An Inocuous Inoculation?

What do you do with a vaccine that was tested on “fewer than 1,200 girls under age 16”, and is potentially responsible for as many as 9,749 adverse reactions (in all age groups), including 20 deaths? If you’re the state of Virginia you make it mandatory that all 11- and 12-year-old girls receive it by Oct 1 or face removal from school. (http://ncregister.com/site/article/15691 - subscription required)

Gardasil “fights two strains of HPV [Human Papillomavirus] believed to cause 70% of cervical cancers”. But among those who have reservations about how quickly the vaccine is being dispensed is Dr. Diane Harper, HPV specialist and Dartmouth Medical School professor—who also just happens to be one of the vaccine’s developers. Harper acknowledges that nobody knows whether there will be other adverse effects because “’the vaccine hasn’t been studied long enough. Nor do we know whether these adverse effects will happen more frequently if more than one vaccine — for example, Menactra [for meningitis] and Gardasil — are given at the same office visit.’”

Harper also raises two other issues:

“’The vaccine has been tested for only six years. So we don’t know if it will protect an 11- or 12-year-old from cancer 25 years down the road.’”

The myth of the vaccine’s ineffectiveness with regards to sexually active girls: “’The studies show girls will be just as protected [from cervical cancer] if they get the shots at age 15, 18, 22, or 26 — even if they’ve been exposed to HPV. There’s no reason to push this on 12-year-olds.’”

Questions have also been raised as to whether this vaccine is necessary at any age given the numbers associated with HPV and cervical cancer. Although 6.2 million Americans are infected annually by this sexually-transmitted disease, “90% of the infections clear up without treatment. A rare few go on to trigger cervical cancer.”

4,000 American women die each year from cervical cancer. By comparison, according to Wikipedia.com over 5,000 people died in 2007 from motorcycle accidents. This is not making light of cervical cancer; it is just putting the statistics into perspective. We are not seeing an epidemic that needs to be attacked immediately.

Finally, there is the question of parental rights. Many parents believe it is inappropriate to introduce their children to human sexuality at the age of 11 or 12, particularly if it is under the circumstances of explaining a vaccine that protects against a sexually-transmitted disease. To many this is the government overstepping its boundaries and co-opting the role of parents.

So who is behind this mad rush to inject our daughters with Gardasil?

There are numerous “progressive” groups obsessed with making our children sexually active at younger and younger ages. Chances are their political clout has helped pressure the government into forcing this onto the American public.

But the biggest culprit in this is probably Merck, the vaccine’s manufacturer, which stands to reap a financial harvest from the Virginia legislation alone. The cost of the vaccine is “$500 for a series of three shots”. Multiply $500 times the number of 11- and 12-year-old girls in the Virginia school system and you are talking about a dollar figure with many zeros at the end of it. And let’s face it: pharmaceutical companies spend huge amounts of money each year lobbying government officials.

Dr. Harper asks, “’Why the rush to get everybody vaccinated?’” A good rule to live by when searching for motivations: Follow the Money



Donald Tremblay

You Will Be Hated By All

American Catholics battle daily against cultural forces antagonistic to Christ and his Church. But our disagreements with liberal politicians, the media, and “progressive” educators are nothing compared to the persecution suffered by our Christian brethren in other parts of the world. Case in point: Yesterday in India , in retaliation for the assassination of the World Hindu Council leader by suspected Maoists, Hindu extremists “set an orphanage on fire in Khuntapali village in Barhgarh district, burning a Catholic nun to death, according to the All India Christian Council.” (http://www.crosswalk.com/news/religiontoday/11580889/)

Throughout the world each day Christians risk martyrdom by their very existence. The website www.christianpersecition.info provides links to articles from around the world detailing the mistreatment of Christ’s followers. Here are just a few of the headlines:


· American Pastor Disappears In Beijing After ProtestAdded: Aug 25th, 2008 8:53 AM
· Yemen Detains Nine Ex-Muslims For Converting To ChristianityAdded: Aug 25th, 2008 4:42 AM
· Pastor Attacked, Churches Burned in Wake of Swami's Murder in Orissa, IndiaAdded: Aug 25th, 2008 4:37 AM
· Six Missionaries and a Bible College Student Beaten in UttarakhandAdded: Aug 21st, 2008 3:13 AM
· Indonesia: Muslim Mob Storms Church, Calls for BanAdded: Aug 21st, 2008 3:11 AM
· China: Religious Freedoms Threatened as Olympics Draw to CloseAdded: Aug 21st, 2008 3:09 AM
· Malaysia: Court Denies Woman's Appeal to Leave IslamAdded: Aug 18th, 2008 3:42 AM
· Nigeria: Islamist Group Attacking Christians in Kwara StateAdded: Aug 18th, 2008 3:39 AM
· Student Attacked Over Gospel TractAdded: Aug 18th, 2008 3:37 AM

