Archive for the ‘LifeStyle Choices’ Category

Condoms for the Desperate

Monday, January 18th, 2010

As I pointed out in this post, there’s no shortage of the sexual hucksters collecting for the unfortunate… 

Port-au-Prince, Haiti (LifeNews.com) — Following the earthquake in Haiti, millions of people are dealing with death, a lack of food and water, shelter, and basic medical care. Planned Parenthood, sending a good time for a fundraising opportunity, is asking for donations for its local affiliate to promote birth control and condoms.

In a new note sent to its supporters on Facebook, Planned Parenthood talked about the giving opportunity.

“The international Planned Parenthood arm is accepting donations for PROFAMIL, a locally based Haitian organization,” the abortion business says. “Fully 100% of donations will go directly to PROFAMIL’s operations.”

At the International Planned Parenthood secure giving web page, the abortion giant says PROFAMIL has been operating in Haiti since 1984 to provide “sexual and reproductive healthcare.”

The group “educates the public about prevention and ensures widespread access to condoms” to “young people aged 10-25″ with “regular condom demonstrations.”

In other words, Planned Parenthood is asking for money to help it pass out condoms and birth control to children who are looking for their next meal and medical care for injuries they and their family sustained in the earthquake.

The Planned Parenthood Help Haiti fundraising site says its local affiliate “meets regularly with the Minister of Health to develop strategies for increasing access” to birth control and contraception and that the group regularly targets “rural communities where the people are totally isolated” and likely have little access to food and water now.

Concerned Women for America president Wendy Wright talked with LifeNews.com about the fundraising appeal.

 

“Haitians need food, water, shelter, safety, comfort. They are wandering in a daze and in pain,” she said. “Yet all Planned Parenthood thinks about is how to benefit from their suffering. Instead of offering a cup of water, they offer a condom.”

“As corpses fill the streets and the world wonders how few Haitians will survive this crisis of mass proportions, Planned Parenthood’s goal is to reduce their numbers even more,” Wright said.

“Planned Parenthood exhibits its racist intentions again. If successful, Haitians would be denied the joy of children and the hope that their country will live on,” she added.

 

Another web site touting PROFAMIL notes that the pro-abortion group ‘does everything possible to ensure widespread access to condoms” and that, during “2005, the organization distributed over 600,000 condoms through its network of clinics, mobile health units, and community promoters.”

The group has also complained that Haiti is a pro-life nation that prohibits the killing of unborn children and injuring women in abortions.

This isn’t the first time Planned parenthood has sought to exploit the victims of a natural disaster.

In August 2005, Planned Parenthood announced it was giving out free morning after pills to victims of Hurricane Katrina who were battling rising waters, destroyed homes and are seeking basic necessities like food, water and shelter.

“As Hurricane Katrina ripped through the southeastern United States, Planned Parenthood [is] there to offer one free month of birth control or one free emergency contraception kit to women from Louisiana and Mississippi,” Planned Parenthood Federation of America interim president Karen Pearl wrote at the time.

Also, Planned Parenthood of New York City offered women free abortions and morning after pills to area victims of the September 11 terrorist attacks. The goal of the 12 days of free services was to “reach out to women who have been displaced and ease their fears,” the abortion business said at the time.

 News of the donation request follows a LifeNews.com expose‘ of a former abortion business owner who said she thought Haiti had too many people.

Ye Need Jesus, Tiger…Go Brit!

Tuesday, January 5th, 2010

School Closures and Sterilized Sex: A Connection Ya Think?

Thursday, November 12th, 2009

This has nothing to do with this.

It’s all just one big coincidence.

If ye won’t have children and ye prefer sterilized sex and sterilized relationships, nature will shut ye down.

Big Brother is the Price of Freedom without Truth

Thursday, August 6th, 2009

LONDON, August 5, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The British government will force thousands of the “worst” families in the country to live with 24-hour CCTV surveillance in a bid to cut back on child abuse and neglect, the Children’s Ministry has said. In the next two years the government plans to expand an existing family monitoring program from 2000 families to 20,000 at a total estimated cost of £400million.

Despite growing complaints that New Labour’s new Britain has in the last ten years become the most spied upon nation in the world, ahead of even China, the Labour government announced late last month that 20,000 “problem families” who have run afoul of social services officials will be watched around the clock and subjected to surprise inspections by government agents.

The new rules will begin by focusing on truancy, alcohol abuse or reports of malnutrition. Parents will be monitored to make sure children go to bed on time, eat proper meals and attend school.

“This is pretty tough and non-negotiable support for families to get to the root of the problem. There should be Family Intervention Projects in every local authority area because every area has families that need support,” said Children’s Secretary Ed Balls in announcing the massive expansion of the surveillance program….


This is the price of not submitting to, and refusing to live within, the confines of the truth. 

When a civilization attacks the traditional family, the tyranny of the State seeks to correct the imbalance caused by deadbeat parents who have long abandoned their responsibilities.  The State helped create the problem of family breakdown by their promotion of liberal values, and now it seeks to “correct” the abuses they have wrought by taking a page out of Orwell.

It only goes to show that if the State and its citizens do not respect traditional morality, there will be a steep price to pay.  How ironic it is that the “Apple of False Freedom” which started the sexual revolution has turned out to be so sour by taking away the freedoms that it purported to extol and protect.

Exit (and Enter) Stage Left

Saturday, July 25th, 2009

SHANGHAI, July 24, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Although 2009 marks the thirtieth anniversary of the one-child policy, China’s second largest city is not celebrating. Far from it. The Times Online reports that far from fearing overpopulation, the city of Shanghai has pleaded with married couples to help them stave off the looming crisis of demographic implosion by having a second child.

Shanghai has announced pro-procreation policy, that contrasts sharply with the rest of the nation’s strict enforcement of the “one couple, one child” policy that has inflicted forced abortions, involuntary sterilizations, and catastrophic fines inflicted on the local population to limit the growth of its 1.3 billion persons. Yet the fewer numbers are exactly what has Shanghai worried, because the city is faced with not enough young men and women to sustain its aging population.

“We advocate eligible couples to have two kids, because it can help to reduce the proportion of the aging people and alleviate a workforce shortage in the future,” Xie Linli, director of the Shanghai Population and Family Planning Commission, told the Times.

Zhang Meixin, a spokesman for the commission, also told the Times that more than three million people over the age of 60 constitute the population of Shanghai. That makes this age cohort 21.6 percent of Shanghai’s population, which as Zhang stated, “That is already near the average figure of developed countries and is still rising quickly.”

If the rate of demographic decline continues, they project that by 2020, the number of elderly will make up 34 percent of the city’s population. The Times reports that a similar phenomenon is happening throughout all of China, and by 2015 the working-age population will begin to decline, and begin to increase the pressure on the social system to support the aging group of pensioners….

