Catholic Sister Disparaged for Catholic Marriage Talk Wacky Wednesday

This Wacky Wednesday was inspired by the article, "Charlotte [North Carolina, USA] diocese backs nun who gave school talk promoting Church teaching on homosexuality" by Kirsten Andersen.

[Update 4/15/2014 (YouTube): "Charlotte Diocese Fully Backs Sr. Jane Dominic Laurel"]

Image source: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/charlotte-bishop-backs-nun-who-gave-school-talk-promoting-church-teaching-o

A sister said truth about marr'age.
Expectedly some had to disparage
The obvious truth.
She wasn't uncouth:
One man and his bride ride the carr'age.

There's someone else who took the risk;
The way it could sound was quite brisk.
His name now is Pope,
He said Satan's hope:
Gay marr'age turns brains into bisque *.

The bisque will have sev'ral key parts:
Confusion, half-truths a la carte.
Homofascists arise.
It's no big surprise:
The Church fights with Truth to change hearts.


* "Let's not be naive, we're not talking about a simple political battle; it is a destructive pretension against the plan of God," wrote Cardinal Bergoglio [now Pope Francis] in a letter sent to the monasteries of Buenos Aires. "We are not talking about a mere bill, but rather a machination of the Father of Lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God."

For Google translation:
marr'age = marriage
sev'ral = several
carr'age = carriage

Churchmen Gone Wacky Wednesday

(Here's the full interview.)

There now is a Card'nal named Kasper
Who desp'rately wants now to plaster
Out words from the law
And words from God's jaw.
Will those with Burke pry out disaster?

© 2014 Wondering Zygote Emeritus

Image sources: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Raymond_Leo_Cardinal_Burke.JPG
http://www.lifesitenews.com/images/sized/images/news/Cardinal-Kasper-Paul-Haring-240x319.jpg

Premise: I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another [remarriage] commits adultery. Matthew 19: 9

Premise: Can. 915 Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin [Decalogue included] are not to be admitted to holy communion.

Conclusion: Since remarriage is a "manifest grave sin", those obstinately persevering in the state are not to be admitted to holy communion.

Corollary: Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. 1 Corr 11: 27 

Sunday Snippets -- A Catholic Carnival Post VI

This is for the weekly Catholic Carnival!

Be sure to visit RAnn at This, That and the Other Thing and check out some posts from other bloggers participating in Sunday Snippets this week. Why not join us and share a blog post or two from last week?

Question of the week:
Question of the Week:  How often do you go to confession?  Do you have a regular confessor or do you go to different priests?
I try to go at least every 3 months. I do not have a regular confessor.

Image source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/101030402@N03/12422054853/sizes/m/

For the week of March sixteenth:

March 17-18 and 21
Commentaries on The Lego Movie
The Lego Movie Bad Cop Singing Danny Boy on Saint Patrick's Day
http://wonderingzygoteemeritus.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-lego-movie-bad-cop-singing-danny.html
The Lego Movie's Prophesying by Vitruvius
http://wonderingzygoteemeritus.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-lego-movies-prophesying-by-vitruvius.html
The Lego Movie and Tolerant Unikitty
http://wonderingzygoteemeritus.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-lego-movie-and-tolerant-unikitty.html

March 20
The Search for Spock and the gods of Genesis
http://wonderingzygoteemeritus.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-search-for-spock-and-gods-of-genesis.html

March 19
Wacky Wednesday Limericks on Silencing Pro-life and Pro-marriage views on Sanford University Campus
Silencing Debate at Stanford Wacky Wednesday
http://wonderingzygoteemeritus.blogspot.com/2014/03/silencing-debate-at-stanford-wacky.html

Silencing Debate at Stanford Wacky Wednesday

The limericks and meme below was inspired by the recent article by Jennifer S. Bryson, Ph.D. entitled, "Stanford, Marriage and Abortion Controversies, and the Mission of a University".

Image Sources: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2008/dec/08122402
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2008/may/08050205

Silencing at Stanford

At Stanford, it was an oasis
For all points of view to have places.
But marr'age for now
Is under the plow
For burying Truth from some faces.

