Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Pope Francis and the new corporal work of mercy?!

I was at Mass on Sunday and one of the prayer intentions was to join in with Pope Francis who wants us to add a new work of mercy. I forget if it’s classified under corporal or spiritual. But he wants to add a couple. One has to do with sharing resources with the less fortunate or something and the other is about protecting mother earth. All I could do was sigh. Pope Francis is such an activist pope. He can’t just leave anything alone. People aren’t coming into the Church because of all the new stuff that’s happening. They want the original and undiluted. Why is he so intent on changing everything?

 

BUT Phil! What’s wrong with sharing and protecting the earth???? Nothing in principle. But the corporal and spiritual works of mercy have been around for like 1000 years. And now he will just change them?? They are already complete in my opinion. Jesus was never focused on saving mother earth and earth-worship. He cared more about our disposition towards God and man. And those are thoroughly addressed by the existing works of mercy. In fact, they are taken from the words of Christ himself. Feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the prisoner, etc. What we do with plastic bottles is something each person must decide. Nobody wants to destroy the planet for no purpose. Pope Francis, in his encyclical seems to think the earth is becoming a giant trash heap. He even says this. Like really? The main source of “trash” is the trash morality we have. But he rarely seems to address that. He is more interested in climate change or whatever.

 

While Pope Francis is trying to come across as hip and “with it”, he’s not bringing any new people into the Church. That’s statistically verified. Why not stick to what Catholicism is about? Spiritual growth and becoming holier, it’s not about reducing our carbon footprint.

Wednesday, August 02, 2017

Modern society turns morality on its head.

One interesting and disturbing thing I have noticed about people in the society around me is that rather than lacking morals altogether, they have flipped them on their heads. Things which should matter do not and vice versa.

One example is in the area of reproductive technology. Ab○rtion and I.V.F. involve the destruction of embryos and fetuses yet this doesn't seem to faze many people, including Catholics. I know many so-called Catholics who wouldn't flinch at using these life-killing technologies to achieve their goals. I know one couple right now in that situation. It seems absolutely irrelevant to them. I brought up naprotechnology, which is a Catholic re-productive technology which has a higher success rate than the standard methods. Yet they wouldn't even consider it. "The doctor at the hospital didn't mention it so I won't do it." They are like moral jellyfish – they just ebb and flow with the prevailing moral attitudes of their environment. We are supposed to be more like salmon, swimming against the tide of popular opinion and moving towards the truth.

But the irony of it is that these same people aren't amoral. They do not have a "nothing matters" attitude. On many subjects, they are zealous. I like to use the example that if we were on a nature walk and I just threw an empty water bottle into the forest or a stream and they saw me do it, they would be outraged. They would look on in shock and become very angry at me. If possible, they would do everything possible to collect the water bottle so it didn't harm the environment. Yet when it comes to human life, they wouldn't even be bothered to find out if something is morally acceptable and why. They would rather remain ignorant. Upon learning the truth, they are unaffected and couldn't care less. How perverse.

Off the top of my head, here is a list of things "modern" people care about vs. what they don't.

Things modern-day people care about:

Animal shelters and animal welfare

Recycling

Global Warming

"Gender expression"

Multiculturalism – regardless of the values of the cultures

 

Things modern-day people don't care about:

Human life

se×ual morality

Intact families

God

Their own culture and values

 

Now more than ever we need a revival of these morals.

Thursday, May 11, 2017

CBC continues to be pathetic

CBC is so pathetic and worthless they can’t even report objective news facts. There is a current March for Life in Ottawa with tens of thousands of people. It barely appears on the CBC website and the article isn’t about the March, it’s about the effects the march will have on traffic. That’s it. “traffic may be snarled due to march”. No indication of numbers or reason. Anyway, they are beyond pathetic. If this was a leftist progressive cause that had 0.001% the number of people involved, it would be the number one article on the CBC website for a week. So pathetic.

Friday, April 28, 2017

Pope Francis - Defender of Catholicism or Social Justice Warrior?

Pope Francis is once again on a mission to prove his bona fides as a modern, rock-star pope. Unlike Pope John Paul II who was sometimes referred to as a rock star because of his charisma and ability to explain Catholic doctrine in a compelling and attractive way, Pope Francis wants to be much more like an actual rock star. Rather than focusing on core Catholic issues, he prefers to stick to the uncontroversial territory of Social Justice Warrior in order to appeal to hip lefties. He’s often proclaimed as a “super duper popular pope that everyone loves”, but this is largely because he makes no moral demands except maybe to recycle and kind of be nice to people. Who would argue with that? Certainly not the hip social leftists of Hollywood and elsewhere.

Most recently, and the inspiration for the writing of this article, he appeared on a TED talk. Was it to talk about a closer relationship to God, or how to live a better life through the teaching of Jesus Christ? Or that Jesus gives his body and blood in the Eucharist to those who want eternal life? Nope. It was about not wasting stuff. You know, because having 4 sweaters instead of 3 is pretty serious stuff. Yeah yeah, salvation, schmalvation, the main issue in our world at the moment is not letting power get to your head as the pope describes as drinking gin on an empty stomach. He referred several times in his talk to taking care of others. But it’s always very vague. “don’t leave people on the side of the road”. Essentially his main message is socialism 101. Some people make too much money, people care too much about “stuff”. One person’s wealth = another person’s poverty. He has never advocated more economic freedom which has been proven to be the driver of success and prosperity. He views the world as a zero-sum game.

200 years ago, 80% of the world was extremely poor. Now it’s like 12%, the lowest rate in human history. This isn’t simply because the 20% gave all their wealth away to the other 80%. Unfortunately the pope doesn’t understand that economic prosperity, rather than simply “being nice to poor people”, is the real solution. In fact, he has denounced capitalism as the “dung of the devil”. He, as a social justice warrior, has advocated the same things that have made Venezuela one of the worst places on Earth. Because of his stances, he has become very popular in pop culture. He is very trendy. No more pesky talk about universal morals or calls to holiness. How passé!

But don’t think this means anything positive for Catholicism in general. Mass attendance has not increased, nor has the number of people converting to Catholicism. In fact, within faithful Catholic circles, people at best try to view Pope Francis as meaning well but making media blunders and at worse view him as purely a social justice warrior who wants to appear popular, relevant and “cool”.

With this current pope, you are much more likely to get an earful about not throwing out rotten bananas or the need to smile more than you will about sexµal ethics, the seven deadly sins, sacrifice, the Eucharist, the necessity of the Church, or traditional devotionals such as the rosary or the stations of the cross. He will not address the personal moral problems facing people around the world today.

As I was thinking about this yesterday, I realized that Pope Francis’s message is only geared toward the top 1% or top 10% people in the world. They are the exploiters and wasters and people destroying the Earth and other people. It seems the other 90% or 99% are entities without agency. They are simply victims who are not moral actors, they are simply acted upon. As my friend noted, his message seems more political and in line with leftist political thought than a message designed to help every individual morally and spiritually.

Despite his attempts to create an image of being a kindly old man who is not interested in dogma but rather in being kind, gentle and “tender”, he actually treats people who question him with harshness, calling them Pharisees and saying they are too strict. He has banished many people who simply seek humble clarification on issues. He has demoted people who merely ask questions.