Truly, Christ had these people in mind when he warned, “You will be hated by all because of my name”. (Mark 9:13)

Let us take a moment today to pray for our Christian brothers and sisters who risk their lives daily when they worship the Lord—something that we too often take for granted.

Our prayers are desperately needed.


Donald Tremblay

Why?

Sometimes you have to wonder what people are thinking.
Yesterday, Father Antonio Rungi of the Italian diocese of Modragone announced that he would hold a beauty pageant for nuns next month. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/2615888/Beauty-pageant-for-Italian-nuns.html) Father Rungi expects about 1,000 nuns to compete for the title of “Miss Sister Italy” in a pageant that will be broadcast online. Why is he doing this? "’Nuns are above all women and beauty is a gift from God. . . . You really think all nuns are old, stunted and sad? This isn't the case any more, thanks to the arrival in our country of young and vital nuns,’ notably from Africa and Latin America , he added.” Sisters who would like to participate must answer profile forms and submit a photo. It is their option as to whether they’d like to compete wearing their habit or not.
One has to wonder whether Father Rungi has been over-indulging in the celebratory wine. Of what value could this spectacle possibly serve? The vanity of a beauty pageant is contrary to the selfless vows taken by nuns when they join a religious order. The self-sacrifice required to live this life is why many orders insist that their sisters wear the traditional habit. A habit submerges the ego and teaches an initiate that she is simply one member of a larger group whose single role is to serve Christ . . . even at the expense of her own desires.

What’s next? A swimsuit competition?


Donald Tremblay

Not Worth The Paper They Are Written On

Darwin, Marx, Lenin? Freud, Kinsley, Nietsche?

Who is the individual whose teachings/writings have most devastated civilization?

Benjamin Wiker has written 10 Books that Screwed Up the World: And 5 Others that Didn't Help to address this question. The Franciscan University of Steubenville philosophy professor tears into the above-mentioned historical figures and adds a few others as well. In his review on insidecatholic.com, columnist Logan Gage recommends that “whether you're looking for a quick course on the Great Books or to inoculate a child going off to college, this book is a must-read.” (http://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4333&Itemid=48)

According to Gage two primary criticisms are addressed by Wiker in the book: “Exposing our often blind worship of ‘Science’ and revealing the central mistake of the past several centuries of intellectual thought: the attempt to destroy and replace the West's traditional understanding of the human person and his place in the world.” Historically there have been many instances of blind worship of science, and one of the examples Wiker cites is the scientific community’s immediate and unquestioned acceptance of Margaret Mead’s biased anthropological account, Coming of Age in Samoa, which was later shown to be, in Gage’s words, “junk science”.

After emerging from the bloodiest century in human history, many historians, philosophers, and theologians attempted to explain the 20th century in the hopes of preventing a repeat. Pope John Paul II was among those who insisted that a faulty concept of the human person was a major cause in this unprecedented evil; in fact, the former pontiff argued that it was the cause of it. In Witness to Hope: The Biography of Pope John Paul II, author George Wiegel reports that “his [Pope John Paul II] fundamental conviction has remained constant: the horrors of late twentieth-century life, whether Nazi, communist, racist, nationalist, or utilitarian in expression, are the products of defective concepts of the human person.” (p. 8)

Wiker’s book sounds informative, and considering the number of zany philosophies Man has created since the dawn of civilization he deserves credit for finding a way to limit the damaging books to just ten.



Donald Tremblay

The New Atheism

Yesterday, the Union of Catholic Asian News posted an article about the Universal Solidarity Movement (USM). (http://www.ucanews.com/2008/08/20/mirror-room-helps-people-discover-divinity-within-themselves/) According to its website, the Indian spiritual group defines itself as a movement “based on the spiritual foundations of all the world religions,” and its vision statement “promotes a paradigm shift from a narrow understanding of religiosity to a broad and liberative spirituality.” (And no, I don’t know what that means.)

