Bishop Gracida goes on to say that while he headed the Diocese of Corpus Christi, Texas, he imposed the canonical penalty of interdiction on a politician who repeatedly stated his support for legal abortion. Although he does not name the politician, Bishop Gracida-- who is now retired from the Corpus Christi diocese-- does say that the individual died while still under the interdict, barred from receiving Communion or the last rites.

Message: 18
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 18:11:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: rich xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Misunderstood Athol - Time for a Joke

Hello all,

In WWII an American was shot down in the Pacific & brought to an Austalian
hospital.

When he came awakened he saw a nurse & asked, "Miss was I brought here to
die?"

She responded "No, You were brought here yesterday." (Pronounced
yester-die for those unfamiliar)

Richard G.

# posted by Squach : 10:25 AM   |  0 comments

Today is very exciting. We have on one hand the Feast of the Archangles Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael. Thank them when you get a chance. IE now.

We also have Sukkot. I wasn't invited. Grumble. Remember, you can't eat the nuts and fruit you use to decorate the Sukkah until the night after the last day of Sukkot is over. No snacking!

And on Saturday we have the feast day of the guardian angels. IE, thank them too lest you find yourself flailing through some sort of starless void deprived of companionship until the day of your death.

On that cheery note, I leave for accounting.

Members of Spain's Popular Party have rejected efforts to strip their political platform of a reference to "Christian humanism" as a philosophical source of the party.

The more than three thousand delegates that will participate in the 15th Popular Party Convention the first weekend of October refused to erase the reference to "Christian humanism" and substitute it with "Traditional Western humanism" in the party statutes, proposed through numerous amendments by Gabriel Elorriaga and Ana Pastor.

According to the proponents of the revised text, traditional Western humanism is a more comprehensive term that incorporates, in addition to Christianity, the values of the Enlightenment, which have provided the foundation for the development of pluralistic democracies. Likewise, they argued, in other statutes of the Popular Party, led by former president Jose Maria Aznar, the phrase "traditional Western humanism" was adopted almost two years ago.

Nevertheless, delegates rejected those arguments and voted to keep the reference to Christianity.

Note to the wise -- the Enlightenment didn't provide squat, at least as far as I can tell. None of the Enlightened despots we learned about in school didn't seem very concerned with pluralism or democracy. Check it out here.

A Russian army choir will salute Pope John Paul II (bio - news) on the 26th anniversary of his papal election, the Vatican has confirmed.

As CWN reported last week, the Russian chorus-- popularly known as the Red Army Choir-- will perform at an evening concert on October 15, the eve of the Pope's anniversary celebration. The concert, to be held in the Paul VI auditorium, will feature Russian folk songs.

Stalin would not be happy.

"She also charges that I called John Kerry a bad Catholic. He is.
And so is Frances Kissling," said Ruse.

Has anyone but me noticed that on new palmpilots whenever you try to draw an s you get an f? Is it possible that they're just using an old font, maybe something to do with IBM typewriters?

We got into a discussion in class about if you could know something. Apparently you can, something I agree with, but Catholic Encyclopedia explains it much better than me.

I just wish people weren't so "I'm so smart I don't believe anyone can know anything ever". It gets frustrating sometimes. If that's true, why are we bothering to have a discussion? Why do you go to school? Argh.

Springfield, Massachusetts, Sep. 27 (CWNews.com) - Prosecutors in western Massachusetts said on Monday that, despite indictments handed down by a grand jury, the retired bishop of Springfield will not be tried because the statute of limitations has expired.

Hampden County District Attorney William Bennett said, "I intend to file a statement ... which will terminate the criminal investigation and prosecution of these matters in Massachusetts." A criminal indictment against Bishop Thomas Dupre on charges of assaulting, abusing, and raping two children under the age of 16 in 1976 and 1979 were handed down by the grand jury on Friday and revealed Monday morning.

Dupre had resigned abruptly in February amid allegations he abused two young men two decades ago. At the time, health problems was given as the reason for his resignation. He has since received treatment of an unspecified nature at St. Luke's Institute in Silver Spring, Maryland, where many well-known accused clerical abusers have been treated.

Bennett impanelled the grand jury in March even as a civil lawsuit by the two accusers was filed in court.

Dupre's attorney, Michael Jennings, earlier on Monday had said the six-year statute of limitations had passed. "These charges are barred by the passing of too much time," he said.

Dupre was the first US bishop to be formally charged with sex abuse. The current policy of the US bishops' conference requires that if "even a single act of sexual abuse ... is admitted or established" through the proper channels, the priest must be removed from ministry permanently and may even be laicized. However, the norms do not specifically mention bishops and no such case has ever been tested. Four other bishops have resigned following allegations, but without formal criminal charges being filed. None are currently in active ministry, yet neither have any been laicized.

I feel compelled to see it.

Critics are giving "Der Untergang" mixed reviews, but there is a general consensus that Swiss-born actor Bruno Ganz's creepily convincing portrayal of the Nazi tyrant is a small masterpiece. In his humanity, Hitler comes across as all the more ghastly.

"If you portray a character like Hitler, you have to portray him as he was," said Bernd Eichinger, the film's producer and screenwriter. "And he was a human being. He was not an alien. He was not another species. I think it's dangerous simply to show him as a maniac or a monster."

Eichinger based his screenplay on the writings of Joachim Fest, a respected historian, and the memoirs of Traudl Junge, Hitler's secretary during the final days.

"We don't have to forget that this man had a charisma. He had the ability to suck millions of people into his ideas and to keep them convinced that he was the one who would lead them out of their misery," Eichinger said.

Eichinger, whose credits as a producer include "The Mists of Avalon," "Resident Evil" and the newly released "Resident Evil: Apocalypse," said that for today's audiences, a feature film often was more "real" than a documentary.

"In a documentary, you have people flicker around in black and white, and you see them mostly in official situations and you don't understand what was it that made everybody follow this man with this strange voice," he said.

"What we did was to take it out of the faraway historical situation. With a feature, you bring these things alive now. Every time the movie is screened it's sort of here and now, and you have to include yourself. You are part of the events and you ... are forced to ask, `What would I have done?'"

. . .

Wolfgang Wittermann, a historian at the Berlin Free University, said all of this was good in that it helped create an audience for serious research into Germany's Nazi past, but bad because movies tend to gloss over the complicity of the German people in the crimes of the Nazi regime at a time when many Germans are beginning to absolve themselves of the sins of their fathers and grandfathers.

Old Oligarch linked to me. That means someone's reading this.

Yikes.

I wonder how google is going to handle me linking to him linking to me.

Everyone pray for the little mantis! And the fact that he hasn't been devoured by his made in traditional mantis style.

Fascinating.

I can look at child porn on a library computer but I can't assemble and petition the government. Hmm . . .

Item -- In June, the FEC ruled that the Bill of Rights Educational Foundation, an Arizona nonprofit corporation headed by a conservative activist named David Hardy, could not advertise Hardy's pro-gun documentary (The Rights of the People) on television and radio during the pre-election season. The FEC noted that the film featured federal candidates and thus qualified as "electioneering communication." Hardy, according to news accounts (I could not reach him by phone or e-mail), yanked the film until after the election.

Item -- On September 9, the FEC ruled that a conservative group called Citizens United was not a "media organization" and therefore could not use unrestricted money to broadcast ads marketing a book and film critical of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry. "Not everyone can be a media organization," said one FEC commissioner.

Item -- Also on September 9, the FEC ruled that the Ripon Society, a Republican group, could run TV ads touting the anti-terrorism efforts of "Republicans in Congress" because no political candidate was referred to in the ads.

Item -- That day, the FEC also ruled that a Wisconsin car dealership, called the Russ Darrow Group, could continue using its own name in its car ads during the election season. Russ Darrow Jr., the patriarch of the company and father of its current president, was running for Senate in Wisconsin (he lost in the primary). The FEC found that the dealership's ads were not "electioneering" because they did not feature the candidate himself.

Set aside how you or I might have decided any of these cases. Focus on the fact that federal bureaucracies -- the FEC and ultimately the federal courts -- are now in the business of making such decisions. "That's where we've gotten to today," FEC Chairman Bradley Smith, a critic of the law, said in an interview. "Can a car dealership run ads?"

Thanks to Eve Tushnet for the link

I still love that they can vote for whoever they want.

Give this guy a Roman throne.

On October 3, Pope John Paul II (bio - news) will preside at the beatification of Carl I, the last Hapsburg emperor of Austria-Hungary, in a ceremony that has already revived controversy about the deposed emperor's role.

Carl I will be beatified alongside four others: the French Albert Vigne and Joseph Cassant, the Italian Ludovica de Angelis, and the German Anne Katherine Emmerich. The beatification of Anne Emmerich-- whose mystical visions furnished inspiration for Mel Gibson's movie, The Passion of the Christ, has also provoked some dispute, since some readers have found anti-Semitic sentiments in her extensive writings.

But as the date of the beatification approaches, the greater part of the public controversy involves a political figure who died in exile, having been driven from his throne, and having tried in vain to bring a quick end to World War I. Carl von Hapsburg died on the island of Madeira in 1922, at the age of only 34. Yet his name excites strong emotional reactions in Austria to this day.

"My father was without a doubt the only head of state during World War I who truly sought peace, moved by his Christian conscience," observes Otto von Hapsburg, the 91-year-old head of the renowned family. During the war-- and against the advice of his cousin, Germany's Wilhelm II-- he refused to allow the use of poison gas or the bombardment of civilian centers in Venice; he also tried unsuccessfully to conclude a peace accord with the French President Clemenceau.

