|
|
|---|
Feast of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin
"In those days Mary arose and went with haste into the hill country, to a town in Judah, and she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth. And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and she exclaimed with a loud cry, 'Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, when the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfillment of what was spoken to her from the Lord'" (Luke 1:39-45 ESV).
Of course, the Blessed Mother's visit to Elizabeth is the second of the Joyful Mysteries of her Most Holy Rosary, the fruit of which is love of neighbor.
This reading and this feast also show us how precious life is, which should make us all the more grateful for those who laid their lives down in service to our country, often standing up against evil and tyranny in the service of the common good of humanity.
Memorial Day: Remember to give thanks
This Memorial Day as we all go about doing what we choose to do, be it shopping, barbeques, mini vacations or a Memorial Day parade. Please remember that your freedom to choose these activities came with a price. Take time to say a prayer of thanks to your God, for all of those service men and women who have secured your freedom through their ultimate sacrifice.
Even better, for those of you who can, follow this advice.
Bill Maher tells us how a black president should handle BP
First, we can add Bill Maher to the growing number of liberals who are not happy with Obama’s handling of the BP oil spill. Maher however, decide to express his unhappiness by letting fly some racial stereotyping. This is how Maher thinks a black president should handle BP.
HBO's Bill Maher: "I thought when we elected a black president, we were going to get a black president. You know, this [BP oil spill] is where I want a real black president. I want him in a meeting with the BP CEOs, you know, where he lifts up his shirt where you can see the gun in his pants. That's -- (in black man voice) 'we've got a motherfu**ing problem here?' Shoot somebody in the foot."
Oh, so all black men are supposed to go around with guns in their pants threatening to cap people in the ass, is that it?
Chalk this up as more of that white liberal racism that the so-called "leaders of the black community" ignore or explain away with “nuance”. If a white conservative ever utter such a thing, these so-called "leaders" would be breaking out the torches and pitchforks. But since white liberal Bill Maher said it, all we will hear from them are crickets.
Via: Memeorandum
Via: Real Clear Politics
Video h/t: Scared Monkeys
Solemnity of the Most Holy Trinity, Year C
Readings: Prov. 8:22-31; Ps. 8:4-9; Rom. 5:1-5; John 16:12-15
Like our patroness, St. Mary Magdalene, to whom the resurrected Lord said, "Stop holding on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father,'" we have a hard time letting go of Easter, which season ended last Sunday with our celebration of Pentecost (John 20:17). It is certainly understandable that we want to continue to bask in the immediate glow of our celebration of Christ’s resurrection. Liturgically, we don’t immediately let go, but neither do we cling. For instance, today we observe the solemnity of the Most Holy Trinity and next week we will celebrate the great solemnity of Corpus Christi. As our reading of Scripture today shows us, there is continuity, not abrupt discontinuity in our practice. A few verses earlier in the same chapter from which our Gospel today is taken that occurs during Jesus’ Last Supper discourse, the Lord says, "if I do not go, the Advocate will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you" (John 16:7). In this we see that Jesus’ glorious ascension into heaven has to happen for the Holy Spirit to come.
All of this should draw our attention to the fact that too often we engage the Trinity, which is most concisely expressed as one God in three divine persons, in a wholly abstract manner, like solving a differential equation, making it an endeavor that bears no fruit in our lives. Our departure point for any meaningful engagement about God, who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is the person of Jesus Christ. St. Paul captures this quite well in our second reading taken from his Letter to the Romans: we are justified by faith and have made "peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom. 5:1). It is through Christ Jesus that we gain access "to this grace in which we stand" (Rom. 5:2). The key word here is grace. It is a word that often passes in one ear and out the other because we hear it so often. So, let’s take a look at this all important word. Grace is our English translation of the Greek word charin, which means, according to the great Protestant exegete, Ernst Käsemann, "the power of salvation which finds expression in specific gifts, acts, and spheres and which is even individualized in the charismata" (Commentary on Romans, pg. 14). Stated a bit more clearly, grace is God’s sharing divine life with us here and now, as the Catechism teaches us, the Father, through his Word, Jesus Christ, "pours into our hearts the Gift that contains all other gifts, the Holy Spirit" (par. 1082).
Charismata, the gifts that are the concrete manifestations of living our grace-filled life together, the new life given us through Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit, brings us to the relationship between faith and hope. Hope is the flower of faith. Without faith, which is faith in Jesus Christ, it is impossible to have hope. The Greek word we translate as hope from this passage is elpida, when translated a bit more literally, means expectation. It is important to note that Paul means expectation in the reasonable sense, like the expectation that in a few minutes we will come forward and receive communion, not an unrealistic expectation, like my Suzuki station wagon will be turned into a Ferrari when I leave Mass, which is why Paul writes that "hope does not disappoint" (Rom. 5:5a). Hence, we distinguish between hoping and wishing, the difference between childish and mature faith. According to Paul, what is it that produces hope, which is certainty about what will happen to us? In a word, experience, especially the experience of affliction, of which Paul experienced plenty for the sake of the Gospel.
