COMMENTARY ON THE POPE AND THE CURRENT SCANDAL FROM PRAVDA

Pravda is presenting a more balanced approach to this story than the New York Times and other American media outlets. That pretty much says all that needs to be said about the current state of American journalism.

"Much of the news coming out, in the effort to disguise ideological propaganda, contains the fundamental error of mistaking the wood with the trees ... especially when the aim is to denigrate. That is, from an isolated case, preferably rough outlines, and generalized in order to induce the reader to think that the whole is of the same nature. This generalization obviously has ideological connotations and follows a political agenda that seeks to deconstruct traditional society and all its secular institutions and to impose a New World Order after the manner of the sinister interests of the international oligarchy, the same ones that handle the financial markets and through them, largely control the global economy. We refer to cases of pedophilia within the ranks of the Catholic Church recently publicized by international news agencies."
Pravda

MORE OBJECTIVE REPORTING REGARDING FATHER MURPHY

"The archbishop of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, apologized repeatedly Tuesday night for the way his archdiocese handled an abusive priest and he defended the Vatican which has come under fire for not disciplining or defrocking the man.

"Mistakes were made in the Lawrence Murphy case," said Archbishop Jerome Listecki at the end of a special holy week mass at St. John's Cathedral in Milwaukee.

"The mistakes were not made in Rome in 1996, 1997 and 1998. The mistakes were made here, in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, in the 1970s, the 1980s and the 1990s, by the Church, by civil authorities, by Church officials, and by bishops. And for that, I beg your forgiveness in the name of the Church and in the name of this Archdiocese of Milwaukee."

The now-deceased Murphy is believed to have molested up to 200 boys.

The Vatican says it did not know about the abuse until 20 years after civil authorities investigated and later dropped the case.

However, a recent New York Times story alleged that top Vatican officials, including the future Pope Benedict XVI, failed to act despite warnings from several American bishops.
Jeff Anderson, a lawyer who obtained internal church paperwork, said it "shows a direct line from the victims through the bishops and directly to the man who is now pope."

In his comments Tuesday night, Listecki attempted to shift the blame away from the Pope.

"The Holy Father does not need me to defend him or his decisions," he said. "I believe, and history will confirm, that his actions in responding to this crisis swiftly and decisively and his compassionate response to victims (and) survivors speak for themselves."

Listecki added that measures have now been put in place in his diocese and across the country to protect children from predatory priests.

"Still, we know it is not words, but actions that will demonstrate our resolve," he said. "And, in some ways, regardless of what I say tonight or any other time, our critics will say it is not enough.

"But that cannot and will not prevent me from making every possible effort at moving forward toward healing and resolution with those who have been harmed, and determined to make sure nothing like this can ever happen again."
CNN

It looks to me as though, while CNN wants to appear objective in their reporting, they have failed the test once again. As evidence I offer the quotes from the story posted below:

"However, a recent New York Times story alleged that top Vatican officials, including the future Pope Benedict XVI, failed to act despite warnings from several American bishops.
Jeff Anderson, a lawyer who obtained internal church paperwork, said it "shows a direct line from the victims through the bishops and directly to the man who is now pope."
In his comments Tuesday night, Listecki attempted to shift the blame away from the Pope."

The New York Times can allege anything it wants. The question is whether the allegations are true. The statement in the article is misleading because it does not address the question of veracity, it just prints the accusation with no follow up. Then it goes a step further. To lend credence to the accusation from the Times it prints another accusation, again with no follow up. I've read the papers this attorney is referring to and they don't paint the clear and unassailable picture of papal guilt that he would like us to believe they do. You can read them yourself here.

"These priests have been allowed to abuse children for years. And with the man who is now the pope knowing about what Father Murphy alone was doing, and not doing anything about it? He needs to resign. He has no business being in the position he is in," said Donald Marshall, who said he was abused once during one of Murphy's regular visits to the Lincoln Hills School, a juvenile detention center in Irma in northern Wisconsin.

CNN prints an emotional outburst from someone that claims to have been abused as a child accusing the Pope of complicity in a crime that hasn't been proved, and further, by the accounts of those involved and the document trail, he was only tangentially involved in the whole process. His involvement resulted in the case against Father Murphy being reopened by suspending the statute of limitations required by Church law and clearing the way for further action. That was about all he could do. Unless, of course, one believes that the accused in any trial should be considered guilty and then forced to prove his innocence. If you believe that then I suppose you would expect the Pope to act unilaterally and condemn the man. But that isn't how justice works.

It seems to me that, as is usual in these abuse cases, the ones claiming abuse demand justice and expect it to be carried out by the most unjust of methods. They can't have it both ways.

Another question. How come when I watch the news or read the paper I never see the name of the accused splashed all over until an indictment has been handed down. The media seems to always go out of their way to protect the rights of the accused. But not this time.

The media and the attorneys are trying to convict the Pope and by extension the Church in the courtroom of public opinion. They don't really care if there is an indictment or a trial. They are not looking for justice, rather for the destruction of the one institution that stands in the way of complete moral decay.

SELLING FISH BAIT TO KIDS ILLEGAL IN ENGLAND

I can only imagine what they'd do to the lady that owns the baitshop up the road from me. The law everywhere has become disconnected from reason and the common good. Is it any surprise that there is so little respect for it?

"Her offence was to unwittingly sell a goldfish to a 14-year-old boy taking part in a trading standards 'sting'.

At most, pet shop owner Joan Higgins, 66, expected a slap on the wrist for breaking new animal welfare laws which ban the sale of pets to under-16s.

Instead, the great-grandmother was taken to court, fined £1,000, placed under curfew - and ordered to wear an electronic tag for two months.

...Defending the goldfish case, Iain Veitch, head of public protection at Trafford Council, said: 'The evidence presented for this conviction clearly demonstrates that it is irresponsible to sell animals to those who are not old enough to look after them.

'Let this conviction send out a message that we will not tolerate those who cause unnecessary suffering to animals. The council will always try to support pet and business owners so that they are able to care for their animals properly, but where they continually ignore the advice they are given, we will not hesitate to use our statutory powers.'

The goldfish was later adopted by an animal welfare officer and is in good health."
Daily Mail

What about the unnecessary suffering of poor Mrs Higgins? And how do they know the goldfish is in good health? Does the government pay for regular examines?

THE POPE AND THE MEDIA-LIES, DISTORTIONS AND CALUMNY

For even more verification of what we already pretty much knew, go read Ioannes' posts on just how awful the reporting on the Popes involvement, or lack thereof in the Father Murphy case, has been at the New York Times. You can read them here and here. I guess if either one of us continues with this we'll be accused of beating a dead horse. The fact of the matter is that if the Pope was guilty I, and I'm sure Ioannes, would be just as loudly calling for justice to be done.

But the Pope is not guilty. As a matter of fact, all of the evidence, even that supplied by the Times, points to exactly the opposite conclusion. Yet they keep putting out the lie and pretending it's fact.

And that's the truly terrible part of this. Our media, the people that are supposed to be objective professionals, have shown their true colors once again. Why is it that all of us are being forced to turn to the blogs to get our news? I mean, I don't know about the rest of you, but I've got more faith in the average guy trying to get a story out than I do the professionals. It's generally easier to tell when an amateur is lying. And I think most of us do try to be as honest as possible. The same can't be said of any of the MSM. They like to say they're one thing and then turn and become something completely different. At least on the blogs, I know where the writer stands most of the time and I can easily check his sources.

So read the posts that Ioannes has put up and then go check the facts for yourself. This is a railroading of an innocent man to satisfy a political agenda. If you can see the lies please tell those you know, especially if you're Catholic. If the people know the truth nobody can tell us lies.

