Irony. Margaret Sanger of Planned Parenthood addressed the KKK but the Obama Administration says that Catholics who defend marriage are like racists.

In another entry I posted about Archbp. Dolan’s letter to Pres. Obama warning him and his administration to back off from their project to equate those who defend true marriage with racists, as if the proponents of same-sex unions held the moral equivalent of black people seeking equality in the early 1960’s.

Even as I posted that, I found an email urging me to post about the time the founder of Planned Parenthood – supported enthusiastically by the Obama Administration – addressed the Klu Klux Klan.  Yes, Margaret Sanger was an ally of the KKK.

I can’t help but wonder at how tone deaf the White House is about racism.  I suppose they depend on general ignorance of the origins of Planned Parenthood and its virulent agenda.

The email I received just had some quotes about Margaret Sanger and the KKK but no references.  You can find some more information about this HERE.  I am sure readers have more on this.  Sanger gives her own account of the event with the KKK in her own words in The Autobiography of Margaret Sanger (Reprint – Dover Publications, 2004, pp. 366-367).

Here is what I received in the email:

Prolife leaders are asking that the first week of October be set aside to recall the fact that Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, spoke at Ku Klux Klan rally. As stated in her autobiography:

“I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan…I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses…I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak…In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.”

85 years after the Planned Parenthood foundress spoke at the KKK rally Planned Parenthood:

  • *A black baby is three times more likely to be murdered in the womb than a white baby.
  • *Twice as many African-Americans have died from abortion than have died from AIDS, accidents, violent crimes, cancer, and heart disease combined.
  • *Every three days, more African-Americans are killed by abortion than have been killed by the Ku Klux Klan in its entire history.
  • *Planned Parenthood operates the nation’s largest chain of abortion clinics and almost 80 percent of its facilities are located in minority neighborhoods.
  • *About 13 percent of American women are black, but they submit to over 35 percent of the abortions.

In this Youtube video you hear Sanger’s own account read from her aforementioned autobigraphy. It is machine generated reading, similar to what you would hear with the Kindle text-to-voice option.  Not perfect but not bad.

[wp_youtube]6Fj-E-Yk78M[/wp_youtube]

The Obama Administration supports an organization founded in part to eradicate black people, Planned Parenthood (HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE).

AND….

The Obama Administration is pushing a policy that anyone (the Catholic Church and others) who support true marriage are similar to racists. (HERE)

It’s all rather like a Salvador Dali painting in which clocks are melting off the edges of tables.

Posted in One Man & One Woman, The Drill, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,
18 Comments

Notre Dame’s Fr. Jenkins and a different view of Pres. Obama

In 2009, the President of the University of Notre Dame, Fr. John Jenkins, actively participated in, promoted and defended, in the bestowal of an honorary doctorate in Law on the most aggressively pro-abortion President of the United States we have ever experienced.  I wrote about that here.

Now that the Obama Administration has shifted aside even the pretense of an interest in “common ground”, and we are looking down the line at a persecution of Catholic institutions by the feds under this administration, it seems that Fr. Jenkins may be shifting ground himself.

I saw this on CatholicVote.  It is also on Forbes:

[The] University of Notre Dame President Fr. John Jenkins sent a letter to the White House denouncing the mandate. “This would compel Notre Dame to either pay for contraception and sterilization in violation of the church’s moral teaching, or to discontinue our employee and student health care plans in violation of the church’s social teaching. It is an impossible position.” Having already spoken at Notre Dame, one wonders what use President Obama has in listening to Fr. Jenkins. http://cvote.to/4x

Qui cum canibus concumbunt cum pulicibus surgent.

Posted in Dogs and Fleas, Emanations from Penumbras, Linking Back, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , , , , , ,
24 Comments

Archbp. Dolan issues a warning to Pres. Obama: Stop attacking marriage and religious liberty!

I found this to be pretty interesting.  I urge you to read the whole thing.  It is perhaps the best presentation of the issues I have seen in a brief form.

Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York City has sent, in his capacity of President of the USCCB, sent a letter to Pres. Obama asking him to back off on his campaign against true marriage and religious liberty.  A pdf of the letter is HERE.

(CNSNews.com) – Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), has written a letter to President Barack Obama warning him that his administration will “precipitate a national conflict between church and state of enormous proportions” if it does not “end its campaign against DOMA, the institution of marriage it protects, and religious freedom.”