Jesus ascends to the Father and then sends forth His Holy Spirit upon the disciples, who, in turn, pass it along by their witness. By our participation in this liturgy, we, too, are witnesses of this, being both recipients and ones charged with passing it along. Turning now to today’s Gospel, Jesus tells the disciples that the Holy Spirit is given them to guide them "to all truth" (John 16:13). Since the Father revealed everything there was to reveal in His Son, the Holy Spirit helps us over time to unpack the revelation of God in Christ. St. Vincent of Lérins, all the way back in the fifth century, demonstrated that not only is progress in our understanding of what God has revealed in Christ possible, it is necessary, a true hallmark of the Church.
More concretely, as Scripture scholar Luke Timothy Johnson stated so succinctly, the Holy Spirit is the mode of Christ’s resurrection presence in us and among us. In other words, the Holy Spirit is the way Christ stays with us. While, as Gerard Manley Hopkins pointed out, "Christ plays in ten thousand places," there are seven specific ways the Holy Spirit makes Christ really and truly present to us, we call these sacraments. It is through our participation in the sacraments, beginning with our baptism, that we are drawn into the divine life of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Like St. Mary Magdalene, whose people we are and to whom the Lord also said, "go to my brothers and tell them, 'I am going to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God'" we, too, are called to give witness to our new life in Christ, the life of grace, which is life in the Spirit, and nothing less than our participation in the divine life of the Most Holy Trinity (John 20:17). So, dear friends, as we move forward to next Sunday’s celebration of Corpus Christi, our annual celebration of the primary way that our Lord remains present to us, a mode of presence that would not be possible had He not ascended to the Father and sent their Holy Spirit, let us go forth and give witness to the fact that He is risen, bringing new life to a world that is in such desperate need of good news.
Like our patroness, St. Mary Magdalene, to whom the resurrected Lord said, "Stop holding on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father,'" we have a hard time letting go of Easter, which season ended last Sunday with our celebration of Pentecost (John 20:17). It is certainly understandable that we want to continue to bask in the immediate glow of our celebration of Christ’s resurrection. Liturgically, we don’t immediately let go, but neither do we cling. For instance, today we observe the solemnity of the Most Holy Trinity and next week we will celebrate the great solemnity of Corpus Christi. As our reading of Scripture today shows us, there is continuity, not abrupt discontinuity in our practice. A few verses earlier in the same chapter from which our Gospel today is taken that occurs during Jesus’ Last Supper discourse, the Lord says, "if I do not go, the Advocate will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you" (John 16:7). In this we see that Jesus’ glorious ascension into heaven has to happen for the Holy Spirit to come.
All of this should draw our attention to the fact that too often we engage the Trinity, which is most concisely expressed as one God in three divine persons, in a wholly abstract manner, like solving a differential equation, making it an endeavor that bears no fruit in our lives. Our departure point for any meaningful engagement about God, who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is the person of Jesus Christ. St. Paul captures this quite well in our second reading taken from his Letter to the Romans: we are justified by faith and have made "peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom. 5:1). It is through Christ Jesus that we gain access "to this grace in which we stand" (Rom. 5:2). The key word here is grace. It is a word that often passes in one ear and out the other because we hear it so often. So, let’s take a look at this all important word. Grace is our English translation of the Greek word charin, which means, according to the great Protestant exegete, Ernst Käsemann, "the power of salvation which finds expression in specific gifts, acts, and spheres and which is even individualized in the charismata" (Commentary on Romans, pg. 14). Stated a bit more clearly, grace is God’s sharing divine life with us here and now, as the Catechism teaches us, the Father, through his Word, Jesus Christ, "pours into our hearts the Gift that contains all other gifts, the Holy Spirit" (par. 1082).
Charismata, the gifts that are the concrete manifestations of living our grace-filled life together, the new life given us through Christ, by the power of the Holy Spirit, brings us to the relationship between faith and hope. Hope is the flower of faith. Without faith, which is faith in Jesus Christ, it is impossible to have hope. The Greek word we translate as hope from this passage is elpida, when translated a bit more literally, means expectation. It is important to note that Paul means expectation in the reasonable sense, like the expectation that in a few minutes we will come forward and receive communion, not an unrealistic expectation, like my Suzuki station wagon will be turned into a Ferrari when I leave Mass, which is why Paul writes that "hope does not disappoint" (Rom. 5:5a). Hence, we distinguish between hoping and wishing, the difference between childish and mature faith. According to Paul, what is it that produces hope, which is certainty about what will happen to us? In a word, experience, especially the experience of affliction, of which Paul experienced plenty for the sake of the Gospel.