Come on, you know you want to subscribe to a magazine written entirely in Latin. It's put out by the Vatican and everything. Even their website is in Latin! I almost sent them an email in Latin to figure out the pretium subscriptionis (that's the price of a subscription for you uninitates) before I found it.

Europeans like to look down their noses at what they see as America’s “cowboy capitalism.” They prefer a system with generous economic and health benefits. And once somebody has a job, employers are all but forbidden to fire them or lay them off.

But the costs are substantial. Employers are understandably reluctant to hire new workers. And the average tax burden in Europe is about 40 percent, compared with 30 percent (federal and state) in the United States. Thus, while America was generating tens of millions of jobs in the 1980s and ‘90s, Europe was virtually stagnant.

There’s a lot of moaning stateside about President George W. Bush’s jobless recovery. But the unemployment rate in America is 5.4 percent, or less than it was in 1996 when Bill Clinton was running for re-election. In Europe, the average unemployment rate is nearly 10 percent.

And lest you think that Europe’s military stinginess and high tax rates at least keep deficits down, most European countries are running substantially in the red. Both France and Germany have failed to meet European Union requirements — which they themselves wrote — to keep deficits under 3.0 percent of GDP. The U.S. deficit is 3.7 percent of GDP.

Psalm 119
33 Teach me, O LORD, the way of thy statutes; and I shall keep it unto the end.
34 Give me understanding, and I shall keep thy law; yea, I shall observe it with my whole heart.
35 Make me to go in the path of thy commandments; for therein do I delight.
36 Incline my heart unto thy testimonies, and not to covetousness.
37 Turn away mine eyes from beholding vanity; and quicken thou me in thy way.
38 Stablish thy word unto thy servant, who is devoted to thy fear.
39 Turn away my reproach which I fear: for thy judgments are good.
40 Behold, I have longed after thy precepts: quicken me in thy righteousness.

The notice continued:

While we do not question the authority of Cardinal McCarrick, we respectfully submit that each of us is in the best position to know the state of our soul and our relationship to God and our Church. Therefore, each of God's children should be the final judge as to whether it is appropriate for them to receive the sacrament of communion. It is not the Cardinal's responsibility or anyone else's responsibility to pass judgment on Catholics as they proceed to the Communion table.

Sorry, but the Catholic Church is the Body of Christ, not a collection of individuals who-pretty-much-do- whatever-they-want-and-decide-which-parts-of being-Catholic-they-like-and-which-ones-they-don't. Not only does the Cardinal have a duty to your souls, lamentably in error as they may be, but also the Church at large, many of whose other members do take what the Church teaches seriously and endeavor to live by it.

Applause, Applause, Applause. Either Ambrose was wrong to refuse Communion to Theodosius after the massacre of the Thessalonicans or something has to be done here.

"A child kicks its legs rhythmically through excess, not absence, of life. Because children have abounding vitality, because they are in spirit fierce and free, therefore they want things repeated and unchanged. They always say, Do it again; and the grown-up person does it again until he is nearly dead. For grown-up people are not strong enough to exult in monotony. But perhaps God is strong enough to exult in monotony. It is possible that God says every morning, Do it again, to the sun; and every evening, Do it again, to the moon. It may not be automatic necessity that makes all daisies alike: it may be that God makes every daisy separately, but has never got tired of making them. It may be that He has the eternal appetite of infancy; for we have sinned and grown old, and our Father is younger than we."

-- GK Chesterton

I also find it fascinating that my local paper changed her column heading from “Is the right outbreeding the left?” to “Women should get out and vote, not worry about some silly study.” Those weren’t Ellen’s words at all, but those of some (likely) male editor at my local paper. Perhaps, knowing how I’d write a letter to the editor about Goodman’s crass choice of words, they nixed it. Well, good for them, for a change.

Outbreeding, indeed. Do we need any more proof how far some people will go to dehumanize humans in their quest to save abortion on demand?

Amid today's political jostling, Catholic citizens are wondering whether they can, in conscience, vote for candidates who support the legalized killing of human beings in the embryonic and fetal stages of development by abortion or in biomedical research.

Responding to requests to clarify the obligations of Catholics on this matter, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome, under its prefect, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, released a statement called "On Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion." Although it dealt primarily with the obligations of bishops to deny communion to Catholic politicians in certain circumstances, it included a short note at the end addressing whether Catholics could, in good conscience, vote for candidates who supported the taking of nascent human life in the womb or lab.

Cardinal Ratzinger stated that a "Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of a candidate's permissive stand on abortion." But the question of the moment is whether a Catholic may vote for a pro-abortion candidate for other reasons. The cardinal's next sentence answered that question: A Catholic may vote for a pro-abortion Catholic politician only "in the presence of proportionate reasons."



What are "proportionate reasons"? To consider that question, we must first repeat the teaching of the church: The direct killing of innocent human beings at any stage of development, including the embryonic and fetal, is homicidal, gravely sinful and always profoundly wrong. Then we must consider the scope of the evil of abortion today in our country. America suffers 1.3 million abortions each year--a tragedy of epic proportions. Moreover, many supporters of abortion propose making the situation even worse by creating a publicly funded industry in which tens of thousands of human lives are produced each year for the purpose of being "sacrificed" in biomedical research.

Thus for a Catholic citizen to vote for a candidate who supports abortion and embryo-destructive research, one of the following circumstances would have to obtain: either (a) both candidates would have to be in favor of embryo killing on roughly an equal scale or (b) the candidate with the superior position on abortion and embryo-destructive research would have to be a supporter of objective evils of a gravity and magnitude beyond that of 1.3 million yearly abortions plus the killing that would take place if public funds were made available for embryo-destructive research.

Frankly, it is hard to imagine circumstance (b) in a society such as ours. No candidate advocating the removal of legal protection against killing for any vulnerable group of innocent people other than unborn children would have a chance of winning a major office in our country. Even those who support the death penalty for first-degree murderers are not advocating policies that result in more than a million killings annually.

CEO Sanjay Kumar pleaded not guilty on Thursday in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, N.Y., to charges of securities fraud and obstruction of justice involving a multi-billion dollar accounting scandal.

Stephen Richards, CA former head of worldwide sales, also pleaded not guilty to charges of fraud and obstruction of justice. The company's former general counsel and a senior vice president, Stephen Woghin, pleaded guilty yesterday to similar charges for his participation in what government officials have described as a companywide accounting fraud scheme.

It's so easy to hide this stuff it's just silly.

It all sounds like going to Confession to me, just once a year. Kinda like those Eastern Orthodox types who go like once whenever. Different view of the sacrament I guess.

Message: 15
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 23:29:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Richard xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Melchizeddek 2/two kinds of covenent

Hi,

1. Melchizeddek’s Blessings:

According to the Talmud God, had intended to draw the Priesthood of Aaron
from Melchitzeddek, but he changed his mind when he saw how Melchitzeddek
blessed Abraham. He blessed both |Abraham and God, but he blessed Abraham
first.

I don’t think that the Talmud is telling us that because of this God
punished him. I think, rather, that the rabbis are pointing out something
fundamental about Melchitzeddek’s concept of God and relationship to
God—the Noachite covenant of which Melchitzeddek was a Priest.

If Melchitzeddek had blessed God first, it would have been to invoke his
blessing and place it on Abraham. He blessed Abraham first because he had
no intention of doing that. Under the Noachite covenant, that just wasn’t
something priests did.

Rashi (the great medieval commentator) gives us indirect proof for that.
He writes, citing a midrash, that when God commanded Abraham to leave his
home, he conferred upon him the power to bless. He said to him, “Until now
I have been the one who conferred blessing. I blessed Adam and I blessed
Noah. From now on, you can bless whomever you like.” What about
Melchitzeddek? He’s not mentioned because he wasn’t “licensed” to confer
God’s blessings.

The rabbis take Noah to task for not interceding on behalf of his
generation as Abraham did on behalf of Sodom. Noah’s passivity in this
regard has, I think, the same root as Melchitzeddek’s inability to confer
God’s blessings. God made his covenant with Noah as God Most High. Man’s
role in that covenant was basically to submit and to obey. This is
suggested by the very manner in which it was made. God didn’t offer Noah
any choice in the matter. It was imposed from above because the whole
point of the covenant was to acknowledge God as the Most High—the God who
had punished Adam, and punished Cain, punished the generation of the
Flood. Melchitzeddek also knew God as the one who had dispersed the
builders of the Tower of Babel.

Two kinds of Covenant:

God, of course, is Most High. Neither the Covenant of Sinai nor the
Covenant of the Gospels changed that. In this respect, the Noachite
covenant was truly an eternal covenant. It is the foundation of all later
covenants with God.



Covenant of Sinai was complex affair. It was based on previous covenants
with the Patriarchs, it required the assent of the Children of Israel, and
the sin of the Golden Calf is part of the story. The end result was a
covenant centered in obedience to Divine laws which, as the rabbinic
tradition acknowledges, would be abolished in the fullness of time when
God’s Glory would fill the world and the law of God be written on their
hearts. In this respect, the Covenant of Sinai was a transitional
covenant rather than an eternal covenant.

