Saturday, September 06, 2008


Since Vatican II, the word "pastoral" has been bandied about with never a clear indication of exactly what this means. There's no definition of it in the CCC, even though Vatican II itself was said to be "pastoral".

An article at Catholic News Service uses this concept of "pastoral" in a discussion of something unrelated.

Even when Pope Benedict XVI speaks, of course, it's not always with full papal authority. In question-and-answer sessions with priests, he sometimes prefaces his remarks by emphasizing that he's only offering them pastoral advice, not infallible directions.

How often does a pope speak "pastorally", and what does it means when he does so? Is this a way of speaking out of both sides of your mouth, saying yes on the right and no on the left? Does it mean that it's ok to take this as gospel truth today, but tomorrow it may not be ok at all? Does it mean a suspension of tradition that may be only temporary? Does it mean I haven't got a clue but this seems logical? And the real question--does it mean that if we act in some way that in the present circumstances seems to be a reasonable and responsible response to them even though it isn't in line with official doctrine, that there will be no penalty due to sin for our actions? That last is what it appears to mean to me.


A high-profile Maryknoll priest is standing by his decision to take part in a woman's priestly "ordination" ceremony despite being reprimanded by his Ossining-based Catholic community and facing possible disciplinary action by the Vatican.

The Rev. Roy Bourgeois has become a prominent figure for his long-time protests against the School of the Americas, a U.S. Army operation at Fort Benning, Ga., that trains Latin American soldiers. An annual demonstration organized by Bourgeois has in recent years drawn upward of 20,000 people who contend the school is linked to human rights abuses in numerous countries.

Bourgeois was called to Ossining on Aug. 18 by Maryknoll's leadership to discuss his involvement 10 days earlier in an "ordination" ceremony for a female friend in Lexington, Ky. Bourgeois gave the liturgy, even though the Vatican has threatened excommunication for those who participate in such ceremonies.

Read the story...


at rense.com Interesting, though keeping the family relationships straight might prove to be a challenge.

CNN.com provides a glimpse behind the curtain titled "Behind the Scenes: Meet George Obama", Barak's half-brother.


The Florida Sun Sentinel reports on the party atmosphere at the Democratic National Convention, listing the numerous bands that graced convention parties, including:

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom is host of an outdoor indie music festival Wednesday evening at the Manifest Hope Art Gallery. The event includes such bands as Clap Your Hands Say Yeah, Cold War Kids, Nada Surf, Death Cab for Cutie and She & Him. (No, the band wasn't named after Hillary and Obama.)

The L.A. Times columnist, Joel Stein also notes the presence of the band Clap Your Hands Say Yeah:

I was at a party thrown by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom featuring a bunch of indie bands, including Clap Your Hands Say Yeah, which played its catchy new song "Satan Said Dance." The chorus goes like this: "Satan! Satan! Satan! Satan! Satan! Satan! Satan! Satan! Satan!" And I had my video camera.

So, under huge H-O-P-E letters and alongside giant posters of Obama as Abraham Lincoln, the band started yelling, "Satan! Satan! Satan!" And by the second chorus, the entire crowd of hundreds starting singing along, shouting, "Satan! Satan! Satan!," many pumping their fists in the air. That's when it finally struck me that video of the Democratic Party faithful chanting for the devil was footage Sean Hannity would love to broadcast over and over. Even the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. would not approve of this tape.

Unfortunately, I am not very good with video cameras. Also, altitude makes beer more potent, as does drinking a vast quantity of it. So my video is dark, the H-O-P-E is out of frame and I missed the audience chant altogether. But I did capture the band yelling "Satan! Satan! Satan!"

The L.A. Opinion blog offers the video on YouTube and suggests that it isn't possible to hear what Stein claims is there. I agree. I couldn't hear the word "Satan" in the YouTube video either.

I can, however, hear the word Satan quite clearly at technorati.com where a clip of the "Satan Said Dance" video is available for your listening pleasure.

If you want to know what else in in the song besides the Satan chorus, check out the lyrics.

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!