Look around today.  If a family has more than 2 kids, they’re considered weird and abnormal.  In fact, everywhere you look, you see an aging population. I was at a wedding recently and my cousin and I were the only ones to have more than 3 children.  Obama is even putting people in place who want to impose compulsory population control in America. It’s all just part of the brave new world we’ve constructed for ourselves. The underlying presumption is that nature is merely arbitrary – a product of evolutionary forces that can be manipulated without consequence.  No design, no purpose, just randomness. 

As our demographic implosion is soon to demonstrate, however, that theory is going to be exposed for the lie it always was. The population controllers never figured that screwing with human reproduction would cause this sort of catastrophe.  What were they thinking?  Just how are we to support an exponentially aging population without embracing a culture of life? 

Well, actually, it can be done…

There are two facets of the “Logan’s Run” Plan…

In the year 2274…the survivors of war, overpopulation and pollution are living in a great domed city, sealed away from the forgotten world outside. Here, in an ecologically balanced world, mankind lives only for pleasure, freed by the servo-mechanisms which provide everything. There’s just one catch: Life must end at thirty unless reborn in the fiery ritual of Carrousel. (Source) Check the video out here.

A) Euthanasia.  That’s obvious. It’ll have to be rather aggressive too. None of this voluntary stuff. Once you hit 65 (or maybe 30 like in the Movie), maybe it will be time for you to check out, pops.  You’ve lived your life. Don’t be such a drain on the system.  You’ve had your share of condoms and vasectomies. Now it’s payback time.  Go “with dignity”, OK?  Don’t be such a drag on the rest of the society.  Just take these pills and fade to black.

However, by itself, that’s not likely to do the trick. It will definitely help, for sure, but it won’t be enough so enter Plan B…

B) Farming.  No, not the kind you do with a hoe, fool. I’m talking about human farming…as in creating babies WITHOUT fathers or mothers on a massive scale.  That way, we don’t upset the pleasure principle that we live and die by.  No more messy 9 month pregnancies.  It’s all state and machine controlled.  So there will be a perfect equilibrium of young people. 

Population Management 101.

We’ve already made fathers unnecessary. Just how long do you think technology is going to wait before a human womb will be unnecessary?  Logan’s Run showed it.  They got the population control prediction correct in our brave new world. I don’t see why their presentation of these human farms is going to be off that much, either. 

In principle, our culture has already accepted this idea, even if the technology is not there yet.

But the fact is that we’re well ahead of schedule. It won’t be the twenty third century. It will occur in this one, the way things are going.

And of course, if the State is dictating entry and exit, you might as well be bought and sold for a price.

See, folks?  Isn’t sexual liberation great?


No Religion Without Sexual Permission

Friday, May 22nd, 2009

LONDON, May 21, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com ) – British churches will be forced to accept practicing homosexuals or “transsexuals” in positions as youth workers and similar roles, under upcoming equality legislation, the government has said. The Labour government’s Equality Bill will prohibit churches from refusing to hire active homosexuals even if their religion holds such behavior to be sinful, said deputy equalities minister Maria Eagle. The legislation is due to come into force next year, and churches fear that it will force them to act against their religious convictions in a broad range of areas. Eagle indicated at a conference called “Faith, Homophobia, Transphobia, & Human Rights” in London, that the legislation “will cover almost all church employees.” “The circumstances in which religious institutions can practice anything less than full equality are few and far between,” she told delegates. “While the state would not intervene in narrowly ritual or doctrinal matters within faith groups, these communities cannot claim that everything they run is outside the scope of anti-discrimination law. “Members of faith groups have a role in making the argument in their own communities for greater LGBT acceptance, but in the meantime the state has a duty to protect people from unfair treatment.” The bill allows a religious exemption for roles deemed to be “for the purposes of an organised religion” but restricts this definition to those who conduct liturgical celebrations or spend their time teaching doctrine. The Daily Telegraph quoted Neil Addison, a Roman Catholic barrister and expert on religious discrimination law, who said that the bill will leave churches powerless to defend the fabric of their organization. “This is a threat to religious identity. What we are losing is the right for organizations to make free choices,” he said Equality commissioners include the homosexual lobbyist, Ben Summerskill, the head of the leading British homosexualist activist group Stonewall. Summerskill has called for churches to be forced to employ homosexuals and for the police to stop Christians who were peacefully protesting against ‘gay rights’ laws outside Parliament. Tony Grew, a homosexualist activist and the former editor of PinkNews.co.uk, wrote recently that the Equality Bill will “entrench gay rights in all aspects of public life.” Grew wrote on PinkNews that the bill will open unprecedented opportunities for homosexuals. The bill, he said will cover central government departments, local authorities, education bodies, NHS bodies and the police service, plus a wide range of other public and private bodies, including churches and church-run institutions. It will impose the “Equality Duty” on all organizations providing public services, he said, such as residential care homes that “would have to consider the needs of same-sex couples.”

It’s very sad that the Catholic Church in Britain (and soon to be the whole Western world) will have to go underground to be true to its faith.  Many of us have been sounding the alarm bell for years, but people just wouldn’t listen or get involved.

We did our best, but it wasn’t good enough. 

I don’t care so much for myself.  Being 40, my life is half over, if I’m lucky.  It’s my kids and my grandchildren that I fear for.  They’ll have to practice their faith in secret, like fugitives and outcasts from society.  Because they will not bend the knee to the Gay god and accept the homosexual dogma, they will be punished for not adhering to the State religion. The Sexual Jihadists will be marching around the country kicking down doors and terrorizing people of faith with their “gay rights” laws. They’ll even setup their secret gay police and hire informants to ensure churches are following the new sexual guideliness mandated by the government. Kinda like what happened in the old Soviet and Nazi days.  (I wonder if this law will be strictly applied to the Mosques as well. This, I have to see.)

Freedom of association is dead in Britain.   If you are a Christian, you will not be able to associate publicly with other Christians in any sort of organized way without accepting the gay passport to do so.  The next step will be to expand the inquisition and imposition from Church building to individual Christian homes. After all, why should they stop at Churches, when they know where influential Christians live?

The sexual liberation of the 60s has turned into the sexual tyranny of the twenty-first century. And the really pathetic part of it is that most Christians are still asleep. Where have our leaders been — the bishops and other Christian leaders?

Please. Don’t get me started.  They’ve either been asleep, on drugs, or in the tank for the Lobby.

