Thursday, October 30, 2014

#Muslim apologists becoming more aggressive proselytizers, targeting #Christians

Brethren, Peace be with you and a'salaam aleikum!

William Kirkpatrick over at the Catholic World Report asks the following question Are We Losing the Apologetics War with Islam? in light of recent lone-wolf terrorist attacks in Canada and the United States, as well as the romance many attach to the depredations of the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. One of the Canadian terrorists had this illustration displayed in his Facebook page:



That got me thinking because that very day I stumbled upon this tweet by the Muslim Times on-line publication:


An inspection of The Muslim Times reveals a sober, careful publication not given to extremism but devoted to its point of view. If I were a Muslim, The Muslim Times would be the kind of publication I would support. Still...

It would be easy to dismiss the above two examples as weak, frivolous, even Jack-Chickesque in its tendency for oversimplifying and creating strawmen arguments. If I do that, II wouldn't be saying what's wrong with their argument and this is what's wrong: the Muslim effort does not engage the best Christian reasons for Christ. Instead, the Muslim apologist(s) who designed the above arguments seize hide behind plain language to create "contradictions" in Christology and Christian self-understanding that will make lightly formed, uninformed, and non-catechized Christian stumble and fall. Therefore, the Muslim apologetic efforts targets the shallow Christian as low-hanging fruit for conversion. Sadly, the field is wide open and advantageous to Islamic missionary inroads in our civilization due to our general ignorance about, or repudiation of the historical Christian faith.

Christians have been engaging and refuting these unitarian arguments from non-Christians since apostolic times. Contemporary refutations can be found in the catecheses of St. John Damascene in the East and later in the Middles Ages in St. Thomas Aquinas' Summa Contra Gentiles in the West. The polemic isn't knew. The Muslim critique was answered long ago.

Yet, we are prisoners of our time and age. Most Christians live blissfully unaware about the old responses to Islamic misinformation. Many Christians of all backgrounds feel they must reinvent the wheel. Others will be stumped at the stunning over-simplicity of the Muslim critique. 

Brothers and sisters, we must arm ourselves with the Armor of God, standing firm  "with the belt of truth buckled around" our waists, with "the breastplate of righteousness" in place,and with our feet "fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace." Furthermore, we must "take up the shield of faith" and "the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God" (Ephesians 6:14-17, NIV); we must be "always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks us to give the reason for the hope that we have  with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against our good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander (1 Peter 3:15-16). This is the only way we can face down the Muslim challenge and win his soul to Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
- Read also The Mind of Islam at the Christ's Faithful Witness blog.

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

Why is it that we refer to our Nation's sins against human life as "blessings" ?

Brethren: Peace be with you.

I've just finished reading three biographies on Abraham Lincoln, John Quincy Adams, and Thomas Jefferson. I even reread one about the elder John Adams to get "in sync" with the one on John Quincy Adams and Jefferson's. Yes, you may call me a "biography nerd" if you wish.

Reading through all of them I'm impressed by the single temptation which our country has been subjected to and the various different ways we have fallen into it: the sin against human life.

The first form this sin took shape in was in our treatment of Native Americans. It was clear in the minds of the Founding Fathers that the Native Americans were to be repressed and expelled from their lands. Only John Quincy Adams regretted this abuse, as he saw Native Americans in Georgia removed from lands they had agreed to till, reap, and sow by a corrupt state government allied with land speculators. Though Lincoln was sympathetic to Native Americans, his sympathy was quite abstract and paternalistic. Embroiled as he was managing the Civil War, Lincolnl never asked himself what role the native inhabitants of our country should play in our constitutional polity following the depredations of Manifest Destiny. Lincoln may have rejected the Manifest Destiny notion, but he did little to stop its depredations. However, I'm not going to fault him too much for he was busy otherwise.