Friday, September 05, 2008


A Few readers have sent in links to the website of the Diocese of Mostar-Duvno where a letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has been posted concerning the canonical status of Fr. Tomislav Vlasic:

The Canonical status of Rev. Father Tomislav Vlašić, OFM
The Bishop, 2008-08-31

The CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH with its letter prot. 144/1985-27164 of 30 May 2008, has authorized me as the local Bishop of the Diocese of Mostar-Duvno to inform the diocesan community of the canonical status of Fr. Tomislav Vlašić, the founder of the association “Kraljice mira potpuno Tvoji – po Mariji k Isusu” – (Queen of Peace, totally Yours – Through Mary to Jesus).
The letter signed by the Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Archbishop Angelo Amato, states the following:
“Within the context of the phenomenon Medjugorje, this Dicastery is studying the case of Father Tomislav VLASIC OFM, originally from that region and the founder of the association ‘Kraljice mira potpuno Tvoji – po Mariji k Isusu’.
On 25 January 2008, through a properly issued Decree, this Dicastery imposed severe cautionary and disciplinary measures on Fr. Vlasic.
The non-groundless news that reached this Congregation reveals that the religious priest in question did not respond, even partially, to the demands of ecclesiastical obedience required by the very delicate situation he finds himself in, justifying himself by citing his zealous activity in the Diocese of Mostar-Duvno and surrounding territories, in initiating religious activities, buildings, etc.
Since Fr. Vlasic has fallen into a censure of interdict
latae sententiae reserved to this Dicastery, I kindly ask Your Excellency, for the good of the faithful, to inform the community of the canonical status of Fr. Vlasic and at the same time to report on the situation in question…”.



as reported by the UK Telegraph:

Although identified only as Frank in Mr Obama’s memoir Dreams from My Father, it has now been established that he was Frank Marshall Davis, a radical activist and journalist who had been suspected of being a member of the Communist Party in the 1950s.

Mr Davis moved to Honolulu from Chicago in 1948 with his second wife Helen Canfield, a white socialite, at the suggestion of his friend the actor Paul Robeson, who advised them that there would be more tolerance of a mixed race couple in Hawaii than on the American mainland.

A bohemian libertine who drank heavily and loved jazz, he became friends with Stanley Dunham, Mr Obama’s maternal grandfather in the 1960s. Mr Davis died in 1987 at the age of 81, five years before Mr Dunham.

“He knew Stan real well,” said Dawna Weatherly-Williams, a close friend of Mr Davis “They’d play Scrabble and drink and crack jokes and crack jokes and argue. Frank always won and he was always very braggadocio about it too. It was all jocular. They didn’t get polluted drunk. And Frank never really did drugs, though he and Stan would smoke pot together.”...

Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama's half-sister, told the Associated Press recently that her grandfather had seen Mr Davis was “a point of connection, a bridge if you will, to the larger African-American experience for my brother".

In his memoir, Mr Obama recounts how he visited Mr Davis on several occasions, apparently at junctures when he was grappling with racial issues, to seek his counsel. At one point in 1979 Mr Davis described university as “an advanced degree in compromise” that was designed to keep blacks in their place.

Can we assume then, that Obama's theories on race relations were largely formed by a Communist mentor?

This mentor had other interesting pursuits:

It has also been established that Mr Davis, who divorced in 1970, was the author of a hard-core pornographic autobiography published in San Diego in 1968 by Greenleaf Classics under the pseudonym Bob Greene....

In the introduction to Sex Rebel, Mr Davis (writing as Greene) explains that although he has “changed names and identities…all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences”.

He stated that “under certain circumstances I am bisexual” and that he was “ a voyeur and an exhibitionist” who was “occasionally mildly interested in sado-masochism”, adding: “I have often wished I had two penises to enjoy simultaneously the double – but different – sensations of oral and genital copulation.”...

One chapter concerns the seduction by Mr Davis and his first wife of a 13-year-old girl called Anne. Mr Davis wrote that it was the girl who had suggested he had sex with her. “I’m not one to go in for Lolitas. Usually I’d rather not bed a babe under 20.

Davis was also a poet. Cliff Kincaid, writing for NewsWithViews.com tells us:

Barack Obama’s childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, a member of the Moscow-controlled Communist Party USA, wrote a poem dedicated to the Soviet Red Army. “Smash on, victory-eating Red Army,” he declared. He also wrote poems attacking traditional Christianity and the work of Christian missionaries.

The “Red Army” poem goes beyond hoping for the communists to beat the Nazis in World War II and hails the Soviet revolution....

The revelations about Davis’ poetry will add to the controversy over what kind of role Davis played in shaping Obama’s political views. Davis (1905-1987) seems to have had the same kind of anti-American outlook that animated Obama’s longtime pastor, Jeremiah Wright. In fact, Davis was pro-Soviet, not just anti-American....

