Tag Archives: Comments

The Jake and Vienna Interview: One Catholic's Thoughts On the State of Relationships Today

Krispy Kreme 10

Image via Wikipedia

I would like to start by making a confession: I truly get a kick out of celebrity gossip. It is inherently wrong and immoral to feed on and into this (although it is as tasty as a Krispy Kreme doughnut and about as healthy) there is just something about watching or reading about celebrities crash and burn that intrigues me.

There are some who certainly get a kick out of this kind of stuff but that's not me. I actually analyze the snippets while reflecting on Scripture and the Catechism. There is the he said/she said, body language, junior-high rumors, etc. And what I've come to know and understand is that as much as things change everything stays the same.

God, Our Blessed Creator, knows us so well that from day one He began to reveal Himself and our salvation in such a caressing and loving manner that He did it one grain of sand at a time. This is mercy and love. Revealing truth in such a gentle manner that, although you cannot stop the hurt, you provide a way to lessen the pain.

This is exactly what I saw on ABC tonight. Many probably already saw the last 20 or 30 minutes of the Bachelorette because of the Jake and Vienna interview concerning their premarital problems. I know I did. And in watching I took note of something some may not have – the poor state of male/female relationships in world today.

Not to contradict myself from before, many things change and many things remain the same. Problems in relationships remain. The nature or should I say expressed nature of relationships have changed.

For example, The Bachelor/Bachelorette programs serve no greater purpose than to promote promiscuity as a way of knowing oneself and gaining experience while contradicting that very premise with the hope of finding "true" love. All of this goes on with "non-actors" who are most certainly coached and prodded like circus beasts displaced before American and the world for all to see. The end result is the perceived notion that, again, checking your options in quasi-unfaithful manner is good because your will eventually get to the "right" one.

In the case of Jake and Vienna, this clearly backfired. One can speculate on the real reasons behind their demise but there are certainly some concrete items to build a case on all stemming from the interview. There are Catechists and marriage people who could really use this to work wonders (Jason and Christalina Everett, Patrick Coffin, Dr. Gregory Popcek, etc – Do you all hear me?):
  • Reality TVThe premise of the show itself is, as I said above, falsity clothed in "reality."
  • Living in Sin: The interview revealed that the couple was living together almost immediately. If the timeline my head is accurate, the two were dating for a total of about six months – they were living as man and wife well into the second month. Even when I was single and reckless I knew this was a recipe for disaster. How can two become one flesh on the promise of courtship – you need the permanency of marriage and the grace bestowed it via God. It is a sacrament after all. (Trust me on this last point. It ain't easy without Him. You want God as the first wheel in your marriage and any relationship for that matter.)
  • Physicality: On this point I was most surprised. Not because of the fact that sexual intimacy seemingly occurred but rather that it pretty much stopped altogether. Humans are made in the image and likeness of God, meaning we have a free will and an intellect. These two intangible features are tied together a rather unique way for humans – this is what separates us from all the other creations. Our free will and intellect are built into an immaterial, immortal soul which is then tied into a material, mortal body. This is why we can be sick in one aspect and have it affect another. In the case of Jake and Vienna, the passion (interesting to know that the root of passion means to suffer together) felt by both parties ceased probably because one or the other had some illness in the spirit that affected the body (sin of course). According to what I heard from Vienna, that would have been Jake. His former fiancé mentioned that one of his excuses was fasting or waiting until after they were married, etc. All valid reasons but in my opinion, a way to try and keep from committing further sin or temptation (truly assuming that they had slept together. This is obviously against our current culture. Just take this comment from a Huffington Post article:

Former 'Bachelor' Jake gave ex-fiancee Vienna a variety of reasons for refusing to have sex with her, from his diet to wanting to wait until marriage. Now contestants on the show say Jake might prefer men.

"I think he has gay potential and definitely gay tendencies," a bachelorette from Season 12 tells Radaronline.com.

Paul Rosseau, who appeared on Season 4 of 'The Bachelorette,' agrees.

"I definitely think he has gay tendencies, not only because of the way he dresses but also because he didn't want to have sex with a beautiful girl and never really tried with the other girls on the show," he told Radar. "Nothing personal, Jake!"