I think the pope needs to return to true Catholic principles and spend less time being a modern-day social justice warrior. The Church will not attract new followers by attempting to appear to be the same as the rest of the world. As anyone in marketing will know, to create a strong brand, an organization must stick to what makes it unique and promote that. No marketer would suggest an image that says you are the same as everyone else. Trying to be more like the world will not bring in converts. I believe what will bring in converts is showing how the Catholic Church can improve your life and the world substantially by following Jesus Christ.

Monday, March 13, 2017

Bill Schutt COMPLETELY WRONG about Catholic Church

Bill Schutt is a professor of Biology Professor at Long Island University. He wrote a book about cannibalism where he says it's perfectly natural. But he doesn't seem to have the first clue what he's talking about when it comes to the Catholic Church.

He was being interviewed tonight, March 13, 2017 on The Current by Anna Maria Tremonti of CBC News. The anti-Catholic bigotry was overt.

He makes one gaffe after another and is completely wrong. I would seriously question anything this man says. If we are to judge the validity of his claims based on how bad he represents historical Catholicism, then his works are worth the paper they're written on.

Let's go claim by claim from the radio interview:

Schutt: Well, mainly because for nearly 400 years, starting in the 13th century, once Pope Innocent the Third proclaimed that the host was the actual body of Jesus Christ that was being consumed.

??? So he pinpointed Pope Innocent III as the originator of the idea of Transubstantiation??

Ok, let's look at references:
St. Iraenus of Lyon said the following a few decades after Jesus Christ:
"[Christ] has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own Blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own Body, from which he gives increase to our bodies."

For dozens more references which date to the first and second century, visit this link.

Jesus himself said the bread and wine are true flesh and true blood. This is a constant teaching of the Church from the very beginning. At best what Bill Schutt is doing here is an amateur move where they see an official pronouncement (done because the doctrine is being denied by heretics) from the pope as the beginning of that belief. This is complete nonsense. The belief existed, and was dogma. It had to be officially defined in a particular way in response to heresies. You'd have to be a first year student to make that mistake.

Even Wikipedia points out that belief in the Real Presence, i.e. that Jesus Christ is present body, blood, soul, and divinity in the Eucharist, dates back to the earliest days of Christianity.

The interviewer, Anna Maria Tremonti, who is equally uninformed then pipes up and says "I mean it is true in the Catholic doctrine. It's the body and blood of Christ. The wine is supposed to be the blood. Yeah."

To which Bill Schutt replies: "Absolutely."

No Bill and Anna, ABSOLUTELY WRONG. The bread AND the wine BOTH become the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ. The wine doesn't only become the blood and the bread only become the body. Anyone with the most cursory understanding of Catholicism would know this. It's the most basic information.

Bill also mentions that many of his so-called good Catholic friends don't "really" believe in the Real Presence, but rather they do a sort of "wink wink nudge nudge" about it and really believe that it's just a symbol. Sorry BILL, those aren't good Catholics, they are bad, informed, uncatechised friends. They ought to know better. If you do not believe in the Real Presence, you should not partake in communion. Real Catholics believe in the Eucharist and that it is the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ.

I find it pathetic that CBC would interview people on a subject which they know nothing about. In fact, Catholicism is the only area where this is deemed acceptable. You wouldn't have someone who knows nothing about baseball doing the color commentary for baseball games. Yet, no one bats an eye when someone whose understanding of Catholicism is less than that of a 5 year old presumes to speak for all Catholics. It's truly pathetic. I can GUARANTEE you, CBC would never have anyone misrepresenting or mocking Islam. They would only hire Islamic experts and apologists.

Our tax dollars are once again being completely wasted on these programs which are spouting countless lies to attack the faith of millions. CBC should be ashamed of themselves.

Sunday, March 05, 2017

SHOCKING: woman reads gospel and gives homily in st. John's Newfoundland

Although I wasn't present at this Mass my friend who was informed me that this morning at 9:30 a.m. at st. Theresa's Church on Mundy Pond Road in St. John's Newfoundland a woman read the gospel from memory in the center of the Altar and then proceeded to give a homily. This is while two ordained priests looked on as she was doing this.

This practice is fully and explicitly forbidden in the general instruction of the Roman missal as well as in the code of canon law. These are two of the guides which govern all the activities that occur within the church.

If you would like the details of what is contained within these Church documents please go to this exclamation given by Father John trigilio when something similar happened to someone else:

http://www.ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage.asp?number=346259&Pg=&Pgnu=&recnu=

I am not sure but I fear this could be part of a new program initiated in Newfoundland to deal with the shortage of priests in certain areas. In the case where there is no priest present in a particular area on a Sunday it is permissible for parishioners to have a form of service. However this service would not include Eucharist or anything that is specifically assigned to a priest. Also it requires that there be no priest available at the time. However this was clearly not the case here because there were two priests actually in the church sitting there doing everything else for Mass.

What is happening is that priests are being given an inch and they are taking a mile. This is pretty much what happens every time there is any form of slight change that occurs in the church. There are radicals within the church that will take it to an extreme that was never intended.

Celebrating this mass or father Tony bidgood and another priest who has not been identified. Either one of these priests should have stepped in to stop what was happening here. But it is most likely that father Tony not only didn't try to stop it but had actually set it up.

This is an outrageous disaster. My friend was so distraught and put off by this that he simply walked out of the church. He felt he had no other option. In fact what I told him was that Catholics are forbidden from spending their Sunday celebration at a non-catholic place of worship. If a Catholic Church is not respecting specific and explicit Catholic laws I have to wonder if it would even fulfill one's Sunday obligation. My friend did the right thing by walking out of the church. When something so manifestly wrong is occurring it is our moral duty to stand up and do something about it. I'm not talking about tiny little peccadilloes which can sometimes occur. I'm talking about massive violations of canon law.

He will be contacting the bishop for something to be done about this. Hopefully the bishop will follow his duty invocation and explicitly forbid this action and tell the priest this is unacceptable. My fear in all of this is that the bishop does nothing and ignores canon law.

I will keep you posted on any updates.

Saturday, March 04, 2017

Temptation

Does anyone here have struggle with sin? It’s such a huge battle at all times. Various things I find a daily thing. It can be anger, lust, gluttony, sloth, etc. I really do envy people who have been able to transcend these. I know we remain human with temptations until death, so no one really fully “overcomes” these sins, I don’t think. But I think you can get to the point where you are not internally tempted to do certain things. You can recognize they are wrong and you use your will to avoid them. But this also applies to positive things, such as almsgiving or attending religious events.

Ultimately I think a lot of it is habit and being at peace with your life. With habit, we can create a lifestyle where we do not face such temptation all the time. Like eating healthy. At first, because we are still fully addicted, it can be difficult. But once we develop a habit of eating a proper breakfast and having good quality nutrition, the longer we do this, the less we are internally tempted to partake. We may still have, in the back of our minds, the idea that partaking in a particular sin might seem like it would be pleasurable but we aren’t holding on to the door frame to prevent ourselves from doing it.

Anyway like I said many saints have come to this point where they are no longer pulled internally toward a sin. They see it, but they are not really “tempted” by it.

