Who needs sufferin'? I want Bufferin

With a hat tip to Carole King from 1975's "Really Rosie" by Maurice Sendak TV special for the title, I'm sufferin'. It is time to admit at least temporary defeat. My efforts at hanging out my own shingle have not proved fruitful. As they say, the fat lady hasn't sung, but she's warming up as sure as you're born. With a larger than usual family to support (and even if I had only a few mouths to support), I have to move on and get back into the for-hire workforce, and you cannot imagine how terrificly emasculating this feels. I had so wanted to make a go of it.

The blessing in all of this, however, is that it has given me the opportunity to love Jesus even more. That is the cloud's silver lining. While He chose the cross, He did not want the cross. And yet He accepted it as being the will of the Father. He told us that if we want to be His followers, we must pick up our cross daily and follow Him. The cross is not just a metaphor. It's not a toothpick. The cross is an instrument of death. It is the injection gurney at San Quentin. It is the electric chair.

So, as St. Ignatius of Antioch wrote, we submit ourselves to being crushed like a grain of wheat, though humanly speaking it is not what we'd want. And it is in this way that we understand the full impact of what Paul writes about in Col 1:24: "I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I make up for /complete (depending on your translation) what is lacking in Christ's afflictions ..."

What is lacking Christ's afflictions? Nothing. His was the "once for all" sacrifice that dismissed the need for further sacrifices. So what could the Apostle mean? And, really, what does the Holy Spirit (the Paraclete, after all, the helper/comforter Who will lead us into all truth) wish to teach us?

Simply that God in His ineffable mercy allows us to participate in the act of His redemptive suffering. Through suffering, he allows us to not only more fully accept and participate in the will of God the Father, to trust Him, to believe in His ultimate providence precisely because He is a loving Father, but He also gives us a glimpse into just how profound was Our Lords' capitulation to that will. Capitulation may not be the best term because it can conote a certain degree of unwillingness. But it was a total, abject surrender to that will. Nothing of self was left. As John Paul II wrote, it was free, faithful, total, and fruitful.

By mirroring this in our own acceptance of suffering (Job: "The Lord has given, the Lord has taken away: Blessed be the name of the Lord."), we have the opportunity to take part in God's redemptive plan. That's pretty awesome. It means our suffering isn't worthless. All "of us may add [our afflictions] to His, in order that the fruits of His redemption be applied to the souls of men." I admit that quote is inartfully and unsatisfyingly put, but its core hits the mark.

All of this is, however, difficult to keep in mind, putting it mildly. Comforting to recall, but when you have no money for next month's rent, very difficult to recall.

However, unlike past times in this situation, I have such a sense of peace about it. I know I'm in God's hands. He takes care of the sparrows and the lillies, so why not me? And because He knows what's best for me, can you imagine what a mess I'd have probably made of things were I given the sort of prosperity that would have made unnecessary the musings I've made here? We're not starving. We're not without shelter. We're not truly suffering in so many ways. It's 11th hour in so many ways, too, but it's not midnight. He has provided. He is providing. He will continue to provide. Blessed be the name of the Lord.

Still, I need a job. Heaven helps those who help themselves, so hi-ho, hi-ho, it's off to job hunt I go!

If you know anyone who needs an accomplished writer, editor, researcher, data manager, or sales professional, please leave their name and contact information in the combox. Thanks, and have a blessed today of Advent.

What if we could abort homosexuals?

I posted this on my page last night, and an old friend from high school who practices the homosexual lifestyle opined thusly:

Hey guess what??? I just pulled up planned parnthood's home page and they actually do offer help and information about planning to have children........golly.........that add is full of crap.

Whenever my friend does this to me, it's like throwing bloody, raw meat to a ravenous lion or putting out a red cape before an angry bull. I charge at it, as you'll see below. Therefore, I'm sharing this because a) I hope the arguments I use will prove useful to others and b) I think it shows the sophistry and lack of reasoning so endemic in our sundry debates. For, just like I do with his responses, my friend always takes the bait whenever I post something on abortion (odd, since short of conversion to the Courage model, he'll never have to worry about it). And whenever he does, he takes such a simplistic, uncritically liberal view of things that, I hate to say it, I cannot help but cringe in frustration. Ergo, my response:

X, we must make distinctions. It's the key to being a good philosopher. Otherwise, we're just people spouting opinions.

If what you wrote were the case, I would have not posted this. (Indeed, I looked at this with some care to make sure that this is not what the tag is saying.)

However, there's a difference between planning out a pregnancy ... although I doubt they know much about the Creighton Method and ovulation cycles, which help pinpoint when pregnancy is most likely to occur ... and helping someone plan for being a parent. As in, "What do I do with this baby once I get her/him home?"

