Gay Marriage and The Supreme Oligarchs

The following quotes on the Supreme Court's gay marriage arguments are from the New York Times article which can be viewed HERE.

Yesterday the Supreme Court heard arguments for two and a half hours on two cases involving gay marriage.

Justice Kennedy said:

“This definition has been with us for millennia. And it’s very difficult for the court to say, ‘Oh, well, we know better.’ ” He added that “the social science on this” — the value and perils of same-sex marriage — is “too new.”

Indeed, it has.  And even ancient Rome, in the midst of their decline when homosexual behavior was quite common, even then, they did not recognize marriage as any other combination than that of a man and a woman.

Justice Kennedy went on:

Same-sex couples say, of course: ‘We understand the nobility and the sacredness of the marriage. We know we can’t procreate but we want the other attributes of it in order to show that we, too, have a dignity that can be fulfilled,’ ” Justice Kennedy said, strongly suggesting that the reasoning resonated with him.

And the attorney for the gay couple...

“….Mary L. Bonauto, representing more than a dozen gay and lesbian couples, urged the justices to remove “the stain of unworthiness” that marriage bans produce.”

When Justice Kennedy explains that gays want to be recognized as having "a dignity that can be fulfilled," I think he has inadvertently identified the true motivation behind the desire of gays to have their unions recognized as marriage.  I know what I am about to say could be very hurtful to homosexuals, who would no doubt deny it.  But it is important to speak the truth about matters of this grave importance.  The issue of gay marriage, I believe, is about moral legitimacy.  Gays want to be free from the awareness that many, many people believe that their intimate behavior is immoral.  I imagine there is a very oppressive shame associated with the knowledge that great religions, such as Christianity, have always taught that their unions are gravely against the good.  

Yes, I have no doubt that gays would like the "stain of unworthiness" to be removed.  But the Supreme Court, no matter how they rule, cannot do that.

Justice Scalia asked:

“Do you know of any society, prior to the Netherlands in 2001, that permitted same-sex marriage?” he asked Ms. Bonauto. She said no, at least as a legal matter.”

Justice Roberts:  

“You’re not seeking to join the institution,” he said. “You’re seeking to change what the institution is.”

Justice Breyer said, "Marriage is about as basic a right as there is."

Now I am not a judge or a Constitutional scholar.  I'm not even an attorney.  But I have read the Bill of Rights and a right for members of the same sex to marry is not in there.  Are there innate human rights that are not in the Constitution?  Well, yes, and the most basic is surely a right to life, a right that the Supreme Court threw out the window in 1973.  There is no "right to marriage," it would seem to me, Justice Breyer.  And isn't that the entire point of this case?  Is it not to determine whether or not there is such a right?

If the Supreme Court rules that there is a Constitutional "right to marriage" for gays (and who knows what other combinations down the road. There is no legitimate reason to prevent other combos if they decide there is a "right to marry.") Then the name of the Supreme Court should be changed to the Supreme Oligarchs.  

I for one have had enough of the Supreme Court usurping the democratic process.  Everyone knows full well there is no right to abortion in the Constitution and there is no right to gay marriage.  If they rule that there is, I hope there will be a powerful and deliberate effort on the part of the American people to at least require terms limits for these oligarchs!!

The Body of Christ-- A Network System

From the wonderful book The Gift of Faith by Tadeusz Dajczer comes the following words of wisdom.

Growth in grace through a greater faithfulness to God intensifies one's specific influence on others like invisible radiation......As Romano Guardini has said:

The prayers of others belong also to you just as their actions, spiritual growth, and purity of heart do.  Have you ever reflected on the community of the suffering, on the fact that the graces flowing from somebody's suffering are transferred to others?  If, united with the suffering of Christ you offer your painful experiences to God for others, then your experiences become a living, beneficial, redemptive, power for them.  Beyond all obstacles and distances, you bring help where nothing else can be of help. ("II senso della Chiesa in La realta della Chiesa [Breseia, Italy: Morcelliana, 1999], p.38.)

     No one is a solitary island.  As the Mystical Body of Christ, we constitute a unique network system, similar to a system of connected vessels.  Your good as well as your evil has a social dimension, because it creates a specific supernatural pressure of good or evil on others.

What a beautiful description of the interconnectedness of prayer, good works, and suffering upon the Body of Christ.  Yes, it does matter what each individual chooses to do.  Good begets good.  Evil begets evil.

Every moment matters for the good of the whole, all of us.  Every decision is significant.

May we keep this truth ever before us, that we might live always for the greater glory of God.

A Diet to Avoid Alzheimer's?!

Just read a great article  by Sumathi Reddy in the Wall Street Journal entitled "A Diet Might Cut the Risk of Developing Alzheimer's."  Well, that's a pleasant thought!

"Experts say there is a growing awareness that lifestyle factors-- not just genetics--play a prominent role in the development of Alzheimer's, and researchers hope to come up with an optimal diet that will lessen the chances of developing the disease."  Yes!!

