Curtailing the Freedom to Religion

Peter Costello makes excellent and sobering points in this opinion piece on The Age today:

.. a parliamentary committee has recommended options to extend the power of the state over the province of religion. One proposed change is to restrict the freedom of religious schools to choose their employees on the basis of their religious faith. ... The Federation of Community Legal Services told the parliamentary review .. "To allow religious organisations a broad exemption for conscience encourages prejudice..." Just think about the moral vanity of that statement. According to these lawyers, a religious conscience leads to prejudice. How did the church arouse public conscience over slavery? How did Florence become a haven for the arts and letters? How did civilisation develop in the past couple of millennia without the Community Legal Services to guide it? .. The question is whether the law of the land should require them to employ people who are indifferent or hostile to their religion in their schools. Parents who choose to send their children to a Christian school have a reasonable expectation that the child will get a Christian education. How could the school fulfill its obligation to the parents if it is required by law to employ non-Christian or anti-Christian teachers to provide it? .. We are led to believe that the purpose of these charters is to stop arbitrary arrests, guarantee a free press and guard against dictatorship. .. In practice, it complicates the life of religious schools and opens lawsuits against the churches. .. Once the churches and religious conscience are out of the way, lawyers will have a clear run. Lawsuits will be used to decide the great moral questions of the age. You can see what’s in it for the lawyers. But don’t think it is a step forward for liberty.

It's a very serious threat. More information can be found in this pastoral letter from the Victorian Catholic bishops.

Rosary Reflections

but written below in rambling fashion..

• In the Annunciation, what does a 14-year-old understand about what she is being called to? Not the specifics, not the nuanced implications, but she says "yes". What about us? Aren't we always called?
• In the Nativity, neither Joseph nor Mary do anything spectacular to bring it about. They make no arrangements for Bethlehem, where the astute Jew knew the messiah would be born. God took care of that, with the emperor's census.
• In the Finding at the Temple, how often do we think that Jesus is missing? A dryness, a feeling of desolation, and we get anxious. Where is the Lord? As the Father continues to work, so does the Son, though we may not see where or how. He is in his Temple on earth, both our bodies and in the Church.
• In Gethsemane, in agony, the Lord's anxiety is real. And it had to be written about because anxiety strikes us at times, and it is real. And we may not be allowed to escape the bitter cup, but God sends an angel, his aid to strengthen us.
• In the Scourging, we might picture ourselves holding the whip. But it may be the people around us whom we scourge unjustly with hurtful words or deeds. And what of us in the place of the victim, being members of the body that suffered scourging? Lashes for us, deserved due to our sin, but perhaps we can generously accept the scourging for others. As the body of Christ received corporal punishment for sin, we who are in the body.. can we not sacrifice our pain in union with his?
• In the crucifixion, Christ is nailed into a position of total surrender, total embrace..
• In the Descent of the Holy Spirit, there is a completely radical transformation from terror (from persecution) to bold evangelical zeal. And by this zeal, the Holy Spirit transforms..

We are in complete control

.. or not. Carolyn Moynihan writes about the grief at the end of delayed motherhood and the promises of IVF. She is reasonably incredulous at "delaying adulthood". One might as well attempt to delay gravity -- which can meet with some success, but only up to a certain point. Motherhood at 45? IVF as a catch all? Time to rethink that.

Nature is resistant to many attempts at tampering. Time. Space. Mass. Energy. Particles. Things follow set laws that aren't easy, nor always safe, to mess with (report by Louise Hall, The Age):

The chairman of the IVF Directors Group and member of the Fertility Society of Australia, Michael Chapman, said pleas to the Federal Government to fund a public health campaign about the increased risks of miscarriage and pregnancy complications for older mothers and defects in their babies had fallen on deaf ears. This week the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists in Britain published a statement on reproductive ageing, reaffirming that biologically, the optimum period for childbearing is between ages 20 and 35. .. the example of celebrity older mothers .. gave women the wrong impression .. .. one thing that is not revealed in magazine articles is many of these celebrities are not using their own eggs, but a donor egg Figures show that the live birth rate for women under 35 undergoing IVF is 31 per cent. This falls below 5 per cent for women over 42.

Andrew Chinn visits our parish

And a fun time was had by all! Please visit his website. His music (and performance overall) made me feel very much like a child again (not such a feat, my wife would say). The concert was a lot of fun, not least was the participation of the children. The man was clearly a gifted master of music and entertainment. His faith came alive in his music, and was rather inspiring. God bless the man and his ministry!

In Ireland: a legal matter on blasphemous libel?

Over at Slashdot, I found this link to Jason Walsh's criticism of Ireland's amended Defamation Bill. The slashdot post naturally elicited some criticism of Ireland's alleged return to the dark ages and so on, as well as quite a flurry about agnosticism, atheism and so on.

I posted a response because what Jason Walsh writes is incorrect. The bill's amendment wasn't about "shield[ing] religious belief from criticism". It defines what the Irish constitution does not, about what blasphemous matter is. Such vaguness caused a few problems in the past, apparently. The amended bill promises penalties for infractions, but significantly gives a definition of blasphemous matter (according to the Irish Times) as

.. matter "that is *grossly abusive* or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion; *and he or she intends*, by the publication of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage." (emphasis mine)

I repeat what I wrote in my Slashdot post:

Freedom of speech should not include grossly abusive speech that would take away from other people their own freedom to hold beliefs without anxiety about arbitrary gross insults. Engaging in healthy criticism and the debate that ensues is one thing, and is welcome. There is a meeting of minds and a clash of ideas. It is an entirely different thing to grossly abuse the beliefs of a group of people concerning what they hold to be sacred matter simply for the sake of insulting them.

It would be nice if governments didn't need to legislate such things, and for the citizenry to exercise common decency and engage instead in honest criticism whose objective is to right wrongs in the context of dialogue. Unfortunately, we have many published celebrities today who instead exercise their ego and vile contempt for those whom they disagree with, and copycats aplenty with blogs, YouTube accounts and art degrees at their disposal.

I truly do not think it ideal to have to enact such laws, but it's hard to blame lawmakers who look at things from a different perspective. Anti-religious bigotry are on the rise, in levels not seen in quite a while, and the world both watches and, sadly, emulates at times. I'm thinking about those museum exhibits involving Catholic personages and symbols in fecal matter, or urine. I also recall a fairly drawn out YouTube matter involving the consecrated host, abuse by bullet, blade, fire and what-not, and a college professor cheering and apparently paying for more. Who would welcome such vile contempt amplified in print?

Things parents don't tell kids anymore

.. will probably make up an interesting list. Catherine Deveny writes about one: vanity is unbecoming. She doesn't use those words, of course; her opinion piece is much better written.

What about the importance of modesty? Chastity? Humility? Ambition? Obedience? Right vs. wrong? Why drinking yourself silly every week at 16 years of age is dangerous? Watch your language? Respect the elderly? Moderation? Love thy neighbor? Thou shall not commit adultery (or fornication)?

It's a long list, and these topics have fallen into disuse more in some countries than in others. But that things have gone this way should be a concern, but I suspect it is being largely ignored by parents who are in a perpetual state of adolescent/teenage rebellion (despite being in their 30s or 40s perhaps. Poor kids (the children, not the parents).

Movie Review: Juno

It's a good movie, surprisingly positive and refreshingly honest. Juno is 16 and gets pregnant without being promiscuous. Yes, it happens. She initially sought abortion, which is probably a typical first consideration in first world countries today, but she gets a good dose of doubts about the rightness of this option. She decides to have the baby and put him up for adoption. Much of the movie is also about the couple that she chooses to adopt the baby. But it isn't that simple either, the couple not being perfect after all. I also liked the way her father and stepmother react to her news. They are supportive, which I think is always good. It bothered me that the stepmother seemed ambivalent concerning abortion, but I'm glad that neither she nor Juno's father pushed for abortion. The movie is realistic in one sense: teenagers in high school can't handle the responsibility just yet. The implications of this will hopefully penetrate most viewers. I found one scene to be rather profound: the first time when Juno wept, and perhaps was at her lowest point about her dilemma, was when she found out about problems between the couple who were adopting the baby later. This reveals the heart of the issue: what happens to the baby? The tears were not about Juno's predicament; they were about the baby's future.

DecentFilms has got a must-read review, but my two cents is that it is a good movie with good insights. I accept the reality that many young girls find themselves in this situation, much of which is avoidable if they had the time and training to think about the consequences of jumping into situations that they are not prepared for. But when a Juno finds herself in such a pickle, there can only be one response from the people around her: support. Should abortion be considered? Of course. And with calm and deliberate reasoning be summarily discarded as the wrong and worst possible option.

