Pope Welcomes Little Bo Peep to Vatican

Tweet

In an organic development of the Second Vatican Council's teachings on ecumenism--proclaimed in Unitatis Redintegratio--the Pope today greeted Little Bo Peep at a Vatican reception. Miss Peep was part of a religious delegation that included Little Jack Horner, the Farmer in the Dell and most of the Children Who Lived in a Shoe, among others.

Initially thought to have missed the meeting, the Itsy Bitsy Spider was spotted gamely climbing up a water spout in the Pope's private gardens.

"This is an opportunity to focus on our common interests so that we can all live happily ever after," declared the Pontiff, over a lunch of curds and whey. "After all, climate change will affect all of us."

This was disputed by the Four and Twenty Naughty Boys, who in the past have been accused of crypto-Lefevbrist tendencies. They were later baked into a pie by Commissioner Volpi.

Terrorist Attack Coverage: The Editors of the Daily Mail Should be Ashamed

Tweet

And the winner of the contest is...a black rectangle!

A sick headline and obnoxious set of sub headers was posted a few minutes ago in the online Daily Mail:

Extreme 'free speech' group refused to cancel provocative 'Muhammad Art Exhibit' despite protests - and told the world they 'know the risks'

• Muhammad Art Exhibit event in Garland, Texas, was attacked on Sunday
• Gunmen opened fire at event held by American Freedom Defense Initiative
• Organizer Pamela Geller had written before that she knew there were risks
• But insisted event had to go ahead to oppose 'the jihad against freedom'
• Garland residents and Democrat congressmen opposed the event 

Thank you for your support, Neville Chamberlin.

The Daily Mail also blacked out all Muhammad cartoon pictures that happened to show up in any of their photographs.

So, let's get this straight: actually exercising one's right to free speech in the face of danger or threats is now extreme. Censorship of other people's speech (blacking out those cartoons) is, I guess, the new normal.

Well, we know what the Daily Mail thinks of free speech.

The People's Choice Winner of the Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest

Tweet

This cartoon by Bosch Fawstin was the "People's Choice" winner, chosen in the run-up to the pro-free-speech Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest this weekend in Garland, Texas.

The overall winner was announced this afternoon and will be featured on this blog as soon as possible.

Earlier this evening two gunmen moved against the gathering and were shot to death by police. A security officer was injured, though not seriously.

There are unconfirmed reports that ISIS has taken responsibility for the attack.

As participants were being herded into lockdown by police, someone unfurled an American flag. People sang God Bless America and prayed for the fallen officer.

BREAKING NEWS: Draw Muhammad Contest in Texas Attacked by Armed Men

Tweet

The War is Here.

From Jihad Watch and Pamela Geller:

Multiple shootings, possible bomb at AFDI-Jihad Watch free speech event in Texas 

Posted on behalf of Robert as he is in lockdown – from Pamela Geller 

This is a war. This is war on free speech. What are we going to do? Are we going to surrender to these monsters? 

Two men with rifles and backpacks attacked police outside our event. A cop was shot; his injuries are not life-threatening, thank Gd. Please keep him in your prayers. 

The bomb squad has been called to the event site to investigate a backpack left at the event site. 

The war is here.

From NBC News:

Two Suspects Killed, Guard Shot 'Draw Muhammad' Contest in Texas BY WILLIAM J. GORTA 

Two suspects were killed and a security guard was shot outside a "Draw Muhammad" contest in Garland, Texas, police told NBC News. 

Police initially said a police officer was shot, but they later revised that to identify the victim as a security guard. The event was heavily policed with up to 40 extra officers assigned at a cost of $10,000 to the organizers, according to published reports. 

The contest was described as a "free speech" event by its sponsor, the American Freedom Defense Initiative. It offered a $10,000 top prize and featured Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who is known for his anti-Muslim views, as its speaker. 

The shooting began about 7 p.m., around the time the event was finishing up. 

