From Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council:
Friday, January 29, 2010
Many are called...
So, in doing my dishes yet again today, I found myself in one of those "theological dissertations" that you can really only have when you're up to your elbows in dishsoap.
This time I was thinking about my siblings. We're all grown now and out of our parents' homes. We are doing well for ourselves, at least decently earning a living, etc. My brother (has cerebral palsy, but that's another story for another blog post) is single, lives on his own, and works for the town. My sister is divorced, lives with some roommates in a farm house, and works for the local Catholic hospital. I'm the youngest of the three of us, and am the only one who still practices the Catholic Faith.
I began to wonder how this happens in families, that only a select one or two out of a family of children uphold the Teachings of the Faith. I mean, in my situation, we were all given the same opportunities to learn and love the Faith growing up. My sister and I attended the same all-girls' Catholic High School, we were taught from the same Sisters, learned the Catechism at the same time. My brother went to Mass with our family and learned the same lessons as we all did growing up. We actually weren't "cradle Catholics" in that my sister, my brother, and I all entered the Faith in our teens. So if anything we were even more "on fire" with our Faith than many of our Catholic peers. By and large we were given the same chances to grow in, and to live, our Faith. Then I wonder why I'm the only one who still strives to live the Teachings of the Church.
I know I'm not alone in this conundrum, as my husband's family has the same situation (although slightly different, as his family members still attend Sunday Mass, but they all contracept, love Dan Brown, and believe pretty much in relative morality.) I started to try to justify our lifestyle choices in that many are called but few are chosen, and my husband and I were given singular graces to have the nuclear family and Faith that we do. And there is truth to that, but I would ardently reject that notion that these same graces weren't offered to my siblings (or siblings-in-law).
Faith in family life (meaning you, your spouse, and children) comes down to an act of the will. It must be a conscientous choice of "yes Lord, I'm going to follow you and abide by the tenets you have established in your Immaculate Bride, the Church". It cannot be that it just "happens", that some children "get the Faith" and some just "don't". And I think its good to look on these things, and "ponder them in the heart", to learn that valuable lesson before my own children are grown with children of their own, deliberating the Faith and whether or not to follow it.
This moment, this fiat, this choice to "come and follow" our Lord has to come at a point. And I think the graces necessary for that moment, for that choice, must come to us in the Sacrament of Confirmation. I think Confirmation is the opportunity for God to send the call, and for us to respond. Because, at least in North America under standard theological norms, young adults receive the sacrament of Confirmation as their "graduation" from CCD. At least that is the way it is perceived and in most cases, presented. And while no one feels love lost for not spending Tuesday and Wednesday nights in the Church basement with a bunch of their CCD classmates, coloring pictures of St. Therese and playing with Tickle Me Jesus, there is a sense of relief when those "Faith Formation" classes come to a close. But is that really all Confirmation is? Recently I had the random and wonderful opportunity to meet Raymond DeSouza, a Catholic apologist, and a worker at Human Life International. He had the most clear and defining portrayal of what the Sacrament of Confirmation really is. I quote him here, "At Baptism, we become citizens of God's Kingdom. At Confirmation, we become soldiers of God's Kingdom." I found that to be very profound, and could correlate it by looking closer at this kingdom. Children in a nation act and respond to their government differently than their parents do. At Confirmation we're given a moment in which to take on our citizenship in an adult way, as our parents do. No more hand-holding, no more forced "Faith Formation" classes, no more "you're going to be grounded if you don't get to Mass on Sunday" moments. We must take up the Cross as adults and follow after our Lord, or sadden him when "many turn away". At Confirmation its our chance too, to honestly and humbly say, I am still a child in my Faith, help me grow. At this point we can honestly assess that we are not ready (and not base it on some arbitrary age requirement that given enough time will change anyway) and continue to live as children in his kingdom until we are prepared for a life in the Faith. Or we can pray for the guidance and wisdom to answer His call depending entirely on His grace to help us along the way. Or we can just go through the motions and get it done, and then become derelicts in the Faith. Sadly, I know of many of my Confirmation classmates that have chosen the latter, and now don't even practice the Faith.