Infidelity

Derrick Jackson (smh.com) talks about something that today's cynical and oversexed culture may tend to disregard in cases of marital infidelity: what about the children? I wonder if this question gets asked enough? It's probably not the most important consideration for people (not necessarily the affected parents) who read about infidelity. We are, after all, steeped in many modernist fallacies. Does it not often seem, according to 21st century western culture, that romance is the end-all? Marriage and exclusive, lifelong commitment seem almost to be taboo subjects. Well.. what does one expect in that situation anyway? If it all hinges upon steamy romance then.. there's nothing for it but to walk away when the steam dissipates. Not that we can belittle the enormity of the commitment, and the magnitude of suffering when we fail to live up to the commitment. But.. that's exactly what sets marriage apart. It is indeed a huge deal. It isn't just a contract, nor is it about satisfaction or your investment back. Call me old-fashioned but that view of marriage is too calculating, too cold, and also too flimsy. What's so romantic about a situation where the door is open for walking away when romance wanes?

My kids often pray that they would love God or love their parents forever. I hope this does not hinge on sentiments, or we're in big trouble.

Battles

Interesting line from Starget SG-1, Season 2, "The Tok'ra": I think it goes like this: "The last thing he'd want is to have his daughter watch him in a losing battle." Dr. Carter is referring here to her father, who is dying of cancer. I'm not comfortable lecturing the terminally ill about feelings of humiliation at the thought of their loved ones witnessing their weakest moments before death. But I wonder what is responsible for making them feel that way. Why is dying seen as a humiliating defeat, rather than the bittersweet farewell that it is?

Judgment Day: One Person vs Another

A discussion I had years ago with a Lutheran (former Evangelical former Catholic) friend of mine came to mind the other day. It stuck in my head because it struck a discordant chord then, and it still would now. In his depiction of judgment day, being that we are all unworthy of salvation, Jesus would sort of interpose himself between us and the Father and say something like this: "This man is saved because I cover him over with my own righteousness." Yes, it's probably a depiction of forensic justification, which is probably popularly depicted by the mental picture of a snow-covered dunghill. It seems illogical to me because it almost makes the Father and the Son adversarial. It also suggests that the Father would declare what is not true, i.e., we are clean outside but unclean inside. It doesn't make much sense to me.

Time for Spiritual Reading

The Codex Sinaiticus, 4th century version of the Christian Bible, is online -- but the English translation does not seem to be available yet. You can read the original koine Greek though.

Papa Benedict XVI publishes his new encyclical, "Caritas in Veritate: On integral human development in Charity and Truth"

What I've been doing lately, however, is going through the Gospel of St. John (one chapter at a time) and the Catechism. That's what I love about commuting. It takes longer to get to work and back, though, but I do manage to spend the minutes more fruitfully. :-)

There's so much to read in my Palm Tungsten, but not much time for it. I've been fantasizing about Heaven lately, if, God willing, I get there. Mostly they're fantasies of eternity, which I can spend marveling at every bit of learning and wisdom that I can lay my eyes on. All those books, all the time to read them, perhaps even some virtual laboratory by which I can study the awesome universe God created. And why settle for a laboratory -- I can observe the universe and all its wonders firsthand!

Then it hit me: why would I want to learn all those things with eternity ahead? I guess my answer is simple: for sheer delight. The way I see it, the new Heaven and Earth are God's creations. And everything in it. And that makes them good.

Statistics of disadvantaged conditions

The Age recently published about the declining conditions of indigenous Australians:

• "indigenous children were six times more likely to be abused or neglected than their non-Aboriginal counterparts"
• "indigenous homicide rate was seven times higher than in the rest of the community"
• "hospitalisations from domestic violence 34 times higher"
• "Aborigines 13 times more likely to be imprisoned"

The Prime Minister describes the report that lays out these statistics as "devestating", and said the situation was "unacceptable and it requires decisive action." And he's right. In a prosperous nation, how can such conditions still remain unresolved at such levels?

But I wonder people would say about these other statistics from another part of the world?

• 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes.
• 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes.
• 85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes.
• 80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes.
• 71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes.
• 70% of juveniles in state operated institutions come from fatherless homes.
• 85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home.

This is not a game of "beat that!" I just wanted to point out that all such statistics of declining and deplorable conditions are devastating and unacceptable. And not to be ignored for the sake of being politically correct. I'm just saying: these statistics cry out for help. How is that happening these days?

Planned Parenthood in Korea: pushing for more babies?

A very odd member of the Planned Parenthood family is advocating for families to have more babies. MercatorNet asks if this is one way for abortion to disappear. Maybe. But the interesting question for me is if, by this particular story, abortion and population control advocates are going in the right direction? I'm not so sure.

But looking back, we recognise that the direction of policy had to be changed when the TFR reached 2.1. In fact, the change was not realised until 20 years later in the early 2000s. We can say that the one-child policy met the needs of its time but it did not change at the proper time. The reasons for low fertility rate are late marriage, an unfavourable social environment for women to do "work and home" at the same time, too much money needed to raise children, and so on.

My understanding of the explanation from PPK (Planned Parenthood Korea) is that this is still a calculated move for an optimal population. The bottom line is still the system, not the person.

And the implications of the last sentence I quote above may not be sufficiently appreciated by PPK. Given that the low rates are based on attitudes about careers, marriage and children, on what grounds can PPK convince women to have more babies? Probably not by population targets, nor economics, nor even patriotism. Governments can throw in material or financial incentives all they want, but I doubt that they would persuade a woman who is convinced that motherhood is of second-rate value and fulfillment. As any parent knows, it isn't just the money. It's the effort, heartaches and pains involved in raising up a child that can put one off. What can offset those? I think only love can. Not that I'm brimming with it -- certainly not. But I do remember both my mother and father.

What was it that Mark Shea pointed out in one of his excellent podcasts? That God delighted to create Man. There are still parents around who are blessed with a similar (albeit imperfect) sense of this delight in parenthood. How do you bring that back after postmodern western society has been slandering the concept of marriage and parenthood for the past 40 years? Now that would be an interesting problem to form strategies about. But the Catholic Church has been largely unheard when they've been shouting the answer for years now: stronger marriages. Seems like Christ was on to something after all when he went so far as to reiterate the beginnings of marriage and giving it his stamp of sanctification.

Catholic Answers needs help

Please donate to this worthy cause for evangelization. We are all called to evangelize, but not all of us can be high profile, high impact evangelists. That's what Catholic Answers provides, and we can assist them in the work that Christ calls us to.

Justification debate

Read about it at Christianity Today, involving Pastor John Piper and Anglican bishop N. T. Wright. David at Sentire Cum Ecclesia covers some of the latter's views in this blog, which homes in on the distinction between "life after death" and "life after life after death". Confused? Follow the links above and think about it.

Movie Review: The Blue Elephant

This was a good movie to watch. Notwithstanding some puzzled comments in Amazon and this blog, its flaws are in the production itself, e.g., some of the lines and dialogue were dry. The story itself is a good one. It includes some perhaps 16th century episodes in the history of Siam and Burma, but the war itself is not glorified. The critique suggests this, and seems to deliberately miss the professed point of war in the movie. The good prince in the move states clearly that they go to war, not because they want to, but because they have to. It is a twisted view of life and reality to actually denigrate self-defense as something to be ashamed of. The movie was also clear in differentiating the evils of aggression against the necessity of self-defense.

On another note, my kids enjoyed the movie, and I think they appreciate the message of the movie. I have no intention to raise extreme pacifists. While I teach them to avoid fights, and never to start them, I am not about to raise them up as victims. It's a tough world out there, and they cannot find happiness and peace as doormats. Of course, I'd have to teach them as well that it is God's right hand that brings victory in the end, not the strength of horses. I just have to find the opportunities for that lesson.

Twists and Cheap Imitation

I'd often marveled at how much of the crazy world out there is based on "almosts": almost true, almost good, almost rational. Tolerance is almost charity, but not quite. New age spirituality is almost about spirituality, but not quite. Pacifism is almost about peace, but not quite. Euthanasia is claimed to be about dignity, but not really. Today we have almost-marriage, almost-happiness, almost-equality, all just twisted and cheap imitations of the real thing.

Christ is the real thing. Charity goes where Tolerance dares not: charity risks one's self, and goes beyond lofty words. Christ offers the Holy Spirit, which is holiness and life. Christ offers peace that comes through charity and justice. Christ makes death a way in, not a way out. With Christ, because of love, suffering and death have meaning -- and through love, so does life. With Christ, marriage is a sacrament, a covenant giving of entire persons, not simply contract with strings and opt-outs. With Christ, happiness is eternal, and it is not about fleeting pleasures, but is about being who we are meant to be. And with Christ, there is true justice, not a lazy attempt that only bears a resemblance.