The letter follows up on two previous letters that Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, the former president of the USCCB, and Archbishop Dolan sent to Obama privately on the matter. Cardinal George sent his private letter in 2010, according to the USCCB, and Archbishop Dolan sent his earlier this year.

In the latest letter–written Sept. 20, publicly posted on the USCCB website Sept. 22, and linked to Archbishop Dolan’s personal blog on Sept. 23–the archbishop sent the president a USCCB staff analysis on “recent federal threats to marriage” that reiterated the warning the archbishop delivered directly to president in the text of his letter.

“Thus, the comprehensive efforts of the federal government—using its formidable moral, economic, and coercive power—to enforce its new legal definition of ‘marriage’ against a resistant Church would, if not reversed, precipitate a systemic national conflict between Church and State, harming both institutions, as well as our Nation as a whole,” says the USCCB analysis.

[NB] The archbishop’s letter and USCCB analysis revealed a second front in an escalating conflict between the Catholic Church and the Obama administration. [Remember Pres. Obama’s blather about finding common ground?  Remember how L’Osservatore Romano nearly quivered over him?] The other front is over regulations the Department of Health and Human Services proposed on Aug. 1 under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act—the Obamacare law—that would compel all private health plans in the United States to cover sterilizations and all-FDA approved contraceptives including those that cause abortions[In other words they are not contraceptives.  They are abortifacients.]

[…]

At issue in the conflict between the Catholic Church and the Obama administration are efforts by the administration to force Catholics, and other Americans who share the church’s moral convictions, to act against their consciences.The Obamacare sterilization-and-contraception mandate not only applies to individual Americans but also includes a “religious exemption” that is so narrowly drawn it does not include Catholic hospitals, charitable organizations or colleges and universities, and, thus, if finalized, would force these Catholic institutions to choose between acting against the teachings of their own church or dropping all health-care coverage for their employees[And this has to be the purposeful intention of this White House.]

On August 31, the USCCB submitted comments on the proposed sterilization-and-contraception mandate to HHS. In these comments, the bishops flatly declared that the administration was launching an “unprecedented attack on religious liberty.”

“Indeed, such nationwide government coercion of religious people and groups to sell, broker, or purchase ‘services’ to which they have a moral or religious objection represents an unprecedented attack on religious liberty,” said the comments.

The bishops’ comments also said that even Jesus would not qualify for the “religious” exemption the administration proposed for its sterilization-and-contraceptives mandate.

[NB] In his letter last week to the president about the marriage issue, Archbishop Dolan indicated that the only “response” he and Cardinal George had received from their previous communications was a stepped up attack on marriage by the administration.

“This past spring the Justice Department announced that it would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court, a decision strongly opposed by the Catholic Bishops of the United States and many others,” the archbishop told the president.

“Now the Justice Department has shifted from not defending DOMA—which is problem enough, given the duty of the executive branch to enforce even laws it disfavors—to actively attacking DOMA’s constitutionality,” the archbishop said. [But they do handle the sale of guns to drug dealers.  I guess they are in favor of the 2nd Amendment, if not the 1st.]

“My predecessor, Cardinal Francis George, OMI, and I have expressed to you in the past our strong disappointment about the direction your Administration has been moving regarding DOMA,” the archbishop told the president. “Unfortunately the only response to date has been the intensification of efforts to undermine DOMA and the institution of marriage.”

The archbishop said he especially objected to the administration falsely equating those who defend traditional marriage to racists. [!?!?  Ohhh… right.  That’s because they want to make this into a civil rights issue.]

“That is why it is particularly upsetting, Mr. President, when your Administration, through the various court documents, pronouncements and policies identified in the attached analysis, attributes to those who support DOMA a motivation rooted in prejudice and bias,” said the archbishop. “It is especially wrong and unfair to equate opposition to redefining marriage with either intentional or willfully ignorant racial discrimination, as your Administration insists on doing.”

The archbishop said that if the federal courts adopt the position the administration is urging on them, then defending traditional marriage will be essentially criminalized in the United States. [! But let’s watch to see what happens to priests who defend true marriage.  Will they be slapped down?  We they be threatened?  Will they be moved, say, to some parish on the edge of a diocese or put in, say, nursing home chaplaincy?]

“Our federal government should not be presuming ill intent or moral blindness on the part of the overwhelming majority of its citizens, millions of whom have gone to the polls to directly support DOMAs in their states and have thereby endorsed marriage as the union of man and woman,” said the archbishop. “Nor should a policy disagreement over the meaning of marriage be treated by federal officials as a federal offense—but this will happen if the Justice Department’s latest constitutional theory prevails in court.”

