Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was selected a few hours ago as the next pope. He has taken the name Pope Benedict XVI.
For some insight into this man, visit Roman Catholic Blog and read the full text of Cardinal Ratzinger's "Dictatorship of Relativism Homily".
Out of our sadness over the loss of John Paul II, we can celebrate a man to lead the Catholic Church. One who is true to the Truth. One who knows, and isn't afraid to voice, the message that the world so desperately wants crushed; that the Truth is that we need to conform to the image of God rather than the world's message of transforming God to the image of the world.
It won't be long before the world will, as is its nature, rail against the light being shone on the darkness of their soul.
Tuesday, April 19, 2005
Monday, April 18, 2005
Patriot's Day
April 19 is Patriot's Day commemorating the Battles of Lexington and Concord.
Two hundred thirty years ago tonight (April 18), Paul Revere rode the countryside to warn that "The Regulars (i.e. British) are coming". By dawn of the next morning (April 19), the events that Ralph Waldo Emerson called "the shot heard 'round the world" began at the Battle of Lexington and Concord; the first battles of the American Revolution.
The Library of Congress has a great write-up as well as many links on various aspects of the Revolutionary War.
Discussion of the military aspects of the terrain (then and now) including a picture of the North Bridge. (Note: you will need to page down).
"Concord Hymn" by Ralph Waldo Emerson
Info on Paul Revere's ride
"The Midnight Ride of Paul Revere" by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow
Two hundred thirty years ago tonight (April 18), Paul Revere rode the countryside to warn that "The Regulars (i.e. British) are coming". By dawn of the next morning (April 19), the events that Ralph Waldo Emerson called "the shot heard 'round the world" began at the Battle of Lexington and Concord; the first battles of the American Revolution.
The Library of Congress has a great write-up as well as many links on various aspects of the Revolutionary War.
Discussion of the military aspects of the terrain (then and now) including a picture of the North Bridge. (Note: you will need to page down).
"Concord Hymn" by Ralph Waldo Emerson
Info on Paul Revere's ride
"The Midnight Ride of Paul Revere" by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow
Sunday, April 17, 2005
Servants of the Truth
Saturday, the cardinals destroyed Pope John Paul II's ring and lead seal providing the formal end to his reign. Monday, they begin the process to select his successor. I have already written my thoughts of John Paul. My Aunt Kathy sent me an email with her thoughts and, with her permission, I am sharing excerpts:
"Hi Larry,Thank you, Aunt Kathy for the reminder, your encouragement, and your love.
Your thoughts on Pope John Paul II were very moving. It has been such a sad time. We all knew he wouldn't be with us forever, but we wanted him a little longer than God planned. He taught us a lot about life in his thoughts, words and actions (especially in the value of suffering) and he also taught us about death. Uncle Dean & I had a Papal Blessing from him at St. Peter's Bascillica in 1995 and I will never forget his face as long as I live. There was so much love! I knew I was in the presence of someone very special. I was brought up in the belief that I must model Christ--so much that people will see Him in me. That is a difficult thing to do, but each day I get up and try my best. I saw Christ in Pope John Paul II.
One of the local pastors of a protestant church here in Albany said Pope John Paul II was "the leader of the Universal Church--he was a leader for all of us". I think he was right. It must have been like that when Peter led the church. How sad his followers must have been when he was put to death. Their loss was no greater or no less than ours, I am sure.
Anyway, Pope John Paul II spoke one time to reporters covering his United Nations visit. This is part of what Pope John Paul II said to them:"You are indeed servants of the truth; you are its tireless transmitters, diffusers, defenders. You are dedicated communicators, promoting unity among all nations by sharing truth among all nations. If your reporting does not always command the attention you would desire, or if it does not always conclude with the success that you would wish, do not grow discouraged. Be faithful to the truth and to its transmission, for truth endures: Truth will not go away. And I say to you, take it as my parting words to you — that the service of truth, the service of humanity through the medium of the truth, is something worthy of your best years, your finest talents, your most dedicated efforts."
Thursday, April 14, 2005
The Big "No Dah!"
The Oregon Supreme Court ruled today that the 3,000 marriage licenses issued last year to same-sex couples were invalide because Multnomah County had no authority in the matter. The AP reported that "The court said while the county can question the constitutionality of laws governing marriage, they are a matter of statewide concern so the county had no authority to issue licenses to gay couples."
Up to this point, we've been told that these couples were anguishing because their marriages were in limbo. Of course, Basic Rights Oregon and the Multnomah County Commisioners who hatch this underhanded plot in secret have never apologized (nor did they apologize in their Press Release today).
They thought that if they marriage licenses were issued then it would be very difficult to have them revoked. And if not for Oregon's new constitutional amendment that would probably have been true.