So when we look at siblings, friends, and other family members, its important to note that they are still being called. Constantly called back to the Faith, to the Father. We must witness to them in Charity and Truth, even when our lives fall on deaf ears. But I don't believe that the gift of Faith is the same as the gift of music or the gift of writing in each child. Christ would not give up any one of these "least of our brothers" (no meaning implied in that), even if has to offer this gift again and again and again. I believe that when it comes to the Faith, that "all are called, all are chosen".
This time I was thinking about my siblings. We're all grown now and out of our parents' homes. We are doing well for ourselves, at least decently earning a living, etc. My brother (has cerebral palsy, but that's another story for another blog post) is single, lives on his own, and works for the town. My sister is divorced, lives with some roommates in a farm house, and works for the local Catholic hospital. I'm the youngest of the three of us, and am the only one who still practices the Catholic Faith.
I began to wonder how this happens in families, that only a select one or two out of a family of children uphold the Teachings of the Faith. I mean, in my situation, we were all given the same opportunities to learn and love the Faith growing up. My sister and I attended the same all-girls' Catholic High School, we were taught from the same Sisters, learned the Catechism at the same time. My brother went to Mass with our family and learned the same lessons as we all did growing up. We actually weren't "cradle Catholics" in that my sister, my brother, and I all entered the Faith in our teens. So if anything we were even more "on fire" with our Faith than many of our Catholic peers. By and large we were given the same chances to grow in, and to live, our Faith. Then I wonder why I'm the only one who still strives to live the Teachings of the Church.
I know I'm not alone in this conundrum, as my husband's family has the same situation (although slightly different, as his family members still attend Sunday Mass, but they all contracept, love Dan Brown, and believe pretty much in relative morality.) I started to try to justify our lifestyle choices in that many are called but few are chosen, and my husband and I were given singular graces to have the nuclear family and Faith that we do. And there is truth to that, but I would ardently reject that notion that these same graces weren't offered to my siblings (or siblings-in-law).
Faith in family life (meaning you, your spouse, and children) comes down to an act of the will. It must be a conscientous choice of "yes Lord, I'm going to follow you and abide by the tenets you have established in your Immaculate Bride, the Church". It cannot be that it just "happens", that some children "get the Faith" and some just "don't". And I think its good to look on these things, and "ponder them in the heart", to learn that valuable lesson before my own children are grown with children of their own, deliberating the Faith and whether or not to follow it.
This moment, this fiat, this choice to "come and follow" our Lord has to come at a point. And I think the graces necessary for that moment, for that choice, must come to us in the Sacrament of Confirmation. I think Confirmation is the opportunity for God to send the call, and for us to respond. Because, at least in North America under standard theological norms, young adults receive the sacrament of Confirmation as their "graduation" from CCD. At least that is the way it is perceived and in most cases, presented. And while no one feels love lost for not spending Tuesday and Wednesday nights in the Church basement with a bunch of their CCD classmates, coloring pictures of St. Therese and playing with Tickle Me Jesus, there is a sense of relief when those "Faith Formation" classes come to a close. But is that really all Confirmation is? Recently I had the random and wonderful opportunity to meet Raymond DeSouza, a Catholic apologist, and a worker at Human Life International. He had the most clear and defining portrayal of what the Sacrament of Confirmation really is. I quote him here, "At Baptism, we become citizens of God's Kingdom. At Confirmation, we become soldiers of God's Kingdom." I found that to be very profound, and could correlate it by looking closer at this kingdom. Children in a nation act and respond to their government differently than their parents do. At Confirmation we're given a moment in which to take on our citizenship in an adult way, as our parents do. No more hand-holding, no more forced "Faith Formation" classes, no more "you're going to be grounded if you don't get to Mass on Sunday" moments. We must take up the Cross as adults and follow after our Lord, or sadden him when "many turn away". At Confirmation its our chance too, to honestly and humbly say, I am still a child in my Faith, help me grow. At this point we can honestly assess that we are not ready (and not base it on some arbitrary age requirement that given enough time will change anyway) and continue to live as children in his kingdom until we are prepared for a life in the Faith. Or we can pray for the guidance and wisdom to answer His call depending entirely on His grace to help us along the way. Or we can just go through the motions and get it done, and then become derelicts in the Faith. Sadly, I know of many of my Confirmation classmates that have chosen the latter, and now don't even practice the Faith.