Rublev's Trinity icon
Jesus ascends to the Father and then sends forth His Holy Spirit upon the disciples, who, in turn, pass it along by their witness. By our participation in this liturgy, we, too, are witnesses of this, being both recipients and ones charged with passing it along. Turning now to today’s Gospel, Jesus tells the disciples that the Holy Spirit is given them to guide them "to all truth" (John 16:13). Since the Father revealed everything there was to reveal in His Son, the Holy Spirit helps us over time to unpack the revelation of God in Christ. St. Vincent of Lérins, all the way back in the fifth century, demonstrated that not only is progress in our understanding of what God has revealed in Christ possible, it is necessary, a true hallmark of the Church.
More concretely, as Scripture scholar Luke Timothy Johnson stated so succinctly, the Holy Spirit is the mode of Christ’s resurrection presence in us and among us. In other words, the Holy Spirit is the way Christ stays with us. While, as Gerard Manley Hopkins pointed out, "Christ plays in ten thousand places," there are seven specific ways the Holy Spirit makes Christ really and truly present to us, we call these sacraments. It is through our participation in the sacraments, beginning with our baptism, that we are drawn into the divine life of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Like St. Mary Magdalene, whose people we are and to whom the Lord also said, "go to my brothers and tell them, 'I am going to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God'" we, too, are called to give witness to our new life in Christ, the life of grace, which is life in the Spirit, and nothing less than our participation in the divine life of the Most Holy Trinity (John 20:17). So, dear friends, as we move forward to next Sunday’s celebration of Corpus Christi, our annual celebration of the primary way that our Lord remains present to us, a mode of presence that would not be possible had He not ascended to the Father and sent their Holy Spirit, let us go forth and give witness to the fact that He is risen, bringing new life to a world that is in such desperate need of good news.
"the horizon of existence is God’s love"
Available now on the Traces website: What Kind of Life Gives Birth to Communion and Liberation? This is a lengthy interview given by Msgr. Giussani to Giorgio Sarco in 1979. I can't wait to begin reading it. To download it, go to the Traces website, given above, and you will see the link with the title of the interview, just "click" on that, it will begin downloading the .pdf.
From the beginning:
Sarco: "What is Communion and Liberation, really—a social project, a culture, an educational strategy, or something else entirely?"
Giussani: "Communion and Liberation is only an insight of Christianity as an event of life, and so as a history. From the beginnings of the Movement, it was always stressed that an idea, something valuable that is intuited, develops in a method of facing reality, which in its turn effects a change in all the relationships that one lives. In the same way, the Christian insight develops in a method of judgment and of living.
"I believe that the history and the development that the Movement has had [to] depend more than anything else on the focused authenticity of the original insight, that is, on the point of view that we started from in order to commit ourselves to the Christian fact. Remembering how this insight began in me awakens one of the most beautiful memories of my life. To be sure, the first insight that the horizon of existence is God’s love began to shine in a spiritual situation that had been prepared by a family education and was then deepened in seminary life; but it really blossomed and reached awareness when I read and understood with real intelligence for the first time the beginning of the Gospel of John: 'The Word was made flesh.' I remember how my seminary professor, Father Gaetano Corti (who I think is now teaching the history of Christianity at the University of Trieste), used to explain this passage to us boys, saying that the cornerstone of reality and the center of the life of the person and of the world had become in Christ a presence that could be met by each one of us."
Thanks to Fred for pointing this out to me during our telephonic SofC this afternoon.
From the beginning:
Sarco: "What is Communion and Liberation, really—a social project, a culture, an educational strategy, or something else entirely?"
Giussani: "Communion and Liberation is only an insight of Christianity as an event of life, and so as a history. From the beginnings of the Movement, it was always stressed that an idea, something valuable that is intuited, develops in a method of facing reality, which in its turn effects a change in all the relationships that one lives. In the same way, the Christian insight develops in a method of judgment and of living.
"I believe that the history and the development that the Movement has had [to] depend more than anything else on the focused authenticity of the original insight, that is, on the point of view that we started from in order to commit ourselves to the Christian fact. Remembering how this insight began in me awakens one of the most beautiful memories of my life. To be sure, the first insight that the horizon of existence is God’s love began to shine in a spiritual situation that had been prepared by a family education and was then deepened in seminary life; but it really blossomed and reached awareness when I read and understood with real intelligence for the first time the beginning of the Gospel of John: 'The Word was made flesh.' I remember how my seminary professor, Father Gaetano Corti (who I think is now teaching the history of Christianity at the University of Trieste), used to explain this passage to us boys, saying that the cornerstone of reality and the center of the life of the person and of the world had become in Christ a presence that could be met by each one of us."