Davis’ writings have become an issue because he became a father-figure to Obama, who is the leading Democratic candidate for president of the U.S., during their time in Hawaii. Obama acknowledges in his book, Dreams From My Father, that he knew and accepted advice from a black poet named “Frank” but doesn’t identify “Frank” by his full name. However, several sources, including Professor Gerald Horne and Dr. Kathryn Takara, have confirmed that “Frank” was in fact Frank Marshall Davis. Trevor Loudon, a New Zealand-based libertarian activist, researcher and blogger, first noted evidence that “Frank” was Frank Marshall Davis in a posting in March of 2007.


WorldNetDaily also identifies Davis as a communist.

Accuracy in Media tells us:

AIM recently disclosed that Obama has well-documented socialist connections, which help explain why he sponsored a "Global Poverty Act" designed to send hundreds of billions of dollars of U.S. foreign aid to the rest of the world, in order to meet U.N. demands. The bill has passed the House and a Senate committee, and awaits full Senate action.

But the Communist Party connection through Davis is even more ominous. Decades ago, the CPUSA had tens of thousands of members, some of them covert agents who had penetrated the U.S. Government. It received secret subsidies from the old Soviet Union.

The article is quite long--prints out at 122 pages--and is difficult to access this morning at the website. Here is a cached version.

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!

Thursday, September 04, 2008


My grandson has not yet been baptised. His mother got sick on the day the Baptism class was scheduled, and there wasn't another one during the remainder of her pregnancy. Now, of course, she is very busy taking care of the baby on top of her previously overloaded schedule. I've been biting my tongue on the subject, but did not think she would go to the trouble of attending the class with such a full plate, and hence I was contemplating a bathroom sink ceremony.

Much to my surprise she told me on Tuesday that she and her husband had attended the Baptism class last Sunday.

"It was a waste of time" she said. "They didn't tell us anything we didn't already know." That "we" consists of my cradle Catholic daughter and her non-Catholic husband. Hmmmmm.

Of course it wasn't a waste of time since it is the necessary ticket to Baptism, without which ticket there will be no sacrament, no matter whether the parents believe and practice or not; and theoretically, at least, no eternal life in heaven with God. Or has that belief gone the way of Limbo?

The class was conducted by lay people, of course.

"What did they tell you," I asked, foolishly.

"Well, they talked about the symbols used in the ceremony, and they talked about child abuse."

"Child abuse? They talked about child abuse in a Baptism class? Why?" Of course she didn't know why either, and it didn't make any more sense to her than it did to me.

"Did they talk about original sin, by any chance?"

"No, they didn't talk about that," she responded.

I guess Baptism class is the new entry-level occasion when the sexual abuse fallout in the form of parent education is introduced to the unsuspecting new parent who has the idea that Baptism is good for the Catholic soul which should be the subject of discussion at a Baptism class. (Uhm...we are still supposed to have a soul, aren't we? One takes anything traditional as absolute truth at their own peril in today's Catholic Church.)

Original sin was already on its way out when we had this new mother Baptised all those years ago, and the lack of acknowledgement of it in the Baptism class her father and I had to endure nearly caused us to forego the sacrament.
Some things never change.

The Baptism isn't scheduled yet. What new wonders are we in for when this sacrament takes place--assuming that it finally does? I haven't been to a Baptism in many years, but already back in the 70s the liturgists had this Sacrament in the crosshairs and were busy seeking novelties to include.



Trinity United Church of Christ--Obama's church--was the subject of a Chicago Public Radio program. Ben Calhoun quoted Melissa Harris Lacewell, Professor of politics and African American Studies at Princeton. She is apologetic for Jeremiah Wright and the style of worship found in this Afro-Centric church. Lacewell was a "regular at Trinity for years." According to Calhoun Lacewell says:

** Trinity is completely mainstream. You know people sort of driving in to 95th Street in their Lexus and Volve, and then driving out again...really not radical folks. People who own three and four bedroom homes with a half acre of yard around it. Hardly the sort of thing that leads to armed insurrection. She says the church might be more politically active than other churches.

** black and white religious traditions have evolved differently. She says in the coverage of Obama and his church what we're seeing are those religious traditions colliding.

What Lacewell doesn't do is deny what takes place in the church. She doesn't deny that it's racial. She merely tries to make it less shocking.

Here is the home page for Trinity. The first thing I noticed was that they use the Masonic lodge layout for the floor plan.

The About webpage tells us:

We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian... Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of civilization. God has superintended our pilgrimage through the days of slavery, the days of segregation, and the long night of racism. It is God who gives us the strength and courage to continuously address injustice as a people, and as a congregation. We constantly affirm our trust in God through cultural expression of a Black worship service and ministries which address the Black Community.