Why do I keep saying “internal”? Well, there are two types of temptation. One is you are being tempted. The other is you are internally tempted, you are struggling to not give in, etc.

For example, if you were offered drugs, if you had no desire for them, someone could still be “tempting you” with them. An internal temptation is one where you are a drug addict and it takes all your will power to decline the offer. In the first example, you are not internally tempted. I feel like after much discipline and habit you can eventually reach that level. I guess that’s our spiritual goal!

Friday, March 03, 2017

How is Everyone’s Lent Going?

Hi everyone, just checking in to see how your Lent is progressing. We are still in the initial stages of it. I gave up soft drinks, but I should do more I think. That's not much of a penance really, even though I partake frequently. I'm in awe of some people. I knew one girl who gave up meat FOR ALL OF LENT! Crazy. She is Indian so maybe they know more recipes. My fiancée is Indian and vegetarian all her life. But still that's a lot. Others will give up drinking all together, chocolate, etc. some are tall orders.

 

But it all depends. If you never eat chocolate, then giving it up is pretty meaningless. Also some people, including myself in past Lents, give up so little it hardly seems like a penance. Like giving up one flavour of ice cream or maybe not drinking one type of alcohol. Pretty low-end. You should really be looking for something that will bring you closer to God. Look for things that take you away from union with the Almighty, and those are good places to start.

 

I do wonder about people who live an entire life of penance, do they give up something else? Some people have already given a lot. Btw, you can also take up something, like being more helpful or saying more prayers. Not all about stopping everything. What do you do for Lent, write it down below!

Google Search #1 "Why do Catholics...Pray to Mary?"

This is the ninth in a series of articles which are based on the top 9 google searches which come after "Why do Catholics..." in the search suggestions. I start at the ninth and will work my way to #1. If you have follow-up questions or comments, please post them below.

The topic of today's blog is "Why do Catholics Pray to Mary?"

Thursday, March 02, 2017

Google Search #2 "Why do Catholics...Pray to Saints?"

This is the eighth in a series of articles which are based on the top 9 google searches which come after "Why do Catholics..." in the search suggestions. I start at the ninth and will work my way to #1. If you have follow-up questions or comments, please post them below.

The topic of today's blog is "Why do Catholics Pray to Saints?"

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Google Search #3 "Why do Catholics...Worship Mary?"

This is the seventh in a series of articles which are based on the top 9 google searches which come after "Why do Catholics..." in the search suggestions. I start at the ninth and will work my way to #1. If you have follow-up questions or comments, please post them below.

The topic of today's blog is "Why do Catholics Worship Mary?"

Note: The next (Google Search #2) will be published on Thursday.


Monday, February 27, 2017

Google Search #4 "Why do Catholics...Light Candles?"

This is the sixth in a series of articles which are based on the top 9 google searches which come after "Why do Catholics..." in the search suggestions. I start at the ninth and will work my way to #1. If you have follow-up questions or comments, please post them below.

The topic of today's blog is "Why do Catholics Light Candles?"

Friday, February 24, 2017

Google Search #5 "Why do Catholics...Eat Fish on Friday?"

This is the fifth in a series of articles which are based on the top 9 google searches which come after "Why do Catholics..." in the search suggestions. I start at the ninth and will work my way to #1. If you have follow-up questions or comments, please post them below.

The topic of today's blog is "Why do Catholics Eat Fish on Friday?"

Thursday, February 23, 2017

Google Search #6 "Why do Catholics...Pray the Rosary?"

This is the fourth in a series of articles which are based on the top 9 google searches which come after "Why do Catholics..." in the search suggestions. I start at the ninth and will work my way to #1. If you have follow-up questions or comments, please post them below.

The topic of today's blog is "Why do Catholics Pray the Rosary?"

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

Google Search #7 "Why do Catholics...Believe in Purgatory?"

This is the third in a series of articles which are based on the top 9 google searches which come after "Why do Catholics..." in the search suggestions. I start at the ninth and will work my way to #1. If you have follow-up questions or comments, please post them below.

The topic of today's blog is "Why do Catholics Believe in Purgatory?"

A lot of people have issues with the Catholic idea of purgatory. Now first of all if you look at history most Church fathers believed in purgatory if not all of them. It actually comes from Jewish belief about purification after death. But beyond the biblical and historical proof for the truth of purgatory I think we need to look at common sense. As we know in the Bible in many places it says that nothing imperfect can enter into the kingdom of heaven. It seems a little bit strips that if nothing can enter Heaven that is not perfect that God wouldn't give us some method to be purified before we entered into heaven. Therefore it only seems logical that human beings with minor flaws remaining would have some way of erasing these flaws before entering into a place where everything must be perfect. I would love to know what you think about on this subject. Please leave your comments below.

Please check out the following link for further information about proof for the existence of purgatory. I think it's possible that the article might be a little bit strongly-worded. But if so please try to overlook that. Thank you.

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Google Search #8 "Why do Catholics...Baptize Babies?"


This is the second in a series of articles which are based on the top 9 google searches which come after "Why do Catholics..." in the search suggestions. I start at the ninth and will work my way to #1. If you have follow-up questions or comments, please post them below.

The topic of today's blog is "Why do Catholics Baptize Babies?"

Obviously many people from various Christian traditions do not baptize infants. They say only adults or people of a certain age at least should be baptized because it has to be a conscious act as opposed to something that you are forced to do as an infant and have no choice over. They would say "how can somebody accept the Lord Jesus Christ unless they are of a certain age and can explicitly give consent?". However Catholics would say that the faith is passed down from parents to children and that the parents are the first teachers of their children.  Children do not necessarily need to give explicit permission for everything that is done to them. And as you will see there are many benefits of baptizing infants and potential pitfalls of neglecting to baptize them.

 When we look in the Bible one of the things that Jesus says over and over again is go and baptize all people in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. He further goes on to say that unless one is baptized that they cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. Catholics throughout the centuries have taken these Commandments very seriously because he doesn't give an exception. Jesus does not say for example that unless a person is baptized "assuming they have reached the age where they can consent to baptism", they cannot be saved. No, instead the command to baptize everyone is explicit and no exceptions are given.

 We also can look at history and find that from very very early in the church, much before any Protestant denominations existed, infant baptism was the norm. All Christians practiced it. It was not until the Reformation that certain Christian sects began removing infant baptism and instead started practicing only adult baptism.  There are many sources of Christian literature that date back to the first one or two centuries of Christianity explaining infant baptism and how it is performed and it is seen as something that naturally occurs for all Christian families. I would suggest looking at the Wikipedia article on this subject because they go into great depth and give a very well-rounded explanation for this practice.

 But when you think about it on another level,  children do not verbally consent to anything until a later age and we must wait even longer before they are old enough to make an independent conscious decision to do something. However just because that is the case does not mean we withhold our culture and values and beliefs from a child until they are of the age where they can make a conscious and personal decision about it. For example we do not wait until a child is 12 or 13 years old to teach them what is right and wrong or to teach them about God or to teach them our language or values. We do that right from the very start when they're very young. Baptism is a form of initiation into the Christian family and into a relationship with God himself. Why would we withhold this amazing gift that God has provided to us just because this is a child who cannot explicitly consent to it. There are many examples of consent in our lives that do not apply to children. For example we would not withhold medicine from an infant simply because they cannot verbally consent to taking it. And if we listen to Jesus and he says baptism is necessary for salvation who are we to say "I think you forgot to mention that this only applies to people of a certain age, Jesus."