The diet was developed at Rush University Medical Center in Chicago.

Called the MIND diet, it is a combination of the Mediterranean diet and the DASH diet.  The DASH diet (Dietary Approaches to Hypertension) was designed to reduce high blood pressure.  Thus the acronym Mediterranean- DASH Intervention for Neurodegenerative Delay. MIND Diet. Clever.

OK. So what's the diet?  Here it is.

Green, leafy vegetables-- a salad and one other vegetable every day
Other vegetables
Beans-- three times a week
Berries (especially blueberries)-- twice a week
Whole grains- three servings a day
Fish-- once a week
Poultry-- two or more servings a week
Olive oil
Wine-- one glass a day
Nuts-- five times a week   LOVE this one!!

And avoid the following!!

Red meats
Butter and stick margarine
Cheese
Pastries and Sweets
Fried and fast food.

Those who followed this diet closely lowered their risk of Alzheimer's by 53%.  Those who followed it moderately lowered their risk by 35%.  So it's even worth doing it halfway!!

The only thing surprising and problematic for me is the whole grain requirement, because I can no longer eat gluten.

David Perlmutter in his book Grain Brain makes a strong case that gluten is bad for everyone and that it's especially bad for the brain.

Well, they're just getting started on this idea.  I'm just excited by the idea that diet can impact one's risk of Alzheimer's.  That's very good news!

"Whatever the Ayatollah Wants" WSJ

The Wall Street Journal as an interesting opinion piece in today's (4/20/15) edition.

Aptly titled Whatever the Ayatollah Wants, the piece opens with this.

     Give Ayatollah Ali Khamenei credit for knowing his opposition.  Two weeks ago the Supreme Leader declared that Western sanctions had to be lifted immediately as a condition of the nuclear deal.  And sure enough, on Friday President Obama said Iran would get significant sanctions relief immediately upon signing a deal.
     The Ayatollah knows that Mr. Obama wants an agreement with Iran so much that there's almost no concession the President won't make.  So why not keep asking for more?

Hopefully, you can read the rest of the editorial HERE.

The U.S. has already granted numerous concessions that contradict previous U.S. positions, concessions that have so alarmed Israel, that Prime Minister Netanyahu has said that even the so-called deal framework paves the way for Iran to obtain nuclear weapons.

We have been negotiating with a country that continues to define the U.S. as its enemy and continues to export terrorism throughout the region.  Chants of "Death to America" and a call for the destruction of Israel, our most important ally in the region, continue.

And during the negotiations Iran staged a mock attack on a U.S. air carrier.  Yes, during the negotiations.  The administration dismissed the maneuver as harmless.

Does it make any sense to trust a country like this?  Does it?  What on Earth is the president doing?  Preserving his foolish and naive belief that making nice and talking to anyone, including terrorists, is the path to peace?  Is the whole dangerous exercise about saving face for the president?

SPRING!!!!! Don't You Just Love It?

From Goodreads I bring you the following fun quotes about spring.  (There are many others on the site so if you enjoy these, you know where to go.  HERE.

"That is one good thing about this world...there are always sure to be more springs.
     L.M. Montgomery, Anne of Avonlea

"Spring is the time of plans and projects."
     Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina

"In the Spring, at the end of the day, you should smell like dirt."
     Margaret Atwood, Bluebeard

"If people did not love one another, I really don't know what use there would be in having any spring."
     Victor Hugo, Les Miserables

"It's spring fever.  That is what the name of it is.  And when you've got it, you want-- oh, you don't quite know what you want, but it just fairly makes your heart ache, you want it so!"
     Mark Twain

I bought some pea and lettuce plants today.  Spring is the time of new life! More energy! Joy!!

Small Success Thursday--Things to Make Time For

Well... on a lighter note.....

Today is Small Success Thursday over at Catholicmom.com.

What are my "small successes" this week?

I have been going to a gym.  This is not like me.  I really don't enjoy exercise.  I enjoy reading and writing and my favorite place to do these things is on my bed, where I am right now.

But I realize that I need to be strong and healthy to enjoy my life, and I do want to enjoy my life.

So I've been exercising at the gym.  Quite regularly, I must say.

This past week I even attended several of the free exercise classes.  I started with a class that didn't sound TOO challenging.  I was wrong.  It was quite challenging.  I kept looking at the other older participants, but nobody seemed to want to look at me and exchange mutual eye rolling.

We needed a stability ball, 3 sets of dumbbells, a foam roller, and an exercise mat.  What a relief it was when we finally laid down on the mats.  I had taken my hair out of a ponytail, because it's hard to lay back on a ponytail.  I forgot that my hair has gotten quite long.  As per the instructions of the teacher, my legs were stretched into a pretzel position when I realized I could not raise my head, having pinned it to the floor by lying on my hair.  I tried to roll a little to the side but the leg pretzel prevented that.  Sheesh.  I guess this is the kind of thing fitness gurus think of before they lie down.