The UCAN article focused mainly on the movement’s Meditation Room, which has elicited surprise from many worshippers who enter it for the first time. The room is empty, except for a ceiling fan, an overhead light . . . and a full-length mirror. No crucifix or Marian statue. No menorahs or postings of the Ten Commandments. No prayer rugs or incense. Just a mirror. And above the mirror is a sign written in English and Sanskrit. The English says, “God Within”. The Sanskrit is “Aham brahmasmi,” translated as “I am God”.

That’s right. “I am God”.

According to USM’s founder, Varghese Alengaden, staring at ourselves in the mirror is an effective way to learn that we are “the image of God”. Sister C. Lissy says that after initially laughing while staring at her own reflection, she realized that “God is within me, not in a church. I also realized I was confronting myself and this helped me behave better with others." USM’s director says that after a week “people become aware of ‘a divine presence’ there, and this divinity is exuded by your reflection, which in a way is just another image of God’”.

Today’s New Age spiritualities are a form of inverted atheism. Whereas throughout history an atheist was defined as one who disbelieves in God’s existence; today’s inverted atheists believe it is “Man” who is God. Believing that God is nothing more than an infinite source of energy that we all possess is no different than denying the existence of the one true God. Any system that denies the “Creator-creature” distinction is atheistic. It is why Pope John Paul II was correct years ago when he referred to Buddhism as atheistic. Belief in God presupposes an acceptance of a “Supreme Being”.

New Agers believe in something . . . but it isn’t God.



Donald Tremblay

We are the Author of Our Sins

An adage that irks me is, “Hate the sin; Love the sinner”. The clear implication is that the sin is distinct from the sinner, which encourages people to “view the sinner as a victim of his sin, rather than the author of the sin he commits”. (“Hate the Sin but Love the Sinner': Not Scriptural, Not Catholic Doctrine” by Erven Park , New Oxford Review, June 2006) This is a dangerous concept with eternal repercussions.

Separating the sin from the sinner implies that the offender is not damaged by his wrongful action. For ex., the man who slanders another needs to worry only about how the victim is hurt by his act—as if he himself is not adversely affected by it.

Quite the contrary, it is only by recognizing the sinner as the source of his sin that we can understand Canon Ripley’s warning that “sin is disastrous for both the soul and the body.” (This is the Faith, p 57) And as the catechism explains it, sin is like a snowball rolling down a hill, gathering speed and size as it travels:

“Sin creates a proclivity to sin; it engenders vice by repetition of the same acts. This results in perverse inclinations which cloud conscience and corrupt the concrete judgment of good and evil. Thus sin tends to reproduce itself and reinforce itself, but it cannot destroy the moral sense at its root.” (The Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1865)

Only through penance (reconciliation) can the marred soul be healed. “Those who approach the sacrament of Penance obtain pardon from God's mercy for the offense committed against him, and are, at the same time, reconciled with the Church which they have wounded by their sins and which by charity, by example, and by prayer labors for their conversion." (Catechism, 1422)

How can we ask for pardon if we don’t recognize ourselves as authors of our sin?

The biblical account of the stoning of an adulterer offers testimony to the importance of recognizing sinners as the source of their sin. An angry mob is on the verge of stoning an adulterer when Christ instructs, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.” (John 8:7) Shamed, the angry mob disperses. Christ informs the woman that since nobody remains to condemn her, then neither will he. But he adds these departing words:

“Go, and now sin no more.” (John 8:11)

Christ’s warning is clear. He is telling the woman, “You may go, but do not assume that my words to the crowd were approval of your actions. You have sinned and are responsible for it. Do not offend my Father again.”

If hating the sin were enough, there would have been no need for this final warning.

Donald Tremblay

The 21st Century Televangelist

The National Post, a Canadian newspaper, asks whether Oprah Winfrey is a talk-show host or a spiritual guru. (http://www.nationalpost.com/arts/story.html?id=729239) I’ve always considered Oprah to be more misguided than manipulative. She is the poster girl for today’s feel good, “it’s all about me” spirituality. The adage that seems to best apply to her New Age philosophies is, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” But after reading the above article, I am reconsidering my assessment of her as genuine.