 Thank you for reading this article. If you have any questions or comments please by all means feel free to leave them down below. In terms of the article I was referencing on Wikipedia that can be found here.

Monday, February 20, 2017

REAL ARTICLE: Google Search #9 "Why do Catholics...Confess to a Priest?"

Sorry about my last article earlier this morning which didn't publish. Here is the real article. I hope you enjoy. Please leave comments and questions below:

This is the first in a series of articles which are based on the top 9 google searches which come after "Why do Catholics..." in the search suggestions. I start at the ninth and will work my way to #1. If you have follow-up questions or comments, please post them below.

The topic of today's blog is "Why do Catholics Confess to a Priest?"

As a child, the concept of confession to a priest always seems someone scary. It seemed like you would go into a dark room and there would be a priest on the other end and you would be very terrified and you would have to reveal all of your embarrassing secrets and once you were done the priest would sit in judgement and tell you just how terrible and horrible of a person you were. Afterwards he would probably go and tell other people all of the stuff you had done and anytime after that whenever you saw him in public he would look at you judgmentally.

 However after I experienced my very first confession which I admit I do not remember very well I can tell you that this is not what happened at all. I felt good about doing it. But as years went by there have been long periods of time where I did not go to confession. But I can guarantee you that every time I do I feel really good about myself. It's practically indescribable how good one feels after confessing one's sins and feeling completely forgiven by God.

 Obviously so far I'm just talking about emotions. But my first point as to the legitimacy of the sacrament of confession is the emotional and spiritual benefits that we derive from it. At first many people are skeptical about it, they fear the worst. But once they experience love and forgiveness it is an indescribable feeling that you can attain nowhere else. One thing I often say is that many people are willing to spend a lot of money speaking to psychologists or therapists or psychiatrists or a whole multitude of people who are willing to listen. They put forth their problems and the professional listens to them and give them advice on how to live a better and happier life. People who are cognizant of mortal sins they have committed generally feel bad about those. And they want to go somewhere where they can get them off their chest and receive spiritual counseling and get back into the grace of God.

 Many people object to the institution of the sacrament of confession because they say there is no need to go to a man to confess your sins. They say why not simply go directly to God? But again I would ask in response the same question rhetorically when it comes to psychologist: Why must we go to speak to somebody about any mental or psychological issues that we are having? Why not just find information at a library and solve the problem ourselves? But for anybody who has ever experienced a powerful negative emotion can tell you, trying to completely resolved an issue totally on your own can sometimes be very difficult if not impossible.

I would like to add a caveat to say that according to Catholic theology forgiveness obviously can be given directly from God and we do not need to go to confession to receive forgiveness. However this applies under certain circumstances and certain conditions. For example your contrition must be perfect. This can sometimes be difficult to attain.

 Also it is very important to remember that according to Catholic theology it is not the man called a priest who is forgiving your sins. It is God himself. In fact according to Catholic teaching there is only one priest and that is Jesus Christ and the men we call priests are actually acting in the name and in the person of Jesus Christ himself becoming somewhat his hands and feet on this Earth. It is the same thing when the priest is saying the prayers of consecration to change the bread and wine into the body and blood soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. The priest is not doing this by his own power but rather he is re-presenting the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on Calvary. Therefore Jesus is not being sacrificed again and again at every Mass but rather the one and only sacrifice is being  re-presented to us in the modern day. Everything the priest is doing is done in what's called Persona Christi which means in the Person of Christ. It's as if Christ himself is doing it. Therefore when a person goes to confession and the priest hears the confession and gives him absolution he is doing so in the Person of Jesus Christ and not by his own power.

I can imagine at this point that many people are asking where is the proof of this from the Bible? The main biblical proof for the existence of confession is when Jesus Christ tells his followers to tell their sins to one another. He is specifically talking to the apostles who he is giving a special Ministry to. Through Apostolic succession other Bishops retain his power which Jesus intended to pass down after he had departed from the Earth. Therefore he is telling the new apostles to listen to sins. Also he tells the same apostles that they have the power to forgive sins on Earth. But again we must always remember and stress that it is not the apostles or Bishops or priests themselves who are forgiving the sins but God himself. Many times throughout the Bible it is said that only God can forgive sins and therefore we do not contradict this because we do not claim that it is the actual man, the priest, who is himself forgiving sins.

 This is just a brief overview of some of my thoughts about the sacrament of confession. Obviously there are thousands of more pages that could be and have been written about this subject already. So by all means if you're looking for anything else please go look for it. If you would like specific biblical references to any of the allegations I have made please feel free to ask me for them in the comments section below. Also keep in mind comments can be anonymous, you do not need to register in order to leave a comment on my blog. I thank you very much for stopping by today and I will be posting a new question and answer tomorrow as we count down the top 9 things people have searched for in relation to why Catholics do certain things.

Sorry about Lack of Article

Hey guys, there was supposed to be an article today about why Catholics confess to a priest. Unfortunately I didn’t publish it in time. It should be available later tonight or tomorrow morning. The other articles in the series should be available on time. Sorry about any inconvenience!

Google Search #9 "Why do Catholics...Confess to a Priest?"

This is the first in a series of articles which are based on the top 9 google searches which come after "Why do Catholics..." in the search suggestions. I start at the ninth and will work my way to #1. If you have follow-up questions or comments, please post them below.

The topic of today's blog is "Why do Catholics Confess to a Priest?"

Friday, February 03, 2017

LOVING ANIMALS, HATING HUMANS??

An extremely disturbing and worrisome trend that I have been seeing over the past couple of years is people having much more concern, love, and compassion for animals than they do for human beings. This is extremely worrying and troubling because it means that our values as a society are completely screwed up. Just yesterday I was watching a movie called XXX starring Vin Diesel as Xander Gear. As they are introducing one of the female characters they showed her with a rifle pointed towards a lion in Africa. The lion was in the crosshairs and it seemed as if she was about to shoot the lion but then she moved her scope over slightly to see three human beings. They were carrying bows and arrows and we're about to shoot a lion. What did she do? Well of course she shot the humans. One she shot the gun out of his hand and the other she just shot in the leg and then she proudly declared that she was making the playing field more even and implied that the three humans would now be eaten by the lion. This produced for her a large amount of pleasure and joy in the thought that this lion would now feast upon its potential killers.

I'm assuming most people feel exactly the same way as this and that's why I'm so disturbed with this trend in our society. In the Book of Genesis God clearly places human beings above all animals and says that we are the stewards of animals and that they are part of our dominion over the Earth. However we have completely reversed this to the point where a human life is practically meaningless to most people and they would much rather see a human or many humans being killed than an animal. We witnessed this back when Cecil the lion was killed by a hunter. Now keep in mind having a regulated lion hunt which brings in tens of millions of dollars and is very specific about what people are allowed to kill can actually be hugely beneficial to the overall lion population. This is something I've talked about at length in other areas and you can look up information about this on the internet. But that's not the point I want to make here because even if there is no overall economic value to killing a lion we should not feel as if killing a lion or any other animal for that matter is anywhere near equal to killing a human being which is far far worse. One of the Ten Commandment is Thou shalt not murder. But when they say this they're not referring to animals because animals cannot be murdered per se. Animals can be killed but they cannot be murdered because murder involves one person killing another.