The USCCB analysis the archbishop sent to Obama specifically addresses the arguments the Justice Department made in a brief filed in July in the case of Golinski v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management. This brief argues that the federal courts should mandate that treating a same-sex couple differently from a married heterosexual couple should be deemed the same as racial discrimination.

“The Justice Department’s argument in Golinski compares DOMA in effect to racially discriminatory laws,” says the USCCB analysis.

“According to the government’s view,” says the analysis, “support for a definition of marriage that recognizes that sexual difference is a defining and valuable feature of marriage now constitutes a forbidden intent to harm a vulnerable class of people. [Hate crime?  Will defense of Catholic teaching on marriage be treated by the Obama Administration as “hate speech”?] The false claim that animus is at work ignores the intrinsic goods of complementarity and fruitfulness found only in the union of man and woman as husband and wife. DoJ’s contention thus transforms a moral disagreement into a constitutional violation, with grave practical consequences.”

The USCCB analysis pointed to three other areas where the administration is seeking to advance same-sex marriage by regulation. These include [1] a White House spokesperson’s statement that Obama wants a federal mandate to ensure “adopotion rights” for same-sex couples; [2] an Agriculture Department “sensitivity training” program on “heterosexism,” and [3] a directive issued then rescinded by the Office of Navy Chaplains that required Navy chapels to allow same-sex wedding ceremonies.

The analysis concluded that if the administration’s policy of treating the defense of marriage as if it were equal to racial discrimination prevailed, the likely result would be legal sanctions and lawsuits against Catholics, Catholic institutions and those who share their moral vision in defense of marriage.  [That, folks, is the bottom line.  Do NOT forget this issue during the election campaign cycle.  Watch and listen for MSM coverage and discussion of this issue.]

“In particular, the Administration’s efforts to change the law—in all three branches of the federal government—so that support for authentic marriage is treated as an instance of ‘sexual orientation discrimination,’ will threaten to spawn a wide range of legal sanctions against individuals and institutions within the Catholic community, and in many others as well,” says the USCCB analysis.

“Based on the experience of religious entities under some state and local governments already, we would expect that, if the Administration succeeds, we would face lawsuits for supposed ‘discrimination’ in all the areas where the Church operates in service to the common good, and where civil rights laws apply—such as employment, housing, education, and adoption services, to name just a few,” says the analysis.

Archbishop Dolan concluded his letter sending this analysis to Obama with a warning from him and fellow Catholic bishops.

The Administration’s failure to change course on this matter will, as the attached analysis indicates, precipitate a national conflict between Church and State of enormous proportions and to the detriment of both institutions,” the archbishop told the president.

“Thus, on behalf of my brother Bishops,” he said, “I urge yet again that your Administration end its campaign against DOMA, the institution of marriage it protects, and religious freedom.”

WDTPRS kudos to Archbp. Dolan.

Posted in Brick by Brick, Fr. Z KUDOS, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged , , , , , , , , ,
50 Comments

My pressing request renewed

I have two heavy intentions. I ask for your support for these intentions with prayer.

In the past I have put this request to you and I now renew it.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
Comments Off on My pressing request renewed

Minnesota Catholic Conference and Archd. STP/MPLS says “Catholics For Marriage Equality MN” is NOT affiliated with Church

I direct now your attention to the website of the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis and their Office for Marriage and Family.  The Archdiocese made this apparent on the front page of their website.

As you may recall, His Excellency Most Rev. John Nienstedt and other bishops in Minnesota have been battling to defend true and natural marriage. More on Archbp. Nienstedt HERE.  More on Bp. Sirba of Duluth HERE.  More on Bp. LeVoir of New Ulm (long-time chaplain to Courage) HERE.

Group “Catholics For Marriage Equality MN” Not Affiliated With Official Catholic Church

Date:  Thursday, September 29, 2011

Source:  Archdiocese of Saint Paul & Minneapolis | Minnesota Catholic Conference

Group Disputes, Misinterprets Catholic Teaching on Marriage, Homosexuality and Moral Law

Saint Paul, Minn. (September 29, 2011)—The Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis and the Minnesota Catholic Conference issued a joint statement today explaining that a newly formed group calling itself “Catholics for Marriage Equality MN” has no recognition from nor affiliation with the Roman Catholic Church.