"Right when we were beginning to drive away, we heard gunshots," Cynthia Belisle, who attended the event with a friend, told NBC News. "We thought they were fireworks, but they were not." 

Belisle said that dozens of cops sprang into action and that she was told to stay put. 

She said she heard a second round of shooting and saw police rushing toward the far end of the parking lot with arms drawn. 

"We were scared," she said. 

Garland police spokesman Joe Harn said that the area was evacuated and that participants were being taken away from the scene on buses. 

A bomb squad robot was checking on a suspicious car Sunday night, he said.
The arena, owned by the Garland school district, hosted a "Stand WIth the Prophet" event in January. It held that event as well as the "Draw Muhammad" event because it has a non-discriminatory policy, according to The Dallas Morning News.

Blue Thomas at Tumbling Toward Dhimmitude just alerted me to this.

Traditionalist Priest: Pope Francis Has "Smoked Out" the Dissenters, Schismatics and Heretics

Tweet

Cardinal Marx and his fellow German "Marxists"

Today I had a conversation with the greatest priest that I am personally acquainted with. Though a staunch traditionalist with strong opinions on the sorry state of the current church, he would never directly criticize a bishop, let alone the Pope, at least not in a conversation with one of his parishioners. And in all things he has an air of charity and affability that can only be called holy.

So, he said something that I was stunned by. Implicitly referring to the bad elements in the current Church--such as the German bishops who recently bizarrely declared that the German Church was "not just a subsidiary of Rome"--he said with a sort of twinkle in his eyes,

You know, the Pope has smoked them all out.

I had never thought of it that way.

Now, I'm not saying that's the only way or even the best way of viewing things. But believe me, this priest is neither naive nor a fool. With faithfulness, charity and perhaps a bit of humor he offered a unique and optimistic way of looking at the Francis pontificate.

Note also--and I remember his exact words--he didn't say that the Pope had intentionally done this.    

What's Wrong with Bruce Jenner

Tweet

This post is my attempt to understand and work through the Catholic position on transgenderism.

It's a very loose and rough attempt. I welcome comments and criticism from everyone. 

Part of the problem is that the Catholic or Christian position has not been clearly or thoroughly set out. This is largely because much of the issue revolves around "advances" in medicine and science that are relatively recent. So, on transgenderism per se there isn't a 4,000 year-old moral and theological tradition. Now, the modern Catholic Church could come out with up-to-date guidance on the matter. But at the moment, under the leadership of Pope Francis, it is more interested in appearing "non-judgmental" to the secular world.

That means no more sin definitions for the time being.

And certainly no more disorder definitions.

Unless of course you're a litterer.

But the other part of the problem is that "transgenderism" covers many different things. For example, it's not merely about "sex-change" operations.

To simplify, let's define it as such.

One difficulty is that while transgenderism is by definition an issue of sexual morality, it differs in kind from the other well-known sexual morality issues. Let's digress for a moment and set those out. Cover your eyes if you're easily offended by sex things. Here goes:

Masturbation
Pornography
Birth control
Homosexual acts
Pre-marital sex

Okay, so I admit this blog post is starting to sound like a song from Hair.

Now, if you're one of my non-Catholic or non-Christian friends, you are probably about to be offended. Or worse, you're going to laugh at me. I apologize if you're offended. But it's okay if you laugh.

The caricature is that the things on the above list are sins because of random and varied edicts from the Bible or Pope Linus XXIII or whatever. Even some Christians and Catholics probably look at it that way. But that's a misunderstanding.

Actually what unites them is the claim that sex was created by God to...well, to make more people. That was it's purpose. Using it in a way that frustrates that purpose is a sin. Another way of putting it is that using it in a way that frustrates that purpose is a rebellion against God.

(Note, though, that the fact that something was created for a purpose does not mean you should always have that purpose in mind when you contemplate or engage in that something. Nor is it wrong to want or desire to contemplate or engage in that something for proximate reasons having nothing to do with its purpose.)