It was obvious last spring the county did not have authority to issue licenses. They trotted out their attorney to say that the constitution and the law did not explicitly say that marriage was between a man and a woman.
Think about this. The Oregon constitution was written by 19th century men at a time when homosexual behavior was considered a crime against nature; an abomination. The framers did not need to explicitly define marriage because everyone knew the definition of marriage. No honest person can say that the framers really intended to allow same-sex marriages even though they found homosexual acts abominable. If they didn't intend same-sex marriage then no constitutional violation exists for not allowing those marriages. To say the framers weren't explicit is to obfuscate their actual intent.
Oregon's Constitutional Amendment only made explicit what was already in the Constituion. If the framer's were alive they would have said, "No, Dah!" although perhaps with somewhat saltier language.
Up to this point, we've been told that these couples were anguishing because their marriages were in limbo. Of course, Basic Rights Oregon and the Multnomah County Commisioners who hatch this underhanded plot in secret have never apologized (nor did they apologize in their Press Release today).
They thought that if they marriage licenses were issued then it would be very difficult to have them revoked. And if not for Oregon's new constitutional amendment that would probably have been true.
It was obvious last spring the county did not have authority to issue licenses. They trotted out their attorney to say that the constitution and the law did not explicitly say that marriage was between a man and a woman.
Think about this. The Oregon constitution was written by 19th century men at a time when homosexual behavior was considered a crime against nature; an abomination. The framers did not need to explicitly define marriage because everyone knew the definition of marriage. No honest person can say that the framers really intended to allow same-sex marriages even though they found homosexual acts abominable. If they didn't intend same-sex marriage then no constitutional violation exists for not allowing those marriages. To say the framers weren't explicit is to obfuscate their actual intent.
Oregon's Constitutional Amendment only made explicit what was already in the Constituion. If the framer's were alive they would have said, "No, Dah!" although perhaps with somewhat saltier language.
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
The "Equal Rights" Washington Deception
Equal Rights Washington, a political advocacy group for the homosexual community, is spending $25,000 on TV ads in order to revive House Bill 1515, which supposedly would ban discrimination against homosexuals in housing, insurance and jobs. A National organization may double that amount.
George Cheung, the group's executive director stated, "A couple of senators are standing in the way of Washingtonians who overwhelmingly want the anti-discrimination bill passed. It's time, once and for all, to end discrimination and treat everyone equally." (emphasis added)
Overwhelmingly? Then why has this bill failed for 30 years. What is their evidence of overwhelming support? Their fact sheet states:
ERW also states:
ERW admits that "many major Washington employers have already embraced LGBT employees" (emphasis theirs) in their anti-discrimination policies. The problem is that not ALL have or even will. And dissent is not allowed on this issue.
Supporters would rather crush liberty by protecting what their own (as well as other sources) facts say do not need protecting. In doing so, they fight "discrimination" by discriminating against those who exercise their freedom of choice in a way that supporters deem unacceptable.
George Cheung, the group's executive director stated, "A couple of senators are standing in the way of Washingtonians who overwhelmingly want the anti-discrimination bill passed. It's time, once and for all, to end discrimination and treat everyone equally." (emphasis added)
Overwhelmingly? Then why has this bill failed for 30 years. What is their evidence of overwhelming support? Their fact sheet states:
"A recent Harris poll found that most Americans support employment anti-discrimination laws for lesbians and gays – only 30% are against them. Washingtonians, with our strong tradition of individual rights, are even more likely to approve of LGBT anti-discrimination laws."They mention a poll of Americans but not for Washingtonians. They presume that because Washington has a "strong tradition of individual rights" that its citizens would be for this particular law. They made a statement of fact of "overwhelming support" based on no evidence but rather a leap of faith. Maybe Washingtonians do support this bill but maybe they don't. One does not have enough evidence to make a statement of fact as ERW did. It is a public relations lie for political gain.
ERW also states:
"According to the most recent US Govt General Accounting Office report on litigation related to LGBT employment discrimination (in those states that have laws protecting LGBT persons), there has been no overall increase in total discrimination cases filed. LGBT-related discrimination accounted on average for 3.5% of cases filed."How does a law that you admit makes no difference in the number of discrimination claims filed accomplish your stated goal to "once and for all, end discrimination"? The answer is that it doesn't.
ERW admits that "many major Washington employers have already embraced LGBT employees" (emphasis theirs) in their anti-discrimination policies. The problem is that not ALL have or even will. And dissent is not allowed on this issue.
Supporters would rather crush liberty by protecting what their own (as well as other sources) facts say do not need protecting. In doing so, they fight "discrimination" by discriminating against those who exercise their freedom of choice in a way that supporters deem unacceptable.