So when we look at siblings, friends, and other family members, its important to note that they are still being called. Constantly called back to the Faith, to the Father. We must witness to them in Charity and Truth, even when our lives fall on deaf ears. But I don't believe that the gift of Faith is the same as the gift of music or the gift of writing in each child. Christ would not give up any one of these "least of our brothers" (no meaning implied in that), even if has to offer this gift again and again and again. I believe that when it comes to the Faith, that "all are called, all are chosen".
AIDS/HIV vaccines don't work. Really?!?
From Population Research Institute:
When one of the world's leading researchers announces that the search for an HIV/AIDS vaccine is unlikely to bear fruit, everyone should take notice. Chastity remains, as it always has been, the only answer.
Steven W. Mosher
Don't Expect an HIV/AIDS Vaccine, Researchers Say
by Joan Robinson
Our hearts go out to infant victims of HIV/AIDS, with their skeletal limbs and rib-ridged stomachs, and some would argue that these could be saved by the development of an HIV/AIDS vaccine.
Not Dr. Bonnie Dunbar, the founder of the Africa Biomedical Center in Kenya, who works daily with victims of HIV and other infectious diseases. Speaking at the 4th International Public Conference on Vaccination, the famed researcher argued that billions of dollars are being wasted on research for an HIV/AIDS vaccine, when there are far more pressing African health needs to address.
Over the years, Dr. Dunbar has received many awards for her efforts to develop a contraceptive vaccine. She recently abandoned this research because all of her trial vaccines turned out not to contracept, but to sterilize, destroying the ovaries of the animals into which it was injected.
Because of her decades of experience in Africa, Dr. Dunbar knows what we in the West have forgotten, namely, that Africans suffer not only from HIV/AIDS, but also from many other STDs and infectious diseases. Not only that, but acquired drug resistance, malnutrition, dehydration, and terrible sanitary conditions are a problem throughout sub-Saharan Africa. All of these factors combine to render Africans particularly susceptible to HIV/AIDS.
Indeed, so compromised are the immune systems of many African children and adults that Dr. Dunbar questions whether they are capable of the immunological response required for a vaccine to be effective. She believes that increased attention to basic health care needs through improved diet and clean drinking water might do much more to reduce disease than a vaccine.
Moreover, not only is there no effective HIV/AIDS vaccine available at present, she believes that it may be impossible to develop one.
Dr. Chuck Wira's celebrated research in reproductive immunology, combined with her own findings, have convinced her that any vaccine for HIV/AIDS will do nothing to prevent heterosexual transmission, which is the chief problem in Africa.
The reasons for this are highly technical, but let me summarize as best I can. First of all, according to Dr. Dunbar, a woman's uterus has very susceptible HIV receptors. And immune responses on the part of the reproductive tract won't stop HIV.
Why is this? For two-thirds of the month the reproductive tract is very active, in an immunological sense. The cervix secretes antibodies that react against foreign bacteria (and sometimes against sperm). The uterus has active cell immunity. The oviducts secrete endogenous microbicides to attack bacteria.
But then, right in the middle of a woman's cycle, the entire immune system of the reproductive tract shuts down for ten days. It shuts down in order to avoid attacking incoming sperm, which are totally foreign, and to protect any fertilized zygotes--tiny human beings--who may be conceived. The hormones of mid-cycle cause both the humoral and cellular immune systems to be depressed so as to facilitate fertilization and implantation.
As Dr. Dunbar explains, “That's the body saying, 'Oh, we've got to hold back. We need that embryo and we need that embryo to implant and we can't attack it.' So this again is the beauty of Mother Nature, helping perpetuate the species through effective reproductive biology.”
So what does all this mean for the development of an HIV/AIDS vaccine? According to Dr. Dunbar, “The implications for heterosexual transmission of HIV/AIDS and some of these other diseases is that for ten days it doesn't matter what you have in your blood system [by way of antibodies] … your reproductive tract is going to be shutting down, totally independent. . . . And so a vaccine that induces either humoral or cellular immunity would not be likely to be effective for preventing STD infections or HIV during mid-cycle in the female.”