That rather sounds like Michelle Obama's senior thesis--extolling the value of segregation.

The Akiba bookstore presents books on Africentric Theology among other subjects. Take a look at the titles and judge for yourself how open to the white man's culture the worshipers at this church are likely to be.

There are also books teaching how to make money in the bookstore, though not nearly so many of them.

On the Mission webpage we are told:

The fortunate who are among us combine forces with the less fortunate to become agents of change for God who is not pleased with America’s economic mal-distribution!

W.E.B. DuBois indicated that the problem in the 20th century was going to be the problem of the color line. He was absolutely correct. Our job as servants of God is to address that problem and eradicate it in the name of Him who came for the whole world by calling all men, women, boys and girls to Christ.

So the church addresses this by forming a black-exclusive congregation? How does this compute?

In clicking through the church website, I kept trying to imagine what the reaction would be if a white church dedicated itself this exclusively to the white culture. If separate but equal is going to be the mission in the black community, why not have the same mission in the white community? Does anyone think this could withstand the outrage from the black community if it were tried? I guess separate but equal is legitimate only if you are black.

I did more checking on the position held by the United Church of Christ with regard to same sex marriage. The New York Times ran an article on the topic where I discovered that "The United Church of Christ became the first mainline Christian denomination to support same-sex marriage." Now where is that in the Bible again??? The Times article is dated July 5, 2005. One line in the argument for this change that potentially could divide the church struck me as so confused as to be almost amusing:

[Rev. John H. Thomas] said the church strove to have "diversity without division, unity without uniformity." His hope, he said, is that "we will not run from one another, because if we run from one another we run from Christ."

Those who choose to "run" will be those who want to avoid belonging to a church that embraces sin and violates Scripture in its official practices. Hardly running from Christ, but oh it sounds so nice and warm and cozy and convincing for anyone who doesn't take time to think about it. I can hear the lemmings repeating that phrase ad nauseum!

UCC has been a frontrunner on other change issues. According to the Times article:

The United Church of Christ prides itself on being in the forefront of human and civil rights issues. On its Web site, the denomination says it and its predecessors were among the first churches to take a stand against slavery, in 1700, the first to ordain a woman, in 1853, and the first to publish an inclusive-language hymnal, in 1995.

Its slogan, "God is still speaking," is meant to suggest that the Bible is not the sole source of divine instruction, and that Scripture must be interpreted in today's context.

It seems to me that truth in advertising would be better served by naming this the United Church of Relativism.

UCC was a frontrunner in another area, as this Profile - LGBTRAN tells:

The Rev. Dr. William R. Johnson (born June 12, 1946 in Houston, Texas) was the first openly gay person ordained in the United Church of Christ and the first such person ordained in the Christian Church in modern times. The historic ordination took place on June 25, 1972, at the Community United Church of Christ in San Carlos, California.

UCC is quite the progressive church.

Wednesday, September 03, 2008


What is it about the 1985 Princeton thesis written by Michelle Obama that prompted Princeton to withdraw it from circulation until Nov. 5, 2008?

Jeffrey Ressner at Politico asks:

Michelle Obama's senior year thesis at Princeton University, obtained from the campaign by Politico, shows a document written by a young woman grappling with a society in which a black Princeton alumnus might only be allowed to remain "on the periphery." Read the full thesis here: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4.

"My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my 'blackness' than ever before," the future Mrs. Obama wrote in her thesis introduction. "I have found that at Princeton, no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my white professors and classmates try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as if I really don't belong. Regardless of the circumstances underwhich I interact with whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be black first and a student second."

The thesis, titled "Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community" and written under her maiden name, Michelle LaVaughn Robinson, in 1985, has been the subject of much conjecture on the blogosphere and elsewhere in recent weeks, as it has been "temporarily withdrawn" from Princeton's library until after this year's presidential election in November. Some of the material has been written about previously, however, including a story last year in the Newark Star Ledger....

Earlier this week, commentator Jonah Goldberg remarked on National Review Online, "A reader in the know informs me that Michelle Obama's thesis ... is unavailable until Nov. 5, 2008, at the Princeton library. I wonder why."

As noted in the above quoete, Politico claims that the thesis was provided to them. They have posted it on the website. In reading through the Conclusion, I found:

If Black students want to have certain speakers or programs, catering to their interests, they must form separate groups within the University, i.e., the Organization of Black Unity, the Princeton University Black Thoughts Table, the Society of Black Engineers. (p. 58)

She was proposing a separate but equal arrangement. Wasn't that what all of the legislation, busing, race riots, and quotas were about stopping? Yet here she was back in 1985 promoting segregation. I can see why Princeton might refuse to release the thesis until after the election in order to defend their grad. One has to wonder, did she change her mind in the intervening years? Is she willing to work with whites as though they and Blacks belong to the same culture now? Or does she want still to promote a Black culture distinguishable from white culture with separate but equal lifestyles?

