First Thanksgiving in America

 

Why should politicians get to decide how important religion is?

During this Covid situation, many politicians have taken it upon themselves to limit religious gatherings. This topic really came up today when I read a Supreme Court document for the case of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn vs. Governor of New York Andrew Cuomo.

In it, Justice Gorsuch wrote the following:

At the same time, the Governor has chosen to impose no capacity restrictions on certain businesses he considers “essential.” And it turns out the businesses the Governor considers essential include hardware stores, acupuncturists, and liquor stores. Bicycle repair shops, certain signage companies, accountants, lawyers, and insurance agents are all essential too. So, at least according to the Governor, it may be unsafe to go to church, but it is always fine to pick up another bottle of wine, shop for a new bike, or spend the afternoon exploring your distal points and meridians. Who knew public health would so perfectly align with secular convenience? 

This is in the US where they supposedly have freedom of assembly and freedom of worship, as specific in the 1st amendment of the US Constitution. So the absurdity is even more stark. How can a hardware store or acupuncturist be considered essential and allowed to open while a church or other place of worship be considered non-essential and forced to stay closed whether or not they follow safety protocols?

First of all, being free means you make your own choices when it comes to risks. If people are afraid to attend a church service, they can stay home. Why should the general populace be forced to stay home because the leader is very risk-averse.

The other question is who gets to decide what is essential and what isn't. Should a secular governor who is non-religious get to decide the value of a religious service? That is absolutely absurd. It's completely subjective. It'd be like asking me the value of an archery class if I have absolutely no interest in archery and have nothing to do with it. Not only that, I allow every other type of physical fitness facility to open, just not that particular one. No one would think that would be legitimate.

The leaders of the religions should be the ones to decide what is open and what isn't. There is meant to be a separation of church and state. I agree with that but only in the sense that the government should keep its paws off religious institutions. Do you really think the bishop cares nothing for his flock? Give me a break. I'm glad the diocese of Brooklyn is suing this terrible governor. He needs to be taught a lesson.

Awesome quote from Justice Gorsuch

 

Text of Quote: At the same time, the Governor has chosen to impose no capacity restrictions on certain businesses he considers “essential.” And it turns out the businesses the Governor considers essential include hardware stores, acupuncturists, and liquor stores. Bicycle repair shops, certain signage companies, accountants, lawyers, and insurance agents are all essential too. So, at least according to the Governor, it may be unsafe to go to church, but it is always fine to pick up another bottle of wine, shop for a new bike, or spend the afternoon exploring your distal points and meridians. Who knew public health would so perfectly align with secular convenience? 

The Date of Advent 2020

The first Sunday of Advent is Sunday November 29, 2020.

The Last Day of Advent is Thursday, December 24, 2020.

Dates of Advent 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

Sunday, November 29, 2020 is the beginning of the Advent season in the Christian Calendar.

 Advent is the period of time in the Liturgical calendar of the Catholic Church preceding Christmas. It is a time of spiritual preparedness so that we are ready to welcome the Christ Child into our lives.

Questions and Answers about Advent:

How long is Advent?
Advent can range from 22 to 28 days long. Each of the 7 lengths of Advent are represented equally (i.e. equal numbers of 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, & 28)

What is the longest possible Advent season?
Advent can be a maximum of 28 days long.

What is the longest possible Advent season?
The shortest possible Advent season would be 22 days long.

Why does the length of Advent change?
This is because Advent always starts on a Sunday and is a total of 4 Sundays. The day of the week for Christmas Day always changes and can be any of the days. However, Advent always starts on a Sunday. If Christmas Day is on a Sunday, the 4th Sunday of Advent will be as far from Christmas Day as possible. If Christmas Day were on a Monday, the 4th Sunday of Lent would be the day before Christmas.

What is the earliest and latest possible start dates for Advent?
The earliest possible start date for Advent is November 27th.
The latest possible start date for Advent is December 3rd.

Does the length of Advent change as much as the date of Easter?
Because both Ash Wednesday (the beginning of Lent) and the date of Easter are always on the same day of the week, the time between both is fixed. If you could every day from Ash Wednesday to Holy Saturday (inclusive), you get 46 calendar days. This is the case every year.

However, the actual date of Easter varies considerably. As we've seen, Advent can start on 7 different calendar days, whereas Ash Wednesday can occur anywhere from Feb 4 to March 10. That means there are 36 possible calendar days upon which Ash Wednesday can occur (this includes February 29).

(Random Side Fact: Ash Wednesday has never occurred on February 29, and will do so for the first time in 2096. Leap years were first introduced with the Gregorian calendar and thus a Feb. 29 Ash Wednesday has only been possible since 1582, but it hasn't happened yet).

Comments:
Look forward to hearing your comments!