And tolerance is just a ruse
Of many who outright refuse
To look at the facts;
It may stop their tracts.
Their views facing facts, they may lose.

© 2014 Wondering Zygote Emeritus

Image sources:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2008/dec/08122402
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2008/may/08050205

In engaging in debates, there is a possibility that one's previous view(s) may change. The purpose of a debate is not necessarily to win or lose, it is to find the truth that is outside ourselves by reason and facts. The college is the ideal setting for such activity.

How I Live Now Part IV

***Spoilers Alert!*** As was mentioned in the last post, Daisy and Eddie were de facto married in the marital relations scene.

Image source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mirror_of_erised/9624599585/meta/

This will come into play for the comments below about Daisy's ending monologue.

Before the war, I used my will power for stupid stuff like not eating chocolate. I think I thought if I could control myself, then maybe the world around me would start to make sense. I guess I was pretty naive back then.

During the war we stopped looking for reasons why things happen. We don't know what happened to Eddie [in the war] -- what he saw, the things he had to do. ...

Now I use my will power to wait for you Eddie. To care for you. To love you. I have to believe that one day you're going to get better. It was like I said to you all that time ago. If the world doesn't end, I wanna be here ... at home ... with you. And that's how I live now.

She's wedded herself to Eddie. She now yearns for him.

It seems as though he is far off, but she is still caring for him like he is there. If it is correct that this movie can be seen as a Christian allegory, then there are two things that can be gleaned from this monologue's corresponding actions.

First, she is loving Eddie by taking care of him even though he does not seem to love her back as he used to. She is essentially taking care of someone else.

Quite often, Christians (like Mother Theresa) take care of people because they see the face of Christ in them. So, when they are taking care of sick and/or distressed people, they believe that they are taking care of Christ. Mother Theresa often said by using her five fingers, "You did it for me." This comes from Matthew 25:37-40.

Then the righteous will answer him and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?’ And the king will say to them in reply, ‘Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.’ Matthew 25:37-40

It was easier for Daisy since she could actually see Eddie's face, but in a way it was not the Eddie who she once knew. Nevertheless, whatever she did for the new Eddie, she did it for the Eddie she once knew and hoped would see again.

As she said, Daisy used to use her will power for herself. But at the end of the movie, the will power that Daisy used was for her Love, her husband, for Eddie's sake. That's how she lives now.

The second thing about Daisy's dialogue will be in the next post.

How I Live Now Part I
How I Live Now Part II
How I Live Now Part III

How I Live Now Part III

So, in the last post, the swimming scene in the movie How I Live Now was explored. ***Spoilers Alert!*** In this post, the wedding scene between Daisy and Eddie will be looked at.

Image source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mirror_of_erised/9627836862/meta/

If you saw the movie, you may be wondering when the wedding scene was. Well, it was the scene where the marital relations take place between Daisy and Eddie.

Before any religion or society, marriage was naturally taking place all the time. No vows were taken, just two people who consummated a marriage and usually raised their children (or adopted children) for life were living it out. In this movie with "no rules" (as the kids at the house said), the natural law rule of marriage still took place. From that intimate scene on, Daisy and Eddie were married, in what is called a de facto marriage, or natural marriage.

As was said in the first post on this movie, I saw this movie as an allegory of the Christian mysteries. This particular scene between Eddie and Daisy can be seen as the marriage between Jesus and the Church. After recognizing the beauty in Christ, whom Eddie represents, and then the life changing act of letting go in the swimming scene (baptism), Daisy who represents a Christian or the whole Church is nourished in the relationship with Eddie. She desires this nourishment wholeheartedly.

For Christians, when Jesus gave his entire self, his entire life up for the Church (those who where baptized in the "bath of water"), he was mysteriously marrying the same Church. When we receive him in the sacrament of the Eucharist at mass, we remember and participate in this saving act. We desire to be intimately joined to Christ.

Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church and handed himself over for her to sanctify her, cleansing her by the bath of water with the word, that he might present to himself the church in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. So [also] husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one hates his own flesh but rather nourishes and cherishes it, even as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. “For this reason a man shall leave [his] father and [his] mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” This is a great mystery, but I speak in reference to Christ and the church. In any case, each one of you should love his wife as himself, and the wife should respect her husband. Ephesians 5:25-33

Wacky Wednesday Arizona's Conscience Law

Update 3/4/2014: Upon rereading the second stanza, it did not convey what was meant to be said. Therefore, it has been changed in the second and third lines. I am sorry for the confusion.

A counter for lunch is for all.
Grand Canyon State's holding the ball.
Comparisons work
For even a jerk
Unless the analogies fall.

And owners have rights to deny
A service to one that is high ‡,
Or raises the finger,
Or clocks one a ringer,
Or other acts that go awry.

Analogies are hard to align,
But here's one that's going to chime.
If 'Zona's law passed
When *More held his fast,
His head would have stayed all the time.

© 2014 Wondering Zygote Emeritus
wonderingzygoteemeritus.blogspot.com

Image Source HT
https://www.facebook.com/georgehtakei/photos/a.737221629640626.1073741825.205344452828349/882719645090823/?type=1&theater

*St. Thomas More was held in the Tower of London instead of revealing his beliefs that the supposed marriage between King Henry VIII and his second Queen was valid and that the King was the head of the Church of England (CoE). He was beheaded for treason for these beliefs. See the movie and play Man for All Seasons for more dramatic details.

‡ For those who are foreign and are translating this stanza: high = high on drugs and/or alcohol; the finger = the middle finger which is highly offensive; clocks one a ringer = punches and/or beats someone up.

The analogy between serving food to all people regardless of any ** accidental trait of a person is not consistent with requiring a caterer or photographer providing services for an event that either directly or indirectly supports an act that is morally repugnant to said caterer or photographer (etc.).

** An "accident" is a philosophical term for some trait that doesn't necessarily define a substance. An accident may change while the substance stays the same.

Wacky Wednesday Klum and Seal

http://shine.yahoo.com/love-sex/could-heidi-klum-seal-reportedly-back-together-202700107.html

 

A Kiss From A Rose is a classic.
Is seems like Seal's range is elastic.
I hope that's it's true:
This picture's a view
Of runways re-latching. Fantastic!

Ender's Game Part I

I read Ender's Game, the 1985 science fiction novel by Orson Scott Card, in a book club a few years ago. The Ender's Game movie, like many movies-from-books, took out many necessary items and added some political jabs (if something is repeated enough, it must be true).

This post is about one of the political jabs in the movie.



Despite the lack of communication from the aliens in the movie (who were not excessively referred to as "bugs" in the movie as they were in the book; more on this in Part II), the humans knew that they were being attacked/annihilated for more land. The additional land for the bugs was necessary since they over-bred on their own planet (they sort-of looked like a cross between an ant and a bee in the movie, at a human scale).

That was the first instance of the so-called over-population meme in the movie. Watch out! or the Earth may turn out like the bug planet.

Second, Ender was the third child of his family. Normally, in the movie universe, a family was permitted to have only two children. Hmm, a two-child policy was the second instance of the over-population meme.

Why do many Christians care about the proliferation of the so-called over-population movement? First, it is not true. We usually don't like falsehood, being one part of the Decalogue n' at.

Second, it treats a family as a ward of the state. The family is pre-state and each particular one determines how that family is constituted within the natural-law framework (man-woman; open to life). Jesus, in the Gospel of Matthew said, "no man must separate" the couple, including in the process of procreation (one-flesh union).

Communist China's one-child policy treats each family as a unit of the state that must follow state laws above all else. However, natural law, which is to regulate state law, takes precedence. The number one natural law is that people are rational creatures who are due respect and dignity of the state, not for the state to claim them as commodity units for its own means or ends.

Many Christians have reported on the brutality and immorality of population control programs, especially in China.

The producers and/or writers of Ender's Game have just jabbed another fictional example of the Malthusian lie of over-population that quite often looks up to China as an ideal for population control.

If it's portrayed enough, it must be true. (sarcasm)

Miss Saigon Wedding Scene

My first girlfriend and I went to see Miss Saigon in Pittsburgh. She asked me a question about the wedding scene that gave me something to think about for a long time. (It's at 2:00 in the video below; **Warning** The first two minutes are not appropriate for young viewers.)



She asked me, "Do you think they are really married?" I thought, I don't know since there was no priest (or minister, she was/is Southern Baptist) to marry them.

It took me a while to discover that it's not a minister that makes someone married, but the couple themselves.

But, how can that be? Well, the nitty-gritty of it is that a marriage really takes place when it is consummated between man and woman. So, in any culture, if they are Christian or not, a man and women are married when the marriage is bonded in the flesh.

This actually comes from Jesus' own mouth.

He [Jesus] said in reply, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate.” Matthew 19: 4-6

So, before Abraham (Judaism/Islam), before Christianity (the incarnation), before all modern religions, the way to make a marriage was through becoming "one flesh".

(Of course, many other questions could be raised, but that's all I'll say about this for now.)

Star Trek: The Motion Picture Part II

This post is about the "meld" between the V'ger probe and Decker.



In the last post, I likened Decker to God the Father (Creator) and the V'ger probe as standing in for humankind. This post will discuss how the relationship between Decker and the V'ger probe is parallel to God the Son and to an individual.

During this clip, Decker wanted to be with the V'ger probe who was once his love interest Ilia. The V'ger probe who is made in the likeness of Ilia, who now stands-in for V'ger, wants with all its being to be with Decker.

This whole relationship reminds me of what St. Paul said about the one-fleshness between man and woman in marriage. He said that the sacrament of marriage was mysteriously a direct parallel to the bond between Christ (Jesus) and the Church.

The question is, how does an individual become part of the Church to have this special relationship with Christ? The answer is baptism.

This Star Trek movie is a commentary on baptism!

The "meld" scene above sort-of shows how Christ and His disciple become a new creation through baptism.

Could it be that the Enterprise is the Holy Spirit that brings the Christ character (Decker) to V'ger? That may be too much. What do you think?

(My first post on Star Trek: The Motion Picture is here.)

Intergenerational Intimacy Abomination

At LSN, I commented the following in response to the article, "Meet the academics who are trying to redefine pedophilia as ‘intergenerational intimacy’".

This man/boy abomination ('intergenerational intimacy') is specifically condemned in 1 Corr. 6:9. The original Greek there in 1 Corr. is specific to this pagan Roman practice. There's no way that the self-identified homosexuals can get around this condemnation like they try to with same-sex "marriage".

During the homosexual Bible study that was sponsored by the Rainbow Alliance at my public university (view my reflection of the study here), we discussed the Bible verses in 1 Corinthians 6: 9-10.

Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.

These specific verses (and others; Romans 1 et al.) were used to say that same-sex "marriage" was not condemned by St. Paul. Despite the fact that the point about "marriage" may be true, sexual relations between men and boys are still condemned here.

I wonder if some Christian denominations (ecclesial communities) will have a vote to determine if "Intergenerational Intimacy" is allowed or should be celebrated, because you know, voting determines morality.

This activity may be in the next Gay Pride parade near you. May God have mercy on us all.

How Will Same-Sex "Marriage" Hurt Marriage?

How Will Same-Sex "Marriage" Hurt Marriage?

Besides the detriment to religious institutions and those with religious objections to those in same-sex "marriages" (and teaching it as a norm in public schools), what harm to "traditional" or "real" marriages will occur from codifying same-sex "marriage" into law?



Some resources:
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2009/06/259
http://www.marriagedebate.com/pdf/UST_fall2004.pdf
http://www.marriagedebate.com/ssm.php
http://www.firstthings.com/article/2009/07/what-marriage-is-and-what-it-isnt
(Will be available free in a few months after July 2009!)
http://www.iptv.org/video/browse.cfm/program/20022
http://www.creativeminorityreport.com/2008/11/priority-of-strengthening-families.html
http://merecomments.typepad.com/merecomments/2009/05/pseudogamy-101.html
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1908243,00.html
http://positivelywaiting.blogspot.com/2008/05/marriage-from-teens-point-of-view.html