Finally the legs were undone and we were told to put the foam roller under our necks to stretch them.  I thought, oh, this is going to feel good, leaning back onto the roller.  The little foam log slipped on my hair and rolled toward the other people on their mats, all ready to relax.  I had to jump up and chase it maybe ten feet further into the room.

A little embarrassing.  But I had the presence of mind to remind myself that I was not there to impress anyone, and I WAS getting exercise.

The small success?  I even tried another class this week!

And tonight I will be seeing a wonderful musical production of "The Music Man" with my daughter Mary.

There are some things we really must make time for.

We Must Obey God Rather Than Men

The antipathy of the current administration to all things Christian makes todays readings and commentary particularly appropriate. (See yesterday's post.)

The first reading, Acts 5:27-33, describes the questioning of the Apostles by the Sanhedrin. They say, "We gave you strict orders, did we not, to stop teaching in that name?" To which the Apostles respond, "We must obey God rather than men."

And from the Gospel, John 3:31-36, "The ONE WHO comes from above is above all." Amen.

I can't say enough good things about the series In Conversation with God by Francis Fernandez. (Not to be confused with another title, Conversations with God, which I do NOT recommend.) Fernandez' series is like daily spiritual direction based on the reading of the day.  It's WONDERFUL!!!  It's orthodox, insightful, and intelligent.  I've never been disappointed with a single day's meditation.

Today's Commentary is from Volume Two: Lent and Eastertide.

Fernandez writes:

     The fortitude and conviction of the first Christians is what Our Lord is also asking from his followers today, when, in certain environments, there breathes a climate of indifference or even direct attack, more or less veiled, on true human and Christian values.

This volume was first published in 1987. Today the attacks are unveiled and even come from our own government. (See yesterday's post.)

     The effective protection of fundamental individual rights, the right to life from the very moment of conception, the protection of marriage and the family, equality of opportunities in education and in work, freedom of education and of speech, religious freedom, personal security, contribution to world peace, all form part of the common good for which Christians should be prepared to fight.
     Passivity in the face of such important affairs would really be a lamentable error and omission-- at times grave-- of the duty to contribute to the common good.

Well.... that got my attention.  He goes on...

     One cannot praise a political action or social regulation or work of art when it becomes transformed into an instrument for evil.  It is a question of strict morality and therefore of common sense.  Who would praise an insult to his own mother just because it was composed in verse which had perfect rhythm?

Indeed.  In reference to abortion and other "abominable crimes," Fernandez writes:

Whatever little each person is able to do, he should do it, especially should he be in public life....It lies in the hands of everybody, of each individual, provided he acts with supernatural outlook and with common sense, to make this world which God has given us to live in, into a more human place and a means of sanctification.  If we strive to fulfill our social duties, whether we live in a big city or in a little out-of-the-way village, with an important job in society or a lowly one, even though we may think our contribution is tiny, we shall be faithful to Our Lord.

We must speak the truth courageously, send the emails, make the phone calls, sign the petitions, and pray, pray, pray.

Come Holy Spirit.

Is the President Anti-Christian?

As Christians we must guard against the temptation to judge others and to assign motives to people for questionable actions.  We can’t know the content of another’s heart, nor what is driving them to behave in a particular way.

That being said, public officials must be held to a high level of accountability to the citizens who elected them, the president of the Unites States perhaps more so than any other elected official. He has unmatched power, influence, and responsibility.

While we cannot know the president’s heart nor calculate his culpability, his accumulated words and actions have a decidedly anti-Christian flavor.  At this point, I don’t think his antipathy can be denied or ignored any longer.

During the government shutdown military chaplains were prohibited from saying Mass and ministering to the troops.  Why? And since that time there have been numerous limitations placed on the speech and actions of military chaplains and many infringements placed on their  freedoms of religion and of speech.  What could possibly explain such antagonistic actions?

In 2013 the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission under this administration sued a trucking company for failing to accommodate Muslim drivers who did not want to deliver alcohol.  And yet no such support is given to Christian bakers and photographers for their religious objections to participating in gay weddings.  In fact, they are only treated with scorn and insults.

When speaking at Georgetown University the president asked that the crucifix and IHS symbol behind his podium be removed.  Yes, the reason given was that they wanted a neutral background. My question is why was a neutral background needed?  

And then there is the Affordable Care Act.

Cardinal Dolan said the following in 2013 when the HHS mandate was first introduced:

Over the last six months or so the Catholic Church in the United States has found itself in some tension with the executive branch of the federal government over a grave issue: religious freedom…Can a government bureau, in this case the Department of Health and Human Services define for us or any faith community what is ministry and how it is exercised? Can government also coerce the church to violate its conscience? 

The president first assured Cardinal Dolan that he considered the “protection of conscience a sacred duty,” and then left the freedom violating mandates in place.