In the Epistle to the Hebrews, Jesus’ priesthood is said to be of the
same order of Melchitzeddek’s. That’s because the Covenant of the Gospels,
like the Covenant of Noah, is an eternal covenant. In this respect, both
covenants differ from the Covenant of Sinai, which was some respects was a
transitional covenant.

All the best,

Richard

# posted by Squach : 1:37 PM   |  0 comments

How do you explain to your five-year-old that one of his favorite computer games has gone away and isn't coming back, all because daddy changed too much of the computer hardware? That's the task that recently faced one reader because of the copy protection scheme on an inexpensive kid's game.

"The Hyperbowl Arcade download version has been a pain for me," the reader wrote. "The demo version was provided free on the Windows XP Plus disk, and I decided to buy it for my son. I downloaded the program and paid the fifteen bucks or so, followed the registration process and installed it on just one computer."

About a year after purchasing the product, his hard drive began acting up. "Using Ghost, I transferred everything including the Hyperbowl game to a different hard drive," the reader wrote. "At the same time I also changed the processor from an XP 1800+ to an XP 2600+. When my-five-year-old tried to play the game afterwards, it said that I would have to get a new activation code because the configuration had changed too much."

The reader wrote Hyperbowl tech support, thinking that they would allow him to reactivate once they understood it was still basically the same computer. In an increasingly heated exchange of e-mail, however, Hyperbowl insisted he would have to pay for another license of the game. As with the Roxio DRM scheme we saw a while ago, Hyperbowl said that it only has product activation on the download version of it software. Therefore customers who "anticipate making significant hardware modifications in the future" should buy the CD version instead, Hyperbowl tech support explained, because it doesn't require online activation.

Or, why we should listen to people who have authority. Rebellion is not cool.

That Talumd talks about the Catholic concept of Hell

The great works of mussar (ethics) and Chassidic thought stress that people must efface themselves before G-d, because to the degree that they are occupied with their own importance, to that degree they separate themselves from G-d. Even sin cannot separate a person from G-d the way vanity does. It is of the vain person that G-d says, "I cannot coexist in his presence" (Talmud, Sotah 5a).

-- From Rabbi Twerski's book "Growing Each Day", stolen from JWR.

Point being, self-centerdness is really the root of all sin, and the thing that gets you in the end, because ultimately, if I may vulgarize for a moment, when it's balls to the wall, you either have to love God or yourself. If you choose yourself, "G-d says, "I cannot coexist in his presence" (Talmud, Sotah 5a)". If you choose Him, "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God has prepared for those who love him." (1 Cor 2:9)

"Good afternoon! I mean, Good morning! How can I help you?"

Found in an interfath marriage group

I think the Catholic Church stopped believing Jews would go to hell in the 60s, and they have an official position of respecting and accepting Jews, so the two religions are really very compatable.

SHOW ME THE DOCUMENT. I suppose we could go to Florence to that lovely bull Cantate Domino, but I think it would be stretching it to say such, though perhaps not stretching the intentions of the people behind it.

At any rate, many people believed such things, but there are Catholics who think everyone's going to hell. And I think that's ok. And there are Catholics who think a lot less people are going to hell. And that's ok too, and more in line with what the Church authentically teaches, seeing as we have a couple of heretic saints(Thank you Mark Shea) on the books.

At any rate, I like Jews.

Ok I really forgot where I wanted to go with this post because I grabbed the quote before I went to class and posted this after. Argh.

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 12:12:50 -0400
From: "Anna xxxxxxxx"
Subject: If the Jewish Church had kept the commandments

> From: Richard xxxxxxxxx
>Subject: If the Jewish Church had kept the commandments

>There are alot parallels between Chassidism and Christianity.

I have read several sources that seem to insinuate or suggest that certain
Chasidic rabbis recognized Jesus on some level. One of Rabbi Nachmann of
Bratslav’s visions is brought to mind, where he sees a wedding in the
World to Come. He is surprised to see a dead man there whose name he
knew; he goes on to say that if other people knew the dead man’s name
there would be an uproar among the wedding guests. Both the groom at this
wedding and the dead man have "holy names," but he doesn't reveal what
they are. He then finds the groom asleep and marvels that so many people
are singing to the groom while he sleeps.

There is another vision Rabbi Bratslav had, where he saw a terrifying man
wielding a sword that reached from heaven to earth.

Never a dull day on my email

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 23:56:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Richard Reinhardt
Subject: Re: liturgy/Mass

Hi Colleen,

Your post about the liturgy awakened in the me need to clarify some issues
for myself. On the one hand, someone (please forgive me--whoever it
was--for forgetting you!)compared the Mass to the sacrificial ritual in
the Temple. That was his justification for the nonparticipatory character
of the Mass.But it seems that the Mass is also the occasion and often the
only occasion for community prayer. In the discussion of the Mass I pick
up on a tension between these two functions.

In the Mass as sacrifice, what happens on the altar is what really counts.
In the Mass as community prayer, what happens in the pews is what really
counts. (Of course, ultimately, that's always what really counts because
the Eucharistic Sacrifice is offered by and for the sake of the Church.
But you know what I mean.)

In the Mass as sacrifice, the most important person is the priest. In the
Mass as community prayer, the priest has no special importance.

The spirit of the Mass as sacrifice is, above all, adoration. The spirit
of the Mass as community prayer is more varied.

The Mass as sacrifice requires a degree of structure and decorum that is
not essential to the Mass as community prayer.

It seems that many Catholics don't know how to paricipate inwardly in the
sacrifice of the Eucharist. So they think of the Mass as theater and they
expect to be entertained, and when its over, they clap.

People are unfamiliar with the sense of the sacred. And they are
accustomed to "entertainments" that are much more, let's say, "out there."
So they can get bored and fidgety.


About Hebrew liturgy: The orthodox Jewish liturgy is very old. What
follows is a short outline of the weekday morning liturgy (Jews gather in
synagogue three times a day for prayer. The afternoon and evening liturgy
is shorter.).

First of all, the men and women are separated by a wall or curtain. I
noticed a passage in St. Augustine's City of God which suggested that the
practice may have been common in the Church of his time. Its one good and
simple step toward more sobriety and concentration.

There is a clear structure to the liturgy, and someone leads the prayers.
Perhaps the English word would be cantor, though that usually implies
that he is a singer, and the person who leads the prayers need not have
any special gift for singing. Anyone in the congretation over the age of
13 can lead the prayers, and in many congregations, its very much left
open as to who does it. If a person wants to lead the prayers, he just
steps forward and starts. By the way, he faces in the same direction as
the congregation. He doesn't face them. He is leading them and says some
prayers in the name of the entire congregation.

The cantor sets the pace of the prayers, but they are not recited in
unison. Everyone says them at his own pace. Some whisper them, some say
them in a fuller voice. A person listening in would just a jumble of
voices, broken here and there by the voice of the cantor, who, as I said,
sets the pace.

Morning prayers begin (after ritually washing hands and the men put on
tefilin and prayer shawls) with the recitation of a series of short
blessings.As the cantor recites them, the congregants answer "Amen." The
congregants also say them on their own.

The cantor then recites the Kaddish, a prayer in praise of God. This
prayer is recited between the different parts of the liturgy, so it is
said several times in the course of the morning prayer. The congregation
responds in unison with a short but lively declaration in praise of
God.(The rabbis of the Talmud teach that whoever praises God with all his
strength is assured a place in the World to Come.)

After that, the Cantor bows reverently and says, "Bless the Lord who is to
be blessed!" and the congregation, also bowing, responds in unison,
"Blessed is the Lord who is to be blessed forever and ever!". That brings
everybody together for the next part of the liturgy, which centers around
the declaration of God's unity and the acceptance of his commandments.
That part of the prayer ends by blessing God as the the redeemer of
Israel, and from there everybody (though some may be a bit delayed because
they prayed more slowly, which is fine) moves on to the silent devotion.

The silent devotion the highpoint of the liturgy. The main purpose of
community prayer is to recite this prayer together. In general, nobody
would dream of talking during the silent devotion. Children learn not to
disturb their parents because it is forbidden for them to break the
sequence of the prayer. It begins by with a few steps back and then,
reverently, a few steps forward to symbolize entering the Presence of God.
Thissilent devotion, consisting of blessings of praise, petition, and
thanksgiving, lasts from five to ten minutes. People go at their own pace.
There's no pressure at all, and here and there a person who is especially
inspired might stand still as a pillar in his meditations for 15 minutes
or more.

One by one, the congregants complete their silent devotions and sit down.
When the cantor sees that most are done, he begins the next part of the
service.

It consists of his reciting this same prayer, the silent devotion, aloud.
The prayer which was recited by the individual in silence while standing
with his congregation is now recited aloud by the cantor in the name of
the entire congregation. But it includes a passage which the individual is
not permitted to recite: the kedushah (sanctus). Everyone stands and cries
out "Kadosh! Kadosh! Kadosh!" (Sanctus! Sanctus! Sanctus!). If someone is
outside passing the synagogue and hears the prayer recited, he stops and
joins in. As the cantor recites each blessing of the silent devotion, the
congregants respond, "Amen."

The next part of the liturgy is confession of sins and prayers for
fogiveness. After that, on Mondays and Thursdays, there is a reading from
the Torah.

The Torah is kept in an ark that is curtained. It is taken out
ceremoniously by one of the congregatnts and handed to the cantor, who
places it on a lecturn large enough to support the opened scroll. (which
can be up to three feet high). The reading is chanted according to ancient
traditions and divided into three parts. Each part begins by calling up a
congregant to recite a short blessing of praise and gratitude to God for
giving the Torah to the Jewish People. After the reading, he recites a
similar blessing and another congregant is called up. The person who reads
the Torah is one of the congregants.