This could all be true but I would rather give the man the benefit of the doubt and say that he was probably conflicted inside. It was the fasting comment – I
don't hear it too m
uch outside of Lent but we do know that fasting is a means for spiritual clarity and an attempt to seek something or do penance.
  • Modern Feminism: My wife's mouth dropped when Vienna opened hers, usually to interrupt Jake. He stated that the chief issue he felt was miscommunication, which resulted from Vienna being mean, undermining (his authority I presume), emasculation, etc. This is the problem with modern feminism – they want their cake and wish to eat it too. Isn't going to happen. I can't tell you how many woman I have dated that suffered from this issue (Hell, I didn't realise I suffered from this issue until well into my marriage – and I still trying to fix what I broke). The problem here is that many of these ladies desire strong, chivalrous men on their terms. Male and female He made them (Gn 1:27), which means we are equal but different. Men and women compliment each other, where one is deficient the other is efficient. This is part of God's will and design (thus the unnatural nature of homosexual union…but that is for another post). When a woman proceeds to contradict the very nature of a man a shift in the balance of the domestic church is disturbed. In the case of this couple there was not church to begin with so the cohabitation already placed a strain on the relationship thus fuel was being added to the fire by a Vienna's actions. Mind you Jake is no innocent man: he willfully cohabited, he lost his temper (on camera too) and seemed a bit too cocky for me vis-à-vis Vienna. Every man must love their "wives as Christ loved the Church" (Ep 5:25) and give himself completely to her, emptying himself for her. This is Christian love – Christian marriage.

All I can say is thank God for the Church. She has never taught error on this (or any other issue on faith and morals), proclaiming the truth of the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony from day one. Look to Theology of the Body, Humane Vitae, etc. for more information.

Well, I think I am out of steam on this. What do you all think?

Zemanta helped me add links & pictures to this email. It can do it for you too.
Advertisements

Learn your faith: Lost finale was not ‘Catholic’

The simple answer here is no. And to be honest I wasn’t going to post on this but since there is apparently some belief among the interwebs that the end of this popular sci-fi/drama was somehow “Catholic,” meaning representative of Catholic dogma, I figured I would chime in to defend the Faith from the faithful – lest we scandalize the Church further.

Let’s take a look at an article published by the joint EWTN/CNA service:

Media_httpwwwewtnnews_nkhez

Spanish daily, La Razon, published an analysis following the finale of the television series, “Lost,” which told the story of survivors of an airline crash on a mysterious island.  The newspaper remarked that the series, which captivated millions of viewers for seven years, ended with a Catholic storyline. [This is most certainly not the case neither for the finale nor the series.]

In their article, reporters Mar Velasco and Pablo Gines pointed out that, “There are two kinds of fans of Lost: Those who believe its value lies in its plot, and those who believe it resides in its characters.  For the former, the series finale was in a certain sense disappointing.  Yes, the script writers could have resolved many questions that remained (and will remain) unanswered.  However, for the latter, the series ended on a high note.”

The finale, they said, resolved “what was essential, what has to do with the human heart, with the meaning and value of life and the capacity to be ‘saved’.” [This is where things go downhill vis-a-vis Catholic doctrine.]

At the critical moments of life, the ‘man of faith’ overcame the ‘man of science.’ [True, but not Catholic. The entire series as agnostic at best.]  The way was opened to the transcendental and, despite a certain … homage to all creeds (the stained-glass window with the symbols of all the religions), it did so in a Christian manner. [Wrong. The Church does teach the doctrine of Invincible Ignorance (CCC 1793) but by showing us the “Coexist” bumper-sticker, the producers/writers prove their “theology” to be all-inclusive in the sense opposed to Doctrine.] It was not in vain that the Risen One awaited the ‘lost’ when they were about to reach the fullness found on the other side of a specifically Catholic chapel,” the reporters asserted. [More like an assumption to me. There was no indication that God, as revealed to us, was even present or responsible for this or any of the events in the series. Jacks father, Christian, attests to this when he replies to his son that he did not know where they were going next.]

In the last episode, the mysterious island was revealed as a real physical place “where the characters ‘were rescued’ from their frustrations and their past, although the price some paid would be their very lives (Locke, Jack). In Christianity, this ‘island’ is the physical world in which mankind journeys and Jesus Christ ‘redeems’ in the act of giving himself up on the cross,” the writers explained. [For this finale to be anything Christian, the island of purgatory must not be a) material, b) filled with sinful behavior especially among the purged, and c) outside of the presence of God. Souls in purgatory are saved but must be purged of their attachment to sin (1 Cor 3:15).]