 One of the reasons that most people now value the lives of animals more than humans is because they have no moral basis on which to make decisions. They do not understand that human beings have a very special relationship with God because they are born and will live for all of eternity hopefully with God who created them. Animals on the other hand lack rationality and are not fully aware of their own existence and therefore they do not live forever but their animal soul dies when they die. Because people have no basis in morality anymore, they have no way of telling what is more valuable than anything else. They believe that all animals are more important and more valuable than human beings which is absolutely sad and will lead to tragic consequences. One of the things that I've noticed is that many people who become animal rights activists do not do so because they care so much about animals but because they have a deep hatred for humans I was at work one time and a lady said that if she sees a video of a human being being injured or killed, most of the time she will burst out laughing. However if she ever sees a video of an animal being hurt in any way shape or form she will break down sobbing and become very upset. This is an extremely anti-human position to take.

 In the Book of Genesis God gives humans dominion over the entire Earth and tells them to use the Earth to advance their own cause. We are in control of all of the animals of the earth and have dominion over all of them. But sadly we are losing our value for human life. That's one of the reasons why abortion is so prevalent and also know euthanasia is becoming completely out of control. It's sad and disgusting that we will care more about random animals then we will about our fellow human beings. Often the same people who are out advocating on behalf of dumb animals will at the same time advocate euthanizing anybody who they do not want to take care of or do not have time for any more. Let's end this absolute hatred of human beings and start living as God wants us to live once again.

Thursday, February 02, 2017

Breaking news

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/762498/paris-explosion-several-feared-dead-suspected-gas-leak

Explosion in France. Not trying to have the details yet. Continue to follow this story to find out more.

READER QUESTION: Is Birth Control ALWAYS Wrong?

Today I received a question from a reader of the blog in reference to the article found here. Here was the question:

Interesting thoughts to have stumbled upon, that birth control is completely immoral for a practicing Catholic. However, I don't think it's as black or white as that.How about in cases where a woman is on certain medications that would prevent healthy pregnancies (for the baby and/or mother), yet they are married? Should they never be intimate with their spouse? Or risk their (or future child's) health? I think of course the answer should be "no."It's not exactly a common case, of course, but some women, after having certain cancers or hormonal conditions are put on birth control pills for optimal health and well-being. Sometimes this is just for a short time, but for others, it's for years. Where would the Catholic church stand on this, in your opinion?

According to Catholic doctrine, birth control cannot be used as an artificial way of preventing pregnancy. However, if a medication is prescribed to treat a particular condition, and as an unintended side effect, prevents pregnancy, then it is morally licit. So it all goes back to the purpose. Kind of like taking drugs to get high would be immoral, but taking drugs to treat an ailment which incidentally caused the person to be high, that would not be immoral.

With regards to the other question, if a woman knew for certain that giving birth to a child could cause damage or problems for her or her child, then this would be a legitimate reason to avoid having sex during fertile times in order to reduce the chance of conception. It would also be acceptable to refrain from sex altogether. The church accepts people understanding their bodies and fertility and doing what is necessary to avoid pregnancy. This does not violate natural law. Sort of like if you knew eating late at night causes weight gain and you avoid this, that is not wrong. But purging after eating would probably not be considered okay.

Again, with adequately serious reasons, Catholics are permitted to take steps to avoid pregnancy, which do not involve artificially altering the way the human body functions.

Hope this helps. If anyone has any further questions, let me know!

Wednesday, February 01, 2017

Catholic Mass is sometimes a FREE FOR ALL

Have you ever watched a movie which shows a Catholic Church? Usually it is somewhat dark with beautiful architecture all around. You can see a section where there are many candles lit, there are statues and icons of many things all over the place. There are beautiful wooden pews and there are people all around in the pews kneeling down praying silently. Some are probably attending Eucharistic adoration and worshiping Jesus Christ in the holy sacrament. There may even be incense. There is a deep spirituality happening in these scenes. It is a place to go for contemplation, to feel God's presence and to reflect on life.

 Well if you're looking for such a place I suggest that you find them in movies because lately these scenes do not often reproduce themselves and real life very much anymore. Usually when I walk into a Catholic Church people are talking and laughing and shaking hands and patting others on the back and telling jokes and so on. The sad part is that this doesn't just happen before Mass or after Mass this happens during Mass! There is almost no sense of reverence whatsoever. That's why I like to say that Catholic Mass with the vernacular translation and with the catchy homilies by the priest has become basically a free-for-all.

 Today I went to mass and they were having multiple baptisms at the same time. Baptisms are one of the worst times to go if you want to see people acting as they should. During the entire mass in which their child will be baptized into the sacrament of initiation of the Catholic church and become part of the body of Christ, most of the people in attendance again are laughing and joking and telling jokes and playing with the baby and talking very loudly and not paying any attention whatsoever. My question is why are they even there? I think a lot of the time it's because the grandmother or grandfather of the child insists that the child be baptized and that's what happens. But these people have no interest or no information or no knowledge about the church whatsoever and so their presence is just a token appearance. They have no interest or intention of ever continuing to attend mass in any way shape or form. They are simply there to placate the desires of their parents by having the children baptized.

 But I suspect that this may also be the logic behind why so many people act so inappropriately during mass. Even today just before communion actually I saw a woman popping gum or some other form of food into her mouth. It wasn't even as if she had accidentally come into the church with gum in her mouth. She specifically put gum into her mouth right before going up for communion. This is basically a sacrilege and completely unacceptable and wrong.

 I understand that many priests nowadays have this extreme desire to appear hip and trendy and to be seen as a social justice warrior and so on. But these behaviors and activities must end and they must end immediately. People need to be informed on a daily basis that they are attending the holy sacrifice of the mass that was instituted by Jesus Christ and his re presentation of his passion and Death on the cross at Calvary for our salvation. If people actually understood this would they really be telling jokes and laughing out loud in such a context? I really sincerely doubt it. And if they do continue to laugh and joke and carry on even after they understand the meaning of what is happening I think they need to be told by the priests to get out of there. I can already see people's response to what I am saying. They are shocked and aghast that I would ever suggest somebody be told to leave the church. But is this a Catholic Church where we are presenting the body and blood soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ? Or is this some kind of bar downtown where we can go and have a few drinks with buddies and make a few jokes? Well if it's the former then it's really not out of place to tell somebody who has no idea what's going on to leave. There's really no point in even being there if you have no interest in it.

 But as usual I would really like to hear what you have to say on this topic so please add your comments below and we'll continue this whole discussion in the comments section. Have a great day!

Tuesday, January 31, 2017

Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch: a true pro-life judge!