FROM THE HORSES MOUTH- THE TRUTH ABOUT THE FATHER MURPHY CASE FROM THE PRESIDING JUDGE

"As I have found that the reporting on this issue has been inaccurate and poor in terms of the facts, I am also writing out of a sense of duty to the truth.


The fact that I presided over this trial and have never once been contacted by any news organization for comment speaks for itself.

My intent in the following paragraphs is to accomplish the following:

To tell the back-story of what actually happened in the Father Murphy case on the local level;

To outline the sloppy and inaccurate reporting on the Father Murphy case by the New York Times and other media outlets;

To assert that Pope Benedict XVI has done more than any other pope or bishop in history to rid the Catholic Church of the scourge of child sexual abuse and provide for those who have been injured;

To set the record straight with regards to the efforts made by the church to heal the wounds caused by clergy sexual misconduct. The Catholic Church is probably the safest place for children at this point in history."
Catholic Anchor

The words of Fr. Thomas Brundage, the presiding judge during the abuse case of Father Lawrence Murphy in Milwaukee. Hard as it may be to believe, it seems that the media has not been particularly accurate in its reporting.

ORIGINAL INTENT AND THE COMMERCE CLAUSE

Funny, but there doesn't appear to be any mention about health care in here. Or any of the other myriad of things that the Congress has used the Commerce Clause to justify.

The Original Meaning of the Commerce Clause

Randy E. Barnett

The U.S. Supreme Court, in recent cases, has attempted to define limits on the Congress's power to regulate commerce among the several states. While Justice Thomas has maintained that the original meaning of "commerce" was limited to the "trade and exchange" of goods and transportation for this purpose, some have argued that he is mistaken and that "commerce" originally included any "gainful activity." Having examined every appearance of the word "commerce" in the records of the Constitutional Convention, the ratification debates, and the Federalist Papers, Professor Barnett finds no surviving example of this term being used in this broader sense. In every appearance where the context suggests a specific usage, the narrow meaning is always employed. Moreover, originalist evidence of the meaning of "among the several States" and "To regulate" also supports a narrow reading of the Commerce Clause. "Among the several States" meant between persons of one state and another; and "To regulate" generally meant "to make regular"-that is, to specify how an activity may be transacted-when applied to domestic commerce, but when applied to foreign trade also included the power to make "prohibitory regulations." In sum, according to the original meaning of the Commerce Clause, Congress has power to specify rules to govern the manner by which people may exchange or trade goods from one state to another, to remove obstructions to domestic trade erected by states, and to both regulate and restrict the flow of goods to and from other nations (and the Indian tribes) for the purpose of promoting the domestic economy and foreign trade.
University of Chicago Law Review
H/T The Dana Show

HEALTH CARE KILLS

As the cost of medical care here in the U.S. is shifted to the public sector decisions will be made; not on the basis of good medicine but on the basis of cost. It isn't a very long walk at all to get from abortion to euthanasia. And, even though I know that no one wants to hear this, the journey began at contraception. It is absolutely logical to believe that, if we have the right to control the creation of life we also have the right to control the end of it.

Compassionately ending the suffering of those that really have outlived their usefulness anyway is the fruit of this Satanic train of thought. Welcome to our "Brave New World" of publicly funded health care and our "right" to be murdered

"Concern is growing that the United Kingdom's Liverpool Care Pathway, intended to ease the comfort of patients whose death is inevitable, is being misused to railroad elderly patients onto a path toward early death.

"While we've been preoccupied with the moral pluses and minuses of living wills, assisted suicide and euthanasia, legalized execution of some of society's most vulnerable has become available, most probably at a hospital near you," writes Telegraph columnist Liz Hunt. "How did we let this happen?"

The Liverpool Care Pathway, which has been endorsed by the British government and adopted by 900 different hospitals and nursing homes across the country, allows a patient's care staff to remove invasive or uncomfortable medications or devices from a patient they have unanimously judged to be close to death, with no hope of recovery. Controversially, this allows medical staff to deprive patients of food or water or to sedate them continuously until they die. Recently, a group of British medical experts objected that these procedures can mask signs that a patient is actually recovering."
Natural News

DRINK WATER

"Shareholders of PepsiCo should vote for a shareholder proposal that the food, drink and snack company disclose its standards for donating over $75 million in corporate assets to controversial groups such as those advocating homosexual causes, an ex-gay group says.

PepsiCo, Inc. is the leading corporate sponsor of Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, Inc. (PFLAG)."
Catholic News Agency

KEEPING THE PRESSURE ON

I often wonder if we're doing the right thing, those of us that are constantly haranguing the USCCB about their misuse of funds and support of Progressive groups. And then I see a story like the one below and I start to think that maybe it's worth it. If the laity doesn't speak up, nothing will change.

"The Diocese of Portland, Maine has cut the funding for a homeless aid group who lied to about their support for same-sex "marriage." Sue Bernard, spokesperson for the diocese, told CNA on Monday that “it's a shame that the funding had to be moved,” given the group's dishonesty.

Officials from both the Diocese of Portland and the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD) recently told the non-profit homeless agency, Preble Street, that it had violated its grant agreement by supporting Maine's “No on 1” campaign last November which opposed legislation that would overturn the legalization of same-sex “marriage.”
Catholic News Agency

HEALTH CARE AND THE OBAMA ARMY

Another one of those stories that make me fear what is coming our way. Is there any legitimate reason for this?

"Obama just got his private army…

…And no one seems to have noticed. It is buried in the Senate revisions to the health care bill.

Subtitle C–Increasing the Supply of the Health Care Workforce
Sec. 5201. Federally supported student loan funds.
Sec. 5202. Nursing student loan program.
Sec. 5203. Health care workforce loan repayment programs.
Sec. 5204. Public health workforce recruitment and retention programs.
Sec. 5205. Allied health workforce recruitment and retention programs.
Sec. 5206. Grants for State and local programs.
Sec. 5207. Funding for National Health Service Corps.
Sec. 5208. Nurse-managed health clinics.
Sec. 5209. Elimination of cap on commissioned corps.
Sec. 5210. Establishing a Ready Reserve Corps.
Subtitle D–Enhancing Health Care Workforce Education and Training

See the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act, page 1312:

SEC. 5210. ESTABLISHING A READY RESERVE CORPS.
Section 203 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 204) is amended to read as follows:
SEC. 203. COMMISSIONED CORPS AND READY RESERVE CORPS.
(a) ESTABLISHMENT–
(1) IN GENERAL.–here shall be in the Service a commissioned Regular Corps and a Ready Reserve Corps for service in time of national emergency.
(2) REQUIREMENT.–All commissioned officers shall be citizens of the United States and shall be appointed without regard to the civil-service laws and compensated without regard to the Classification Act 2 of 1923, as amended.
(3) APPOINTMENT.–Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall be appointed by the President and commissioned officers of the Regular Corps shall be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.
(4) ACTIVE DUTY.–Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall at all times be subject to call to active duty by the Surgeon General, including active duty for the purpose of training.
(5) WARRANT OFFICERS.–Warrant officers may be appointed to the Service for the purpose of providing support to the health and delivery systems maintained by the Service and any warrant officer appointed to the Service shall be considered for purposes of this Act and title 37, United States Code, to be a commissioned officer within the Commissioned Corps of the Service.
(b) ASSIMILATING RESERVE CORP OFFICERS INTO THE REGULAR CORPS.—Effective on the date of enactment of the Affordable Health Choices Act, all individuals classified as officers in the Reserve Corps under this section (as such section existed on the day before the date of enactment of such Act) and serving on active duty shall be deemed to be commissioned officers of the Regular Corps.

[Note here that those personally appointed by BO -- without advice and consent of the Senate -- automatically become a part of the Regular Corps. Ed.]