The last season of Lost was characterized “by the creation of what was thought to be a ‘parallel reality’ and that was, in the end, revealed to be a sort of ‘purgatory’ in which each person ‘re-created’ the life he or she would have liked to have lived in the world [This is not purgatory (CCC 1030-1032).]: Jack became a good son and father; Kate was innocent; Sawyer, a decent police officer; Benjamin became an affectionate professor … When they all ‘recognized’ and discovered that they were in this ‘purgatory,’ for some, the door to resurrection and eternity (the ‘light’ at the other end of the chapel) was opened, while for others the purgatory continued because they still had issues to resolve (Ben, Eloise, Ana Lucia…). [I can see some parallel here since Ben himself said to Hurley that he still “needed to work some things out.” But why would Hurley have invited him into the chapel in the first place?]

Likewise, “Love was not only understood as ‘eros,’ possessive love, but as ‘agape,’ the love that seeks the good of the other: ‘Jack, I hope someone does for you what you’ve done for me,’ Locke told him. [Here is another problem. You see, we do not redeem each other directly. Jesus is the only redeemer and this statement is contrary to the Gospels (Gal 1:8-9).]

Another key element in this finale was forgiveness, which was featured in one of the most powerful scenes of the entire series: Locke, who has been murdered by Ben, encountered him shortly before entering eternity: ‘John, I’m really sorry for what I did to you: I was selfish and jealous, I wanted everything that you had.’ Locke responded: ‘If it’s of any help to you, Ben, I forgive you.’  ‘Thanks, John. That helps me. It means more to me than you can imagine’.” [Again, true forgiveness comes from Jesus alone thus the Sacrament of Reconciliation for our earthly lives. Once we die, we are judged (Heb 9:27) and are thus rewarded Heaven (possibly through Purgatory) or Hell.]

The series ended with the sacrifice of the main character. “Jack offered his life to save the others. Never believing in the peculiarities of the island, he ends up understanding through another friend, Locke, who had to die in order to show him the way.  It’s a sacrifice that, in the end, acquires all of its value and meaning.” [“Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” (John (RSV) 15:13) – I give you that one. But on the latter, Jack’s death acquiring all of its value and meaning on the island, I don’t think this is possible without dying “in a state of Grace.” And as far as was represented in the series and finale, Jack did not die “in a state of Grace.”]

Well, I think that covers it.

Learn your faith: Lost finale was not 'Catholic'

The simple answer here is no. And to be honest I wasn’t going to post on this but since there is apparently some belief among the interwebs that the end of this popular sci-fi/drama was somehow “Catholic,” meaning representative of Catholic dogma, I figured I would chime in to defend the Faith from the faithful – lest we scandalize the Church further.

Let’s take a look at an article published by the joint EWTN/CNA service:

Spanish daily, La Razon, published an analysis following the finale of the television series, “Lost,” which told the story of survivors of an airline crash on a mysterious island.  The newspaper remarked that the series, which captivated millions of viewers for seven years, ended with a Catholic storyline. [This is most certainly not the case neither for the finale nor the series.]

In their article, reporters Mar Velasco and Pablo Gines pointed out that, “There are two kinds of fans of Lost: Those who believe its value lies in its plot, and those who believe it resides in its characters.  For the former, the series finale was in a certain sense disappointing.  Yes, the script writers could have resolved many questions that remained (and will remain) unanswered.  However, for the latter, the series ended on a high note.”

The finale, they said, resolved “what was essential, what has to do with the human heart, with the meaning and value of life and the capacity to be ‘saved’.” [This is where things go downhill vis-a-vis Catholic doctrine.]

At the critical moments of life, the ‘man of faith’ overcame the ‘man of science.’ [True, but not Catholic. The entire series as agnostic at best.]  The way was opened to the transcendental and, despite a certain … homage to all creeds (the stained-glass window with the symbols of all the religions), it did so in a Christian manner. [Wrong. The Church does teach the doctrine of Invincible Ignorance (CCC 1793) but by showing us the “Coexist” bumper-sticker, the producers/writers prove their “theology” to be all-inclusive in the sense opposed to Doctrine.] It was not in vain that the Risen One awaited the ‘lost’ when they were about to reach the fullness found on the other side of a specifically Catholic chapel,” the reporters asserted. [More like an assumption to me. There was no indication that God, as revealed to us, was even present or responsible for this or any of the events in the series. Jacks father, Christian, attests to this when he replies to his son that he did not know where they were going next.]