The administration went on to inform Cardinal Dolan that, in Cardinal Dolan’s words, “the broader concerns of religious freedom—that is, revisiting the straight-jacketing mandates, or broadening the maligned exemption—are all off the table.”

Well over 100 lawsuits have been filed against the HHSmandate.

Why is this happening?  At a minimum it would appear that the president has no respect for the Catholic Church or for religious freedom.  How could anyone be so committed to offering free contraception, abortifacients and sterilization to the American people as to be willing to alienate the U.S. Conference of Catholic bishops, the Catholic population, as well as many, many evangelicals?  Why would those things be so important? Clearly, this is the most anti-life president we have ever had—by far.  And he holds more than a little antipathy toward Catholics in particular.

At the National Prayer Breakfast he minimized the atrocities of ISIS by comparing them to the “terrible deeds” committed during the Crusades and the Inquisition “in the name of Christ.” He went on to blame Jim Crow laws on Christians.  (Never mind, Mr. President, that the Crusades were fought against Muslim aggression and that Jim Crow laws could never be justified by Christian teaching.) Christians all over the Middle East are being martyred for their faith and our president chose to criticize Christianity at the National Prayer Breakfast. Virginia governor Jim Gilmore said of the president’s words, “The president’s remarks at the prayer breakfast are the most offensive I’ve heard a president make in my lifetime.”  Indeed, in anyone’s lifetime.

And at the Easter Prayer Breakfast at the White House the president said, “On Easter I do reflect on the fact that as a Christian, I am supposed to love.  And I have to say that sometimes when I listen to less than loving expressions by Christians, I get concerned.  But that’s a topic for another day.”  This statement was greeted with laughter.

Keep in mind that the above statement was made on the highest holy day of the year for Christians and just days after a terrorist attack in Kenya by Islamist terrorists where 147 Christians were killed specifically for their faith.  These martyrs were not even mentioned in the Easter Prayer Breakfast remarks. And on the day of the Kenyan attack, the president did not even say that these people were specifically killed because they were Christians.

President Obama claims that he is a Christian.  Frankly, I don’t know how that could be. He seems to use every opportunity he has to belittle Christians, and his policies have consistently shown hostility to the Christian faith.

We have whispered and thought this for years now.  It’s time to hold the president accountable by naming this antipathy for what it is—anti-Christian hostility. Sign the petitions, write the letters to the editor, ask the prospective presidential candidates what they think of the president’s words and actions and how they stand on religious freedom. Ask how their policies differ from the president’s.  Take every opportunity you are given to defend the faith and to point out that the president is failing in his solemn obligation to defend the Constitution of the United States—that Constitution that very specifically guarantees religious freedom.

Daniel Henninger tells it like is in "The Incredible Obama Doctrine."

Daniel Henninger has written a great opinion piece in today's Wall Street Journal, "The Incredible Obama Doctrine."

Here is a snippet:

     Mr. Obama then offered an example of how this would work-- U.S. support for Israel: "What we will be doing even as we enter into this deal is sending a very clear message to the Iranians and to the entire region that if anybody messes with Israel, America will be there."
     This statement, and indeed the Obama Doctrine is a hoax.
     Set aside that "messes with Israel" and "America will be there" are phrases with no real operational meaning.
     "American will be there" could mean that if someone set off a nuclear backpack bomb in Tel Aviv, where the Obama administration would be the next day is on New York's east side, condemning the attack in a U.N. Security Council resolution.
     Any American foreign policy doctrine needs interpretive wiggle room for the commander in chief. But anyone would assume that the phrase "America will be there" refers to the deployment of what Mr. Obama invokes as "our military superiority."
     Unless it doesn't.
     In the case of the Obama presidency, it doesn't.  There is next to no chance that this president under any circumstance-- and that would include China's invasion of Taiwan-- will use the U.S. military on the scale he implies here......

He goes on to say:

Put it this way: Any conceivable Democratic presidential candidate would associate with Teddy Roosevelt's foundational dictum-- Speak softly and carry a big stick.  That sounds like the Obama doctrine, or what Hilary Clinton and progressive foreign-policy pundits call "smart" power.  But the reality of modern democratic foreign policy is-- Speak softly and claim to carry a big stick, which you have no intention of ever using.

Hopefully, you can read the entire article HERE.

For those who would argue that of course he would use the full force of the American military if necessary, I would ask where is the evidence?  He has drawn red lines and then ignored them. Deadlines are not even deadlines for this president. In my humble opinion, he is weak, indecisive, passive to a fault, and an extremely dangerous president for America to have in these chaotic and violent times.

The Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary…..Points to Ponder

In this week of contemplating the Passion of Our Lord, I offer the following thoughts/questions that may be of help while reciting the Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary.  How he suffered for us!  These "points to ponder" first appeared as a post on Catholic365.com.  The original post can be found HERE.