St. Dymphna

Prayers for People suffering from Epilepsy

In the Catholic Church, there are many saints who can be invoked for those suffering from epilepsy. I will try to list them here and perhaps add a short reason why they are considered such a patron saint. I will also provide a prayer if available for each saint.

St. Apollinaris of Ravenna
A native of Antioch, St. Apollinaris was made bishop of Ravenna by St. Peter himself. What a great honor. This saint suffered greatly under the persecution of various Roman emperors. Despite this, he continued to preach, even when Christianity was outlawed. He was known as a miracle worker and churches were built in his honor in Europe, especially in Germany.

Pope St. Cornelius
This saint and pope is an interesting figure. He was the Bishop of Rome during a debate in the Church over whether Christians who had practiced pagan rituals, offered sacrifices to idols, temporarily stopped practicing their Christian faith or performed other such actions so as to avoid being killed could be readmitted to the Church. One group led by Novatian thought that such people could not be forgiven by the Church or in this life but that it was left up to God whether such people could be forgiven.

Pope Cornelius, on the other hand, believed that such people could be reconciled with the Church after a period of repentance. Ultimately the viewpoint of Pope Cornelius prevailed. Novatian was also a pretender to the papacy and there was something of a struggle in that regard as well.

St. Dymphna
This is a very well-known saint who is asked to intercede often in the case of mental health issues. St. Dymphna has a very strange story. She devoted her life to Christ at a young age. When her mother died, her father, who was a petty king in Ireland, became very distraught. He sought a new wife but wanted someone who looked like his deceased spouse. The person who most closely resembled his dead wife was his daughter Dymphna. Horrifyingly, he attempted to marry his own daughter, so she fled to another country.

Eventually the king located Dymphna in Belgium where she had fled. He demanded she return with him to Ireland. When she refused, he took out his sword and cut off her head.

This tragic story is the source of St. Dymphna's patronage of those with mental illness. Clearly her father had gone crazy. Perhaps through her prayers in heaven, she was able to convert his heart.

◇◇◇

These are just 3 saints who are invoked against epilepsy. The following is a prayer against epilepsy said to St. Dymphna:

Good Saint Dymphna, great wonder-worker in every affliction of mind and body, I humbly implore your powerful intercession with Jesus through Mary, the Health of the Sick, in my present need. (Mention it.) Saint Dymphna, martyr of purity, patroness of those who suffer with nervous and mental afflictions, beloved child of Jesus and Mary, pray to Them for me and obtain my request.

(Pray one Our Father, one Hail Mary and one Glory Be.)

Saint Dymphna, Virgin and Martyr, pray for us.

Feast Day of Christ the King Christus Rex

 

O Lord our God, You alone are the Most Holy King and Ruler of all nations.

We pray to You, Lord, in the great expectation of receiving from You, O Divine King, mercy, peace, justice and all good things.

Protect, O Lord our King, our families and the land of our birth.

Guard us we pray Most Faithful One.

Protect us from our enemies and from Your Just Judgment.

Forgive us, O Sovereign King, our sins against you.

Jesus, You are a King of Mercy.

We have deserved Your Just Judgment

Have mercy on us, Lord, and forgive us.

We trust in Your Great Mercy.

O most awe-inspiring King, we bow before You and pray;

May Your Reign, Your Kingdom, be recognized on earth.

Amen.

Prayer for Abdominal Pains and Stomach Cramps (Also Labour Pains and more)

An interesting saint I discovered today was St. Erasmus of Formia also known as St. Elmo. He is invoked in prayer for those suffering from abdominal pain and stomach cramps. I'll get into why he is the patron of these ailments and maybe talk a little about my theory as to why this is the case.

He is also the patron of women in labor and those with appendicitis. Basically anything to do with abdominal pain in general.

But first of all here is the prayer:

The prayer that I found to St. Elmo speaks of his valiant faith. He maintained this faith in the face of great persecution and suffering. 

Prayer to St. Elmo for those suffering from Abdominal Pains or Stomach Cramps

O God, grand us through the intercession of Your dauntless bishop and martyr St. Erasmus, who so valiantly confessed the Catholic Faith, that we may learn the doctrine of this faith, practice its precepts, and thereby be made worthy to attain its promises. We ask all this through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Prayer I composed to St. Elmo for healing:

O Great St. Elmo, Through your powerful intercession, you have brought healing to many of those who suffer from various ailments and pains of the abdomen, the pains of childbirth, those suffering from stomach cramps and many other ailments.

You yourself suffered great persecution and tortures in your holy witness of the Catholic faith. I ask your intercession for the intention of ___________ (state intention). Please intercede for me to God, our loving Father, that he may bring healing in body, mind, and soul. May I follow your example of great faith in the face of adversity and may God bless me with his abundant Grace.

