Are You Ready for Judgement Day?

Posted on May 20, 2011 by Susan Kehoe

You have probably heard that a radio preacher named Harold Camping is  predicting that the end of the world is tomorrow. At least for the saved amongst us. Those who are not saved will live another five months on earth being tortured.  But don’t worry he has predicted the end of the world before. He once was certain that the end would come on September 1994!

Over at the Catholic Lane, Jeffery has a post up on the subject:

This “predicting of the end of the world” and interpreting Scriptures in a very clever way to support some prediction of the date of the return of Jesus is all too familiar to me.  I was raised in another apocalyptic cult known today as the Jehovah’s Witnesses.  This group promotes a similar “cleverly invented story” which continues to deceive millions of people and has destroyed the faith of countless others.

Russell and Camping: The Great Decoders of the Bible

One characteristic that is common among individuals who like to make predictions regarding the end of the world or the return of Christ is that these individuals believe that there is some secret knowledge contained in Holy Scripture that only they can decode for the world. Read more here.

Catholic Answers has a good article explaining the various end time scenarios here.

A song to help you get ready for the judgement day:

Posted in Four Last Things | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Prohibiting Late Term Abortions Kills Jobs

Posted on May 14, 2011 by Susan Kehoe

The Des Moines Register editorial staff has finally jumped the shark.   Their latest argument for even late term abortions: kill babies and create jobs:

There is a business that wants to move from Nebraska to Iowa. It would bring some high-paying jobs to our state.

Based on how these things typically work, state officials would fall all over themselves, offering tax breaks or forgiveable loans or both to seal the deal. Those “sweeteners” would be offered even if critics pointed out the business’ record of polluting the environment or exploiting workers with low wages and the lack of benefits. Government would justify its actions by reminding us that job creation is important for Iowa’s future and that government shouldn’t stick its nose into a business’ operations.

But this time, lawmakers are doing everything they can, including the use of twisted logic, to keep this business out of Iowa.

That’s because this particular business belongs to Nebraska physician LeRoy Carhart, who performs so-called “late term” abortions. He wants to open a clinic in Council Bluffs. Lawmakers can’t see past the controversy to recognize that he provides a legal medical service and would employ trained medical personnel who would pay taxes.  Continue reading here.

This is the stupidest Pro Abortion argument that I have encountered to date. By their reasoning we should bring back the death penalty, in Iowa, in order to create jobs.

Posted in Abortion, Culture of Death | Tagged | Leave a comment

Why Catholics are Right

Posted on May 14, 2011 by Susan Kehoe

Michael Coren is a controversial Canadian talk show host. He is also an adult  convert to Catholicism who has written several books. The Calgary Herald interviewed him about his latest book, Why Catholics are Right. He sounds like my kind of guy.

Excerpt:

Here are some of his thoughts during his conversation with the Herald.

On anti-Catholicism:

“(These are) people who say things about the Church that are not true. They’re vicious. They’re incredibly offensive. They know nothing. We have to stand up and say no, this is the truth.”

On reaction to the book: “So far, it’s actually been very generous.

“My parents weren’t Catholic. Most of my best friends aren’t Catholic. But if I believe this to be true, then I have to believe the alternative to be untrue.”

“I believe the Catholic Church is the best guaranteed way of finding salvation and spending eternity with God in fulfilment. How can I not share that with other people? It would be very rude of me not to.”

On atheism being the “most aggressive” critic of the faith:

“Today there’s this cult of rudeness from people. It’s not like Bertrand Russell. He was very courteous in his atheism. Today, they have to be abusive about Christianity to justify their position.”

“Many other atheists think Christians are dumb. Oh, you’re stupid. You worship the tooth fairy and your imaginary friend in the sky. This is the religion of Thomas Aquinas. Cardinal Newman. C.S. Lewis. Some of the greatest minds of all time. Dostoevsky. Suddenly we’re all stupid because you’ve read a book by Richard Dawkins.”

On the Catholic Church today:

“Pope John Paul stopped the rot and began to rebuild and it’s going in the right direction in every way, but I think a lot of damage has been done. We lost many of the Catholic institutes of education. High school. University. A lot of people lost their faith. But now we’re beginning to rebuild. There are new Catholic colleges. New Catholic newspapers. The seminaries are beginning to fill up with very good, sound, young people. It’s going very well. We have a marvellous pope. We’ve had two wonderful popes in a row.”

On the Catholic liturgy:

“Sometimes the liturgy can be very, very sloppy. There’s meant to be reverence in liturgy. It’s not a continuity of the outside world. People think to get people interested in Christianity they have to make the Church resemble TV. Well, if you want TV, you watch TV.”