In the last episode, the mysterious island was revealed as a real physical place “where the characters ‘were rescued’ from their frustrations and their past, although the price some paid would be their very lives (Locke, Jack). In Christianity, this ‘island’ is the physical world in which mankind journeys and Jesus Christ ‘redeems’ in the act of giving himself up on the cross,” the writers explained. [For this finale to be anything Christian, the island of purgatory must not be a) material, b) filled with sinful behavior especially among the purged, and c) outside of the presence of God. Souls in purgatory are saved but must be purged of their attachment to sin (1 Cor 3:15).]

The last season of Lost was characterized “by the creation of what was thought to be a ‘parallel reality’ and that was, in the end, revealed to be a sort of ‘purgatory’ in which each person ‘re-created’ the life he or she would have liked to have lived in the world [This is not purgatory (CCC 1030-1032).]: Jack became a good son and father; Kate was innocent; Sawyer, a decent police officer; Benjamin became an affectionate professor … When they all ‘recognized’ and discovered that they were in this ‘purgatory,’ for some, the door to resurrection and eternity (the ‘light’ at the other end of the chapel) was opened, while for others the purgatory continued because they still had issues to resolve (Ben, Eloise, Ana Lucia…). [I can see some parallel here since Ben himself said to Hurley that he still “needed to work some things out.” But why would Hurley have invited him into the chapel in the first place?]

Likewise, “Love was not only understood as ‘eros,’ possessive love, but as ‘agape,’ the love that seeks the good of the other: ‘Jack, I hope someone does for you what you’ve done for me,’ Locke told him. [Here is another problem. You see, we do not redeem each other directly. Jesus is the only redeemer and this statement is contrary to the Gospels (Gal 1:8-9).]

Another key element in this finale was forgiveness, which was featured in one of the most powerful scenes of the entire series: Locke, who has been murdered by Ben, encountered him shortly before entering eternity: ‘John, I’m really sorry for what I did to you: I was selfish and jealous, I wanted everything that you had.’ Locke responded: ‘If it’s of any help to you, Ben, I forgive you.’  ‘Thanks, John. That helps me. It means more to me than you can imagine’.” [Again, true forgiveness comes from Jesus alone thus the Sacrament of Reconciliation for our earthly lives. Once we die, we are judged (Heb 9:27) and are thus rewarded Heaven (possibly through Purgatory) or Hell.]

The series ended with the sacrifice of the main character. “Jack offered his life to save the others. Never believing in the peculiarities of the island, he ends up understanding through another friend, Locke, who had to die in order to show him the way.  It’s a sacrifice that, in the end, acquires all of its value and meaning.” [“Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” (John (RSV) 15:13) – I give you that one. But on the latter, Jack’s death acquiring all of its value and meaning on the island, I don’t think this is possible without dying “in a state of Grace.” And as far as was represented in the series and finale, Jack did not die “in a state of Grace.”]

Well, I think that covers it.

Learn your faith: Lost finale was not ‘Catholic’

The simple answer here is no. And to be honest I wasn’t going to post on this but since there is apparently some belief among the interwebs that the end of this popular sci-fi/drama was somehow “Catholic,” meaning representative of Catholic dogma, I figured I would chime in to defend the Faith from the faithful – lest we scandalize the Church further.

Let’s take a look at an article published by the joint EWTN/CNA service:

Spanish daily, La Razon, published an analysis following the finale of the television series, “Lost,” which told the story of survivors of an airline crash on a mysterious island.  The newspaper remarked that the series, which captivated millions of viewers for seven years, ended with a Catholic storyline. [This is most certainly not the case neither for the finale nor the series.]

In their article, reporters Mar Velasco and Pablo Gines pointed out that, “There are two kinds of fans of Lost: Those who believe its value lies in its plot, and those who believe it resides in its characters.  For the former, the series finale was in a certain sense disappointing.  Yes, the script writers could have resolved many questions that remained (and will remain) unanswered.  However, for the latter, the series ended on a high note.”

The finale, they said, resolved “what was essential, what has to do with the human heart, with the meaning and value of life and the capacity to be ‘saved’.” [This is where things go downhill vis-a-vis Catholic doctrine.]