After the reading, several psalms and prayers are recited, separated by
the recitation of the kaddish, and the service ends. The whole thing takes
from half and hour to an hour, depending on the pace of the congregation.

The structure of the liturgy on holidays is substantially the same.
Sections of the prayer may be sung, the Torah reading is longer, a reading
from the prophets is added, there may be a sermon, and, in a second
silent devotion, the sacrifices of the day are offered in prayer.

It's interesting to consider how the Jewish liturgy addresses problems of
the sort you have raised: freedom and discipline, decorum and spontaneity,
participation, rhythm, variety, pacing etc.

All the best,
Richard

# posted by Squach : 7:16 AM   |  0 comments

I'm all with detaining people who are "High risk" or what have you. But I'm not ready to agree with his conclusions.

Amnesty International has laid down the gauntlet, placing a higher priority on civil liberties than on protection from Islamist terrorism. In contrast, I worry more about mega-terrorism — say, a dirty bomb in midtown Manhattan — than an innocent person spending time in jail.

The nice thing about the US is that it doesn't matter what you or anyone thinks. You are innocent until proven guilty, regardless of what's going on, except for a couple of situations where you can be held for a while longer. Nabbing terrorists is good, but I don't think that making a mockery of the Constitution is the way to do it. If you're gonna go after people, arrest them and bring them up on criminal charges. That way a court of law (me trusting courts, what has this world come to) can decide their fate. None of this let's hold you for a couple of years business.

"For those of you who don't follow, you can just zone out"

Time for a little reflection.

Rabbi Joseph Ber Soloveitchik, z.l., of Boston is known to have commented that the sages may have included this story in the Rosh Hashana reading as a warning to all those who attend the synagogue prayers on the High Holidays. In his opinion, the inclusion of this portion is to draw attention to the fact that once the Akeida episode had come to an end "nothing had changed," and that commonplace life just continued as normal. An event such as the Akeida should have caused the world to shake on its foundations. It should have caused all those who heard about it to better their ways and start a new chapter, but nothing of this actually happened. Once back home, Abraham was not asked by his neighbors about this episode or how it affected his personality or what there was to be learned from such a shattering experience.

Instead, he was confronted with a world which was immune to religious experiences and had nothing to say other than that another few children were born, a world of religious irrelevance in which nothing else counted but the day to day family affairs. One of the greatest moments in man's history was as such completely trivialized into a spiritual nothingness.

This, Rabbi Soloveichick warns, is the danger that waits us all after Rosh Hashana. While we may be lifted up to the highest level of spiritual exaltation on the day itself, we are warned that "the day after" we may be back to our former lives without having changed an iota. Instead of asking ourselves and our fellowmen what Rosh Hashana did for us, many of us start to discuss the cantorial excellence (or failure) of the chazan (synagogue reader) or the ba'al tekia's (the one who blows the shofar) wonderful musical expertise or failure as a trumpeter. Similar expressions are common after Yom Kippur has ended. One question, possibly the most frequent, is, "Did you fast well?" If we would ask somebody to what extend he was affected by the Yom Kippur prayers, we would be seen as a iconoclast who has lost his religious balance.

I, of course, don't get to do any reflection. Of course, I just posted an article about a Tridentine seminary, so maybe I just have some mental problems.

Something seems so beautiful about this day. Maybe it's the constant prayer or the fact that you get to study theology and Hebrew. Hard to say.

I have almost as many hits in as Mark Shea gets a day.

Here's our lucky reader.

Domain Name eushc.org ? (Organization)
IP Address 163.246.22.# (Various Registries)
Language Setting English
Operating System Microsoft WinNT
Browser Internet Explorer 6.0
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 4.0; H010818; FunWebProducts)
Time of Visit Sep 20 2004 9:29:02 pm
Last Page View Sep 20 2004 9:29:02 pm
Visit Length 0 seconds
Page Views 1
Referring URL
Visit Entry Page http://squach.blogspot.com/
Visit Exit Page http://squach.blogspot.com/
Time Zone UTC-5:00
EST - Eastern Standard
EDT - Eastern Daylight Saving Time
Visitor's Time Sep 20 2004 9:29:02 pm

I wonder who's going to put me over the top . . .

Party in the country where the judges rule.

San Antonio, Sep. 20 (LifesiteNews.com/CWN) - A a federal appeals court judge has dismissed the motion brought forward by Norma McCorvey, known to legal history as "Roe" in Roe v. Wade , to overturn the landmark 1973 decision that legalized abortion in the US. However the judge, Edith Jones of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, has made some surprising statements in her ruling regarding that Supreme Court ruling.

McCorvey provided the court with over 5,000 pages of evidence, including over 1,000 affidavits from women hurt by abortion. "The ruling is not a surprising development," said Allan Parker, president of The Justice Foundation, the organization that is helping to fight the case. "It moves us one step closer to the US Supreme Court, which will ultimately decide this case," he said.

Judge Jones said that the knowledge and social conditions that now exist have effectively changed the landscape on abortion. She implied that had the facts been known at the time, the decision might have been different. "If the Courts were to delve into the facts underlying Roe's balancing scheme with present-day knowledge, they might conclude that the woman's 'choice' is far more risky and less beneficial, and the child's sentience far more advanced, than the Roe Court knew."

However, she warns that because laws have become entrenched, no "live controversy" will arise that would allow the Supreme Court to re-criminalize abortion. She admits that the courts over the years have taken the issue of abortion out of the hands of representative, democratic legislative bodies. "The perverse result of the Court's having determined through constitutional adjudication this fundamental social policy, which affects over a million women and unborn babies each year, is that the facts no longer matter," she wrote.

Judge Jones concludes, "One may fervently hope that the Court will someday acknowledge (scientific) developments and re-evaluate Roe and Casey ( v. Planned Parenthood ) accordingly. That the Court's constitutional decision making leaves our nation in a position of willful blindness to evolving knowledge should trouble any dispassionate observer... about the abortion decisions... "

Many Catholic Kerry supporters will argue that the best way to beat abortion is to address the issues that have historically been important to the Dems (but are of questionable importance now) such as aid to the poor, health care, increased minimum wage, etc.

The idea is, with more aid to the poor abortion rates will go down. This is not the case.

Most of the people who have abortions are white middle class women who do not abort for economic reasons.
~38% are women with family incomes between $30,000 and $59,999. (This income bracket represents the largest segment of women having abortions)
14.1% say their partner doesn't want the baby
25.5% of women deciding to have an abortion simply want to postpone childbearing.
10.8% say it will disrupt their career.
47% of abortions are repeat procedures.
41% are married.
63% are white.
13.8% are women with family incomes over $60,000.
ONLY 21.3% of women state they must abort because cannot afford a baby. Therefore almost 80% of abortions have little to do with serious economic problems.

As you can see, the majority of women receiving abortions are not eligible for poverty programs and will never be. I didn't include the 19.5% of women with incomes between 15,999 and 29,999, most of whom would also be ineligible for poverty interventions. As income INCREASES so do abortion rates.

Thanks to Mr. Shea for the link.

I learned this firsthand in 1996, when I registered my wife's cat as a voter in Cook County, Ill., Norfolk County, Mass., and Cuyahoga County, Ohio, and then requested absentee ballots from all three venues. My purpose wasn't to cast illegal multiple votes but to demonstrate how vulnerable to manipulation America's election system has become.

It was a simple scam to pull off. "Under the National Voter Registration Act — the `Motor Voter Law' — states are required to accept voter registrations by mail," I wrote at the time. "No longer can citizens be asked to make a trip to town hall or the county office. No longer do they have to provide proof of residence or citizenship. In fact, they don't have to exist. Motor Voter obliges election officials to add to the voter list any name mailed in on a properly filled-out registration form. Anyone so registered can then request an absentee ballot — by mail, of course. The system is not only open to manipulation, it invites it."

I'm sorry, but I don't think that requiring voters to be real will really disenfranchise anyone except the people that don't exist. That's just me, though.

Oh, anyone who understands and explains the title gets a supply of grumblecakes.

Was 5764 a good year? For Jews around the world, it was the usual mixed bag of bad and even worse news. Abroad, there was worry about anti-Semitism in Europe, a seeming stalemate in Iraq and little let-up in the ongoing terrorist war against Israel. At home, scandals and partisan politics seemed to take center stage.

But the arrival of a new Jewish year has us asking the same question about what's in store for 5765: Can things get worse? Of course, they can!

I trust any guy that uses the word prognosticate in a sentence correctly. Of course he also predicted The Passion would bomb.

For the record, in last year's quiz, I was right about the future of the peace process. No applause please, predicting a stalemate there is like shooting fish in a barrel. However, I also wrongly predicted that Howard Dean would win the Democratic nomination for president, and that Sam Katz would be elected mayor of Philadelphia, as well as forecasting that Mel Gibson's movie "The Passion of the Christ" would bomb at the box office. Topping those whoppers will be difficult. Save this column, and see if you or I do better this time.

We call that the McGovern effect. That's when you ask all your friends who their voting for and use that to determine who's going to win the presidential election. In this case, he asked all his Orthodox Jewish friends if they were gonna see the movie, got negatives, and figured no one would want to see it. Never mind just about every Christian and quasi-Christian religious group on campus either bought, sponsored, or was giving out tickets in exchange for email addresses, not to mention the fact that no Catholic can stay away from any movie that's Catholic. Factor in DVD sales (mine should be here by the end of the week)and we're off by a couple of hundred million dollars.