Planned Parenthood's primary drop down menu has information on their locations, abortion (parenthood prevention), birth control (parenthood prevention), body image, general health care, men's sex health, the MAP (parenthood prevention), pregnancy, relationships, sex & sexuality, sexual orientation & gender, STDs, and women's health.

Understandably, there is nothing about parenting under "Get Involved" or "About Us." Under their "Tools for Parents" section, there's plenty about talking to one's children about sex. Although I didn't read it, I was pleased to see the article about delaying sex.

We'll leave aside the fact that these sex talk articles were all written from an atheistic perspective. We'll also leave aside that the first image you see once you pull up the home page is an article about the wonders of IUD ... which prevents the implentation of a fertilized ovum, i.e., a fetus, i.e., a baby, i.e., a human person who was fully human and distinct from its mother and is therefore *not* a part of its mother, any more than you and I are now or ever were (after all, a baby can't help where it starts off life; that's just biology).

But what about what to do once you get the baby home? Or what to be thinking about from a non-health care perspective while your unborn child is gestating? Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

So the offending image is not "full of crap." In this respect -- as I understood it from the get go and found it to be a wry comment that might make people think -- I found it worth sharing.

And since we're on the subject, let's not forget that the whole reason for PP's founding is inextricably linked with the murder of unborn persons, usually of color (according to government statistics). It's not for nothing that they're the largest abortion provider in the nation. Indeed, without abortion, as they have implicitly admitted, PP couldn't stay in business. It's an incontravertible fact that they have pressured their branch managers in recent years to increase the number of abortions performed at their clinics.

And abortion is simply murder by a less offensive name. While it might make one squeamish to say so, while it's nasty to think about, while it's unpleasant to have to discuss, this is an incontravertible medical, biological, scientific fact. It is the extinction of human life. Unborn human life, but an human life, nonetheless (as if born or unborn should make a difference). And how anyone can condone the murder of even one such innocent, can shrug their shoulders and say, "Oh, well. Too f---ing bad for the little brat," frankly not only shows a degree of callowness on the part of such people, but it sells short the very women whom they purport to support. Women deserve better than abortion, and it's to the detriment and shame of our society that we settle for this.

BTW, I know how to get the entire homosexual rights movement behind the pro-life message: Find the gay gene. Then watch the number of abortions rise for babies conceived with that gene, just like 90% of Downs' babies are aborted in the US. What would have happened, X, if your parents, given the times, had decided to abort you because you had that gene (and recall that abortion was legal in CA before it was nationally)? This conversation would not have happened. If that doesn't put what is implicitly at the heart of this conversation in perspective, I don't know what does.

Said it before, saying it again, will forevermore say it: I love you, X. I always have and always will. You're a fantastic person, and arguing with you keeps me on my toes. Thank you! Make it a fantastic Thursday.

California: We're #50! We're #50!

Eureka! We've learned that California is the worst state in the nation for the second year in a row! Yeah! What pride we Californians must take in this news.

Or not.

As a former longtime resident of the formerly Golden State, I take no pleasure in this. As a former denizen of the "Belly of the Beast," as my friend Eric Hogue puts it, i.e., the Capitol, however, I do take a certain devilish delight in the ranking, only because it gives me what I think is a well-deserved right to say, "I told you so." The quacked thing is that the voters not only keep voting for the status quo, but they made the situation worse by giving the governor and co-partisans in the Legislature super majorities. California used to be a great place to live. Now? I'm glad I escaped, and I use the word "escaped" advisedly.

A big part of this last ranking is not mentioned: California's cost of living. Try finding a reasonably priced two or three bedroom apartment in a major metropolitan center that isn't in a bad part of town. Look at gas prices. Look at taxes (even with Prop. 13). And then look at the regulatory climate. It's insane.

I worked in the Capitol for seven years, and we minority staffers would just shake our heads in disbelief at what the majority was allowing to happen. Of course, it could be that all the majority's legislators were almost exclusively class warfare ideologues (I hate to put it that way, but it's true).They were union activists and lawyers or career pols or all of the above. I can only remember one being a businessman, former Assemblyman John Dutra.

In other words, they had no real world conception of the burden their onerous laws placed on the ability of the economy to continue creating the kinds of jobs needed to keep up with their ever burgeoning social spending. When the coffers ran dry after the Internet bust -- and they were always bone dry -- the class warfare types' answer was to raise taxes on the rich. Never mind that the super rich could easily move to Nevada and commute into their LA or San Francisco places of employment (as a good number do).

They never did raise taxes because they could never get the 2/3 majority they needed to do so as there were still enough GOP legislators there to make a difference. But now, with the loss of the GOP bullwark in the Legislature during the last election? All bets are off. You have Gov. Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown, the most liberal governor California has ever had (didn't people learn their lesson during the '70s and '80s?), and a legislature controlled by San Francisco and Los Angeles liberals with no real understanding of how economies work and with no real world business experience. None have ever had to meet a payroll, etc.