(c) PURPOSE AND USE OF READY RESERVE.–
(1) PURPOSE.–The purpose of the Ready Reserve Corps is to fulfill the need to have additional Commissioned Corps personnel available on short notice (similar to the uniformed service’s reserve program) to assist regular Commissioned Corps personnel to meet both routine public health and emergency response missions.
(2) USES.–The Ready Reserve Corps shall–
(A) participate in routine training to meet the general and specific needs of the Commissioned Corps;
(B) be available and ready for involuntary calls to active duty during national emergencies and public health crises, similar to the uniformed service reserve personnel;
(C) be available for backfilling critical positions left vacant during deployment of active duty Commissioned Corps members, as well as for deployment to respond to public health emergencies, both foreign and domestic; and
(D) be available for service assignment in isolated, hardship, and medically underserved communities (as defined in section 399SS) to improve access to health services.
(d) FUNDING.—For the purpose of carrying out the duties and responsibilities of the Commissioned Corps under this section, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to the Office of the Surgeon General for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014. Funds appropriated under this subsection shall be used for recruitment and training of Commissioned Corps Officers.

How many of you, dear readers, were aware of the fact that the health care bill created another army?"
American Daughter

THE SEVEN YEAR TRIAL

I've followed Mark Mallett's blog for a couple years now. He has a lot of insight. Whether he is right or not is for all of us to discern, but he's worth the read.

"Seven years shall pass over you, until you know that the Most High rules over the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will. (Dan 4:22)


During Mass this past Passion Sunday, I sensed the Lord urging me to repost a portion of the Seven Year Trial where it essentially begins with the Passion of the Church. Once again, these meditations are the fruit of prayer in my own attempt to better understand the Church’s teaching that the Body of Christ will follow its Head through its own passion or "final trial," as the Catechism puts it (CCC, 677). Since the book of Revelation deals in part with this final trial, I have explored here a possible interpretation of St. John’s Apocalypse along the pattern of Christ’s Passion. The reader should keep in mind that these are my own personal reflections and not a definitive interpretation of Revelation, which is a book with several meanings and dimensions, not the least, an eschatological one. Many a good soul has fallen on the sharp cliffs of the Apocalypse. Nonetheless, I have felt the Lord compelling me to walk them in faith through this series, drawing together the Church’s teaching with mystical revelation and the authoritative voice of the Holy Fathers. I encourage the reader to exercise their own discernment, enlightened and guided, of course, by the Magisterium.

The series is based on the the book of Daniel’s prophecy that there will be a "week" long trial for God’s people. The Book of Revelation seems to echo this where an antichrist appears for "three and a half years." Revelation is full of numbers and symbols which most often are symbolic. Seven may indicate perfection, whereas three and a half indicates a shortfall of perfection. It also symbolizes a "short" period of time. So, in reading this series, keep in mind that the numbers and figures used by St. John may only be symbolic.

Rather than send an email to you when the remaining parts of this series are posted, I will just repost the remaining parts, one per day, for the rest of this week. It seems appropriate that we meditate not only the Passion of Our Lord, but the coming Passion of His body, which appears to be drawing nearer and nearer…"
Mark Mallett

JUDAS TODAY!

LIFE UNDER HITLER-HISTORY GOES 'ROUND IN CIRCLES

1938 Austria -- Land of "The Sound of Music"
Story By: Kitty Werthmann (An Austrian who witnessed what took place under Hitler)

America Truly is the Greatest Country in the World. Don’t Let Freedom Slip Away

By: Kitty Werthmann (An Austrian who witnessed what took place under Hitler)

What I am about to tell you is something you’ve probably never heard or read in history books.

I am an eyewitness to history. I cannot tell you that Hitler took Austria by tanks and guns; it would distort history. We elected him by a landslide – 98% of the vote. I’ve never read that in any American publications. Everyone thinks that Hitler just rolled in with his tanks and took Austria by force.

In 1938, Austria was in deep Depression. Nearly one-third of our workforce was unemployed. We had 25% inflation and 25% bank loan interest rates.

Farmers and business people were declaring bankruptcy daily. Young people were going from house to house begging for food. Not that they didn’t want to work; there simply weren’t any jobs. My mother was a Christian woman and believed in helping people in need. Every day we cooked a big kettle of soup and baked bread to feed those poor, hungry people – about 30 daily.

The Communist Party and the National Socialist Party were fighting each other. Blocks and blocks of cities like Vienna , Linz , and Graz were destroyed. The people became desperate and petitioned the government to let them decide what kind of government they wanted.

We looked to our neighbor on the north, Germany , where Hitler had been in power since 1933. We had been told that they didn’t have unemployment or crime, and they had a high standard of living. Nothing was ever said about persecution of any group -- Jewish or otherwise. We were led to believe that everyone was happy. We wanted the same way of life in Austria . We were promised that a vote for Hitler would mean the end of unemployment and help for the family. Hitler also said that businesses would be assisted, and farmers would get their farms back. Ninety-eight percent of the population voted to annex Austria to Germany and have Hitler for our ruler.

We were overjoyed, and for three days we danced in the streets and had candlelight parades. The new government opened up big field kitchens and everyone was fed.

After the election, German officials were appointed, and like a miracle, we suddenly had law and order. Three or four weeks later, everyone was employed. The government made sure that a lot of work was created through the Public Work Service.


Hitler decided we should have equal rights for women. Before this, it was a custom that married Austrian women did not work outside the home. An able-bodied husband would be looked down on if he couldn’t support his family. Many women in the teaching profession were elated that they could retain the jobs they previously had been required to give up for marriage.

Hitler Targets Education – Eliminates Religious Instruction for Children:

Our education was nationalized. I attended a very good public school.. The population was predominantly Catholic, so we had religion in our schools. The day we elected Hitler (March 13, 1938), I walked into my schoolroom to find the crucifix replaced by Hitler’s picture hanging next to a Nazi flag. Our teacher, a very devout woman, stood up and told the class we wouldn’t pray or have religion anymore. Instead, we sang “Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles,” and had physical education.

Sunday became National Youth Day with compulsory attendance. Parents were not pleased about the sudden change in curriculum. They were told that if they did not send us, they would receive a stiff letter of warning the first time. The second time they would be fined the equivalent of $300, and the third time they would be subject to jail. The first two hours consisted of political indoctrination. The rest of the day we had sports. As time went along, we loved it. Oh, we had so much fun and got our sports equipment free. We would go home and gleefully tell our parents about the wonderful time we had.

My mother was very unhappy. When the next term started, she took me out of public school and put me in a convent. I told her she couldn’t do that and she told me that someday when I grew up, I would be grateful. There was a very good curriculum, but hardly any fun – no sports, and no political indoctrination. I hated it at first but felt I could tolerate it. Every once in a while, on holidays, I went home. I would go back to my old friends and ask what was going on and what they were doing. Their loose lifestyle was very alarming to me. They lived without religion. By that time unwed mothers were glorified for having a baby for Hitler. It seemed strange to me that our society changed so suddenly. As time went along, I realized what a great deed my mother did so that I wasn’t exposed to that kind of humanistic philosophy.

Equal Rights Hits Home:

In 1939, the war started and a food bank was established. All food was rationed and could only be purchased using food stamps. At the same time, a full-employment law was passed which meant if you didn’t work, you didn’t get a ration card, and if you didn’t have a card, you starved to death. Women who stayed home to raise their families didn’t have any marketable skills and often had to take jobs more suited for men.

Soon after this, the draft was implemented. It was compulsory for young people, male and female, to give one year to the labor corps. During the day, the girls worked on the farms, and at night they returned to their barracks for military training just like the boys. They were trained to be anti-aircraft gunners and participated in the signal corps. After the labor corps, they were not discharged but were used in the front lines. When I go back to Austria to visit my family and friends, most of these women are emotional cripples because they just were not equipped to handle the horrors of combat. Three months before I turned 18, I was severely injured in an air raid attack. I nearly had a leg amputated, so I was spared having to go into the labor corps and into military service.