Tuesday, September 02, 2008


That is a portion of the title of a World Net Daily August 31, 2008 article:

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama has a long and established record of promoting homosexuality in contrast to the presumptive GOP candidate, Sen. John McCain., according to a new report card issued by a pro-family organization in California.

The report card, which has been posted online, was produced by the Campaign for Children and Families, which said it isn't taking a position on the political candidates but wanted people to see the "unrepudiated positions" of the candidates on issues including homosexual "marriage," teaching homosexuality to school children and adoption by homosexuals.

"Let the record show that John McCain and Barack Obama are polar opposites on partial-birth abortion, parental notification of abortion, marriage protection on the ballot, homosexual indoctrination of schoolchildren, gay adoptions, gun-owner rights, activist judges, and raising taxes," said Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families. "No one should base their vote on personality or mere feelings. Our carefully researched report card shows you exactly where Obama and McCain stand on issues of importance to voters, their families, and our nation's future."

Continue reading...


Gospel Music Bites reported this death on January 3, 2008. There is a picture of Young at the website and a description of the murder scene:

Two days before Christmas, Donald Young, the popular choir director at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, was discovered murdered in his apartment. He had been shot multiple times, including a shot in the head.

Donald Young, 47, conducted choir for more than two decades at the well-known church. He also taught fourth grade at a Chicago public school.

On Saturday, December 29, more than 2,500 people attended Donald Young’s standing-room-only funeral service, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. Some mourners waited outside for over 20 minutes to say goodbye.

Senator Barack Obama, who attends the church, sent a letter of condolence. The letter, along were many others, was read during the service, according to the paper.

The Hilary Clinton forum is following this story and alleges:

"What does Democratic presidential front-runner Illinois Senator Barack Obama, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, a man named Larry Sinclair and Trinity United Church of Christ’s murdered homosexual choir director have in common? According Mr. Sinclair, maybe quite a bit.

According to Sinclair, he has given new evidence to Chicago police linking Obama to the murder."


Given that Obama allegedly engaged in homosexuality, and given that there are claims alleging his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, also engaged in such acts, I thought it would be interesting to find out where Wright stood on the subject.

I found a 1999 article on The Presbyterian Layman website by Mark Tooley and Holland Webb of the Institute on Religion and Democracy.

From the website:

The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC) hosted its annual "Breaking the Silence" summit on black sexuality in Washington, DC, attracting over 600 clergy and laity. Summit speakers defended not only the full availability of abortion, but also the full acceptance of homosexuality by churches and the distribution of contraceptives to sexually active children.

With few exceptions, RCRC speakers were skeptical of sexual abstinence programs for teenagers and declined to mention traditional Christian teachings about heterosexual marriage as the proper context for sexual expression....

Jeremiah Wright, a United Church of Christ pastor in Chicago, told the RCRC audience how he once had been "homophobic" but now accepts that God has created a certain number of animals in each species to be attracted to the same sex. He now asks parents to accept their children's homosexuality and to avoid the example of Saul in the Bible, who Wright believes opposed Jonathan because of a homosexual relationship with David. "Fag hags [meaning women who support homosexual causes] need to rise up and put Homo-bashers in their place," Wright concluded.

Joining Wright in the same workshop was Bishop Kwanebe Rainer Cheeks of the Inner Light Unity Fellowship, a New Age-type group. Cheeks, who is homosexual, said, "My sexuality is a gift of God. It is between me, God and whoever I'm with." He said he was merely following the example of Jesus, who preached love and acceptance but was rejected by the religious elites of His day.

You can see a picture of Bishop Cheeks here and read more about his ministry to the GLBT community. Cheeks talks about his life at this website, including his decision to open a church and develop a ministry, his fight to stay alive with AIDS including the various alternative medicine remedies he uses.

The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, the organization that sponsored the "Breaking the Silence" summit on black sexuality at which Wright and Cheeks spoke, deserves a look.

Rev. Carlton W. Veazey is President and CEO. He is pictured on its Mission webpage where we are told

RCRC was founded in 1973 to safeguard the newly won constitutional right to abortion. The Coalition founders were clergy and lay leaders from mainstream religions, many of whom had provided women with referrals to safe abortion services before the Supreme Court legalized abortion in Roe v. Wade. The founders believed that there would be at most a ten-year struggle to secure the right to choose. In fact the struggle is far from over. It has changed and intensified, and the stakes are growing....