One of Catholics for Marriage Equality MN’s expressed aims is to defeat the Minnesota Marriage Protection Amendment that will appear on the November 2012 ballot, and which defines marriage as the union of one man and one womanThe group misleadingly tries to convince Catholics that they can, in good conscience, support a state redefinition of marriage without undermining marriage itself.  The Catholic Church, in keeping with Catholic teaching, reason and natural law, and in concert with many other faiths, strongly supports maintaining the current, traditional definition of marriage by voting “yes” for the Amendment during the November 2012 election.

“Anyone can selectively piece together statements taken out of context from Church documents or the writings of theologians to construct a religious worldview that suits his or her personal preferences,” said Jason Adkins, MCC executive director.  “But such a pick-and-choose cafeteria religion is antithetical to Catholicism.  One of the most compelling reasons for being Catholic is that we believe in the Faith given to the Apostles by Jesus Christ himself and handed on and safeguarded by their successors, the bishops.”

Adkins continued:  It is the responsibility of the bishops in communion with the Pope to uphold the Truth as well as encourage and support all Catholics who are trying to live their baptismal promise of believing and trusting in our one, Catholic and apostolic faith.  This is especially true in the area of marriage and sexuality, where the universal moral law and Gospel values are constantly under attack in American law and culture.”

Both MCC and the Archdiocese stress the importance of respecting the God-given dignity of all persons, which means the recognition of authentic human rights and responsibilities, while pointing out that official Catholic teaching goes well beyond what Catholics for Marriage Equality MN’s website states.  Adkins reiterated longstanding Catholic Church teaching that “Homosexual persons are to be fully respected in their human dignity and encouraged to follow God’s plan with particular attention in the exercise of chastity.” And, that the “duty calling for respect does not justify the legitimization of behavior that is not consistent with moral law” for those with same-sex inclinations or heterosexuals, married or unmarried.

The full statement can be found HERE in pdf format.

WDTPRS kudos to the bishops of the Minnesota Catholic Conference.

I hope that all the dioceses in Minnesota will make this story and the release apparent on all their websites and will provide bulletin inserts for parishes and publish it in their papers, and hire someone to stand with a Stratocaster and sing about it on street corners.

Posted in New Evangelization, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , , ,
8 Comments

Marine Corps Birthday News

Some of you long time readers here and of my columns in The Wanderer might recall that over the years from time to time I have mentioned a wonderful couple, an active duty Marine Corps officer, M, and his wife, C, who now have several children.  I had the honor of baptizing one of them.

Since I regularly ask for good news from you readers, here is some good news from The Missus, C.

It looks like we will have baby Gianna on November 10th……the Birthday of the Marine Corps!  Would you expect anything less from this Marine Family?  They usually do scheduled c-sections on Wednesdays, but M asked the Doc to push it a day so it will be on the 10th, and it looks like it will happen!   Oh the things I do for my marine!

OOH-RAH!

Posted in Just Too Cool, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged
9 Comments

The lost tomb of St. Jerome, Doctor of the Church. A Roman mystery.

If there have to be reality TV shows or treasure hunt movies, I propose finding the tomb of St. Jerome (+420) in the Basilica of St. Mary Major in Rome.

For a couple years I have posted something about Jerome’s burial place.  Here it is again.

This is an interesting story and I dug into it a little. This is what I found.

We read in J.N.D. Kelly’s work Jerome: His Life, Writings, and Controversies (Duckworth, 1975, p. 333 – emphasis mine) :

Apocryphal lives extolling [Jerome’s] sanctity, even his miracles, were quick to appear, and in the eighth century he was to be acclaimed, along with Ambrose, Augustine, and Gregory the Great, as one of the four Doctors of the Church.[2] In the middle ages his works were eagerly copied, read, and pillaged; while towards the end of the thirteenth century the clergy of Santa Maria Maggiore, at Rome, were to persuade the public, perhaps themselves too, that his remains had been transported from Bethlehem to Italy, and could be venerated close to certain presumed fragments of the Saviour’s crib.[3]

Note 2: This was formally ratified by Pope Boniface VIII on 20 Sept. 1295: see Corpus iuris canonici II, 1059 (ed. E. Freidburg, Leipzig, 1879-81). The original number four (the list was later to be greatly expanded) was chosen so that the Doctors could match the Evangelists.