Starting a recurrent pattern in our history, Manifest Destiny was dubbed  "a blessing" during the time the future President was reaching political maturity: 
The untransacted destiny of the American people is to subdue the continent — to rush over this vast field to the Pacific Ocean — to animate the many hundred millions of its people, and to cheer them upward — to set the principle of self-government at work — to agitate these herculean masses — to establish a new order in human affairs — to set free the enslaved — to regenerate superannuated nations — to change darkness into light — to stir up the sleep of a hundred centuries — to teach old nations a new civilization — to confirm the destiny of the human race — to carry the career of mankind to its culminating point — to cause stagnant people to be re-born — to perfect science — to emblazon history with the conquest of peace — to shed a new and resplendent glory upon mankind — to unite the world in one social family — to dissolve the spell of tyranny and exalt charity — to absolve the curse that weighs down humanity, and to shed blessings round the world! Divine task! immortal mission! Let us tread fast and joyfully the open trail before us! Let every American heart open wide for patriotism to glow undimmed, and confide with religious faith in the sublime and prodigious destiny of his well-loved country. (1)
Perhaps it was the peculiar institution of Negro slavery what really marked the most egregious violation of human life our nation had perpetrated upon other human beings up to that time. Slavery, too, was once called a "blessing":
To insist that a status of society, which has been almost universal, and which is expressly and continually justified by Holy Writ, is its natural, normal, and necessary status, under the ordinary circumstances, is on its face a plausible and probable proposition. To insist on less, is to yield our cause, and to give up our religion; for if white slavery be morally wrong, be a violation of natural rights, the Bible cannot be true. Human and divine authority do seem in the general to concur, in establishing the expediency of having masters and slaves of different races. In very many nations of antiquity, and in some of modern times, the law has permitted the native citizens to become slaves to each other. But few take advantage of such laws; and the infrequency of the practice establishes the general truth that master and slave should be of different national descent. In some respects the wider the difference the better, as the slave will feel less mortified by his position. In other respects, it may be that too wide a difference hardens the hearts and brutalizes the feeling of both master and slave. The civilized man hates the savage, and the savage returns the hatred with interest. Hence West India slavery of newly caught negroes is not a very humane, affectionate, or civilizing institution. Virginia negroes have become moral and intelligent. They love their master and his family, and the attachment is reciprocated. Still, we like the idle, but intelligent house-servants, better than the hard-used, but stupid outhands; and we like the mulatto better than the negro; yet the negro is generally more affectionate, contented, and faithful. 

The world at large looks on negro slavery as much the worst form of slavery; because it is only acquainted with West India slavery. But our Southern slavery has become a benign and protective institution, and our negroes are confessedly better off than any free laboring population in the world. How can we contend that white slavery is wrong, whilst all the great body of free laborers are starving; and slaves, white or black, throughout the world, are enjoying comfort? . . .(2)
Fast-forward a century and we find abortion recognized as a "right" by Supreme Court justices who gave us Roe v. Wade as good law, forgetting the lessons set by awful precedents such as Dred Scott: that no true justice will ever flow from bad law and anti-human presuppositions. Yet, in an abhorrent, ritual repetition of a damnable past, abortion too has been called "a blessing" by no less than a Christian clergywoman in a sermon:

...Finally, the last sign I want to identify relates to my fellow clergy. Too often even those who support us can be heard talking about abortion as a tragedy. Let's be very clear about this:

When a woman finds herself pregnant due to violence and chooses an abortion, it is the violence that is the tragedy; the abortion is a blessing.


When a woman finds that the fetus she is carrying has anomalies incompatible with life, that it will not live and that she requires an abortion – often a late-term abortion – to protect her life, her health, or her fertility, it is the shattering of her hopes and dreams for that pregnancy that is the tragedy; the abortion is a blessing.


When a woman wants a child but can't afford one because she hasn't the education necessary for a sustainable job, or access to health care, or day care, or adequate food, it is the abysmal priorities of our nation, the lack of social supports, the absence of justice that are the tragedies; the abortion is a blessing.