Just what exactly is motivating Oprah? Is it simply an “enlightened” desire to see people happy and “fulfilled”? Not quite, according to Kathryn Lofton, assistant professor of religious studies at Yale University . The academic says to look no further than Oprah’s commercial empire for the real inspiration: “"Her imperative is not to save souls. Her imperative is to give you a line that makes you want to return and consume the product."

That’s awfully cynical, Prof Lofton. Are you saying that behind the spiritual guru is nothing more than an opportunistic entrepreneur? How about the Katrina rebuilding and the Angel network? “"I think there is a sincere desire to give back - and you can see it on the documentaries that you can buy on the website for $29.95."

Ouch.

Jokes aside Lofton makes a good argument. Oprah’s rallying cry does seem to focus around, as Lofton phrases it, “’Buy this product, and I'll change your life.'” Chicago actress Robyn Okrant can offer one example as to how her life has changed. Okrant started a blog, “LivingOprah.com, recording her year-long efforts to live as Oprah would have her live. She watches the program, tracks what products Oprah says she ‘must’ buy, she reads the magazines, makes the recipes, buys the Favorite Things.” Okrant reports that she has spent nearly $2,000 and was forced to move into a smaller apartment after her rent was increased. (It was either move or abandon the Oprah project.)

Perhaps Oprah is the 21st century televangelist. The 20th century televangelist was a smarmy Southern man who promised that if you gave him money he would heal you and bring God’s grace down upon you. Maybe the 21st century televangelist is an intelligent, wealthy woman from a major metropolitan city who will teach you the secrets of your divinity and how to empower yourself . . . if you send her your money.


Donald Tremblay

The Wrong One

“And now I am not in the world, and these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep them in thy name whom thou has given me; that they may be one, as we also are.” (John 17:11)

What if the Church itself is a big reason why Christ’s followers are not “One”?

The schism in the Anglican Church has raised the possibility of a mass conversion to Roman Catholicism. However, experts in greater numbers are openly questioning whether certain elements in the Roman Church will try and prevent this unity. Syndicated columnist Rod Dreher points this out in his Beliefnet.com column, “Ex-Anglicans: The Wrong Kind of Catholics?” (http://blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2008/08/exanglicans-the-wrong-kind-of.html) The traditional, conservative bloc of the Anglican Church is in revolt over the American Anglican Church’s decision to ordinate homosexuals and women as bishops. Serious discussions are ongoing about this disaffected group uniting with Rome in some capacity. More priests, more Catholics, and more supporters for the Vatican . Why would anyone in the Roman Church object? “Some Catholic clergy don't want those traddie Episcopalians, presumably because they would be a force for Catholic orthodoxy.”

Bingo.

Dreher hits it on the head. The Roman Church, particularly the American branch, contains a strong liberal contingent among its clergy. The shift toward tradition already underway thanks to Pope Benedict is already marginalizing these liberal factions. What could be worse for their careers than an influx of religious conservatives who will diminish their influence even further?

Dreher relates a story “about a former Episcopal bishop of Fort Worth who wanted to convert to Rome but was sabotaged by Catholic clergy”. It’s worth reading.



Donald Tremblay

Downloading the Adversary

Anyone who grew-up during the 1980s crack epidemic knows that Satan exists. I was raised in a NYC neighborhood that lies on the border of Brooklyn and Queens . As a teenager I remember the horror and sadness I felt watching guys from the neighborhood become shells of themselves under the influence of drugs like crack cocaine, cocaine, angel dust, etc . . . People remember crack cocaine most because of the violent crimes people committed while under its influence, but the other drugs were just as bad in their own ways. It’s a heartbreaking sight watching a 20-year-old man obliviously staring off into space because his brains had been fried from too many hits of angel dust and acid. Heroin is another wonderful drug. A friend of mine who graduated third in his high school was living in an abandoned building within a few years of graduation. Daily he could be seen hurriedly pacing the streets wearing his NY Rangers hockey jersey begging for money. It might be 90-degrees and humid, but he was still wearing that jersey.

Whatever the drug, the proof of its evil was in the eyes of the user. The haunting look branded an impression into your mind. Instantly, you recognized that there was nothing this person wouldn’t do to get his next fix.