“No one to my knowledge has really looked at this in the vaccine development.” Dr. Dunbar concluded. “I think this is one of the reasons why they've not been successful in many cases.”
The billions of dollars being spent on HIV and STD vaccine development would be much better spent on basic food and water, Dr. Dunbar asserted. “I would like to say that poor nutrition and water sources are basically our nightmare in Africa. Our most effective vaccine is a glass of clean water.”
Though I agree with Dr. Dunbar in her plea for clean water and nutritive food, we parted company when she called for more "population control" in Africa.
In the past, she has worked as a staff scientist on population issues with The Population Council, Rockefeller University, and as an advisor to USAID and WHO in the population-target developing nations of China, India, South America, and Africa. She continues to believe that, “If population growth and other basic health issues are not addressed immediately on the global scale, emerging disease problems as well as environmental damage, global warming, will cause insurmountable problems.”
But on the question of an HIV/AIDS vaccine, I think that she is a thoroughly credible witness.
If the African people are able to access the clean drinking water and grow the nutritious food that their countries are capable of producing, disease of all kinds, including HIV/AIDS, will decrease.
We could help.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
The only thing worse than the State of our Union was the State of the Union Address
Yes, I admit I watched it last night, President Obama's release of hot air. My husband and I sat and watched the State of the Union address while following the live feed on Catholic Vote Action, and I have to thank them for their comedic relief. Otherwise I found Obama once again dark and depressing.
In fairness to Obama, I think he came in with pre-conceived notions of how the speech would go:
and I think he was knocked off his game when people didn't receive him in the usual fashion. Now President Obama is not new to uncomfortability. Afterall, he had to sit through some State of the Union addresses that left him wiggling in his seat too.
So I think he had to resort to the usual tactics. And this is where his hypocrasy began to get the better of me...As he's talking out one side of his mouth about "doing away with the bitter disputes of bi-partisanship" he became intent on finding new scapegoats. He enjoyed the usual roast,
But realizing his crowd wasn't going to let him get away with it for more than a year, he turned on some new tricks. When talking about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, he couldn't help himself in throwing some officials under the bus...But I guess under this CIC's watch, they're getting used to it.
And then, when they stop putting their hands in his pocket, Obama comes out with a sneak attack. Although considering their recent rulings, I guess those looks of surprise on their faces were'nt really an appropriate response?
He talked briefly of the women who marched recently in Iraq to secure their rights. I found the silence in failing to recognize the largest gathering of people in defense of life on the steps of his Supreme Court last Friday to be glaring. But as is typical with this pro-death President let's fail to recognize the truth:
And instead, let's chase after science fiction.
My husband mentioned that he could have shortened his lengthy talk by just promising tax cuts across the board. I wondered what would have happened if he had simply tried telling the truth...Would President Obama have bothered to show up at all then?
I'm well aware that many of my friends and family voted for this President. Many of my fellow Catholics promised he was our "best bet" even though he was militantly pro-death. Sadly it is estimated that 80% of our Bishops also voted for "that one". I know their consciences are screaming at them at this point, as several voters have stepped out to express their regret. Even then I am wary of them. What are they regretful of? That Obama isn't paying their mortgage? That he isn't paying off their credit cards? Giving them free health care yet? Are they merely upset that he hasn't yet followed through on his campaign promises? Or do they see the substantial effects of letting a Margaret Sanger wannabe loose on the Capitol? Do they regret their vote as Silent no More regrets abortion? Or do they recognize that through their actions, they have promoted abortion all over the world? I'm not condemning, because you can't change the past. And now, even if at best they understand the error of their ways and want to amend them, we're stuck for the next three years with a man who is attempting on every front to dismantle this nation. There may not be a next election in which these prodigals can redeem themselves. If I sound bitter its because many of these zealots dragged me along on this "social justice" experiment gone wrong.
And yet, last night, weary from the struggles of our economic downturn, fighting to keep my family afloat and my faith in this One Nation Under God alive, I came to listen to some form of reassurance from our "great leader". And what did we end up with? More of the empty lies and rhetoric, more of the name calling and villanizing, more of the promises that will not be fulfilled. Even the spending freeze will have to wait. Because we elected a man who does not understand the rebuplic he governs. He does not understand the values of its citizens that he continues to try and thwart. He does not understand this nation's vast resources, her mission inherent to her founding to be One Nation Under GOD. That's the first time in a long time I've heard this pagan even mention God in an address.