At the critical moments of life, the ‘man of faith’ overcame the ‘man of science.’ [True, but not Catholic. The entire series as agnostic at best.]  The way was opened to the transcendental and, despite a certain … homage to all creeds (the stained-glass window with the symbols of all the religions), it did so in a Christian manner. [Wrong. The Church does teach the doctrine of Invincible Ignorance (CCC 1793) but by showing us the “Coexist” bumper-sticker, the producers/writers prove their “theology” to be all-inclusive in the sense opposed to Doctrine.] It was not in vain that the Risen One awaited the ‘lost’ when they were about to reach the fullness found on the other side of a specifically Catholic chapel,” the reporters asserted. [More like an assumption to me. There was no indication that God, as revealed to us, was even present or responsible for this or any of the events in the series. Jacks father, Christian, attests to this when he replies to his son that he did not know where they were going next.]

In the last episode, the mysterious island was revealed as a real physical place “where the characters ‘were rescued’ from their frustrations and their past, although the price some paid would be their very lives (Locke, Jack). In Christianity, this ‘island’ is the physical world in which mankind journeys and Jesus Christ ‘redeems’ in the act of giving himself up on the cross,” the writers explained. [For this finale to be anything Christian, the island of purgatory must not be a) material, b) filled with sinful behavior especially among the purged, and c) outside of the presence of God. Souls in purgatory are saved but must be purged of their attachment to sin (1 Cor 3:15).]

The last season of Lost was characterized “by the creation of what was thought to be a ‘parallel reality’ and that was, in the end, revealed to be a sort of ‘purgatory’ in which each person ‘re-created’ the life he or she would have liked to have lived in the world [This is not purgatory (CCC 1030-1032).]: Jack became a good son and father; Kate was innocent; Sawyer, a decent police officer; Benjamin became an affectionate professor … When they all ‘recognized’ and discovered that they were in this ‘purgatory,’ for some, the door to resurrection and eternity (the ‘light’ at the other end of the chapel) was opened, while for others the purgatory continued because they still had issues to resolve (Ben, Eloise, Ana Lucia…). [I can see some parallel here since Ben himself said to Hurley that he still “needed to work some things out.” But why would Hurley have invited him into the chapel in the first place?]

Likewise, “Love was not only understood as ‘eros,’ possessive love, but as ‘agape,’ the love that seeks the good of the other: ‘Jack, I hope someone does for you what you’ve done for me,’ Locke told him. [Here is another problem. You see, we do not redeem each other directly. Jesus is the only redeemer and this statement is contrary to the Gospels (Gal 1:8-9).]

Another key element in this finale was forgiveness, which was featured in one of the most powerful scenes of the entire series: Locke, who has been murdered by Ben, encountered him shortly before entering eternity: ‘John, I’m really sorry for what I did to you: I was selfish and jealous, I wanted everything that you had.’ Locke responded: ‘If it’s of any help to you, Ben, I forgive you.’  ‘Thanks, John. That helps me. It means more to me than you can imagine’.” [Again, true forgiveness comes from Jesus alone thus the Sacrament of Reconciliation for our earthly lives. Once we die, we are judged (Heb 9:27) and are thus rewarded Heaven (possibly through Purgatory) or Hell.]

The series ended with the sacrifice of the main character. “Jack offered his life to save the others. Never believing in the peculiarities of the island, he ends up understanding through another friend, Locke, who had to die in order to show him the way.  It’s a sacrifice that, in the end, acquires all of its value and meaning.” [“Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” (John (RSV) 15:13) – I give you that one. But on the latter, Jack’s death acquiring all of its value and meaning on the island, I don’t think this is possible without dying “in a state of Grace.” And as far as was represented in the series and finale, Jack did not die “in a state of Grace.”]

Well, I think that covers it.

CNA: Phoenix bishop receives worldwide support for stand on abortion


.- Following an Arizona bishop’s condemnation of an abortion that occurred at a local Catholic hospital, prominent Catholic leaders from around the globe are voicing their support for the prelate, writing that they “stand in solidarity” with him amid fierce criticism from the media. [I think Catholics around the world are beginning to say “enough is enough.”]