That's the quick explanation of most sexual sin. Go ahead and laugh again. I find it kind of funny myself.

But transgenderism is different. It's not necessarily about the sexual act, like the other things are, but rather, your point of view or role within the sexual act, whether you actually have any sexual acts or not.

So, what's wrong with Bruce Jenner?

I think the basic idea is that virtually everyone was created by God to have a particular role. Some of that (though not all) is physical. You were given a body that comports with that role. The actual sex part follows from it but need not. For example, it doesn't (or shouldn't) follow from it if you're a priest or a nun, or a consecrated virgin or incorrigible bachelor or whatever.

A few people may have, so to speak, an issue with that role, or at least they might think that they do. Is that wrong? Not necessarily. It might better be called, in the language of the Catechism, a disorder.

Why does God create or at least allow disorders? That's a deep philosophical and theological question, and I'm not going to answer it here. But in essence it's on the same footing as asking why God creates or allows anything in this world that is imperfect.

The non-Catholic Christian apologist Jim Dennison presented "three theological facts" on the issue a few days ago:

One: none of us is the person we were created to be. "God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them" (Genesis 1:27). As fallen people, we have each distorted the image in which we were made, and feel a deep longing to fulfill our God-given identity and purpose. 

Two: suffering people are desperate for hope. Sex-reassignment surgery and hormone treatments are drastic measures. When we are in pain, we will try whatever promises to help. We need compassion and community, not ridicule and rejection. 

Three: separating the body from the soul heals neither. According to Dr. McHugh [Paul McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital], changing the physical gender does not heal the psyche. That's because God made us in his image, as unified in diversity as our Three-In-One Lord. Where we are wounded most deeply, we most need the transforming power of the Spirit.

So, here's what the church should say to Bruce Jenner: God's hope for you isn't to become a woman, but to be the man you were created to be...

Thus, it's not completely about the disordered versus the "normal" or whatever. Fundamentally, we're all disordered. Ever since our ancestors got kicked out of the garden, we've all had issues with how God created us. It's a bent world and we're part of it.

We are all Bruce Jenner.

Giving in to those issues is always unwise, often selfish, and potentially fatal. Eternally fatal. That's not a knock on Bruce Jenner. It's a warning for all of us.

The Catholic Church teaches that a person is not a soul trapped in a physical body--a mere ghost in a machine. If one were such a thing, then radically transforming one's body--say, to mimic the appearance of the opposite sex--might not only be permissible but perhaps irrelevant. Rather, according to the Catechism,

The human body shares in the dignity of "the image of God": it is a human body precisely because it is animated by a spiritual soul, and it is the whole human person that is intended to become, in the body of Christ, a temple of the Spirit. 

Man, though made of body and soul, is a unity. Through his very bodily condition he sums up in himself the elements of the material world. Through him they are thus brought to their highest perfection and can raise their voice in praise freely given to the Creator. For this reason man may not despise his bodily life. Rather he is obliged to regard his body as good and to hold it in honor since God has created it and will raise it up on the last day. 233 

The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the "form" of the body: i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature (364-65).

Forty years ago, after years of training, Bruce Jenner, reached a pinnacle that few men have ever achieved. I have no idea whether he was a Christian then. In one sense, at least, it doesn't matter. He did something amazing by optimally developing the physical and spiritual gifts given to him by God. He didn't mutilate his body. He honored it. And he glorified God in a particular way that I suspect none of the rest of us have done or will ever do.

He was the man God created him to be.

But now and if he is to be believed, for many years, Bruce Jenner has, for all intents and purposes, wanted to destroy his body. In a mockery of Christ's promise to all of us, he wants a different one.

He won't get it.

But God grant that he will eventually get far more.