"You are so Vatican I" -- Jess's mother to her

Doesn't get any better than this. I can read all about library science while trying to decipher the cryptic Roman dating system. Too bad she isn't dating AUC.

I guess he's looking to the American bishops for inspiration here.

Who would have guessed?

In response to a question from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the archbishop made it clear that the issue of abortion should take clear precedence over all other political questions. "You have an erroneous conscience if you think there is some case in which you can vote for a pro-abortion candidate," Archbishop John Donoghue told the daily newspaper. "You're wrong as far as Church teaching is concerned."

To his flock in Minnesota, Archbishop Flynn gave a quite different message. Mentioning that some American bishops have advocated withholding Communion from public proponents of abortion and euthanasia, he rejected that approach. "It is my strong belief that the Eucharist is a source of healing and unity and that it should not be an occasion for political scrutinizing and judgments," he said.

Vatican officials (such as Cardinals Arinze and Ratzinger) and documents (such as Redemptionis Sacramentum (doc) and the Code of Canon Law have indicated that bishops and priests should not administer Communion to people who persist in grave public sin. But Archbishop Flynn set a separate policy in his newspaper column. "But I do not believe that it is my responsibility or anyone else’s responsibility to pass judgment on Catholics as they proceed to the Communion table," he wrote.

Remember, if you're a Protestant and you present yourself for Communion, you get it?

Today is the 25th Sunday temporis per annum, or the first Sunday of the Jewish year, or even quarttordecim dies p. Ka. Oct. 2757 AUC. Just thought I'd start off Sunday with a little quote from the GIRM which some might find interesting:

"41. All other things being equal, Gregorian chant holds pride of place because it is proper to the Roman Liturgy. Other types of sacred music, in particular polyphony, are in no way excluded, provided that they correspond to the spirit of the liturgical action and that they foster the participation of all the faithful.50

Since faithful from different countries come together ever more frequently, it is fitting that they know how to sing together at least some parts of the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin, especially the Creed and the Lord's Prayer, set to the simpler melodies."

“Escapulário” Brazilian lucky charm w/ clear frame and brown string. Capoeira players (Capoeiristas) and surfers wear this lucky charm for protection in the "roda" or in the ocean.

Oh my. Will the troubles never end?

To this.

Wow, that is most certainly amusing...he is the most Jewish goy that I
know. I hope that all is going well with your big sis today!! You did an
amazing job at Flower Sunday and I can't wait to come and hear you guys
perform again!!

Leah

Brothers and sisters:
If Christ is preached as raised from the dead,
how can some among you say there is no resurrection of the dead?
If there is no resurrection of the dead,
then neither has Christ been raised.
And if Christ has not been raised, then empty too is our preaching;
empty, too, your faith.
Then we are also false witnesses to God,
because we testified against God that he raised Christ,
whom he did not raise if in fact the dead are not raised.
For if the dead are not raised, neither has Christ been raised,
and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is vain;
you are still in your sins.
Then those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.
If for this life only we have hoped in Christ,
we are the most pitiable people of all.

But now Christ has been raised from the dead,
the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.

Message: 18
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 05:29:23 -0000
From: "xxxxxxxxxxx"
Subject: Re: Eastern Rite

Hi Richard,

I don't post very much since I'm new to the group and am still trying to
get my bearings. This thread is several days old so you may have moved on
to other topics.

There are some twenty Rites that make up the Catholic Church. The
Latin is, by far, the largest. I believe the Roman Communion is the only
ancient body of Christians that has representatives from all the
liturgical families. The others tend to be limited to a single Rite.

While there are some other Latin traditions, today the Latin Rite is
practically alone in representing the West. What you call the Eastern
Church or Rite are really all the remaining Rites of the Church combined,
with the Byzantine being the largest.

If you think of the Church apart from schisms/heresies all the
ancient churches basically fall into Latin, Antiochian, Alexandrian
and Jerusalem traditions. Had it not been for the advances of Islam, the
Antiochian would still be large, having given birth to the East & West
Syrian liturgical families. The Alexandrians might well also have
continued to evangelize deep into Africa, as they did among Ethiopians,
etc.

Unfortunately, the 5th C. Christological debates hived off large
chunks of the Great Church which later succumbed to the Muslim
advance. The Nestorians split off around 431. They would largely be the
East Syrian Tradition which ended up in Iran, Iraq, India and, I think,
China. They are the smallest of the surviving liturgical families. The
Jersalem Tradition is, practically speaking, lost to us although it
influenced all other families and they all returned to the Holy City.

Monophysitism broke off the Alexandrian and Armenian Traditions
around 451. The so-called Photian and later 11 C. split with the
Byzantines, hardening after the sack of Constantinople and it's final
collapse, give us the final massive break of the Great Church into
Orthodox and Catholic. The split with the daughter churches of Byzantium,
among the Slavs, is not as pronounced as today's Orthodox would have us
believe. They seem to have come in and out of communion with us over the
centuries. The western Ukraine restored communion formally but was driven
underground only to emerge after the fall of Communism. The Byzantines
(now Orthodox & Catholic) are a West Syrian Tradition.

Armenians would be part of the West Syrian Tradition. Antioch was
the hardest hit, being affected by all the major splits so that there are
Orthodox, Catholic, Monophysite and Nestorian Christians there today.

At various points in history, parts of all these Churches came back
into communion with Rome. The Maronites (West Syrians) are the only
Eastern Church that entirely returned to (or as they sometimes say, never
intentionally left) Catholic Communion.

The liturgical families and Rites are characterized by their
Liturgical Calendars including different disciplines of feast and
fasts, monastic traditions, architecture, etc. Obviously, for
catholicism, most of these are secondary matters that do not affect
the unity of Faith.

The structure of the Eucharist is different. Although they all have the
words of Institution (some claim the East Syrian Addai & Mari is missing
these because they don't appear in some manuals). The intercessions may
be split or combined. The invocation of the Holy Spirit (Epiclesis) may
be explicit or implied and there may be a single or double invocation
framing the Eucharistic prayer. The recitation of G_d's mighty deeds will
take different forms, developing some themes over others. The schema may
be more explicitly Trinitarian (I think the Byzantine is like this,
possibly the Liturgy of St. Basil) or less developed as is the Latin Rite.

The Latin Rite itself won out in the West not because of Rome but
because of the Carolingians reforms attempting to standardize usage
in the Germanic domains, later re-imposed on Rome, which actually
surrounded the Roman Canon (Eucharistic Prayer or Anaphora) with
traditions found outside of Rome. The small or defunct western
traditions (Gallico-Mozarabic & Ambrosian) seem to have West Syrian
connections (if memory serves). The Celtic is lost.

There is much more to say on the matter but I think the finest source is
Louis Bouyer's "Eucharist: Theology and Spirituality of the Eucharistic
Prayer" which a sweeping account of the Liturgy from its Jewish roots
through all the liturgical families that created today's Rites in all the
ancient churches. Published around '66 I don't know if it's still
available. In any case, I believe you're one of the members who can't
keep such materials lying around.

Sorry if this is long-winded.

Frank
St. Peters, MO

Someone handed me a flyer that says

"Seeking Male Models for Professional Haircuts at Upscale Salon"

I don't think I fit into the model category.

Thus, even those who appreciate the metaphysical depth of Thomism in other matters have expressed surprise that he does not deal at all with what many now think the main metaphysical question; whether we can prove that the primary act of recognition of any reality is real. The answer is that St. Thomas recognised instantly, what so many modern sceptics have begun to suspect rather laboriously; that a man must either answer that question in the affirmative, or else never answer any question, never ask any question, never even exist intellectually, to answer or to ask. I suppose it is true in a sense that a man can be a fundamental sceptic, but he cannot be anything else; certainly not even a defender of fundamental scepticism. If a man feels that all the movements of his own mind are meaningless, then his mind is meaningless, and he is meaningless; and it does not mean anything to attempt to discover his meaning. Most fundamental sceptics appear to survive, because they are not consistently sceptical and not at all fundamental. They will first deny everything and then admit something, if for the sake of argument - or often rather of attack without argument. I saw an almost startling example of this essential frivolity in the professor of final scepticism, in a paper the other day. A man wrote to say that he accepted nothing but Solipsism, and added that he had often wondered it was not a more common philosophy. Now Solipsism simply means that a man believes in his own existence, but not in anybody or anything else. And it never struck this simple sophist, that if his philosophy was true, there obviously were no other philosophers to profess it.

Three years after 9/11, the grand, anti-fascist coalition of World War II is now falling into place. First, it was America alone. Then Great Britain threw in. Now, here comes Russia.

. . .
Vladimir Putin's government (and before it, Boris Yeltsin's government and successive Communist regimes) made similar miscalculations. Russia helped Iran with its nuclear program, sold weapons and supplies to Saddam Hussein and Baathist Syria and gave political support to the Palestinians - and hoped these good deeds would preserve it from fascist jihad.


Then Muslim holy warriors showed up at the schoolhouse in Beslan, and Putin underwent a battlefield conversion to the Bush Doctrine. "We have to admit that we showed no understanding of the danger occurring in our own country and the world," Putin told Russians after the massacre. Gen. Yuri Baluyevsky, chief of the general staff, promised to "liquidate" the terrorists "in any region of the world."

ustria's controversial bishop at the center of a scandal involving his seminary on Thursday denied reports that he would soon resign. A spokesman for Bishop Kurt Krenn of St. Poelten said media reports of Vatican pressure on Krenn to resign on health grounds were wrong.

The Austrian Catholic news agency originally reported Krenn's impending resignation last week and Vatican sources confirmed to Catholic World News on Monday that while Krenn's resignation was not yet office, an announcement was expected soon. At the time, Michael Dinhobel, a spokesman for the bishop, told Austrian reporters that he was not aware of any plans for Krenn's departure, but that "if the Pope tells Bishop Krenn that he should resign, he will."

But now Dinhobel says the resignation reports are wrong. He said on Thursday, "Bishop Krenn has certainly not offered his resignation." Krenn also told an Austrian magazine that he was being mistreated. "I am suffering great injustice," Krenn told the weekly Die ganze Woche . "Our beloved Savior was also not well treated." The greatest level of public outrage concerning the scandal occurred when Bishop Krenn dismissed photos of seminarians and priests in compromising positions as "boyish pranks."

FRIDAY FAX

September 17, 2004
Volume 7, Number 39

UNFPA Report Claims Reproductive Rights Still Key to Development

In a seeming effort to remain relevant in light of plunging
worldwide fertility rates, the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) released a
report this week stating that the earth’s environmental future remains
threatened by population growth, a reality that it claims can only be
addressed by UNFPA’s increased provision of contraceptives and
abortifacients.

The report, entitled “State of the World Population 2004,” also
argues that the work of UNFPA is still essential in meeting current
international development goals, despite the agency’s failure to stem
maternal mortality and AIDS rates in the developing world.

Regarding abortion, the report appears to endorse the legalization
of abortion, praising the fact that “open discussion…on the circumstances
when abortion might be permissible has grown” throughout the world. It
also claims that, “The social taboos surrounding abortion and the
penalties for both women who seek abortions and those who provide them are
further challenges in many countries.”

The report reiterates UNFPA’s support for emergency contraception,
without mentioning that emergency contraception sometimes works by
stopping an already-conceived human embryo from implanting in the uterus,
thereby acting as an abortifacient.

The report claims that, even where reproductive health services
“are available, adolescents may face barriers, including…family
opposition.” The report goes on to praise countries that have overcome
parental authority, such as Papua New Guinea, where a new law ensures that
“adolescents over age 16 can access reproductive health services without
parental consent.”

UNFPA admits that AIDS has not been brought under control, noting
that, “Despite expanding prevention activities, some 5 million new
infections are occurring each year.” However, the report then goes on to
endorse policies that have not worked, most notably “promoting the correct
and consistent use of condoms…” UNFPA appears more concerned with
dispelling the “pervasive myths, misperceptions and fears about condoms”
that may “inhibit their use” than in promoting abstinence and sexual
fidelity, the only strategies that have shown significant results in
sub-Saharan Africa.

The report also admits that, “Tragically, despite progress in some
countries, the global number of deaths per year – estimated at 529,000, or
one every minute – has not changed significantly since” 1994, even though
UNFPA has long trumpeted its role as the lead international agency in
addressing this issue.

The only country that is criticized in the report is the United
States, which it claims has attempted to destroy worldwide consensus
because of the “administration’s political opposition to some aspects of
reproductive health.” The report finds reason to praise China, since
“China has seen a dramatic drop in the incidence of poverty” due to its
decreased fertility. The report does not mention that this fertility
decline is the result of draconian population laws that include forced
abortions and sterilizations.

Copyright 2004 – C-FAM (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute).
Permission granted for unlimited use. Credit required.

And there goes my subscription to Computer Shopper.

Hello!
Hopefully many of you have seen the Columbia Spectator's
coverage of the CCSC's efforts around financial aid, adding Furnald to the
housing lottery system, and removing student Social Security numbers from
CUID cards. As always, if you have any comments on anything that we're
doing, or simply would like to learn more, you can e-mail us at
ccsc@columbia.edu or drop by our weekly meetings on Sundays at 8.
Also, I don't want to make a habit of including holidays in these
e-mails, but I did want to mention that September is Hug a Texas Chef
Month, Library Card Sign-Up Month, and the National Month for Biscuits,
Chicken, Pediculosis, Honey, and Organic Harvest. If any of you are
suffering from pediculosis, I'm sorry. That was insensitive.

Best,
Matthew

There was one incident where the woman had the baby while she was waiting at the door for the clinic to open. She got there at 7a. The clinic opened at 8a. She said the baby was born alive. The baby was now dead, and she was holding the baby in a bag. She was bleeding.

I was in the room when Dr. X gave the digoxin to stop that baby’s heartbeat beforehand. [Digoxin is a medication inserted by needle through a mother’s abdomen into a baby’s heart to cause instant cardiac arrest.]

Well, he didn’t have an ultrasound machine that day. He inserted the needle blindly. He said he’d been doing it so many years, he knew the location. But he didn’t actually know if he hit the heart.

I know this nurse Bridget. She was working there when the new doctor held a baby under water in a bucket when she told him the baby was alive. That baby was between 25-26 weeks. Bridget left two months ago because of that.

Just keep saying it to youself. "It's my choice".

Thanks to afterabortion for the link.

Message: 18
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 07:23:20 -0000
From: "seekingchai"
Subject: Shana Tova

Shana tova...

To modern, ultra & just plain Orthodox Jews, Charedi Jews,
Misnagdim, Conservative, Conservadox, Reform & ConForm Jews,
Gartel Jews, non-Gartel Jews, Jews with sheitels & without,
Tichel Jews, Sheitel, tichel & hat Jews, converted Jews,
adult & child Jews, Frum from birth Jews, Baalei Teshuva,
Satmar, Agudah, black hat, kipa s'ruga, Mir, Munkacs, Belz,
Beta Yisrael, Bobov, Chaim Berlin, Y.U. Jews, payos in front of
the ear Jews, payos in back of the ear Jews, kipa only in shul/
hat in shul/ no shul at all Jews, Mizrachi Jews, Jews by choice,
Bathrobe on Friday night Jews, Likud Jews, Labor Jews,
Meimad Jews, Ten Lost Tribes Jews, cardiac Jews, Irish Jews,
Black Jews, White Jews, 3-day-a-year Jews, Rav Nachman Jews,
Rav Shlomo Jews, Neturei Karta Jews, Hasidim, Telz, Lakewood &
Ner Yisrael Jews, Chofetz Chaim Jews, zaftig Jews, skinny Jews,
Fremeiners, Dinevers, Kook-ies, JTS, RJJ, HUC, HTC, MTJ,
BMT Jews, Celebrity Jews, Generation X,Y & Z Jews, NCSY Jews,
Solomon Schechter Jews, Chinuch Atzmai Jews, Fackenheim Jews,
Yitz Greenberg Jews, Kahane Jews, Feminist Jews, Chauvinist Jews,
egalitarian Jews, traditional Jews, Kaddish-zuger Jews, political
Jews, intellectual Jews, ignorant Jews, tomato Jews & orange Jews,
Shinui Jews, Shas Jews, Israeli Jews, American Jews, Persian Jews,
Russian Jews, Galitzianers, Litvaks, Polacks, Birthright Jews,
single Jews, married Jews, wish I was married Jews, Greener Jews,
Redder Jews, Scandinavian Jews, South of the Border Jews,
Italian Jews, Bald Jews, Hairy Jews, Canadian Jews, Latino Jews,
Ladino Jews, Jews in kapatas, Jews in T-shirts, Jews in sandals,
Jews in gym shoes, Jews in cowboy boots, Hungarian Jews,
Czech Jews, Jews on the Hungarian-Czech Border Jews,
Ashkenazim, Sefardim, Yemenite Jews, Afrikaaner Jews,
Romanian Jews, Zionists, non-Zionists, anti-Zionists, post-Zionists, Jews
with an accent, Jews who speak perfect Midwestern English Hebrew, Native
American Jews, Anglo-Saxon Jews, French Jews, German Jews, Greek Jews,
Indian Jews, Chinese Jews, Jews who like David Levy Jews , Wannabee Jews,
Conspiracy Theory Jews, Japanese Jews, Shayna Panim Jews, Meesekite Jews,
Closet Jews, Shnorrers, Baalei Tzedaka, Tzadikim, Baynonim, Rashaim,
Chacham-Tam- Ayni Yodea Jews, Chevramen & Forbisseners, kvetching Jews,
Guta Neshama Jews, Vizhnitzer, Ger, Gerer, Chabadnik, Kohenim, Levi'im,
Yisraelim, Machers, Mavens, & Pashet Jews, Manchester, Melbourne,
Jerusalem and Toronto Jews, EVERY KIND of Jew in this vast Universe: [I
think they forgot Catholic Jews myself :)))]

May we all unite -- without a fight! -- and together ignite G-d's
great light.

May we see a sweet and blessed year together with a true peace.

Hannah

You were caught by police radar doing 85 MPH in a 45 zone, your lawyer can't fix the ticket, you've had three violations already this year, and the toughest judge in the county is about to throw the book at you. What do you do now?

How about this: As the arresting officer steps forward to present the facts against you, you reach into your briefcase, pull out a trumpet, and blast away at full volume. The officer becomes confused and bungles his accusation, leaving the judge no choice but to dismiss your case.

And they're in Russia! Check it out.

In truth, Democrats have learned a lesson that Burk and her dour sorority sisters fail to grasp: That all issues are "women's issues." Women, like men, are concerned about homeland security and winning the war on terror. They want a vibrant economy that produces jobs for themselves and their families. A summer Gallup poll found that women ranked Iraq, the economy, and employment as their top issues for this election. A more recent Newsweek poll of both men and women confirmed that security, terrorism, and the economy are voters' top priorities, which suggests there's no big gender gap on the key issues of concern.

But the feminists keep on fighting yesterday's battles. They fixate on statistical discrepancies like the so-called wage gap, wringing their hands each time the Department of Labor releases data on male versus female wages. Never mind that these figures fail to account for the number of years worked and educational achievement — or for the simple fact that some working moms aren't trying to maximize pay, but want jobs with enough flexibility to spend time with their children.

Professors of women's studies complain that "society" views women as baby machines, but it's the feminists who obsess about reproduction. According to Gallup, just one in twenty women says that abortion will affect her vote. Listen to NOW, and you'd think that abortion is the top priority of nearly every American woman.

The world should celebrate the tremendous strides that women have made in Afghanistan and Iraq, but the Feminist Majority Foundation — an organization that often highlights the truly egregious abuses of women internationally — ridiculed the First Lady for mentioning these gains in her speech. Feminist Majority Foundation President Eleanor Smeal's smug statement ("Don't we wish that all is tranquil in Afghanistan? Instead, violence roams and the United States refuses to provide adequate peacekeeping troops") reveals an astonishingly partisan mindset blind to the progress made for women who had been suffering under brutal regimes.

Big on vision. Short on common decency.

During the Democratic presidential primaries of 1992, former Sen. Bob Kerrey, a decorated Vietnam War veteran, similarly criticized fellow candidate Bill Clinton for his student deferments.

On Feb. 27, 1992, Kerry took to the Senate floor to lament that "Vietnam has yet again been inserted into the campaign," and that Democrats "should now be refighting the many conflicts of Vietnam in order to win the current political conflict."

That speech deserves to be broadly quoted in light of Kerry's decision, as presidential candidate, to make Vietnam the foundation of his campaign.

"The race for the White House should be about leadership, and leadership requires that one help heal the wounds of Vietnam, not reopen them; that one help identify the positive things that we learned about ourselves and about our nation, not play to the divisions and differences of that crucible of our generation.

"We do not need to divide America over who served and how. I have personally always believed that many served in many different ways.

"While those who served are owed special recognition, that recognition should not come at the expense of others, nor does it require that others be victimized or criticized or said to have settled for a lesser standard."

Interpret what you may.

Hi Marcia,

I want to thank Ronda and you. I have always assumed that the baby is the
aggressor, but I see that that doesn't really make sense. Thanks.

All the best,
Richard

Catechism, 1. Talmud, 0.

Eating meat is akin to Nazism is the message from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, known for its graphic, controversial animal-rights tactics.

A young Jewish woman who happened upon the exhibit disgustedly handed a pamphlet back to a PETA activist.

"You can't compare people to animals, especially when you're showing pictures of the Holocaust, people who are starved, their bones sticking out," she said. "It's wrong, it's offensive."

Standing next to one of PETA's eight panels, each measuring about two by 2 1/2 metres, another passer-by said the imagery shocked him.

Halldor Eiriksson was sitting on a bench, eating a turkey sandwich. "I think it's rather tasteless to compare animals" to the millions imprisoned and killed in concentration camps, he said.

"And, logically, I don't think it makes sense. There are things in the production of meat that are definitely not OK, but their comparison is simply wrong. These animals have been produced for meat. There's a fundamental difference between why they are being killed. They are products, just like soybeans or whatever."

Peoplesoft starts getting nervous

"He's the most Jewish goy I know of" -- Leia

We have here a little Jesus and the Temple stuff . . . fascinating
-----------------------------------------
Shavuah Tov.

Dear Richard,

Jesus Himself said He is Lord of the Sabbath and greater than the
Temple. Matthew 12:5-8.

I have problems with your post, you seem to be saying that His
contrast against the religious authorities is not particularly
important, as though He were a rabbi among rabbis, disagreeing over
minhagim (customs which vary among communities on how the Law is
practiced) and matters of rabbinic detail.

The issue is about authority, as I read it. I agree that Galilee was
thought suspect but the point is that the halachic authorities were in
Jerusalem, they were the ones who sat on Moses' seat and no-one had the
authority to stand independently, let alone lead others to oneself away
from the tradition. That would still now be the issue. From the rabbinic
side of the argument Jesus had no authority at all, hence the miracles
would be some kind of witchcraft as He was a renegade and a heretic in
their eyes, and God Who had given His authority into the tradition would
not be the cause of the signs and wonders of a heretic. That explanation
continues in the Talmud about the miracles which continued within the
Church. Matthew was a Jew, had there been little importance in the clash
between Jesus and the religious authorities he would not have had cause to
write so much about it, nor in fact would there have been much of a Jewish
problem with Jesus to write about.

I am aware that many Jews today do take the view that there was not
much of a Jewish problem with Jesus but then they go on to say there was a
christological development of such proportions that the Gentiles made a
god and a religion out of him, the Christian texts written far after the
event with their `bad Jews versus good Jesus message' being a result of
that development. It depends on how one is reading the Gospels, if as
Scripture then we take them as one integral whole which cannot be played
down, accepting their message that Jesus is absolutely distinct from the
Judaism around Him and was confronted by the Rabbonim for that reason.

On Jesus' side of the argument it would be impossible for Him to
violate the Sabbath or anything in Torah, His observance being on an
infinitely higher level of purity than ours. It reminds me of that mystery
we have in Parshas Tetzaveh (Exodus 28:8) where we learn that the Kohanim
are commanded to wear shatnez (the mixture of linen and wool) in the
Temple, when outside of the Temple shatnez is so strictly forbidden by the
same Torah that it is said if a man were to pray wearing shatnez his
prayers will be rejected for forty days. Shatnez is a chok (a law beyond
any human rationale) so its reverse in the Temple is also a chok but I
learned an explanation in Chassidus that the negative forces usual with
shatnez in all ordinary places were nullified in the intense holiness of
the Temple. If Jesus is greater than the Temple then perhaps we have a
hint here of how the Law relates to Him in practice, and that being the
case it is not so amazing that He would clash with the Rabbonim when what
is truly amazing is His condescension to be subject to the Law in anything
at all.

Therefore what makes sense to me is this: there is a hierarchy of
principles within the Law, including the Sabbath laws, as we know. As the
laws for Temple service supercede the laws for life outside the Temple,
and the laws for Temple service on the Sabbath supercede the laws for
ordinary life outside the Temple on the Sabbath, so does the Lord of the
Sabbath supercede even the laws of the Temple on the Sabbath, as He
Himself says.

sarah

Found this in my mailbox . . .
------------------------
Dear Debbie,
I just now found out that my 35 year old niece in law, mother of 2 babies
(4 and 1) has breast cancer. Her physicians suspect the birth control
pill. She just found a great job after a year of unemployment. She will
probably take a year recovering. Please keep her in your prayers. I have
read your posts and see where you are coming from. Please let me explain
where I am coming from. My only sister aborted a baby between #2 and #3.
She didn't give her husband any choice, and my mother couldn't talk her
out of it. The reason: She didn't "feel" she is ready for a 3rd baby. She
has been suffering from depressions ever since, although never mentioning
it. She thinks I do not know about it.(30 years ago) My best childhood
friend aborted her first baby(40 years ago) 'cause it was too soon to have
a baby, they just got married and were having too much fun. Also, she was
working at the time while her husband was finishing his education. SHE
NEVER COULD CONCEIVE AFTER THAT (and it was in a perfectly good clinic,
in Israel, where it wasn't illegal). Both her husband and herself were
only children of holocaust survivors. With this one act they destroyed
what Hitler couldn't. 2 whole families were eradicated off the face of the
earth. The majority of abortions are NOT due to health of the mother, rape
or incest. Please take the time of reading the book of Bernard Nathanson
(a famous abortionist, who in a moment of watching an unborn baby move
away from his knife in fright, stopped the practice after years and
thousand abortions, repented and turned to God and eventually to the
Catholic Church) The Hand of God, about the truth of the abortion mills
behind the flowery words of "choice". Not everything that sounds good and
feels good - is good. What is scary is the nonchalant non thinking choices
which we are made to believe are our choices. What we don't consider is
the amount of brain washing we are subjected to in a subliminal way in all
the movies, commercials, misinformation regarding the overpopulation of
the world, and in trying to engineer a perfect person, so if she is not a
he we abort her. My sister didn't even give it another thought - had to
get rid of that burden. My friend was more worried about the difficulty
for her husband if she should have a baby before they are "ready". No
thoughts about the baby itself at the time, but for years they were
suffering and paying for it. Yes, it is a private choice. But the majority
of the women make their choices in a most uninformed way. Back to
contraception, how many men had gone through vasectomy "since it can
always be reversed" to find out that in many cases it cannot? (the reason
why we never had children) Do you feel that abortions are only performed
in rare cases, for very good reasons, and only in the first trimester?
Haven't you noticed how the down hill of the last 30 years is now "any
time even if the baby is already coming out" or if the baby was aborted
alive it must be killed by the nurse or physician?

your sister in Christ,
Ariela

Or, why the religion of peace still holds the see of Augustine and has been trying to conquer territory from the 7th century right up until the rather more successful colonization efforts of the 21st century. If 14 centuries of warfare dont' qualify you for inclusion as a warlike type, I really don't know what does.