The fullness of God: don't settle for less

This evening prayer's antiphon, taken from the first Psalm of tonight, Psalm 136 (137), cries with a passion that we should all share: If I forget you, Jerusalem, let my right hand wither! Given that Jerusalem is a foreshadow of the kingdom of God, the kingdom of our hope, this sentiment brought to mind with some regret how we often settle for less. Settling for accolades from men, putting our ultimate trust in human reason, settling for purely natural notions of beauty and goodness, lust instead of love, material instead of Heavenly wealth. How ironic when the Lord seeks to give us abundance and fullness. In the evening prayer's reading, St. Paul wrote (Col 3:16), "Christ's message, in all its richness must live in your hearts. Teach and instruct each other with all wisdom." There's too much in Scripture to quote which I don't even know off the top of my head (and any visiting reader might want to put them in the comments). But look at what he's given. The Hebrews wanted Saul, God gave -- not just David, nor Solomon -- but the Son of God. Many people believe in a spiritual resurrection, or a reincarnation. Christ promises a complete resurrection -- body and soul -- and Heaven.

With that offer on the table, how can we settle for less -- without even examining the offer thoroughly?

[Note: the readings above are based on Tuesday of the 4th week, rather than the vespers before the Feast of St. John the Baptist's birthday.]

Oh that we would stick to the truth

Some days, especially when it comes to TV or mainstream media, this seems to be wishful thinking... First order of business for anyone bent on destroying everything seems to be to make obfuscation an art form. A trendy, hip and popular art form.

From Eli Stone to Supernatural to the news, the boob tube is quick (or a quick and easy way) to portray truth as falsehood and vice versa. And people so easily take for granted what they see on TV. There is little inclination nor time to get to the truth. Or underestimating the effect of "a little" falsehood portrayed as truth on TV. Truly, how awful for those who do not hunger nor thirst for the truth!

Places in Heaven?

Mark Shea tackles a reader's question about this in his blog, and of course, great answer and comments. He quotes St. Thomas Aquinas ("I will have Thyself") and St. Therese of Liseux (who will take everything that God offers because she "will not be a saint by halves!"). For me, there are moments of blessed prayer when I almost whine in despair "but there's nothing else to desire!" Often this comes after repeating the Psalmist who says "Why cast down, my soul? Why groan within me? Hope in God, I will praise him still: my Savior and my God!" For some reason, this almost desperate admission makes me happy. :-)

but never despair

Today's First Reading is from 2 Cor 4:7-15, which includes these words of pragmatic reassurance:

We are in difficulties on all sides, but never cornered; we see no answer to our problems, but never despair; we have been persecuted, but never deserted; knocked down, but not killed; always, wherever we may be, we carry with us in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus, too, may always be seen in our body.

It struck me because these words of St. Paul were not assuring us of an easy life. Such would be meaningless to us because we all suffer difficulties. Far from the New Age gospel that blames our ills on our own "negative vibes", St. Paul tells it as it is: life is difficult, but God is with us. And the latter makes all the difference. As to why life is difficult, it would be senseless to blame it on any one single thing. It would be just as senseless to think that we will always have the answer. Quite often, we won't, but we need not despair. God is with us.

Stem cells restore eyesight: ADULT stem cells, that is

But Seven News does not give the complete story, which you can find elsewhere, this one from biotechnews.com.au:

The research team from UNSW’s School of Medical Sciences harvested stem cells from patients’ own eyes to rehabilitate the damaged cornea.

What sort of world arises when there is no concept of right and wrong?

Something like this, perhaps. The 60s and 70s folks took up the fight for no taboos, no rules, no boundaries, and what did they expect to happen? Can peace, order or love flourish without the notion of good and bad? When all they teach children are consequences and how to escape or suppress them, then we can expect no less than this sort of insanity.

Oz Conservative talks about the same problem here, concerning the Christchurch woman who consented to a night out with seven football players at once. His point is simple and correct: obtaining consent cannot take the place of morality. He cites Andrew Bolt in his Herald Sun column who states what should be obviously alarming:

Consent also means it’s every man for himself. That you can do whatever you can force some silly or intimidated woman to agree to, however much it will hurt them.

It isn't just that concepts of objective good and evil are relevant to society. They certainly are, but so those concepts make sense, there should be love -- charity. If that had won out over lust, perhaps one or more of those football players might have spared a thought about the woman herself, her welfare, whether they would be causing harm to her -- or themselves.

The Urgency of Sanctification

One of the things I've come to realize as my parenting years went by is just how daunting my accountability really is, as a parent. While I can look to the Holy Spirit to be the ultimate illumination and sanctification of my children, I do have a great deal to do with how their characters shape up. Just as they inherit genetic aspects of mine, so they also inherit behavioral traits. I'm not proud of my less than stellar control over my temper (and my mouth, when the former slips). I see the fruits of my trespasses in my children, who can be emotional and/or grouchy as a result. In a truly horrifying way, "my sin is always before me". Which brings me to my point: I need sanctification. Thank God for his free gift of the Holy Spirit who is the Sanctifier, but I'm not making the job easy. And my other point is that this need to be made holy, set apart for God and consecrated for good works, is an urgent need. I have a long way to go in ridding myself of my attachment to Sin, and that's a big problem, for nothing unclean may enter the Kingdom. But it isn't just that I might die tomorrow and I'm not ready. I think it is a bigger problem that I might still be alive tomorrow and I would have left my children with unresolved bad examples to follow. I'm not exaggerating my role in their upbringing, for I know that the Holy Spirit is the ultimate source of their growth in the faith, hope and love. But I do know how my actions have badly affected their behavior in some ways.

I don't want to define the boundaries of my sons' ideals based on my failures. That is simply not fair to them. Like me, the inheritance marked out for them is of the best: Heavenly glory. My bad example pulls them down and away from that! I've often thought of it in terms of health and hygiene. If I needlessly risk my health, I might fall ill and either fail to care for them due to some debilitation or.. bring home a virus that will in turn infect them.

Which is why sanctification is urgent for parents. We must cooperate with grace and do our darnedest best to become holier men and women. It's a matter of life and death, joy and misery, and it isn't just mine that's on the line.

Galactic Catholic: very interesting posts

I found Sarah's blog, Galactic Catholic, via her response to one of my posts below. Very interesting posts in that blog, and a good tendency to respond to God's invitation: "let us reason together" (Isaiah 1:18), by looking at Science and the physical universe. She has one up there now on Biology. Please visit!

Non-evidence on preventing AIDS by condom: in mainstream media (of course)

Not that I expect to see this printed, but I sent the following letter to The Age in response to "The evidence on preventing AIDS is clear", which was full of unclear assertions with few details and no references:

Professors Toole and Moodie wrote assertively about AIDS in Thailand and the Philippines without references. That circumcision reduces the risk of AIDS is not conclusively proven (see http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/, which provides references to studies). Something else about the Philippines was unmentioned: men are sexually conservative by western (and Thai) standards. This is the most avowed Catholic country in the region. The good professors also failed to cite Dr. Edward Green's studies on Uganda (see http://www.usaid.gov/pop_health/aids/Countries/africa/uganda_report.pdf, an official report submitted to USAID). He is the Director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project of Harvard University. Dr. Green recently cited "no consistent associations between condom use and lower HIV-infection rates, which, 25 years into the pandemic, we should be seeing if this intervention was working.” (see http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article5987155.ece). Instead, the Guttmacher Institute was cited. But Alan Guttmacher was president of Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion and contraception provider in America, whose international projects include spending money and lobbying for legal safeguards in the Philippines for abortion and contraception (http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/the_filipino_front_in_the_culture_wars/). Finally, condom success in Senegal was cited, but a USAID report cites abstinence education, partner reduction along with condom use (see http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_health/aids/TechAreas/prevention/condomfactsheet.html) as deciding factors.