On Friday of last week, Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix publicly condemned an abortion that took place late last year in the city’s St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center. [This is apparently a “Catholic” hospital that runs, somewhat, under the pastoral authority of the bishop. Both provisions violate Ethics and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, Fourth Edition (ERD) Part 4.43 and CHW’s Statement of Common Values. The latter is applicable to CHW-run facilities that are not considered Catholic. I don’t know what that means either.] The mother was 11 weeks pregnant and was seriously ill with pulmonary hypertension, the Washington Post reported.

An ethics committee which included doctors and hospital executive Sr. Margaret McBride ruled that the abortion was necessary. [The Church has always made it clear that abortion, which is intrinsically evil, is never an option even under these circumstances.] Sr. Margaret McBride later told Bishop Olmsted that her ruling was “a morally good and allowable act.” [Like spitting in the face of God.]

The Arizona prelate stressed on May 14 that the “direct killing of an unborn child is always immoral, no matter the circumstances, and it cannot be permitted in any institution that claims to be authentically Catholic.” [ERD 4.43] He also underlined that any Catholic who “formally cooperates in the procurement of an abortion” is “automatically excommunicated by that action.” [CIC 1398]

Following the revelation that Sr. McBride has excommunicated herself, Bishop Olmsted faced intense criticism from various media outlets over his statement on the matter.

On May 23, 71 prominent Catholic individuals—including Vatican officials, academics, medical professionals and pro-life leaders—signed a joint statement in support of the Phoenix bishop and his position.

We the undersigned are aware of the strong defense of Catholic teaching recently propounded by Bishop Thomas Olmsted, Diocese of Phoenix, Arizona, in the case of an abortion that occurred in St. Joseph Hospital and Medical Center,” the statement reads.

“We are also aware of the hostility toward Bishop Olmsted created by a media dedicated to watering down Catholic teaching [This unfortunately also comes from media outlets that call themselves Catholic],” the leaders continue. “We take this opportunity to stand in solidarity with Bishop Olmsted in his defense of truth and life as we also offer our prayers for those who were involved with this direct act of cruelty.”

Signatories of the International Declaration of Support included multiple members of the Pontifical Academy for life, such as Christine de Vollmer, Fr. John Fleming and Msgr. Michel Schooyans. Other signatories were Austin Ruse, president of Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute; Steven Mosher, president of Population Research Institute, and Dr. Jan Hemstad, president elect of Catholic Medical Association.

via Catholic News Agency

During the whole health care reform debate-era, I once had a “Catholic” throw in my face the fact that some Catholic “sisters/nuns” were in favor of the bill despite the abortion inclusive language. For him, the opinion of a select group of nuns outweighed the collective voice of the USCCB on this particular matter and the Magisterium on the abortion issue as a whole. These “correct” points of view against the Church’s teaching on abortion (this person was, of course, personally against abortion) became vital due to the need to justify support of the bill in the face of the grave evil that could become more common place. You see, this Catholic, a retiree, was afraid that if the bill did not pass his life was directly put at risk. Selfish.

Although the act of defiance and evil perpetrated by Sr. McBride was not directly beneficial to her (at least I do not think so), it is still inherently selfish as committing sin is always a choosing oneself over God.

CNA: Phoenix bishop receives worldwide support for stand on abortion


.- Following an Arizona bishop’s condemnation of an abortion that occurred at a local Catholic hospital, prominent Catholic leaders from around the globe are voicing their support for the prelate, writing that they “stand in solidarity” with him amid fierce criticism from the media. [I think Catholics around the world are beginning to say “enough is enough.”]

On Friday of last week, Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix publicly condemned an abortion that took place late last year in the city’s St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center. [This is apparently a “Catholic” hospital that runs, somewhat, under the pastoral authority of the bishop. Both provisions violate Ethics and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, Fourth Edition (ERD) Part 4.43 and CHW’s Statement of Common Values. The latter is applicable to CHW-run facilities that are not considered Catholic. I don’t know what that means either.] The mother was 11 weeks pregnant and was seriously ill with pulmonary hypertension, the Washington Post reported.

An ethics committee which included doctors and hospital executive Sr. Margaret McBride ruled that the abortion was necessary. [The Church has always made it clear that abortion, which is intrinsically evil, is never an option even under these circumstances.] Sr. Margaret McBride later told Bishop Olmsted that her ruling was “a morally good and allowable act.” [Like spitting in the face of God.]