I raise this issue today because of an ABCnews.com article that appeared over the weekend entitled, “Web Delivers New Worry for Parents: Digital Drugs”. (http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=5547519&page=1) According to the article, “websites are targeting your children with so-called digital drugs. These are audio files designed to induce drug-like effects. All your child needs is a music player and headphones.” I confess that I had never heard of digital drugs until I read this article. Apparently, they are based on something called binaural beats, which are “ambient sounds designed to affect your brain waves.”
The writer of the ABCnews.com article says she found sites on the web that “sell audio files (‘doses’) that supposedly mimic the effects of alcohol and marijuana. But it doesn't end there. You'll find doses that purportedly mimic the effects of LSD, crack, heroin and other hard drugs. There are also doses of a sexual nature. I even found ones that supposedly simulate heaven and hell.”

How appropriate that something which mimics drug use can simulate hell.

St. Paul warns us that “our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.” (Ephesians 6:12). Do not doubt for a moment that it is through mechanisms such as drugs, real and digital, that the Evil One attempts to destroy our young people. Protect your children by staying involved. Know the music they listen to, the friends they spend time with, and the websites they log onto. Don’t wait until that haunting look appears before you start asking questions.

Donald Tremblay

Freedom...Even to be a Disgrace

A few weeks ago a depraved man used his internet web show to desecrate the Eucharist. Determined to flaunt his contempt for religion, University of Minnesota biology professor Paul Zachary Myers hammered a nail through the Eucharist and then threw it in the garbage. Many Catholics demanded that the university fire the self-proclaimed 'godless liberal'. (National Catholic Register, August 10, 2008) They argued that if he had used a swastika as the backdrop for his program or had walked around the set wearing a Klan hood, the university would have fired him instantly. And they are right. In today's politically correct climate certain groups are protected, while others can be denigrated without anyone raising an eyebrow. So I guess I am among those who want Myers fired, correct?

No.

I am incensed by what Myers did, but my reason for objecting to his dismissal has a lot to do with Matthew 5:25:

"Be at agreement with thy adversary betimes, whilst thou art in the way with him: lest perhaps the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison."

In this passage Jesus warns that we shouldn't assume that a third-party will side with us in our disagreements with others. We may confidently approach a judge believing that our case is guaranteed, only to walk away on the losing end of the judgment.

Our Lord’s instruction applies in this case. Sure what Myers did was offensive and his firing would elicit little sympathy from anyone. But if we as a society allow the “powers-that-be” to dismiss others because of their unpopular views, what is to stop others from applying that same litmus test against us when it is our views that are unpopular? And let's face it: the Church's views are hardly popular. As Jesus warns in Matthew, we may be the ones delivered to the judge and cast into prison. For example, a Myers dismissal would open the doors to many anti-Church groups who view the Church’s teachings as offensive, such as the homosexual lobby. What would prevent the homosexual lobby from demanding that the university dismiss Catholic professors because gays and lesbians find the Church’s views offensive?

A better approach than firing Myers would be to let the Law of Supply and Demand run its course. Catholics should widen the publicity net exposing Myers’ views and actions. As more people learn about his wickedness, fewer students will register for his courses and overall enrollment at the university may even suffer as parents opt to send their children elsewhere. Eventually, Myers will either realize that his own atheism doesn’t give him carte blanche to denigrate the faith of others, or he will be forced to slither away to his burrow, shamed into obscurity.


Donald Tremblay

Cohabitation vs. Marriage

We’ve all heard it before: “Marriage is just a piece of paper. We don’t need a piece of paper to prove our love.” Or, “We’ve lived together for x years. It’s like we’re married.”

Wrong. No, it’s not.

Cohabitation is not marriage. There is a huge difference. Anyone who has stood at the altar and pledged his/her vows under the eyes of God, family and friends, and the Church can tell you that it is a commitment like no other in life.

It’s understandable why young people today would wish cohabitation and marriage were the same. In today’s world the chances of a new marriage ending in divorce are better than the betting odds you’d get from a Vegas Sports Book. And the financial strain on married couples who divorce can leave people in debt for years to come. Plus, theoretically, it seems logical that if you live with someone to confirm compatibility there’s a better chance of your relationship surviving. Well, as with many things in life, theories that sound great on paper often don’t survive the reality test. The New Oxford Review’s website has re-posted an article they ran in Sep 2007 entitled, “Cohabitation: Ten Facts”. (http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=0907-schneider) It was written by Patrick Schneider II, M.D., M.P.H., who holds boards in family and geriatric medicine and who received a Masters in Public Health from Harvard University .