Thanks to Fred for pointing this out to me during our telephonic SofC this afternoon.
Drive By Bloggin’
Sorry folks for the limited content over the last few days. Unfortunately, I had to make some very serious deadlines in Real Time. During the last few days there were several stories I wanted to comment on, but my Real Time obligations kept we away. So, stealing a page from our Lame-Stream Media with their drive by reporting, I am going to do a little drive by bloggin’
Buckle up and here we go.
I still cannot believe what a political blunder this White House/ Sestak job offer is. This administration is all about the political, yet they so easily stepped into such a political mess. I have two thoughts about why this happened. First, I think they allowed the Chicago Way to over take political sensibilities. Second, I think Obama and the gang let their Chicago habits take over, because they have grown too confident in the media’s willingness to cover for them.
Given how the media is feeling a little ignored by Obama and their willingness to show some anger over the BP oil spill, counting on the media at this point maybe a little risky.
What is truly risky is involving Bill Clinton in this mess. The media despite their bad feelings, will try to push this story off the national headlines and allow it to only exist in the Pennsylvania race. Pat Toomey will no doubt keep this scandal alive in his race against Sestak. Bill Clinton, being an ex president, does have the ability to drag this story back to national headlines at anytime, simply by dropping a comment here or there. If the Clintons are still smarting from their loss to Obama, what better way to pay him back than to keep this story alive with a leak or two?
Given how terribly wrong this whole spill is going, it is high time we start figuring out who exactly is working for whom?
Both my BS Detector and my Hypocrisy Proximity Alarm both went off with this story. Only the most severe PDS sufferer could buy any of McGinniss’ nonsense.
Washington Post: When a source told Joe McGinniss that he could rent the house next to Sarah Palin's Wasilla, Alaska, home, the author was sold.
A room at the Best Western, not far away, would have been prohibitively expensive. The landlord of this house, meanwhile, offered it to McGinniss for $1,500 per month after a friend of the author recommended him as a solid alternative to the other people asking about the property.
"She was talking to this mutual friend of ours and said, 'I've got to find someone we're comfortable with,' " McGinniss said Friday evening from the deck of the house -- a deck that became famous after Palin posted a photo of it on Facebook this week. " 'My biggest concern is the Palins' privacy, especially the children.' So this mutual friend said, 'Well, you know, I think you're in luck. Joe McGinniss is going to be coming back here, and you couldn't find a better guy, just the right sort of person to move in and guarantee their privacy.'"
What happened next, said McGinniss, came as a total surprise. He had planned to keep the news off the Internet and tell the Palins himself that he'd be their neighbor as he wrapped up his biography of the former governor.Riiiiight. We are supposed to believe that old Joe is all innocent and everything. Meanwhile the creep is really good friends will all of the creepy anti-Palin Alaskan bloggers.
The Other McCain: Remember Jesse Griffin, who masqueraded behind the “Gryphen” pseudonym as a vicious anti-Palin blogger and Trig-Truther? And remember how he lost his job at an Alaska elementary school after his identity was revealed and school officials learned how he’d beenpromoting pornography and masturbation on his blog (extreme language warning) while being paid by taxpayers to supervise young children?
Well, guess what? Joe McGinnis is a “huge fan” of Jesse Griffin, as confirmed by none other than . . . Jesse Griffin:
I found the table that our host Phil Munger had reserved for us and sat down with some of his other guests, who I did not know, but who turned out to be fans of both IM and Mudflats. (Oh did I mention that AKM was with me?)
Soon I was introduced to author Joe McGinniss, who is up here researching HIS Sarah Palin book, and who also turned out to be a huge fan of both AKM’s and I. (I swear I will NEVER get used to hearing that.)
– Jesse Griffin, a/k/a “Gryphen,” October 3, 2009
In case you didn’t get the reference, “IM” is Jesse’s “Immoral Minority” blog where he described his ironclad certainty that Sarah Palin’s fifth child “was not conceived in her uterus,” declared how much fun it is to “wank off” to amateur porn, advised youngsters that “your penis will respond more readily” if you practice by “watching porn on your computer.” and told the world that “it brings me joy to work with these children.”
You betcha!
When this porn-blogging Trig-Truther obsessive Palin-hater was forced to resign from Trailside Elementary School in Anchorage in August 2009, it wasn’t exactly a secret. so why — two months later, in October 2009 – was Joe McGinniss raving about being a “huge fan” of Jesse Griffin’s Immoral Minority blog? Why is McGinniss laughing it up with Griffin at the “celebrity table” all night?
Via: The New York Times
Via: WhiteHouse.gov
Via: CNN
Via: The Washington Post
Via: The Other McCain
"so that you may belong to another..."