Pope Francis Comes Out in Favor of Genuflecting

Tweet

Pope Francis Praying

The issue of when to genuflect is a simmering mini-controversy among Catholics. I know that will bring a smile to the lips of non-Catholics and non-Christians alike. But there it is. The caricature is that Catholic liberals are generally against genuflecting, while Catholic traditionalists are generally for it.

Pope Francis just commented on the issue. In a recent "video message" to the actors and audience in a performance for charity, the Pope said,

How I wish...that Christians could kneel in veneration when a poor person enters the church.

Okay, so he wasn't talking about genuflecting to Christ.

Or was he?

Did he mean Christians should kneel to and venerate the poor? Or did he mean Christians should kneel to and venerate Christ through kneeling to and venerating the poor? Or did he mean, at that very moment (when a poor person enters the church) they should kneel and venerate Christ in the tabernacle?

"Hey man, this is a cool place. Why are those guys suddenly kneeling? Wait, let me walk backwards and repeat. Whoa! They did it again. I could get used to this!"

I have no idea. And, frankly, I suspect the Pope doesn't either.

So, I don't have answers here. But I want to set forward a number of somewhat random points and questions that I think are interesting. How these are sorted out (if they can be) is up to the reader:

• As far as I know the Pope has never explicitly recommended genuflecting to God, or to Christ at Mass.
• The Pope has been accused (with abundant evidence) of NOT kneeling at the expected times at Mass, unlike all of his modern predecessors.
• This has been explained by the claim that he has bad knees.
• The Pope HAS kneeled at other expected and appropriate times.
• He has also kneeled at inappropriate times--such as to holy roller preachers.
• Some non-tradititionalists--such as the Pope? (see above)--appear to think that kneeling is more appropriate at independent prayer or, say, at confession, than during Mass.
• Does this make sense?
• As far as I know, the Pope has never kneeled and venerated a poor person.
• Why not?
• If you have really bad knees or are in a wheelchair, etc., you don't have to kneel.
• Tradition tells us the Devil has no knees.
• I have bad knees and sometimes I carry a baby in a sling. I try to perform a rough bow.
• If my son slinks out of the pew and starts sprinting up the aisle, I do a nod before pursuing him.
• Does that make me a poser?
• They tell me that modern churches have no kneelers. I have never seen this. Maybe it's in Belgium.
• In the Bible, Jesus says the poor are blessed. He makes kindness to the poor a virtue. He also prescribes poverty for many--including at least one would-be follower, his apostles and (by extension) many priests.
• But excessive worship of the poor or of poverty (intrinsically or in general) has been designated a heresy by the Church.
• Once, Mary Magdelen poured an entire jug of expensive perfume over Jesus' head. She was rebuked by, of all people, Judas, who said she should have sold the perfume and given the money to the poor. Judas was in turn rebuked by Jesus who famously said, "The poor will always be with you, but I will not always be with you."
• What relevance does that have for today's Christian?
• Liberals think you should receive communion standing.
• Traditionalists think you should receive communion kneeling.
• Some traditionalists would say that even though you should receive it kneeling, if everyone else is doing it standing, you shouldn't call attention to yourself.
• Others disagree.
• A young girl once genuflected before taking communion from Bishop X. He snarled, "Don't ever do that in my church again."
• Is he a bishop of mercy?
• During a certain era in the early Church, it was decreed that communion shouldn't be taken standing.
• This was because there had been an an epidemic of kneeling that at that time signified a particular status that some people were faking.
• Nevertheless, some contemporaries point to this as an early Church practice that we should go back to.
• Oddly, they don't want want to go back to the early Church practice of permanently expelling adulterers from the Christian community.
• People are inconsistent.
• Many sincere and faithful Protestants think this is all silly.
• With respect to them, what I like about Catholicism is the acknowledgment that we are spiritual and physical creatures. Physical gestures aren't everything, but they also aren't nothing.
• Since we are both physical and spiritual, the physical often complements the spiritual.
• If and when you meet God and truly see His face, what will you do?