Here are some of the facts listed:

· One in ten [cohabitating couples] survives five or more years

· The rate of divorce among those who cohabit prior to marriage is nearly double (39 percent vs. 21 percent) that of couples who marry without prior cohabitation

· Cohabiting women often end up with the responsibilities of marriage -- particularly when it comes to caring for children -- without the legal protection (ibid.), while contributing more than 70 percent of the relationship's income

· A UCLA survey of 130 published studies found that marriages preceded by cohabitation were more prone to drug and alcohol problems

· Three-fourths of children involved in criminal activity were from cohabiting households


Marriage supporters are not surprised. There is a reason why the family, led by a married man and woman, has been the basic building block of every human society since the dawn of civilization. Why is marriage so much better than cohabitation, with or without the addition of children?

People cohabit because they fear commitment. Both sides enter the living arrangement with a (usually) unspoken agreement that they’ll “try it out”, and if it doesn’t work they’ll go their separate ways, no questions asked. The problem with this plan is that both partners live with one foot pointing to the exit. At the first sign of trouble their thought is, “How do I get out of this?” and not, “How do we get through this?”

Relationships do not work unless both parties are committed to one another. There will be many ups and downs in a relationship, and sometimes the downs can be very down. Standing on the altar and promising to remain “until death do us part” will be the single greatest commitment you will make in your life. I’ve heard cohabitants argue that they’ve bought a house together to show their commitment. It’s not the same thing. A house can be sold, proceeds split, with the partners going their separate ways as if the experience never happened. A “do-over” is not as easy when you’re married. Aside from the legal and financial ramifications of an ended marriage, there are emotional and spiritual ones as well. Even when there are legitimate reasons for a marriage to end, be it through infidelity or physical/mental abuse, both spouses will always remember that there was a time when, in front of God and their loved ones, they promised to stay united till death.

That’s an oath no individual can forget.

Donald Tremblay

False Saviors

In my junior year of high school I took a course in American History. Late in the semester our teacher discussed World War II and Nazi Germany. Many of the students sat dumbfounded as he explained how Germany fell under the spell of Adolf Hitler. We couldn’t understand how a nation could deify a man and follow him as if he were the return of Jesus Christ.

As I watch people embarrassingly fawn over Barack Obama I begin to understand how this can happen.

Do not misunderstand me. I am not suggesting Obama is another Hitler. I am merely commenting on the ridiculous Messiah-like attention many Americans are showering the presidential candidate with. Think I’m exaggerating?

The July 27 edition of the Sunday NY Daily News published a story about former Cincinnati Bengals linebacker Reggie Williams, who is trying to recover from multiple operations to replace his right knee. A photo of Williams walking in a leg brace accompanied the article. Written in marker across the straps of the brace is “Obama Heals”.

In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, Time Magazine’s Joe Klein jokingly explained what happened when two Obama supporters visited his house: “’When two activists rang my doorbell, I wondered whether they had taken Ecstasy. I was afraid that they might hug me.’"

· In a February 13, 2008 article entitled, “Obama-The Savior Superstar”, Le Monde journalist Corine Lesnes declared, “The United States is a country that prides itself on its insistence on the merits of individualism. Nothing is more embarrassing to this country than these great moments of collective obsession (shared, of course, with Super Bowl frenzy), where every critical faculty appears to have been abandoned in the service of a universal pursuit.

Mark Steyn, in his column for the blog Falling Panda, quotes Ezra Klein of The American Prospect: "Obama's finest speeches do not excite. They do not inform. They don't even really inspire. They elevate. They enmesh you in a grander moment, as if history has stopped flowing passively by, and, just for an instant, contracted around you, made you aware of its presence, and your role in it. He is not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of word over flesh, over color, over despair."


And let’s not forget Oprah Winfrey who at a December 2007 campaign rally in Iowa referred to Obama as “The One”.


There are many, many other examples. These are just a few.

I suppose this was inevitable given the secular society we’ve become. A secular society will yearn for secular heroes and saviors. For years many have compartmentalized God in their lives—that is those who haven’t outright rejected God as irrelevant or non-existent. We have figuratively pushed God from His throne and installed Man in His place. Whether it has been through worshipping New Age spiritualities that promise to unlock your inner god, or through embracing pseudo-psychologies that preach self-empowerment and self-actualization, our society’s self-worship has risen to levels never before seen in our nation’s history.