My bet is that next year, California will be no. 51 (and I know there are only 50 states, but that is how bad things will be still, if not much, much worse). I take no pleasure in saying this. It makes me sad. But Californians have made their bed. That it continues to do as well economically as it does is a miracle and a testimony to the resilience and ingenuity of American businesses.

"Good times for a change ..."

OK, so maybe it's not "good times," but I couldn't think of a song that had "good news for a change," so I settled for this chestnut by the Smiths (as Richard Blade might say, "one of my fay-vorite bahnds.")

Anyway, we can a) all use a little good news and b) agree that this report showing abortions hit a five year low in 2009 is good news.

Fascinating history: The Massacre at Duffy's Cut

Who knew?

On my way home from retreat Sunday, I saw a big historical marker at the intersection of Kings Road and Sugartown Road in Malvern, PA. Now, I'm a sucker for historical markers. Mea culpa, I've broken many a road law pulling illegal U-turns and scared the bejeebers out of my wife and kids (not to mention others) swerving off to the side of the road to see what one says.

So as soon as I noticed the one pictured in the link, I quickly (and this time safely) pulled over to the side of the road, got out of my car, and walked back to the intersection.

In case you don't want to click on the link, it says that 57 men died nearby in 1832. They were Irish immigrant railroad workers who contracted cholera (contracted by drinking feces tainted water). Due to a mixture of anti-Catholic sentiment that said they didn't deserve to be treated and because of ill-founded fears of contagion, some died naturally, and some were shot and/or bludgeoned to death. Forensics has proven that last assertion.

At the time, public opinion largely held that Catholics were stupid, incapable of thinking for themselves, superstitious subhumans beholden to a foreign power. Twelve years later, this thinking would erupt into rioting and the complete immolation of St. Augustine Church, not far from Independence Hall. For a great contemporary woodcut, see here. It also led to the Nativist/Know Nothing movement, not to mention the rebirth of the KKK in the last century (most historians agree the 19th century KKK was animated strictly by prejudice against blacks; its 20th century rebirth, however, was the result of prejudice against Jews and Catholics, as well as blacks).

In Malvern, it was reflected in the Horse Company, which was the de facto police force and was in cahoots with Judge Cromwell Pearce. According to the man who verified the Duffy's Cut deaths, both were anti-Catholic (or is "Cromwell" something average, well-informed papists would name their kid? ... not likely, is it?), and His Honor's land is probably where the executions took place.

And why not kill them? They were not only expendable because 57 more were waiting back in Ireland. What made them especially expendable to Cromwell and Co. was that they were Catholics, subhumans, untermenschen.

Since verifying the story and discovering the dig site ca. 2004, a group led by Dr. Bill Watson from Immaculata College (a stone's throw away) has unearthed artifacts such as this and bodies such as this woman, the only one there (beware: it's a little scary looking, just in case you're bothered by this sort of thing). Every coffin has had 120-180 coffin nails in it. Why so many unless someone wanted to make sure no one inadvertantly opened the coffins and saw faces blasted off and people with point blank bullet holes on the tops of their crowns?

Watson is convinced this was a mass execution followed by a massive coverup. For instance, reports of initial newspaper reports shows that about half of Frank Duffy's railroad crew died during the epidemic. Given that he had roughly 100-120 men working the mile of track for which he had a contract, 57 would be about right. However, subsequent newspaper reports stated he had lost only eight workers.

As project leader Watson told me, this tree was "nurtured by the bodies of found human beings." He believes there are still body parts within the crevices and surrounded by the tree's roots and stump.

 

 

This picture is of a grave enclosure holding roughly 50 of the bodies. Wouldn't it be great if they turned this humble enclosure into an oratory dedicated to the Blessed Irish Martyrs of Malvern? I'm not presuming the judgment of the Church, mind you.

You Muslims out there, help me to understand if I have this wrong

I think the key point here is that if Muhammad cannot be criticized because he is "the Prophet" and, indeed, must be imitated in all things, if this is true, then Muslims are bound to murder people like us, that is, those in the "World of War" (consider the language ... man!), we who are dimmi.

 

And if this is correct (I'm just doing the logical progression here, folks ... if my logic is faulty, let me know), then there are no "good" Muslims vs. "bad, radical, terrorist" Muslims. There are only poorly formed Muslims, those who don't know their faith, vs. those who are well formed and know the story of Mohammed, who know their religion and what it requires, and who accept it even though it is on its face, by the natural law, and by definition so patently crazy, so, dare I say, evil.