The Mystery of the Annunciation

I wonder if Evangelicals would sometimes consider the significance of the episode of the angel Gabriel's annunciation to Mary. When I was praying the Rosary earlier, in contemplating the mystery of that event, I was struck as I often was: this annunciation is now to me! I am not kecharitomene or full of grace as Mary was, but I am given grace. Unearned, undeserved grace, given in baptism, a free gift of justification and sanctification begun. Graced in every sacrament and Eucharist, every And the announcement is simply unbelievable, that I should somehow bring Christ to the world. I shall have to ask with Mary: how can this be? For I am a sinful man! But Gabriel provides the answer: it is the Holy Spirit's work, for what is my body if not, as St. Paul says, a temple of the Holy Spirit. And as St. John says, if I have love, then God lives in me and I in Him. And, again, St. Paul declares, that I am a member of the body of Christ. Whatever else I may bemoan of my unworthiness, I must never forget: this is the work of the God who raised the dead, brought inexplicable healing, gave men the power to cast out demons and change hearts and minds. We're talking about the God who became man, after all. What have I to fear and fret about? I cannot fathom it, but the Word does not return to the Father in vain. I have but one logical answer to give to the God who loved me first: fiat -- "be it done to me according to thy word."

And it only makes sense to ask our Lady who especially lived through this mystery, and knew our Lord best through those years, to walk with me and teach me the ways of her son, our Lord. And may he be made flesh in me.

Feast of the Annunciation

I shall always miss my days in De La Salle University, Manila, where the chime tolls twice a day for the Angelus (noon and 6 pm), and most everyone stops and at the very least listens to the prayer. It is the threefold celebration of God's mercy and love towards man:

  First, it is he who loves us first, and promises salvation for mankind. And his graciousness means he does not override our Lady's will, but permits her to respond freely.

  Second, she responds for all mankind with the only response we should rightly give: fiat -- let it be done. We must respond with docility to God's will, with faith, even if we do not fully comprehend.

  Finally, as God promises, his Word does not return in vain, but accomplishes as it proceeds. The Word is made flesh, and that is also his promise to all who respond to His grace.

Each time we pray the Angelus, we go back to the mystery of the Incarnation, and renew its fulfillment in ourselves -- we who are called see and love Christ in the least of our brethren, and for them to receive Christ's love through our love, which we give for His sake.

Did Pilate invent irony?

Jesus answered, “.. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.”
Pilate said to Him, “What is truth?” (John 18:37-38)

Someone listening in might have said “Exactly.”

'or something worse may happen to you'

In the gospel reading from last Tuesday, Jesus heals a man who was apparently unable to walk for many years (John 5:1-3,5-16). Afterward, Christ warns him:

‘Now you are well again, be sure not to sin any more, or something worse may happen to you.’

I'd read in some commentary someplace (can't remember by whom) that sin and sickness were commonly associated in ancient times. But it would not be a very Christian attitude to allude irrational superstition to the Son of God. There is, in fact, a lot of empirical evidence for the association.

I can think of a few sins that involve behavior that risks one's health. Violence has its own risks, and a violent life, and certainly when unwarranted (not in war or law enforcement), carries unwarranted extra risks. Substance abuse? Sexual promiscuity certainly comes to mind, too. It is now considered conventional medical wisdom (for example) that there is a strong correlation between promiscuity with multiple partners and STD contraction. If environmentalists can cite violations against the ecosystem, why can't we cite destructive human behavior, too? It doesn't even take being a Catholic to understand that. Perhaps all you need are facts.

Fear

My household has been somewhat plagued with bird mites for the last 3 weeks. I am ever so thankful to God that my wife and kids have been spared the worst of the little critters, but found it almost unbearable to be their human host (the birds were gone, their holes around the house boarded up) of choice. Lack of sleep, paranoia, and overall general discomfort. It was at this time (of Lent, too!) that I realized how weak my trust in God was.

Thank God for two people: my wife, and my doctor. First, my wife was incredibly patient through the tons of laundry she had to do at overdrive right after the house was sprayed with insecticide. She was also much less worried about the mites than I was, and was a source of strength. My doctor, while not an expert in bird mites, did give me good general advice in dealing with the discomforts, but moreso with the weakening faith. He shared the exegesis of his pastor (Evangelical) about Job's plight that had at its origin neither God nor Satan, but in fear. Job exclaimed somewhere in his soliloquy that his worst fears were realized in his trials.

Ecclesiastes 10:8 speaks of a hole in the hedge, whereby a serpent shall come through. Well Satan challenges Job's faithfulness by remarking to God and the hedge that He built around Job, explaining the latter's faithfulness. What hole then did Job make through the hedge? His fear of misfortune, taking away all his riches and happiness. In my case, it was already dawning on me that my confidence in God's protection was too easily shaken, whereas my wife's was rock solid. The anxiety was certainly taking its toll on me in many ways. And while the infestation is not yet over, it has died down without any help from my anxiety. Instead, it was just a matter of time. Meanwhile, I just needed to relax, sleep better, cope, and foster some hope. Not one thing about my problems would be helped by my worrying.

Why are you cast down, my soul, Why groan within me? Hope in God; I will praise him still, My savior and my God. (Psalm 42)

Tolerance ain't Love: not even close

Ms. Juliette Hughes makes a big opinion splash out of the mess in St. Mary's Brisbane parish. It's a rather judgmental piece, which is ironic, and it's also loose with facts, which is.. well.. perhaps standard fare for too many writers when the topic is religion. Her piece revealed too many misconceptions about the Catholic faith, and I sincerely pray for her and her parish priest and/or bishop. They should get together and clarify some rather pressing issues. Foremost of these was the disastrous confusion between love and tolerance.

Tolerance is a postmodern buzz-word. It falls horribly short as a noble cause. Tolerance is about "live and let live". It makes rubbish of responsibility (there is no sense of it) while allowing everyone to feel good about themselves. Love goes much further. Love means accepting an appropriate amount of responsibility. Love means caring beyond the feelings of the loved one. Otherwise, the latter may feel wonderful about their lives while harming themselves in various ways. Leaving them in such a state is not love. Encouraging them to remain in that state is not love. What Ms. Hughes should really be considering are the Catholicism's claims in the case of St. Mary's. She does not sound interested. She dismisses the bishop's views with one short quote.

She prefers tolerance to love. But rejecting love in favor of tolerance rejects so much more: sin (the absence of which accounts for why tolerance must be infinite), forgiveness (since there is no forgiveness if there is no such thing as sin), correction (nothing to correct, eh?), healing (what's to heal if everything is fine?), salvation (if there is no sin, what is there to save us from?). No, ma'am, tolerance ain't love. Ask any parent and they'll tell you. If they've ever had to compel their child away from something clearly harmful, which their child did not understand as being so, they'll tell you: their children deserve love, not tolerance.

Population control and children as burdens: Japan may exhibit the logical conclusion

Startling firsthand account and statistics from Michael Thomas Cibenko in this New Oxford article about Japan's population implosion: http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=0209-cibenko

"The starkest example I encountered was an elementary school that had been built for a student population of at least one hundred. There were several full-size classrooms, a large gymnasium, library, playground, swimming pool, and parking lot. But I was astounded to discover on my first visit that there was only one student. One student with one teacher." ... "I later attended an autumn festival in my village at which elders traditionally take turns calling out the names of babies born that year. But that portion of the festival was very short and somewhat awkward, as there were dozens of senior citizens but only three names to be called." ... ".. I witnessed the bizarre sight of elderly women cuddling robotic dolls. It was explained to me that women buy these expensive dolls because they have no grandchildren to dote on. The dolls, which apparently sell in huge quantities, tell their owners how much they love them, and welcome them when they walk back into the room." ... "In 1950 there were approximately twenty-eight births for every thousand people in the population; in 2007 that number was only eight births per thousand. When one pauses even briefly to consider it, the difference is staggering. It is also interesting to note that the average number of children per Japanese family today is, low and behold, one -- the same as in China. The difference being that in China it's by state mandate; in Japan it's by choice." ... "Japan's population peaked in 2005, and will plunge from its current 127 million to just 89 million in 2050 -- a decline of 30 percent. In terms of median age, Japan is currently the oldest nation on earth. The median age in Japan today is 43 years old, which, from the data I've read, is twice the age of many African nations. Japan will continue to hold this title through the year 2050, when the average age in Japan is projected to be 61 years old." ... "An increasing number of Japanese leaders are looking for the "easy way out" of the dilemma of over-aging, as evidenced by the Japanese Association of Acute Medicine's 2007 recommendation to allow euthanasia for the terminally ill." ... "... in 2007, the government soberly noted that the number of children in Japan has declined for the twenty-sixth consecutive year. Over the past decade more than two thousand junior and senior high schools have closed due to lack of children. Many of these have been converted into homes for the elderly. ... more and more Japanese pediatricians are switching to geriatric medicine." ... "One recent poll revealed that a staggering 70 percent of young Japanese single women say they have no intention of getting married, many of them stating that babies are simply "too much trouble."" ... ".. the only real solution to the plague of depopulation is also rooted in another, yet altogether different, aspect of Western culture, that of Christianity. What Japan really needs to experience is a radical rekindling of the love of God, and as a consequence, love of children."

