The Church hates Science…

9 05 2013

…right?

religion dark ages2

This ain’t exactly a list of “nobodys”, folks.

It’s exceedingly difficult to read this list and continue to assert that the Church is opposed to Science™ with a straight face.  Especially once one counts the number of influential scientists who lived in those so-called “dark ages”.

I also get a giggle at how, in an attempt to strip our calendar of its’ Catholic roots, anti-Christians still use the birth of Our Lord as the marker for the start of the “common era”.

Advertisements




Reality is something one discovers…

29 04 2013

…not something one creates at whim.

20110604-020_wide-dfe7f2cccdb6b127171aef676dcb3bc471a282ce-s6-c10

In related news – I’ve been drafted as the new Seahawks’ star quarterback in defiance of the Seattle Seahawks!

We play on our own field, but the good news is – I have plenty of Season Tickets for sale.

That’s pretty much on par with what Rosemarie Smead just did.

Why is it that, when it comes to the Catholic Church, the media see fit to ignore, misrepresent, or malign the Church so long as it serves as a convenient backdrop to push their own agenda?  There are not several issues that I have with this article – the entire presupposition of the writer is what I have an issue with.

The writer, who is not alone in the Media, has likely never read the text of Ordinario Sacredotalis or any of the related Church documents.  If she had, she would realize that the Church cannot “lift the ban” on women’s ordination because there is no ban to lift.

Ms. Smead doesn’t have to “worry about excommunication” because she excommunicated herself by her action – just like a man who sleeps with another woman doesn’t have to wait for his wife to catch him for it to be considered “cheating”.

Sadly, Ms. Smead must have gone a lifetime missing out on all of the amazing female saints, like Catherine of Sienna, who’s feast day is celebrated today.  It is further confounding that with her theology degree she would have missed the lives of the Saints, not to mention the Mother of God, and think the Church wanted to “keep the voices of women silent”.  (Further – the entire Church is referred to as “she”.  It would be a feat indeed to keep female voices silent as all throughout Catholic tradition we refer to her as “Holy Mother Church”).

The idea that “Jesus was only acting according to the customs of his time” is asserted and has been asserted for some time.  The problem is that if that assertion were true, then it implies that He was not the God who created the Universe and Everything in it.  Even if someone wished to cling to the idea of Jesus as merely a “good teacher”, it ignores the fact that his breaking with the “customs of his time” was exactly why he was crucified.  It’s an assertion that falls apart with even a halfhearted challenge.

That statement is also shockingly ignorant of the actual “customs of the time”.  If Jesus was in fact, so constrained, he would have *MOSTLY* had women priests, because priestesses were de rigueur in Greece and Rome throughout the centuries of early Christianity (ever hear of the Vestal Virgins?)

This attitude that the Church needs to “get with it” will no doubt continue.  Her opponents continue to ridicule and spit at her, because to do otherwise would mean chancing being caught in her vast, rational, and ever-lasting traditions.  It is easy to be ignorant of the Church.  It is impossible to be Neutral.

liberalshate_zpsa87b323a





Fr. Marcel Guarnizo relieved of duty

12 03 2012

You can read much more about it at The Deacon’s Bench.

There are a lot of unanswered questions.  My first one for the Archdiocese is, “Why now?”  It’s pretty obvious that Barbara Johnson and others will mark this as a “win”.  Hopefully, answers will be provided in due time.








%d bloggers like this: