Rumor has it that Pope Benedict will visit Oxford when he comes to the UK. Hmmm.
Wherever your life’s travels take you, may you have an excellent New Year.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Belated Thoughts on the Covenant
My patient readers may think that I’ve been ignoring the proposed Anglican Covenant. I have not. But I’ve been having issues with time and energy. Plus it is not easy to get my arms around my thoughts on the Covenant. So I’ve thought it best not to post on it.
But now I will take a stab at it.
Although I am not quite as negative on the Covenant as Still on Patrol, I agree with him that it is ineffective and irrelevant and “will not solve anything.”
And that is not because the proposed Covenant is a horrid document. It is not that horrible in my view, though I could surely pit-nick it if I wanted. The core problem is not a lack of standards to abide by; the problem is a lack of will to enforce standards, especially the lack of will on the part of the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Rowan Williams, although not a pope, has a number of powers to discipline The Episcopal Church and has declined to use them. He could have disinvited from Lambeth Presiding Heretic Schori and other “bishops” who consecrated Gene Robinson and have not disavowed that. Or he could have put TEC’s apostasy front and center on Lambeth’s agenda. Instead, he invited all the TEC bishops save one and indabaed Lambeth into irrelevance.
Dr. Williams could have followed the lead of several Global South Primates and declared impaired or broken communion with The Episcopal Church. He has done nothing of the sort.
Instead he has been an enabler. And when he absolutely, positively has had to make a decision, he has given The Episcopal Church a pass – even when he had to undermine the rest of Primates to do so.
The Anglican Communion under Rowan Williams is like the parent who threatens and threatens a misbehaving child . . . but never actually disciplines. For effective discipline, including church discipline, there not only has to be good standards and timely warnings, there has to be the will to discipline.
The Anglican Communion, and especially the Archbishop of Canterbury, lacks that will.
Without that will, the Covenant is close to pointless.
But now I will take a stab at it.
Although I am not quite as negative on the Covenant as Still on Patrol, I agree with him that it is ineffective and irrelevant and “will not solve anything.”
And that is not because the proposed Covenant is a horrid document. It is not that horrible in my view, though I could surely pit-nick it if I wanted. The core problem is not a lack of standards to abide by; the problem is a lack of will to enforce standards, especially the lack of will on the part of the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Rowan Williams, although not a pope, has a number of powers to discipline The Episcopal Church and has declined to use them. He could have disinvited from Lambeth Presiding Heretic Schori and other “bishops” who consecrated Gene Robinson and have not disavowed that. Or he could have put TEC’s apostasy front and center on Lambeth’s agenda. Instead, he invited all the TEC bishops save one and indabaed Lambeth into irrelevance.
Dr. Williams could have followed the lead of several Global South Primates and declared impaired or broken communion with The Episcopal Church. He has done nothing of the sort.
Instead he has been an enabler. And when he absolutely, positively has had to make a decision, he has given The Episcopal Church a pass – even when he had to undermine the rest of Primates to do so.
The Anglican Communion under Rowan Williams is like the parent who threatens and threatens a misbehaving child . . . but never actually disciplines. For effective discipline, including church discipline, there not only has to be good standards and timely warnings, there has to be the will to discipline.
The Anglican Communion, and especially the Archbishop of Canterbury, lacks that will.
Without that will, the Covenant is close to pointless.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
A Modest Proposal
A brilliant send up of libchurchers’ arguments for gay clergy, etc. may be found here in the guise of “a modest proposal,” namely temple prostitution.
I particularly find this excerpt deliciously on target:
First off, let’s address the common objections. Sure, there are a handful of Bible verses that might seem to condemn the practice. But all the condemnation of temple prostitution involves pagan practices or worship of false gods. The objectionable thing is the idolatry, not the physical act itself. Sanctified, faithful prostitution in service of the true God is a new thing. The Biblical writers never foresaw or contemplated sanctified, faithful, God-pleasing prostitution in the churches and thus never wrote about it. Attempts to find a Biblical injunction against the practice therefore fall short.
Sounds familiar, does it not?
Do read the whole thing, but not while drinking coffee.
But what is most amazing about this piece is that it comes from . . . a Lutheran. Lutherans do satire?
I particularly find this excerpt deliciously on target:
First off, let’s address the common objections. Sure, there are a handful of Bible verses that might seem to condemn the practice. But all the condemnation of temple prostitution involves pagan practices or worship of false gods. The objectionable thing is the idolatry, not the physical act itself. Sanctified, faithful prostitution in service of the true God is a new thing. The Biblical writers never foresaw or contemplated sanctified, faithful, God-pleasing prostitution in the churches and thus never wrote about it. Attempts to find a Biblical injunction against the practice therefore fall short.
Sounds familiar, does it not?
Do read the whole thing, but not while drinking coffee.
But what is most amazing about this piece is that it comes from . . . a Lutheran. Lutherans do satire?
Baucus Office Denies Drunkenness
Sen. Baucus’s (D(runk)-Montana) spokesman indignantly denies that the Senator was drunk on the Senate floor:
When his friend of 30 years Ted Kennedy, with whom he had fought so hard to provide health care to children, was being used as a cheap foil to oppose health care reform, Senator Baucus gave a passionate defense. Unfortunately, those who want to kill any meaningful reform, turned it into an unfounded, untrue personal smear internet rumor. This is beyond the pale and this type of gutter politics has no place in the public sphere. It is this type of slander that makes Montanans, and Americans, disgusted with the politics as usual in Washington. And what is even more sad is that such a personal attack would be given any validity at all, let alone being elevated to the status of "news".
Translation: If my boss speaks on the Senate floor as if he’s either drunk as a sailor or channeling Ted Kennedy, it’s not news.
But what do you think? Was Baucus drunk? A helpful poll with plenty of choices may be found here. It is interesting to note that only 3 out of 730 so far picked that Baucus was “sober.”
Me? I voted that he was “channeling Ted Kennedy.”
When his friend of 30 years Ted Kennedy, with whom he had fought so hard to provide health care to children, was being used as a cheap foil to oppose health care reform, Senator Baucus gave a passionate defense. Unfortunately, those who want to kill any meaningful reform, turned it into an unfounded, untrue personal smear internet rumor. This is beyond the pale and this type of gutter politics has no place in the public sphere. It is this type of slander that makes Montanans, and Americans, disgusted with the politics as usual in Washington. And what is even more sad is that such a personal attack would be given any validity at all, let alone being elevated to the status of "news".
Translation: If my boss speaks on the Senate floor as if he’s either drunk as a sailor or channeling Ted Kennedy, it’s not news.
But what do you think? Was Baucus drunk? A helpful poll with plenty of choices may be found here. It is interesting to note that only 3 out of 730 so far picked that Baucus was “sober.”
Me? I voted that he was “channeling Ted Kennedy.”
Monday, December 28, 2009
Baucus Drunk During Senate Floor Speech
It is not quite as amusing as this version of the Twelve Days of Christmas, but Sen. Max Baucus (D(runk)-Montana) was full of Christmas spirits as he gave this Senate floor speech attacking Republicans on Obamacare.
Perhaps, maybe, he was just drunk with power. But if I had to defend Obamacare on the floor of the Senate, I might want to get some fortification, too.
Not-so-by-the-way, have you heard of this in the “Mainstream” News Media? Do you think they would be as quiet as a mouse if it were a leading Republican drunk on the Senate floor?
Perhaps, maybe, he was just drunk with power. But if I had to defend Obamacare on the floor of the Senate, I might want to get some fortification, too.
Not-so-by-the-way, have you heard of this in the “Mainstream” News Media? Do you think they would be as quiet as a mouse if it were a leading Republican drunk on the Senate floor?
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Nine Lessons and Carols
Tomorrow morning, Christmas Eve, I’ll have my annual attack of teary eyes (brought on by allergies, mind you) while I listen to Nine Lessons and Carols from King’s College, Cambridge.
For me the most awesome moment of Christmas is when a lone boy sings to a packed King’s College Chapel and to a listening world and begins the great service.
By the way, the boy in the above video is Sam Landman. I had the privilege of meeting a 15-year-old version of him at King’s in 2007. He already possessed a humble confidence and graciousness rare in anyone, much less a teenage boy.
In the evening, my parish will celebrate Christmas Eve with a humbler version of Nine Lessons and Carols with Holy Communion following. The glory of Christmas will be every bit as great.
May you also have a glorious and merry Christmas.
MORE: The service booklet for the King's College Nine Lessons and Carols may be found in pdf form here.
For me the most awesome moment of Christmas is when a lone boy sings to a packed King’s College Chapel and to a listening world and begins the great service.
By the way, the boy in the above video is Sam Landman. I had the privilege of meeting a 15-year-old version of him at King’s in 2007. He already possessed a humble confidence and graciousness rare in anyone, much less a teenage boy.
In the evening, my parish will celebrate Christmas Eve with a humbler version of Nine Lessons and Carols with Holy Communion following. The glory of Christmas will be every bit as great.
May you also have a glorious and merry Christmas.
MORE: The service booklet for the King's College Nine Lessons and Carols may be found in pdf form here.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Tyranny: Democrats to Make Obamacare Repeal-Proof
Senate Democrats are about to pass an Enabling Act, a provision that makes it almost impossible to repeal Obamacare. For in their bill is a provision that would require a two-thirds vote to repeal a key subsection. The provision reads thus:
it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.
Just like the Enabling Act of 1933, this provision ties the Senate’s hands from repealing tyranny. And not just the hands of this Senate but of future Senates.
Democrats, your Fascism is showing.
Obamacare must be stopped.
More here and here.
it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.
Just like the Enabling Act of 1933, this provision ties the Senate’s hands from repealing tyranny. And not just the hands of this Senate but of future Senates.
Democrats, your Fascism is showing.
Obamacare must be stopped.
More here and here.
Monday, December 21, 2009
Obamacare, Bribery, and Election Fraud
Democrats got Obamacare past the 60 vote barrier in the Senate in the wee hours of the morning overnight. Funny how thieves like to operate at such hours. They succeeded thanks to brazen bribery and election fraud. Yes, election fraud
Without the fraudulent “election” of Al Franken, of Tim Johnson and Mary Landrieu in their first elections, and the illegal first election of Frank Lautenberg in New Jersey, the Democrats could not have gotten their 60 votes.
Elections matter. . . . And sometimes election fraud matters more.
Without the fraudulent “election” of Al Franken, of Tim Johnson and Mary Landrieu in their first elections, and the illegal first election of Frank Lautenberg in New Jersey, the Democrats could not have gotten their 60 votes.
Elections matter. . . . And sometimes election fraud matters more.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
First ACNA Provincial Council
The first ACNA Provincial Council has met and issued a communiqué.
Some are focusing on the goal of one thousand new congregations in five years. But, realistic or not, that goal is old news from the Provincial Assembly in Bedford.
What I find more notable is the wholehearted endorsement of the Manhattan Declaration and the firm nudge given to the Anglican Church of Uganda concerning the bill there on homosexual conduct.
The Uganda bill is madness. My understanding is that it contains the death penalty for homosexual conduct and harsh fines against those who don’t report it. The church should speak out and pray against this bill.
Some are focusing on the goal of one thousand new congregations in five years. But, realistic or not, that goal is old news from the Provincial Assembly in Bedford.
What I find more notable is the wholehearted endorsement of the Manhattan Declaration and the firm nudge given to the Anglican Church of Uganda concerning the bill there on homosexual conduct.
The Uganda bill is madness. My understanding is that it contains the death penalty for homosexual conduct and harsh fines against those who don’t report it. The church should speak out and pray against this bill.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Church of England Rings Bells for Holy Climate Conference
When I was last in the UK, I suspected that climate change was religion over there. Now, I know it:
Bells in churches across Britain have chimed 350 times to press for a deal at the Copenhagen climate conference.
York Minster and Westminster Cathedral were among churches which joined a world event coinciding with a service in the Danish capital.
The aim was to highlight the 350 parts per million some developing nations say is the safe upper concentration for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. . . .
Other countries taking part in the bell ringing include New Zealand, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Sweden and the US.
The ecumenical service at the Lutheran Cathedral in Copenhagen was attended by Queen Margarethe of Denmark, as well as politicians and delegates taking part in the climate conference.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, who last week at an Environment Service in London said human well-being relied on the well-being of the world, also attended the service.
The initiative was organised by the World Council of Churches [of course], which represents more than 500 million Christians [Yeah, right].
Bells in churches across Britain have chimed 350 times to press for a deal at the Copenhagen climate conference.
York Minster and Westminster Cathedral were among churches which joined a world event coinciding with a service in the Danish capital.
The aim was to highlight the 350 parts per million some developing nations say is the safe upper concentration for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. . . .
Other countries taking part in the bell ringing include New Zealand, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Sweden and the US.
The ecumenical service at the Lutheran Cathedral in Copenhagen was attended by Queen Margarethe of Denmark, as well as politicians and delegates taking part in the climate conference.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, who last week at an Environment Service in London said human well-being relied on the well-being of the world, also attended the service.
The initiative was organised by the World Council of Churches [of course], which represents more than 500 million Christians [Yeah, right].
Monday, December 14, 2009
Upper SC and the Increasing Irrelevance of the Episcopal Church
In choosing Andrew Waldo as its bishop, the Diocese of Upper South Carolina has not also chosen apostasy but also irrelevance.
In case you don’t know where’s Waldo, here’s where:
Waldo counts Bishop Robinson as his "mentor," seeks to institute same sex blessings after General Convention approves a rite, counts Jesus as "my way" and "my truth," and practices Communion of the Unbaptized, in violation of the national church canons, at his parish.
You get the picture.
I am sure this will bring South Carolinians running to the Episcopal Church! . . . or is that running away? This election indeed begs the question: What demand is there in South Carolina for a church that is weak in affirming Jesus as the way and the truth, but that eagerly affirms homosexuality?
And Upper South Carolina is not the only liberal TEC diocese in a conservative region. The persistent and accelerating membership losses of the Episcopal Church show liberal churchianity is irrelevant if not repugnant to most who have any interest in joining a church. Does that not apply all the more in more conservative areas, such as the South?
The Episcopal Church is so letting its agenda be set by an uberliberal segment of American culture that they are becoming irrelevant to American culture. Again, the Episcopal Church is not only rushing to apostasy; they are rushing to irrelevance.
Put another way, the Episcopal Church’s desire to be oh-so-relevant is bringing about just the opposite.
In case you don’t know where’s Waldo, here’s where:
Waldo counts Bishop Robinson as his "mentor," seeks to institute same sex blessings after General Convention approves a rite, counts Jesus as "my way" and "my truth," and practices Communion of the Unbaptized, in violation of the national church canons, at his parish.
You get the picture.
I am sure this will bring South Carolinians running to the Episcopal Church! . . . or is that running away? This election indeed begs the question: What demand is there in South Carolina for a church that is weak in affirming Jesus as the way and the truth, but that eagerly affirms homosexuality?
And Upper South Carolina is not the only liberal TEC diocese in a conservative region. The persistent and accelerating membership losses of the Episcopal Church show liberal churchianity is irrelevant if not repugnant to most who have any interest in joining a church. Does that not apply all the more in more conservative areas, such as the South?
The Episcopal Church is so letting its agenda be set by an uberliberal segment of American culture that they are becoming irrelevant to American culture. Again, the Episcopal Church is not only rushing to apostasy; they are rushing to irrelevance.
Put another way, the Episcopal Church’s desire to be oh-so-relevant is bringing about just the opposite.
Iranian Smoking Gun?
If The Times has not unveiled the smoking gun, or “smoking uranium” if you will, on Iran’s nuclear weapon ambitions, it appears they have come very close to doing so:
Confidential intelligence documents obtained by The Times show that Iran is working on testing a key final component of a nuclear bomb.
The notes, from Iran’s most sensitive military nuclear project, describe a four-year plan to test a neutron initiator, the component of a nuclear bomb that triggers an explosion. Foreign intelligence agencies date them to early 2007, four years after Iran was thought to have suspended its weapons programme.
An Asian intelligence source last week confirmed to The Times that his country also believed that weapons work was being carried out as recently as 2007 — specifically, work on a neutron initiator.
The technical document describes the use of a neutron source, uranium deuteride, which independent experts confirm has no possible civilian or military use other than in a nuclear weapon. . . .
“Although Iran might claim that this work is for civil purposes, there is no civil application,” said David Albright, a physicist and president of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, which has analysed hundreds of pages of documents related to the Iranian programme. “This is a very strong indicator of weapons work.”
I suspect this means an attack on Iran will come sooner than later. . . . And it needs to come sooner than later and in massive force.
Israel has the sense and the manhood to do so. I doubt anyone else does.
Confidential intelligence documents obtained by The Times show that Iran is working on testing a key final component of a nuclear bomb.
The notes, from Iran’s most sensitive military nuclear project, describe a four-year plan to test a neutron initiator, the component of a nuclear bomb that triggers an explosion. Foreign intelligence agencies date them to early 2007, four years after Iran was thought to have suspended its weapons programme.
An Asian intelligence source last week confirmed to The Times that his country also believed that weapons work was being carried out as recently as 2007 — specifically, work on a neutron initiator.
The technical document describes the use of a neutron source, uranium deuteride, which independent experts confirm has no possible civilian or military use other than in a nuclear weapon. . . .
“Although Iran might claim that this work is for civil purposes, there is no civil application,” said David Albright, a physicist and president of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, which has analysed hundreds of pages of documents related to the Iranian programme. “This is a very strong indicator of weapons work.”
I suspect this means an attack on Iran will come sooner than later. . . . And it needs to come sooner than later and in massive force.
Israel has the sense and the manhood to do so. I doubt anyone else does.
Tuesday, December 08, 2009
Blockbuster: “Tea Party” Tops GOP on Generic Ballot
As I noted on twitter yesterday (BTW, I recommend my twitter feed. I mention important matters there that I may not mention here.), I think this Rasmussen Poll is a blockbuster. Now there is no Tea Party . . . Party, yet, but in response to this question -- Suppose the Tea Party organized itself as a political party. When thinking about the next election for Congress, would you vote for the Republican candidate from your district, the Democratic candidate from your district or the Tea Party candidate from your district? -- the response was as follows:
Democratic 36%
Tea Party 23%
Republican 18%
Not Sure 22%
That’s right. The hypothetical Tea Party polls higher than the GOP.
I think this a blockbuster as it shows beyond reasonable dispute that the Tea Party movement is a power to be reckoned with. Those who dismiss them as extremists do so at their own political peril. And this will increase the confidence and assertiveness of Tea Party activists that much more.
Whether this is good news or bad news for the Republicans depends on whether two lessons are learned:
1. Republicans must enthusiastically adopt the Tea Party issues of lower taxes, lower spending, and less intrusive government. Those are also conservative Republican issues, of course. But far too often this decade, Republican actions have not matched Republican words, alienating many in the Tea Party movement.
2. The Tea Party activists need to note and note well that Democrats win if the Tea Party and Republicans split their votes. If Tea Party activists indiscriminately run their own candidates against Republicans under a separate party label, they will simply enable detested Socialist politicians and policies.
There are times when a third party can play a constructive role (as the New York State Conservative Party did in the recent Special Election), but for the Tea Party movement to have electoral success instead of handing elections to Democrats, they must work within and/or pressure the Republican Party. And many are already so doing.
Yes, this would be unappetizing for many Tea Partiers. But they should take a good look and see how ruinous would be the alternative of enabling the Democrats and their Socialism.
Democratic 36%
Tea Party 23%
Republican 18%
Not Sure 22%
That’s right. The hypothetical Tea Party polls higher than the GOP.
I think this a blockbuster as it shows beyond reasonable dispute that the Tea Party movement is a power to be reckoned with. Those who dismiss them as extremists do so at their own political peril. And this will increase the confidence and assertiveness of Tea Party activists that much more.
Whether this is good news or bad news for the Republicans depends on whether two lessons are learned:
1. Republicans must enthusiastically adopt the Tea Party issues of lower taxes, lower spending, and less intrusive government. Those are also conservative Republican issues, of course. But far too often this decade, Republican actions have not matched Republican words, alienating many in the Tea Party movement.
2. The Tea Party activists need to note and note well that Democrats win if the Tea Party and Republicans split their votes. If Tea Party activists indiscriminately run their own candidates against Republicans under a separate party label, they will simply enable detested Socialist politicians and policies.
There are times when a third party can play a constructive role (as the New York State Conservative Party did in the recent Special Election), but for the Tea Party movement to have electoral success instead of handing elections to Democrats, they must work within and/or pressure the Republican Party. And many are already so doing.
Yes, this would be unappetizing for many Tea Partiers. But they should take a good look and see how ruinous would be the alternative of enabling the Democrats and their Socialism.
Monday, December 07, 2009
The 10PM Mass
I note with interest that Pope Benedict is moving the Midnight Mass back a couple hours to 10pm.
This is provoking some speculation about Pope Benedict’s health. I am in no position to add to that speculation in a knowledgeable way except to make the obvious point that Benedict is no longer a very young man. If he wants to go to bed earlier, give him a break.
This is provoking some speculation about Pope Benedict’s health. I am in no position to add to that speculation in a knowledgeable way except to make the obvious point that Benedict is no longer a very young man. If he wants to go to bed earlier, give him a break.
The Lesbian “Bishop” and More of the Same
Although I am not quite as jaded as Captain Yips about the matter, I do not see the election of partnered Lesbian Mary Glasspool as a bishop in the TEC Diocese of Los Angeles as groundbreaking.
Instead I see it as leading to more of the same. I expect the election will receive the necessary consents, thereby demonstrating The Episcopal Church’s contempt for orthodoxy and unity. But that contempt would be more of the same, would it not? And liberals will use this opportunity to make life more difficult for the orthodox, as –Bruno has hinted. But making life difficult for the orthodox has practically been a sacrament of The Episcopal Church since 1979.
++Rowan Williams will make sonorous pronouncements to string along the orthodox, but mean nothing, until he is absolutely forced to take a stand. And then he will back and enable the apostates. More of the same.
And the rest of the Anglican Communion will lack enough backbones to do anything about it. Yes, there is talk about TEC being expelled from the Communion, but get real!
Those who do retain enough orthodoxy and moral clarity, such as GAFCON, will drift further from the Communion, but not cut bait. More of the same.
Need I say more? I mean, really people, this has all the suspense of Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown to kick. We may not know all the details of what will transpire, but we know how it will end. More of the same.
Instead I see it as leading to more of the same. I expect the election will receive the necessary consents, thereby demonstrating The Episcopal Church’s contempt for orthodoxy and unity. But that contempt would be more of the same, would it not? And liberals will use this opportunity to make life more difficult for the orthodox, as –Bruno has hinted. But making life difficult for the orthodox has practically been a sacrament of The Episcopal Church since 1979.
++Rowan Williams will make sonorous pronouncements to string along the orthodox, but mean nothing, until he is absolutely forced to take a stand. And then he will back and enable the apostates. More of the same.
And the rest of the Anglican Communion will lack enough backbones to do anything about it. Yes, there is talk about TEC being expelled from the Communion, but get real!
Those who do retain enough orthodoxy and moral clarity, such as GAFCON, will drift further from the Communion, but not cut bait. More of the same.
Need I say more? I mean, really people, this has all the suspense of Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown to kick. We may not know all the details of what will transpire, but we know how it will end. More of the same.
Friday, December 04, 2009
The Problem with Modern Theology and WO
In a discussion of Women’s Ordination, Jeffery Steel hits upon the problem with much (most?) modern theology – it is man-centered, not Christ-centered.
On the subject of holy orders, Steel points out (in all caps, no less) that no one has the right to holy orders. The attitude that “social justice” or women’s rights somehow demands W. O. is an example of man-centered theology.
Of course, such poor man-centered theology is displayed in other areas. Modern culture is allowed to change doctrine and practice . . . and then the Holy Spirit is blamed for it, of course. As if the Holy Spirit has suddenly changed his mind and is now oh-so concerned with approving and pushing modern Western culture.
And it is not just liberals that engage in such uberhumanistic sloppiness. One reason I don’t call myself evangelical is all the “evangelicals” who let their theology sway to cultural winds.
Myself, I choose Christ over culture, thank you.
On the subject of holy orders, Steel points out (in all caps, no less) that no one has the right to holy orders. The attitude that “social justice” or women’s rights somehow demands W. O. is an example of man-centered theology.
Of course, such poor man-centered theology is displayed in other areas. Modern culture is allowed to change doctrine and practice . . . and then the Holy Spirit is blamed for it, of course. As if the Holy Spirit has suddenly changed his mind and is now oh-so concerned with approving and pushing modern Western culture.
And it is not just liberals that engage in such uberhumanistic sloppiness. One reason I don’t call myself evangelical is all the “evangelicals” who let their theology sway to cultural winds.
Myself, I choose Christ over culture, thank you.
Tuesday, December 01, 2009
“Tolerance” and D. C. Same Sex Marriage
The IRD has posted a succinct piece which sums up well what I’ve been saying here, that most of those who push same-sex marriage and the like are using “tolerance” as an Orwellian cover to stamp out tolerance. The article uses the District of Columbia same-sex marriage ordinance likely to pass today as a case in point.
The D. C. city council could have protected religious conscience in their ordinance . . . could have.
Council member Yvette Alexander proposed an amendment that would have granted individuals and institutions the right to distinguish between same-sex relationships and man-woman marriage, based on religious convictions. The amendment was rejected.
And just in case you think that omission is a bug and not a feature . . .
Churches and clergy would not be forced to conduct same-sex weddings. But in every other respect religious persons and institutions would be pressed to act as if there were nothing special about the lifelong, one-flesh union of the two complementary sexes. Those most vulnerable to such pressure would be persons and institutions financially beholden to the D.C. government.
Foremost among those are Catholic Charities of D.C., the largest city-contracted provider of social services. Its roughly $20 million in annual city contracts provide services such as homeless shelters, medical clinics, and tutoring programs to 68,000 city residents. When the Catholic archdiocese warned that it might lose those contracts if it could not comply with a same-sex marriage mandate, council members reacted harshly-against the archdiocese.
Council member Mary Cheh called the archdiocese "somewhat childish." Catania suggested that Catholic Charities were not "an indispensable component of our social services infrastructure." He complained, "It's a shame they don't extend the same efforts to issues that really matter, like health care and homelessness."
It is odd that Catania, having devoted so much effort to redefining marriage, should now classify it as an issue that did not really matter. And that he should presume to instruct a religious body about which issues should really matter to it.
All this rage suggests that perhaps forcing private individuals and institutions to approve same-sex relationships is not an unintended side effect of the same-sex marriage movement. Perhaps such coercion is the whole point.
I disagree with the article on one point there. It is not “perhaps.”
But I suspect the writer comes to that conclusion as well.
Same-sex marriage laws, in abolishing all distinctions between same-sex relationships and man-woman matrimony, turn supporters of such distinctions into enemies of state policy. Because "marriage equality" is claimed as a "civil right," akin to racial equality, those who would deny it become the equivalent of racist bigots in the eyes of the law. And they would be treated as racist bigots have been (properly) treated: shamed and shunned, targeted for lawsuits and driven out of public life.
Exactly. And all in the name of “tolerance”, of course.
The D. C. city council could have protected religious conscience in their ordinance . . . could have.
Council member Yvette Alexander proposed an amendment that would have granted individuals and institutions the right to distinguish between same-sex relationships and man-woman marriage, based on religious convictions. The amendment was rejected.
And just in case you think that omission is a bug and not a feature . . .
Churches and clergy would not be forced to conduct same-sex weddings. But in every other respect religious persons and institutions would be pressed to act as if there were nothing special about the lifelong, one-flesh union of the two complementary sexes. Those most vulnerable to such pressure would be persons and institutions financially beholden to the D.C. government.
Foremost among those are Catholic Charities of D.C., the largest city-contracted provider of social services. Its roughly $20 million in annual city contracts provide services such as homeless shelters, medical clinics, and tutoring programs to 68,000 city residents. When the Catholic archdiocese warned that it might lose those contracts if it could not comply with a same-sex marriage mandate, council members reacted harshly-against the archdiocese.
Council member Mary Cheh called the archdiocese "somewhat childish." Catania suggested that Catholic Charities were not "an indispensable component of our social services infrastructure." He complained, "It's a shame they don't extend the same efforts to issues that really matter, like health care and homelessness."
It is odd that Catania, having devoted so much effort to redefining marriage, should now classify it as an issue that did not really matter. And that he should presume to instruct a religious body about which issues should really matter to it.
All this rage suggests that perhaps forcing private individuals and institutions to approve same-sex relationships is not an unintended side effect of the same-sex marriage movement. Perhaps such coercion is the whole point.
I disagree with the article on one point there. It is not “perhaps.”
But I suspect the writer comes to that conclusion as well.
Same-sex marriage laws, in abolishing all distinctions between same-sex relationships and man-woman matrimony, turn supporters of such distinctions into enemies of state policy. Because "marriage equality" is claimed as a "civil right," akin to racial equality, those who would deny it become the equivalent of racist bigots in the eyes of the law. And they would be treated as racist bigots have been (properly) treated: shamed and shunned, targeted for lawsuits and driven out of public life.
Exactly. And all in the name of “tolerance”, of course.
Monday, November 30, 2009
About the Swiss and Minarets . . .
I have mixed feelings about 57% of Swiss voters banning the construction of minarets. My first reaction was to be appalled. As my good readers know well, freedom of religion is important to me.
But how much is this about freedom of religion? One can still be Muslim in Switzerland, just as I am Anglican in America. But my freedom of religion does not mean I have the right to build a 300 foot spire with loud speakers that periodically proclaim “Eat cake or die!”
And as pointed out here (in an albeit over the top manner), mosques and minarets are not just Muslim church buildings.
A mosque is NOT a Muslim "church." It is a Muslim "church" and a Muslim "community center" and a Muslim "armory" and a Muslim "army recruiting center" and a Muslim everything.
And that comes complete with a loud and obnoxious call to prayer multiple times a day. Yes, more obnoxious than “Eat cake or die!” Minarets, especially when placed in areas with many non-Muslims, are nothing if not a form of religious bullying.
And, as Cranmer boldly points out , Switzerland is still a democracy not under the thumb of Gulag EU. So if the Swiss look at the rest of Europe and its foolishness and say, “No, we will not be bullied by Muslims,” and put limits on Muslim freedom of religion that do not violate human rights, then that is their right to do so.
So on second thought, I do not blame the Swiss. It would be nice to have absolute freedom of religion. But as long as people use religion to bully, abuse, or even kill the innocent, then even that freedom which I cherish and defend must have its limits.
I still understand why many disagree with how the Swiss have limited that freedom. But I wonder how many of those critics are non-Muslims who have lived close to a minaret.
But how much is this about freedom of religion? One can still be Muslim in Switzerland, just as I am Anglican in America. But my freedom of religion does not mean I have the right to build a 300 foot spire with loud speakers that periodically proclaim “Eat cake or die!”
And as pointed out here (in an albeit over the top manner), mosques and minarets are not just Muslim church buildings.
A mosque is NOT a Muslim "church." It is a Muslim "church" and a Muslim "community center" and a Muslim "armory" and a Muslim "army recruiting center" and a Muslim everything.
And that comes complete with a loud and obnoxious call to prayer multiple times a day. Yes, more obnoxious than “Eat cake or die!” Minarets, especially when placed in areas with many non-Muslims, are nothing if not a form of religious bullying.
And, as Cranmer boldly points out , Switzerland is still a democracy not under the thumb of Gulag EU. So if the Swiss look at the rest of Europe and its foolishness and say, “No, we will not be bullied by Muslims,” and put limits on Muslim freedom of religion that do not violate human rights, then that is their right to do so.
So on second thought, I do not blame the Swiss. It would be nice to have absolute freedom of religion. But as long as people use religion to bully, abuse, or even kill the innocent, then even that freedom which I cherish and defend must have its limits.
I still understand why many disagree with how the Swiss have limited that freedom. But I wonder how many of those critics are non-Muslims who have lived close to a minaret.
Friday, November 27, 2009
Personal Ordinariates and UK Property Issues
I have been hoping that property issues surrounding Church of England Anglo-Catholic parishes that decide to cross the Tiber would be handled in a gentlemanly manner. But I am now afraid “hope” is the operative word.
[R.C. Archbishop Vincent Nichols] added that Dr Williams had already ruled out the purchase of Church of England buildings as "impossible".
. . .
Forward in Faith, the largest Anglo-Catholic group, has estimated that 450 parishes are considering the Pope's offer and as many as 200 of them might accept it.
Anglican Bishop John Broadhurst of Fulham, chairman of Forward in Faith, said: "We have 1,000 priest members in my organisation and there are many others who agree with us. The main issue for many Anglican priests is now the ownership of parish churches.
" Understanding the attachment of Anglo-Catholics to their church buildings, many of which are listed or historic, the Catholic commission is expected to look at the possibility of church-sharing and also the chances of taking out 100-year leases of some Anglican parishes, including a commitment to maintain and repair them.
Fr Anthony Symondson, a former Anglo-Catholic vicar who became a Jesuit priest, doubted however whether mass conversion was inevitable. He predicted that if an English Ordinariate relies on "shared churches and temporary buildings" he felt it would "represent a very small number of people with a very limited future".
"None of us really know how the Church of England is going to respond to it and how the Church Commissioners are going to respond to it in terms of letting property go," he said. Congregations are likely to be split by the decision and may be tempted to experiment with parish-sharing, he said, but he explained that when this was tried at a church in west London in the 1990s it was soon halted by Cardinal Basil Hume because of divisions between Catholic converts and the resident Anglican congregation.
I do not want to comment too much on this as I am not expert on peculiar CofE property laws and the like. Nevertheless, I am puzzled as to why the sale of some CofE buildings is “impossible”. Doesn’t the Church of England need the money to put it bluntly? Aren’t many of these buildings very expensive to maintain?
Surely, accommodations can be made that would benefit both the Church of England and departing parishes. Surely, the ugliness exhibited by The Episcopal Church won’t at all be practiced in the Church of England.
Right?
Hat tip to Jeffrey Steel.
[R.C. Archbishop Vincent Nichols] added that Dr Williams had already ruled out the purchase of Church of England buildings as "impossible".
. . .
Forward in Faith, the largest Anglo-Catholic group, has estimated that 450 parishes are considering the Pope's offer and as many as 200 of them might accept it.
Anglican Bishop John Broadhurst of Fulham, chairman of Forward in Faith, said: "We have 1,000 priest members in my organisation and there are many others who agree with us. The main issue for many Anglican priests is now the ownership of parish churches.
" Understanding the attachment of Anglo-Catholics to their church buildings, many of which are listed or historic, the Catholic commission is expected to look at the possibility of church-sharing and also the chances of taking out 100-year leases of some Anglican parishes, including a commitment to maintain and repair them.
Fr Anthony Symondson, a former Anglo-Catholic vicar who became a Jesuit priest, doubted however whether mass conversion was inevitable. He predicted that if an English Ordinariate relies on "shared churches and temporary buildings" he felt it would "represent a very small number of people with a very limited future".
"None of us really know how the Church of England is going to respond to it and how the Church Commissioners are going to respond to it in terms of letting property go," he said. Congregations are likely to be split by the decision and may be tempted to experiment with parish-sharing, he said, but he explained that when this was tried at a church in west London in the 1990s it was soon halted by Cardinal Basil Hume because of divisions between Catholic converts and the resident Anglican congregation.
I do not want to comment too much on this as I am not expert on peculiar CofE property laws and the like. Nevertheless, I am puzzled as to why the sale of some CofE buildings is “impossible”. Doesn’t the Church of England need the money to put it bluntly? Aren’t many of these buildings very expensive to maintain?
Surely, accommodations can be made that would benefit both the Church of England and departing parishes. Surely, the ugliness exhibited by The Episcopal Church won’t at all be practiced in the Church of England.
Right?
Hat tip to Jeffrey Steel.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Orthodox With Attitude: Bishop Tobin and the Manhattan Declaration
I have long thought that the decline of church and society in the West can not only be laid at the feet of libchurchers but also at the feet of those “orthodox” who done nothing. So I am heartened by two recent developments in which orthodox leaders show some backbone and maybe even a little attitude, too.
First was RC Bishop Thomas Tobin’s excommunication of Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI). The Kennedys are perhaps the family which has done the more harm than any other to this nation. Their evil, which extends beyond support of abortion on demand (although that is certainly bad enough), had long been brazen. Yet has any RC cleric stood up to them and said, “Enough”?
Now one has. And it’s about time. Kudos to Bishop Tobin.
Second was, and is, the Manhattan Declaration. It is a robust statement by Christian leaders in defense of life and marriage.
But it goes well beyond that in a needful time. And this is where such backbone is displayed as to stir my heart. It proclaims both a right and obligation to act upon orthodox Christian principles in these areas. This declaration is more than just words.
Moreover and perhaps most importantly, it acknowledges openly and confronts the attack on religious freedom in the West, particularly attacks on those speaking and acting in the areas of life and marriage.
It is ironic that those who today assert a right to kill the unborn, aged and disabled and also a right to engage in immoral sexual practices, and even a right to have relationships integrated around these practices be recognized and blessed by law—such persons claiming these “rights” are very often in the vanguard of those who would trample upon the freedom of others to express their religious and moral commitments to the sanctity of life and to the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife.
We see this, for example, in the effort to weaken or eliminate conscience clauses, and therefore to compel prolife institutions (including religiously affiliated hospitals and clinics), and prolife physicians, surgeons, nurses, and other health care professionals, to refer for abortions and, in certain cases, even to perform or participate in abortions. We see it in the use of anti-discrimination statutes to force religious institutions, businesses, and service providers of various sorts to comply with activities they judge to be deeply immoral or go out of business. After the judicial imposition of “samesex marriage” in Massachusetts, for example, Catholic Charities chose with great reluctance to end its centurylong work of helping to place orphaned children in good homes rather than comply with a legal mandate that it place children in samesex households in violation of Catholic moral teaching. In New Jersey, after the establishment of a quasimarital “civil unions” scheme, a Methodist institution was stripped of its tax exempt status when it declined, as a matter of religious conscience, to permit a facility it owned and operated to be used for ceremonies blessing homosexual unions. In Canada and some European nations, Christian clergy have been prosecuted for preaching Biblical norms against the practice of homosexuality. New hate crime laws in America raise the specter of the same practice here.
And in confronting this attack on religious freedom, it states a manful determination to refuse to submit to it, ending with . . .
Going back to the earliest days of the church, Christians have refused to compromise their proclamation of the gospel. In Acts 4, Peter and John were ordered to stop preaching. Their answer was, “Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard.” Through the centuries,
Christianity has taught that civil disobedience is not only permitted, but sometimes required. . . .
Because we honor justice and the common good, we will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryodestructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other antilife act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.
To which I say, “Yes!” and “Amen!”
I have signed the Manhattan Declaration and urge my good readers to do likewise.
And I may post further analysis at a later time.
First was RC Bishop Thomas Tobin’s excommunication of Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI). The Kennedys are perhaps the family which has done the more harm than any other to this nation. Their evil, which extends beyond support of abortion on demand (although that is certainly bad enough), had long been brazen. Yet has any RC cleric stood up to them and said, “Enough”?
Now one has. And it’s about time. Kudos to Bishop Tobin.
Second was, and is, the Manhattan Declaration. It is a robust statement by Christian leaders in defense of life and marriage.
But it goes well beyond that in a needful time. And this is where such backbone is displayed as to stir my heart. It proclaims both a right and obligation to act upon orthodox Christian principles in these areas. This declaration is more than just words.
Moreover and perhaps most importantly, it acknowledges openly and confronts the attack on religious freedom in the West, particularly attacks on those speaking and acting in the areas of life and marriage.
It is ironic that those who today assert a right to kill the unborn, aged and disabled and also a right to engage in immoral sexual practices, and even a right to have relationships integrated around these practices be recognized and blessed by law—such persons claiming these “rights” are very often in the vanguard of those who would trample upon the freedom of others to express their religious and moral commitments to the sanctity of life and to the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife.
We see this, for example, in the effort to weaken or eliminate conscience clauses, and therefore to compel prolife institutions (including religiously affiliated hospitals and clinics), and prolife physicians, surgeons, nurses, and other health care professionals, to refer for abortions and, in certain cases, even to perform or participate in abortions. We see it in the use of anti-discrimination statutes to force religious institutions, businesses, and service providers of various sorts to comply with activities they judge to be deeply immoral or go out of business. After the judicial imposition of “samesex marriage” in Massachusetts, for example, Catholic Charities chose with great reluctance to end its centurylong work of helping to place orphaned children in good homes rather than comply with a legal mandate that it place children in samesex households in violation of Catholic moral teaching. In New Jersey, after the establishment of a quasimarital “civil unions” scheme, a Methodist institution was stripped of its tax exempt status when it declined, as a matter of religious conscience, to permit a facility it owned and operated to be used for ceremonies blessing homosexual unions. In Canada and some European nations, Christian clergy have been prosecuted for preaching Biblical norms against the practice of homosexuality. New hate crime laws in America raise the specter of the same practice here.
And in confronting this attack on religious freedom, it states a manful determination to refuse to submit to it, ending with . . .
Going back to the earliest days of the church, Christians have refused to compromise their proclamation of the gospel. In Acts 4, Peter and John were ordered to stop preaching. Their answer was, “Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard.” Through the centuries,
Christianity has taught that civil disobedience is not only permitted, but sometimes required. . . .
Because we honor justice and the common good, we will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryodestructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other antilife act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.
To which I say, “Yes!” and “Amen!”
I have signed the Manhattan Declaration and urge my good readers to do likewise.
And I may post further analysis at a later time.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Pope, Rowan Meet for . . . 20 Minutes? UPDATED
I am not yet able to confirm Damian Thompson’s report that the long awaited meeting between the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Pope lasted only 20 minutes. And I do find that hard to believe.
But if they did indeed have such a brief meeting, that [Anglican understatement alert] does not reflect well on RC-Anglican relations.
UPDATE:
The Guardian’s report also has the meeting pegged at 20 minutes.
But if they did indeed have such a brief meeting, that [Anglican understatement alert] does not reflect well on RC-Anglican relations.
UPDATE:
The Guardian’s report also has the meeting pegged at 20 minutes.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Jesse Jackson, Racist
Jesse Jackson: “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”
Yes, if a Negro strays from the Obama Left plantation, why, he’s not a good darkie; he’s hardly a black man at all.
Can you imagine a White public figure getting away with spewing such racist garbage? He would be tarred and feathered in the media, then driven off the public stage. And rightly so.
And that’s exactly what should happen to Jesse Jackson and his ilk.
But I don’t think the “mainstream” news media will even pay much attention to this. We shall see.
Yes, if a Negro strays from the Obama Left plantation, why, he’s not a good darkie; he’s hardly a black man at all.
Can you imagine a White public figure getting away with spewing such racist garbage? He would be tarred and feathered in the media, then driven off the public stage. And rightly so.
And that’s exactly what should happen to Jesse Jackson and his ilk.
But I don’t think the “mainstream” news media will even pay much attention to this. We shall see.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
TEC’s Pythonesque Attack on Ft. Worth Floundering UPDATED
As Texanglican sums up well, The Episcopal Church’s attempt to loot the Diocese of Ft. Worth by claiming to be THE REAL Diocese of Ft. Worth is not going very well.
First, the trial court judge has already ruled that the lawyers suing on behalf of TEC's "diocese" DO NOT represent the corporation known as the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth that was established in 1983 and which Bishop Iker still heads. Yet the trial judge did not strike all the pleadings TEC's lawyers had filed claiming to act on behalf of the corporation at the time he ruled that they were not real diocese's lawyers. Logically, if these TEC lawyers do not represent the real diocese that actually owns the property, then they should not be able to even appear in court to file pleadings demanding that property be handed over to the folks they represent!
The appellate court has stayed any further proceedings until this fundamental illogic can be resolved. And that is GOOD news for the ACNA diocese--the real diocese of Fort Worth.
One wonders what sort of stimulant the worthies at 815 were drinking when they decided to pretend they and/or their puppets were the real Diocese of Ft. Worth in order to loot the Diocese of Ft. Worth. That strategy is, well, rather silly. It reminds me of the Monty Python School Prize-Giving sketch in which a thief mugs the Bishop of East Anglia, who was presiding over a school awards ceremony, and proceeds as follows:
I'm afraid there's been a mistake. The man who has been speaking to you is an impostor. He is not in fact the Bishop of East Anglia, but a man wanted by the police. I am the Bishop of East Anglia and anyone who doesn't believe me can look me up in the book. Now then, the first prize is this beautiful silver cup, which has been won by me. (He puts the silver cup into a sack) Next we come to the Fairfax Atkinson Trophy for outstanding achievement in the field of Applied Mathematics. Well, there was no-one this year who reached the required standard so it goes in my sack. And by an old rule of the school all the other silver trophies also go in my sack.
It makes for good humor, but a questionable legal strategy.
UPDATE:
The Diocese of Ft. Worth (Yes, the real one.) has issued a statement.
The Anglican Curmudgeon is following this closely, of course.
First, the trial court judge has already ruled that the lawyers suing on behalf of TEC's "diocese" DO NOT represent the corporation known as the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth that was established in 1983 and which Bishop Iker still heads. Yet the trial judge did not strike all the pleadings TEC's lawyers had filed claiming to act on behalf of the corporation at the time he ruled that they were not real diocese's lawyers. Logically, if these TEC lawyers do not represent the real diocese that actually owns the property, then they should not be able to even appear in court to file pleadings demanding that property be handed over to the folks they represent!
The appellate court has stayed any further proceedings until this fundamental illogic can be resolved. And that is GOOD news for the ACNA diocese--the real diocese of Fort Worth.
One wonders what sort of stimulant the worthies at 815 were drinking when they decided to pretend they and/or their puppets were the real Diocese of Ft. Worth in order to loot the Diocese of Ft. Worth. That strategy is, well, rather silly. It reminds me of the Monty Python School Prize-Giving sketch in which a thief mugs the Bishop of East Anglia, who was presiding over a school awards ceremony, and proceeds as follows:
I'm afraid there's been a mistake. The man who has been speaking to you is an impostor. He is not in fact the Bishop of East Anglia, but a man wanted by the police. I am the Bishop of East Anglia and anyone who doesn't believe me can look me up in the book. Now then, the first prize is this beautiful silver cup, which has been won by me. (He puts the silver cup into a sack) Next we come to the Fairfax Atkinson Trophy for outstanding achievement in the field of Applied Mathematics. Well, there was no-one this year who reached the required standard so it goes in my sack. And by an old rule of the school all the other silver trophies also go in my sack.
It makes for good humor, but a questionable legal strategy.
UPDATE:
The Diocese of Ft. Worth (Yes, the real one.) has issued a statement.
The Anglican Curmudgeon is following this closely, of course.
Monday, November 16, 2009
The Episcopal Church Welcomes You . . . Unless You’re Pro-Life
The Episcopal Church likes to pat itself on the back for being oh-so tolerant and inclusive. But that inclusiveness has not extended to pro-life people for many years. Pro-lifers and their consciences have been thrown under the bus and run over repeatedly by such outrages as TEC’s support of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice.
Now it seems in at least some parishes, the disdain for pro-lifers is personal:
Abby Johnson, the former Planned Parenthood clinic director whose about-face on abortion prompted her to resign her job, says she's gotten flack for her decision from an unexpected quarter: her own church.
Her Oct. 6 decision to leave Planned Parenthood in Bryan, Texas - after viewing an ultrasound-guided abortion of a 13-week-old fetus two weeks earlier - made headlines, especially when she ended up volunteering at the Coalition for Life center a few doors away. Her former employer filed a restraining order to silence Mrs. Johnson, but a judge threw out the case on Tuesday.
Now she is facing a different kind of music at her parish, St. Francis Episcopal in nearby College Station, the home of Texas A&M University.
Whereas clergy and parishioners welcomed her as a Planned Parenthood employee, now they are buttonholing her after Sunday services.
"Now that I have taken this stand, some of the people there are not accepting of that," she told The Washington Times. "People have told me they disagree with my choice. One of the things I've been told is that as Episcopalians, we embrace our differences and disagreements. While I agree with that, I am not sure I can go to a place where I don't feel I am welcome."
The rector at St. Francis refused to comment on the charge of nonacceptance.
Just like he refuses to speak up against all sorts of evil, I’m sure.
In the Episcopal Church, evil is treated as good and good is treated as evil. “Tolerance” and “inclusiveness” are just code words to paper that over.
Hat tip to Stand Firm.
Now it seems in at least some parishes, the disdain for pro-lifers is personal:
Abby Johnson, the former Planned Parenthood clinic director whose about-face on abortion prompted her to resign her job, says she's gotten flack for her decision from an unexpected quarter: her own church.
Her Oct. 6 decision to leave Planned Parenthood in Bryan, Texas - after viewing an ultrasound-guided abortion of a 13-week-old fetus two weeks earlier - made headlines, especially when she ended up volunteering at the Coalition for Life center a few doors away. Her former employer filed a restraining order to silence Mrs. Johnson, but a judge threw out the case on Tuesday.
Now she is facing a different kind of music at her parish, St. Francis Episcopal in nearby College Station, the home of Texas A&M University.
Whereas clergy and parishioners welcomed her as a Planned Parenthood employee, now they are buttonholing her after Sunday services.
"Now that I have taken this stand, some of the people there are not accepting of that," she told The Washington Times. "People have told me they disagree with my choice. One of the things I've been told is that as Episcopalians, we embrace our differences and disagreements. While I agree with that, I am not sure I can go to a place where I don't feel I am welcome."
The rector at St. Francis refused to comment on the charge of nonacceptance.
Just like he refuses to speak up against all sorts of evil, I’m sure.
In the Episcopal Church, evil is treated as good and good is treated as evil. “Tolerance” and “inclusiveness” are just code words to paper that over.
Hat tip to Stand Firm.
Leftists Assault Tea Party Activists in Florida Amnesty Protests
I’d like to see how Leftists are going to explain this violent assault away.
This story is not out there much yet. But it will be.
This story is not out there much yet. But it will be.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Q: How Do you Ask for a Terrorist Attack?
A: Try 9-11 terrorists in a criminal court in New York City.
This is an inexcusably irresponsible move from the Obama Administration.
This is an inexcusably irresponsible move from the Obama Administration.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Owens Seated Before the Votes Are All In
Interesting story here. It turns out that the vote count in the NY-23 Special Election (the one that featured Democrat Owens, Conservative Hoffman, and a certain RINO) is much closer than thought on election night. There were some input errors that night that did not count Hoffman votes.
No, I am not going to rant about vote fraud, because I don’t think there is any here. This looks like simple human and/or technology error to me. However, I find it outrageous that Owens was seated as a member of the House before the votes were all in, counted, and canvassed.
Why the rush anyway? So he could vote to nationalize health care? Hmmmm?
It seems unlikely that a full counting of the ballots will change the NY-23 result. (But I would LOVE it if it did. Imagine the embarrassment of unseating Owens after he voted for Obamacare in a close vote. Wow.) Still, Owens should NOT have been seated until all the votes were counted and canvassed. The rush to seat him beforehand is beyond scandalous.
No, I am not going to rant about vote fraud, because I don’t think there is any here. This looks like simple human and/or technology error to me. However, I find it outrageous that Owens was seated as a member of the House before the votes were all in, counted, and canvassed.
Why the rush anyway? So he could vote to nationalize health care? Hmmmm?
It seems unlikely that a full counting of the ballots will change the NY-23 result. (But I would LOVE it if it did. Imagine the embarrassment of unseating Owens after he voted for Obamacare in a close vote. Wow.) Still, Owens should NOT have been seated until all the votes were counted and canvassed. The rush to seat him beforehand is beyond scandalous.
About Voter Enthusiasm/Anger
Amongst all the poll numbers thrown about, something you do not hear much about is the enthusiasm and/or anger potential voters have about their positions. This enthusiasm/anger is important because it affects the likelihood of them actually going out and voting their positions instead of just yakking. And, as any politico will tell you, voter turnout is always key, especially in off-year elections.
I have suspected that this enthusiasm/anger factor favors the Republicans for off-year 2010 congressional elections. For one thing, the tea party movement would not have the success it has had without a great undercurrent of both anger and enthusiasm out there. And I think the 2009 Virginia and New Jersey elections were affected by that anger/enthusiasm.
Now some other numbers are confirming my suspicions. From a Pew poll:
[V]oters who plan to support Republicans next year are more enthusiastic than those who plan to vote for a Democrat. Fully 58% of those who plan to vote for a Republican next year say they are very enthusiastic about voting, compared with 42% of those who plan to vote for a Democrat. More than half (56%) of independent voters who support a Republican in their district are very enthusiastic about voting; by contrast, just 32% of independents who plan to vote for a Democrat express high levels of enthusiasm.
Those numbers are *interesting* and do not look good for Democrats. However, Obama and friends are pushing the most offensive aspects of their Socialist agenda now and will surely soft pedal that by late summer as the election nears. (Won’t they?) So anger may wane some. And no one really knows what the economy will be like. That, as always, is a huge factor that will influence voter attitudes.
Nevertheless, the enthusiasm/anger factor, which is now favoring conservatives, is one to watch.
I have suspected that this enthusiasm/anger factor favors the Republicans for off-year 2010 congressional elections. For one thing, the tea party movement would not have the success it has had without a great undercurrent of both anger and enthusiasm out there. And I think the 2009 Virginia and New Jersey elections were affected by that anger/enthusiasm.
Now some other numbers are confirming my suspicions. From a Pew poll:
[V]oters who plan to support Republicans next year are more enthusiastic than those who plan to vote for a Democrat. Fully 58% of those who plan to vote for a Republican next year say they are very enthusiastic about voting, compared with 42% of those who plan to vote for a Democrat. More than half (56%) of independent voters who support a Republican in their district are very enthusiastic about voting; by contrast, just 32% of independents who plan to vote for a Democrat express high levels of enthusiasm.
Those numbers are *interesting* and do not look good for Democrats. However, Obama and friends are pushing the most offensive aspects of their Socialist agenda now and will surely soft pedal that by late summer as the election nears. (Won’t they?) So anger may wane some. And no one really knows what the economy will be like. That, as always, is a huge factor that will influence voter attitudes.
Nevertheless, the enthusiasm/anger factor, which is now favoring conservatives, is one to watch.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
The Perfect Man for the Job!
The word is that retired Bishop Wallis Ohl is in line to become the bishop of the faux Diocese of Ft. Worth in The Episcopal Church (opposed, of course, to the real diocese in the Anglican Church in North America).
Yes, that is the same Bishop Ohl who, as Bishop of Northwest Texas in 2005, drove the orthodox congregation of St. Nicholas’ Episcopal Midland out of their building they built and bought just four years earlier. . . .
. . . Which means he is the perfect man to be a bishop in Katharine Schori’s Episcopal Church!
Yes, that is the same Bishop Ohl who, as Bishop of Northwest Texas in 2005, drove the orthodox congregation of St. Nicholas’ Episcopal Midland out of their building they built and bought just four years earlier. . . .
. . . Which means he is the perfect man to be a bishop in Katharine Schori’s Episcopal Church!
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Gulag Obama: Prison for Obamacare Dissidents
Many of you are already aware of this, but I have not yet mentioned it here. And it should not only be mentioned but opposed with all the strength we can muster. The House Obamacare bill passed Saturday night, with the approval of my congressman Solobama Ortiz, has prison for those who refuse to submit.
Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.
To their credit, even some Lefties are appalled at this provision.
Democrats, your jackboots are showing.
Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.
To their credit, even some Lefties are appalled at this provision.
Democrats, your jackboots are showing.
Monday, November 09, 2009
God and the Fall of the Berlin Wall
Today, Germany and the World (except for Obama and some other Leftists) celebrate the 20th Anniversary of the Fall of the Berlin Wall.
The anniversary connects with me because it reminds me of a way God very personally demonstrated his sovereignty.
Just over 20 years ago, a news story about East Germany (I don’t remember the details.) so provoked me that in anger, I prayed that God would remove “that Communist fossil” East German leader Erich Honecker from power.
Only a few months later, not only was he removed from power, but the Berlin Wall fell.
Now, of course, God did not say, “Oh my, Mark has prayed. I must do his bidding.” Just the opposite. God showed the arm of His sovereignty and answered the prayers and yearnings of millions beyond what they hoped or imagined, certainly far beyond what I hoped or imagined. The Iron Curtain fell, and that peaceably for the most part. Not longer afterward, the Cold War ended with the Fall of the Soviet Union, again with hardly a shot fired.
Younger readers may not understand how remarkable that was. So a little perspective. In the late 80’s, I was already well past 25, and the Cold War and the Iron Curtain was all I knew. These evils preceded me and I expected they would continue my whole live and beyond. And if I did see them end, it would surely be with violence. Communists did not care what “the people” really thought. They would hold on to power until it was ripped out of their cold dead hands by either internal revolution or by war, or so I thought. Nuclear war was still far more thinkable than the peaceful fall of Communism in Europe. In fact, the 80’s saw not a little Nuclear War scare. See the movie The Day After for one symptom (and cause) of that. I, myself, gave a lot of thought to what I would do if a nuclear strike seemed likely. On the other hand, it did not even occur to me that the people behind the Iron Curtain would see freedom and that peaceably.
So I practically had to pinch myself when the Fall of the Berlin Wall and the other events of 1989 occurred. I still consider these a wonderful act of God. And I still get a bit emotional thinking back on it.
The Lord is indeed Lord. He is sovereign. Thanks be to God!
The anniversary connects with me because it reminds me of a way God very personally demonstrated his sovereignty.
Just over 20 years ago, a news story about East Germany (I don’t remember the details.) so provoked me that in anger, I prayed that God would remove “that Communist fossil” East German leader Erich Honecker from power.
Only a few months later, not only was he removed from power, but the Berlin Wall fell.
Now, of course, God did not say, “Oh my, Mark has prayed. I must do his bidding.” Just the opposite. God showed the arm of His sovereignty and answered the prayers and yearnings of millions beyond what they hoped or imagined, certainly far beyond what I hoped or imagined. The Iron Curtain fell, and that peaceably for the most part. Not longer afterward, the Cold War ended with the Fall of the Soviet Union, again with hardly a shot fired.
Younger readers may not understand how remarkable that was. So a little perspective. In the late 80’s, I was already well past 25, and the Cold War and the Iron Curtain was all I knew. These evils preceded me and I expected they would continue my whole live and beyond. And if I did see them end, it would surely be with violence. Communists did not care what “the people” really thought. They would hold on to power until it was ripped out of their cold dead hands by either internal revolution or by war, or so I thought. Nuclear war was still far more thinkable than the peaceful fall of Communism in Europe. In fact, the 80’s saw not a little Nuclear War scare. See the movie The Day After for one symptom (and cause) of that. I, myself, gave a lot of thought to what I would do if a nuclear strike seemed likely. On the other hand, it did not even occur to me that the people behind the Iron Curtain would see freedom and that peaceably.
So I practically had to pinch myself when the Fall of the Berlin Wall and the other events of 1989 occurred. I still consider these a wonderful act of God. And I still get a bit emotional thinking back on it.
The Lord is indeed Lord. He is sovereign. Thanks be to God!
Benny Hill Stamp Rejected by Royal Mail
It is with regret that I pass on the sad news that the Royal Mail has rejected a Benny Hill stamp.
Newly released minutes from a Royal Mail committee meeting show that political correctness won the day when it came to selecting images to represent ITV comedy. "Benny Hill has been included in previous presentations but concerns were raised by our public relations team as it was in direct opposition to company's policies on harassment in the workplace," the minutes stated.
Mark Steyn is also concerned:
Hmm. Hope this won't derail the USPS Clinton commemorative.
Newly released minutes from a Royal Mail committee meeting show that political correctness won the day when it came to selecting images to represent ITV comedy. "Benny Hill has been included in previous presentations but concerns were raised by our public relations team as it was in direct opposition to company's policies on harassment in the workplace," the minutes stated.
Mark Steyn is also concerned:
Hmm. Hope this won't derail the USPS Clinton commemorative.
Friday, November 06, 2009
BREAKING: NPR Reporting on Ft. Hood Shooter’s Radical Muslim Background UPDATED
NPR (Yes, NPR.) is reporting on Ft. Hood shooter Major Hasan’s Muslim background. And, in case you haven’t figured it out yet, he is not one of those nice Muslims:
He gave a Grand Rounds presentation. . . You take turns giving a lecture on, you know, the correct treatment of schizophrenia, the right drugs to prescribe for personality disorder, you know, that sort of thing. But instead of giving an academic paper, he gave a lecture on the Koran, and they said it didn’t seem to be just an informational lecture, but it seemed to be his own beliefs. That’s what a lot of people thought.
He talked about how if you’re a nonbeliever the Koran says you should have your head cut off, you should have oil poured down your throat, you should be set on fire. And I said well couldn’t this just be his educating you? And the psychiatrist said yes, but one of the Muslims in the audience, another psychiatrist, raised his hand and was quite disturbed and he said you know, a lot of us don’t believe these things you’re saying, and that there was no place where Hasan couched it as this is what the Koran teaches but you know I don’t believe it. And people actually talked in the hallway afterwards about ‘is he one of these people that’s going to freak out and shoot people someday?’
More here.
Meanwhile, much of the news media is distracting us from this core cause of his evil. I wonder how much longer they can keep that up.
UPDATE: Kudos to the Wall Street Journal (Registration may be required.) for recognizing that the presence of Muslims in the U. S. Armed Forces raises “difficult issues.”
He gave a Grand Rounds presentation. . . You take turns giving a lecture on, you know, the correct treatment of schizophrenia, the right drugs to prescribe for personality disorder, you know, that sort of thing. But instead of giving an academic paper, he gave a lecture on the Koran, and they said it didn’t seem to be just an informational lecture, but it seemed to be his own beliefs. That’s what a lot of people thought.
He talked about how if you’re a nonbeliever the Koran says you should have your head cut off, you should have oil poured down your throat, you should be set on fire. And I said well couldn’t this just be his educating you? And the psychiatrist said yes, but one of the Muslims in the audience, another psychiatrist, raised his hand and was quite disturbed and he said you know, a lot of us don’t believe these things you’re saying, and that there was no place where Hasan couched it as this is what the Koran teaches but you know I don’t believe it. And people actually talked in the hallway afterwards about ‘is he one of these people that’s going to freak out and shoot people someday?’
More here.
Meanwhile, much of the news media is distracting us from this core cause of his evil. I wonder how much longer they can keep that up.
UPDATE: Kudos to the Wall Street Journal (Registration may be required.) for recognizing that the presence of Muslims in the U. S. Armed Forces raises “difficult issues.”
Leftist Thugs Targeting Maine Voters
Now that liberal Maine, like liberal California, has voted down gay marriage, leftist gay rights activists are, as in California, targeting those who bravely opposed gay marriage for harassment and worse.
…In a defiant speech to several hundred lingering supporters, No on 1 campaign manager Jesse Connolly pledged that his side “will not quit until we know where every single one of these votes lives.”
The aftermath of the Maine vote is something to watch.
By the way, have you noticed the bait and switch pulled by the gay rights crowd the past few years? We were once told that gay rights is all about tolerance. Now we are told that opposition to gay “rights” should not be tolerated and that tactics such as blacklisting and mobs outside of churches and businesses are justified.
So which is it, gay rights people? Are you about tolerance . . . or brownshirt thuggery?
MORE: Maggie Gallagher puts the Maine vote in perspective:
Americans have a great deal of goodwill toward gay people as friends, neighbors and fellow citizens. Most of us do not want to hurt them or hate them or interfere with anyone's legitimate rights to live as they choose. But we do not believe gay marriage is a civil right; we think it is a civil wrong. And we do not appreciate the increasingly intense efforts to punish people who disagree with gay marriage as if we were racists, bigots, discriminators or haters.
Case in point: Don Mendell, a school guidance counselor at Nokomis Regional High School in Maine, now faces ethics complaints for his decision to appear in a TV ad for the Yes on One campaign in the closing days of the contest. If substantiated, the ethics complaint could lead the government to yank his license as a social worker and, therefore, threaten his livelihood. What kind of movement spurs people to act like this? Meanwhile, a teacher of the year who campaigned for gay marriage faces no such threat to her livelihood. Is gay marriage really about love and tolerance for all?
…In a defiant speech to several hundred lingering supporters, No on 1 campaign manager Jesse Connolly pledged that his side “will not quit until we know where every single one of these votes lives.”
The aftermath of the Maine vote is something to watch.
By the way, have you noticed the bait and switch pulled by the gay rights crowd the past few years? We were once told that gay rights is all about tolerance. Now we are told that opposition to gay “rights” should not be tolerated and that tactics such as blacklisting and mobs outside of churches and businesses are justified.
So which is it, gay rights people? Are you about tolerance . . . or brownshirt thuggery?
MORE: Maggie Gallagher puts the Maine vote in perspective:
Americans have a great deal of goodwill toward gay people as friends, neighbors and fellow citizens. Most of us do not want to hurt them or hate them or interfere with anyone's legitimate rights to live as they choose. But we do not believe gay marriage is a civil right; we think it is a civil wrong. And we do not appreciate the increasingly intense efforts to punish people who disagree with gay marriage as if we were racists, bigots, discriminators or haters.
Case in point: Don Mendell, a school guidance counselor at Nokomis Regional High School in Maine, now faces ethics complaints for his decision to appear in a TV ad for the Yes on One campaign in the closing days of the contest. If substantiated, the ethics complaint could lead the government to yank his license as a social worker and, therefore, threaten his livelihood. What kind of movement spurs people to act like this? Meanwhile, a teacher of the year who campaigned for gay marriage faces no such threat to her livelihood. Is gay marriage really about love and tolerance for all?
Thursday, November 05, 2009
Betrayal: Cameron Surrenders UK to EU Beast
The Labour Party betrayed the British people by reneging on a promise to hold a referendum on UK participation in an EU treaty. Now David Cameron and the Conservative Party have done the same.
Thus, with Cameron’s cowardly whimper, the UK gives up its sovereignty to Gulag EU. It is indeed a sad and sorry day for Britain. What Guido Fawkes tried to do with gunpowder on the Fifth of November, the two major parties have now done willingly.
Peter Hitchens’ take may be found here.
This betrayal will drive more into support of the BNP and UKIP, for better or worse. But that will not be nearly enough to stop this craven surrender.
When I was a youth, it was fashionable among dispensationalists to suggest that the then European Common Market was the precursor of the Beast of the Apocalypse. Given how the UK and other nations have so easily given up their sovereignty to the EU and its tyranny, I am once again wondering if Hal Lindsey et al were actually right.
MORE: Here is just one example of EU tyranny.
Thus, with Cameron’s cowardly whimper, the UK gives up its sovereignty to Gulag EU. It is indeed a sad and sorry day for Britain. What Guido Fawkes tried to do with gunpowder on the Fifth of November, the two major parties have now done willingly.
Peter Hitchens’ take may be found here.
This betrayal will drive more into support of the BNP and UKIP, for better or worse. But that will not be nearly enough to stop this craven surrender.
When I was a youth, it was fashionable among dispensationalists to suggest that the then European Common Market was the precursor of the Beast of the Apocalypse. Given how the UK and other nations have so easily given up their sovereignty to the EU and its tyranny, I am once again wondering if Hal Lindsey et al were actually right.
MORE: Here is just one example of EU tyranny.
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
A Lesson for the GOP from North Carolina
“From North Carolina?” my perplexed readers may already be saying. “Weren’t New Jersey and Virginia the big elections last night?”
Well, yes. And, despite amusing protestations from Democrats otherwise, those two elections were an angry repudiation of Democrat policies. Look at the margins of those two gubernatorial elections.
But I think it more important for the Republican Party to pay attention to two municipal elections in North Carolina, along with the NY-23 Special Election. John Hood sums up the two North Carolina results well:
The only major city in North Carolina with a Republican mayor going into Tuesday’s balloting was Charlotte. In a expensive and hard-fought race, a Democratic city councilman, Anthony Foxx, defeated fellow Republican councilman John Lassiter last night, thus taking the top job back for the Democrats for the first time since the late 1980s. Lassiter ran as a moderate, fudging the differences between the two men on virtually every issue and generating little enthusiasm from GOP-leaning voters.
In North Carolina’s third-largest city, something very different happened. Greensboro's municipal elections are nonpartisan, but both parties are extremely active supporting their candidates. The incumbent mayor, Yvonne Johnson, is a longtime Democratic politician in Greensboro. She was upset last night by Republican Bill Knight, who's never held political office and who ran on a strongly conservative platform on fiscal and criminal-justice issues. The GOP now holds a majority on that city council for the first time ever, as far as I can tell.
Both cities voted for Barack Obama last year. Both Democratic candidates were black. The difference was the content of the Republican message.
The lesson from North Carolina as well as from the disappointing NY-23 result? It is not enough not to be Obama and not to be a Democrat (although I suspect that will help in next two election cycles). To be successful, Republicans have to stand for something more than “me too.” The long standing tendency of establishment Republicans to back wimps and RINOs is self-destructive. It alienates conservatives, does not attract enough liberals and so-called moderates, and enables Democrats.
Now one would think the expensive disaster that was the Dede Scozzafava campaign would teach the Republican Party this lesson and teach it well. But the National Republican Party has historically been rather slow to learn this lesson.
Which, by the way, is why I will not give my political donations to the NRC, the NRSC, or the NRCC. Further, should they ask (again) for my money, I will make clear to them in no uncertain terms why I am not giving to them.
Well, yes. And, despite amusing protestations from Democrats otherwise, those two elections were an angry repudiation of Democrat policies. Look at the margins of those two gubernatorial elections.
But I think it more important for the Republican Party to pay attention to two municipal elections in North Carolina, along with the NY-23 Special Election. John Hood sums up the two North Carolina results well:
The only major city in North Carolina with a Republican mayor going into Tuesday’s balloting was Charlotte. In a expensive and hard-fought race, a Democratic city councilman, Anthony Foxx, defeated fellow Republican councilman John Lassiter last night, thus taking the top job back for the Democrats for the first time since the late 1980s. Lassiter ran as a moderate, fudging the differences between the two men on virtually every issue and generating little enthusiasm from GOP-leaning voters.
In North Carolina’s third-largest city, something very different happened. Greensboro's municipal elections are nonpartisan, but both parties are extremely active supporting their candidates. The incumbent mayor, Yvonne Johnson, is a longtime Democratic politician in Greensboro. She was upset last night by Republican Bill Knight, who's never held political office and who ran on a strongly conservative platform on fiscal and criminal-justice issues. The GOP now holds a majority on that city council for the first time ever, as far as I can tell.
Both cities voted for Barack Obama last year. Both Democratic candidates were black. The difference was the content of the Republican message.
The lesson from North Carolina as well as from the disappointing NY-23 result? It is not enough not to be Obama and not to be a Democrat (although I suspect that will help in next two election cycles). To be successful, Republicans have to stand for something more than “me too.” The long standing tendency of establishment Republicans to back wimps and RINOs is self-destructive. It alienates conservatives, does not attract enough liberals and so-called moderates, and enables Democrats.
Now one would think the expensive disaster that was the Dede Scozzafava campaign would teach the Republican Party this lesson and teach it well. But the National Republican Party has historically been rather slow to learn this lesson.
Which, by the way, is why I will not give my political donations to the NRC, the NRSC, or the NRCC. Further, should they ask (again) for my money, I will make clear to them in no uncertain terms why I am not giving to them.
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
How Appropriate
There are reports that the New Jersey Democrat Party has hired convicted felons for its Get Out the Vote efforts.
Given that half the NJ Democrat Party ought to be convicted felons, I find this appropriate.
Given that half the NJ Democrat Party ought to be convicted felons, I find this appropriate.
An Anglo-Catholic Slice of Life
To get an idea how lonely being an Anglo-Catholic can be, I recommend this slice of life over at Anglican Wanderings. Due to geography and the sorry state of the Anglican Church of Canada, the blogger’s parish is over a thousand miles from the next orthodox Anglo-Catholic parish. Yes, rather isolated.
When many Anglo-Catholics are isolated and often not exactly welcomed, one can understand why Pope Benedict’s invitation is . . . inviting.
Personally, if I had to choose between being a lonely Anglo-Catholic and crossing the Tiber, I would be a lonely Anglo-Catholic for reasons I may go into sometime. But I certainly understand those who would choose differently.
When many Anglo-Catholics are isolated and often not exactly welcomed, one can understand why Pope Benedict’s invitation is . . . inviting.
Personally, if I had to choose between being a lonely Anglo-Catholic and crossing the Tiber, I would be a lonely Anglo-Catholic for reasons I may go into sometime. But I certainly understand those who would choose differently.
Monday, November 02, 2009
“Hell hath no fury like a RINO scorned.” UPDATED
Over the weekend, Dede Scozzafava continued to disgrace herself and the “Republicans” who backed her by withdrawing from the NY-23 Special Election race, then endorsing the liberal Democrat.
A lot of good all that Republican money showered on her did.
This appears to be a good development for Conservative Doug Hoffman. The final PPP poll has him double digits ahead.
But those “Republicans” who pushed Scozzafava might want to barricade the gates against those carrying pitchforks and torches. RINO Dede letting her true colors all hang out will increase conservative Republican anger all the more. For a sample of that anger, check out Newt Gingrich’s site.
Frankly, I think those “Republicans” who nominated and pushed Scozzafava need to resign their party offices . . . after they wipe the egg off their faces.
Meanwhile, with Hoffman, Christie, and McDonnell all polling ahead, that earthquake might just happen tomorrow.
UPDATE: But do NOT think a Hoffman victory is a shoo-in. A new Siena poll still has it close.
UPDATE 2: Turnout for a Biden-Owens rally today in Watertown is pitiful.
DISCLAIMER: If Democrats get thumped tomorrow, just remember: it has nothing to do with Obama. Nothing at all.
A lot of good all that Republican money showered on her did.
This appears to be a good development for Conservative Doug Hoffman. The final PPP poll has him double digits ahead.
But those “Republicans” who pushed Scozzafava might want to barricade the gates against those carrying pitchforks and torches. RINO Dede letting her true colors all hang out will increase conservative Republican anger all the more. For a sample of that anger, check out Newt Gingrich’s site.
Frankly, I think those “Republicans” who nominated and pushed Scozzafava need to resign their party offices . . . after they wipe the egg off their faces.
Meanwhile, with Hoffman, Christie, and McDonnell all polling ahead, that earthquake might just happen tomorrow.
UPDATE: But do NOT think a Hoffman victory is a shoo-in. A new Siena poll still has it close.
UPDATE 2: Turnout for a Biden-Owens rally today in Watertown is pitiful.
DISCLAIMER: If Democrats get thumped tomorrow, just remember: it has nothing to do with Obama. Nothing at all.
Saturday, October 31, 2009
SCOZZAFAVA WITHDRAWS
Debe Scozzafava has withdrawn from the NY-23 Special Election race. This is obviously big news. It likely will help Conservative Hoffman and may make Republican politicos think twice before they put forth RINOs.
And, for better or for worse, Sarah Palin’s power just increased a couple notches.
Much more here.
And, for better or for worse, Sarah Palin’s power just increased a couple notches.
Much more here.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
BREAKING: Daily Kos has NY-23 as Hoffman-Owens dead heat.
You know Conservative Doug Hoffman is running strong in the NY-23 special election when even the Daily Kos *spit* has that race as a virtual dead heat between he and Democrat Bill Owens, 32 to 33%.
RINO Dede Scozzafava? She’s back at 21%
Again, this could be a political earthquake this Tuesday.
RINO Dede Scozzafava? She’s back at 21%
Again, this could be a political earthquake this Tuesday.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Pray for South Sudan
Please do pray for South Sudan. Dinkas and Christians there are the targets of what can only be called a campaign of genocide by Muslims.
Among the attacks chronicled at the link above is the massacre of an Anglican archbishop and of thirty defending him by covering him with their bodies.
Among the attacks chronicled at the link above is the massacre of an Anglican archbishop and of thirty defending him by covering him with their bodies.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Beware of The Telegraph’s Religion Reporting
Recently, I was embarrassed by relying too much on the Telegraph’s religion reporting.
It nearly happened again yesterday.
I thought about blogging on this article from the Telegraph. After all, the Bishop of Chichester openly saying he would be “happy” to swim the Tiber would be quite newsworthy.
The problem is that is not what he said. He has clarified matters on his site, politely making it clear the Telegraph ripped his words out of context:
An article has been published today in the Sunday Telegraph asserting that I have announced that I am about to become a Roman Catholic.
This is not the case.
The report appears to come from a misunderstanding of an answer I gave to questions from the floor at the recent ‘Forward in Faith’ assembly, at which I spoke.
A questioner had asked about the Papal condemnation of Anglican Orders. I responded by speaking about the subtlety of the position. I referred to the moment when it seemed as if the issue of how the Roman Catholic Church sees Anglican orders might be reopened but how the ordination of women to the priesthood and other developments have now made that impossible.
In the light of that I stated that in the event of union with the Roman Catholic Church I would be willing to receive re-ordination into the Roman Catholic priesthood but that I would not be willing to deny the priesthood I have exercised hitherto.
This is clearly a contentious and complex issue and one where it is easy to misunderstand the nuances of the debate. I think I made my position clear in my address at the Forward in Faith assembly.
That is twice this month already that the Telegraph has twisted the words of a senior CofE bishop. May I suggest that paper needs to get their act together?
And let this be a lesson to current and prospective bloggers to be very careful about what sources you trust. Don’t learn this lesson the hard way as I have.
It nearly happened again yesterday.
I thought about blogging on this article from the Telegraph. After all, the Bishop of Chichester openly saying he would be “happy” to swim the Tiber would be quite newsworthy.
The problem is that is not what he said. He has clarified matters on his site, politely making it clear the Telegraph ripped his words out of context:
An article has been published today in the Sunday Telegraph asserting that I have announced that I am about to become a Roman Catholic.
This is not the case.
The report appears to come from a misunderstanding of an answer I gave to questions from the floor at the recent ‘Forward in Faith’ assembly, at which I spoke.
A questioner had asked about the Papal condemnation of Anglican Orders. I responded by speaking about the subtlety of the position. I referred to the moment when it seemed as if the issue of how the Roman Catholic Church sees Anglican orders might be reopened but how the ordination of women to the priesthood and other developments have now made that impossible.
In the light of that I stated that in the event of union with the Roman Catholic Church I would be willing to receive re-ordination into the Roman Catholic priesthood but that I would not be willing to deny the priesthood I have exercised hitherto.
This is clearly a contentious and complex issue and one where it is easy to misunderstand the nuances of the debate. I think I made my position clear in my address at the Forward in Faith assembly.
That is twice this month already that the Telegraph has twisted the words of a senior CofE bishop. May I suggest that paper needs to get their act together?
And let this be a lesson to current and prospective bloggers to be very careful about what sources you trust. Don’t learn this lesson the hard way as I have.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Hoffman Leading in NY-23 Special Election?!?
With the big caveat that this is one poll for a conservative group, a Club for Growth poll shows Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman is leading in the three-way special election for the NY-23 congressional seat.
Should Hoffman actually win, it would be a political earthquake that would show the power of anger at Obama and at me-too Republicans. It would most certainly teach the Republican Party a much needed lesson.
This is a result to watch on November 3rd.
Should Hoffman actually win, it would be a political earthquake that would show the power of anger at Obama and at me-too Republicans. It would most certainly teach the Republican Party a much needed lesson.
This is a result to watch on November 3rd.
George Will Nails Obama on Fox News
I normally would not make a post merely to post a quote. But the following from George Will is so on target, I cannot restrain myself.
No president in the history of the Republic has less reason to complain about his treatment in the press than Barack Obama. Liberals have Academia, they have the mainstream media, they have Hollywood. They’re all for diversity in everything but thought.
And out here is this one channel, Fox, and they’re all up in arms because, in the words of Ms. Anita Dunn of the White House, it is “opinion journalism masquerading as news,” which some of us would say describes the New York Times and certainly MS-NBC.
To which I can only say, “Amen.”
No president in the history of the Republic has less reason to complain about his treatment in the press than Barack Obama. Liberals have Academia, they have the mainstream media, they have Hollywood. They’re all for diversity in everything but thought.
And out here is this one channel, Fox, and they’re all up in arms because, in the words of Ms. Anita Dunn of the White House, it is “opinion journalism masquerading as news,” which some of us would say describes the New York Times and certainly MS-NBC.
To which I can only say, “Amen.”
Don’t Ask Democrat Pols About the Constitution . . .
. . . unless you want to see them reveal themselves as arrogant and power-hungry.
Yes, that may be slightly harsh. But it seems that lately they take great and pretentious offense or evade the question or both when one ventures to ask whether their policies, particularly on healthcare, are allowed by the Constitution.
Cases in point:
Nancy Pelosi.
Rob Andrews.
Patrick Leahy.
Maybe that is because Democrats don’tgive a . . . have any regard for the Constitution. Leahy in particular has proven that in spades by the bozos he has supported (and the good nominees he has opposed) for the federal judiciary.
And to ask them as they try to exercise naked power whether they are wearing any constitutional clothes . . . . Well, one shouldn’t ask such things.
Yes, that may be slightly harsh. But it seems that lately they take great and pretentious offense or evade the question or both when one ventures to ask whether their policies, particularly on healthcare, are allowed by the Constitution.
Cases in point:
Nancy Pelosi.
Rob Andrews.
Patrick Leahy.
Maybe that is because Democrats don’t
And to ask them as they try to exercise naked power whether they are wearing any constitutional clothes . . . . Well, one shouldn’t ask such things.
Saturday, October 24, 2009
More Sordid BDS!
If Benedict Derangement Syndrome amuses you, then MCJ is the place to go.
And the BDS is even coming from Episcopalian “bishops”:
“We for our part continue to welcome our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters, both lay and ordained, conservative and liberal, who wish to belong to a church that treasures diversity of thought.”
“At the heart of all of this is the reality that the Roman Church is willing to welcome angry, reactionary, misogynistic, homophobic people.”
How pastoral.
And the BDS is even coming from Episcopalian “bishops”:
“We for our part continue to welcome our Roman Catholic brothers and sisters, both lay and ordained, conservative and liberal, who wish to belong to a church that treasures diversity of thought.”
“At the heart of all of this is the reality that the Roman Church is willing to welcome angry, reactionary, misogynistic, homophobic people.”
How pastoral.
Audio from Forward in Faith UK Conference
I haven’t read or listened to enough to comment, but much audio from the aforementioned Forward in Faith UK Conference is already posted here.
Readers may find this presentation particularly interesting and timely.
Readers may find this presentation particularly interesting and timely.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
More Reaction to Vatican Anglican Announcement (with sordid BDS!)
In discussions of the Vatican announcement of provisions for Anglicans, count Christopher Johnson among those who have nailed it. He, too, thinks the Archbishop of Canterbury has only himself to blame:
Consider the irony. Benedict XVI, confronted with a problem (or an opportunity, however you want to look at it), comes up with a bold, innovative and, one might even say, audacious plan for dealing with it.
Rowan Williams, confronted by a problem, constantly falls back on what the “instruments of unity” will or will not permit him to do. Then whenever the current crisis abates for a while, he issues delphic responses that can be interpreted according to the political position of the reader.
What could Dr. Williams have done, Johnson? Quite a bit. He could have not invited the Americans to Lambeth (and that’s when I think the Pope finally made up his mind). He could declare that ACNA recognition is inevitable and that therefore, he was going to be begin inviting Bob Duncan to primates meetings.
He could have insisted that the Americans observe the terms of the Dar es Salaam Communiqué rather than completely cutting the ground out from under it after the New Orleans TEO bishops meeting. At least once, he could have acted as if Katharine Jefferts Schori was not the actual Archbishop of Canterbury.
But he didn’t do any of that. So if thousands of Anglicans in Great Britain and around the world take the Pope up on his offer, he only has himself to blame.
The Bovina Bloviator is even more to the point:
Well, your Grace, you had six-and-a-half years to do something about this mess and dithered all the while. The Pope, who isn't getting any younger, heard a cry for help and helped. It really should not come as a surprise.
Meanwhile, there’s been an outbreak of Benedict Derangement Syndrome. Here’s a predictably virulent case from a uberEpiscopalian. It begins:
There came in this morning's mail an announcement from Lambeth Palace concerning the "special and different" set up of the pseudo-Church that Pope Bennie has set up for "disaffected Anglicans.
More feminista BDS here with this comical headline:
Vatican to Anglicans: Come be bigots with us!
Feel free to post other cases of BDS. Or heck, if you have BDS, vomit away in the comments. Laughter is the best medicine, you know.
Consider the irony. Benedict XVI, confronted with a problem (or an opportunity, however you want to look at it), comes up with a bold, innovative and, one might even say, audacious plan for dealing with it.
Rowan Williams, confronted by a problem, constantly falls back on what the “instruments of unity” will or will not permit him to do. Then whenever the current crisis abates for a while, he issues delphic responses that can be interpreted according to the political position of the reader.
What could Dr. Williams have done, Johnson? Quite a bit. He could have not invited the Americans to Lambeth (and that’s when I think the Pope finally made up his mind). He could declare that ACNA recognition is inevitable and that therefore, he was going to be begin inviting Bob Duncan to primates meetings.
He could have insisted that the Americans observe the terms of the Dar es Salaam Communiqué rather than completely cutting the ground out from under it after the New Orleans TEO bishops meeting. At least once, he could have acted as if Katharine Jefferts Schori was not the actual Archbishop of Canterbury.
But he didn’t do any of that. So if thousands of Anglicans in Great Britain and around the world take the Pope up on his offer, he only has himself to blame.
The Bovina Bloviator is even more to the point:
Well, your Grace, you had six-and-a-half years to do something about this mess and dithered all the while. The Pope, who isn't getting any younger, heard a cry for help and helped. It really should not come as a surprise.
Meanwhile, there’s been an outbreak of Benedict Derangement Syndrome. Here’s a predictably virulent case from a uberEpiscopalian. It begins:
There came in this morning's mail an announcement from Lambeth Palace concerning the "special and different" set up of the pseudo-Church that Pope Bennie has set up for "disaffected Anglicans.
More feminista BDS here with this comical headline:
Vatican to Anglicans: Come be bigots with us!
Feel free to post other cases of BDS. Or heck, if you have BDS, vomit away in the comments. Laughter is the best medicine, you know.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Forward in Faith UK Conference This Weekend
As mentioned on Ruth Gledhill’s blog, Forward in Faith UK has a conference this weekend in London. Needless to say, in light of the events of this week, the previous agenda has been torn up.
That should be an interesting meeting indeed.
That should be an interesting meeting indeed.
Kendall Harmon (and moi) on Vatican Anglican Announcement
In short, Kendall Harmon nails it.
If the Anglican Communion and the Archbishop of Canterbury want to find someone to blame for the Vatican’s announcement of provisions for Anglo-Catholics, they need only look in the mirror.
I will give one break to Dr. Rowan Williams, however. He advocated for adequately providing for orthodox Anglo-Catholics as the CofE moves toward women bishops. But, sadly, those who don’t give a damn about traditionalists prevailed.
What amazes me is that those who have worked the hardest to push Anglo-Catholics out, such as Christina Rees, now fault the Vatican for welcoming them:
Christina Rees, of the pro-women group Watch, described the Vatican’s move as poaching. She said: “It is one thing to offer a welcome, but this seems to be a particularly effusive welcome where people are almost being encouraged. In the Anglican Church we like to operate with transparency. If this has not been done here that will add to the sense of this being a predatory move.”
Wolves complaining about all the predators around here. . . . I’ve got nothing to say.
If the Anglican Communion and the Archbishop of Canterbury want to find someone to blame for the Vatican’s announcement of provisions for Anglo-Catholics, they need only look in the mirror.
I will give one break to Dr. Rowan Williams, however. He advocated for adequately providing for orthodox Anglo-Catholics as the CofE moves toward women bishops. But, sadly, those who don’t give a damn about traditionalists prevailed.
What amazes me is that those who have worked the hardest to push Anglo-Catholics out, such as Christina Rees, now fault the Vatican for welcoming them:
Christina Rees, of the pro-women group Watch, described the Vatican’s move as poaching. She said: “It is one thing to offer a welcome, but this seems to be a particularly effusive welcome where people are almost being encouraged. In the Anglican Church we like to operate with transparency. If this has not been done here that will add to the sense of this being a predatory move.”
Wolves complaining about all the predators around here. . . . I’ve got nothing to say.
Washington Post, ABC Rig Their Obamacare Poll
I’ve long suspected that “mainstream” media polling was biased. But until recently, I had no idea how much their polls are blatantly rigged. A case in point: a Washington Post-ABC poll purporting to show support for an Obamacare public option – a convenient conclusion to help their Dear Leader cram socialized healthcare down our throats.
But look at the sampling. 33% were Democrats; only 20% were Republicans. 20%.
Just how absurd is that rigging? The 33%-20% spread is larger than ABC-WashPost’s Election Day sample, not exactly a great Republican day. And numerous polls indicate that the spread between the two parties’ support has dramatically narrowed since then.
As if that is not bad enough . . .
The public-option question gets asked in this manner:
8. Would you support or oppose having the government create a new health insurance plan to compete with private health insurance plans?
I’d call that more than a little biased. The “compete with private insurance” is a political claim by ObamaCare advocates.
Not to mention that there is no mention of “public” or “federal” or “government-funded” or even “government-backed” in the question. It’s just a shiny “new health insurance plan” that would be "created."
And people think I’m biased.
This leads me to one of two conclusions:
1. Those behind the poll are so stupid and out of touch and downright incompetent that they did not realize their methods render their poll unreliable (to put it nicely). Or . . .
2. They knew what they were doing. During a crucial time for Obamacare, the Washington Post and ABC conveniently rigged their poll.
I choose #2.
But look at the sampling. 33% were Democrats; only 20% were Republicans. 20%.
Just how absurd is that rigging? The 33%-20% spread is larger than ABC-WashPost’s Election Day sample, not exactly a great Republican day. And numerous polls indicate that the spread between the two parties’ support has dramatically narrowed since then.
As if that is not bad enough . . .
The public-option question gets asked in this manner:
8. Would you support or oppose having the government create a new health insurance plan to compete with private health insurance plans?
I’d call that more than a little biased. The “compete with private insurance” is a political claim by ObamaCare advocates.
Not to mention that there is no mention of “public” or “federal” or “government-funded” or even “government-backed” in the question. It’s just a shiny “new health insurance plan” that would be "created."
And people think I’m biased.
This leads me to one of two conclusions:
1. Those behind the poll are so stupid and out of touch and downright incompetent that they did not realize their methods render their poll unreliable (to put it nicely). Or . . .
2. They knew what they were doing. During a crucial time for Obamacare, the Washington Post and ABC conveniently rigged their poll.
I choose #2.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Libchurchers Support Obama’s Attack on Free Speech
It is becoming clear that the Obama Regime with the support of libchurchers is conspiring to attack the free speech of political conservatives. Part of this attack is disguised as going after “hate speech.”
United Church of Christ member Jeffery Lord documents much of this attack and the involvement of libchurchers in painstaking detail. And it is chilling.
It is no coincidence that this is occurring at the same time when the Obama White House is constantly seeking to delegitimize Fox News:
The Obama White House is now quite specifically using the presidential bully pulpit to de-legitimize Fox News.
Note how this works:
• White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel says: "…the way we, the President looks at it, we look at it is it's not a news organization" and that Fox is not "a legitimate news organization."
• White House senior adviser David Axelrod says Fox News is "not really a news station."
• White House Communications Director Anita Dunn says: "What I think is fair to say about Fox -- and certainly it's the way we view it -- is that it really is more a wing of the Republican Party," said Anita Dunn, White House communications director, on CNN. "They take their talking points, put them on the air; take their opposition research, put them on the air. And that's fine. But let's not pretend they're a news network the way CNN is."
Folks, this kind of attack on non-compliant news media is more what one would expect from a totalitarian regime than from a democratic White House. It is not enough that CNN, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, ABC et al are in the tank for Obama. Those on the airwaves who oppose The Dear Leader must be silenced!
Some may find me alarmist to point out again the totalitarian streak of the Obama regime. I find it enabling and dangerous to ignore it. And I find it beyond shameful for “church” leaders to support it.
United Church of Christ member Jeffery Lord documents much of this attack and the involvement of libchurchers in painstaking detail. And it is chilling.
It is no coincidence that this is occurring at the same time when the Obama White House is constantly seeking to delegitimize Fox News:
The Obama White House is now quite specifically using the presidential bully pulpit to de-legitimize Fox News.
Note how this works:
• White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel says: "…the way we, the President looks at it, we look at it is it's not a news organization" and that Fox is not "a legitimate news organization."
• White House senior adviser David Axelrod says Fox News is "not really a news station."
• White House Communications Director Anita Dunn says: "What I think is fair to say about Fox -- and certainly it's the way we view it -- is that it really is more a wing of the Republican Party," said Anita Dunn, White House communications director, on CNN. "They take their talking points, put them on the air; take their opposition research, put them on the air. And that's fine. But let's not pretend they're a news network the way CNN is."
Folks, this kind of attack on non-compliant news media is more what one would expect from a totalitarian regime than from a democratic White House. It is not enough that CNN, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, ABC et al are in the tank for Obama. Those on the airwaves who oppose The Dear Leader must be silenced!
Some may find me alarmist to point out again the totalitarian streak of the Obama regime. I find it enabling and dangerous to ignore it. And I find it beyond shameful for “church” leaders to support it.
Vatican Announces New Personal Ordinariates for Anglicans
As many of you are already aware, the Vatican has announced new Personal Ordinariates to accommodate groups of Anglicans who wish to enter full communion with Rome. The provisions are quite generous, including retention of much Anglican liturgy and ordination of married clergy.
Although, the Archbishop of Canterbury is exercising a stiff upper lip in receiving this development with the RC Archbishop of Westminster, one can read between the lines and see His Grace is not pleased with this being sprung on him. By his own admission, he was not informed of the announcement until “a very late stage.” His letter to Bishops of the CofE and to Primates of the Anglican Communion may be found here along with a letter from the Bishops of Ebbsfleet and Richborough. The two Anglo-Catholic bishops are pleased along with Forward in Faith UK.
I intend to follow this development with interest. Initially I have mixed feelings about it. Pope Benedict is to be commended for his efforts to accommodate Anglo-Catholics. And I rejoice for those Anglo-Catholics eager to swim the Tiber. But I am afraid one result will be that Anglo-Catholics, such as Texanglican, who can not in good conscience submit to RC dogmas such as Papal Infallibility and certain Marian doctrines will find themselves more and more alone.
MORE: Unbiased headline from the Times: “Vatican moves to poach traditional Anglicans”.
Although, the Archbishop of Canterbury is exercising a stiff upper lip in receiving this development with the RC Archbishop of Westminster, one can read between the lines and see His Grace is not pleased with this being sprung on him. By his own admission, he was not informed of the announcement until “a very late stage.” His letter to Bishops of the CofE and to Primates of the Anglican Communion may be found here along with a letter from the Bishops of Ebbsfleet and Richborough. The two Anglo-Catholic bishops are pleased along with Forward in Faith UK.
I intend to follow this development with interest. Initially I have mixed feelings about it. Pope Benedict is to be commended for his efforts to accommodate Anglo-Catholics. And I rejoice for those Anglo-Catholics eager to swim the Tiber. But I am afraid one result will be that Anglo-Catholics, such as Texanglican, who can not in good conscience submit to RC dogmas such as Papal Infallibility and certain Marian doctrines will find themselves more and more alone.
MORE: Unbiased headline from the Times: “Vatican moves to poach traditional Anglicans”.
Friday, October 16, 2009
A Big Tea Party . . . in San Francisco?!?
I did not intend to become a tea party blog this morning, but this is remarkable. When Obama came to town, a big tea party broke out . . . in San Francisco. Yes, you read that correctly. And I don’t use the word “big” lightly. Look at the this photo.
If the tea party movement is that strong in Sodom, then it is stronger than most elite think or wish. Politicians who underestimate the importance of this movement do so at their own peril.
Hat tip to Gateway Pundit.
If the tea party movement is that strong in Sodom, then it is stronger than most elite think or wish. Politicians who underestimate the importance of this movement do so at their own peril.
Hat tip to Gateway Pundit.
Tea Party People Complicate RINO Plans
The Wall Street Journal has an interesting article today (Registration may be required.) on how Tea Party people are throwing big wrenches into a common GOP strategy. That strategy is to nominate “moderate” Republican candidates who are supposedly more electable.
Tea Partiers are having none of that and may even cost Republicans elections, particularly the upcoming special election in New York’s 23rd Congressional District. After Republicans nominated “moderate” Dede Scozzafava, who supports abortion “rights”, gay marriage, and Obama’s stimulus, Tea Partiers threw their support behind Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman. It’s a now a three-way race with Democrat Bill Owens narrowly ahead in the polls. He may take a seat that would otherwise go back to the Republicans.
To which I say . . . good! No, I’d rather not Owens win that seat. (Although that may be preferable in the long run to Scozzafava. Owens will likely be beatable in 2012. If Scozzafava wins, we may be stuck with her.) But the Republican Party needs to learn that nominating RINO (Republican in Name Only) candidates is both bad policy and bad politics. To win elections in the long run, one needs to provide people something to vote for, and “me, too” ain’t it. Who is the most successful Republican presidential candidate since WWII, elected in two landslides? Ronald Reagan.
Besides, is it not the duty of parties to provide the electorate with alternatives? But I am getting idealistic there.
And, if one succeeds in electing RINOs, it is bad policy. What is the point of electing Republicans if they will simply enable Obama and big government? Take Charlie Crist, please:
In Florida, Republican leaders were elated when popular Florida Gov. Charlie Crist agreed to run for the Senate. He has adopted policies such as an aggressive approach to global warming that appeal even to Democrats. Those very policies infuriated conservatives, as did Mr. Crist's decision to campaign with President Barack Obama on behalf of the president's $787 billion stimulus package.
The man campaigned with Obama for that stimulus. That is no alternative. What is the point of electing such a RINO?
So good for the Tea Partiers. This former Republican precinct chairman thinks someone should make the GOP pay when they push such RINOs on the electorate.
Tea Partiers are having none of that and may even cost Republicans elections, particularly the upcoming special election in New York’s 23rd Congressional District. After Republicans nominated “moderate” Dede Scozzafava, who supports abortion “rights”, gay marriage, and Obama’s stimulus, Tea Partiers threw their support behind Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman. It’s a now a three-way race with Democrat Bill Owens narrowly ahead in the polls. He may take a seat that would otherwise go back to the Republicans.
To which I say . . . good! No, I’d rather not Owens win that seat. (Although that may be preferable in the long run to Scozzafava. Owens will likely be beatable in 2012. If Scozzafava wins, we may be stuck with her.) But the Republican Party needs to learn that nominating RINO (Republican in Name Only) candidates is both bad policy and bad politics. To win elections in the long run, one needs to provide people something to vote for, and “me, too” ain’t it. Who is the most successful Republican presidential candidate since WWII, elected in two landslides? Ronald Reagan.
Besides, is it not the duty of parties to provide the electorate with alternatives? But I am getting idealistic there.
And, if one succeeds in electing RINOs, it is bad policy. What is the point of electing Republicans if they will simply enable Obama and big government? Take Charlie Crist, please:
In Florida, Republican leaders were elated when popular Florida Gov. Charlie Crist agreed to run for the Senate. He has adopted policies such as an aggressive approach to global warming that appeal even to Democrats. Those very policies infuriated conservatives, as did Mr. Crist's decision to campaign with President Barack Obama on behalf of the president's $787 billion stimulus package.
The man campaigned with Obama for that stimulus. That is no alternative. What is the point of electing such a RINO?
So good for the Tea Partiers. This former Republican precinct chairman thinks someone should make the GOP pay when they push such RINOs on the electorate.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
An Obama Chaplain A Fervent Evangelical
This is interesting. A favorite chaplain of Obama, the one he most hears while at Camp David, is a fervent evangelical. So fervent that he’s become controversial, particularly after a Washington Post article. He’s even gotten attention across the pond.
Carey Cash, great-nephew of the late Johnny Cash, is involved in Campus Crusade for Christ, sees Islam as a violent religion, and has baptized more than 50 servicemen, often with water from a canteen.
Sounds like good guy.
And I am glad to read that President Obama likes to hear him preach. (Yes, I would rejoice in the salvation of Obama.) The president has been quoted as saying Cash “delivers as powerful a sermon as I've heard in a while. I really think he's excellent."
The two coming together may be providential. Cash was assigned by the Navy to preside over the small and very private Evergreen Chapel at Camp David. The main purpose of the chapel is to accommodate the military families stationed at the presidential retreat. But the Obama family has been attending as well.
However, it will be interesting to see if Obama distances himself from Cash now that there is a little controversy. The White House has already taken pains to say that Cash is not Obama’s pastor. (Hence, the Times’ headline stating he is “President Obama’s new pastor” is inaccurate.)
Obama has already been burned by his association with his past pastor, Jeremiah Wright. He does not want to be burned again.
Carey Cash, great-nephew of the late Johnny Cash, is involved in Campus Crusade for Christ, sees Islam as a violent religion, and has baptized more than 50 servicemen, often with water from a canteen.
Sounds like good guy.
And I am glad to read that President Obama likes to hear him preach. (Yes, I would rejoice in the salvation of Obama.) The president has been quoted as saying Cash “delivers as powerful a sermon as I've heard in a while. I really think he's excellent."
The two coming together may be providential. Cash was assigned by the Navy to preside over the small and very private Evergreen Chapel at Camp David. The main purpose of the chapel is to accommodate the military families stationed at the presidential retreat. But the Obama family has been attending as well.
However, it will be interesting to see if Obama distances himself from Cash now that there is a little controversy. The White House has already taken pains to say that Cash is not Obama’s pastor. (Hence, the Times’ headline stating he is “President Obama’s new pastor” is inaccurate.)
Obama has already been burned by his association with his past pastor, Jeremiah Wright. He does not want to be burned again.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
“Anglican” “Mother Earth” Drivel
Whom God destroys He first makes silly. A good illustration of this immutable truth may be found in the Diocese of New Aquarius Westminster:
What might Creation, the Spirit of Gaia, our Living Dew-Hearted Mother Earth spinning in the Infinite Cosmic Mystery, be asking of the church today?
Don’t laugh too hard. Even the Anglican Communion office is buying into this sort of neo-pagan drivel:
Our faith and our ancestors have always taught us that the earth is our mother and deserves respect . . .
Our faith? Funny, but I haven’t found “the earth is our mother” in the creeds or the catechisms or the Bible. Or is the faith in question actually Christian?
. . . we know that this respect has not been given.
Really? With all the greenie stuff about, I think more than a little respect is given to environmental causes. As it should be to at least some extent. I’m a conservationist and put my money where my mouth is in that regard.
But I’m not a neo-pagan. I’m an orthodox Anglican Christian, thank you. So if “our faith” worships “Mother Earth”, leave me out of it.
What might Creation, the Spirit of Gaia, our Living Dew-Hearted Mother Earth spinning in the Infinite Cosmic Mystery, be asking of the church today?
Don’t laugh too hard. Even the Anglican Communion office is buying into this sort of neo-pagan drivel:
Our faith and our ancestors have always taught us that the earth is our mother and deserves respect . . .
Our faith? Funny, but I haven’t found “the earth is our mother” in the creeds or the catechisms or the Bible. Or is the faith in question actually Christian?
. . . we know that this respect has not been given.
Really? With all the greenie stuff about, I think more than a little respect is given to environmental causes. As it should be to at least some extent. I’m a conservationist and put my money where my mouth is in that regard.
But I’m not a neo-pagan. I’m an orthodox Anglican Christian, thank you. So if “our faith” worships “Mother Earth”, leave me out of it.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Labour Cowards Put in Their Place: Wilders Ban Overturned
I am thrilled to see that the Labour government’s decision to ban Geert Wilders from entry into the UK has been overturned.
This tribunal decision is indeed a victory for freedom. That it puts totalitarian cowards in their place makes it that much sweeter.
This tribunal decision is indeed a victory for freedom. That it puts totalitarian cowards in their place makes it that much sweeter.
How About Zero Tolerance for Administrative Idiots? UPDATED
Do you think a 6 year old should be sent to reform school for 45 days for bringing his cub scout camping utensil to school? The Christina School District in Delaware does. Yes, it’s their “zero tolerance” policy as in zero common sense.
And it’s not the first time that the Christina School District has engaged in such abusive idiocy:
“Something has to change,” said Dodi Herbert, whose 13-year old son, Kyle, was suspended in May and ordered to attend the Christina district’s reform school for 45 days after another student dropped a pocket knife in his lap. School officials declined to comment on the case for reasons of privacy.
Ms. Herbert, who said her son was a straight-A student, has since been home-schooling him instead of sending him to the reform school.
The Christina school district attracted similar controversy in 2007 when it expelled a seventh-grade girl who had used a utility knife to cut windows out of a paper house for a class project.
Any school district that abdicates their responsibility like that with idiotic “zero tolerance” deserves hell from parents and taxpayers. God help any school that ever abuses a child of mine that way.
As a former bullied kid, I do think school districts should be tough in protecting students from bullies and worse. But “zero tolerance” and no common sense just turns the schools themselves into mindless bullies.
UPDATE: That DANGEROUS 6-year-old has been paroled.
And it’s not the first time that the Christina School District has engaged in such abusive idiocy:
“Something has to change,” said Dodi Herbert, whose 13-year old son, Kyle, was suspended in May and ordered to attend the Christina district’s reform school for 45 days after another student dropped a pocket knife in his lap. School officials declined to comment on the case for reasons of privacy.
Ms. Herbert, who said her son was a straight-A student, has since been home-schooling him instead of sending him to the reform school.
The Christina school district attracted similar controversy in 2007 when it expelled a seventh-grade girl who had used a utility knife to cut windows out of a paper house for a class project.
Any school district that abdicates their responsibility like that with idiotic “zero tolerance” deserves hell from parents and taxpayers. God help any school that ever abuses a child of mine that way.
As a former bullied kid, I do think school districts should be tough in protecting students from bullies and worse. But “zero tolerance” and no common sense just turns the schools themselves into mindless bullies.
UPDATE: That DANGEROUS 6-year-old has been paroled.
Monday, October 12, 2009
SHOCKING!: BBC Notices Debate Over Global Warming!
The BBC is actually noticing that there is legitimate debate over global warming and that, lately at least, the world is not getting warmer. Shocking!
To understand my (faux) shock, it would help to live in the UK for a time. Back in 2007, when I studied there, it was hard not to notice that global warming was a secular religion held by just about all British. And the news media treated global warming as established fact with admittedly interesting graphs, maps, inserts, and the like.
Sometimes, it wasn’t just a secular religion. Dr. Jane Shaw, Chaplain of New College, gave an eloquent sermon at Christ Church on global warming . . . on the most miserably cold day of my time in Oxford. I good-naturedly ribbed her about the weather that evening at New College.
So I do find it quite remarkable to see the BBC recognizing that the issue of global warming is not so clear cut after all. Heresy!
MORE: Meanwhile, Drudge has a number of headlines this morning about how COLD things are, including this story about an early Fall record cold snap in Montana.
To understand my (faux) shock, it would help to live in the UK for a time. Back in 2007, when I studied there, it was hard not to notice that global warming was a secular religion held by just about all British. And the news media treated global warming as established fact with admittedly interesting graphs, maps, inserts, and the like.
Sometimes, it wasn’t just a secular religion. Dr. Jane Shaw, Chaplain of New College, gave an eloquent sermon at Christ Church on global warming . . . on the most miserably cold day of my time in Oxford. I good-naturedly ribbed her about the weather that evening at New College.
So I do find it quite remarkable to see the BBC recognizing that the issue of global warming is not so clear cut after all. Heresy!
MORE: Meanwhile, Drudge has a number of headlines this morning about how COLD things are, including this story about an early Fall record cold snap in Montana.
Rowan Williams, Jerk (RETRACTED)
NOTE: I am retracting this post. See below.
[As you can tell by the title of this post, I am not the most tactful man in the world. However, I do have enough sense to know that one usually should not use the sermon at a memorial service for fallen soldiers to grind one’s political axe and to score points against political opponents.
But Rowan Williams doesn’t even possess that much common sense and decency.
Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, mounted a direct attack on the Government over the invasion and occupation of Iraq when he used a national memorial service commemorating the servicemen killed in the conflict to accuse Tony Blair and his ministers of failing to “measure the price” of military action.
Delivering his address in St Paul’s Cathedral before a congregation including the Queen, Gordon Brown and Mr Blair himself, the spiritual head of the Church of England accused the former prime minister of indulging in rhetoric before the 2003 invasion, while leaving ordinary servicemen and women to pick up the pieces in a campaign which went on to last six years and claim 179 British lives.
Now, I am NO fan of Tony Blair. But a memorial service is not the time nor the place to indulge in such an attack. Dr. Williams can wear all the nice tat and use all the high-sounding language he can muster. What he did at St. Paul’s is still being a jerk.
Oh, but I’ve seen worse at memorial services.]
RETRACTION: Although some of what Dr. Williams said was of questionable wisdom, I now think the Telegraph article linked puts a rather harsh interpretation on his sermon. For starters, it is a bit of a stretch to see the sermon as a “direct attack on the Government.” Indirect, perhaps. But still . . .
As for me, I jumped the gun and went over the top, to put it mildly. I apologize and retract this post. Mea culpa.
[As you can tell by the title of this post, I am not the most tactful man in the world. However, I do have enough sense to know that one usually should not use the sermon at a memorial service for fallen soldiers to grind one’s political axe and to score points against political opponents.
But Rowan Williams doesn’t even possess that much common sense and decency.
Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, mounted a direct attack on the Government over the invasion and occupation of Iraq when he used a national memorial service commemorating the servicemen killed in the conflict to accuse Tony Blair and his ministers of failing to “measure the price” of military action.
Delivering his address in St Paul’s Cathedral before a congregation including the Queen, Gordon Brown and Mr Blair himself, the spiritual head of the Church of England accused the former prime minister of indulging in rhetoric before the 2003 invasion, while leaving ordinary servicemen and women to pick up the pieces in a campaign which went on to last six years and claim 179 British lives.
Now, I am NO fan of Tony Blair. But a memorial service is not the time nor the place to indulge in such an attack. Dr. Williams can wear all the nice tat and use all the high-sounding language he can muster. What he did at St. Paul’s is still being a jerk.
Oh, but I’ve seen worse at memorial services.]
RETRACTION: Although some of what Dr. Williams said was of questionable wisdom, I now think the Telegraph article linked puts a rather harsh interpretation on his sermon. For starters, it is a bit of a stretch to see the sermon as a “direct attack on the Government.” Indirect, perhaps. But still . . .
As for me, I jumped the gun and went over the top, to put it mildly. I apologize and retract this post. Mea culpa.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Trinity College Cambridge Presents . . . WWE RAW 09!
Yes, I am slightly amused that Trinity College Cambridge has bought into the O2 Arena.
Friday, October 09, 2009
Obama Wins Nobel Peace Joke (UPDATED)
When I sleepily flipped on the TV this morning and heard that Obama had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, I had to immediately go online to make sure I heard that right, and sure enough . . . .
It is hard to plumb the depths of the absurdity of this award, but to start: the deadline for nominations was February 1st. So The Dear Leader earned the Nobel Peace Prize after only ten days in office. Sing to The Dear Leader!!
I may comment more later. But I think it best for now to provide some links:
The Times of London has published an excellent editorial. And even the U.S. “mainstream” news media is a bit stunned.
Hot Air and The Corner are following this matter closely.
MORE:
Funny that Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize the same day he bombs the Moon. ;)
O.K., this is really getting silly now. The Democrat National Committee says that if you criticize Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize, you side with terrorists! I. am. not. joking.
It is hard to plumb the depths of the absurdity of this award, but to start: the deadline for nominations was February 1st. So The Dear Leader earned the Nobel Peace Prize after only ten days in office. Sing to The Dear Leader!!
I may comment more later. But I think it best for now to provide some links:
The Times of London has published an excellent editorial. And even the U.S. “mainstream” news media is a bit stunned.
Hot Air and The Corner are following this matter closely.
MORE:
Funny that Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize the same day he bombs the Moon. ;)
O.K., this is really getting silly now. The Democrat National Committee says that if you criticize Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize, you side with terrorists! I. am. not. joking.
Thursday, October 08, 2009
Obama Attacks Freedom of Religion, Belmont Abbey
As many of you know, the Obama Regime is attacking Belmont Abbey for following their Catholic conscience and refusing to provide coverage for contraception.
This is an outrage that calls for action. But it should not be a surprise. Attacks on freedom of religion are to be expected from those of a totalitarian bent.
This is an outrage that calls for action. But it should not be a surprise. Attacks on freedom of religion are to be expected from those of a totalitarian bent.
SEC Goes After Mark Cuban . . . Again. (Or Whatever Happened to No Double Jeopardy?)
When our founding fathers sought to protect our freedom from government abuses, they specifically mandated in the Fifth Amendment that the feds cannot prosecute a man twice for the same alleged crime. In other words, no double jeopardy.
So why the heck is the SEC going after Mark Cuban again for the same allegations after their flimsy case has already been dismissed?
Oh I’m sure there is some lawyerly bull manure excuse as to why this is supposedly not double jeopardy. But I’m not buying it. This is wrong. It’s prosecutorial abuse. And I wish Cuban would be allowed to sue the SEC to Hell for violation of his civil rights.
So why the heck is the SEC going after Mark Cuban again for the same allegations after their flimsy case has already been dismissed?
Oh I’m sure there is some lawyerly bull manure excuse as to why this is supposedly not double jeopardy. But I’m not buying it. This is wrong. It’s prosecutorial abuse. And I wish Cuban would be allowed to sue the SEC to Hell for violation of his civil rights.
Tuesday, October 06, 2009
Obama Kills Iran Human Rights Agency
The Obama Administration is cutting off all funding for the State Department’s Iran Human Rights Watch Documentation Center.
Mustn’t let uncomfortable facts about the mullahs’ oppression of Iranians get in the way of a good appeasing sell-out.
I wonder if Obama will only bow to the mullahs, or also kiss their butts.
Mustn’t let uncomfortable facts about the mullahs’ oppression of Iranians get in the way of a good appeasing sell-out.
I wonder if Obama will only bow to the mullahs, or also kiss their butts.
CNN = Obama’s Whore
CNN once again acts as Obama’s whore by fact-checking the Saturday Night Live skit lampooning Obama’s lack of accomplishments.
Fact checking . . . a comedy skit. I don’t know what’s funnier, the skit or the fact checking. I do hope SNL comes back and skewers CNN. There is certainly some rich comedy material here.
Can you imagine CNN doing this for Bush? I didn’t think so.
Fact checking . . . a comedy skit. I don’t know what’s funnier, the skit or the fact checking. I do hope SNL comes back and skewers CNN. There is certainly some rich comedy material here.
Can you imagine CNN doing this for Bush? I didn’t think so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)