And as for the parents who still have no idea of what is about to befall them, they will find out soon enough at their kids’ future Sunday School class.  The teacher is going to be teaching them about how great it is to have two moms, and that a father is really not necessary in the end.  But then it will be too late. On reflection, it’s not difficult to understand how feminism paved the road for the homosexual take-over.  Demote the father and reduce his role to being a mere option among many.

You can think about this while you are waiting for the knock at the door and your arrest.

The Charge? 

Conducting unlawful religious activities without permission of the Sexual Secretariat.

Liberals pass resolution to end gay organ donor ban

Wednesday, May 6th, 2009

At their convention in Vancouver this past weekend, Liberal Party delegates passed a resolution that supports lifting the ban on gay men from donating organs.

“Apparently it was a positive discussion, and it passed easily, so I was quite pleased about that,” says gay Toronto MP Rob Oliphant. “It seems to be a shift in the party in understanding that this is an issue of discrimination, not an issue of some trumped-up health issue.”….(Source)

Normally I would say this would be a great case for the courts, then I thought….not really.

Nobody is concerned with the facts.

So we all have to die because we won’t admit the truth about risky sex.

Remember, folks, sin makes you stupid.

Vous récoltez ce que vous semez

Friday, May 1st, 2009

I had a friend over last night for supper, and remarked how important Quebec is to Canada and how transformation will not come without a revival in Quebec.  They took us down. They’ll bring us back up.

Here are his remarks to me from our conversation last night:

Thank you, John, for the perspectives on Quebec which you shared yesterday.

This morning I happened to be reading Ezekiel chapter 7, about God punishing a people who had turned to iniquity, and realized that this may well be what Quebec is headed for.  The text even touches on immigration:

“... the city is full of violence.  Wherefore I will bring the worst of the heathen, and they shall possess their houses:  I will also make the pomp of the strong to cease; and their holy places shall be defiled“  – Ezekiel 7:23-24.

One of these things is not like the other…

Thursday, April 30th, 2009

 AFRICAN BISHOP: 

April 30, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – As an Archbishop, dealing on a daily basis with people infected and affected by HIV/AIDS, I know that the Pope is speaking the truth. I suspect that those who were so vociferous in condemning the Pope have never touched an HIV infected person, let alone rendered any care and attention. It is so much easier to distribute gadgets, especially at other people’s expense.

What reduces infections is less casual sex, not more condoms. That is the truth. Those who accuse the Pope of being “unrealistic,” that young people will have sex anyway, have no respect for the young people. When they are given true orientation, they freely respond with far greater sexual responsibility that the armchair social experts can ever imagine.

As an African Archbishop, it is my nephews and nieces that are in danger of dying of HIV/AIDS. Let no one ever suggest that they are more concerned about them than I am. The condom distributors should listen to the truth coming not only from the Pope and Bishops, but even from impartial and serious scientific research. The facts are there, as Cardinal Pell has briefly illustrated. To ignore these facts is the greatest disservice anyone can do to the future of Africa. The struggle continues, and we are overcoming!

CANADIAN BISHOP:

 MONTREAL, April 14, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) -

….

During the recent interview, Turcotte also addressed the controversy over Pope Benedict’s remark against condoms during his recent trip to Africa.  According to Cardinal Turcotte, it would be “ridiculous” to suggest that the Pope said condoms should not be used.

“Essentially, the pope said that it took two things to fight this disease, the means, but also a change of mentality. He pronounced this sentence to show that condoms were not in and of themselves the perfect solution; we took his words out of context and all this was largely amplified,” said Cardinal Turcotte.

“As if the pope had said that condoms should not be used. This is ridiculous! When someone has AIDS, it is his or her responsibility to protect the people with whom he or she has intercourse.”

OK, boys and girls, can you spot the difference?

Frenzied laws are failing our young people

Tuesday, April 14th, 2009

Scotland is staring into the abyss of social collapse. Too many of our young people are caught up in a maelstrom of drug- and alcohol-fuelled promiscuity, hedonism, vandalism and outright nihilism. It is a whirlwind, which we will reap for a long time to come.

We are paying the price for denying too many of our young people security, stability and morality, a price paid in shattered lives and broken children. Yet as the human debris of our failure accumulates, our politicians have become paralysed by a chronic fear of moralising. In place of leadership and a moral compass, a stifling political consensus seems to compel our parties and our parliament into ever more frenzied regulation.

In recent weeks much coverage has been given to the decision by the Scottish government to limit sales of alcohol to young people by increasing the selling price through restrictions on a variety of retail offers and by asking local authorities to consider raising the age for alcohol purchases. This policy mirrors the approach taken by this and previous administrations to drug use, vandalism, anti-social behaviour, obesity, even promiscuity, and might usefully be called the “command and control” model of public governance.

Advocates of such a model take the view that “bad behaviour”, whether it be public drunkenness, health-threatening over-eating or teenage promiscuity, are all immutable and unchangeable. The urge and desire to commit acts of this type cannot be curbed, far less removed, goes the argument, therefore public, social and health policy must all be orientated towards mitigating the effects.

It is an approach that is deeply flawed and utterly discredited. It is also, however, the logical destination for a policy that refuses to judge or differentiate between actions conducive to the public good and those who threaten it.

When our fellow citizens err and lapse, we seldom focus on them or ask why they behaved as they did. Rather we rush to impose legal restraints, forgetting that no external restrictions can ever match the effectiveness of self-restraint. When a toddler is shot with an airgun, we regulate the sale of such weapons; alcohol abuse by our young people is met with legislation to restrict sales, and sexual promiscuity with regulations aimed at ensuring contraception and abortion are widely available. We do not as a society take action to tackle the underlying motivation; instead we limit our action to blunting the impact of our excesses. We obsess over the symptoms and ignore the cause….

Like the manic sorcerer whose spells have gone disastrously wrong, our politicians cannot control the urge to cast yet more spells upon the chaos. It is an approach that seems to be driven by moral cowardice and perhaps because the alternative, to admit they were wrong, is far too frightening….

(Source)

If the bolded sections above do not explain the West in a nutshell, I don’t know what does. Read the whole article by Cardinal Keith O’Brien of Scotland. It’s fabulous. 

Hope for the hopeless

Saturday, December 20th, 2008

I’ll never complain again…

On another note, what do you think would have happened to him in uetero? Aborted? Yeah, probably. And so would his message have been to all of the self-absorbed youth today who are committing suicide.

Ad Hominem

Wednesday, December 10th, 2008

The nature of man is intrinsically ordered to create and to sustain. This paternal drive, of course, is tangibly reflected in the relationship of marriage. In marriage, man has essentially two roles: first, to focus his attention and sacrifice in serving his wife and, second, to join with her in participating in God’s creation by the raising of their children. If man’s drive is directed towards these goals, his marriage and the society around him flourish into a healthy and prosperous civilization of love. Through his sacrifice of love, his service to his family magnify God’s paternal care for his creation and provide the necessary blueprint for generations to follow.