Hitler Restructured the Family Through Daycare:


When the mothers had to go out into the work force, the government immediately established child care centers. You could take your children ages 4 weeks to school age and leave them there around-the-clock, 7 days a week, under the total care of the government. The state raised a whole generation of children. There were no motherly women to take care of the children, just people highly trained in child psychology. By this time, no one talked about equal rights. We knew we had been had.

Health Care and Small Business Suffer Under Government Controls:

Before Hitler, we had very good medical care. Many American doctors trained at the University of Vienna .. After Hitler, health care was socialized, free for everyone. Doctors were salaried by the government. The problem was, since it was free, the people were going to the doctors for everything. When the good doctor arrived at his office at 8 a.m., 40 people were already waiting and, at the same time, the hospitals were full. If you needed elective surgery, you had to wait a year or two for your turn. There was no money for research as it was poured into socialized medicine. Research at the medical schools literally stopped, so the best doctors left Austria and emigrated to other countries.


As for healthcare, our tax rates went up to 80% of our income. Newlyweds immediately received a $1,000 loan from the government to establish a household. We had big programs for families. All day care and education were free. High schools were taken over by the government and college tuition was subsidized. Everyone was entitled to free handouts, such as food stamps, clothing, and housing.

We had another agency designed to monitor business. My brother-in-law owned a restaurant that had square tables. Government officials told him he had to replace them with round tables because people might bump themselves on the corners. Then they said he had to have additional bathroom facilities. It was just a small dairy business with a snack bar. He couldn’t meet all the demands. Soon, he went out of business. If the government owned the large businesses and not many small ones existed, it could be in control.

We had consumer protection. We were told how to shop and what to buy. Free enterprise was essentially abolished. We had a planning agency specially designed for farmers. The agents would go to the farms, count the live-stock, and then tell the farmers what to produce, and how to produce it.

“Mercy Killing” Redefined:

In 1944, I was a student teacher in a small village in the Alps . The villagers were surrounded by mountain passes which, in the winter, were closed off with snow, causing people to be isolated. So people intermarried and offspring were sometimes retarded. When I arrived, I was told there were 15 mentally retarded adults, but they were all useful and did good manual work. I knew one, named Vincent, very well. He was a janitor of the school. One day I looked out the window and saw Vincent and others getting into a van. I asked my superior where they were going. She said to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade, and to read and write. The families were required to sign papers with a little clause that they could not visit for 6 months. They were told visits would interfere with the program and might cause homesickness.

As time passed, letters started to dribble back saying these people died a natural, merciful death. The villagers were not fooled. We suspected what was happening. Those people left in excellent physical health and all died within 6 months. We called this euthanasia.

The Final Steps - Gun Laws:

Next came gun registration. People were getting injured by guns. Hitler said that the real way to catch criminals (we still had a few) was by matching serial numbers on guns. Most citizens were law abiding and dutifully marched to the police station to register their firearms. Not long after-wards, the police said that it was best for everyone to turn in their guns. The authorities already knew who had them, so it was futile not to comply voluntarily.

No more freedom of speech. Anyone who said something against the government was taken away. We knew many people who were arrested, not only Jews, but also priests and ministers who spoke up.

Totalitarianism didn’t come quickly, it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria .. Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles. The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little eroded our freedom.

After World War II, Russian troops occupied Austria . Women were raped, preteen to elderly. The press never wrote about this either. When the Soviets left in 1955, they took everything that they could, dismantling whole factories in the process. They sawed down whole orchards of fruit, and what they couldn’t destroy, they burned. We called it The Burned Earth. Most of the population barricaded themselves in their houses. Women hid in their cellars for 6 weeks as the troops mobilized. Those who couldn’t; paid the price. There is a monument in Vienna today, dedicated to those women who were massacred by the Russians. This is an eye witness account.

“It’s true….those of us who sailed past the Statue of Liberty came to a country of unbelievable freedom and opportunity.

America Truly is the Greatest Country in the World. Don’t Let Freedom Slip Away

"After America , There is No Place to Go"
Resistnet

"Kitty Werthmann, 83, of Pierre (South Dakota), is president of the South Dakota Eagle Forum. She lobbies the state legislature on family issues. She has lived in the United States since 1950 and has been a U.S. citizen since 1962."
Dakota Voice

IT TAKES A VILLAGE-OR-NEVER INVITE A VAMPIRE INTO YOUR HOUSE

SEC. 1904. GRANTS TO STATES FOR QUALITY HOME VISITATION PROGRAMS FOR FAMILIES WITH YOUNG
CHILDREN AND FAMILIES EXPECTING CHILDREN.
Part B of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 621–629i) is amended by adding at the end the following:
‘‘Subpart 3—Support for Quality Home Visitation Programs
‘‘SEC. 440. HOME VISITATION PROGRAMS FOR FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN AND FAMILIES EXPECTING CHILDREN.
‘‘(a) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this section is to improve the well-being, health, and development of children by enabling the establishment and expansion of high quality programs providing voluntary home visitation for fami1lies with young children and families expecting children.

Wasn't that fun, kids? You can read the rest of this here if you can stand it. A friend of mine e-mailed me a link to CPS Corruption, the blog site that directed me to the above. I'm going to post an excerpt from this blog below:

"The proposed Obama government healthcare bill has a government snitch network built into it, allowing social workers to gain access to your home under the pretext of checking on your new baby, or soon-to-be-born baby. It will result in many many more children being taken from families by state Child Protective Services agencies.

This is the fulfillment of a long-held dream by child protection agencies to gain access to homes, without first getting a report of abuse or neglect, as currently required by law. Mandated visits to homes by government agents has been a favorite cause of Hillary Clinton, and of the radical bureaucrats running the U.S. Administration of Children and Families.

This "home invasion" program is found on page 838 of the lengthy bill, in Section 1904, and it is called the "Home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children." The pretext on which the state agents would enter the home would be to "to improve the well-being, health, and development of children by enabling the establishment and expansion of high quality programs providing voluntary home visitation for families with young children and families expecting children." It sounds pretty innocuous, but based on my 15 years of fighting these bureaucrats in court on behalf of innocent families, it can be predicted that the way it will work in real life will be much more sinister.

Visits from the bureaucrats are voluntary in theory. (However, so are income taxes.) Here is how it will work: after your first appointment with your OB/GYN to confirm a pregnancy, the doctor will be required to report it to the leviathan healthcare bureaucracy. If you somehow fall through the cracks during the pregnancy, the birth hospital will do the honors of reporting you to the state. Then, chirpy social workers will show up at your house one day, and pressure you to allow them to come "voluntarily" into your house. These people are so-called "mandated reporters," who must report any abuse or neglect or potentially face fines and jail."

This is just one example of the insidious nature of the health care bill. It establishes systems of government control that will just be humming away in the background, unnoticed and innocuous until the day the agent of the state shows up at your door. A simple visit to your doctor or a conversation with someone at a store can set off a chain of events that will end with your freedoms in tatters and your life ripped apart by the state.

Dogs and people react in ways that are quite similar to each other. When you get a dog it has a certain sense of freedom and resists the commands of its master. Usually most dogs can be trained to follow orders with a firm hand on the leash and a reward for good behavior. Some dogs, though, will continue to resist. This may require a choke chain and a firmer hand still, maybe even a swat across the nose. For most dogs, this will be sufficient to break their spirit and to get them to obey. Some dogs, when choked and swatted will bite and snarl. Those dogs won't submit to their masters wishes and will continue to fight for freedom. Those dogs generally end up in the pound or shot.

This home visitation crap is the beginning of the training. We'll be offered a treat and a smile, a reassurance that letting the government into your home is the best thing for the child. After all, who better to manage the growth of a child, the parent or a qualified, degreed and oh so concerned professional bureaucrat?