I ask these prayers in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Please let me know in the comments below your thoughts on the prayer I composed. It was written in my own words, so please let me know if I am missing anything or if I said anything improperly.

So, back to St. Elmo. St. Erasmus was the bishop of Formia, Compagnia, Italy. During the prosecutions on Christians by Diocletian, he fled to Mount Lebanon to live a life of solitude. It is said he was fed by a raven who visited him. But the emperor discovered his whereabouts and threw St. Elmo in prison and had him tortured.

Let's just think about that for a minute. The emperor was so rabidly and violently opposed to Christians, he sought them out in mountains where they were in seclusion. Sometimes we think we have it bad in our day and age with Christians being persecuted, and we certainly are, but those times were so much worse. However, despite anything these terrible emperors tried to do, they had no impact. In fact, their attempts at stamping out Christianity only made it stronger. So be thankful for prosecutions because as we see in history, it strengthens the faith. The Roman empire no longer exists, but the Church most certainly does. Put your trust in God, not in temporal powers.

Back to the story. St. Erasmus was arrested by Diocletian, but he was able to escape. It is said he did so with the help of an angel.

St. Erasmus moved from Formia to Gaeta, both on the west coast of Italy. Because they were both on the coast, St. Elmo was invoked by sailors for his protection as they frequently visited the ports where he resided. Eventually during storms at sea, sailors would sometimes see electrical discharges. They saw these as indicators of St. Elmo's protection and thus became known as St. Elmo's fire.

According to Wikipedia, St. Elmo's fire is a weather phenomenon in which luminous plasma is created by a corona discharge from a sharp or pointed object in a strong electric field in the atmosphere (such as those generated by thunderstorms or created by a volcanic eruption).

Wow:

.

So eventually St. Elmo was again arrested and executed by the evil emperor. He was disemboweled.

Back to my theory. Why are saints often the patrons of their method of death. My theory is that once a saint dies and is in heaven, they receive a glorified body without any blemish or issue. Technically though, it's the same body they had on Earth, yet it's glorified. This means that their body had to undergo a transformation. The body parts were transformed from diseased and damaged to perfect and without issue, in fact, glorified. Therefore, that particular saint has intimate and holy knowledge as to how God can bring perfect healing both physically and spiritually.

Thanks for reading and until next time. Look forward to all comments!

USCCB takes a couple of good steps, but is it consistent?

The head of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops Archbishop Jose Gomez has issued some statements concerning Joe Biden and his possible presidency. First of all we all need to remember that Joe Biden isn't officially confirmed as president yet. And plus there are many lawsuits that are currently being undertaken which could see reversals and so on. So we shouldn't jump to any conclusions which it seems the US Conference of Catholic Bishops is currently doing.

Anyway, I just read this article where the conference is welcoming Joe Biden as the successor of Donald Trump. However they are expressing concern over his stance on abortion. This is obviously a fantastic development that they are actually speaking out. However there are still issues with this in terms of how it's being done.

Once again first and foremost it's fantastic that the USCCB is actually issuing a statement condemning abortion and condemning Joe Biden's approach to it. As we all know Joe Biden is very pro-choice and has no issue with abortion up to the moment of birth. In fact his party, the Democratic party, wants to increase access to abortion and eliminate anything that stands in its way.

From a Catholic perspective and from a basic perspective of morality, abortion is an absolute evil. There are no circumstances under which a direct abortion can be morally licit. It is murder. This is where the problem comes in with the statement by the Bishops. The problem is that in the same pronouncement in which they express concern over Joe Biden's stance on abortion they also congratulate him on many far less important issues and which I would argue don't have anything really to do is Catholicism at all. For example they say that he is doing a good job when it comes to climate change, racial justice, and immigration issues.

First of all let's talk about climate change and immigration issues. Those issues are ones which do not have solid Catholic doctrine behind them. For example how we should deal with climate change is definitely up for debate. In Catholic theology, human beings are the most important things on the Earth. We do not worship the Earth because the Earth is meant to serve humanity. This goes for animals of the Earth and all of the resources of the earth. Their ultimate end is to help humanity. And so the only correct understanding of our place in the world is that humanity must be placed first. Therefore, if our goal in reducing climate change is for the betterment of humanity overall then it can be acceptable. But often times climate change rhetoric looks at human beings as being some kind of parasite or disease of the earth which must be eradicated. Many climate change advocates demand less humanity and fewer people on the Earth and this is completely contrary to Catholic morality.

Also, as I've alluded to, the measures taken to lessen climate change must always be weighed against the negative effects these measures will have on humanity from a Catholic perspective. For example, if implementing climate change protocols will lead to great levels of hardship and possibly even starvation of many people it can in no way be considered. However, this is rarely the case when it comes to global warming.