The Arizona prelate stressed on May 14 that the “direct killing of an unborn child is always immoral, no matter the circumstances, and it cannot be permitted in any institution that claims to be authentically Catholic.” [ERD 4.43] He also underlined that any Catholic who “formally cooperates in the procurement of an abortion” is “automatically excommunicated by that action.” [CIC 1398]

Following the revelation that Sr. McBride has excommunicated herself, Bishop Olmsted faced intense criticism from various media outlets over his statement on the matter.

On May 23, 71 prominent Catholic individuals—including Vatican officials, academics, medical professionals and pro-life leaders—signed a joint statement in support of the Phoenix bishop and his position.

We the undersigned are aware of the strong defense of Catholic teaching recently propounded by Bishop Thomas Olmsted, Diocese of Phoenix, Arizona, in the case of an abortion that occurred in St. Joseph Hospital and Medical Center,” the statement reads.

“We are also aware of the hostility toward Bishop Olmsted created by a media dedicated to watering down Catholic teaching [This unfortunately also comes from media outlets that call themselves Catholic],” the leaders continue. “We take this opportunity to stand in solidarity with Bishop Olmsted in his defense of truth and life as we also offer our prayers for those who were involved with this direct act of cruelty.”

Signatories of the International Declaration of Support included multiple members of the Pontifical Academy for life, such as Christine de Vollmer, Fr. John Fleming and Msgr. Michel Schooyans. Other signatories were Austin Ruse, president of Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute; Steven Mosher, president of Population Research Institute, and Dr. Jan Hemstad, president elect of Catholic Medical Association.

via Catholic News Agency

During the whole health care reform debate-era, I once had a “Catholic” throw in my face the fact that some Catholic “sisters/nuns” were in favor of the bill despite the abortion inclusive language. For him, the opinion of a select group of nuns outweighed the collective voice of the USCCB on this particular matter and the Magisterium on the abortion issue as a whole. These “correct” points of view against the Church’s teaching on abortion (this person was, of course, personally against abortion) became vital due to the need to justify support of the bill in the face of the grave evil that could become more common place. You see, this Catholic, a retiree, was afraid that if the bill did not pass his life was directly put at risk. Selfish.

Although the act of defiance and evil perpetrated by Sr. McBride was not directly beneficial to her (at least I do not think so), it is still inherently selfish as committing sin is always a choosing oneself over God.

CNA: Phoenix bishop receives worldwide support for stand on abortion


.- Following an Arizona bishop’s condemnation of an abortion that occurred at a local Catholic hospital, prominent Catholic leaders from around the globe are voicing their support for the prelate, writing that they “stand in solidarity” with him amid fierce criticism from the media. [I think Catholics around the world are beginning to say “enough is enough.”]

On Friday of last week, Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix publicly condemned an abortion that took place late last year in the city’s St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center. [This is apparently a “Catholic” hospital that runs, somewhat, under the pastoral authority of the bishop. Both provisions violate Ethics and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, Fourth Edition (ERD) Part 4.43 and CHW’s Statement of Common Values. The latter is applicable to CHW-run facilities that are not considered Catholic. I don’t know what that means either.] The mother was 11 weeks pregnant and was seriously ill with pulmonary hypertension, the Washington Post reported.

An ethics committee which included doctors and hospital executive Sr. Margaret McBride ruled that the abortion was necessary. [The Church has always made it clear that abortion, which is intrinsically evil, is never an option even under these circumstances.] Sr. Margaret McBride later told Bishop Olmsted that her ruling was “a morally good and allowable act.” [Like spitting in the face of God.]

The Arizona prelate stressed on May 14 that the “direct killing of an unborn child is always immoral, no matter the circumstances, and it cannot be permitted in any institution that claims to be authentically Catholic.” [ERD 4.43] He also underlined that any Catholic who “formally cooperates in the procurement of an abortion” is “automatically excommunicated by that action.” [CIC 1398]

Following the revelation that Sr. McBride has excommunicated herself, Bishop Olmsted faced intense criticism from various media outlets over his statement on the matter.

On May 23, 71 prominent Catholic individuals—including Vatican officials, academics, medical professionals and pro-life leaders—signed a joint statement in support of the Phoenix bishop and his position.