By showing his complete and total abandonment to his wife and his children, he becomes, what is by today’s standards, a radical man. He becomes a revolutionary against a self-serving and narcissistic culture which seems bent on its own destruction. His self-sacrifice is a repudiation of its values. He is the figurehead of new Christian counter-culture – a living and growing culture which is at war with its decadent sibling.

In giving up time consuming endeavours which are not central to his vocation as the head of his family, the husband shows his wife that her role as his lover and mother to his children have inestimable worth. He is more willing to spend his time, his energies, and his focus on his family more than any other interest in his life. In choosing to order his life around her and the children, he shows them tangible love by devoting his time and effort to them, thereby devoting his paternal devotion and fidelity to the familial covenant. His love abounds and becomes a beacon to his wife and children as something to emulate and follow. As he accepts and is open to his wife’s fertility, he affirms God’s creation and his responsibility in it. Through his sacrificial love which he manifests in countless ways, all aspects of his life appropriate a new meaning and vitality so that even his sexual experience is more meaningful and even more physically gratifying.

He is willing to give more of himself because he trusts that God will show him that he is more of a man than he is now. He will allow God to increase his love, his sacrifice, and his selflessness in supporting and guiding his family. Through man’s fiat, God will not only magnify man’s masculinity, but He will touch and heighten his wife’s femininity so that she too may understand her distinct, irreplaceable, and glorious vocation in creation.

In contrast to this man of God, modern man has long abandoned this sublime vocation of sacrificial fidelity. Instead, his attention is directed at a crass and destructive materialism which has, at its core, only one goal: self-gratification at the expense of the other. This capitulation to his lower nature relegates all of his relationships to a base level of utility. Even his most sacred union to his wife is tragically obscured so that he begins to see his wife, no longer as an end unto herself, but merely as a means – an instrument – to hisown self-fulfillment. Indeed, this degradation begins to drown his intellect and reason. Because he fears the loss of his material advantages, he begins to see his wife’s fertility as a threat. Sadly, he begins to consider his offspring as a disease to be contained. Invariably, he avails himself of means to thwart creation and the conception of his children. He needs to contra-cept his sexual act in order to maintain his selfish lifestyle. As his sexual desires are fulfilled through the separation of the procreative and pleasurable elements of intercourse, he is able to rear fewer and fewer children. This mentality leads to a further erosion through a smaller and more decadent subculture known as “DINKS” – “double income no kids”.

As this culture begins to erode his vocation as a husband and a father, his wife’s vocation as a wife and mother is also undermined and perverted. Since she begins to see her role as merely one of utility to him, she needs to recover her sense of worth. But her sense of worth can now not be considered in terms of her intrinsic femininity. Instead, she must recover this worth through a descent into the materialism that her husband has accepted. In other words, she must show her worth through material utility and superficiality in order to be valued in his eyes. So she seeks worth by leaving the home in search of something which he values: money. In such a situation, the destruction of the family is only a sad inevitability. As husband and wife seek something other than their vocation to one another, the children are the casualties of their pursuits as the State assumes its role as surrogate mother. The disintegration of the family is all but complete. The substance of their bond has been mortally weakened with only the gaunt and pitiable form of their covenant remaining.

As society witnesses this dysfunctional and distorted family structure, it subconsciously gravitates to its logical sexual corollary. If the contracepting man can have licit sexual intercourse with his wife, then why cannot he gratify himself without his wife? If a husband and wife insist that they have a moral right to mutual masturbation (i.e. contraception), then there can be no objection to self-masturbation or a host of other deviant sexual behaviours. In fact, the next logical progression to a contracepting culture is a homosexual culture. Indeed, from an ontological perspective, since his wife has been effectively neutered and her procreative power sterilized, contraception renders the woman another man within the sexual act. Indeed, since the woman’s unique contribution to the marital embrace has been removed from necessity, there becomes less of a demonstrable difference between a man having sex with a neutered woman and a man having sex with another man. In fact, the purpose of the sexual act in both scenarios has the same goal: sexual orgasm with a person who will not procreate.

In societies where consumerism and materialism dominate, contraception is the sexual opium of its people. This is the reason why there is such a divergence of opinion over contraception between the first and third worlds. Where a materialistic or consumerist ideology is not as inculcated into the culture, contraception and deviant sex simply do not sell. The majority of the third world population, particularly those in Christian communities, oppose contraceptive sex as something foreign and unnatural. Indeed, that is precisely what contraceptive sex is and, in order for its propagation to be successful, it requires a compatible underlying ideological foundation to support it. This foundation is none other than the atheistic, materialistic, and consumerist ideology of a dying Western culture whose precepts it borrowed from Marxist Russia. The cancerous spread of these errors, long ago predicted by Our Lady at Fatima, were not simply the facile form of autocratic government that some supposed. No. Rather, it was the rejection of the dignity of the human person and the promotion of a God-denying, soulless monster who can do business in either economic currency.

And this fact really serves as the key to understanding how our culture is to recover from its self-destructive path. The attack on this culture of death must be focused on the atheistic supported consumerism which feeds its ravenous appetite. This consumerism can be defeated, but it must start with man whose focus must turn from adoring material idols. He must focus his life and his love on His God by finding meaning in serving others. In marriage, that means man must turn back to his wife and children and serve them faithfully. This is the path that men must take. There is no other option. “No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.” (Matt. 6:24)

Bringing Murder to the Middle Class

Tuesday, December 9th, 2008

The thing the left doesn’t yet realize about us is that we think of them simply as bad people, capable of great evil, in fact, intent on it.

Some people might want to cut these lefties a break, making allowances for their spectacularly bad behaviour, saying that they mean well. Maybe they’re only doing the best they know how. They have been badly taught.  They, themselves, are victims, too.

We don’t buy that.  Nobody does. We know from past experience with the left, not only do they mean the outrageous things they say, in fact, there is much more they don’t say out loud. There are hidden depths to their depravity. There seems to be no cause too horrible for them to champion. We are left speechless much of the time, unable to defend morality against the implacable attacks from the left.

Neither can we separate out their sophistication, erudition and wit from their bloodthirsty behaviour. See them together at their soirees; they have such good taste, but no morals. They drink too much, do too many drugs, sleep around. Charity cannot limit their behaviour.

We look at their designer clothes and their cars and lovely homes and gardens, all the while thinking, “How is it possible these seemingly nice people believe, for instance, that it is okay to expel a child from the womb?”

When at Grandmother’s house for the holidays – Season’s Greetings! – and they sit around their Martha Stewart table, how can they partake of Grandmother’s mince-meat pie knowing they have already decided to euthanize the old gal if it ever becomes expedient?