And when a woman becomes pregnant within a loving, supportive, respectful relationship; has every option open to her; decides she does not wish to bear a child; and has access to a safe, affordable abortion – there is not a tragedy in sight — only blessing. The ability to enjoy God's good gift of sexuality without compromising one's education, life's work, or ability to put to use God's gifts and call is simply blessing.


These are the two things I want you, please, to remember – abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Let me hear you say it: abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. (3)

Brothers and sisters, when are we ever going to learn that blessing evil will never make that evil a good? What are we calling "blessings" nowadays, or invoking God's blessing over these evils as if they were intrinsic goods? Same-sex "marriage"? Euthanasia? Contraception? Embryonic stem research? Hmmm? Farfetched? Not in the slightest. It's history repeating itself and we don't learn from it; it is the same demon tempting us in the same manner and we keep falling into this temptation. All these "blessings" fall within the same spectrum of evil and depravity besmirching our Nation's honor since its founding.

We call these sins "blessings" because we don't want to see the depth of evil within ourselves. So we dress up this filth and call it a "blessing" from God. Or, to complicate the offense with sacrilege, we call God's blessings upon manifest evil to assuage our consciences and convince us that we are doing "good".

We have paid for the evil of slavery with a civil war that killed 600,000 Americans. What chastisement is in store for us for fostering the "blessings" of abortion over 50 million unborn children, and visiting death upon the old and the infirm to "protect their dignity"? Whatever it is, and whenever it comes, it will be highly deserved. Let us pray that the Lord holds his hands and delays the time of punishment to give us an extended opportunity to repent and heal.

===============

1.  William Gilpin, address to the U.S. Senate (2 March 1846); as quoted in Mission of the North American People, Geographical, Social, and Political (1873), by William Gilpin, p. 124

2. George Fitzhugh, The Blessings of Negro Slavery, (1857) URL: http://wps.ablongman.com/wps/media/objects/26/27123/primarysources1_13_2.html, accessed 28 October 2014.

3. Katherine Hancock Ragsdale, Speech given in defense of abortion rights in Birmingham, Alabama, following a failed push by anti-abortion protesters to shut down a clinic, (2007): URL: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/9363917/Abortion_is_a_blessing_and_abortionists_are_doing_holy_work_says_Anglican_priest/, accessed 28 October 2014

Monday, October 27, 2014

Fr. Silvan Rouse Called to Our Father's House - Updated

Brethren, Peace be with you!

Fr. Silvan Rouse, C.P. (+2014) (Photo by John Varljen)
Yesterday, my long time confessor and spiritual director, Father Silvan Rouse C.P., transited to Our Father's house. Fr. Silvan was full of years and, according to reports, happy that he was soon to see the Love of his life.

Fr. Silvan maintained a retreat house , St. Mary's House, in rural Bedford County, Pennsylvania. It was an oasis of peace where clergy, seminarians, and others went to retreat and obtain spiritual direction from the wise priest. My wife and I went there regularly until my professional commitments took me away from Pennsylvania and the charity of this warm man of God. He never failed in his hospitality. He gave me my first breviary and a copy of his doctoral thesis, which I treasure.

We met Fr. Silvan in 2001 or 2002. We fell in love instantly with his grace and obvious holiness. We weren't the only ones, for Fr. Silvan was a spiritual father to bishops, priests, deacons, monks, seminarians, Protestant ministers, and numerous lay men and women of all stations in life and Christian denominations. His "parish" had no limits. His door was always open, sometimes literally.

His hearing aid malfunctioned constantly. The last time I talked to him on the phone Fr. Silvan kept calling me "Bill" even if that wasn't my name. I corrected him once and he still kept calling me "Bill" so I said, what the heck, I'll be whoever he needs me to be. He never lost his compusure and I know that if he had seen me in person, he would have recognized me.

Now he's no longer of this world, not that he ever was. However, I don't feel sad because I'm certain he is in heaven. In fact, I've found it strange to pray for him as much as to him. Now Fr. Silvan is pleading on behalf of all his spiritual children before the Throne of Jesus. We have gained a new intercessor in heaven. I'm not ashamed of my private canonization of Fr. Silvan and my private cultus to him. If you had known him, you would agree with me.