On change in the Church:

“The Church changes cosmetically, but the truths and the teachings don’t change and we have to emphasize them.

“You don’t change for the sake of change. You keep to those truths and you express them in a more articulate manner perhaps. You reach out to people. We’ve been given God’s guarantee the Church will be fine. That doesn’t mean there won’t be challenges. There’s lots of challenges.”  Read more here.

Posted in Catholic Church | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Pro Amnesty Equals Pro Abortion?

Posted on May 13, 2011 by Susan Kehoe

File this under more Catholic Than the Pope (H/T New Advent). From the Catholic Key Blog:

John Zmirak had a post yesterday at the new Crisis Magazine equating amnesty for illegal aliens with abortion, in so far as it can be expected that amnestied illegals would vote overwhelmingly for Democrats. The equation is so lock-tight in Zmirak’s mind, that his post was titled ‘Amnesty Equals Abortion’.

Not by implication does he say that those who support amnesty are necessarily not pro-life:

I would never leave such a statement to mere implication. I wish to say it outright: Those who favor amnesty for illegal immigrants are not, in cold fact, pro-life. That goes for politicians and voters, bishops and priests, men, women, and children, red and yellow, black and white.

It would be a risible accusation if it applied to any actual person, but since nobody is suggesting amnesty, in the Ronald Reagan sense that the term came to be known, I suppose no harm done. Even our pro-post-natal-murder President is not suggesting a Ronald Reagan type amnesty, nor is the inarguably pro-life Archbishop José Gomez of Los Angeles.

John Zmirak had a post yesterday at the new Crisis Magazine equating amnesty for illegal aliens with abortion, in so far as it can be expected that amnestied illegals would vote overwhelmingly for Democrats. The equation is so lock-tight in Zmirak’s mind, that his post was titled ‘Amnesty Equals Abortion’.

Not by implication does he say that those who support amnesty are necessarily not pro-life:

I would never leave such a statement to mere implication. I wish to say it outright: Those who favor amnesty for illegal immigrants are not, in cold fact, pro-life. That goes for politicians and voters, bishops and priests, men, women, and children, red and yellow, black and white.

It would be a risible accusation if it applied to any actual person, but since nobody is suggesting amnesty, in the Ronald Reagan sense that the term came to be known, I suppose no harm done. Even our pro-post-natal-murder President is not suggesting a Ronald Reagan type amnesty, nor is the inarguably pro-life Archbishop José Gomez of Los Angeles.

But Zmirak has a flexible definition of amnesty. In an offline, fringe nativist publication called ‘Chronicles’, he described the very modest DREAM Act as “an open-ended amnesty to illegal aliens who were brought here as children by their parents.” So, not by implication, but directly, Zmirak accuses every single Catholic bishop in the United States who, without dissent, supported the DREAM Act as “not, in cold fact, pro-life.”

Such people may be pro-life in theory, as thousands of antebellum Southerners claimed to be inward abolitionists.

As a DREAM Act supporter, I suppose it accuses me of being “not, in cold fact, pro-life”. So, when I founded a pro-life club in my liberal Catholic high school with no faculty sponsor, collected a string of arrests for blockading abortion clinics across the country, canonically sued my liberal Catholic college for forcing the student union to support a pro-choice group – and got kicked out, ran numerous pro-life campaigns in California, battled squishy priests and chancery rats as editor of the diocesan paper in San Francisco and volunteered at a myriad of direct pro-life ministries over almost every decade of my life, I was merely collecting social capital in Pelosiville. I collected so much social capital in my San Francisco of five generations that I now live in Kansas City. (Thank God!, btw)

Mother Teresa would not meet Zmirak’s pro-life test. But I suppose that’s conjecture – We cannot know for certain whether Mother Teresa would have supported sending the children of illegal immigrants, who know no other country than the U.S., to a homeless existence in a foreign country – a necessary qualification for being pro-life in Zmirak’s world. Go to the Catholic Key blog post here. 

Well I am Pro Life and Pro Amnesty. So there.

Posted in More Catholic than the Pope, Pro life | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Marriage: the core of every civilization

Posted on May 13, 2011 by Susan Kehoe

Archbishop Dolon explains marriage excerpt (H/T New Advent);

This frenzied group, taunting the people as they left Mass, were rabid in criticizing the Catholic Church, especially her bishops, for our teaching that homosexuals deserve dignity and respect.

To be more precise, this group was yelling at us because, they objected, the Catholic Church was so friendly, welcoming, and defensive of gay (they used other foul words) people.  They waved placards explicitly quoting and condemning #2358 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which affirms the dignity of those with same-sex attraction, and warns against any form of prejudice, hatred, or unjust discrimination against them, and insists that homosexual acts, not persons, are not in conformity with God’s design.