When we refuse this benevolent guidance from our government the choke chain will be slipped around our neck. After all, you must remember the I.R.S. is the enforcement arm of the health care bill. And I'm sure that along with the power to enter your home the benevolent bureaucrat will also be armed with the power to threaten removal of your child.

When we still refuse, when we decide to exercise our God given right to privacy and to raise our kids as we see fit, what choice will we have left our benevolent masters? For the good of the children and society we will be separated from our kids. They will be sent to others that will raise them properly and educate them in the goodness and supremacy of the state while we will be sent somewhere else to be reeducated or shot.

You say that this can't happen, that this is just more right wing paranoia. I say Russia, Cuba, China, Venezuela, North Korea and Vietnam along with most of the Muslim countries thrown in to boot. Don't tell me this can't happen here.

It has already begun. Don't invite the vampire in.

PRAY 'EM IF YOU GOT 'EM

I received this in an e-mail earlier this evening. I gotta say, it seems like a darn fine idea.

So let's all try to remember to do this. And if you're not Catholic, pray anyway. However you want to do it. We're all in this together. So copy this and email to all your friends.

Realistically, it's the best weapon we have.

Hi Everyone,

Imagine what might happen if every Catholic in the world would pray a Rosary on the same day! We have an example in October of 1573, when Europe was saved from the invasion of the mighty Turkish fleet, by the praying of the Rosary by all Christians!

So, on Good Friday, let us all pray a Rosary for peace in the world and the return of moral values into our communities. If possible, please pray your Rosary between Noon and 3:00pm.

Also, please e-mail this message to every Catholic on your address list, and ask them to pass it along to every Catholic on their lists. Let's unite in praying one of the most powerful prayers in existence, for these intentions, on one of the holiest days in our Church year.
God bless all,

Note: This email has been going around the world -

STATES RIGHTS AND HUMAN RIGHTS- WE'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE

"Obamacare may be the last straw. It strips away fundamental economic liberties, empowering the federal government to de facto nationalize everyone's body by controlling our health. Americans are compelled - upon pain of penalty and eventual imprisonment - to purchase insurance.

Moreover, the law codifies the federal funding of abortion. Taxpayer dollars will be used to subsidize the murder of innocent life. Hence, Mr. Obama has violated the social compact: He has abrogated the conscience of pro-lifers, making them tacitly complicit in the slaughter of the unborn. Obamacare is a radical assault upon fundamental religious freedoms.

The Obama revolution threatens to tear America apart. This has happened before. Slavery eventually triggered the Civil War between the industrial North and the agrarian South. Abortion is the slavery of our time - the denying of basic human rights to an entire category of people.
Washington Times

It is becoming increasingly clear to me that we are entering times so similar to those that preceded the War Between the States that I have to believe the future will end with the same results. America is splintering. Compare the news of today to what was happening just prior to the outbreak of war in 1861.

We have a large segment of our society that are not recognized as persons. In the 19th century it was the blacks that were denied their personhood in the Dred Scott decision. Today it is the unborn child. In both cases the judicially defined lack of personhood denied both groups the rights enshrined in the Declaration of Independence; life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

We have political deals being made today that are designed to benefit certain business groups, deals such as health care, TARP and cap and trade. All of these deals exceed the powers granted the Congress in the Constitution. In the 1850's we had the Kansas-Nebraska Act, a piece of legislation designed to allow expansion of the railroads. While the transcontinental railroad did eventually lead to massive profits for politicians and businesses (not to mention nearly bringing down the Presidency of U.S. Grant through the corruption of the Credit Mobilier), because of its connection to the question of slavery it sparked the war along the Missouri-Kansas border in 1854, the first shots fired in the War Between the States. Health care is tied to the question of abortion in nearly the same way.

The question of state sovereignty was at the heart of all of this. The question of who held the power in this country, Washington or the states, was the root cause of a war that took the lives over a half million Americans. Taxation and Washington's power to use it to force individual states and their citizens to support programs that benefited one group while damaging another were at the center of the debate. Today, as state Attorney General's file suit and state legislatures create laws to enforce the Tenth Amendment to the constitution their arguments and reasons are the same as those put forth by the Southern states as they tried to stand against tyranny.

And just as it was 150 years ago, all of the underlying anger, the political strife and the public arousal just needs a reason, something to rally around, some spark to set it off. Something has to be seen as the moral justification to set the country aflame. In 1861 it was slavery; today it is abortion.

Some states (Thank God) have laws that are far more restrictive in regards to abortion than federal law. The citizens of those states may very well, by citing the Tenth Amendment, declare their intention to opt out of a system that is morally indefensible. Those of us that understand that we are participating in the murder of children now just by paying our taxes will look to our states for protection. It is our only possible recourse and defense. If a state decides that it has the authority under the Tenth Amendment to opt out, just as it did at Ft. Sumter the federal government will do something to provoke war. You see, South Carolina didn't fire on the fort because it wanted war, it fired because a foreign government (the United States) refused to vacate ground owned by a sovereign state, and further was attempting to resupply it. Lincoln provoked South Carolina to start a war. Today's government is more than capable of the same sort of thing.

And before I wrap this up, there is one more similarity between then and now; Lincoln and Obama both hail from Illinois.

History just continues to spin in circles.

A RIDER ON A PALE HORSE HEADS OUR WAY

"Prediction: Abortions will be performed at community health centers. You can bet your foreclosed mortgage on that. There was always a will by this administration, and now there's a way."
Kathleen Parker- Washington Post

Here is the question that is not being addressed by anyone: if our tax dollars ARE going to fund abortion then we are participating in the death of innocent children; how do we avoid this?

Obviously, this isn't some brand new problem because we all know how the government works. Hyde Amendment or no, tax dollars have been and will continue to be funneled into support for abortion. It's always been done with a wink and a nod and we've been able to avoid the direct complicity we've all been a part of. But not anymore.

Lines are being drawn by God to separate us into those that follow Him and those that don't. This is part of the process. No more murkiness; evil is out in the open for all to see. To be guilty of sin we must realize we are sinning. Regarding abortion funding and the deaths of children; is there any doubt left?

So what do we do about it? Do we refuse to pay taxes? Which ones? We're taxed on damn near everything we do and the money collected is mixed and mingled to such an extent that we can't separate dollars spent on abortion from anything else. Do we rely on the power of the ballot box? Sure, we can try that. The ugly reality is, however, that even if we can get this thing overturned at some point countless innocent lives will be lost before then, using our money to carry out the crime, with our knowledge and our tacit consent. Do we try to opt out of the system entirely? Is that even possible?

We need some help here. The Church needs to step up and tell us what options we have available. Americans are about to be forced to begin slaughtering babies by paying for the holocaust, an action no different than picking up a knife and cutting their little throats ourselves. We are about to become part and parcel of the culture of death in ways so obvious that we WILL be held accountable. Somebody with moral authority needs to give us some direction.

Because if they don't, hell is about to ride on its pale horse down the streets of America. As people begin to internalize what has happened and how they are going to be held responsible there will be an uprising. It'll start as civil disobedience which I fear will have little impact on the machinery of murder. As it becomes apparent that our government is determined to turn us into a nation of Satanic murderers little option will be left for those of us that refuse to follow the Devil. We will follow God, wherever He leads us. He may ask us to stand as witnesses and martyrs or He may ask us to fight. Whatever, we'll have to do it. We'll be bound by the promise of greater glory to suffer the fate we will here on earth. For no matter the suffering, we know who will win.

America, WE DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS! We don't have to keep poking God in the chest saying, "I dare ya'." Unfortunately, we will. And we are about to get what we've asked for.

Pray for discernment. Pray that you will hear God's voice. Pray that the Church will rise up and give us the direction we so desperately need. Pray for the conversion of hearts. Just simply pray.