The grey haired old lady of the house serves pie and cream to her daughter who has only recently aborted this same grandmother’s newest grand-daughter. Heaping horror onto horror, it is just possible that it was the grandmother who drove the car to the clinic in a nightmarish twist on the old tradition of girl’s day out. Sorry, Grandma, but we’ve just lost our appetite.

Who else is at the table this Christmas?  That man, passing the gravy boat to the family’s son and heir, is planning to pop the question soon, so the two men can plan their wedding or civil union, or whatever. No one is bothered that these two men are using the room which the twins have graciously vacated for the holidays. These men are long-term lovers, and all well-meaning lefties agree they should be allowed to sacramentalize their love. But what does anyone in this group know about love? Would Abelard recognize this homoeroticism as love, or, more to the point, would Eloise?  Love? What kind of love is this illicit attraction between two men or two women?

Down the table near Granddad sits the oldest son and his new wife.  His divorced wife is, where? Nobody knows or cares, whether it be rehab, or Rio, or only at her mom’s house.  She was part of this family for a decade or so.  Being pushed out, she has moved on.  The kids are with her, too. Dad gets them at thanksgiving and the grandparents can see them then.  If anyone feels disenfranchised, nobody says anything.  The merriment continues.

You know, there are few children present.  There hardly ever are in Martha Sterwart-land.  Mom and dad have for years tried everything to prevent the arrival of children.  It’s a Holiday wish list from hell:  pills, douches, plastic bladders, scalpels, intrauterine wire, (…these are a few of my favourite things.) These products have proved their practicality over the decades, and the “women’s centre.”  (Bringing Murder to the Middle Classes,) is always there to eradicate any mistakes, no charge.

When a mature, married couple decides to fill their empty, brand new, luxury, four bedroom home with a contented gurgling of a pink and lovely baby, they might find they can’t conceive.  What a tragedy.  It’s a good thing that their double income ensures financial liquidity. With their savings and a little help from medicare, nothing can stop them from following their dream of procreation.  Years later, after sweeping who knows how many fertilized eggs into the drain – all these little souls whose name God know before the world was created – they finally look reality in the face for a moment and stand aghast.  This is a bad moment for them, a Prozac moment, and this little anti-depressant pill seems better than therapy, (tried it,) better than prayer, (never tried it).

So, when it comes to the left, it is not that we agree to disagree with them.  It is not a case of live and let live.  Neither do we respect their differences of opinion. We do not even support their right to have contrary opinions in cases of faith and morals.  We do not wish to allow them to follow their own perilous path, because we know there is nothing they won’t sell, compromise or jettison on the way to their stated goals.

What we wish is this:  that they stop the destruction of children in the womb; stop the assault on the Sacrement of Marriage; stop funding immoral behaviour with money confiscated from the citizenry; stop giving comfort to our sworn enemies.  There’s a whole lot more we want: stop denigrating Holy Mother Church, stop peddling birth control in the third world, stop destroying our families, stop defining our Culture down.  Stop the drugs, stop the porno.  Please: an end to infidelity. No more blasphemy, apostasy, heresy. No more sacrilege.

Ed Roche

Cheap Day-Care: The Devaluation of Parenthood

Tuesday, December 2nd, 2008

As a candidate in the 2003 provincial election, I had the opportunity to participate in a number of all-candidates meetings. Unfortunately, most of the issues were agenda-driven and every effort was made to avoid the more controversial moral issues such as abortion and homosexual marriage. Besides the usual spending promises, the NDP candidate discussed how her party would implement a ten-dollar per day day-care program. This promise caught my attention because a few days earlier the media reported about a day-care workers’ strike in Quebec.

Quebec, as our readers may or may not know, has a five-dollar per day day-care system. Although it is often touted as a major success, the facts prove otherwise. Outside of the devastating impact on children, the system has become so costly, that the Quebec government has had to withdraw funds from the Quebec pension plan in order to keep the system afloat. While this fact is certainly scandalous in its own right, it pales in comparison to the message that it sends about the importance of parenthood.

For the sake of argument, let’s assume that all of the day-care centers in Quebec could house sixteen children. Sixteen children times five dollars is eighty dollars. If each child had two parents, there would be thirty-two parents in each program. Next, if you take eighty dollars and divide it by thirty-two parents, you get two dollars and fifty cents. In essence, the day-care industry in Quebec is saying that parenthood is worth a couple of bucks and some change. The message here is that parenthood is something that you can put a price on. It is the commodification of parenthood taken to its extreme.

It is not my intent to bash day-care. Some parents truly do need day-care programs in order to work and make ends meet. These parents, however, are clearly in the minority. In my opinion, there is no excuse for middle class or wealthy, dual income couples to put their children in day-care centres.

I make a modest living and my wife is a stay-at-home mom. We have five children and we are regularly asked just how we are able to make ends meet. What I usually tell people is that children are born with a loaf of bread under their arms. Our Lord himself said that He would provide for us. We must depend on providence and trust that God will give us what we truly need (Cf. Lk. 12: 22-32).

My wife was a preschool teacher for the first two years of our marriage. She worked for a very professionally run day-care program that could accommodate a maximum of sixteen children. I can remember with vivid detail the stories that she used to tell about the damage done to children who attended her day-care. For example, a number of children would cling to the legs of their parents while crying and begging not to be dropped off. After a few weeks, these children would develop a hardness of heart as a result of the stress associated with the separation and feelings of abandonment. Parents would report that on weekends their children would say things such as, “I miss Lindy” (my wife’s name is Melinda). Other parents would report that their children actually dreamt about the caregivers. The saddest of all were the children who waited by the window with long, sad faces for their parents to pick them up at 6:30 pm and beyond. This becomes even more tragic when you consider the fact that most of these parents were doctors, lawyers and other professionals.

As I watched the day-care workers in Quebec picket and chant slogans in front of their workplaces, I couldn’t help but think just how lucky some of the kids were that day. Alternative arrangements would certainly be made for some, but for others the day would mean something else – a chance to spend it in the company of mom, dad or even both parents.

How did it come to this? How did our country come to de-value parenthood? I would argue that this has been the goal of the state for a number of years. Communist dictatorships have always known that they must destroy the family and all of its traditions in order to secure allegiance to the state. In the academy award winning film, The Killing Fields, there is a scene where the North Vietnamese are indoctrinating the Cambodians in one of their concentration camps. Children are shown attending a school. There is a “stick drawing” on the blackboard of a family holding hands. The teacher asks a question and one of the children raises his hand. The child then gets up, goes to the blackboard and proceeds to draw a big X through the mother and father. The communists understood that the younger the Cambodian, the greater the chance of indoctrination.