Never have I faced such a vitriolic crowd, blasting the Church for simply following the teaching of Jesus by loving and respecting people regardless of anything, including their sexual orientation.

When a reporter asked me for a comment, I replied, “They’re right:  we do love and respect homosexual people.  These protestors understand Church teaching very well.”

I’ve been recalling that episode often of late, because now I hear Catholics, — and, I am quick to add, Jews, other Christians, Muslims, and men and women of no faith at all — who have thoughtfully expressed grave disapproval of the current rush to redefine marriage, branded as bigots and bullies who hate gays.

Nonsense!  We are not anti anybody; we are pro-marriage.  The definition of marriage is a given:  it is a lifelong union of love and fidelity leading, please God, to children, between one man and one woman.

History, Natural Law, the Bible (if you’re so inclined), the religions of the world, human experience, and just plain gumption tell us this is so.  The definition of marriage is hardwired into our human reason.

To uphold that traditional definition, to strengthen it, and to defend it is not a posture of bigotry or bullying.  Nor is it a denial of the “right” of anybody.  As the philosophers remind us, in a civilized, moral society, we have the right to do what we ought, not to do whatever we want.  Not every desire is a right.

To tamper with that definition, or to engage in some Orwellian social engineering about the nature and purpose of marriage, is perilous to all of us.  If the definition of marriage is continually being altered, could it not in the future be morphed again to include multiple spouses or even family members?

Nor is it “imposing” some narrow outmoded religious conviction.  One might well ask just who is doing the “imposing” here:  those who simply defend what the human drama has accepted from the start, a belief embedded in nature and at the core of every civilization — the definition of marriage — or those who all of a sudden want to scrap it because “progressive, enlightened, tolerant culture” calls for it.

Sadly, as we see in countries where such a redefinition has occurred, “tolerance” is hardly the result, as those who hold to the given definition of marriage now become harassed and penalized. Go read the whole article here.

Posted in Catholic Church, Marriage | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Innocence Lost: Child Given Botox

Posted on May 13, 2011 by Susan Kehoe

Things are so much better for girls and women since we have been liberated

Age of Innocence Joshua Reynolds

from old fashioned ideas on sex, marriage, chastity, and modesty.  Females are judged based on their intelligence and character not on physical attributes.

Yea right.  H/T Deacon Greg

A San Francisco mom defends using Botox to remove the lines from the face of her 8-year-old daughter. The interview first aired on ABC’s Good Morning America Thursday morning and immediately touched off a controversy and now there is an investigation.

Child Protective Services is now getting involved. Many people say what the mom is doing is child abuse, but she insists she’s not the only mother giving Botox to her child.

Britney: It hurts and I get used to it and&
Reporter: Do you cry?
Britney: A little.
Reporter: You do?
Britney: But now, I don’t.

Britney is only 8 years old, but she gets Botox injections regularly. Her mother, Kerry Campbell, told ABC’s Good Morning America she administers the shots. Campbell has been entering her daughter in beauty pageants and says she got the idea from other moms.

“And they were just telling me about the lines on her face and how, you know a lot of the moms there, they’re giving their kids Botox. And it’s pretty much like the thing. I’m not the only one that does it,” said Campbell.

Viewers who watched the story Thursday morning were outraged. In fact, San Francisco’s Child Protective Services was flooded with calls from people concerned about Britney’s well-being. Read more here.

I really don’t get parents who push the idea that beauty is only skin deep.  I don’t get parents who let their teenage daughters dress for the street corner in low cut tops and skirts that are belts.

The pedestal has been replaced by the pole.

Posted in Women | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Saint of the Day: Damien of Molokai

Posted on May 10, 2011 by Susan Kehoe

The Saint Damien website.

Posted in Saints | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Embracing the Heavy Cross of Infertility

Posted on May 10, 2011 by Susan Kehoe

Carolyn and Sean Savage were in the news several months ago, because of a  heart breaking mistake. They underwent IVF treatment, and the embryos of another couple were implanted instead of theirs.  You can read about their story here.

Well it turns out that they are Catholic, and surprise surprise they disagree with the Church’s teaching prohibiting IVF.  Sean has written a post for the CNN religion blog refuting the Church’s position..

“According to the Roman Catholic Church, the only moral route to conceiving a child is through sexual intercourse. As a Catholic, I find the Church’s position to be discriminatory against couples who have medical conditions that prevent them from conceiving in that manner.”

Frankly his post demonstrates that he really doesn’t understand why the Church insists that IVF is always morally wrong.  His argument is , “we want a big family and IVF is the only way to make that possible”.

He doesn’t realize that children are gifts from God and not products.  We are not guaranteed the right to children.

