SAINT MARY OF THE CROSS
A concert by Lebanese band Mashrou’ Leila, scheduled for 29 April in Amman, Jordan, has been called off by Jordanian authorities.
Government spokespersons have explained that the performance “would have been at odds with the ‘authenticity’ of the site…”
This in the context of the band being famously promoters of homosexual lifestyles….
The performers have asked the Kingdom of Jordan to “reconsider its stance towards our message, and our art…to choose fighting alongside us, not against us, during this ongoing battle for a culture of freedom….”
People who do homosexual acts merit respect as persons — but are they not typically enslaved by habits arguably harmful at the personal level and also anti-social?
To use pop-music appearances to groom vulnerable audience-members into considering adopting similar lifestyles — that is something any government might reasonably try to prevent.
A new study by University of South Australia’s Centre for Population Health Research says one-fifth of Australian children are at serious risk of adult mental illness.
One factor identified being that one in three pre-teen children experience “low warmth” parenting.
“Warmth” as in, for example, a parent hugging their child for no reason.
Spokeswoman Professor Leonie Segal says, “We’re saying a lot of these things are inter-generational and if we don’t put the resources in the right places they won’t go away.”
And she says we need “earlier and more intensive intervention programs”.
Ouch. That sounds like more social workers.
Perhaps all this isn’t as complicated as the academics make out.
A couple of simple thoughts:
You can’t be warm to your child if you aren’t there.
You can’t even hug them if you aren’t there.
Step one in making children’s lives better has got to be a move towards more mothers staying at home with their children
And closing down more child care centres.
You can’t help liking her:
“I declare before you all that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong . . . God help me to make good my vow, and God bless all of you who are willing to share in it.”
(on her 21st birthday)
“It has always been easy to hate and destroy. To build and to cherish is much more difficult . . . today we need a special kind of courage. Not the kind needed in battle, but a kind which makes us stand up for everything that we know is right, everything that is true and honest . . . so that we can show the world that we are not afraid of the future.”
“For me the teachings of Christ and my own personal accountability before God provide a framework in which I try to lead my life.”
“God sent into the world a unique person . . . a Saviour, with the power to forgive. Forgiveness lies at the heart of the Christian faith. It can heal broken families, it can restore friendships and it can reconcile divided communities. It is in forgiveness that we feel the power of God’s love.”
“Nothing that can be said can begin to take away the anguish and the pain of these moments. Grief is the price we pay for love.”
(to the people of the USA on 22 September 2001)
And, last but not least:
“Football’s a difficult business and aren’t they prima donnas?”
(BBC News, 2007)
THEY WANT YOU TO ACCEPT THE NOTION OF EUTHANASIA AS BEING “MERCIFUL” AND A “RIGHT”: think about it. resist emotivist rhetoric.
In 50 years of practising medicine, including in the third world, often with no palliative care practitioner or any other doctor available to discuss near-death care, I only ever had one serious request for euthanasia.
This patient did, in fact, find another doctor to consult. I never heard the outcome.
I think Australia’s media cover the euthanasia issue badly.
They imply that without legal euthanasia, patients will be left in artificially-prolonged suffering when already irretrievably in the process of dying.
This falsifies what opponents of euthanasia are saying.
I think the truth is best summed this way:
“An act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his Creator….
“Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of ‘over-zealous’ treatment. Here one does not will death; one’s inability to impede it is merely accepted….”
(quote from Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2277-2278)
Filipino boxer and MP, Manny Pacquiao, got in trouble with the media recently for mentioning that homosexuals, in view of the acts they typically perform, could be described as “worse than animals”.
He later apologised for upsetting people.
But he didn’t exactly apologise for the content of what he had said:
“The problem is they cut my interview . . . the interview is about 5-10 minutes, but they cut it short.
“I explained it properly, that who am I to condemn or discriminate against other people? I’m also human, I’m also a sinner, so who am I to condemn other people?
“But what I’m telling is the truth, and what I am condemning is the act, that’s what I am explaining, the act.”
If the Pope is to lead the Church aright, he must judge people’s wrong lifestyles.
He must tell them that God hates what they do.
He must also find ways to reassure them that God loves them more than they can imagine, and that their sins are forgivable.
POPE FRANCIS’S NEW STATEMENT ABOUT FAMILY LOVE: does “amoris laetitiae” make Catholic teaching clearer?
The Pope’s recent “exhortation” on family issues is long – nine chapters, broken down into 325 paragraphs and covering 256 pages.
A lot of it is good thoughts emphasising that we should love each other, especially family members.
He reaches the key contentious issue — whether people living in adulterous relationships, having been divorced and later re-married, should receive Holy Communion – in chapter eight, paragraphs 299-304.
Paragraph 299 says such people “need to be more fully integrated into Christian communities . . . Their participation can be expressed in different ecclesial services . . . Such persons need to feel, not as excommunicated members of the Church, but instead as living members . . . .”
Is not-feeling-excommunicated the same as not-excluded-from-receiving Communion?
He doesn’t quite say. It all seems a bit ambiguous. You could take it either way.
Paragraph 304 goes on to be even more ambiguous: “It is true that general rules set forth a good which can never be disregarded or neglected, but in their formulation they cannot provide absolutely for all particular situations. At the same time, it must be said that, precisely for that reason, what is part of a practical discernment in particular circumstances cannot be elevated to the level of a rule.”
It seems like stating a rule and providing a loophole to justify ignoring the rule all in one breath.
A loophole through which one could drive a Mack truck.