One of the most perennial and difficult philosophical questions is the nature of morality. I have no intent to try to resolve this is in a blog post. For me, as a Catholic, morality for the most part is objective, which renders it no less complex. Like everything else, morality has to have content, these amount to prescriptions and proscriptions (i.e., things I must do and things I must avoid doing). For example, there are actions that are always and everywhere wrong, regardless of circumstances or intent, like murder, like engaging in sexual relations with someone other than my wife, etc. But I recognize that there is a difference between sin and wrong-doing.
Intention and circumstance cannot turn something that is intrinsically evil into something good, but they can mitigate culpability and be the difference between sin and mere wrong-doing. Something can only be truly sinful if I know it to be wrong and freely choose to engage in it anyway. So, truth and freedom are the most important components in living a moral life. Because it is necessary not only to know what is good and what is evil, but to know why, formation and education are necessary. It is important to know why something is required or forbidden so that I understand that morality is not arbitrary or capricious. All of the above can be summarized in the injunction to do good and avoid evil.
Another important moral axiom, one that is frequently ignored under the guise of pragmatism, is that I may never do evil that good may come of it, which is just an opaque way of saying that ends do not justify means. To believe and to act otherwise is simply dangerous. If I am to live with any integrity at all I must try to live in this way. Yet, it can never be a matter of mere rule-keeping. Why can morality never be a matter a rule-keeping? Because my experience has shown time and again that I am incapable of keeping the rules!
St. Paul writes powerfully about this, especially in his Letter to the Romans: "For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good" (7:15-16). We see that for Paul there is a standard of holiness, the Law given through Moses; "the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good" (7:12).
So, what is the remedy, you might well ask? The what is a who and the who is Jesus Christ. In the same chapter of Romans, St. Paul gives a brilliant analogy of what it means to live in Christ, which requires death and resurrection (i.e., baptism):
In the previous chapter, Paul is more explicit about this:
Of course, it all comes to down how one views the human person, whether you see the purpose of existence as striving for autonomy and independence, choosing for yourself what is right and wrong in god-like fashion, which was the original sin, or whether you see that you belong to Another, who loves you and wants you to be happy, not just in eternity, but right now. It also turns on the question, in what does happiness consist, living for yourself, or living for Another? You belong to Another because you were made by Another and begotten as a child through your baptism.
To allude to the overused and often misused line by St. Augustine, our hearts are restless until they rest in the One who made us because He made us for Himself and we are not complete until this is fully realized, that is, made real, objective. Christ is not the Alpha and Omega only in some cosmic sense, He is your origin and your destiny, too! In my opinion, hell is nothing other than the full realization of living for yourself, striving for independence and autonomy. Was it not Jesus who said, "where your treasure is, there your heart will be also" (Matt. 6:21)?
I have a holy card with a big color picture of Don Gius on it, which Holly insists we keep on our fridge door, underneath his picture is this quote from St. Gregory Nazianzen, one of the three great Cappadocian fathers: "Were I not yours, my Christ, I would feel a finite creature."
Intention and circumstance cannot turn something that is intrinsically evil into something good, but they can mitigate culpability and be the difference between sin and mere wrong-doing. Something can only be truly sinful if I know it to be wrong and freely choose to engage in it anyway. So, truth and freedom are the most important components in living a moral life. Because it is necessary not only to know what is good and what is evil, but to know why, formation and education are necessary. It is important to know why something is required or forbidden so that I understand that morality is not arbitrary or capricious. All of the above can be summarized in the injunction to do good and avoid evil.
Another important moral axiom, one that is frequently ignored under the guise of pragmatism, is that I may never do evil that good may come of it, which is just an opaque way of saying that ends do not justify means. To believe and to act otherwise is simply dangerous. If I am to live with any integrity at all I must try to live in this way. Yet, it can never be a matter of mere rule-keeping. Why can morality never be a matter a rule-keeping? Because my experience has shown time and again that I am incapable of keeping the rules!
St. Paul writes powerfully about this, especially in his Letter to the Romans: "For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good" (7:15-16). We see that for Paul there is a standard of holiness, the Law given through Moses; "the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good" (7:12).
Carravaggio, Christ showing His wounds
So, what is the remedy, you might well ask? The what is a who and the who is Jesus Christ. In the same chapter of Romans, St. Paul gives a brilliant analogy of what it means to live in Christ, which requires death and resurrection (i.e., baptism):
"Or do you not know, brothers and sisters—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives? For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage. Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress.It is kind of a complicated analogy, one that can be reasonably understood in more than one way. The understanding I prefer because I think it most accurately captures what Paul is trying to communicate, is that we are not the widowed wife, with the law being the dead husband. Rather, we are ones who die in order to "belong to another"!
"Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code" (7:1-6).