The First Sorrowful Mystery—The Agony in the Garden

·      Imagine the Garden of Gethsemane, a favorite place of prayer for Jesus and the apostles.  It is said to be very beautiful.

·      Agony:  1. Intense pain of mind or body  2. A violent struggle or contest (Merriam-Webster)  This agony was a mental suffering.

·      “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass me by,” Jesus asks the father.  As a human, Jesus dreaded suffering as much as we do.

·      Jesus surrenders to the Father’s will even though he knows full well what he will suffer. “My Father, if this cannot pass me by without my drinking it, your will be done!”

·      Three times Jesus asks for the cup to be taken away and each time again surrenders to the Father’s will.  An angel then came to strengthen him. Was it just the sight of the angel that strengthened him?

·      Jesus was let down by his three closest friends.  He needed their company and wanted them to pray with him.  Three times he asked them.  They gave in to sleep instead.  They did not know what lay ahead.  Nor do we at any point in our lives.  That’s why we must always try to do what the Lord may be asking.

·      “In his anguish he prayed with all the greater intensity, and his sweat became like drops of blood falling to the ground.”  This is a very rare medical condition called hematohidrosis, caused by extreme stress.  It is said to also make the skin more fragile.

·      The soldiers arrive and Jesus says, “Sleep on now. Enjoy your rest!” The apostles receive this well deserved sarcasm.

·      Jesus is betrayed with a kiss by one of his very own, with whom he had just sat at table and celebrated Passover.  Let’s not forget that Jesus loved Judas.  This was a painful betrayal of friendship.

·      One of the apostles grabs his sword and slashes off the ear of the high priest’s servant.   Jesus answers, “Enough!” then touches the man’s ear and heals him.  The soldiers witness a miracle before their very eyes and still continue the arrest.  How often do we too ignore the miracles in our lives?

The Second Sorrowful Mystery—The Scourging at the Pillar

·      We know that because of the hematohidrosis Jesus’ skin was very fragile and tender.  It was in that state that he received the blows from the torture instruments.

·      Did Mary witness the scourging?  It was done in a public place. Did any of Jesus’ followers see it?  Imagine their anguish.

·      The Precious Blood of Jesus is spilled all over the ground. The Precious Blood!  The soldiers were probably spattered with it.  They probably stepped in it.

·      How long did the scourging last? For Jesus and for those who loved him, it must have seemed an eternity.

·      We can easily ask how the soldiers could have done such a thing.  How could they be so sadistic?  Yet, we are the ones who truly inflicted the wounds.

·      Jesus had told the apostles that this would happen.  Speaking of himself as the “Son of Man” Jesus said, “He will be delivered up to the Gentiles.  He will be mocked and outraged and spat upon.   They will scourge him and put him to death, and on the third day he will rise again.” (Luke18: 32-33)

·      Surely the apostles put this prediction out of their minds at the time.  They must have been in denial, hoping he was speaking in some kind of figurative sense.

·      On this day they came to realize that Jesus’ words were literally going to happen.  Imagine their horror and fear.

·      Did the apostles wonder why Jesus would allow this to happen?  They knew he had control of even the wind and the waves.  Why would he allow this to be done to him?  Perhaps some were starting to understand.  “Upon him was the chastisement that makes us whole, by his stripes we were healed. “           Is 53:5

·      What was the reaction of Pilate’s wife when she heard of what Pilate had ordered?  Perhaps she too was filled with fear.

The Third Sorrowful Mystery—The Crowning with Thorns

·      What horrible irony—the King of Kings and Lord of Lords mocked and tortured with a crown of thorns.

·      “The soldiers then wove a crown of thorns and fixed it on his head, throwing around his shoulders a cloak of royal purple.”

·      “Repeatedly they came up to him and said, ‘All hail, king of the Jews!’,’slapping his face as they did so.”

·      The Savior, the long awaited one of Israel, has his kingship mocked.  He suffers now the additional pain of derision.

·      “Meanwhile the men guarding Jesus amused themselves at his expense. They blindfolded him first, slapped him, and then taunted him:  ‘Play the prophet; which one struck you?’  And they directed many other insulting words at him.”

·      Do you think they blindfolded Jesus to avoid looking into the eyes of love?  Perhaps they could not do what they did and also see his eyes.

·      Have you ever felt that you were being treated in a manner that you did not deserve?  Think of Jesus wearing this crown.  How many thorns pierced his scalp?

·      “…I am an object of reproach, a laughingstock to my neighbors, and a dread to my friends….”  Psalm 31:12

·      “Continually striking Jesus on the head with a reed and spitting at him, they genuflected before him and pretended to pay him homage.”

·      We are the reason Jesus endured this suffering and mocking.  When we genuflect before him perhaps we can remember and offer him true homage.

The Fourth Sorrowful Mystery—The Carrying of the Cross

·      How heavy was the cross Jesus carried?  Even just the crosspiece would weigh about 100 pounds.  Have you ever lifted that much? 