Power in Sacraments

My niece, who is leaning towards Evangelical Protestantism these days, asked me earlier if I had heard of "Power in Praise", which appears to be this particular book. No objections to the power of praise, and I've been to pentecostal services too (both Evangelical and Catholic). I'm not a great big fan, but I don't mind, assuming it doesn't stand to replace what Christ never meant to be replaced. I'm talking about sacraments.

Such as the sacrament of reconciliation. As the Holy Father explains, it is a restoration of our communion with the Father. We were indeed washed, justified and sanctified in baptism, a sacrament which St. Peter declares saves us, but as we journey through life, we dally with sin on occasion. St. Peter cites the example of someone who once again takes up his vomit. But Christ is the healer, and as he declares to the leper, "of course I want you to be clean". He goes beyond declaring us clean though. He stretches out his arm, touches us, and makes us clean.

Physical. Sacramental. Not because the priest is holy, but because Christ is holy.

And don't get me started on the Eucharist. On second thought, please do. The source and summit of our faith indeed, the Eucharist. Unless we eat of the flesh and blood, meat indeed and drink indeed, then we have no life in us (John 6). Physical. Sacramental. Not because the bread is yummy, or the wine makes us feel good, or that the worship service has great praise and worship music. No, it's because Christ declared it so. His body. His blood. We can't really understand it completely, and it isn't obvious. We might regard it with complete skepticism (or cynicism) as did the Pharisees when they beheld the poor, unknown carpenter from Nazareth. Nothing spectacular to look at. No bells and whistles. As plain as ordinary bread. And that's enough Truth for me.

Rosary Reflections; the agony in the garden

Prolixius, I think I read from St. Josemaria Escriva's book on the Rosary. The Lord was kneeling, and in a "bitter agony." In the mp3 I use as a prayer aid, Mother Angelica invites people to "agonize with Him for souls!" It was perhaps a month ago when I realized just how remiss I was with this: to have grave concern for the salvation of others. My family. My friends. How often do I pray for them? How often do I offer assistance? Encouragement? Advice? Not that I want to be pushy, but neither can I afford to shrug off any responsibility and say "live and let live." And then it hit me: the postmodern culture we have is often about that. Along with "whatever floats your boat" or "if it makes you happy." The unfortunate corollary is then a tendency towards individualism.

And yet there is the Lord in the garden, taking on the sin of the world, so that all may be made anew. The awesome responsibility unfolds before him, one that he embraces completely, as so he does also with the cost, which he should not have to bear. Who is he doing this for? Me. In my sins. But largely unasked and unappreciated, he accepts the yoke. In agony, but committed.

Prayers for Michael Dubruiel..

.., evangelist and writer, and husband of blogger/writer Amy Welborn. He collapsed at the gym and could not be revived. I've only read one piece of Michael's, and it was good and very insightful. Our Sunday Visitor posted this tribute to Michael on their blog.

Blogging around the Net on Humanae Vitae Issues

Some interesting snippets I found tonight:

	"We are told to have sex any time we feel the urge. Condoms are handed out in grade schools. Promiscuity is not only condoned, it’s tacitly encouraged ... But if you should get pregnant and it’s just not a ‘convenient’ time for you, don’t worry, there are Family Planning Services. ... That inconvenient fetus can be surgically ripped from its uterine moorings, ground up and tossed into the trash like so much garbage. "Problem solved, and the mother can resume her egocentric lifestyle. But the scars on that woman’s soul will never quite heal. I’m a man, but I’ve got them on mine." Responding to those who call for abortion to be "legal but rare," Graham asked, "Why rare? "What’s wrong with abortion, that you think it should be a rare occurrence? I’ve had moles removed from my skin. Doctors don’t tell us that a mole removal should be rare. So what’s with this ‘rare’ business? Or is it a tacit agreement that abortion … is plain wrong?
	-- Actor Gary Graham rejecting abortion
	Djerassi, a chemist, novelist and playwright, said that in most of Europe there was now “no connection at all between sexuality and reproduction” he said, “This divide in Catholic Austria, a country which has on average 1.4 children per family, is now complete.”
	-- Dr. Djerassi comments on low birth rates in Austria. (Note the MercatorNet article posted an update where Dr. Djerassi clarifies errors in previous reports.)

I must say I found the comments in the last link somewhat bizarre, for the most part. They range from despair to cold materialism, with a smattering of environmental extremism thrown in.

SSPX Bishop Williamson

As Fr. Z says, he mans up with an apology about his "imprudent comments" about the Holocaust. Insightful enough to be politically sensible, I guess, but I doubt that people would ever let him get away with it anyway. But I have to say that, while the media furor was understandable, I thought it was a teaching moment, too. The bishop was ordained in schism, after all. Lifting the excommunication was because the schism was deemed to be over. The bishop's historical perspectives and actions in publicizing them are obviously wrong, and, yeah, he should be sorted out on those. But I don't want to see excommunication being the blunt instrument used against political, historical, social and various other commentaries, even horribly wrong ones. Perhaps some other disciplinary action to keep him from offending again?

In any case, Israeli Jews seem to understand that Bishop Williamson is (very) wrong and the pope is rejecting his Holocaust views and commentaries.

We've got ants

And the interesting thing is that having a minor ant infestation (they're coming in because they can't handle the 43 C heat outside) helped us discover a few things about the house. Like where we've been sloppy with crumbs. Or we've been holding on to one last chocolate wafer in a pack that is just sitting there with a bag of choc chip cookies. Both packs are several weeks old, up to a month, and no one wants to eat them but the ants. And of course who's been eating in front of computer and dropping crumbs into the keyboard?

Kinda corny drawing life lessons from our problem with ants, but I'll take these lessons anyway. At least they make sense.

Dad, you forgot to put the baby Jesus back in!

Yeah, I did. Little Francis noticed the day after. Not that I meant to, of course, but one of my other kids got so close to breaking it that I had to tuck it away, supposedly until Christmas day. But, naturally, I forgot about it. It probably wasn't a good idea to put it away so out of sight though. Which explains why I ended up forgetting to put it back in.

Which might explain why the same thing happens to lots of people. Even confessing Catholics and Christians forget about Christ when they find a pet cause and put that in the center of their lives. Think world hunger, the environment, self-esteem, feminism, patriotism, getting along with everyone else, political correctness -- it could be anything. And Jesus falls out of the picture and.. well, then all sorts of nuttiness comes from it. Luckily, the Lord is not a willing victim to that. He was done with that on Calvary, but now -- for our sake, not his -- he makes sure that he is being offered someplace to the world that thinks it doesn't need him. That's when you can be sure that it really needs him. And so we have Pope Benedict XVI. And we have wonderful (and typically Pentecostal) Evangelicals -- be they Catholic or Protestant. And we have mothers and children. And even when the world distills Christmas down to its bare jolly-elf-Santa and commercial Christmas-season-at-the-malls shadows, the world still gets more than it bargains for. Not that I like either versions of Christmas, but some osmosis might do secularists some good when, at the back of their minds, they mull over what Christmas really means or what is the point of giving love on Christmas. They might miss the point one year after another, but perhaps this Christmas is different. God willing, they'll have the baby Jesus in it this time.

Thanks to Jimmy Akin's blog where I found the nice painting that goes with this blog post.

Advent Reflections

How do we make straight the way for the Lord? It isn't in being a theologian, nor a lawyer, nor a scholar. What a humbling setting Bethlehem was, that stable, and what a humble beginning Nazareth was. How mundane and simple was the first royal audience given by the Holy Child to shepherds who were told by the angelic host! I wish I could make myself so small, simple and ordinary!

Amnesty International on the wrong side in Nicaragua

AI is soliciting support for "women's rights activists" in Nicaragua who helped a rape victim obtain an abortion. They consider the activists victims, persecuted for defending the right of women to abort their child. They're not mentioning that the activists helped the stepfather rapist escape to Costa Rica. With the rape victim. By whom another child was conceived (now a toddler, I guess).

You'd think that AI would know enough to recognize the real crimes committed here.

[More background details here.]