As an example of this way of thinking I remember watching a show about very poor people in Africa and this United Nations institution was helping them build solar panels and other green energy technology in their Village. These people could not even access clean drinking water and they did not have access to electricity. But the primary focus of the UN was that these people use renewable energy even though renewable energy would be far more expensive than conventional forms of energy.

Countries and people must be allowed to evolve in terms of their technology. Perhaps once a society reaches a very advanced level they can start implementing green energy policies. But if they do so prematurely this actually ends up harming people far more. I remember reading an article about how every developed Nation at one point was very polluted and used very dirty forms of energy but after they had achieved a certain level of economic status they were able to implement cleaner forms of energy. But the point is if people are starving to death that is not the time to force them to have very expensive forms of energy at the expense of their development.

Similarly, when it comes to immigration, this is a matter of prudential judgment that each person with influence must make for themselves. Of course we must be compassionate and welcoming of refugees and people suffering under difficult situations but when it comes to the policy of a country concerning immigration this is not a moral issue but rather a prudential issue. One could reasonably argue one way or the other when it comes to this topic. No country is morally obliged to take in an unlimited number of people. As happens often, these discussions can become very polarized. One side says we need to have unlimited amounts of immigration while the other side insists there should be absolutely no immigration. My point is that the level of immigration that a particular country embraces can be the matter of discussion and debate and not something which should be seen as an absolute moral issue. Who is to say that taking in 100,000 immigrants is morally inferior to taking in 1 million. This is something that people must decide on their own and with the leaders of their country. Immigration policy does not involve Catholic doctrine or any kind of absolutes in that way.

This is far different from abortion which is an absolute evil. It is wrong to place these two issues on the same footing as it seems the USCCB is doing. This is causing great confusion to uncatechized Catholics. They falsely take on the idea that immigration policy is of the same importance as abortion policy. And so they weigh out their two options in that way. For example, they may say well one candidate is pro-life but he's also opposed to high levels of immigration, while the other candidate is pro-choice but embraces high levels of immigration. Based on the statements of the USCCB, someone who is not well-informed could reasonably think that both candidates in this case were equal, morally speaking. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Racial Injustice is definitely something of importance. However it is my belief that this issue has been blown completely out of proportion. The Catholic Church is probably the most diverse institution on the face of the planet. We have laity, priests, and bishops from all over the world, of all different nationalities, speaking dozens of languages. There is hardly a place on Earth that doesn't have the Catholic Church. And the two places where the church is growing fastest are Africa and South America. Clearly these people do not feel the Catholic Church is a racist Institution. So I think it's a poor prudential judgment for the bishops to be aligning themselves with groups such as black lives matter which stands firmly against most of the beliefs of the Catholic Church. I know the church has not officially aligned itself with BLM but at the same time they are making statements talking about our Collective guilt when it comes to these issues. I'm not saying there's nothing that should be done but to make it sound like racism is an ever-present threat to every non-white person is rather absurd. Of course racism is wrong but the demand for racism in order to advance certain ideas is far greater than the supply.

Overall, I believe that bishops conferences have become far too political. There are potentially thousands of sins one could commit. Yes, racism is one of them. Yes, maliciously destroying the Earth is a sin. But these are but two out of thousands of sins. We need to get back to the traditional teachings of the church. We need to talk about the seven deadly sins, about sins of pride, sins of gluttony and lust and so on and so forth. We rarely hear about these things. Instead of aligning itself with the state, the Church needs to separate itself from the state. Although we do not believe in the separation of church and state, the Church needs to act completely independently and have no ties to the state that would curtail its activity. The Church is appointed by Jesus Christ to pass judgement on the state and to tell those within it whether they're acting in a moral or immoral way.

The Simple Solution of World Hunger and Poverty

I've heard many religious people preach on poverty and world hunger and offer their simple and easy way to beat it. It's the billionaires and millionaires! If only those greedy businesspeople would give a tiny part of their wealth to the poor, we'd eradicate poverty and all would be great!

It sounds so simple. Rich people have "too much" and poor people have too little. So the rich just have to give money to the poor and bam, problem solved. I have many issues with this sentiment and I believe it causes more harm than good.

These days everyone seems to want to save the world. They want to end world hunger, end pollution, end fossil fuels, save the whales, end global warming, etc. People seem to think in the grandest and most grandiose of terms. Why go for something small like helping your neighbor with something when you can save the entire planet!

It's a very enticed proposition and one that leads to great damage in my opinion. Let me explain why.