Photograph of Nietzsche, taken the last year of his life- 1899
In the previous chapter, Paul is more explicit about this:
"For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. For one who has died has been set free from sin. Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus." (Rom. 6:5-11)Nietzsche, in The Antichrist, called for the "transvaluation of values." In his mind, the revaluation of all values had to occur first, which meant overcoming Christianity:
"I call Christianity the one great curse, the one great intrinsic depravity, the one great instinct for revenge for which no expedient is sufficiently poisonous, secret, subterranean, petty -- I call it the one immortal blemish of mankind… And one calculates time from the dies nefastus on which this fatality arose -- from the first day of Christianity! Why not rather from its last? From today? Revaluation of all values!"I can't help but think that Paul is suggesting something similar here with regards to the law. At the end of the day, what Nietzsche proposes isn't much different from Freud's pain/pleasure principal: what brings pleasure is good and what brings pain is bad. This is a big reason why purveyors of porn frequently allude to Nietzsche, though they rarely quote him. At least in the Antichrist, where he counter-poses Buddhism, Nietzsche puts the premium on pain avoidance and overcoming suffering. As another great musico-philosopher, Gram Parsons, put it "love hurts, love scars, it wounds, and mars." How else could love overcome death? Love, which, if true, always seeks the good of the other and requires sacrifice given freely and without complaint, is what makes any act truly good, that is, moral.
Of course, it all comes to down how one views the human person, whether you see the purpose of existence as striving for autonomy and independence, choosing for yourself what is right and wrong in god-like fashion, which was the original sin, or whether you see that you belong to Another, who loves you and wants you to be happy, not just in eternity, but right now. It also turns on the question, in what does happiness consist, living for yourself, or living for Another? You belong to Another because you were made by Another and begotten as a child through your baptism.
To allude to the overused and often misused line by St. Augustine, our hearts are restless until they rest in the One who made us because He made us for Himself and we are not complete until this is fully realized, that is, made real, objective. Christ is not the Alpha and Omega only in some cosmic sense, He is your origin and your destiny, too! In my opinion, hell is nothing other than the full realization of living for yourself, striving for independence and autonomy. Was it not Jesus who said, "where your treasure is, there your heart will be also" (Matt. 6:21)?
I have a holy card with a big color picture of Don Gius on it, which Holly insists we keep on our fridge door, underneath his picture is this quote from St. Gregory Nazianzen, one of the three great Cappadocian fathers: "Were I not yours, my Christ, I would feel a finite creature."
Quick notes: Obama’s press conference on the oil spill in the Gulf
Obama held a press conference for the first time since I don’t know when. Basically, he used BP’s, so far successful, top kill method to address the Gulf Oil Spill. The press conference was typical Obama. While accepting blame, Obama also did everything he could to rhetorically pass the buck.
The American people should know that from the moment this disaster began, the federal government has been in charge of the response effort. As far as I’m concerned, BP is responsible for this horrific disaster, and we will hold them fully accountable on behalf of the United States as well as the people and communities victimized by this tragedy. We will demand that they pay every dime they owe for the damage they’ve done and the painful losses that they’ve caused. And we will continue to take full advantage of the unique technology and expertise they have to help stop this leak.
This is BS of the first order. The Federal government was clearly AWOL on this disaster. The Obama administration tried to dump the whole thing in BP’s lap, so that it could stand by and with clean hands and demonize BP for political points.
Sarah Palin questions this notion of the government being there on day one in her latest Facebook note:
If the President really was fully focused on this issue from day one, why did it take nine whole days before the administration asked the Department of Defense for help in deploying equipment needed for the extreme depth spill site?
Why was the expert group assembled by Energy Commissioner Steven Chu only set up three weeks after the start of this disaster?
Why was Governor Jindal forced more than a month after the start of the disaster to go on national television to beg for materials needed to tackle the oil spill and for federal approval to build offshore sand barriers that are imperative to protect his state’s coastline?
Why was no mention of the spill made by our President for days on end while Americans waited to hear if he grasped the import of his leadership on this energy issue?
Why have several countries and competent organizations who offered help or expertise in dealing with the spill not even received a response back from the Unified Area Command to this day?
Obama should have made sure that the fed was playing two roles throughout the spill. The government should have acted as both guardian and facilitator. As a guardian, the government should have kept a close eye on BP’s activities to make sure the nation’s best interests were being served. As a facilitator, the Obama should have been cutting through red tape to expedite both BP’s efforts and the clean up efforts (e.g. Bobby Jindal’s requests).
Here is where Obama does the classic passing of the blame. Of course the blame is passed to the administration’s handy dandy scapegoat the Bush administration (this time through inference).
In recent months, I’ve spoken about the dangers of too much -- I’ve heard people speaking about the dangers of too much government regulation. And I think we can all acknowledge there have been times in history when the government has overreached. But in this instance, the oil industry’s cozy and sometimes corrupt relationship with government regulators meant little or no regulation at all.