I will continue to pray and sacrifice, and fight for the future of my nation - both for my children, and their unborn children too. And if I could say just one thing to those who voted for him with the "best Christian intent", I guess it would best be surmised this way:
In fairness to Obama, I think he came in with pre-conceived notions of how the speech would go:
and I think he was knocked off his game when people didn't receive him in the usual fashion. Now President Obama is not new to uncomfortability. Afterall, he had to sit through some State of the Union addresses that left him wiggling in his seat too.
So I think he had to resort to the usual tactics. And this is where his hypocrasy began to get the better of me...As he's talking out one side of his mouth about "doing away with the bitter disputes of bi-partisanship" he became intent on finding new scapegoats. He enjoyed the usual roast,
But realizing his crowd wasn't going to let him get away with it for more than a year, he turned on some new tricks. When talking about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, he couldn't help himself in throwing some officials under the bus...But I guess under this CIC's watch, they're getting used to it.
And then, when they stop putting their hands in his pocket, Obama comes out with a sneak attack. Although considering their recent rulings, I guess those looks of surprise on their faces were'nt really an appropriate response?
He talked briefly of the women who marched recently in Iraq to secure their rights. I found the silence in failing to recognize the largest gathering of people in defense of life on the steps of his Supreme Court last Friday to be glaring. But as is typical with this pro-death President let's fail to recognize the truth:
And instead, let's chase after science fiction.
My husband mentioned that he could have shortened his lengthy talk by just promising tax cuts across the board. I wondered what would have happened if he had simply tried telling the truth...Would President Obama have bothered to show up at all then?
I'm well aware that many of my friends and family voted for this President. Many of my fellow Catholics promised he was our "best bet" even though he was militantly pro-death. Sadly it is estimated that 80% of our Bishops also voted for "that one". I know their consciences are screaming at them at this point, as several voters have stepped out to express their regret. Even then I am wary of them. What are they regretful of? That Obama isn't paying their mortgage? That he isn't paying off their credit cards? Giving them free health care yet? Are they merely upset that he hasn't yet followed through on his campaign promises? Or do they see the substantial effects of letting a Margaret Sanger wannabe loose on the Capitol? Do they regret their vote as Silent no More regrets abortion? Or do they recognize that through their actions, they have promoted abortion all over the world? I'm not condemning, because you can't change the past. And now, even if at best they understand the error of their ways and want to amend them, we're stuck for the next three years with a man who is attempting on every front to dismantle this nation. There may not be a next election in which these prodigals can redeem themselves. If I sound bitter its because many of these zealots dragged me along on this "social justice" experiment gone wrong.
And yet, last night, weary from the struggles of our economic downturn, fighting to keep my family afloat and my faith in this One Nation Under God alive, I came to listen to some form of reassurance from our "great leader". And what did we end up with? More of the empty lies and rhetoric, more of the name calling and villanizing, more of the promises that will not be fulfilled. Even the spending freeze will have to wait. Because we elected a man who does not understand the rebuplic he governs. He does not understand the values of its citizens that he continues to try and thwart. He does not understand this nation's vast resources, her mission inherent to her founding to be One Nation Under GOD. That's the first time in a long time I've heard this pagan even mention God in an address.
I will continue to pray and sacrifice, and fight for the future of my nation - both for my children, and their unborn children too. And if I could say just one thing to those who voted for him with the "best Christian intent", I guess it would best be surmised this way:
Amen.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
God and Government
In proportion as Americans let go of faith in the absolute power of God, they have accepted the belief in an all powerful State. This is true of peoples or nations, for their idea of God determines the form of their civil, political, religious and social institutions . . . Each religion has a form of government, and Christianity astonished the world by establishing self-government . . . Reading and studying American history revealed the fact that this nation is unique; it had a singular beginning; it has the sacred covenant of individual freedom or local self-government in all spheres entrusted to its care.
Verna Hall, The Christian History of the Constitution of the United States:
Christian Self-Government, 1960, pp II-III.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)