Father Silvan Rouse, Passionist, a holy priest called unto the Lord on the 26th day of October, A.D. 2014. May eternal light shine upon him and may he rest in the peace of our Lord. I'll see you there later in this century, God willing, Fr. Silvan! If sooner, then the better.

Obituary as Published in Scranton Times on Oct. 28, 2014
 
The Reverend Silvan Rouse, C.P., 83, a Passionist priest and noted scholar in spirituality, died Saturday after a brief illness at St. Mary House, Bedford, Pa.

He was the son of the late Martin Francis Rouse and Mary Catherine Howley Rouse, graduated from Most Holy Rosary High School, Syracuse, N.Y., in 1939, and attended Holy Cross Preparatory Seminary, Dunkirk, N.Y., from 1939-1941. After a year of novitiate, he professed his vows in the Passionist community at St. Paul of the Cross Monastery, Pittsburgh in 1942. Rev. Rouse studied philosophy and theology at various Passionist monasteries and was ordained to the priesthood by Thomas M. O'Leary, bishop of Springfield, Mass., in 1949. Father Rouse received his STL in 1950 and a doctorate in sacred theology from St. Thomas University in Rome, Italy in 1952. He also studied spirituality at the Angelicum and the Teresianum in Rome. Upon his return to the U.S., he was a professor of theology at Passionist Monastery in Jamaica, N.Y., Baltimore, Md., and West Hartford, Conn., from 1952 to 1959. A deeply contemplative and prayerful man, Father Rouse lived at the Cistercian Abbey in Berryville, Va., from 1959-1961. An accomplished theologian, he served both Bishop Cuthbert M. O'Gary, C.P. and Quentin Oldwell, C.P. at the Second Vatican Council in Rome from 1962-1965. He then served in Passionist leadership and education posts from 1965-1968.

Father Rouse conducted retreats for clergy, religious and lay persons. Many people from around the world traveled to St. Mary's House to seek spiritual guidance, receive his support, and to discover pathways for their religious journeys. He also published numerous works on the letters, diary and spirituality of St. Paul of the Cross. The founder of the Passionists, the Meaning of the Cross, and the Passion of Christ in the Contemporary World, and the Letters of Mother Mary Crucified Constanti, the founder of the Passionist Nuns. He frequently served as an international consultant on the Monastic and Contemplative Vocations. He was co-founder of the Passionist House of Solitude in Birmingham, Ala. in 1969 and St. Mary House of Solitude in Bedford, Pa. Father Rouse has resided at St. Mary House from 1972 until the time of his death.

Surviving are nieces, Karen F. Rouse, Syracuse; Mrs. James Hunt, Syracuse; Mrs. Mark Pereiras, St. Charles, Mo.; and Joan Rouse, Baldwinsville, N.Y.

The funeral will be Wednesday at 11 a.m. in St. Ann's Basilica, to be celebrated by the V. Rev. Robert Joerger, C.P. Interment, St. Ann's Monastery Cemetery.

Friends may call today at St. Ann's Basilica, from 6 to 8 p.m. Memorial contributions can be made to St. Ann's Monastery, 1233 St. Ann's St., Scranton, PA 18504. Arrangements by the Thomas J. Hughes Funeral Home Inc., 1240 St. Ann's St., Scranton, PA 18504.

Funeral Home

Thomas J Hughes Funeral Home
1240 Saint Ann St Scranton, PA 18504
(570) 346-3498

Thursday, October 23, 2014

U.S. District Court Judge Rules in Favor of Natural #Marriage

Brethren, Peace be with you.

This, according to LifeSiteNews. I quote the whole thing:
U.S. District Judge Juan Pérez-Giménez
In a rare court victory for supporters of true marriage, a U.S. District Judge this week upheld the legality of Puerto Rico’s marriage protection law, which defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman. 