A remarkable turn of events in Uruguay

What a refreshing development in Uruguay when their president vetoed an abortion law reform bill of sorts, despite the push from his own party in the other direction. Truth and no small degree of charity saved the day. In his own words:

"There is a consensus that abortion is a social evil which must be avoided. Nonetheless, in those countries where abortion has been liberalised, it has increased. In the United States, in the first ten years, they tripled, and the figure has been maintained. It has become customary. The same thing happened in Spain. Laws cannot ignore the reality of the existence of human life in its gestational stage, just as science reveals it. Biology has evolved greatly. Revolutionary discoveries, such as IVF or sequencing the human genome, show that from the moment of conception there is a new human life, a new being. So much so, that in modern legal systems, including our own, DNA has become the acid test of determining the identity of persons, independent of their age, even if the body is destroyed, or when practically nothing is left of the human being, and even after a long time. The true degree of civilisation of a nation is measured by how the neediest are protected. Therefore we must protect the weakest amongst us. Because the criterion is not the value of the subject with respect to how others respond to him, or his usefulness, but the value which exists due to his mere existence... This text also affects freedom of enterprise and association when it imposes upon medical institutions with legally approved statues which have, in some cases, been functioning for more than a hundred years, an obligation to perform abortions, expressly contrary to their foundational principles. The law, furthermore, describes, erroneously and in a strained fashion, against common sense, abortion as a medical act, ignoring international declarations... which reflect the principles of Hippocratic medicine which characterise the doctor as someone who acts in favour of life and physical integrity. In accordance with the particular characteristics of our people, it is better to seek a solution based upon solidarity which promotes women and their babies, giving them the freedom to be able to choose other ways, and in this fashion, to save both of them. We need to tackle the true causes of abortion in our country which are rooted in our socio-economic circumstances. There are many women, particularly in the poorest sectors, who are alone in the task of raising children. Hence, we should protect abandoned women with solidarity, instead of offering them abortions.

As Feminists for Life have been saying for a while now: Women deserve better than abortion. And I would add: as do their babies.

[Source: MercatorNet.]

Serbian abortionist comes to terms with the truth

Strange that an atheist who did not even recognize the name 'Aquinas' received visions of the saintly scholar. Regardless of how it came about, thank God that this man eventually learned the truth.

"That same day a cousin came to the hospital with his four months-pregnant girlfriend, who wanted to get her ninth abortion - something quite frequent in the countries of the Soviet bloc. The doctor agreed. Instead of removing the fetus piece by piece, he decided to chop it up and remove it as a mass. However, the baby's heart came out still beating. Adasevic realized then that he had killed a human being,"

[Source: Lifesite News, CNA]

A logical extension to the principle behind abortion

.. appears to be a reasonable question as to who should be aborted? After all, if abortion is subject to no objective terms of morality, then there isn't really anything wrong with it. Hence, the mother may choose it, the mother's parents or boyfriend or husband may choose it over and above the mother's wishes (being a minor, for example), and perhaps even the government may choose it where it deems it advantageous to do so. And even if the government does not coerce the abortion, it can certainly make it more acceptable. It already does so from a socio-political standpoint, after all, when Victorian adherents in Parliament championed the Abortion Law Reform Bill in order to make the choice more comfortable for doctors and women to make. Why not economic then, such as this proposal to pay for the abortion of handicapped babies in order to save on welfare benefits?

The Australian Parliamentary Group on Population and Development has been slammed by Queensland Senator Ron Boswell for holding to Nazi-style eugenic ideology on the abortion of disabled children. ... The pro-abortion group had made a submission, signed by 41 Australian MPs, to the parliamentary committee that is examining the issue of abortion in Australia. The group said paying women a Medicare rebate for second-trimester abortions would save the government about $180,000 a year, due to the high costs of caring for handicapped babies who are allowed to be born.

Source: Lifesite news

Like a bridge crumbling when its supports are broken from underneath, one beam at a time: that's what happens to law and order when objective notions of right and wrong are discarded.

Karol: A Man Who Became Pope

This is a quick plug of five stars for the DVD. I loved it not simply because it was about a pope. It is simply an awesome story. This man lived through several tragedies, including Nazi as well as Soviet Socialist occupation of Poland. My wife commented later how incredible it was that anyone could possibly remain optimistic. But it isn't just optimism: it is hope. It is hope that comes through faith, and bears fruits of love, all three being gifts from God.

Should you get an opportunity to see it (it is out on DVD), you won't be disappointed.

Sign a Petition Opposing the Abortion Law Reform Bill of 2008

Many thanks to David at Sentire Cum Ecclesia for the link to this online petition that appears to be spearheaded by Dr. Jereth Kok, MBBS.

When Does Life Really Begin?

According to Associate Professor Maureen Condic: it begins at conception. Her white paper, "When Does Life Begin?", is online from the Westchester Institute. Here's an excerpt of an interview she gave Zenit.org (emphasis mine):

Q: You define the moment of conception as the second it takes for the sperm and egg to fuse and form a zygote. What were the scientific principles you used to arrive at this conclusion? Condic: The central question of "when does human life begin" can be stated in a somewhat different way: When do sperm and egg cease to be, and what kind of thing takes their place once they cease to be? To address this question scientifically, we need to rely on sound scientific argument and on the factual evidence. Scientists make distinctions between different cell types (for example, sperm, egg and the cell they produce at fertilization) based on two simple criteria: Cells are known to be different because they are made of different components and because they behave in distinct ways. These two criteria are used throughout the scientific enterprise to distinguish one cell type from another, and they are the basis of all scientific (as opposed to arbitrary, faith-based or political) distinctions. I have applied these two criteria to the scientific data concerning fertilization, and they are the basis for the conclusion that a new human organism comes into existence at the moment of sperm-egg fusion.

Post-election Analysis of the Catholic Church in North America?

It's a pretty good one. More importantly, given that the situation in Australia is not much different, if behind by a few years, here's the big question: What does the Church in Australia do about it? We've recently lost the battle over the Abortion Law Reform bill in the state of Victoria, with a number of self-named Catholic/Christian legislators voting the wrong way. Debate over the Assisted Reproduction Treatment Bill is ongoing, but votes from the same group are once more up in the air.

Witness and scandal

Exit polls in electorates where Obama won showed self-professed Catholics voting mostly Obama. But in electorates where their bishops came out publicly and explicitly against Obama, even where Obama won, Catholics were not as supportive of Obama.

Will the bishops who deliberately stayed silent or left their statements vague remember what the Lord said about scandals and the lukewarm?

Truly, a problem of clear and authoritative teaching.

Update:Like I said.. it's about teaching.

Adopting into single parent households is not a trivial matter

Not as trivial as what was reported by a single parent in The Age anyway ("Single parents eligible to adopt Filipino children", 5 Nov 08, The Age Online):

the evidence showed that children adopted by single people fared just as well as children in two-parent households.

Whereas there is considerable evidence otherwise:

Gunilla Ringbäck Weitoft from Sweden's National Board for Health and Welfare in Stockholm conducted the largest study ever performed on how children are affected by single-parenting. This study, released January 25, 2003 in The Lancet was conducted over the course of a decade (during the 1990s), involving 65,085 children living with a single parent, and 921,257 living with two parents. ...   children with single parents showed increased risks of psychiatric disease, suicide or suicide attempt, injury, and addiction. After adjustment for confounding factors such as socioeconomic status and parents' addiction or mental disease, children in single-parent households were twice as likely to have psychiatric disease compared with those in two-parent households; relative risks of suicide attempt and for alcohol-related disease were also doubled. The risk of childhood narcotic abuse was increased threefold among girls and fourfold among boys living in single-parent households.

I'm not saying that they should not be adopting. Having a loving single parent is much better than being a complete orphan. But having a loving father and a loving mother is still the ideal.

The Culture of Death is coming to invade the Philippines

through a "reproductive health" bill with rather sinister designs all over it. We do need prayers for my former home.

.. Access to contraceptives is already unrestricted in the Philippines. The government family planning service, which has been in place since the 1970s, has an infrastructure of workers all the way down to the grassroots. .. So what is the purpose of House Bill 5043, which is entitled “An Act Providing for a National Policy on Reproductive Health, Responsible Parenthood and Population Development” .. what makes it so objectionable to the church and those legislators and members of the public who are pushing from the other side? The answer is, coercion. The contraceptive-driven fertility decline program of HB 5043 may be the most coercive ever designed outside China. .. it establishes an “ideal” family size, setting the stage for a proposed two-child policy; it imposes a national sex education curriculum at fifth grade level. Couples would be denied a civil marriage license unless they present a “certificate of compliance” from a family planning office certifying that they have been adequately instructed in family planning and “responsible parenthood”. If before, quota-driven programs have led to gross human rights violations, this time around this bill could easily penalize with fines and jail sentences workers who will be unable to meet their quota. Employers who refuse to provide reproductive health care services to their employees will likewise be subject to penalties. Worse, it curtails freedom of speech, since any person who dares to talk against the program will also be subject to jail sentence and fines. This program turns the Philippines into a veritable police state with the government using police powers to interfere in the personal affairs of its citizens. It will surely drive a wedge between couples since a health worker must provide sterilization services even in the absence of spousal permission -- or incur a penalty; and likewise between parents and children, since the latter can have access to reproductive health services without parental consent. In a generation or two, the six years of value-free sex education the bill mandates for school children will surely create sexually active adolescents.