We the undersigned are aware of the strong defense of Catholic teaching recently propounded by Bishop Thomas Olmsted, Diocese of Phoenix, Arizona, in the case of an abortion that occurred in St. Joseph Hospital and Medical Center,” the statement reads.

“We are also aware of the hostility toward Bishop Olmsted created by a media dedicated to watering down Catholic teaching [This unfortunately also comes from media outlets that call themselves Catholic],” the leaders continue. “We take this opportunity to stand in solidarity with Bishop Olmsted in his defense of truth and life as we also offer our prayers for those who were involved with this direct act of cruelty.”

Signatories of the International Declaration of Support included multiple members of the Pontifical Academy for life, such as Christine de Vollmer, Fr. John Fleming and Msgr. Michel Schooyans. Other signatories were Austin Ruse, president of Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute; Steven Mosher, president of Population Research Institute, and Dr. Jan Hemstad, president elect of Catholic Medical Association.

via Catholic News Agency

During the whole health care reform debate-era, I once had a “Catholic” throw in my face the fact that some Catholic “sisters/nuns” were in favor of the bill despite the abortion inclusive language. For him, the opinion of a select group of nuns outweighed the collective voice of the USCCB on this particular matter and the Magisterium on the abortion issue as a whole. These “correct” points of view against the Church’s teaching on abortion (this person was, of course, personally against abortion) became vital due to the need to justify support of the bill in the face of the grave evil that could become more common place. You see, this Catholic, a retiree, was afraid that if the bill did not pass his life was directly put at risk. Selfish.

Although the act of defiance and evil perpetrated by Sr. McBride was not directly beneficial to her (at least I do not think so), it is still inherently selfish as committing sin is always a choosing oneself over God.

Steve Jobs Says iPad Revolution Means ‘Freedom from Porn’



Steve Jobs Says iPad Revolution Means ‘Freedom from Porn’

Posted by : Helen Gonsalves | Wednesday, May 26, 2010 | Published in
,
,

Media_http3bpblogspot_cdbti


Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple Computers, says his company will not be a party to the pornography industry and hopes that the iPad and iPhone revolution will help lead to a porn-free world.

Jobs reiterated his position in a heated e-mail  exchange with Ryan Tate, a writer for Gawker.com, which follows news and gossip in Silicon Valley and elsewhere. Tate, who admitted that he was home alone and slightly inebriated at the time, took issue with a television ad calling the iPad a “revolution” and fired off an e-mail to Jobs. READ MORE

If it weren’t for the fact that I truly enjoy my Sprint service (and the free Palm Pixi) I would have switch to the iPhone for this reason alone. Guess that means I *have to* buy and iPad.

Steve Jobs Says iPad Revolution Means ‘Freedom from Porn’

Steve Jobs Says iPad Revolution Means ‘Freedom from Porn’

Posted by : Helen Gonsalves | Wednesday, May 26, 2010 | Published in
,
,

Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple Computers, says his company will not be a party to the pornography industry and hopes that the iPad and iPhone revolution will help lead to a porn-free world.

Jobs reiterated his position in a heated e-mail  exchange with Ryan Tate, a writer for Gawker.com, which follows news and gossip in Silicon Valley and elsewhere. Tate, who admitted that he was home alone and slightly inebriated at the time, took issue with a television ad calling the iPad a “revolution” and fired off an e-mail to Jobs. READ MORE

If it weren’t for the fact that I truly enjoy my Sprint service (and the free Palm Pixi) I would have switch to the iPhone for this reason alone. Guess that means I *have to* buy and iPad.

Steve Jobs Says iPad Revolution Means ‘Freedom from Porn’

Steve Jobs Says iPad Revolution Means ‘Freedom from Porn’

Posted by : Helen Gonsalves | Wednesday, May 26, 2010 | Published in
,
,

Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple Computers, says his company will not be a party to the pornography industry and hopes that the iPad and iPhone revolution will help lead to a porn-free world.

Jobs reiterated his position in a heated e-mail  exchange with Ryan Tate, a writer for Gawker.com, which follows news and gossip in Silicon Valley and elsewhere. Tate, who admitted that he was home alone and slightly inebriated at the time, took issue with a television ad calling the iPad a “revolution” and fired off an e-mail to Jobs. READ MORE

If it weren’t for the fact that I truly enjoy my Sprint service (and the free Palm Pixi) I would have switch to the iPhone for this reason alone. Guess that means I *have to* buy and iPad.