Certainly infertility is a cause of great suffering.  It is not something that should be taken lightly.  But as Christians we are called to embrace our suffering. Jesus told us to pick up our cross and follow him. We are not called to find a way around the cross.

Yes this a hard teaching.  Sometimes we are given the thorns without the rose.

My favorite deacon (MFD) and I are blessed with two children and five grandchildren.  So what do I know?

Not much.

But the author of the blog, This _Cross_ I_ embrace is suffering with infertility.  She and her husband are faithful Catholics. IVF, therefore, is not an option, and they are unable to adopt. Still she understands redemptive suffering. In a post on infertility and adoption she writes:

“This is what God wants to do for each individual couple (is that an oxymoron?) who suffers with infertility/childlessness. He wants us to deepen our faith, grow in His love, and become His hands on earth. Our focus as humans should not be on a pregnancy or an adoption as the “result” at the end of the infertile couple’s suffering, but rather, on life everlasting. Should a couple adopt children or conceive after years of infertility, all glory and praise be to He who gives life – but these are blessings only, NOT the Resurrection of the cross of childlessness. Our Resurrection will come in heaven, not on this earth.”

Amen.  Man I wish that I had such faith, fortitude, and insight at her young age.

Posted in Catholic Moral Teaching, Marriage, Moral Theology, Suffering, Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Offer Up Suffering

Posted on May 10, 2011 by Susan Kehoe

Elizabeth Scalia, the Anchoress, as a post up on the  Christian virtue of suffering for the good of others. She calls it A Theology of Expansive Love.

Human suffering is one of life’s great mysteries. It is often a stumbling block to faith.  But we can find meaning in our suffering if we look to the cross of Christ.  Like Elizabeth, I grew up hearing “offer it up” and “offer it up for the poor souls in purgatory”.

I heard it quite a lot—probably because I was a frequent whiner.

But I only came to understand that suffering for others is a virtue when MS hit after 20 years in hiding. That doesn’t mean that I have ceased all whining. But I am getting better at it with God’s grace and by meditating on the cross. There are days where the only way that I cope is by literally fixing my gaze on the cross.

But we live in the age of suffering is the only sin. It has no meaning. The concept of penance, therefore, is all but a relic of an earlier era.  Elizabeth asserts, correctly, that is because penance is seen as a punishment and not a Christian virtue.

“ We  Catholics who grew up straddling the cusp of the conciliar divide may have a vague memory of the phrase “offer it up.” It was advice frequently given by the sisters who taught us our catechisms: “when you are in pain, when you are disappointed, when your feelings have been hurt, offer these things up to the Lord and ask him to use your suffering—that He join it to His own pain on the cross, for the good of others. Offer it as penance for your own sins, or the sins of those who cannot or will not do penance for themselves; offer it for the sick, the lonely, or for their intentions.”

“Penance” has received a bad name over the last thirty or forty years, largely because it was taught to many in the language of punishment rather than in the language of virtue, offering, and peace.

So, why not, penance? Why not take some of one’s suffering and—rather than popping a pill—endure it for a bit; live with it and in it, and do something with it; make it worthwhile instead of meaningless.

If we are told to “offer it up” at all today, it is usually in a tone of sarcasm or very weak irony. To we moderns, the concept has come to be regarded—like formerly common practices as prayerful ejaculations or a solemn breast-beat—as a quaint throwback to a time when notions of sin and reparation seemed to consume entirely too much of the Catholic sensibility. The idea of “offering it up” has fallen under the false but widely promulgated cultural disdain for something called “Catholic Guilt,” which is in truth, the marginalizing dismissal of the Catholic conscience.

Far from being a picturesque and nonchalant “there, there” to someone enduring either a minor inconvenience or a larger concern, “offer it up” is powerful theological advice that comes to us directly from scripture. As Paul writes to the Colossians: “Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and fill up on my part that which is lacking of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body’s sake, which is the church . . .”

Pondering the crucifix, and the immensity of what Christ endured, we wonder what could possibly be ‘lacking’ in his afflictions. But then, gazing upon His outstretched arms, we see an invitation. If we accept that no act in human history can begin to match the power, the healing, the victory and the justice that was achieved in the crucified suffering of Jesus of Nazareth, then attaching our own trials, minor or major though they be, to that still-resonating act of generosity and self-abnegation exposes them to all of the good contained in Christ’s sacrifice, and it assists in the salvation of the world.”  Continue reading here.

Posted in Suffering | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Mom Song

Posted on May 9, 2011 by Susan Kehoe

Heh. What a typical mom nags says in a typical day. Takes me back! H/T Man With Black Hat.

Posted in Humor | Tagged | Leave a comment