·      Jesus had lost a great deal of blood and his skin had been ripped apart.  In this state he carried the cross.  Unimaginable.

·      He fell three times.  How painful each fall must have been.  Surely he felt that he would not be able to get up.

·      Imagine Jesus meeting his mother.  What emotional pain he must have endured at the sight of her horrified face.  How could any mother see her son suffering like that?

·      Perhaps the “women of Jerusalem” knew each other.  Did they gather together to find Jesus on the Via Dolorosa?  Were they women who had shown him hospitality?  Women who were his friends?

·      How did Simon feel about helping Jesus carry the cross?  Did he realize, in some way, what a mystical privilege he had been given?

·       Scripture says that Simon was forced to help Jesus carry his cross.  But surely as he carried it, he was flooded with grace.  Did it change his life?

·      Did Veronica see the blood dripping down Jesus’ face and felt that she just had to do something?  Was Jesus’ blood perhaps dripping into his eyes? 

·      Imagine the tenderness with which Veronica  must have patted her own veil against his skin.  Imagine the look of gratitude and love that Jesus surely gave her.

·      Imagine Veronica discovering the miraculous image of the face of Jesus on her veil.

The Fifth Sorrowful Mystery—The Crucifixion

·      Jesus arrives at Golgotha.  Imagine the pain of the torn flesh of his back against the cross.

·      Imagine the pain of the nails entering his hands.

·      Imagine the pain of the nails in his feet.

·      Think of the pain as the cross is lifted high and his weight is pressed against his nailed hands and feet..

·      How difficult it was for Jesus to breathe as he had to press upward against his feet.  How awful it must have been for him to not be able to get enough air.

·      Jesus gives us his mother.  Even in the agony of his death Jesus was still thinking of us.

·      How sweet was the reassurance Jesus gave to the good thief that he would see him in paradise.  Who was the good thief?  Had he listened to Jesus preach before?  Or did he simply realize by the power of the Holy Spirit, or the power of the presence of Jesus, that this was indeed the King of kings?

·      “My God, my God, why hast thou abandoned me?”  Did Jesus the man truly feel abandoned?   Was this an exclamation of the depths of his suffering and not to be taken literally?

·      “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit.”  With what complete and utter surrender to the will of the Father did Jesus die.  “It is finished.”

·      When the soldier’s lance pierced the side of Jesus, blood and water gushed forth, the blood representing the Precious Blood of Jesus which is now given to us in the Eucharist, and the water representing the water of Baptism.  Imagine the Divine Mercy image and the perfection of Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross.  May we be eternally grateful.

As we say the Sorrowful Mysteries of the rosary may we come to a greater understanding of the infinite depth of God’s love for us and the mystical power of the redemptive sacrifice of Jesus, our Lord.

Oh, Father, for the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world.

What Is Going On With Our President??

I was stunned to read that our president had not even responded to a request from Jens Stoltenberg, the new secretary general of NATO, to meet with him.  He didn't reject the request.  He didn't even answer.  Nearly all of the leaders of the 28 NATO countries have met with Stoltenberg.  But our president either didn't have time or didn't have the inclination.  Does he think he's too important to talk to our allies? Is he so anti-military that he refuses to treat our allies with even the basics of common courtesy? Is he suffering from a mental illness? That last suggestion is not tongue-in-cheek.  I find his behavior so inexplicable that all possibilities need consideration.

From an article entitled NATO Chief Added to Obama's 'Diss List' by Hana Levi Julian in the Jewish Press.com...

But there’s just no getting around the fact that Obama’s behavior is an outright insult. Where was he and what was so incredibly important that he could not make time for the head of NATO –an alliance in which the U.S. is a pivotal member?
The only event on Obama’s schedule for Wednesday, media moguls said, was a short speech to launch the Affordable Care Act. On Thursday he is also pretty free: he heads to Alabama to deliver a speech. Wow. Stressful.

Read the rest of the article HERE.

And from an article entitled Obama Snubs NATO Chief as Crisis Rages by Josh Rogin in Bloomberg View:

America's commitment to defend its NATO allies is its biggest treaty obligation, said Volker, adding that European security is at its most perilous moment since the Cold War. Russia has moved troops and weapons into eastern Ukraine, annexed Crimea, placed nuclear-capable missiles in striking distance of NATO allies, flown strategic-bomber mock runs in the North Atlantic, practiced attack approacheson the U.K. and Sweden, and this week threatened to aim nuclear missiles at Denmark’s warships.
“It is hard for me to believe that the president of the United States has not found the time to meet with the current secretary general of NATO given the magnitude of what this implies, and the responsibilities of his office,” Volker said.

Read the rest of the article HERE.

