Archive for May, 2010

American interest online has an interesting article about the splits that continue in the Episcopal Church:

People like me will be in a tough spot. I think Bishop Glasspool’s election and consecration were ill-advised, but that is by no means the same thing as denying the possibility that in due time and with due order and deliberation, such a step could be taken without harm to Christian faith and morals.

They are talking about the second openly gay (in this case lesbian) bishop. He then compares this to an earlier time:

And those who criticize this step most bitterly need to reflect that earlier steps to desegregate Episcopal churches and ordain African Americans were once bitterly fought as well.

I don’t claim to be a biblical expert, but I can’t seem to find anything in the bible that forbids black people from being ordained. If anyone can show it to be I’d be rather surprised, however there does seem to be something specific about homosexuality even Mr Mead concedes the point.

It’s also impossible to avoid the reflection that the Episcopal church is unilaterally imposing its own vision of the church on a worldwide communion. Whatever one thinks of the matter on a personal basis, the New Testament as well as the Old specifically condemns homosexual behavior as contrary to the will of God…These are not easy questions and a person doesn’t need to be a homophobe or unthinking fundamentalist to continue to accept traditional Christian teaching on this subject.

Most generous of you. This is a great example of the sin of pride and this type of thing isn’t just a protestant issue:

Now is a time to challenge the bishops head on. The definition of Catholicism — of what it means to be Catholic — is what is at stake. Now is a time of upheaval. Dare I say war?

Oh how about that, war against the church, that sounds very faithful:

The Church needs to change. If it is to change it is going to change now. And it will change only with direct challenges to authority from within its fold, not from without.

We as Catholics must be prepared to lose everything — even risk excommunication — in order to gain back our moral authority. As my Italian-born Catholic grandfather used to say, “You can’t excommunicate me. I excommunicate you.”

That my dear friends is the sin of pride, Thomas Peters takes on some of this nonsense

Buddy, just where are you getting your facts? Is it the seminaries with record numbers of young Catholic men ready to embrace a life of celibacy for the sake of the Church? Is it the flourishing proudly-Catholic colleges like Steubenville, Christendom, and a dozen more? Is it the tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of young, brave Catholics who proudly live their faith despite all the cultural forces being against it?

How’s that “inspid and weak” Cafeteria Catholicisim working out for you? After all, people with far more ability to threaten the Church have predicted its demise before, and they have all been wrong as yes, you are now mistaken.

Let’s get down to business this is the basics of Christianity:

He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. Matthew 16:15-17

This sentence is the basis for all of Christianity. The divinity of Christ. Any denomination or church that doesn’t emphasize this as a blunt fact is unlikely to sustain itself. Lets continue the passage:

And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Matt 16:18-19

Well that seems pretty direct too in terms of authority doesn’t it, but hold on a second some might suggest this doesn’t apply to those pope’s who followed Peter, lets take a peek at another passage:

And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.” Thomas, called Didymus, one of the Twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. John 20:22-24

Now does anyone dispute Thomas’ position among the apostles? Does anyone deny his apostolic authority? Apparently Mr. Rotondaro, his allies in the dissenting group Catholics in alliance for the common group would and perhaps Mr. Mead would too.

The reason why the church is not a democracy is that people given the chance to define sin, will always define it to excuse their own actions or desires. That’s where the Anglican communion came from in the first place. Anglicans aren’t coming over to Rome because of the arguments of our liberal friends.

I’ve been mentioning how Morning Joe and Politico et/al seemed to have suddenly discovered Pa-12 when the polls were trending in their direction:

the plan apparently is to set the race now that the polls favor the dems as a possible or probable loss, so if they win, it becomes a HUGE win for democrats and if they lose, well it was a tight race in a conservative district. This is spin.

This weekend I touched on SEIU money and Mark Critz having to worry about Scott Brown being in the house, but I hit the sack without seeing Brinkley’s Robert Stacy’s latest post reporting on the latest poll, quite a difference:

The special election to replace John Murtha looks to be headed for a photo finish, with Republican Tim Burns leading Democrat Mark Critz 48-47 in PPP’s final poll of the race.

And Stacy had this to say about the numbers:

Sestak’s surge in the Senate race is the probably the only reason Critz isn’t trailing significantly in PA-12. In early April, a Quinnipiac poll showed Specter leading by 21 points and Sestak trailed in every poll through the end of April. Five of the six most recent polls, however, show Sestak leading, so Democrats have a lot more incentive to turn out.

With the latest poll showing a 1 pt difference with only a day left we would expect Morning Joe to mention the race again…

…you would be wrong. They talked about PA all right but only about the Senate race, they discussed it in each segment and even brought in Gov Rendell who talked up Arlen Specter. Not a single word about Pa-12, and Rush would say, zip zero nada.

It couldn’t be that seeing the new poll they decided to focus on the Senate race to bump up democratic turnout in the district could it?

I have several friends who might be considered more conservative than me, who have been telling me for a couple of years that basically this administration is being run by Marxists. I have resisted that suggestion for a long time. Then Powerline posted this:

ASSISTANT SECRETARY POSNER: Sure. You know, I think – again, this goes back to Ambassador Huntsman’s comment. Part of a mature relationship is that you have an open discussion where you not only raise the other guy’s problems, but you raise your own, and you have a discussion about it. We did plenty of that. We had experts from the U.S. side, for example, yesterday, talking about treatment of Muslim Americans in an immigration context. We had a discussion of racial discrimination. We had a back-and-forth about how each of our societies are dealing with those sorts of questions. …

QUESTION: Did the recently passed Arizona immigration law come up? And, if so, did they bring it up or did you bring it up?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY POSNER: We brought it up early and often. It was mentioned in the first session, and as a troubling trend in our society and an indication that we have to deal with issues of discrimination or potential discrimination, and that these are issues very much being debated in our own society.

Powerline comments:

What an idiot! China murdered millions of its citizens who opposed the government’s Communist policies and allows most of its people little or no freedom. We, on the other hand, enforce our immigration laws. No, wait–actually we don’t. That’s why Arizona had to take a shot at it. Oh, by the way, Michael Posner, you clueless moron–China actually does enforce its immigration laws.

I looked at the organized adulation of a “dear leader” but wasn’t willing to call it marxism, just people excited and gone a bit overboard.

I agreed that the health care bill was socialism gone amok but wasn’t willing to call it marxism

I looked at the some of the appointments and figured hey you are just dealing with low level guys from academia.

I looked at the undermining of Israel and figured it wasn’t Marxism, just simple antisemitism, and those are two different things.

Then came the Arizona law and I figured it was just pandering to their radical base domesticity.

Eventually you have to go where the data takes you. I think i’ll give the last word to Jay Nordlinger:

I hope I have read that incorrectly, or am interpreting it incorrectly. Did we, the United States, talking to a government that maintains a gulag, that denies people their basic rights, that in all probability harvests organs, apologize for the new immigration law in Arizona? Really, really?…Do you ever get the idea that our government is a bunch of left-wing undergraduates come to power?

As my friends have said: “If you start from the idea they are all Marxists it makes perfect sense.”

To my friends that I’ve argued the point with in the past: Point conceded.

Update: Apparently this doesn’t just apply to the administration.

…is what they are saying on Morning Joe. Yet the AG who came out against it hasn’t even read the law. The question is this:

How many people at the table, Hass, Halperin et/al have actually read the Arizona law?

I’ve got 2 1/4 hours, I’ll wait.

Update: Guess not