They are all set to turn Filipino society on its head and brings it down the same path of ruin that many western societies now face: millions aborted every year, families broken up by instant gratification, promiscuity and adultery, women objectified, children abandoned in the aftermath of adultery and the pursuit of self-fulfillment with no commitment, etc. Oh what evils these proponents of that bill are toying with.

And if you follow the story in that link, here's a shocker (that isn't so shocking if you've been studying such lobbies worldwide):

In the House, Congressman del Mar revealed departures from the established procedure in the handling of HB 5043. There were actually four reproductive health bills referred to two House committees. A first hearing on three bills took place on April 29 this year. By the second hearing on May 21, however, the committee chairman announced they would now consider “the substitute bill” (replacing all four bills) and, in the blink of an eye, the committees approved it. Usually a technical working group is convened to painstakingly put together the substitute bill. The question is, where did the substitute bill come from? Former Senator Francisco S. Tatad, an incisive commentator, sources HB 5043 to the Philippine Legislative Committee on Population and Development (PLCPD) — an NGO with offices in the same building as the House of Representatives. .. PLCPD is essentially a foreign body. A popular columnist, Jose Sison, reports that PLCPD’s 2008 lobbying fund of two billion pesos comes from the David and Lucille Packard Foundation, IPPF and UNFPA the latter two both well known for their global agenda to legalize abortion.

IPPF -- the International Planned Parenthood Federation. Ring a bell?

Why Embryonic Stem Cell Research?

Perhaps Prof. Alan Trounson knows why, and so he pursues that. But Prof. Colin McGuckin is as puzzled as I am, and so he has given up on U.K. universities where money is poured into ESCR -- and no one is paying attention to adult stem cell research, despite thousands of successful human treatments. I guess actually treating patients is not the goal for these folks?

Lest we be presumptuous

From today's Gospel reading, from St. Luke 13:1-9:

At that time some people who were present there told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with the blood of their sacrifices. He said to them in reply, "Do you think that because these Galileans suffered in this way they were greater sinners than all other Galileans? By no means! But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did! Or those eighteen people who were killed when the tower at Siloam fell on them --do you think they were more guilty than everyone else who lived in Jerusalem? By no means! But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did!" And he told them this parable: "There once was a person who had a fig tree planted in his orchard, and when he came in search of fruit on it but found none, he said to the gardener, 'For three years now I have come in search of fruit on this fig tree but have found none. (So) cut it down. Why should it exhaust the soil?' He said to him in reply, 'Sir, leave it for this year also, and I shall cultivate the ground around it and fertilize it; it may bear fruit in the future. If not you can cut it down.'"

Judge orders a 12-year old to abort her baby

There is so much that is wrong in this picture that I can't figure out where to begin.

Legislating for the next generation

That is precisely what legislators did when they voted for both the Abortion Law Reform bill (passed in both houses of the Victorian Parliament, only amendments may be possible) and the Assisted Reproduction Treatment bill (passed the lower house). These are votes to repeat the mistakes in other countries. A generation stolen from the womb, or a generation undergoing social experiment.

Update: Here's an argument for the social experiment of redefining parenthood and raising children with any number of parents. Good luck finding data to support that. Oh, that doesn't really matter, does it? That explains why they didn't bother with data.

Beauty in the midst of madness

My past few blogs were rather morose, and the video below is so beautiful that it is almost a shock encountering it here. But perhaps it should be here, not so much to lighten the mood as to remind me of hope.

[Thanks to The American Catholic blog for this gem.]

The Abortion Law Reform bill was passed

This makes abortions legal in Victoria without restrictions up to the 24th week, and legal all the way through to full term if two doctors agree that it is necessary. It's a sad day, and I can understand the anger of those in the gallery, but their outbursts may be misconstrued, hurting the pro-life cause in the process.

What to do now? Amendments are now apparently welcome, but who knows which amendments, exactly?

The battleground now is the Victorian society itself. Regardless of abortion being legal, it remains illicit in the Church and unacceptable in orthodox Christian ethics. It now becomes a matter of educating ourselves and our children. This is where we lost the battle in the first place: mis-education or missed education. How many so-called Christians and Catholics advocated for this bill in Parliament? How many ordinary citizens did? How many actually had or facilitated abortions themselves? This is where we lost the battle one generation ago. The ethical deficiencies are self-inflicted, or inflicted by educators and parents who became relativists, conformists to modernity, who stopped challenging their children to be consecrated -- set apart -- for God. We reap what we sow.

The sanctity of human life should be part of catechism. Christians have often lived under unjust laws, but what matters is that they live in justice themselves, for we answer to the Heavenly authority, not civil ones. And then we become leaven. Only then will the secular society be transformed.

Speaking objectively

I had been rather peckish today about vandals painting over the pro-life posters at the university and scribbling their own messages (some rather crude) instead of putting up their own oppositional posters. I had declared that these people weren't satisfied with counter-arguments and felt the need to conceal pro-life sentiments because the former group can't handle the truth. My friend Philip simply said "I wouldn't presume to know why they did that" (painted over the pro-life posters).

Mea culpa. I will try to speak objectively. Truth to tell, I do not know if the falsehoods circulating the arguments of abortion advocates are deliberate or accidental. I know that their logic, premises and data are indeed incorrect, but I have no mind-reading ability, hence I cannot judge them as liars. I have no right, and I am sorry.

IVF bill for gay and lesbian parents passes the Lower House

Ever get that feeling that we're getting hit from multiple angles? So while many are on the phone and email (among others) to their MPs concerning the Abortion Law Reform bill, this IVF bill has zoomed past. It still has the Upper House to hurdle, however, and I hope those who are concerned can muster the time to voice concerns to the Legislative Council about this one, too. Both bills are fraught with problems, e.g., lack of data, foresight, appreciation for the big picture, etc.

Incredible abortion statistics

As previously posted, much of abortion advocacy is based on lies. I'd like to temper that by saying that advocates are not always nor necessarily lying deliberately. However, they can be typically unwilling to dig deeper into the issues. I came into the university today to find that campus posters paint and scribbles on top of quoted abortion survivors (born alive after an abortion, fortuitously given medical care and now are scarred but competent adults). The quotes were painted over with red. Some angry scribbles were put in.

What sort of truths are out there? Note these statistics which apparently come from the Guttmacher Institute, itself a well known advocate for abortion "rights":

UNITED STATES Number of abortions per year: 1.37 Million (1996) Number of abortions per day: Approximately 3,700 ... Who's having abortions (income)? Women with family incomes less than $15,000 obtain 28.7% of all abortions; Women with family incomes between $15,000 and $29,999 obtain 19.5%; Women with family incomes between $30,000 and $59,999 obtain 38.0%; Women with family incomes over $60,000 obtain 13.8%. Why women have abortions 1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient). ...

So let's go back to facts: what is the abortion lobby about, really?

By their fruits indeed

Over the years, one would notice (if research is actually conducted sincerely) that much of the lobbying to legalize and facilitate abortion on demand is based on lies. When NARAL Pro-Choice America in the US was conceived (simply as NARAL), according to one of its founders, they deliberately exaggerated the number of deaths due to backyard abortions:

"How many [maternal] deaths were we talking about when abortion was illegal? In N.A.R.A.L. we generally emphasized the drama of the individual case, not the mass statistics, but when we spoke of the latter it was always '5,000 to 10,000 deaths a year.' I confess that I knew the figures were totally false, and I suppose the others did too if they stopped to think of it. In 1967, the federal government listed only 160 deaths from illegal abortion. In the last year before the Blackmun era began, 1972, the total was only 39 deaths. [T]he actual total was probably closer to 500." [Aborting America, p. 193.] When it comes to lying, NARAL has continued being "tough and persistent, undiscouraged and unbowed."

The same lies are being used today in Mexico:

Citing the number of women who had had abortions legally in the nation's capital since legalization, Velasco claimed, "What the 12 thousand that were served in the Federal District means is that it is probable that two thousand would have died" had legal abortion not been available. However, Mexico City's own health department gives statistics that differ dramatically from Velasco's estimates of deaths due to illegal abortions. In the year before legalization, the health department recorded that only eight women died from miscarriages and induced abortions. The city does not distinguish between miscarriage and illegal abortions in its official statistics, so it is unknown how many of the eight deaths were caused by illegal induced abortions.