While our member organizations are religiously and theologically diverse, they are unified in the commitment to preserve reproductive choice as a basic part of religious liberty.

The Member Organizations webpage lists 40 organizations including Catholics for Choice, the Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ, plus organizations within the United Methodist, Presbyterian and Unitarian Universalist churches. There are several secular organizations as well, and an interestingly disproportionately large number of Jewish organizations--17 to be exact, nearly half. Catholics for Choice is the only Catholic organization on the list.

The Board of Directors webpage indicates there is a representative from People for the American Way on the board, and Francis Kissling is a member.

The History webpage tells that the organization was founded by a Baptist minister in 1967. At a 1973 meeting the topic of discussion was "the Roman Catholic Church's pledge to overturn the new U.S. Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade. This meeting, called by the United Methodist Board of Church and Society, leads to the formation of the Religious Coalition for Abortion Rights. The name was changed in 1993 to Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. In 2004 it was active at both the Democratic and Republican National Conventions.

SourceWatch tells of Veazey's receipt of a Planned Parenthood's Champions of Choice Community Partnership Award in 2001.

What is the relevance of all of this information about the activities of Jeremiah Wright in 1999? To me this would indicate that Wright was not just in sympathy with the pro-abortion and pro-homosexual arguments, but that he was actively promoting them, and would likely have done so in his preaching to which Obama listened for many years. We see in Obama's voting record on partial birth abortion, that his actions are in sympathy with the RCRC position on abortion--that abortion must be defended at every level. Is it not reasonable, then, to suspect that he is every bit as much in sympathy with the RCRC position on homosexuality, and that Obama would support every effort to make same-sex marriage legal nationally?

Obama's "change" is a change that Catholics cannot approve and still be faithful to the teachings of the RCC. A vote for Obama is a vote against the Roman Catholic Church.


Even as Barack Obama gave his soaring speech Thursday night, his campaign was playing hardball with its critics.

Team Obama has launched an offensive against WGN, the Chicago Tribune's radio station, for interviewing Stanley Kurtz. Mr. Kurtz is a conservative writer who this week forced the University of Illinois to finally open its records on Sen. Obama's association with William Ayers, the unrepentant 1970s Weather Underground terrorist.

An Obama campaign email to supporters called Mr. Kurtz a "slimy character assassin" whose "divisive, destructive ranting" should be confronted. WGN producer Zack Christenson says the outpouring of negative calls and emails is "unprecedented." He also notes that it is curious -- because "we wanted the Obama campaign's take" on Mr. Kurtz's findings, but the campaign declined to put anyone on air.

Separately, Mr. Obama's lawyers have also demanded that the Justice Department prosecute an organization called the American Issues Project for running an ad about ties between their candidate and Mr. Ayers....

anyone questioning the approved story line is liable to be ignored, misled or even bullied. This isn't what reporters expected when Mr. Obama began campaigning for a "new politics" that would bring honesty and openness to government.

Walking the rows of media outlets at the Denver convention, I had no trouble finding reporters who complained the campaign was secretive and evasive. Ben Smith of Politico.com1 has written about Team Obama's "pattern of rarely volunteering information or documents, even when relatively innocuous."

Read the whole story...

Monday, September 01, 2008


Back and forth across the stage he paces, microphone in hand, promising a bright new future of change for America. His charisma causes us to overlook the fact that he never spells out what change he has in mind.

We need to ask the question, and we need to be sure we've gotten the answer. We know where he stands on partial birth abortion. But what other changes might this man promote once he gets into office?

Catholic News Agency offers us a clue:

Presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama has promised to use the presidency as a “bully pulpit” for homosexual activism, according to an open letter released on his campaign website.

In the February 28 letter posted under the “LGBT” section of the “People” heading, Senator Obama said he would press for the passage of hate crime laws and a “fully inclusive” Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would outlaw discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

"As your President, I will use the bully pulpit to urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws," Obama said.

LifeSiteNews.com also reported on March 16, 2007 that Obama was an activist for homosexual causes:

U.S. Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama entered the media furor yesterday over comments General Peter Pace, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made against homosexuality last week, with both issuing statements saying, “I do not think homosexuality is immoral.”

Clinton and Obama made the statements after a homosexual activist group attacked “Democratic candidates” for failing to oppose General Pace’s comments that he believes homosexuality to be “immoral.” The general told the Chicago Tribune Monday, “I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts.”