In the formative years, children have no baggage and they have not yet developed a value-system or a properly formed conscience. It is the parents who are primarily responsible for this formation process. Christian parents must begin to instill a sense of the sacred and divine at this age or else risk losing their children to the dominant post-Christian culture. Even parents who are able to do this still must compete with the dominant culture that is at war with traditional Christian morality. Although the deck seems to be stacked against Christian parents, there is at least hope within the family.

Obviously Canada is not a communist dictatorship, but it would seem that we are heading in this direction. Those in our government who would seek to undermine the family would never be upfront about it because Canadians would never tolerate it. Incrementalism is the modus operandi of those who seek to re-define the family unit. Like the frog that is being cooked to death slowly on low heat, we Canadians have been willing to accept minor encroachments on our freedom during these past forty years. As the readers know, there are many groups that are actively trying to dismantle the very definition of family.

Make no mistake about it, the Canadian government realizes that he who controls education controls the future of any society. Why do you think that the current provincial government seems so hostile to home-schools and private education? They know that the faith and values that so many of these families hold dear are passed on within the family. Secular humanism and moral relativism, which are the pillars of most public education, are undermined within the alternative systems. I would argue that the Catholic secondary system lost something when it decided to accept government funding. They inadvertently opened the door enough for the State to water down the Faith.

After being deprogrammed and then reprogrammed, the children in the concentration camps developed a resentment and hostility towards their parents as a result of being isolated and alienated from them. Many of the children were then given the authority to ‘rule’ over their parents. Faced with the trauma of daily separation and the competition for the attention of the day-care workers, children will most certainly rebel against those who should be raising them – mom and dad. Recent studies have found heightened levels of aggression in children who have attended day-care compared to those who have been raised at home. What the North Vietnamese did by force, too many Canadian parents are doing the same thing by choice, the consequences of which will resonate for generations.

Chris Beneteau

Family Size and the New Evangelization

Thursday, November 27th, 2008

As proud parents of seven children, my wife and I are often amazed at the comments we receive when people discover the size of our family. Because it is hard to stand out in this day and age, more traditional rebellious behaviors have become mainstream, while traditional family activities and attitudes have become counter-cultural.

Everybody’s A Critic

This means that if you are a man who stays married to one woman, has more than two children, and attends Church on a regular basis, people treat you as if you are from another planet. The big difference between the old rebels and the new rebels, however, is that faithful Catholics are rebels with a cause. The cause, in our case, is to pass the gospel message on to our children and to set a living example of authentic faith so that the Church can become strong once again.

As a father of so many, one of the most popular topics of conversations with friends, co-workers, and even relatives concerns my family’s size. You would think that after the third or fourth child, family and friends would stop expressing shock and disbelief after learning about another pregnancy. Most of the time, however, the opposite reaction occurs. It seems that they are just waiting for my wife and me to make the big announcement: “Well, that’s it. We are ‘done’. Now we can have our life back.”

How times have changed. Two generations ago, the reaction would have been quite different. Instead of expressing shock and horror at the arrival of the sixth child, a Catholic friend might instead say, “And to think that you still have ten more child-bearing years left” or “Well, you’re halfway there.” Sadly, though, all too often the remarks my family receives are sarcastic, cynical, or just plain insulting. The following list is a sample of some of the most common remarks we sometimes hear along with a few of my imagined, but unspoken comebacks:

• “Are these all yours?” (Is this all you have?)• “I don’t know how you do it.” (Did you miss biology class?)• “I can barely handle one child.” (That’s because you need to grow up, dear.)

• “I wanted more but my husband got fixed.” (Actually, your husband is broken and he needs to be fixed.)

• “We tried NFP but it didn’t work for us.” (What part of “no” didn’t he understand?)

• “Are you done yet?” (Have you begun yet?)

• “So how many children do you want to have?” (We haven’t learned to count that high yet.)

• “You’re crazy!” (You’re lazy!)• “Just what do you two do in that bedroom anyway?” (Have productive sex which is more than you can say)• “Have you two ever heard of birth control?” (Yes. Have you ever heard of a retirement home with no prospect of visitors?)

• “You have almost got enough for a baseball team.” (You almost have enough for a tennis match.)

• “Is your wife pregnant yet?” (No, but I’m sure you’ll let us know)

• “Don’t you two have a TV?” (Yes but we’re having too much sex to be bothered watching it.)

• “I didn’t know you ran a daycare facility!” (Not a problem. We’re investing in future income earners for our pensions. How’s your retirement planning coming?)

While most of these comments are somewhat irritating, I must always remind myself that the people expressing these thoughts are being challenged with the Gospel of Life through the mere presence of my large family. A number of these incidences have remained with me, and a few of them bear relating here.

A Sideshow on Wheels

One memorable episode occurred when the seven of us walked through the door of our local McDonald’s restaurant. As my wife struggled to get our newborn daughter out of the car seat, the four older brothers and I entered the restaurant ahead of them. Sitting at a booth by the door was a mother, father and their two young children. As I stood holding the door open, waiting for my wife and my daughter, the children and their parents gave us a long stare. In a very loud voice, one of the boys blurted out, “Mommy, daddy, look at the size of that family.” The other boy then piped up and said, “Look, there are four boys.” As I continued to hold the door, my wife made her way through the door with our daughter. Glancing over at the family, I noticed a look of utter shock on both of the parents’ faces. Their children then went ballistic and I heard them say, “O my God, there are five kids!” In order to avoid making a scene, the parents quickly moved to quiet their children. Being a little embarrassed, my wife and I shuffled our five children to the nearest booth. As I glanced back over my shoulder, I noticed that all four family members were staring at us. My wife later remarked that we had become the topic of conversation for the duration of their meal.

Perhaps in the course of the parents’ conversation about our family’s size, the Holy Spirit used us to plant a seed in their hearts to conceive new life. Indeed, it would be a great grace for them and for our dying culture if the parents thought to themselves, “If they can have more than two children, then why can’t we?” A large family can reawaken the truth of the sanctity of human life which has been smothered by an aggressive anti-life culture. A seemingly innocuous incident such as this provided my family with a great opportunity to evangelize for the Gospel of Life. This particular form of evangelization does not require a lot of words, only mere presence.