That's one problem I have with the abortion agenda: the obfuscation and outright lies. Here in Victoria is another one: hiding the fact that the Abortion Law Reform bill contradicts existing laws and international agreements. Why can't abortion proponents stick to the truth?

And has anyone else found this eerie echo between the so-called "Abortion Law Reform" bill and the "National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws" (the original name of NARAL)? Surely there is no connection -- it isn't as if the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (who earned about $115 million in profits, according to their last annual report) is planning to set up shop here in Australia. Right?

Is the abortion debate steering off course?

The latest abortion-related issue is concerning Catholic hospitals. The debate on the parliamentary floor is on decriminalizing abortion completely, and extending abortion beyond 24 months upon the say-so of two doctors. Pretty soon the debate will likely be about partial-birth abortion. Nothing new here as this has happened or is still happening elsewhere. No one even blinks an eye anymore that a US presidential candidate voted against protecting newborn infants who survive an abortion. Abortion has become so mainstream that it is a wonder how its advocates are not even looking at the overwhelming evidence of abortion's devastating consequences to women, families and society at large.

What bugs me is that all these things are peripheral to the real problem: that deliberate abortion is wrong. The Catholic hospitals issue is already in itself a concession to a society that has legalized abortion. No society that legalizes abortion has ever really confronted the fact that abortion is unjust. Nor has it been seriously considered that other options are far more ideal, such as providing sufficient state support for women to see the pregnancy through to keep the child or have the child adopted. Women deserve better than abortions, but governments refuse to investigate further.

As it stands, with so many people getting it wrong on abortion, including Catholics, the job of the Church is to go on the offense: educating people. And this is a truly critical task. For we can now see far too many Catholics, including lawmakers, repeat the anti-Catholic lines about Church control. They're not even aware that their very dissent proves that the Church CANNOT exercise the draconian control that they are protesting. Ironically, the current debate is actually about how the State threatens to wield such dictatorial authority over Catholic doctors and nurses, who view abortion as murder, but will be compelled to be complicit to murder through referrals.

Update: Found this article with some data on late term abortions for psychosocial, no health-related reasons. This supports a separate thesis of mine, that people are not paying enough attention to where this is all going. Yesterday, restricted abortions. Today, if Morand has her way, unrestricted abortions, tomorrow, partial birth abortions?

The Age Polls: Should Catholic hospitals be forced to comply with the new abortion laws?

I'm not sure what new abortion laws they speak of here, since the Abortion Law Reform bill has not yet been legislated. It has passed the Lower House, but must still go through the Upper House in a few weeks.

In any case, the poll as it stands now is a big "Yes", obviously from non-Catholics who find nothing wrong with the State dictating over the doctrines of the Church while at other times (when it suits them) crying "separation of Church and State". Please visit the poll and make your views count. Polls are a dime a dozen, but in this day and age, many people actually let polls shape their principles. Tragic, I know..

Update: this abortion law is about forcing hospitals to refer women seeking abortion to abortion providers. Our Archbishop has spoken out against this. We refer to this as cooperating with evil, which in itself is a grave and objective evil, given the nature of what is at stake (murder). The government would use the term "collusion" or "aiding and abetting" in other situations, but obviously not when it is an abortion.

Stop the Abortion Law Reform Bill

Someone from the university has kindly prepared several PDF documents containing contact information about specific members of parliament and the legislative council, as well as letters urging them to oppose the Abortion Law Reform Bill here in Victoria. It is probably preferred that the letters are given a personal touch, but note that whatever is written must be given in charity and respect. These people are not enemies: they are public servants whom we should pray for and assist in their decision-making. Our role is not berate them, but to voice our concerns to them, in the hope that we will influence their understanding. Marcin (who prepared these documents) sends along this explanation for the various documents in the zip file linked to above:

1. find out what your Legislative Council Region is by seeing "list_of_council_members-3.pdf" (Clayton is in the SouthEastern Region)
2. open the PDF for your Council Region (western, northern, etc.) and fill out the forms with your Name and Address up the top and Name down the bottom (copy and paste will do the trick) for all FIVE members.
3. find out who's your Assembly MP by seeing "assembly_members-4.pdf" and filling out and printing ONE of the letters in that PDF
4. sign and send them (each in separate envelope with name of MP on the front) to Parliament House, East Melbourne, Vic 3002
Or type up your own letters. Or, even better, hand write them. Or even better visit an MP or two in person.

This fight isn't about condemning women who obtain abortions. It's about saving lives: the mother's, the father's and the baby's.

Sydney lab cleared to clone human embryos

It did not involve the creation of a human life. "We are not creating an embryo for reproductive purposes," Dr Stojanov said.

-- The Age (online), 17 September 2008

So... creating an embryo does not involve the creation of human life? And these guys are IVF professionals? What's their batting average then??

One body

First reading today from Corinthians 12,12-14.27-31.

As a body is one though it has many parts, and all the parts of the body, though many, are one body, so also Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, slaves or free persons, and we were all given to drink of one Spirit. Now the body is not a single part, but many. Now you are Christ's body, and individually parts of it. Some people God has designated in the church to be, first, apostles; second, prophets; third, teachers; then, mighty deeds; then, gifts of healing, assistance, administration, and varieties of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work mighty deeds? Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? Strive eagerly for the greatest spiritual gifts. But I shall show you a still more excellent way.

And came a Jehovah's witness a-knocking at my door

.. and fool that I was, there I stood chatting with him at the doorway, leaving my work undone. :-) It was a pleasant enough chat, though it took almost an hour, it seems, and plans to bring the family to a barbecue were abandoned. I should have held my tongue, but I cannot do so when told that there is no immortal soul, that there is no eternal punishment, that the kingdom of God on earth started less than a century ago. Oh and the 144,000 in Revelations is taken literally, but not Christ's words about eternal punishment. Hmm... And my Evangelical wife stayed wisely indoors. But I didn't have the heart to hurry the man along. He was old enough to be my father, and kindly, and obviously sincere, if a bit inconsistent in exegesis.

The Glory of the Cross

Today we celebrated a feast of the Exaltation of the Cross. Glory to God in the highest whose mercy and kindness was graciously given to us not only in spite of but through death and horror. As the poisonous serpents were foiled by the serpent raised up on a standard, so was the torturous horror of crucifixion foiled by the Savior crucified. O happy cross, too, that foiled thereby the wages of sin through the innocent Lamb who took the penalty of sin unto his own flesh!

Authority and Reason

Today's Gospel reading (Luke 4:31-37) relates the amazement of the Lord's audience at his authority to teach and command. He taught at the synagogue with authority, and he commanded the unclean spirit to depart the man it was afflicting. Behind all this is the divine power which is God's alone; I think divinity is the basis for authority. Perhaps it is not too much of a stretch to consider that it is also the basis for reason, for what can be rational if it is not based on unassailable, perfect, eternal (and thus divine) Truth? What can be logical if it is not based on objective and true premises?

The commentary cited by DailyGospel.org from Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) is worth repeating here:

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger [Pope Benedict XVI] Lenten sermons 1981 "What is there about his word?" The moment that the Bible calls «the beginning» points us to the One who had the power to create what is and to say: «Let there be...!» and it was (Gen 1,1-3)... That phrase «Let there be..!» did not bring mindless chaos into existence. The more we get to understand the universe, the more we discover a rationality in it whose ways, interpenetrated by thought, amaze us. Through them we find again that creator Spirit to whom we, too, owe our reason. Albert Einstein wrote that the laws of nature: «Manifest so superior a reason that all other rationality of human thought and will seem, by comparison, to be an absolutely insignificant reflection of it.» We note that the infinitely great universe of stars is ruled by the power of Reason [Logos]. But we learn even more concerning this from the infinitely small, the cell, the fundamental elements of living things. There, too, we discover a rationality that astonishes us, so that we have to say with Saint Bonaventure: «Anyone who cannot see this is blind. Anyone who cannot hear it is deaf. And anyone who does not start praying and praising the Creator Spirit at this point, is dumb»... Through creation's rationality, God himself confronts us. Physics, biology, all the sciences generally, have offered us an account of the new and unheard of creation. Such great, new images help us to know the Creator's face. They remind us, yes, that in the beginning, and in the depth of every being, stands the Creator Spirit. The world has not issued forth from darkness and absurdity. It resonates intelligence, freedom, the beauty that is love. Seeing all this gives us the courage that makes living possible and makes us able to take up confidently on our shoulders the adventure of life.