Rick Moran in a piece called Obama disrespects NATO chief, raising questions about his commitment to the alliance at the American Thinker had this to say:

"Putin is no doubt delighted at the snub.  Russia has been trying to drive a wedge between Europe and the U.S. since NATO was established.  Now, Obama has done that for them."

Read Moran's entire article HERE.

It seems to me that it is more than high time to hold our president accountable for this and many other mind-boggling decisions he has made in the area of foreign policy.  What is with him??

On the few warm days we have had this month I have gone out on my bike a few times to my favorite  destination-- Gallup Park.

It's more lovely in the other seasons, but even winter has its own charm..

The blue sky melting the lingering ice and snow is magnificent.

When it's in the forties, I am on my bike. :-)

Living In The Day You Have

It’s so easy to forget that God is loving us in the Now.  He is with us at this very moment.  Our relationship with him is not about yesterday and not about tomorrow.  It is about the moment we are in, on this day. 

What does he want right now?  He wants our love.  He wants us to turn our faces to him, to ask for his help, to praise him, to thank him.  We only have to ask.  God never imposes himself.

How is he blessing us at this very moment.  For me, I can feel the sunshine on my face as I sit in a teahouse with my daughter.  She is studying.  I am writing.  What a blessing to have her company.  The sunshine coming through the window is warm despite the bitterly cold temperature outside.  It’s so comforting.  The light sparks my spirit as does the crystals on the piled snow on the side of the road in front of us.

The tea is delicious as are the macaroons my daughter just brought back to the table.

Now is the time to embrace the joy that the Lord is offering.

No one has a perfect life.  But the present moment can be nearly perfect if we stay there.

Stay in the Now, the day or the hour that you have.  The Lord is offering his love.  We have only to receive it and offer it back to Him who is waiting for our response.

Live in the Day you have.  It is the only one that exists at the moment.  Live it in love.  Live it in gratitude.  Live it in and with the Lord.

This article was first published in Catholic365.com at THIS SITE.

Well Said (In My Opinion) Wednesday

From the Wall Street Journal Opinion page, "Review and Outlook," written before it was widely recognized that Netanyahu had won......

Two paragraphs from the Journal's editorial "Israel's Election Cliffhanger."

.......
One thing for sure is that whoever prevails, the winner won't be President Obama's nuclear diplomacy with Iran.  Almost everyone across the Israeli political spectrum opposes the emerging deal with Tehran.
........
A Netanyahu victory would be bitter news for Mr. Obama, who worked hard to defeat the Israeli leader, including an attempt to stop and then belittle his speech to Congress this month. It isn't Mr. Obama's habit to admit error, or to be gracious to his opponents, but it would serve the interests of both nations if he were.  Israel's raucous democracy is imperfect, like our own, but it is the only reliable one in the bloody cauldron of the Middle East.

Yes.  Would that our president could be a little more gracious.

And from the essay "Congress Deserves a Vote on Iran," by Joseph Lieberman, former four term US senator from Connecticut.

.....The Constitution and history, not to mention common sense, argue that it is entirely proper for America's elected representatives in Congress to review a far-reaching agreement with a foreign government of such national-security significance. The president as commander-in-chief deserves deference in devising national-security strategy, but Congress has clear constitutional standing and an institutional prerogative not to be cut out of the process.
....Congress should also review an Iran agreement because of the unusually extensive and direct role it has already played in formulating exactly those policies that a nuclear deal would alter and undo.
....The sanctions under negotiation, however, are overwhelmingly the creation of Congress--put in law through bills passed by large bipartisan majorities.  Given that Congress built the sanctions against Iran, it is unreasonable to bar it from any review or oversight in how that architecture is disassembled.

I THINK you can read all of Senator Lieberman's article HERE.

Indeed.  In fact, if Congress imposed the sanctions one might question whether or not the president even has the authority to lift them without an act of Congress.

Should We Trust Iran?

Should we trust Iran to honor a deal that allows them to develop nuclear energy but forbids them to develop nuclear weapons?

It almost seems that Secretary of State Kerry and President Obama believe that placing trust in Iran will somehow make them trustworthy.

If they have never been trustworthy, why would we expect that they will become so now?
From www.usnews.com:

....at the end of the current negotiations, Iran will be left as a threshold nuclear power with very grave consequences – and it won’t stop there. It will continue to develop nuclear military capacity.
How do we know this? Because deceit is where Iran really excels. What it is doing today is just another version of what it has done in the past, a portent of the future. It hid a nuclear program in the side of a mountain for four years before we found out about it. Iran is, as we write, developing inter-continental missiles whose only purpose would be to threaten the U.S. The notion that Iran will give up its missile program is simply naive to the point of idiocy. Yes, it has reduced its production of fissile material, but this sounds better than it really is as it delays by only 24 days Iran’s ability to produce enough for nuclear weapons. It has not stopped its research and development on centrifuges, which puts it even closer to a nuclear breakout when the constraint period is over.

Read the whole article HERE.

From Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech:

The U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency, the IAEA, said again yesterday that Iran still refuses to come clean about its military nuclear program. Iran was also caught -- caught twice, not once, twice -- operating secret nuclear facilities in Natanz and Qom, facilities that inspectors didn't even know existed. 
Right now, Iran could be hiding nuclear facilities that we don't know about, the U.S. and Israel. As the former head of inspections for the IAEA said in 2013, he said, "If there's no undeclared installation today in Iran, it will be the first time in 20 years that it doesn't have one." Iran has proven time and again that it cannot be trusted. And that's why the first major concession is a source of great concern. It leaves Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and relies on inspectors to prevent a breakout. 

Read the entire text of the speech HERE.

Yes, it was extraordinary for Congress to have invited Netanyahu to speak to Congress, without having consulted the White House.  It was also extraordinary for senators to write a letter directly to Iran suggesting that whatever deal Obama makes could be overturned in two years.  

Were the senators trying to undermine the talks that our government is engaged in with Iran?  Yes, I believe they were.

I believe the senators who signed the letter want to undermine our country's negotiations with Iran because the administration is about to enter into an agreement that is decidedly not in the best interests of the Unites States and not in the best interests of Israel, our most important ally in the region.

Suddenly the administration is concerned about separation of powers.  Interesting.  I am pleased that we have a Congress that is looking out for the people of the United States.

"Well Said" Wednesday

Sometimes when I am reading a good article I will come across a passage and think to myself, "That is well said."  Today, I am going to share one of those. (And perhaps even make it a regular Wednesday post. )

Anthony Esolen, professor of English at Providence College, has written an excellent feature in Touchstone magazine (Jan/Feb) entitled "Mission Nary Impossible: The Unevangelized May Be Better & Worse than Savages."He speaks at length of Father Pierre-Jean De Smet who was a missionary to native Americans of the Northwest. He states that Father De Smet did not consider the Indians to be savages.  Esolen adds that they also were not insane,

"They could reason and act from principles.  You can argue with a sane man, advising him that his principles are wrong.  You can evangelize a sane society, directing minds and hearts to the Lord, who is alone the Way.  But what the evangelist meets today is insanity or perhaps subsanity.  It will not suffice to correct a mistaken principle when the people can no longer reason from principles.  You cannot redirect a lost people when they have no direction and no experience of following one..."

And here is the golden nugget.

"We are now among people who are better and worse than most savages.  They are, in most places, and for the time being, less likely to break crockery, as Chesterton put it, than were the savages of old.  They will cut babies to pieces in the womb, more than a million a year, but they will be roused to the height of righteous wrath should they see someone leave a dog in a hot car in the summer."

Indeed.  There are only a few things that merit widespread condemnation any more.  The very mention of a sexual morality will make people apoplectic.   Parents can let their children defy authority, even their own, mouth off and be generally and specifically disrespectful and that, it seems, is exhibiting patience. But when a child is given even the mildest of corporal punishment that is child abuse.  One cannot even hint that homosexual behavior might be immoral and an offense against human dignity because such a view would be declared intolerant.  But the most ignorant and mean spirited criticism of all things Christian evokes only nods of agreement and ridicule.

How on Earth did we get to this place of insanity.  Anthony Esolen has made an excellent point.

Whatever Happened to the Intelligence Gathered at the bin Laden Raid??

Friday's (3/6) Wall Street Journal included a very interesting Opinion piece by Stephen Hayes (senior writer for the Weekly Standard) and Thomas Joscelyn (senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies).  The piece was entitled "How America Was Misled on al Qaeda's Demise."

Hayes and Joscelyn explain that the CIA was given a tremendous amount of terrorist materials from the raid that resulted in the death of Osama bin Laden.  They write:

According to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, the team produced more than 400 separate reports based on information in the documents.
     But it is what happened next that is truly stunning:  nothing.  The analysis of the materials-- the "document exploitation" in the parlance of intelligence officials-- came to an abrupt stop.  According to five senior intelligence professionals, the documents sat largely untouched for months-- perhaps as long as a year.

What??!!??  Why isn't the White House being hammered about this?  Who ordered that they not be touched?

Hayes and Joscelyn go on:

After a pitched bureaucratic battle a small team of analysts from the Defense Intelligence Agency and Centcom was given time-limited read-only access to the documents.  The DIA team began producing analyses reflecting what they were seeing in the documents.
     At precisely the time Mr. Obama was campaigning on the imminent death of al Qaeda, those with access to the bin Laden documents were seeing, in bin Laden's own words that the opposite was true.....
     This wasn't what the Obama White House wanted to hear.  So the administration cut off DIA access to the documents and instructed DIA officials to stop producing analyses based on them.

By limiting access to these documents wasn't the White House aiding and abetting the enemy?  Were they not also lying to the American people?

If a republican president had done this the media would have been screaming for impeachment.  It appears that the Obama administration can pretty much do whatever it wants.