I have heard this phrased in various ways, but how can someone expect to "change the world" when they can't even change the sheets on their bed. It's a legitimate question. Think of yourself. Think of a negative characteristic or issue you've been dealing with. Perhaps you are impatient, maybe you are messy, perhaps you are rude or inconsiderate. Maybe you don't do your fair share of chores. The list could go on. Now, just think of the difficult you had or are having in overcoming this relatively minor flaw. So you can't even overcome something this small and yet you expect at the flick of a finger, you can change over 7 billion people? You must be a real optimist!

By trying to change the world and not ourselves, we are passing the buck on to everyone else while convincing ourselves that we are morally upright and perfect. We adopt a sort of relativist mentality whereby our failures are insignificant and meaningless and we are doing our part to rescue every man, woman, and child on the Earth. Wow, what a sense of moral superiority one can achieve through this!

In fact, many people neglect to do even small things as they are too busy focusing on the big things. Yet, they probably have little if any real impact on the so-called "big things", despite what they tell themselves. People try to convince others to vote a certain way. They spend dozens of hours informing themselves, discussing their opinions to others, etc. In the end, most likely they will get the influence of exactly one vote and have no other impact. Yet they could have spent those countless hours helping out a neighbor, visiting family, or working on becoming holier.

The issue of global poverty is not as simple as saying well look at this huge corporation that had profits of $X Billions of dollars. They simply have to transfer that money and poof, problem over. Again, when we think this way, we shift all the responsibility to everyone else. "I'm not responsible for poor people, that's the responsibility of billionaires." I'm not saying billionaires shouldn't help if they have the means, but I am saying we shouldn't scapegoat our own responsibility on them.

Global poverty is a complex issue. It will not be solved simply by throwing money at it. Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have pledged to give tens of billions of dollars toward eradicating poverty. Will poverty be over once this happens? Of course it won't. I'm not holding them up as moral paragons as there are many issues we could discuss. But I am talking about the concept of money solving all problems.

As Catholics we believe in the value of work. It's better for a man to work and earn money to provide for his family rather than become permanently dependent on someone else to support him. Jesus said to feed the hungry and clothe the naked. But he meant it in a personal one-on-one way, not please advocate for rich people to give stuff to the poor.

The other part is that we don't know how rich we are. If you are reading this from a computer or expensive mobile device, you are relatively rich. In fact, to be among the global one percent, you only have to earn something like $36,000 per year. That's really not that much. What if someone from a poor country was speaking to you and said you should support them because you are among the 1%?

Sure, you could say you may be in the 1% but others are richer. First of all, that's got nothing to do with you. You are given commands by God Almighty. They can't be deflected onto someone else. Secondly, could someone with $10 million say they are not responsible because there are billionaires out there with much more? Could someone with $1 billion say he isn't responsible because Jeff Bezos has almost $200 Billion? Of course that would be absurd.

I also think we as human beings are designed to help those around us first. It has to be a personalized approach. I heard this as one of the key problems with government poverty-reduction strategies - it's completely impersonal. If you know someone who is struggling financially, you can help them but more than financially. Maybe you can help find them a job. Perhaps you can help them with any addiction issue they may have. Perhaps you can provide a place to stay in some circumstances. But you are an accountability partner and you can do much more good than them receiving a paycheck from an anonymous source.

Another point is that poverty is not a simplistic issue. Tens of billions of dollars have been given to poor people and poor countries and yet there is still much poverty. Poverty is going down a lot globally though, but this decrease has very little to do with charity. It has more to do with a global market for products and services and increased efficiency brought by capitalism. Charity definitely has its place, but again I think it mainly has to be personalized.

Stop blaming everyone else for the problems of the world. Help out a relative you've neglected, make amends with an old friend, help out someone who is hard on their luck. Don't think you have to change the whole world and demand others to do your work. Look forward to seeing your comments and have a great day!

Prayer for Those Suffering from Pneumonia and/or Covid

 

St. Bernardino of Siena - Patron Saint of Those Suffering from Respiratory Illness

I would like to share with you a prayer that I wrote for the patron saint of respiratory illnesses, St. Bernardino of Siena. I wrote this myself so please pardon me if it is not the greatest of prayers.

I am writing this prayer because pneumonia is a highly-searched illness and I wanted to provide a Catholic prayer in response to it. Covid is also a respiratory illness so one can also pray this prayer for that intention as well. Without further ado, here is the prayer I composed:

Prayer to St. Bernardino of Siena (Patron Saint of Respiratory Illness)

Lord, Father all-powerful and ever-living God,
You led St. Bernardino of Siena to help those suffering during the Plague.
Lord, you also assisted and cured St. Bernardino of Siena of his respiratory illness.
You gave St. Bernardino strength and courage to preach beautifully to the people of Italy.
I ask you, St. Bernardino, through your powerful intercession, to pray to God Almighty
For the intention of (State Intention Here)
Pray that the Lord brings healing, peace, love and joy to this person.
I ask this in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord.
Amen.