In his 21-page decision, Judge Juan Perez-Gimenez passionately defended true marriage and delivered a scathing rebuke to his colleagues across the nation who have overwhelmingly ruled to overturn state bans on same-sex “marriage” in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s controversial 2013 ruling striking down key portions of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). 

“Because no right to same-gender marriage emanates from the Constitution, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico should not be compelled to recognize such unions,” Perez-Gimenez wrote.

“Recent affirmances of same-gender marriage seem to suffer from a peculiar inability to recall the principles embodied in existing marriage law,” wrote Perez-Gimenez. “Traditional marriage is the fundamental unit of the political order.  And ultimately the very survival of the political order depends upon the procreative potential embodied in traditional marriage.” 

“Those are the well-tested, well-proven principles on which we have relied for centuries,” added the judge. “The question now is whether judicial ‘wisdom’ may contrive methods by which those solid principles can be circumvented or even discarded.”

Lambda Legal staff attorney Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, who represented the gay plaintiffs in the case, told the Washington Blade that Tuesday’s ruling “flies in the face of the blizzard of rulings of the last year … and the decision by the U.S. Supreme Court let stand the rulings striking down five bans similar to Puerto Rico’s.”

Added Gonzalez-Pagan, “One struggles to understand how this judge came to a different conclusion.”

In his ruling, Judge Perez-Gimenez acknowledged he is in the minority of judges willing to defend true marriage.  But he had harsh words for the activist courts that have now redefined marriage to include same-sex couples in 32 states.

“A clear majority of courts have struck down statutes that affirm opposite-gender marriage only,” Perez-Gimenez wrote. “In their ingenuity and imagination they have constructed a seemingly comprehensive legal structure for this new form of marriage. And yet what is lacking and unaccounted for remains: are laws barring polygamy, or, say the marriage of fathers and daughters, now of doubtful validity? Is ‘minimal marriage,’ where ‘individuals can have legal marital relationships with more than one person, reciprocally or asymmetrically, themselves determining the sex and number of parties’ the blueprint for their design?”

The Supreme Court’s decision regarding DOMA, “does not – cannot – change things,” wrote Perez-Gimenez.  “[The Supreme Court] struck down Section 3 of DOMA which imposed a federal definition of marriage, as an impermissible federal intrusion on state power. [The court’s] opinion did not create a fundamental right to same-gender marriage nor did it establish that state opposite-gender marriage regulations are amendable to federal constitutional challenges.  If anything, [the decision] stands for the opposite proposition: it reaffirms the States’ authority over marriage.”

“It takes inexplicable contortions of the mind or perhaps even willful ignorance … to interpret [the Supreme Court’s] endorsement of the state control of marriage as eliminating the state control of marriage,” Perez-Gimenez added.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, praised the judge for his ruling, calling him, “a model of judicial restraint.”

Lamenting an “epidemic of federal judges legislating from the bench on the issue of marriage,” Perkins said, “it is time for other courts to follow his example, and the Supreme Court shouldn't allow activist lower courts to redefine states' marriage laws.”

"Judge Pérez-Giménez not only rejected the constitutional arguments for redefining marriage, but succinctly made the case for natural marriage,” Perkins said.  “He is correct in saying that this is among the 'principles of logic and law that cannot be forgotten.'”

"In my recent Fox News Sunday debate with [pro-same-sex “marriage”] attorney Ted Olson, I challenged him to articulate what boundaries may be placed if 'love' is the only criteria for marriage. He refused to do so,” added Perkins. “Judge Pérez-Giménez offered the same challenge … .”

Concluded Perkins, “Every judge considering a marriage case-and every public official charged with administering or enforcing his or her state's laws on marriage-should read and take guidance from this ruling.”
Commentary. What Judge Pérez Giménez did took guts. He took the legal bull by the horns and twisted it into submission. This is how a Federal Judge is supposed to judge on this matter, the intense propaganda and agitation to the contrary notwithstanding. Continental judges should stop and notice: it took an American citizen from Puerto Rico to arrive at the right decision on this matter and come up with the courage to vindicate it from the bench. 
- Download and read U.S. District Judge Pérez Giménez's decision from here.