I'm so glad to see that President Donald Trump has appointed Neil Gorsuch as nominee for Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Gorsuch has a reputation for being very pro-life and in favor of religious liberty. For example he ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby in their lawsuit to prevent them from having to provide contraception even though it was against the religion of the owners of the company. Also he prevented group of nuns from being forced to pay for contraception which was mandated by Obamacare.

Gorsuch is only 49 years old and so we can expect many decades of this pro-life Advocate being on the Supreme Court. And if all goes well Roe versus Wade will be brought back before the court and a new ruling will be made in which case it is very possible that it could be overturned in abortion could be made illegal in the United States of America. We can only hope.

Looks line Gorsuch's Prolife Credentials are Legit!

Trump Selects Supreme Court Justice: Neil Gorsuch

Breaking News!! Trump has chosen a new supreme court justice. Judge Neil Gorsuch.

More to come on his prolife credentials later.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/bc.marfeel.com/amp/www.nationalreview.com/article/444437/neil-gorsuch-antonin-scalia-supreme-court-textualist-originalist-heir

[VIDEO] Bishop Violently Attacked by Thug DURING MASS!



Very shocking and disturbing video has emerged from New Jersey of Bishop Manuel Aurelio Cruz being punched in the face during Mass by an assailant identified as Charles Miller who is aged 48 years old and a citizen of Newark. Charles Miller apparently had no criminal record before this incident. In the video Mr. Miller just casually saunters up to the altar and people immediately become very suspicious because parishioners should not be approaching the altar at this time during the Mass. Then all of a sudden out of nowhere Mr. Miller attacks the priest by punching him in the face. Very fortunately there were guardian angels in the form of police officers immediately available to end the altercation. Although Bishop Cruz has been able to since address the congregation about the incident he nonetheless had injuries which resulted in him needing 30 stitches in his face and also many of his teeth became loose.

Of course because our mind have been poisoned to believe that all Catholic priest abuse children many people are assuming that Mr. Miller was once an altar boy and that he was sexually assaulted by Bishop Cruz. But there is absolutely not one shred of evidence for this assertion but I guess people will continue to believe whatever they want to believe. The fact of the matter is that Catholic priests were no more likely to abuse children than anybody else and any other denomination or religion. In fact, many studies have suggested that the incidence was in fact lower. But we also know that the priests who did these things were horrible, horrendous people who deserve strict punishment and that most of them were gay and that's why they targeted boys as opposed to girls.

 My only caution is not to just jump on the bandwagon and believe that Bishop Cruz was abusing anybody in his role as priest or bishop. This is jumping to conclusions and making assumptions that are not validated and this is extremely unChristian Behavior.

Catholic Response to TRUMP Bans 7 Countries

So a lot of people are very upset with Donald Trump's newest announcement that he will be banning people from 7 different countries.  The countries that are being banned include Iran Iraq Syria Sudan Libya Yemen and Somalia. These countries have been known to export dozens of  terrorists into other countries who have committed savage acts of violence.  However some people say the US has no business Banning people from entire countries. It should be done on a case-by-case basis. For instance if somebody is determined to be a terrorist or have terrorist ties then it will be legitimate to ban that particular person but not to ban an entire country.

 There are a number of problems and things that people are not looking at the situation. First of all no country has a moral obligation to accept any and all refugees from any other place in the world. It is a Prudential judgment how many people a particular country will take in. This can be debated. For one thing Donald Trump won the election which means that he was given a mandate by the People based on what he said he would do during the election. One of his promises was to ban Muslims until we can figure out what exactly is going on and help us to deal with the situation. People decided that this was the best thing to do in this case and they voted for him and now that's what he's banning some people on a limited basis. Again this doesn't affect moral teachings in this area because this is a prudential judgment. We are not obliged to take in every and all refuge in the entire world.

 Secondly, reports from Gallup and others have indicated that approximately 138 million people would and really want to come to United States to live as immigrants. However each year the United States takes in just 1 million people which represents .7% of the total who applied. This means that the United States refuses immigration to 99.3% of people who want to come. Obviously the country must arbitrarily decline Millions upon millions of applications to become immigrants. To me it does not seem overly crazy for the United States to ban people from a few countries that have been known to support and export terrorists into other countries. Another way to look at it is to realize that beforehand the United States was banning 99.3% of immigrants into the country. Now they are increasing that to 100% for certain countries. It's not as if the US was taking every single Refugee from all around the world and now they've suddenly stopped taking anybody from anywhere. The chances already of entering the United States as an immigrant were infinitesimally small.

 The people  who have a real moral obligation to take care of refugees are the actual countries themselves where the refugees live. We must make sure to place the blame on what is causing all of these refugees in the first place. For instance there are wars being caused by Islamic extremists which are displacing millions of people. We have to realize that the Islamic extremists are the people to blame not the United States or Donald Trump just because he doesn't want to allow terrorists to come into the country.

 Anyway as usual many Catholics and Christians in general have made the question of immigration and allowing and refugees the number one issue in their faith. But this is far from the truth. We must more than ever focus on being good moral and decent people. If you want to help somebody else, clothe the naked or feed the hungry please go ahead and do so but that does not mean that if somebody does not want to take in people from certain regions of the world which have been known to sponsor terrorism that that makes them a bad person no more than you not inviting every single person you meet into your home to live there makes you an evil person.

 Plus we are entering into the realm of prudential judgement which means that there can be a legitimate debates among Catholics on this issue. This is unlike abortion where there is no room for legitimate debate on that topic. It's morally wrong and that's all there is to it. However when it comes to immigration and accepting refugees that is a different story. In those cases we must follow our conscience is to decide what is the most moral way to proceed but we cannot vilify others just because they do not share our opinions. I've heard some pretty awful nasty things coming from so-called Christians and Catholics on this issue. They will call anybody who disagrees with them Hitler and they will say that anybody who supports immigration limits are the same as Hitler. Well I want to make 100% clear that Hitler actually slaughtered millions of innocent people. If all Hitler did was prevented immigration into Germany from certain other countries nobody would even know his name anymore. So let's calm down the rhetoric and try to have some good will towards other people who may not share our opinions word-for-word.

Monday, January 30, 2017

"More things Jesus never said":

TRUMP stands up for Christians

Yesterday, Sunday, January 29, 2017, trump wrote the following:


He's absolutely right! According to the Center for the Study of New Religions, in 2016, Christians were the most persecuted religion in the world. 90,000 Christians were executed for their faith. Obama pretty much did nothing. Our Canadian Prime Minister doesn't even care about Christians who are being persecuted. He has focused exclusively on bringing in Muslims into the country.

I think a lot of people are upset because Donald Trump is challenging this view of many people that all religions are absolutely identical. So saying that we need to stand up for Christians who are being persecuted more than any other religion is really terrible to these people. They somehow think specifically mentioning the plight of Christians will diminish their belief that all religions are the same despite the fact that they are absolutely and completely different in practically every way.

Christians have a view of the universe and of God which is very spiritual and goes beyond our human nature. However Muslims do not have the same view. Islam is a very human religion which sees God as sort of a master and that we must serve him or we will be punished severely. However if we obey our Heavenly master then we will be rewarded with lots of food and virgins and all of our carnal desires will be fulfilled.