Update: Thank you for viewing.

Civil Unions for Homosexuals? (10/21)

Well-done homily on the subject. Worth listening to.

Is Pope Francis Starving For Attention? His latest disheartening comments about gay civil unions.

Pope Francis has once again made headlines over his careless comments. The mainstream media and world in general is fawning over his latest remarks in which he advocates civil unions for gay people. Rather than defend and explain Catholic doctrine, which he should do since he's, you know, THE POPE, he just randomly goes on some tangent about giving legal rights to gay people, etc.

His exact words in new documentary titled Francesco, state:

“Homosexual people have a right to be in a family. They are children of God and have a right to a family. Nobody should be thrown out or be made miserable over it. What we have to create is a civil union law. That way they are legally covered.”

Why is the pope even commenting on this? Gay people do not have a "right" to a family. What does this even mean. People have the right to start a family, but gay people can't even procreate. So what does this mean? Does it mean a gay man has the right to live with another gay man and have a child or children live there as well? How is this a "right"?

Has Pope Francis forgotten that homosexual acts are sinful and condemned by the Church he leads? Affirming people living in sinful situations does not help them! I don't mind if he affirms their inherent dignity or says they have the right to respect, etc. That all makes sense. But to say a state has the obligation to create a special type of "marriage" for gay couples is absurd.

Again, it goes back to the basics. What is marriage? Is it any combination of consenting adults? Is procreation an aspect of marriage? Is a business partnership a marriage? I mean, marriage has a definition. If it doesn't have a definition, then it's meaningless. Why even have a word?

But if it does have a definition, what is it? Is it the union of 2 consenting adults? Okay, why not three consenting adults? Why are you limiting it? So if it can be any number of people, what else is in the definition? Does it have to be procreative? Well if it can involve gay people, then the answer is no. So now what is it? It's nothing. So what is there to want?

Some might say it's a legal arrangement. Well, you can have legal arrangements that aren't marriage. But marriage has always been something that is special and unique. It pre-exists Christianity. But it has certain key factors. It has been used around the world to create and sustain families. Gay marriage does none of this and it violates basic natural law.

This all boils down to a problem of non-specificity, a lack of clarity. St. Thomas Aquinas would define all of his terms and be very precise. He would use exact language. Fr. Ripperger points this out as well in many of his talks. He too will often define a word when using it so that everyone is on the same page.

On the other hand, look at Pope Francis. Specifics are his Kryptonite. As Patrick Coffin puts, he uses weaponized ambiguity. You can't just start with one premise and then throw the baby out with the bath water based on it. To put it concretely, just because gay people are human beings loved by God, it doesn't mean we throw out the definition of marriage that we have had for centuries. Just because we must respect everyone, it does not mean we must condone all activity. We need clarity on these things.

The pope has reneged on his duties. Is he waiting for someone else to preach sound doctrine? Has he forgotten that he is the pope, our spiritual father? It seems he has. 

I feel as though Pope Francis has abandoned his spiritual children. He has gone off seeking the approval and affection of "others". In this case, the "others" are the media, the secular world, etc. He is doing everything he can to get in their good books. He doesn't realize they are just using him. Does he think his actions are attracting the enemies of the Church into the Church? If he thinks that, he is sorely mistaken.

Men who leave their families to be with another woman almost never end up marrying that woman in the end. Once the other woman was done with him, it was over. So it is with the evil secular world. They will try to attract you, but once you're in, they spit on you and leave you in the dirt.

I recently read a quote from Pope Benedict XVI concerning Pope John Paul II. To paraphrase, he said Pope John Paul II never sought popularity or to be liked. He was willing to present the unadulterated truth and to "take the blows" that came with it.

Sadly, it seems we now have the opposite of this in Pope Francis.

P.S. I hate to be so harsh. I just feel upset by all of this. I hope the pope realizes soon what he is doing. In the meantime, we must always pray for him.

Trump and Biden Debate

I watched much of the debate last night featuring Joe Biden and Donald Trump. I will first and foremost say that I prefer Donald Trump over Joe Biden for many reasons. Whatever Trump may do during the debate does not change the substance of their positions. Having said that, let's take a look at the debate and what happened.

From my point of view, I cannot defend the actions of Donald Trump during this debate. He continually interrupted, made irrelevant points, etc. I think he discovered that he could flummox Biden by interjecting random comments. Biden often took the bait. He would go off his planned speech and try to address whatever word or phrase Trump through out. Trump used this to knock Biden off-kilter.