Another occasion for evangelization occurred when a co-worker found out that my wife was expecting our sixth child. In the past, he would typically remark, “Well, is that it?” Traditionally, my reaction would have gravitated toward deflecting attention away from the issue by responding in an ambiguous way and quickly changing the topic. Sensing the Holy Spirit’s guidance, this particular incident would be different. Instead of avoiding the issue, I confronted it. I replied, “Well, we always wanted to have six children.” His next question was truly hilarious. “So are you going to get a hysterectomy?” After clarifying that the correct term was “vasectomy,” he added, “Yeah, I mean are you going to get snipped?” At this point I started to get a little hot under the collar. I thought to myself, “Who does this guy think he is? Is it not enough that he obsesses over my family size? Now he wants to know if I am going to neuter myself for good. Has he no shame?!” Instead of my normal polite response, I decided to employ the tactic that these people so often employ on faithful Catholics. I looked him straight in the eye, raised my voice and with a firm sincerity replied, “No, I am not a dog!” I then added, “I can’t think of anything more repulsive. We neuter animals by force, and yet we humans do it by choice. How sick is that!” He then let out an uncomfortable laugh and quickly changed the subject.

Hungry for Children

When women inquire about my family size, I tend to be a little gentler with my responses. Most of the women I know want more children, but societal and economic pressures — through what the Holy Father calls “sinful structures” — plant seeds of doubt in their minds. During my last dentist appointment, for instance, my hygienist asked me about my family. When I told her that we were having our sixth child, she asked, “It is so rare these days for a family to have as many children as you have. May I ask why you have so many?” Now I could have responded in a number of ways, but on this occasion the Holy Spirit inspired me to respond with simplicity and humility. Before I had a chance to even think of a response, these words fell from my mouth: “Because we love them.” A moment of silence followed my response, as if some great truth had been revealed to her. Instead of trying to find an excuse or provide an “intelligent” reason for more children, I had allowed God to guide me to the most effective and authentic response possible. Love of children is why we have more of them. This is the simple truth. We have children because they reflect the love that we have for the Creator. To share in His creative power is awesome because it is to share in an infinite love. When we have children, we participate in the creation of something that never existed before yet will live for all eternity. What a beautiful and awesome gift and responsibility this is!

Our experiences in engaging our culture serve to remind my wife and me just how blessed we are. We are also reminded that our children will likely grow to share our pro-life views and hopefully fill the twilight of our existence with many grandchildren. What our secular society fails to understand is that love never divides — it multiplies.

The future is truly in the hands of large families. As the birth rates in North America and other developed countries continue to plunge, children from large families will fill the gaps left by the families that choose voluntary extinction. “Blessed are the meek”, our Lord says, “for they will inherit the earth” — or, in this case, their children will.

- Chris Beneteau

Feminism in Reverse

Monday, September 15th, 2008

If Catastrophe were to strike…

Thursday, August 28th, 2008

I was sitting at a table in a senior’s home recently, enjoying the conversation of a couple of elderly men. They were talking about how they stored food throughout the winter on the farm when they were children. As I listened to their stories, it dawned on me… the last couple of generations have no clue how to survive any longer on their own!We have lost the wisdom of the ages, learned and passed on from generation to generation over millennia. Those skills of how to build, hunt, plant, grow, reap… yes, survive—without the help of technology—are nearly all but gone for most of Generation X and the succeeding generations in the Western world.

OVER-DEPENDENT

Don’t get me wrong—I’m not against progress. But there is something ominous about the current situation. In the Western world, we live on the grid. That is, we depend entirely upon the state or corporations to provide us electricity and heat (or power for air conditioning.) Furthermore, we depend upon “the system” for our food and most of our material things. Few of us actually provide for ourselves from our own resources, something most generations did to some degree up until this past generation…(More)

Remember what happened to us a few years back when the power went out in Ontario and in the Northern part of the U.S.?

I’ve been thinking about this somewhat lately as well.  If everything goes belly up in some kind of catastrophe, what would you do? Could you survive?  Not sure about you, but I’d have a hard time.   Farming?  Are you kidding? Still, I think conservatives would be better off.  After all, we still have intact families, for the most part.  As for liberals, they’d be screwed.    If the State isn’t taking care of them, then nobody would help them.  Everyone knows liberals don’t help liberals when it’s everybody for themselves.

Demographic Plunge

Tuesday, August 19th, 2008

WASHINGTON, August 19, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The percentage of childless women who have reached the end of their child-bearing years in the United States has doubled from 10% to 20% in the last 30 years, reported the US Census Bureau on Monday.The survey also found that, “Women 40 to 44 years old will end their childbearing years with an average of 1.9 children each, a number below replacement-level fertility.” This is markedly fewer children than in 1976, when 3.1 children was the national average.36% of the women who gave birth in 2006 were separated, widowed, divorced or never married. Five percent were living with a partner.

The survey also revealed that most women who go on to post-secondary education wait until they are between 30 and 34 to have children. 27% of those women with undergraduate degrees and upwards are childless.

Only the Hispanic and Black populations in the US are replacing themselves with an average of 2.3 and 2.0 children born per woman respectively, making them the only stabilizing force in the American population. At this rate, experts say, whites will be the minority in America by 2042.

Andrew Cherlin, a sociology professor at Johns Hopkins University whose specialties are family and public policy commented on the newly released numbers, observing that fewer children forebodes a future demographic crisis.

“It means that 25 years from now, there’ll be many elderly people who are childless and who may not have anybody to care for them,” he said.

In a 2006 message to the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences Pope Benedict XVI, whose own native land of Germany has seen massive declines in birthrates, remarked that children are too often looked upon in terms of their economic cost and not as gifts from God. This mentality, he says, is not only causing a decline in birth rates, but it is also detrimental to children already born.

“It is children and young people,” he said, “who are often the first to experience the consequences of this eclipse of love and hope.” 

“Often, instead of feeling loved and cherished, they appear to be merely tolerated.” 

It is not only the United States that is experiencing drastic population decline. Last year, surveys revealed that the Canadian birthrates have also hit an all time low, clocking in at an average of 1.5 children per woman, while the European Union’s statistics agency, Eurostat, has predicted an overall drop in Europe’s population of 7 million people by 2050.

Many of the old people who introduced the culture of death to the West will be euthanized. 

They don’t have any kids, and if they do, their kids (1 or 2) don’t give a damn about them.  Check out the “long term care” facilities in this country. Ever been to one?  I have. Not joyous places. That’s where they are going to put you when you’re old, Mr. Liberal.

And no one will come and visit you.  Because all your kids have been butchered by an abortionist’s knife or flushed down the toilet with a condom.

You didn’t give love during your time on this earth, and you’re likely not to receive it on the back end either – unless some kind Christian soul decides to pay you a visit from time to time.

So, tell me again, what was the purpose of your life?

Breaking Ranks

Tuesday, August 19th, 2008

LANCASTER, UK, August 19, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Roman Catholic Bishop Patrick O’Donohue of the Lancaster diocese in northwest England, has heavily criticised his fellow bishops of England and Wales for what he sees as a weak, “flat” response to many of today’s moral crises, especially that of the radical homosexualist and anti-Catholic, secularist lobby.