Note 3: The story of their alleged translation, in response to a visionary appearance of Jerome himself, is set out by J. Stilting in Acta Sanctorum XLVI, Sept. VIII, 636 (Antwerp, 1762); it is reprinted in PL 22, 237-40. Stilting also provides a discussion of its date, veracity, etc. on pp. 635-49.

In the Acta Sanctorum for 30 September, under the entry for St. Jerome, we find the following section with its articles:

LXV. Corpus Sancti ex Palestina Romam translatum, depositumque in basilica s. Mariae Majoris. The body of the saint was brought to Rome from Palestine, and put in the Basilica of St. Mary Major.
LXVI. Inquiritur tempus quo Sancti corpus Romam delatum. An investigation is made into the time when the body of the saint was brought back to Rome.
LXVII. Corpus Sancti depositum prope aediculam Praesepis, conditum deinde ibidem altare, sub quo positum, ubi mansit usque ad pontificatum Sixti V, quando dicitur clanculum ablatum & absconditum. The body of the saint was placed near to the small chamber of the Crib, established then right at the same altar, under which it was placed, where it remained until the pontificate of Sixtus V, when it is said to have been secretly taken away and hidden.
LXVIII. Corpus Sancti clanculum ablatum & absconditum dicitur, ne transferretur alio a Sixto V: deinde frequenter frustra quaesitum. The body of the saint is said to have been secretly taken away and hidden lest it were to be transferred to another place by Sixtus V: aftward it is frequently sought in vain.
LXIX. An reliquae, sub altari principe S. Mariae Majoris inventae, videantur illae ipsae, quae ut corpus S. Hieronymi ad illam basilicam fuerunt translatae. When the relics found under the main altar of St. Mary Major which had been transferred to that Basilica seem to be the very same as the body of St. Jerome.
LXX. Admodum verisimile & probabile inventas esse S. Hieronymi. Clearly the [relics] found are most like and probably of Saint Jerome.
LXXI. Respondetur ad objectionem ex reliquiis Nepesinis: reliquiae, quae verisimiliter sunt S. Hieronymi sub mensa principis altaris depositae. An objection is answered about the relics at Nepi: relics placed under the main altar which more than likely are those of St. Jerome.
LXXII. Reliquiae Sancti in pluribus civitatibus Italiae, Galliae, Germaniae, Belgii, & aliis provinciis. The relics of the saint in more cities in Italy, France, Germany, Belgium and other provinces.
LXXIII. Cultus S. Hieronymi: festivitates eius & Officia. The veneration of St. Jerome: his feasts and offices.

Here is the page where these articles begin. If you want to have a fuller experience of the joys (the chore) of reading the Acta Sanctorum for any length of time click here for a larger image.

Posted in Classic Posts, Just Too Cool, Saints: Stories & Symbols, The Drill | Tagged , , ,
4 Comments

Coffee and You. A POLL.

Thanks to all of you who have been ordering Mystic Monk Coffee and Tea from the Carmelites in Wyoming.  You are helping them build their new monastery and put groceries on the table.  You are also helping me put groceries on the table.  Keep that coffee supply refreshed!

When people put in orders using my link I can see what is being ordered.  I have no idea who you are, of course.  I just see that someone, somewhere, ordered up, for example, “Hermits Bold Blend“.

However, lately I have noticed a sharp up-tick in monthly subscriptions (cheaper) orders of flavored coffees.  High on the list would be Pumpkin Spice, Cinnamon Coffee Cake, and Royal Rum Pecan. They all sound rather seasonal and desserty, don’t they?

This make me curious.

I am a very strong black coffee type.  Right now I am working through 5 lbs of Dark Sumatra. I will have a cappuccino once in a while or caffè corretto.  Flavored?  Never.

What about you?

Here is a WDTPRS POLL.  Choose your best answer and give your reasons in the com box.

About "flavored" coffee.

View Results

Posted in Lighter fare, POLLS | Tagged , ,
51 Comments

QUAERITUR: Is gambling a sin?

From a reader:

I have recently started dating a woman who is a devout Catholic. I was
baptized, but have fallen away from the church since I was young.
Since I have love her so much I decided to start attending mass again
because I knew it would make her happy. I went with an open mind and
am very happy about the decision. My question is this, I make my
living by playing professional poker. I do very well for myself. I
myself see nothing wrong with this. Gambling to me, is perfectly fine
as long as you don’t have a problem. I consider it in the same way I
think about alcohol. It is good and okay as long as you are
responsible. What is the Catholic church’s opinion on poker or
gambling?