People were saying Trump was debating Chris Wallace along with Biden. I kind of get where they are coming from. Biden seemed like he was being attacked by Trump and so Wallace would step in to defend him. One commentator asked, why not just have the candidates in a room without a moderator and just have at it. At this point, that's almost what it was.

These are not just the actions of Mr. Trump. I have noticed this type of comportment in various debates, whether in the US or Canada or locally. Instead of both parties having an understood agreement that they will let the other speak, they seem to be using tactical bullying and talking-over to get their points across. It's more of a battle than simply a battle of words.

More civil debates seemed to rely on the premise that "I will let you speak and get your full point across. Ultimately I don't want people following you, and so it would be better for you to not even say your points of view. However, if I am to get my own point across, I will sacrifice the chance to interrupt you so that I can have a chance to speak myself."

Nowadays, it's more like don't let the other person get a point across lest people may be convinced by his argument. Make the other person look ridiculous, incoherent, etc. Perhaps they are attempting to appear dominant. The person who speaks over the other more wins?

Either way, I think it is a blow to what debates aspire to. As someone I know mentioned, if this were a high school debate, they would both be told to sit back down and get an F.

People choose sides, it's just what people do naturally. But I think you can be in favour of a candidate without condoning his behavior. I definitely do not want Biden to win, I think he has a very dangerous party and dangerous ideas. The style of debate is not the same as the platform of the parties. Therefore, I think Trump should win and lead the country. There is a lot at stake.

If you want to see a big difference from the new style of debate, check out a debate featuring Ronald Reagan. He argues well but he is still cordial and follows the rules of etiquette. If Trump is the proponent of Law and Order, it starts with your comportment.

Church and State: Covid

Catholic churches are reopening in Canada and around the world. I've noticed a few things that speak to a lack of separation of CHurch and state, and show the CHurch acquiescing to every request of the state without question and going overboard. Let me explain.

Churches were allowed to reopen about 6 weeks ago in Newfoundland, Canada. Unlike many other public places such as businesses, churches were some of the last places that were allowed to open. When they did finally open, they were limited to 50 total people in the church building. This is far less than the number allowed at other similarly-sized establishments. For example, the Basilica, which is one of the biggest churches in Canada, could only have 50 people.

Not only could they only have 50 people, they adhered to restrictions other places did not even consider. The church I attend has been following "protocols" far more strictly than anywhere else. You have to answer a survey each time you enter the building, then you have to wear your mask while you walk anywhere. When you sit, masks are optional because everyone is more than 6 feet apart with area cordoned off.

But one particularly strange part I found was the extreme lengths churches will go to announce every little detail of how to act while receiving communion, as if everyone is in constant danger. Again, nothing like this happens outside the church, such as in shopping areas and grocery stores. There is an announcement at the beginning of Mass, and then one right before communion. And it's not a small, short announcement either. It's a long, detailed message going into every possible detail about maintaining distance, sanitizing hands, how to receive communion, etc.

Remember, in NL, we only have one active case, and that is very recent, and it is someone under the age of 19 who is a known person. And yet, as mentioned, the church adheres to these regulations with more fervor than anywhere else.

But what upsets me the most is that never in any other area does the local church broadcast specific regulations and procedures for anything else. There is never any mention of only Catholics in the state of Grace being allowed to receive communion. They are seemingly quite lax in that area. Yet, when the state asks them to make an announcement on Covid, they don't know how far to go. They go way above and beyond, even beyond the wildest dreams of the most cautious politician.

Why is this? Why do they only seem to place value on temporal things such as government announcements and seem to downplay the importance of eternal things? It seems to me there is far more risk in the latter.

I'm not saying don't make any messages concerning Covid, but I am saying make other announcements. Perhaps announcing that the church is a sacred place and that people should not whisper throughout the Mass. Perhaps mention that only Catholics in the state of Grace should receive communion. Maybe talk about confession from time to time.

We shouldn't just always kowtow to what the government says. Whatever happened to separation of Church and state? We are only reinforcing the idea that the state and all the earthly orders of politicians are more important than Jesus Christ and our eternal salvation.

Modern-Day Obliviousness to Morality

Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter.- Isaiah 5:20

It seems to me that as the world embraces more and more immorality, it ironically starts to think it is becoming more and more morally virtuous.

This became all the more clear lately as social justice warriors go around looking for statues of men who lived centuries ago to tear down because of their alleged imperfections. As though now that this latest generation has conquered all sin and is a paragon of moral virtue, it can now set its sights on bygone generations.

If this does not epitomize pompous self-righteousness, nothing does. While people of this generation hardly know or recognize the seven deadly sins or 10 commandments, they not only feel qualified to tell their own generations what they are doing or did wrong, but feel justified in searching for iniquities from the last 500 years.