When Secretary Salazar took office, he found a Minerals and Management Service that had been plagued by corruption for years –- this was the agency charged with not only providing permits, but also enforcing laws governing oil drilling. And the corruption was underscored by a recent Inspector General’s report that covered activity which occurred prior to 2007 -- a report that can only be described as appalling. And Secretary Salazar immediately took steps to clean up that corruption. But this oil spill has made clear that more reforms are needed.
Well with almost a year and a half of this administration, why hasn’t the cozy and corrupt relationship between the oil industry and government regulators ended? If they can identify it, why couldn’t they correct it?
Again Sarah Palin, point out the flaws in this argument:
He suggested today that a “culture of corruption” at the U.S. Minerals Management Service (MMS) was solely the previous administration’s responsibility and that the failure of the inspection system was a failure of that administration. That is false. The MMS has been his responsibility since January 20, 2009.
The MMS director who resigned today, Elizabeth Birnbaum, was appointed by his administration. And the most recent inspection of the oil rig took place a mere 10 days before the explosion –also very much on his watch, not President Bush’s.
All in all, this press conference did not do Obama any favors. What Americans are looking for now is action not rhetoric. If Obama wants to escape the Katrina analogy, then he has to make sure he and the administration stays deeply involved in the clean up process. Simply giving his speech and then walking away will not do.
Via: Memeorandum
Via: White House. Gov
Rest In Peace: Gary Coleman dies at age 42
USA Today: Gary Coleman, the child star of the TV sitcomDiff'rent Strokes, died Friday after suffering an intercranial hemorrhage. He was 42.
Utah Valley Regional Medical Center spokeswoman Janet Frank says life support was terminated and Coleman died at 12:05 p.m.
Coleman was hospitalized Wednesday after falling and suffering a head injury at his home south of Salt Lake City, according to family members.
For a while, it seemed that Gary Coleman's cherubic face was everywhere, from TV to T-shirts to lunchboxes. [MORE]
I really feel sorry for the way Gary Coleman’s life turned out. No one help the young star prepare for the fate dished out by our disposable culture. Stars who are hot today and yesterday’s news by tomorrow. Unless you are a master of reinventing yourself, obscurity awaits. Coleman’s parents and managers clearly let him down in this regard. Given Coleman’s success during the 1980’s he should have been set for life. Instead, poor Coleman’s adult life turned out to be a long list of woes.
For all the laughs and good cheer Gary Coleman gave us in his early years, I hope he get his rewards in heaven. Rest in peace Gary.
Via: Memeorandum
Via: USA Today
"Now it's all or nothing..."
It's been a musical week here at Καθολικός διάκονος. Nonetheless, a Friday traditio is still very much in order. I deliberately chose not to feature the 2003 digitally re-mastered version of Simple Minds' Alive and Kicking, due in no small part to the fact that embedding has been disabled. This is more authentic, anyway (he wrote in a half-hearted attempt to be content). Alive and Kicking is the second traditio of our '80s retrospective summer.
What you gonna do when things go wrong?
What you gonna do when it all cracks up?
What you gonna do when the Love burns down?
What you gonna do when the flames go up?
Who is gonna come and turn the tide?
What's it gonna take to make a dream survive?
Who's got the touch to calm the storm inside?
Who's gonna save you?
House votes to allow the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell
The New York Times: WASHINGTON — The House voted Thursday to let the Defense Department repeal the ban on gay and bisexual people from serving openly in the military, a major step toward dismantling the 1993 law widely known as “don’t ask, don’t tell.”
The provision would allow military commanders to repeal the ban. The repeal would permit gay men and lesbians to serve openly in the military for the first time.
It was adopted as an amendment to the annual Pentagon policy bill, which the House is expected to vote on Friday. The repeal would be allowed 60 days after a Pentagon report is completed on the ramifications of allowing openly gay service members, and military leaders certify that it would not be disruptive. The report is due by Dec. 1.
The House vote was 234 to 194, with 229 Democrats and 5 Republicans in favor, after an emotionally charged debate. Opposed were 168 Republicans and 26 Democrats.
Hot Air names the five Republican votes in favor of the repeal. Oh, and for those who might say libertarians are all about discrimination because of current news, check out the last name on the list.
Hot Air: Update: Still waiting for the roll, which should be available here once it’s up, but the names of the five (not four) GOP defectors are already being reported on Twitter: It’s Djou, Joe Cao (also from a deep blue district), Judy Biggert, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and … Ron Paul.
I don’t have a problem with homosexuals serving in the military. Homosexuals can be every bit the patriot as a heterosexual. Any homosexual willing to make the ultimate sacrifice to protect and defend our great nation should not be denied the opportunity. That being said, protecting and defending the nation should be their true reason. Hoisting the rainbow flag, as a primary concern should not. We have already seen how political correctness can kill.