COMMENTARIUS COMMENTS ON THE CONSTITUTION PARTY

He's getting ahead of me. Ioannes at Commentarius de Prognosticis is posting commentaries on the Constitution Party Platform again and I haven't kept up. They're well worth reading and I suggest you do so. Consider this party seriously. The Republicans and the Democrats have brought us to the precipice of collapse we now find ourselves looking over because they have both become acolytes of strong central government. There is no reason to believe they will pull us back.

You can find Ioannes' to latest articles here and here.

PEDALING OUR WAY TO SERFDOM

"Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has announced a “major policy revision” that aims to give bicycling and walking the same policy and economic consideration as driving.

“Today I want to announce a sea change,” he wrote on his blog last week. “This is the end of favoring motorized transportation at the expense of nonmotorized.”

The new policy, which was introduced a few days after Mr. LaHood gave a well-received speech from atop a table at the National Bike Summit, is said to reflect the Transportation Department’s support for the development of fully integrated transportation networks.

It calls on state and local governments to go beyond minimum planning and maintenance requirements to provide convenient and safe amenities for bikers and walkers. “Walking and biking should not be an afterthought in roadway design,” the policy states."
NY Times

It's time for states to begin withholding most of the tax monies they collect for transportation.

I think that an argument can be made under the Commerce Clause for federal funding for interstate highways and I think that our tax money should support their maintenance and construction, within reason. However, all other roads need to be maintained by the towns, counties and states they are built in.

If a local community wants bike trails they should be able to build them. They can create a funding mechanism that is approved by the citizens and construction and maintenance will be provided for by local dollars. Perfectly within the bounds of subsidiarity.

However, when local communities and states are forced to send their tax dollars to Washington and beg to have them sent back, only after they have passed through the sieve of special interest, the citizen has lost control. Their property is being forcibly taken from them to be used by others for purposes determined by others. This is the very definition of wealth redistribution, a bedrock tenet of Marxism. Americans have had this Communist system of government foisted on them over time, so as not to have it noticed.

I like bicycles. I have a couple of them and I used to commute to work on them. I've got nothing against bike paths to make riding safer. But, if bike paths are to be built I want them to be approved and paid for by the communities that use them. Ray LaHood has no right to use my property to satisfy the demands of some political constituency that has found favor with the boys in Washington. If he does this, he is a thief and a despot.

GET THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OUT OF OUR LIVES!

24 GOES OFF THE AIR AFTER THIS SEASON

"Tick, tick, tick … and done.

After eight seasons, Fox’s “24” is coming to an end.

The groundbreaking action drama will air its final real-time episode in May, the victim of a confluence of circumstances: a swelling budget, declining ratings and creative fatigue.

Yet for fans of Jack Bauer, there remains hope. Studio 20th TV is developing a theatrical film that takes Bauer to Europe, and showrunner and executive producer Howard Gordon says other possibilities are being explored as well."
The Hollywood Reporter

It hasn't always been great and sometimes I got tired of the underlying political correctness, but overall, 24 has been the one show on TV I had to watch. I'm sorry to see it go.

WHEN WILL THE BISHOPS ACT?

They have been credited with “a critical demonstration of support” for the health bill that will cost the lives of innocent unborn children. And yet, not a whisper, a whiff, a murmur or a hint of canonical action against these "sisters".

So where are you bishops? This is an American group under your authority.

WHERE ARE YOU??!!

"Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards has praised the Catholic religious sisters who endorsed the Senate health care bill, claiming they deserve gratitude for making “a critical demonstration of support” for a bill that significantly increased coverage of “reproductive health care.”

Writing for the Huffington Post Wednesday in her capacity as president of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Richards claimed that it was Catholic nuns who “most importantly broke with the bishops and the Vatican to announce their support for health care reform.”

“This brave and important move, demonstrating that they cared as much about the health care of families in America as they did about church hierarchy, was a critical demonstration of support.”

VATICAN STATEMENT REGARDING FATHER MURPHY

It is important that people read the following statement from the Vatican without emotion. The application of law, whether by civil or Church authorities, has to be cold and orderly. The law can only be enforced inside the framework established to guide it. Regardless of the sentiment attached to any act the law must be restrained to only the questions laid before it and must act only within it's legal jurisdiction. To step outside these boundaries is to leave the law behind, to see the law destroy itself in a fit of moral outrage which would leave both the guilty and innocent accountable only to the vagaries of emotion and mob justice.

The secular press is trying to tie the Pope to this sex abuse scandal regardless of guilt. The object of their inquisition is not justice but the destruction of the Church and the last barrier to the modernist Marxist Utopia they desire.

Pray for the Pope, the truth, the Church and all of mankind. We are slipping over the edge. As Rome goes, so goes the world.

"The following is the full text of the statement given to the New York Times on Wednesday by Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, the director of the Vatican press office.

* * *

The tragic case of Father Lawrence Murphy, a priest of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, involved particularly vulnerable victims who suffered terribly from what he did. By sexually abusing children who were hearing-impaired, Father Murphy violated the law and, more importantly, the sacred trust that his victims had placed in him.

During the mid-1970s, some of Father Murphy's victims reported his abuse to civil authorities, who investigated him at that time; however, according to news reports, that investigation was dropped. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was not informed of the matter until some twenty years later.

It has been suggested that a relationship exists between the application of Crimen sollicitationis and the non-reporting of child abuse to civil authorities in this case. In fact, there is no such relationship. Indeed, contrary to some statements that have circulated in the press, neither Crimen nor the Code of Canon Law ever prohibited the reporting of child abuse to law enforcement authorities.

In the late 1990s, after over two decades had passed since the abuse had been reported to diocesan officials and the police, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was presented for the first time with the question of how to treat the Murphy case canonically. The Congregation was informed of the matter because it involved solicitation in the confessional, which is a violation of the Sacrament of Penance. It is important to note that the canonical question presented to the Congregation was unrelated to any potential civil or criminal proceedings against Father Murphy.

In such cases, the Code of Canon Law does not envision automatic penalties, but recommends that a judgment be made not excluding even the greatest ecclesiastical penalty of dismissal from the clerical state (cf. Canon 1395, no. 2). In light of the facts that Father Murphy was elderly and in very poor health, and that he was living in seclusion and no allegations of abuse had been reported in over 20 years, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith suggested that the Archbishop of Milwaukee give consideration to addressing the situation by, for example, restricting Father Murphy's public ministry and requiring that Father Murphy accept full responsibility for the gravity of his acts. Father Murphy died approximately four months later, without further incident."
Zenit
H/T LaSalette Journey

CAN WE BELIEVE ANYTHING THESE GUYS SAY?

"The health care reform bill would have passed the House without the votes of Rep. Bart Stupak’s pro-life Democrats because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi “always carries a number of votes in her pocket,” Stupak told CNA in a Thursday phone interview.

The Michigan Democrat explained that by opting for the executive order, pro-life Democrats believe they ensured the legislation was “somewhat restrictive” towards abortion funding."
Catholic News Agancy

If, and this is a big if, Rep. Stupak is being truthful then I can understand his point. I would have voted against the bill regardless because of it's unconstitutional nature but, if what Stupak says is true, it may have made more sense to at least try to get some protections for the unborn. His actions could be viewed as a sort of strategic retreat.

Of course, all of this is based on what he now says being true. I guess the question I have regarding his actions is if this is the real reason behind them why has it taken so long to state it? The cynic in me says that he's had nearly a week to come up with a semi plausible explanation for his actions and he's trotting it out for all the world to see, hoping to hold onto power and retain his seat. But that would just be the cynic in me.

POSSUM KISSIN' DRUNK

"State police have charged a central Pennsylvania man with public drunkenness after he was seen giving mouth-to-mouth "resuscitation" to a long-dead opossum along a highway.