This is a little tricky.  It is not for nothing that in archaic English games of chance were called games of “hazard”.

Full disclosure: I made a lot of money in my first year of college shooting pool at my dorm and elsewhere and I was known to shuffle a deck.  Let’s just say I didn’t need a work/study job on campus.  Like Dr. Maturin, I didn’t have qualms about skinning the annoying.  Of course I wasn’t even a Catholic yet in those days.  As a priest, I have had a few friendly wagers here and there, but nothing big or anywhere near what could be considered scandalous.  In all my years I think I have spent less then $20 total on lottery tickets.  Holy Church had severe canons about clerics and gambling and for very good reasons: for their own sake, for the sake of the goods of the Church, and to avoid scandal.  Priests demonstrate time and again that they aren’t always very bright.  Why would they be good gamblers?

As far as I know there is no biblical prohibition against gambling. In fact, I think Joshua threw lots in order to distribute property.

However, the gambling you describe involves your time and your money and repetition. The Lord has some serious words about the possibility of serving “two masters”.  Furthermore, while it may be true that you are in complete “control” of this activity, and that it is not in control of you, that is, you are not addicted to gambling as many gamblers come to be, you may be putting yourself in the near occasion of sin, risking becoming addicted.  It is a sin knowingly to place oneself in the near occasion of sin.

It could be argued that playing poker is hardly different from day-trading.  Okay.  Maybe so.  However, playing cards is immediate and involves other people, some of whom may be addicted to the action.  We can also participate in the sin of another person by our cooperation of providing the means or counsel or approval for their sin.

That said, gambling is not in itself sinful.  The old Catholic Encyclopedia article provides some criteria.  I urge you to read the whole article here, to see with what grave reserve gambling has been viewed by the Church and great saints through history.  But here are the criteria:

Theologians commonly require four conditions so that gaming may not be illicit.

  • What is staked must belong to the gambler and must be at his free disposal. It is wrong, therefore, for the lawyer to stake the money of his client, or for anyone to gamble with what is necessary for the maintenance of his wife and children.
  • The gambler must act freely, without unjust compulsion.
  • There must be no fraud in the transaction, although the usual ruses of the game may be allowed. It is unlawful, accordingly, to mark the cards, but it is permissible to conceal carefully from an opponent the number of trump cards one holds.
  • Finally, there must be some sort of equality between the parties to make the contract equitable; it would be unfair for a combination of two expert whist players to take the money of a couple of mere novices at the game.

If any of these conditions be wanting, gambling becomes more or less wrong; and, besides, there is generally an element of danger in it which is quite sufficient to account for the bad name which it has.

I will add that when casinos began to open up in greater numbers, and bus trips were organized for seniors and advertisements began to draw young people into, for example, the wave of playing Texas Hold’em (a particularly energizing form of poker I might add), as a confessor I noted a sharp sharp increase in the number of people who began to have serious problems with gambling, and who were hurting themselves and their dependents.  I am sure other priests noticed this as well.

In sum, I understand that the venom of certain highly poisonous snakes has beneficial medicinal uses in small doses.  The collection of the venom can be more or less problematic.  Don’t forget that the biblical account of the fall of man describes the Father of Lies as having appeared to our First Parents in the guise of a serpent.

Even snake handlers get snake bit.

UPDATE 1909 GMT:

All of this brings to my mind the hymn written many years ago by the official WDTPRS Parodohymnodist whose work we have enjoyed and even recorded.  You will recall such hits as “O Come O Come Liturgical Blue”.

Here is just the first verse.

To the tune “The Church’s one foundation”.

The Church’s one foundation is B-I-N-G-O.
It is the one salvation from all the debt we owe.
And when foreclosure threatens we’ll play it every night,
for bigno pays the mortgage but also heat and light.

I hope I remembered that correctly.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, O'Brian Tags, Our Catholic Identity, Parody Songs | Tagged , , ,
43 Comments

BENEDICT XVI’S PRAYER INTENTIONS FOR OCTOBER

BENEDICT XVI’S PRAYER INTENTIONS FOR OCTOBER

VATICAN CITY, 30 SEP 2011 (VIS) – Pope Benedict’s general prayer intention for October is: “That the terminally ill may be supported by their faith in God and the love of their brothers and sisters”.

His mission intention is: “That the celebration of World Mission Day may foster in the People of God a passion for evangelisation with the willingness to support the missions with prayer and economic aid for the poorest Churches”.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
1 Comment