Christians have a much more spiritual and transcendent view of the afterlife and the rewards that are in store for those who follow God's will. Another difference is that Islam would find it repulsive to call God Father. They do not see God as a father but as a harsh master who is punishing people for disobeying him. Christians obviously on the other hand see God is a loving father who is loving them so much that he would do anything for them including giving his only son to die for them so that they could have eternal life in spiritual union with God.

It's so refreshing to finally have a president of the United States who is willing to call things what they are. He says that Christians are suffering and he actually uses the word Christian. He doesn't just say many people of various different faiths or something very generic like that. He points them out and he names them. Secondly he points to the root cause of so many of our world problems which is Islam. He doesn't beat around the bush and call it "other people" or radicalism or some other generic euphemism. He comes right out and calls it what it is - Islamic extremism.

Sunday, January 29, 2017

BREAKING NEWS: 5 DEAD IN MOSQUE SHOOTING

Photo Credit: CBC News
There are very few details yet, but it seems not long ago, there was a shooting at a Quebec City mosque. One report says there are 5 dead. This happened in Quebec City, which is in the province of Quebec in Canada. In total there are about 250,000 Muslims in the province of Quebec out of a total of about 8.18 million, or about 3%.

Quebec was once the hub of Canadian Catholicism, but since the 60s, Quebec has turned strongly against the Church. There was a massive revolt. It's so bad that most Quebecois swear words are words from Catholicism, such as references to the tabernacle, the wounds of Christ, the chalice of Holy Communion and more.

Let's hope this incident is now over.

More information here:
CBC
Globe and Mail
Global News

Thursday, January 26, 2017

What I think faithful Catholics want to see from Pope Francis

Pope Francis needs to focus way more on speaking to the faithful about personal sanctity and how to achieve peace and joy in our lives. He seems to spend an awful lot of time talking about the environment or calling pro-lifers and people who like the traditional Latin Mass “rigid” and other mean words. Basically any traditional Catholic can find himself at the end of a critical comment by the pontiff. What’s going on with this? A couple of days ago, he issued a statement about the US election where he insinuated that Trump’s rise is the same as HitIer’s and we must be very weary of Trump as president for the same reasons. I don’t recall him mentioning anything about how Trump is pro-life and has ended funding for international ab0rtions.

The thing I also find is that the pope will say pro-lifers and traditional Catholics are rigid and mean-spirited and not loving enough, but then he will say things like capitalism is the greatest evil, and just use very over the top language when describing people or behaviors he doesn’t like. He bashed anyone who questioned his encyclical about giving communion to divorced and remarried Catholics. So while he is saying some people are mean, he acts very meanly himself.

I think part of the blame lies in the reporting that we hear. Whether or not the pope is aware, the media yearns for stories of dissent, or for any indication the Church will accept their immoral views. So those stories are widely reported with glee. The pope has issued strong statements opposing ab0rtion and many lgbt causes, but these are less reporter and often when they are it’s in the context of something like “although he has said x, the pope is changing the direction of the church”.

As I’ve said before I think the pope should stick to official pronouncements and seek to avoid confusion rather than adding confusion through off the cuff interviews on an airplane or issuing encyclicals and denouncing anyone who asks questions about it. These actions add confusion which we definitely don’t need right now.

Monday, January 09, 2017

The Young Pope: My Review

First of all, I want to mention that I haven't watched all episodes of this new show called "The Young Pope" yet. In fact, I have not watched complete episodes. What I have watched is a large selection of 1-5 minute clips available on YouTube of this show.

The show seems somewhat interesting from a fictional point of view. But I think it's very far from reality. As with most shows and movies from secular sources, they portray the Vatican, the pope, and cardinals in a very particular way. Let me know explain.

In most fictional portrayals of the Holy See, the pope and cardinals are seen as very and exclusively political. They have little, if any, spiritual aspect whatsoever. Usually cardinals are scheming and plotting in order to advance their own causes. They are seeking most power, but also wealth and notoriety. These "church politicians" have people blackmailed, assaulted, or even killed to advance their evil. Plus they are so powerful, little can be done about it.

This particular series is no different. It is produced by Sky and HBO, and it has a clear resemblance with the Sopranos, also produced by HBO. The pope, played by Jude Law, is ambitious, rigid, and Machiavellian. He is a control freak and power hungry. He is not very Christ-like.

The activity within the Vatican seem no different than within a political party or something portrayed on West Wing, except in West Wing the characters aren't nearly as evil.

In the show, the pope and cardinals discuss doctrine as if it is as changeable as the policies of any political party. For example, the pope and a bishop who was almost elected are discussing abortion. But the way they talk about it was the bishop was urging the pope to change the Church's teaching on abortion. To say that it's not the intentional killing of a human person and therefore murder. They made it seem like the pope, on a whim, could easily just change the Church's teaching.

This betrays a complete lack of understanding of how doctrine works. It's not a "coincidence" that most popes don't change anything with regards to doctrine. Rather, once something is declared a doctrine it does not change. The only things that are changeable are disciplines. For example, not eating meat on Friday is a form of penance and practice, but not an eternal moral law. Therefore, a pope, or the church in general can change this teaching. But the Church does not see itself as having the ability to change the teaching on murder or abortion or marriage, or other issues such as this. I hope that makes sense.

The sad part about all of this is that people are left with completely incorrect views of how the Church functions and the people in it. The pope isn't a politician who can change any law, no more than a physicist can change any law of physics, even if he is the head of a department. Also, after watching the show, many non-Catholics and fallen away Catholics are left with the impression that the pope and cardinals, and others in the Church are conniving, ambitious, immoral people, which is very far from the truth. To see why, we need look no further than the last several centuries of popes to see their personal holiness which is usually exemplary.

For example, both Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI were known for living very simply. JPII didn't even usually remember what he ate because he was too focused on his dinner guests. They had small rooms and did not live in luxury. To improve himself spiritually, John Paul II would even use a discipline or small whip to "mortify" his flesh. These great holy men would pray (and in the case of Benedict XVI continue to pray) for hours daily for the needs of the Church and the world.

The papacy is not somewhere a traditionally ambitious person would want to end up. Most of a pope's days are spent entertaining guests and dignitaries, attending events and making big decisions. When a bishop is first elected pope, he goes to a room to get his outfit. This room has been dubbed the Room of Tears, given that most new popes break down in tears upon realizing the huge responsibility they are now charged with. Pope Benedict XVI made clear his desire not to be pope, but when elected anyway, he accepted.

On the bright side, it is possible that if people find this show interesting, they may seek more information themselves. Perhaps in their search they will find the truth and be attracted to it.

Friday, January 06, 2017

In the Netherlands, this prodigy would have been killed!

Last night my fiancée and I were watching a show about a man named Derek Paravicini.  He's an extraordinary piano Prodigy who can play any piece of music after hearing it just once. He is also able to improvise with very complex patterns of music. But there's something unique about this person. He was born premature and after being exposed to high levels of oxygen he became blind. He is also extremely autistic and cannot even take care of himself to do normal day-to-day activities. He doesn't interact with people in a normal way. However his musical genius outperforms almost anybody currently living.