I wouldn't even mind this so much if this newest generation wasn't one of the most immoral and hypocritical of our entire human history. They have taken the words above from Isaiah not as a warning but as instruction. Practically every sin imaginable is not only accepted, but celebrated and when this generation does target a particular sin, they almost always get it wrong by misidentifying where the sin is and why it is sinful.

The ten commandments are set up in order of importance. The first commandment, to Love God alone and to worship Him only is more important than the commandment to honor one's mother and father, which is more important than the commandment to not murder. Almost all of the 10 commandments are routinely violated by the latest generation. They have turned every commandment on its head and become quite passionate in arguing for the opposite. The same goes for the 7 deadly sins. Truly a reversal has taken place with them.

I remember at work one time a coworker joking about the idea that we would even need the 10 commandments. He laughed that they were obvious and so why would we need commandments to tell us what to do. There was a slight amount of truth in what he was saying. As Catholics, we hold that the 10 commandments form part of the natural law which is naturally knowable by all people. And yet, if these 10 commandments were so obvious, why is it that our society embraces the breaking of each one of them?

Take for instance the fourth and sixth commandments: honor your mother and father and do not murder. In Canada, with the introduction of euthanasia, it became legal to kill your mother or father. Most people are okay with this. It, of course, started out slow, saying that only elderly people with a terminal illness could choose to take their own life. Yet now, the criteria for who is "permitted" to kill themselves is ever-expanding. They are taking away the age requirement, as well as the terminal illness requirement. Now they are saying people with depression can kill themselves. What differentiates this all from suicide?

People are on board. They no longer honor their mother and father, and when they become too much of a burden, they encourage their parents to just end it. Parents, themselves not wanting to be burdens, are pressured into this.

Of course, some morally good doctors oppose killing patients as it violates their oaths. So does the government allow these good doctors to follow their consciences? Of course not. They are forced to send the patient to another doctor who will in fact kill the person.

The majority of Canadians, being highly immoral, have accepted state-sanctioned murder. They use Orwell-type words to sanitize what is truly happening, and phrase it as a personal choice and dignified. How can killing a vulnerable person be dignified for anyone? They publish articles by those who choose to be killed and without fail advocate this amazing system. We of course never hear any counter arguments.

I once read an article in the local newspaper where a doctor lamented the fact that in Newfoundland and Labrador, not enough people are killing themselves. He "blamed" strong families and other things on this negative situation. So he was trying to get the message out that offing oneself is a great choice and that you should avail!

It won't be long before this option to kill oneself becomes an obligation. People will be told they are selfish for opting to live longer. Bill Gates himself rhetorically asked in a public speech whether it's better to "let" an elderly person live longer or if it's better to hire 10 teachers. This rhetorical question will be asked of the elderly as well before long. They will be made to feel guilty for not doing the responsible thing of killing themselves once they reach a certain age or have a certain health prognoses.

This is just one example of a grave violation of the commandments. It would be easy to find dozens of examples of violations of each of the other commandments as well. But unlike any other time, we do not as a society condemn these violations, but rather celebrate them, and wonder how they can be expanded to include more people. We are surrounded everywhere we go with evil. Anyone who is good will be severely punished. This is just a friendly reminder of that.

If you decide to be a good person, just remember that you will be persecuted and prosecuted. You will face many difficulties. But I think if you are aware of this, it might make it a little easier to accept. Jesus Himself told us this:

The eighth beatitude says: "Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

Remember those words as you do what is right.

Prayer for an End to the Coronavirus / Covid19 Pandemic

St. Roch, Patron Saint against pandemics.

Here is a prayer to a patron saint against diseases and illnesses, in particular against epidemics such as the one we are currently experiencing (more information about the saint is found at the end):

O Blessed Saint Roch,
Patron of the sick,
Have pity on those
Who lie upon a bed of suffering.

Your power was so great
When you were in this world,
That by the sign of the Cross,
Many were healed of their diseases.

Now that you are in heaven,
Your power is not less.
Offer, then, to God
Our sighs and tears
And obtain for us that health we seek
Through Christ our Lord.

Amen.

St. Roch was born with a birthmark of a cross on his chest. He became a powerful intercessor while on earth. He contracted the bubonic plague, as can be seen in his statue above. However, he survived with the help of a dog who would bring him food.

St. Roch's holiness started at a young age, when he would fast, along with his mother, twice a week, even while he was nursing.

He followed in the footsteps of St. Francis by giving away all of his earthly possessions to help the poor, which were left to him by his parents who died when he was only 20 years old.

Pres. Trump Watches Mass Via Live-Stream at St. Patrick's Cathedral, Thanks Cardinal Dolan |

Pres. Trump Watches Mass Via Live-Stream at St. Patrick's Cathedral, Thanks Cardinal Dolan |: Let us pray for our president! ��