This is change, alright! But is it the change Americans are looking for? As Catholics, will we be subject to religious persecution because we believe homosexuality is immoral?

At Mass yesterday I heard a homily on the immorality of homosexuality. It was surprising that a priest was saying it. We know what the Church teaches, but that teaching has been spread mostly by the secular press and the Catholics in the pew. I don't recall ever hearing homosexuality labeled immoral from the pulpit before.

Perhaps there is more to this Obama commitment to homosexual activism than securing votes in the homosexual community. Back in February a story came out about Obama being engaged in homosexual activity. I say came out, but that is stretching it. I hadn't heard about it until this weekend. Have you heard?

World Net Daily reported the story on February 17, 2008:

The electrifying presidential campaign of Barack Obama faces a new challenge – a Minnesota man who claims he took cocaine in 1999 with the then-Illinois legislator and participated in homosexual acts with him.

When his story was ignored by the news media, Larry Sinclair made his case last month in a YouTube video, which has now been viewed more than a quarter-million times. And when it was still ignored by the media, Sinclair filed a suit in Minnesota District Court, alleging threats and intimidation by Obama's staff.

Sinclair, who says he is willing to submit to a polygraph test to validate his claims, will now get his chance – thanks to a website offering $10,000 for the right to record it and $100,000 to Sinclair if he passes.

"My motivation for making this public is my desire for a presidential candidate to be honest," Sinclair told WND by telephone. "I didn't want the sex thing to come out. But I think it is important for the candidate to be honest about his drug use as late as 1999."

Ok, but did he "inhale"? Was Sinclair wearing a blue dress? We've seen it before, just not quite as shocking as this one appears to be, given that the last round involved marijuana, not cocaine, and the blue dress was being worn by a woman.

WND has posted the legal paperwork outlining Sinclair's allegations on their website:

Defendants have and continue to conspire against the rights of citizens in that they are actively engaged in ongoing internet intimidation, claiming to be engaging in the conduction of illegal investigations into plaintiffs personal life, an (sic) actively involved in preventing allegations brought of illegal drug use and sexual activity involving Defendant Obama from becoming public knowledge.

Plaintiff states that he personally engaged in sexual activity and personally used illegal drugs in November 1999 with U.S. Senator Barak Obama on two separate ocassions (sic).

As if the Sinclair story isn't bad enough, the Citizen Wells website reports on May 11, 2008:

First there was Larry Sinclair's allegations that he and Obama did drugs and engaged in gay sex in Chicago in November, 1999.

Next came Lawrence Lessig and his use of a gay Jesus video in multiple seminars along with his proposal to blur the distinction between heterosexuals and gays.

Next we find out about the close ties to weathermen bomber William Ayers and his admission that he had sex with male friends.

Next we hear form a former Chicago restaurant chef about persistent rumors in the gay community that Obama was on the down low.

Now a video has just surfaced in which the reverend James Manning calls both Obama and Jeremiah Wright, closet homosexuals.

Do Larry Sinclair's allegations seem so far fetched now?

The video linked at the website has been deleted unfortunately. This one on youtube.com has not been removed. Is this what we can expect if we criticize President Obama--being led off in handcuffs?

Iowa Presidential Watch has coverage of the "Obamabomb?" taken from the "Cleveland Leader" which claims that Sinclair failed his polygraph tests. Ok, but what is the Cleveland Leader? Cleveland used to have a newspaper by that name, but it merged into the Cleveland Plain Dealer in 1917. There is no Cleveland Leader that I know of now. Maybe this website is coming out of someplace else named Cleveland.

As bad as it looks, this story descends even further into the underbelly. There is a murder connected with Jeremiah Wright's church where Obama worshiped:

A Freeper reports:

Choir director at White House Hopeful's controversial Chicago church shot to death.

Presidential hopeful Barack [Hussein] Obama has become tangled in a gay-murder probe rocking his controversial Chicago church as insiders ask: How much does he really know about the choir director's savage slaying? So far, Chicago cops' investigation into the murder of the Trinity United Christian Church's gay choir director has come up empty. But a top Chicago private detective tells GLOBE he believes the shooting death of 47-year-old Donald Young may be connected to Obama, who belongs to the church once headed by scandal-scarred preacher the ["]Rev.["] Jeremiah Wright.

"Donald Youmg was silenced because of something he knew about Obama," says a private investigator, who has connections to the police department's homicide unit. "Donald was in a position where he heard a lot of things and saw a lot of things concerning Barack, the mose well-known member of the church."