 Then this morning I was going through my Facebook feed and I noticed an article from lifesitenews where they explained that doctors in Groningen Netherlands are legally allowed to kill children who have been born if the doctor believes that the quality of life of this child won't be sufficient. And their definition of what constitutes a good quality of life to these doctors is more stringent than you may think. As far back as 1992 the Dutch  Royal Society of Medicine decided that it's best to kill a child if that child would not be able to live independently and experience self realization which includes the ability to hear read write and labor among other things as well as having meaningful interpersonal relationships. They decided that if a child does not meet these criteria he does not have the right to even live and should be killed by the doctor.

Obviously Derek Paravicini would not qualify for life under these strict conditions. Clearly Derek does not have the ability to live independently as he requires people to take care of him. He is not able to read or write or labor in the normal sense of the word. Obviously killing Derek would not make the world a better place but this is precisely what doctors in the Netherlands feel is the best course of action. This is absolutely unbelievable and extremely shocking and sad. That a so-called modern society can even get away with such atrocities is unimaginable. We are currently seeing Eugenics and genocide occurring before our very eyes in countries we thought more advanced but clearly are more barbaric than almost any others.

Even though the situation is particularly terrible in places like the Netherlands and Belgium, where the Culture of Death is, ironically, alive and well, we too have our fair share of blame. In our so-called modern Western cultures, over 90% of unborn babies diagnosed with Down Syndrome are aborted. Down Syndrome people are some of the happiest, joyful, and unconditionally loving people in the world. And yet, they are killed before they see the light of day.

Whenever a small opening is allowed for the culture of death into a society, it inevitably expands. At first, doctor-assisted suicide was allowed in some countries under strict conditions. But as years go by, the conditions are continually reduced, and more and more people start being killed. Before you know it, anyone can become a victim. And so it goes in so many area.

Let's do everything we can to end these barbaric practices in our so-called modern societies.

Here's the video about Derek:

Thursday, January 05, 2017

Latin Mass Tip: Read the English

I hope I don't cause any controversy by saying this and if I'm making some kind of a mistake or doing something I shouldn't be doing please let me know as soon as possible in the comments section below. But what I wanted to mention was an idea that I have for facilitating and making the Latin Mass more approachable. One of the things that I like to do is especially when the priest is doing silent prayer and there is silence in the church is to read the English side of the prayer book to keep track of where the priest is and to follow along with the Mass.

I find this extremely beneficial because you are engaging your mind and your soul in participating in the Mass. I will also do this during parts of the Mass where the priest is reciting passages out loud. I find reading the English side of the Missal to be very beneficial in my spiritual attendance at Mass and I do not drift off in thought.

Now, as I mentioned, I'm not sure if this is what you are supposed to do. Are we always supposed to just read the Latin side and to recite the Latin prayers? I'm not 100% sure. In fact it is my understanding that we are not required to recite all parts of the Latin Mass designed for the congregation. I find in the Latin Mass that I attend that a lot of people will read the vast majority of these parts but while I was speaking with one of my friends who is very knowledgeable in this area he said that it is not required for Catholics to read aloud most of the parts of the Mass.

In fact he said the requirement is only to read two or three things during the Mass such as the Nicene Creed. Anyway as I mentioned this is just a tip that I find beneficial for connecting to the Mass on a deeper level. I hope to share more of these tips in the future weeks and months ahead. Have a great New Year!

Wednesday, January 04, 2017

Reason #152 I Like Latin Mass: No Talking Before and During Mass

One of the things I really prefer about Latin Mass over the typical vernacular Mass is the atmosphere. I went to mass this past Sunday and when I walked in there weren't a whole pile of people just talking about anything under the sun. In fact there were very few, if any, people talking whatsoever.

Usually when I walk into a church for Mass every single person is talking - many are talking at a very loud volume. But when I go into the Latin Mass church, people are silent and praying and being reflective as they should be. I even remember in one of the other churches that I attend where they have the ordinary Mass and they have a sign up that says "please respect the peace and quiet of this church while you were waiting for Mass to begin". But very few, if any, people actually follow this.

So from that standpoint being able to go into a church where people are prayerful and Silent is a really huge help and also during mass people listen to and respond to the prayers as they should and nobody is talking during the mass. It's so much better.

Tuesday, January 03, 2017

Forgotten Tradition of Blessing Mother After Birth

I found a fascinating article about an ancient tradition in the Catholic Church wear by a mother was reintroduced back into the church after giving birth to a new child. It was a form of blessing for the mother and for her health and for the health of her new baby and a form of Thanksgiving for the birth of the child. In earlier times children were always baptized very soon after birth often the same day or the next day. Nowadays it can be a little bit longer because the fear of a child dying soon after birth are diminished and often children are baptized a week or maybe 2 weeks after birth. But check out this fascinating article about this form of blessing for a new mother after giving birth.

The Forgotten Tradition of “Churching,” the Ancient Post-Partum Blessing

Monday, January 02, 2017

WARNING: Pot-Smoking Nuns FAKE

CAUTION: THESE ARE NOT REAL NUNS!



 There has been a video that has been circulating widely about a group of nuns who are in the business of growing and selling marijuana. They wear a habit just like ordinary Catholic nuns but it must be pointed out that these are not legitimate real actual Catholic nuns that are sanctioned by the Catholic church in any way shape or form.

These are in fact imposters who for some reason are trying to make themselves look like their actual Catholic nuns or sisters but nothing could be further from the truth. In fact I don't believe they follow any form of Catholic spirituality whatsoever. The only reason they are wearing a seemingly Catholic outfit is to give themselves an appearance of legitimacy. Obviously all around the world especially in the United States there are all kinds of people who are growing and selling marijuana. But nobody is covering them as a news story because they don't seem  noteworthy. But when they don a religious habit all of a sudden they appear to be more legitimate.

I strongly urge you to reject these people and to call them out to tell them to stop imitating Catholic nuns because they have no business doing so and they should stop doing it immediately.

Sunday, January 01, 2017

Happy New Year AND Feast Day of Mary, Mother of God

First of all I want to say Happy New Year to all of the people who read this blog. I hope 2017 is your best year yet and that it brings all kinds of joy peace and happiness in your life. January 1st is celebrated as New Year's Day in most of the world but for Catholics it also marks another very special day. It is the solemnity of Mary the Mother of God. It is celebrated exactly one week after Christmas and it is especially celebrated to contemplate Mary's unique motherhood of God in the person of Jesus Christ.

 The title of  Mother of God in relation to Mary was officially adopted and defined at the First Council of Ephesus in the year 431 however even before then Mary had been called the Mother of God. It follows an unavoidable series of logic:

1. Jesus is God.
2. Mary is the mother of Jesus.
3. Therefore Mary is the mother of God.
In Greek the name is Theotokos which technically means God Bearer or She Who Gave Birth to God.

 In Canada the solemnity of Mary the Mother of God is a holy day of obligation. Every country has its own list of holy days of obligation which by definition are days on which Catholics are obliged to attend Mass but which are not Sundays. In Canada there only two such days. One is Christmas day and the other is January 1st, the solemnity of Mary the Mother of God. This particular Christmas season both of these days fall on a Sunday which means you actually do not have to attend any additional masses this year.

 So once again happy and joyful New Year and may 2017 be your best year yet!