Monday, April 11, 2005
Mean-spirited, Defenders of Discrimination
The Columbian reports today that legislator Jim Moeller is unhappy with his Republican counterparts in the Washington state Senate, who last week used a parliamentary maneuver "to push aside House Bill 1515, which would protect gays from housing, employment and financial discrimination."[1]
Mr. Moeller has a history of crying wolf (see Jim Moeller's Record for examples). He excels at painting himself (and his cause) as victims. However, disagreement does not necessarily equate to discrimination. And Mr. Moeller believes you discriminate against homosexuals unless you bow before their agenda.
If you don't believe this then ask this question: " On what conditions would Mr. Moeller consider the bill's opponents to not be 'mean-spirited' and 'discriminatory'"? The answer is, if they agree with him and support the bill!
If he denies this then he must answer on what grounds can someone oppose this legislation and not be mean-spirited?
BTW, if he believes that it is not mean-spirited to oppose the bill but that using the parliamentary maneuver was the "mean-spirited" and "discriminatory" act then where was his outrage during the last session when his side used a parliamentary maneuver to force the House to address similar legislation (HB 1809)? [2]
Will Mr. Moeller answer these questions or will he continue to assassinate the characters of those who oppose him? The clock ticks.
[1] Don Jenkins, "Transportation budget doesn't please Wallace," Columbian, 4/11/2005, page C1.
[2] Don Jenkins, "Senate shutdown kills House bills, Columbian, 3/6/2004, page C1.
"I think that the move was mean-hearted," said Moeller, one of four gay House members. "It really paints the Senate Republican caucus as the defenders of discrimination, and that's unfair because I know some people in that caucus who really don't buy into that."As I mentioned before, The Columbian (Vancouver, WA) published my article, 'Gay rights' bill tyranny in disguise, on why this legislation is not needed. My footnoted version is here.
Mr. Moeller has a history of crying wolf (see Jim Moeller's Record for examples). He excels at painting himself (and his cause) as victims. However, disagreement does not necessarily equate to discrimination. And Mr. Moeller believes you discriminate against homosexuals unless you bow before their agenda.
If you don't believe this then ask this question: " On what conditions would Mr. Moeller consider the bill's opponents to not be 'mean-spirited' and 'discriminatory'"? The answer is, if they agree with him and support the bill!
If he denies this then he must answer on what grounds can someone oppose this legislation and not be mean-spirited?
BTW, if he believes that it is not mean-spirited to oppose the bill but that using the parliamentary maneuver was the "mean-spirited" and "discriminatory" act then where was his outrage during the last session when his side used a parliamentary maneuver to force the House to address similar legislation (HB 1809)? [2]
Will Mr. Moeller answer these questions or will he continue to assassinate the characters of those who oppose him? The clock ticks.
[1] Don Jenkins, "Transportation budget doesn't please Wallace," Columbian, 4/11/2005, page C1.
[2] Don Jenkins, "Senate shutdown kills House bills, Columbian, 3/6/2004, page C1.
Saturday, April 02, 2005
Being Transformed into the Image of Christ
We, who with unveiled faces reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit." - 2 Cor 3:18
As I write, Pope John Paul II lies near death. I am not Catholic but this is a sad time. A great man of God is nearing the end of his race, a race he ran extremely well, and for which he will enter into his eternal reward. The Pope has shown compassion and conviction in his life. He has spoke for those without a voice, the weak and the vulnerable. He has stood for righteousness and stood against evil. In fact, in a world increasingly incapable of even recognizing evil, he has shown the light of Christ into the darkness of man's soul.
Dr. John Mark Reynolds provides some elegant tributes:
John Paul the Great
Gallant Knight of Christendom
Hugh Hewitt provides some informative links on John Paul II's theological work "Theology of the Body" and the papal succession process. He also posts emails he has received from people expressing their gratitude to this man.
In 1987, I attended the papal visit in Pontiac, Michigan. Beyond the experience of seeing and hearing the Pope, I remember something that struck me as quite odd at the time. I had attended sporting events at the Pontiac Silverdome and there is the usual people rushing to and fro, especially after the game. Cutting people off. After the Pope's visit the atmosphere was remarkably different. 90,000+ people calmly exited the building, singing and praising the Lord, talking with perfect strangers as if they were family - because, after all they were (and are) brothers and sisters in the Lord. This atmosphere reflected this man - gentleness, compassion, strength, love of Lord and each other.
A picture at the back of the Pastoral Visit guide provides, for me, a summation of Pope John Paul II's ministry. John Paul has his arm around a girl of around 10. Her head is upon his chest, eyes looking up at him. He is looking down at her with love and compassion. Words do not give the picture justice. It reminds me of how Christ interacted with others.
Pope John Paul II was indeed a model of one being transformed into the image of Christ.
To my Catholic family and friends, my heart grieves with you. And like you, I look forward to that day when we will all see this great man after God's own heart once again; this time in the Lord's presence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)