Trooper Jamie Levier says several witnesses saw 55-year-old Donald Wolfe, of Brookville, near the animal along Route 36 in Oliver Township Thursday about 3 p.m. The trooper says one person saw Wolfe kneeling before the animal and gesturing as though he were conducting a seance, while another saw the mouth-to-mouth attempt.

Levier says Wolfe was "extremely intoxicated" and "did have his mouth in the area of the animal's mouth, I guess."
CBS3

While I'm sure that I've done many things at least this stupid in my previous life, the fact of the matter is I wouldn't remember them anyway. That's because, to get drunk enough to put my lips to a possum's mouth I would have been so drunk that I would have blacked out hours before I lip locked the ugly, stiff little sucker. I would have been functioning purely on auto pilot by that time.

So you just got to wonder what went through this guys head the next day when he sobered up in a jail cell and all he could taste was dead critter flavor on his lips. We've got a ton of possums here at my house; we've gone so far as to name a few, so I'm fairly familiar with their lifestyle. NEVER, EVER PUT YOUR LIPS ON A POSSUM'S MOUTH, DEAD OR ALIVE! You ought'a see what those things eat.

Oh, by the way, I'm glad to see stupid, white trash, idiocy isn't peculiar to Missouri. I was thinking it might just be us.

RESTORATION NOT REFORMATION

Restoration, not reformation. This is the key to achieving our goal. We must stay loyal to the Church while we work to restore her to the authoritative teaching Church she once was. Groups like SPPX and SPPV have the goal of creating a parallel church, believing that they have the authority to go it on their own. This is wrong and extremely dangerous, putting the souls of many at risk of damnation. We must stay with Peter.

"And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven." Matthew 16:18

This same power was foreshadowed in Isaiah 22:22: "And I will lay the key of the house of David upon his shoulder: and he shall open, and none shall shut: and he shall shut, and none shall open." Isaiah tells of the future time when King Hezekiah will lose his power and the keys (authority) to the Kingdom of David (foreshadowing the Kingdom of Christ) will be passed on to another.

It is this authority that Jesus gives to Peter and his successors through the keys. The rightful authority of Christ is tied, forever, to the office of the Pope. It is the reason our destiny as Christians is and will always be dependent upon the successor of Peter. We must stay with him.

Without that simple promise the Church would have no more authority than any other. With it, the Church carries the authority of God. For through this promise and the power to bind and loose the Church is protected from error.

We are not reformers. We will restore the Church and hold tight to Peter.

"We are not reformers:we are restorers". I wonder where I saw that just the other day?

BISHOP CHAPUT AND HEALTH CARE

"...The bad law we now likely face, we owe in part to the efforts of the Catholic Health Association and similar “Catholic” organizations."
Archdiocese of Denver

This sentence comes from an article by Archbishop Chaput, a man that I respect. However, even he doesn't seem to understand what the real underlying problem of the health care bill is. The problem is in the understanding of our right to health care. It appears that Bishop Chaput has bought into the lie that the USCCB has been foisting on the Catholics in America. This lie is that our right to health care is something more than it really is.

Until the bishops stop pushing this Marxist vision of government down our throats we will never get the type of health care reforms needed. I take that back. Until everyone, bishops, politicians and the man on the street accepts the plain fact that health care is a good, just like property and that our real right to health care does not give us permission to take the rights of someone else away from them, we cannot have a resolution to this. If the bishops can find a way to make the argument that I have the right to someone else's property to exercise my right to health care, let them.

They won't because they can't and it is this very inability to make their argument logical or just that has made this bill so divisive. The people sense that health care, with or without abortion attached to it, is not a right in the same sense as say, speech or liberty. We know when we are being lied to.

So while I agree that this "bad law we now likely face" is partially the responsibility of rogue Cathoilc politicians and bogus health organizations it is more the fault of leadership inside the Church in America that have tried to sell the people a bill of goods to satisfy their own Progressive political desires.

MORE NEWS ABOUT THE MILWAUKEE SEX ABUSE CASE

Head on over to the Telegraph and read this story. It looks like I'm not the only one that just doesn't trust the motives of the New York Times.

Thanks to Dan Collins for sending me the link to this story.

"In the early 1990s, when I was religious affairs correspondent of The Daily Telegraph, I reported on the American Catholic Church’s terrible failure to address allegations of child abuse. I think I was one of the first journalists in Britain to write about the way pervert priests were being shuffled around US parishes by bishops. So don’t accuse me of being an apologist for the culture of secrecy and cowardice that enabled wicked men to go unpunished.

But something smells fishy about today’s New York Times story implying that Pope Benedict XVI was complicit in the cover-up surrounding the crimes of a Wisconsin priest, Fr Lawrence Murphy, who abused children at a school for the deaf between 1950 and 1974."

THE ANSWER FROM REAL CATHOLIC TV

Is it? I don't know but it deserves a look.



Christifideles Laici

Opus Dei

CHRISTIAN JUSTICE, NOT SOCIAL JUSTICE

Strangely, as I listen to the Popes words, I don't hear any mention of re-distributive wealth or "social justice". What I hear is a call for business leaders to CHOOSE to structure their businesses not only around profit but around profit and people, too. To CHOOSE to incorporate Christian practices in their business practices. What I hear is that it is vital that business leaders CHOOSE to use their skills to not only profit but to better the world they live in.

While the Pope recognizes our inherent right to make a choice based on our God given free will, here in America the current administration would rather take the profit from the business and make their choices for them. They believe that the state has the "right" to choose, not the people; unless of course that choice is to kill a baby, but that's for another time.

I wonder if the boys at the USCCB have noticed this difference in approach?

THE VATICAN'S SIDE OF THE STORY

This is the Vatican's response to the New York Times story posted below. It basically reiterates the conclusions that I arrived at after reading the documents supplied by the Times. The case was passing through the system in a deliberate, methodical and maddeningly snail like pace. Just like it would in the secular legal system.

But I'm sure we'll be hearing lots about it in the weeks to come.

"The New York Times printed an article on Wednesday in which they alleged that in the 1990s the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), then Cardinal Ratzinger, did not respond to letters of a Wisconsin bishop on the matter of a sexually abusive priest. In an official response to the Times for the article, Fr. Federico Lombardi addressed the specific case and the CDF response.

...Fr. Federico Lombardi released his full response to the New York Times about the “Murphy Case” to members of the press in the Holy See’s Press Office on Thursday. The Vatican spokesman's response was only cited in part in the article from the New York Times.

He underscored that “Father Murphy violated the law and, more importantly, the sacred trust that his victims had placed in him.”

Fr. Lombardi related that victims reported abuses to the civil authorities in the mid-1970’s, but “according to news reports, that investigation was dropped.”

The CDF was made aware of the matter nearly two decades later, he pointed out, adding that the examination of how to address the question canonically was initiated, since the case involved a violation of the Sacrament of Penance.

Fr. Lombardi emphasized in his reply, “It is important to note that the canonical question presented to the Congregation was unrelated to any potential civil or criminal proceedings against Father Murphy.”

“In such cases, the Code of Canon law does not envision automatic penalties, but recommends that a judgment be made, not excluding even the greatest ecclesiastical penalty of dismissal from the clerical state," he explained."
EWTN News

LET THE INFLATION GAMES BEGIN

"WEAK DEMAND: Interest rates climbed in the bond market Thursday after a government debt auction drew tepid demand. Auctions Tuesday and Wednesday also saw lower demand.

NOT THAT INTERESTED: The auction of $32 billion in seven-year notes saw demand fall from the past two months. That means the government could have to start offering higher interest rates to attract buyers.

BERNANKE SAYS: Testimony from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke affirmed the government's pledge to keep interest rates near zero for an extended period."
Yahoo Finance

IT TAKES ONE TO KNOW ONE

"It perhaps was not the endorsement President Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress were looking for.