Now, Larry Sinclair, the Minnesota man who has been dogging Obama with claims he engaged in gay sex and drugs with the presidential candidate in 1999, says he has given cops shocking new evidence linking the Deomcratic White House hopeful to the baffling murder. Sinclair failed a disputed lie detector test over his initial "gay" claims about Obama.

But now he insists he had "contact" with Young shortly before the choir director was brutally killed. He says that each time, Young "instigated" phone calls, which were made "not long" before the murder.

Young's bullet-riddled body was found when his rommate returned to their apartment on Christmas Eve. Some presents and jewelry were missing and the apartment door was closed but unlocked.

The Globe story appears to have been removed from their website, not surprisingly.

This tale has a postscript. If you so desire, you can sign the Petition to "Impeach, expel Barak Obama" here. He isn't even in office yet and already there are people trying to get rid of him.

The curse of interesting times...

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!

Sunday, August 31, 2008


(The bolding in Fr. Euteneuer's following email is mine - ct)

Spirit & Life®
"The words I spoke to you are spirit and life." (Jn 6:63)

Human Life International e-Newsletter
Volume 03, Number 33 | Friday, August 29, 2008

Montezuma's Abortion Revenge

Men like Pancho Villa and Emiliano Zapata may be remembered as some of the worst criminals of Mexican history, but yesterday's vote of the Mexican Supreme Court will make Villa's and Zapata's killings seem like so much child's play. Reminiscent of the US Supreme Court decision in 1973, eight (out of eleven) Supreme Court justices of Mexico legalized abortion yesterday, August 27th, and consigned themselves to the annals of history as the worst of their country's killers. They gave Mexico the disreputable distinction of being the first country in Latin America to legalize abortion on demand, and in fact, if the likely "domino effect" of abortion legalization in the Hispanic world follows, they will be guilty of the innocent blood of a whole continent.

Criminals are apparently not bound by logic or popular convention. Despite recent surveys of millions of Mexicans indicating that at least 65% of the people were totally against the legalization of abortion, the Supreme Court just simply ignored them - which is another way of saying that democracy is essentially meaningless in Mexico. And, despite the specific wording in the Mexican Constitution that enumerates a right to life "from the moment of fertilization," something the US Constitution could only dream of, the eight enlightened gods of law sitting on their lofty thrones simply declared that right null and void - which is another way of saying that the rule of law is meaningless in Mexico too.

These eight justices have now, arbitrarily and inhumanely, unleashed a plague of killing that will destroy the Mexican family, the already-plummeting fertility rate and the degrading morals of Mexico's youth. The Mexican bishops said it correctly in their televised ads prior to the killer decision that "when a society opens up a debate on abortion, what they are doing, in effect, is debating the very future of a nation." Yes indeed; and not only the future of Mexico, but of the whole Hispanic world.

I have continuously tied the business of abortion to the satanic work of child sacrifice which has tried to rear its ugly head in every age since biblical times. Abortion is a demonic industry, and every society that opens its doors to the killing of its infants becomes slowly possessed by these demons whose thirst for innocent blood will never, ever, be sated. Mexico was at one time home of the devilish Aztec religion which practiced bloody human sacrifice until Hernando Cortes and his troops defeated the Emperor Montezuma in the 16th Century thus preparing the way for the total Catholic evangelization of that land by Our Lady of Guadalupe. Yet, demons don't live in time. They live in the sinfulness of the human heart, and they have been given a new birth in Mexico once again.

I have no doubt that the recent appearance and immense popularity of the so-called "Santa Muerte" ("holy death") occult practice in Mexico, whose symbol is the Grim Reaper, has presaged the appearance of the demon of human sacrifice once again. This ancient demon that once ruled Mexican society only needed a few servants on the Supreme Court to ritualize human sacrifice once again - this time in the guise of abortion on demand. And they have already begun to reconstruct the new pagan pyramids of Mexico - in the hospitals and abortion mills where blood sacrifice is being offered as we speak.

In light of this catastrophic defeat for life, I can only repeat the Lord's stinging rebuke of the black-robed leaders of His day who were responsible for the death of the Innocent One: Woe to the eight servants of Montezuma's abortion revenge - their souls are in danger of a worse death than they inflict on those innocent children. We must pray for their eternal salvation. And I must add: Woe to everyone who remains silent while this demon satisfies his blood lust on innocent children anywhere in the world.

Sincerely Yours in Christ,

Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer,
President, Human Life International

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com

<< # St. Blog's Parish ? >>