I do have to wonder though, with our financial house still in such disarray, why has the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, taken such prominence in Washington’s agenda? Any thoughts?
Via: Memeorandum
Via: The New York Times
Via: Hot Air
Via: UK Telegraph
Good News: Top Kill method appears to be working
Here is some much-needed good news concerning the oil spill in the Gulf.
LA Times: Officials are cautionary but say drilling fluid has blocked oil and gas temporarily. Engineers plan to begin pumping in cement and then will seal the well.
Reporting from Houma, La. —
Engineers have at least temporarily stopped the flow of oil and gas into the Gulf of Mexico from a gushing BP well, the federal government's top oil-spill commander, U.S. Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, said Thursday morning.
The "top kill" effort, launched Wednesday afternoon by industry and government engineers, had pumped enough drilling fluid to block oil and gas spewing from the well, Allen said. The pressure from the well was very low, he said, but persisting. The top kill effort is not complete, officials caution.
Once engineers had reduced the well pressure to zero, they were to begin pumping cement into the hole to entomb the well. To help in that effort, he said, engineers also were pumping some debris into the blowout preventer at the top of the well.
As of early Thursday morning, neither government nor BP officials had declared the effort a success yet, pending the completion of the cementing and sealing of the well.
Let’s keep our fingers crossed that this method proves fully successful. Now that things are looking like they are getting under control, heads are starting to roll.
Michelle Malkin: News leaking ahead of President Obama’s scheduled 12:45pm Eastern press conference today: the first head has been delivered.
Via AP:
Democratic sources say the Obama administration has fired the head of the U.S. Minerals Management Service in response to blistering criticism over lax oversight of offshore drilling.
The sources, speaking on condition of anonymity before the official announcement, tell The Associated Press that President Barack Obama will announce the decision Thursday.
Given how terribly this spill has been handled, I would expect a long list of heads to roll from both BP and the government. Let’s see if Obama will start thinning the herd of incompetents and throw Ken Salazar out the door.
Via: Memeorandum
Via: The LA Times
Via: Michelle Malkin
Obama’s Sestak problem is not going away
Joe Sestak isn’t fooling anyone with his half answer about being offered a job to drop out of his race against Specter. All seven Republicans on the Senate Judicial Committee are asking Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint an independent prosecutor to look into the matter.
We all know that seven Republicans asking anything of this partisan administration won’t amount to a hill of bean. However, liberal voices are starting to questions the White House/ Sestak offer. Enter Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell, who by no stretch of the imagination could be considered anti-Obama, is asking for details into the job offer.
The White House and Joe Sestak should explain what happened with the alleged job offer, Gov. Ed Rendell said Wednesday before a press conference on Capitol Hill.
"I actually think the White House and Joe Sestak should be a little more detailed and put this behind them," Rendell said.
He said the issue of whether Sestak was offered a job in the Obama administration to get out of the primary race against Specter isn't on the forefront of voters' minds. But, he acknowledged that it is a distraction that will only linger if not addressed.
Rendell said he is sure nothing illegal went on, noting that such conversations have been "going on for decades."
He predicted that someone at the White House probably told Sestak that if he wanted to do something with his "terrific background in the military" there would likely be a job for him with the administration. But Rendell said he does not believe it was any kind of a bribe to get Sestak out of Specter's way.
Rendell is the latest among a growing list of people that include Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin and Republican candidate for Senate, Pat Toomey, who are pressuring Sestak to come out and say who offered the job and what it was.
Lefty blogger Greg Sargent from the Plum Line also would like clarification, albeit from the Sestak side of the equation:
Senate Republicans are now calling for a special prosecutor to look intoJoe Sestak's claim that the White House offered him a job in order to drop his primary challenge to Arlen Specter. On the merits, this seems silly: Good government experts say that what Sestak claims took place doesn't seem like a big deal.
But that doesn't change the fact that Sestak has played this too cute by half, and he needs to clean up this mess. He needs to clarify what exactly happened -- even if it's thoroughly uncontroversial. For his own good and for the sake of the Democratic Party.
Sestak let the cat’s head out of the bag. Robert Gibbs confirmed that the cat was peeking out. At this point both sides need to come clean and just say what is what and let the chips fall as the may. The current situation where Sestak says he got a job offer and the administration says yeah but it was legal leaves out way too much detail to end the speculation. Both parties have to come clean or Sestak could go down and Republicans will have something to look into when they get control.
Already Rep. Darryl Issa has raised The Impeachment issue. I would caution Issa on that route. Have you seen the order of succession?
Via: Memeorandum
Via: ABC News
Via: Pennsylvania Ave
Via: Plum Line
Via: Fox News
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)