 

After all, any religion that says it's OK to ram an arrow in someone's eye for singing a couplet goes against God, especially when that person poses no threat against you. It's really, "I don't like your opinion, so I'm going to kill you."

That's evil, because only God knows peoples' hearts. It's evil because, even if someone's heart is black as coal and their views so displeasing to God as to warrant eternal damnation, God says, "Vengeance is mine"! God says, "You shall love your enemies.... Bless those who curse you.... He who rejects you, rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects the One who sent Me.... Shake their dust from your feet."

It's not, "Shake their dust from your feet after you ram an arrow through their eye."

 

Furthermore, since such definitely goes against the mind of God (to the extent we can know it, granted), and because anything that is against the truth of God is evil by definition, I can't see how the story related in the link is thus anything but evil. As such, it shows Mohammed's incapacity to be God's messenger, let alone the bringer of true religion to mankind. Quite the opposite, actually.

 

Have I fundamentally missed something? If so, what? I'm not being insincere. I want to know.

 

For instance, do Muslims have some recognition of Muhammed like Catholics do of the Church? That is, we believe she is made of sinful members, of members needing redemption for their sins by Christ's loving sacrifice on the cross. However, the sins of her members don't obliterate the truths held and taught by the Church.

 

Similarly, do Muslims believe Mohammed was sinful as all men are, but that even so, his message is true? So they ignore -- even condemn -- the times when he did bad things (just like Catholics ignore and condemn the actions of John XI, Stephen VI and Formosus, Boniface VIII, Alexander VI, etc.) and focus instead on the message? I don't see that happening, but maybe it's just hard for the message to get through here in the West for any number of good reasons.

 

If it is correct, i.e., that Muslims see him as sinful but his message as true, then I'd like textual proof from some sura of the Koran, some hadith, something from sharia, etc.

Please do you a favor

I want to encourage you to do something for yourself in the near future, something I did this weekend: Go on a retreat. Find a good retreat house (don't just look one up in the phone book; it could be run by heretic nuns into the eneagram, worshipping goddess Gaia, and labrynths) offering a retreat led by competent retreat masters, and prepare for two-three days of rejuvenating silence. Never have I done a retreat where I didn't come back totally recharged and with much greater self-knowledge. Because of this, my employers have benefited, my wife has benefitted, my children have benefitted, and because of all this, *I* have benefitted, not only in the here-and-now but eternally. PLEASE DO YOURSELF THIS FAVOR. It's the greatest Christmas gift you can give yourself and those you love.

Personally, my best experience has been with a former Legionnary priest when he was still with the Legion, Fr. Jeffrey Jambone, now in Louisiana. Well, I take that back. I did a diaconate discernment retreat that was out of this world. For 12-24 hours (sadly, that was all), I lived as the Christian man, husband, and father I wanted to be. But I know it's possible now.

This past weekend's retreat was with Fr. Anthony Mastroeni. He is very good. However, he's not like Fr. Jambone, who touches you with Scripture and, through this, an encounter with the Word made Flesh Who dwelt amongst us. He takes you through a series of scriptural, historical, and philosophical considerations, largely letting you to connect the dots or draw the conclusions God wants you to have. And it works, largely speaking. I know it did for me this weekend. Nonetheless, it didn't surprise me that at least two handfuls of retreatants saw no purpose in the weekend at all. Listening to them, they missed the forest for the trees. "He's being anti-homosexual. He's being anti-woman. Why, who would say that segregating the sexes works and is what's best for the students? [Uhm, research and centuries old experience? Just sayin' ...] Why, my daughter's a public school teacher. Don't tell me she's not doing a fine job. Those public school teachers work hard." And, sigh, so on.

But I think most guys got the fact that we as men, both in general and as individuals, have a lot of room for improvement.

Anway, I know they can be expensive. Still, if you went on holiday for two days and two nights and all your meals and lodging were taken care of for $100-200, you would think you did pretty well, by and large. And if you need to write a check in one foul swoop, that can be hard. But it's not hard if you sock away $15-50/month (depending on your budget, naturally). If you're poor, do $5-10/month. Many retreats offer scholarships. At worst, on such means you don't go every year, but by the end of two years, you'll have enough saved up.

And then there are always those parish missions, the boxed lunch version of retreats. Granted, with these, you're not going away for a weekend, entering into Great Silence from the first conference/talk to the last, shutting off your pagers and cell phones, etc. (Wow ... pagers ... Am I dating myself these days or what?) That doesn't mean you won't get fantastic things out of them. By and large, you will! You'll always, without fail learn something, and if you pray for God to show you the one thing He wants you to take away from this experience, He will answer that pray ... sometimes in spades.

So, again, do you a favor. Do yourself the favor of going on retreat. They're absolutely wonderful experiences.