LifeSiteNews.com has exclusively obtained a copy of a document that is due to be published next week, in which O’Donohue calls on his fellow bishops to “rediscover” and fearlessly exercise their teaching authority in union with the Pope.

In the densely packed 92-page document, “Fit for Mission? Church“, Bishop O’Donohue writes of the failure of the Catholic bishops of England and Wales forthrightly to face the issues of homosexual activism as a body. He especially emphasizes his “disappointment that our Bishops’ Conference recently could not agree on a collegial response to the Government’s legislation on same-sex adoption.”

“Attempting to arrive at a consensus among bishops with sometimes divergent views, Episcopal Conference statements and documents have a tendency to be often flat and ’safe’ at a time when we need passionate and courageous public statements that dare to speak the full truth in love.” 

“I must admit that during my 15 years as a bishop I have increasingly come to share certain concerns about the relationship between individual bishops and the National Conference.” Bishop O’Donohue says he agrees with the warning of the 1985 Synod on the “necessity of limiting the authority of national Episcopal conferences.”

The Bishop writes that the idea of dividing the areas of responsibility, such as education, liturgy and healthcare, among the bishops, has resulted in a “reluctance among the rest of the bishops to speak out on these issues.” He notes particularly that some bishops had reacted with “surprise” that he had dared to produce his own teaching document, “Fit for Mission? Schools”, earlier this year.

“The effort to achieve a consensus” he says, “results…often in the loss of the ’scandal’ and the ‘folly’ of the Gospel, so that we are no longer the ’salt’ and ‘leaven’ so urgently needed.”

“Confident, courageous and prophetic bishops [are] vital for the well-being of the Church during this time of increasingly aggressive secularism.”

Citing the great 5th century bishop St. Augustine, Bishop O’Donohue calls for bishops to “re-exercise their individual teaching charism.” This rediscovery of the charism of bishops, he says, is needed to combat the loss of passion for Catholicism notable in many parishes and lay people.

“The passion to serve the Lord is noticeably absent in many cases – there seems to be at times a tiredness and reticence to preach the gospel.” He says that in the course of the 16-month consultation in preparation for the document, he saw a “lack of confidence and knowledge of the Catholic faith.” He therefore calls for a revival of apologetics, the reasoned defence of Christianity, especially in the face of increasingly popular atheist polemics from writers such as Richard Dawkins.

In the document, produced as Bishop O’Donohue prepares to retire, he says that “Agencies and Commissions of national conferences” have failed to uphold the “fullness of the Church’s teaching”, particularly “doctrinal and moral teaching, in their collaboration with secular agencies.”

“I’m thinking in particular of agencies with a responsibility for education or economic development. The staff of these agencies are often in a position to witness to the truth of the Church’s teaching on, say, the theology of the body with its positive refutation of pre-marital sex, ’safe sex’, or artificial birth control, in their dealings with government departments and committees.”

Bishop O’Donohue does not name names, but many have made similar criticisms of the English Catholic bishops’ overseas aid and development agency, CAFOD, that has insisted on promoting condoms as a means of controlling the spread of HIV/AIDS.

In another case, at least one Catholic adoption agency has opted to abandon its association with the Catholic Church to adhere to the government’s requirement to adopt children to homosexual “partners.” When the problem of the Sexual Orientation Regulations and the Catholic adoption agencies arose in the news last year, it was revealed that many agencies held the policy of allowing children to be adopted to single homosexuals, and this with at least the tacit blessing of the local bishop.

Bishop O’Donohue’s own suggestion for the Catholic social services agency was to have it adopt an uncompromisingly Catholic position and refuse to adopt to anyone who is not in a legal marriage. In the document he criticises the administrators of Church institutions, saying, “There must be no back peddling on these issues just because certain truths are unwelcome in the corridors of power.”

“We have talked too much and done too little. We have witnessed over the past forty years a growing crisis in the Catholic understanding or self-identity of the Church…Have we forgotten what it is to be Catholic?”

Hope for the future, he says, lies with the younger generation who are notably more interested in reviving the essentials of the Catholic religion. “The maturity of the Pope John Paul II generation will lead, I hope, to a resurgence of orthodox, committed adults in the Church, gradually renewing vocations to the priesthood, religious life and marriage.”

News of the document was first publicized on Damian Thompson’s Daily Telegraph weblog, “Holy Smoke.”

Daphne McLeod, a Catholic lay activist and head of the organisation Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice, who has been campaigning for years to restore the Catholic Church in Britain, said: “What he’s saying is what we’ve all been saying for years, but now it’s a bishop saying it. We can use it and quote it and build on it. So yes, it’s a very good thing.”

Hallelujah!  A bishop with some backbone who FINALLY gives the marshmellow crowd the what-for.  I’ve been waiting years for the more faithful bishops to speak bluntly about the scandalous witnesses of their brother bishops.  In this country, of course, Bishop O’Donohue’s remarks are just as relevant if not more so.  In fact, the perfect example of these episcopal conference’s intransigence and corruption is right here in our own backyard with the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Winnipeg Statement.  I won’t bother you all with the underhanded politics that occurred behind the scenes, but the final vote was not unanimous.  Many of the Canadian bishops did not accept the Winnipeg Statement, but remained silent when it was published.  That was a big mistake.

What needs to happen now is for just ONE Canadian bishop to do what Bishop O’Donohue did:  break ranks and defend the truth.  A Bishop is not required to be loyal to bishops who refuse to teach the Gospel and even less for those who subvert it, intentionally or not.

Bishop O’Donohue shouldn’t retire. Rome should appoint him Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster when the current occupant leaves this year.

Brave New World

Monday, August 18th, 2008

A SQUAT grey building of only thirty-four stories. Over the main entrance the words, CENTRAL LONDON HATCHERY AND CONDITIONING CENTRE, and, in a shield, the World State’s motto, COMMUNITY, IDENTITY, STABILITY.

The enormous room on the ground floor faced towards the north. Cold for all the summer beyond the panes, for all the tropical heat of the room itself, a harsh thin light glared through the windows, hungrily seeking some draped lay figure, some pallid shape of academic goose-flesh, but finding only the glass and nickel and bleakly shining porcelain of a laboratory. Wintriness responded to wintriness. The overalls of the workers were white, their hands gloved with a pale corpse-coloured rubber. The light was frozen, dead, a ghost. Only from the yellow barrels of the microscopes did it borrow a certain rich and living substance, lying along the polished tubes like butter, streak after luscious streak in long recession down the work tables.

“And this,” said the Director opening the door, “is the Fertilizing Room.”

Source