Cuban revolutionary leader Fidel Castro on Thursday declared passage of American health care reform "a miracle" and a major victory for Obama's presidency, but couldn't help chide the United States for taking so long to enact what communist Cuba achieved decades ago.

"We consider health reform to have been an important battle and a success of his (Obama's) government," Castro wrote in an essay published in state media, adding that it would strengthen the president's hand against lobbyists and "mercenaries."
Yahoo Finance

HAVE THEY FOUND THE SMOKING GUN?

Top Vatican officials — including the future Pope Benedict XVI — did not defrock a priest who molested as many as 200 deaf boys, even though several American bishops repeatedly warned them that failure to act on the matter could embarrass the church, according to church files newly unearthed as part of a lawsuit.

The internal correspondence from bishops in Wisconsin directly to Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the future pope, shows that while church officials tussled over whether the priest should be dismissed, their highest priority was protecting the church from scandal.
NY Times

Wow, so they finally found the smoking gun that can tie the Pope to the abuse scandals. Or have they?

The New York Times did supply copies of all the documents they base this story on at their website. Go read them. I did and I'm not so sure they paint the story the Times would like us to believe.

In reading all of this I came away with the sense that I was reading documents very similar to those I've read in court cases I've been involved with in business. One side is in the right and they are appealing for justice; the other side is in the wrong and I think quite aware of it and they are appealing for mercy. You've got a bunch of lawyers involved trying to figure out the best way to move forward within the strictures of the law.

The only difference is that in this case the accused is a priest, the attorneys are priests and the court is the Church, which on the surface just doesn't seem right, at least in a civil sense. However, this is purely a matter of Canon law that is being discussed and the Church is the legal authority.

Admittedly this case of abuse was handled wrong way back when it happened, in the '50's and '60's. That is where the real problem lies. But then, in this respect it really isn't that much different than most of these cases. The big difference is that, because it passed through the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith during the Popes tenure there it is seen as a way to finally link him to the scandal.

By the time it got to the CDF and theoretically into the hands of Cardinal Ratzinger how much of a case was there? Reading the documents you start to see the predicament faced by the attorneys. The case had long ago exceeded the statute of limitations of both the Church and the civil authorities. This was addressed by the Church by suspending the statute to allow the trial to move forward. Next they had a problem with the witnesses, all of whom were deaf and presented a barrier to clear communication. Thirdly, Father Murphy is obviously nearing death because some of the documents are concerned with setting up his funeral.

Surrounding all of this is the question of scandal. The Church realizes that the case will open a big can of worms and that prosecution will be extremely difficult. They know they have a priest that is probably guilty but is on the verge of death. So they are trying to weigh the possible good of the trial against the bad.

Based on legal situations I've been in these seem to be pretty normal parts of the process. Because it is child abuse emotions run high. Because it is child abuse and the Church, the sense that justice demands action is even higher. It is after all the Church and it is, or should be, held to a much higher standard than any other organization.

Now, because there is a possibility that the Pope can somehow be tied to it, justice has been thrown out the window and the jackals are circling.

This case is bad because of the numbers of kids potentially involved. It's bad because it was so badly handled from the very beginning. It's bad for the victims because they must feel betrayed and they must feel like they can never get back what they lost. I believe all these things are true.

What it is not true is a condemnation of the Pope or his activities as head of the CDF. And it is not evidence that he was somehow involved in a cover up. It is none of the things that the press and the enemies of the Church will try to paint it as.

What it is is just another sad reminder of how much evil has entered the Body of Christ and how much damage it has done.

SHOULD OUR FAITH AFFECT US OUTSIDE CHURCH?

"PICKET: Do you believe in the primacy of the Pope over in Rome?

STUPAK: Do I believe in the primacy…can you explain that to me?

PICKET: Well considering the Vatican have in terms of the Catholic religion…

STUPAK: The Pope and the Catholic faith does not control Catholic legislators. We must vote reflective of our districts and our beliefs. When I vote pro-life, it happens to be my own personal belief, also my district’s beliefs and the nation's. As the polls show 61 percent of the American people believe we should not use public funds to pay for abortion. I agree with that."
Washington Times

OK bishops, it's your turn. Where is your response to this? Will you let this just go by with nary a whimper?

Very few Catholics understand the role of the Church or their faith in their lives, whether at the personal or civic level. Your job, as our shepherds, is to instruct us in the truth. Is the statement by Rep. Stupak true? Because if it isn't and you stay silent on this, you will have given, by default, your imprimatur to a lie.

It's your turn.

ALL "RIGHTS"-NO RESPONSIBILITY

Philadelphia officials are taking aim on recent "flash mobs" that have erupted around the city. Mayor Michael Nutter reassured city residents they are safe during a news conference at Headhouse Square Wednesday.

...Officials said parents must take responsibility for their children, or they could face charges if their kids participate.

"I ran for mayor, I didn't run for mother. I can't take care of everybody's child," Nutter said.

...The police commissioner even lashed out at parents of teens involved in the melee.

"You had them, you raise them, you take care of them. When they come to me, I got something else for them," Ramsey said."
CBS3

I just love all this tough talk to parents; "You had 'em, you raise 'em" and how the parents are going to be held responsible for the actions of the kids.

Well, here's the deal. We aren't allowed to "raise 'em" anymore. Our kids have been given "rights" by the same government that now wants to hold us responsible for their actions. It gave them these "rights" without ever once explaining to them that with "rights" come responsibilities. Maybe that's only true of real rights, though. And the ones the government gave them aren't real because the kind it gave them stops parents from any effective form of discipline. The kind of "rights" kids have been given intrude upon and destroy the real rights to parental authority that parents possess. And real rights cannot infringe on the rights of another.

If my kid decides to go on a rampage and I try to stop him he doesn't have to listen to me. If I try to physically restrain him, well he'll just call the police and I'll go to jail. So I'm forced to call the police, social services and who knows what other government agency and get them involved in my family and my life. All this does is strengthen the idea in the kids head that their parents really can't control them.

There is a relationship between rights and responsibilities and it goes both ways. Just as rights come with responsibilities, responsibilities come with rights. If I am responsible for something it only stands to reason that I have to be able to exert control over it. If parents can't spank, yell at or restrain their children when needed then they can't control them. If kids can run to the government to over rule the decisions of their parents then their parents can't control them. If kids think they've been "done wrong" and a simple complaint (childish whining) to a counselor at school can turn loose the force of government against the parent, then the parent can't control them. If society refuses to recognize the God given right of parents to raise their kids as they see fit, then the parents cannot be held responsible for the action of the child.

I guess I grew up in a different time. While I was seldom spanked (seldom, not never), I knew that it could happen. I knew where the authority in my life was centered. It was my parents. There was no place to hide. If I lived in my parents house I lived by my parents rules. And every other adult that I came into contact with was part of the conspiracy. From the teacher to the cop, from my friends parents to the priest, they all conspired to hand me over to justice. Usually after they had exacted some of their own.

And I knew that the only truly safe haven was at my parents house. So my choices were rather limited; do as I was told and keep a roof over my head and a warm bed to sleep in or hit the road. Obviously we weren't as smart as the kids today because the choices were kept much simpler.

Kids aren't old enough or wise enough to be given the kinds of authority they are given today. And since most have been coddled by parents that worship the ground their kids crawl on, they are even less prepared to accept responsibility than we were. They aren't responsible yet they have "rights"; and we are held responsible. Just like everything else in this Satanic Utopia we live in this is all turned on it's head and backwards.

So I leave our children with a bit of advice I got from my Dad on a fairly regular basis, "Kids are meant to be seen and not heard. I'm only going to tell you this once."

We never felt that special. As a "product of a moment of lust" (thanks, Dad), I knew my place in the world. And so did all the rest of us. We learned responsibility before we were trusted with rights. That's they way it is supposed to be.