Wednesday, October 22, 2014

Houston Mayor @AnniseParker Has Abused Her Power And She Must Resign

Brethren: Peace be with you.

Houston Mayor Annise Parker
As you may be aware from numerous newsfeeds, Ms. Annise Parker (@AnniseParker) is using her powers as a mayor to intimidate and burden Christian pastors and their communities who, in their exercise of First Amendment freedoms, challenged an ordinance passed to guaranteed so-called "equal rights" to gay and transgendered people, including an order to allow people of one sex access to public restrooms designated for the opposite sex under certain circumstances. The citizens of Houston collected enough signatures to put the issue on the November ballot but the city refused to recognize their signatures. When the citizens sued to overturn the city's decision, Mayor Parker leveled subpoenas against five Houston-area pastors, demanding access to their sermons, records, and other private information related to their activism.

Whose death allowed Mayor Parker to become Queen of Houston? Inquiring minds want to know.

Since when the city government, or any other level of government for that matter, has the power to violate a citizen's private correspondence in order to ascertain a notional violation of some city ordinance - short of treason?

The subpoenas Ms. Annise Parker authorized are outrageous. They are morally wrong and illegal, as I understand the Constitution of the United States and our form of government and founding ideals. These misguided subpoenas aim to chill discussion and freedom of expression and of conscience, aimed at those whom Ms. Parker may consider political enemies. The subpoenas smack of royal power, they stink of despotism and tyranny.

J'accuse Ms. Annise Parker of abuse of power and malfeasance in this affair. I hope the citizens of Houston and their City Council see it my way, and sanction Ms. Parker appropriately. If I had a choice in the matter, I would demand her resignation.

Today we remember Pope St. John Paul the Great



Charles Joseph Wotjtyła was born in 1920 in Wadowice, Poland. After his ordination to the priesthood and theological studies in Rome, he returned to his homeland and resumed various pastoral and academic tasks. He became first auxiliary bishop and, in 1964, Archbishop of Krakow and took part in the Second Vatican Council. On 16 October 1978 he was elected pope and took the name John Paul II. His exceptional apostolic zeal, particularly for families, young people and the sick, led him to numerous pastoral visits throughout the world. Among the many fruits which he has left as a heritage to the Church are above all his rich Magisterium and the promulgation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church as well as the Code of Canon Law for the Latin Church and for the Eastern Churches. In Rome on 2 April 2005, the eve of the Second Sunday of Easter (or of Divine Mercy), he departed peacefully in the Lord.

On 19 December 2009, John Paul II was proclaimed Venerable by his successor Pope Benedict XVI and was beatified on 1 May 2011 after the Congregation for the Causes of Saints attributed one miracle to him, the healing of a French nun from Parkinson’s disease. A second miracle, attributed to the late pope, was approved on 2 July 2013 and confirmed by Pope Francis two days later. John Paul II was canonized on 27 April 2014, alongside Pope John XXIII. Like John XXIII, his feast day is not celebrated on the date of his death as is usual, but on the anniversary of his papal inauguration, 22 October 1978. (Source).

Let us pray:
O God,
who are rich in mercy
and who willed that
the blessed John Paul the Second
should preside as Pope over your universal Church,
grant, we pray, that instructed by his teaching,
we may open our hearts to the saving grace of Christ,
the sole Redeemer of mankind.
Who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever.
Amen.

Saturday, October 18, 2014

Synodal Document Released

Brethren, Peace be with you.

The relatio synodi or synodal document of the XIV Extraordinary Synod of Bishops was released today, as this first phase of the Synod on the Family came to an end today.

The Holy See has not released an official English version yet, but you may read a Google-translated version here.

Like I said before: the Holy Spirit is in the details. He always was, and always will be.