I don't think I'll ever understand why people think attacking themselves will endear them to them, if that's a sentence. Metus ac terror est infirma vincla caritatis.

In memoriam

I was wrong! Zenit follows.

Code: ZE04090722

Date: 2004-09-07

Why "For All" in the Words of Consecration?

And More on the Preparation of the Gifts

ROME, SEPT. 7, 2004 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.

Q: A very conservative friend of mine says she cannot attend Mass in English because the translation of the consecration renders the words "pro multis" (for many) as "for all." She says this is a heresy. Is she right? -- J.S., Washington, D.C.

A: Here I will supply the answer which the Holy See gave to a similar question 34 years ago. The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments first gave a brief official reply in January 1970 and later commissioned a brief but dense article on the subject by noted Jesuit scholar M. Zerwick, published in the May 1970 edition of Notitiae, the congregation's official organ (pages 138-140).

The translations from the Latin and Italian were done for personal reasons by a priest friend of mine several years ago. They are an accurate translation but, as is obvious, cannot be considered official.

The official January reply (slightly adapted here) is typically brief and uses the usual form of a succinct query and reply.

The query states:

"In some vernacular versions the words of the formula for the consecration of the wine 'pro multis' are translated in the following way: in English 'for all men'; in Spanish 'por todos' and in Italian 'per tutti.'

"The following is asked:

"a) Is there a good reason, and if there is, what is it, for deciding on such a variation?

"b) Whether the doctrine regarding this matter handed down through the 'Roman Catechism ordered by Decree of the Council of Trent and edited by St. Pius V' is to be held outdated?

"c) Whether the versions of the above-mentioned biblical text are to be held less appropriate?

"d) Whether in the approval given to this vernacular variation in the liturgical text something less correct crept in, and which now requires correction or amending?

"Response: The above variation is fully justified:

"a) According to exegetes, the Aramaic word which in Latin is translated 'pro multis,' means 'pro omnibus': the multitude for whom Christ died is unbounded, which is the same as saying: Christ died for all. St. Augustine will help recall this: 'You see what He hath given; find out then what He bought. The Blood of Christ was the price. What is equal to this? What, but the whole world? What, but all nations? They are very ungrateful for their price, or very proud, who say that the price is so small that it bought the Africans only; or that they are so great, as that it was given for them alone.' (Enarr. In Ps. 95, n. 5)

"b) In no way is the doctrine of the 'Roman Catechism' to be held outdated: the distinction that the death of Christ was sufficient for all, efficacious only for many, still holds its value.

"c) In the approval given to this vernacular variation in the liturgical text, nothing less than correct has crept in, which would require correction or amendment."

Since the debate continued unabated, the Vatican congregation weighed in with Father Zerwick's May article entitled "Pro vobis et pro multis effundetur" which expounded the biblical justifications for the change from "many" to "all." The following text, while sometimes a trifle technical, is sufficiently clear:

"A response was already given in Notitiae, n. 50 (January 1970), pp. 39-40, to the difficulty that in the vernacular interpretations of the words of the consecration of the wine 'pro omnibus' was used in place of 'pro multis.' Since, however, some uneasiness seems to persist, it seemed that the matter should be addressed again a little more extensively from an exegetical point of view.

"In that response, one reads: 'According to exegetes the Aramaic word, which in Latin is translated "pro multis," means "pro omnibus."' This assertion should be expressed a little more cautiously. To be exact: In the Hebrew (Aramaic) language there is one word for 'omnes' and another for 'multi.' The word 'multi' then, strictly speaking, does not mean 'omnes.'

"But because the word 'multi' in different ways in our Western languages does not exclude the whole, it can and does in fact connote it, where the context or subject matter suggests or requires it. It is not easy to offer clear examples of this phenomenon. Here are some:

"In 3 Esdras [Ezra] 8:3 we read: 'Many have been created, but only a few shall be saved.' It is clear that all have been created. But here the interest is not in the whole, but in the opposite of 'few.' Hence, 'many' is used, when it truth it means 'all.'

"In the Qumram text Hodayot IV, 28, 29, both words 'many' and 'all' are found in a synonymous parallel (two parallel verses in which the same thing is said twice): 'You have worked wonders among the many on account of your glory that you might make known to all your great works.'

"Moreover, in Qumram 'many' (with or without the article) came to be a technical term (almost a name) for the community of all the full-fledged members, and thus just in the 'rule' of the sect it occurs in around 30 places.

"We come now to the texts of the New Testament with which we are particularly concerned: Romans 5:12,15. Here the comparative argumentation from the minor premise to the major is set up between the universality of Adam's sin and the universality of Christ's grace: 'Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned (after the insertion of verses 13 and 14, the comparison continues) 'But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died through the one man's trespass, much more surely have the grace of God and the free gift in the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abounded for the many.' Let us note: 'all' those of the first part become the 'many' (with an article) of the second part. Just as sin affects all, or rather much more, so also grace is destined for all.

"Mark 10:45 = Matthew 20:28 has Jesus' words: 'the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.' That 'for many' ambiguous in itself, in fact is to be understood as 'for all,' proven by what we read in 1 Timothy 2:6: 'Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all.'

"But even if we didn't have this authoritative interpretation, that 'for many' nonetheless should certainly be understood as 'for all' because the coming of Jesus ('he came in order to give ...') is explicitly carried out for the purpose which can abundantly be shown to have as its object the whole world, i.e. the human race as a whole.

"John 1:29: 'Here is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin (singular!) of the world!'

"John 3:16,17: 'For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him ... may have eternal life. Indeed, God did not send the Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.'

"1 John 2:2: 'he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.'

"1 John 4:14: 'And we have seen and do testify that the Father has sent his Son as the Savior of the world.'

"1 Timothy 4:10: '... we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.'"

"These texts, however, have the Eucharist itself in view:

"John 6:33: 'For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.'

"John 6:51: 'the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.'

"Given all this, it can indeed rightly be asked, not so much what the words 'pro multis' in the consecration mean, but rather given all this evidence, why 'pro omnibus' is not explicitly said.

"In response, it seems that

"1) in the primitive Palestinian Church, considering both their soteriology and their Semitic mind-set, there was no misunderstanding that had to be avoided by employing the formula 'pro omnibus.' They could freely keep the traditional 'pro multis' because those Christians sensed and marveled at the beauty of that original formula 'pro multis.'

"2) 'pro multis' seems to have been used by Jesus himself, because evoking the memory of Chapter 53 of Isaiah about the Servant of Yahweh who sacrifices himself, it is suggested that Jesus would fulfill what was predicted about the Servant of Yahweh. The main text is Isaiah 53:11b-12: 'The righteous one, my servant, shall make many righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore I will allot him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he poured out himself to death ...; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.'

"Therefore the formula 'pro multis' instead of 'pro omnibus' in our texts (Mark 10:45 = Matthew 20:28; Mark 14:24 = Matthew 26:28) seems to be due to the desired allusion to the Servant of Yahweh whose work Jesus carried out by his death.

"This brings us now to another question: Why therefore in our liturgical version this venerable original 'pro multis' should yield to the phrase 'pro omnibus'? I respond: because of a certain accidental but true inconvenience: the phrase 'for many' -- as it is said -- in our minds (not forewarned) excludes that universality of the redemptive work which for the Semitic mind could be and certainly was connoted in that phrase because of the theological context. However, the allusion to the theology of the Servant of Yahweh, however eloquent for the ancients, among us is clear only to the experts.

"But if on the other hand it is said that the phrase 'for all' also has its own inconvenience, because for some it might suggest that all will actually be saved, the danger of such an erroneous understanding is estimated to hardly exist among Catholics.

"Besides, the change which the words of the consecration underwent was not unique nor the first. For the traditional Latin text already combines the Lucan text 'pro vobis' with the phrase of Mark and Matthew 'pro multis.' And that is not the first change. For already the liturgy of the early Church (Mark-Matthew) seems to have adjusted the saying over the chalice to the formula pronounced over the bread. For originally that formula of the chalice according to Paul (1 Corinthians 11:25) and Luke (22:20) was: 'This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.' -- a formula which was excellent perhaps in depth, but not really in clarity.

"It is clear how the Church of the Apostles was not interested in preserving the very voice of the Lord even in the words of the consecration, certainly cited for the first time as such by Jesus himself."

I was reading my torah.org weekly commentary and the good Rabbi decided to talk about how in Judaism, repentence is different because it's supposed to be based on love and not fear of fire and brimstone. Also it's thought of as a return to love.

Umm. Perfect contrition? Sacrament of Reconciliation? PRODIGAL SON?

Oy.

I'm a little bitter today. Plus I got called by a telemarketer for some company and she got insulted when I called her a telemarketer, so yeah.

What a guy, what a guy. Interview prisoners and pedophiles and pass it off as a study for the whole country. A great scientist.

Kinsey was also shown to be an atheist who loathed religion and its constraints on sex. All sexual activity is natural, he said. The main reason that children are not sexually active and adults tend to be heterosexual is because of "cultural restraints" and "societal inhibitions," he said in his 1948 report.

Never mind the fact that I thought girls were dirty in elementary school. Never mind that thing called "pueberty" that tends to occur in the early teen years. No, second graders aren't screwing each other because of "cultural restraints".