And now we have reached a new plateau: American citizens looking to a politician to lead them to the Promised Land.

Unbelievable.

How many times does history need to repeat itself before people realize that salvation is not of this world and that it will not be brought by any human other than he who was both God and man, our Lord Jesus Christ. Americans need to be reacquainted with John’s Gospel:

But Jesus did not trust himself unto them, for that he knew all men, and because he needed not that any should give testimony of man: for he knew what was in man. (John 2: 24-25)


Donald Tremblay

Time to Clean House

The current issue of the New Oxford Review examines Leon Podles latest book, Sacrilege: Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church. (http://www.newoxfordreview.org/reviews.jsp?did=0708-bower) Podles is also the author of The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity. Reviewer Paul Bower describes Sacrilege as “thoroughly researched and painstakingly detailed” and adds that it “inspires anger and disgust”. Among the more shocking allegations in the book is that there has been “networks of child-abusers in the priesthood, some of which spanned entire geographic regions and crossed several diocesan borders. The most notable of these were in New Mexico and Iowa .” According to Podles it is a desire for power, and not sexual gratification, that drives these abusers. They are classic narcissists in his view.

At 675 pgs Sacrilege should provide a wealth of information. I am eager to read the tome since Podles take on the sexual abuse crisis differs so widely from my own.

A Feb 2007 article in the National Catholic Register (http://ncregister.com/site/article/1876) states that “between 75% and 80% of the abuse involved adolescent male victims”. Some argue that the reason so many of the victims are males is because the abusers had greater access to boys than to girls. Possibly. But I tend to agree with the analysis of Dr. Paul McHugh, former psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital , who argues that “the abuse crisis wasn’t pedophilia but ‘homosexual predation on American Catholic youth.’” Why homosexual predation and not pedophilia? The overwhelming majority of the victims were adolescent males, not prepubescent children of both sexes. There is a major psychological difference between the two. Acknowledging this distinction is essential because only by properly defining a problem can you expect to solve it.

So what should the Church do to prevent this disgrace from happening again?

Pope Benedict’s apology on behalf of the Church and his willingness to confront the issue is an excellent first step. In addition, the standards spelled out in 2005 by the Congregation for Catholic Education are a very important step in preventing future abusers from entering the clergy:

“In light of this teaching, this department, in agreement with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, holds it necessary clearly to affirm that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, may not admit to the seminary and Holy Orders those who practice homosexuality, show profoundly deep-rooted homosexual tendencies, or support the so-called gay culture.” (http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=40891)

But the cleansing of the seminaries should not end here. The Church needs to purge the seminaries of those ecclesiastics who have allowed or encouraged the gay subculture to exist in seminaries. Numerous articles and books have been written about this subculture. Goodbye, Good Men by Michael Rose is probably the most recognizable. Among the sickening tidbits exposed by Rose are the nicknames given to some American seminaries: “Notre Flame” for the Notre Dame Seminary in New Orleans ; “Theological Closet” for Theological College at the Catholic University of America in Washington , D.C. ; and the “ Pink Palace ” for St. Mary's Seminary in Baltimore .

After classifying the church sexual abuse crisis as “homosexual predation on American Catholic youth,” Dr. McHugh added, “’I’m astonished that people throughout America are not talking about it, thinking about it, and wondering about what the mechanisms were that set this alight.’” We the laity need to assume this responsibility. Stiff resistance can be expected from entrenched ecclesiastics who favor the status quo, so we need to actively and zealously support the clergy who want to enforce these “changes”. In a society where Catholic doctrine and dogma is anathema, reform-minded clergy desperately need our reinforcements.

“Thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:18) Although we may take comfort in knowing that the Lord is protecting His Church, we cannot use this knowledge to absolve ourselves of responsibility. We are soldiers of Christ and we are called to defend His Church against the gates of hell.


Donald Tremblay

Click here to hear what the Pope is talking about

Who Are You?

A disturbing article has been posted on the Christian Newswire (http://christiannewswire.com/news/568387358.html) There is a group called the Concerned Roman Catholics of America, Inc (CRCOA) who are accusing the Knights of Columbus of failing to “to expel pro-abortion and pro-homosexual politicians” from their midst. Boston CRCOA member John O'Gorman accuses the Knights of Columbus of the following:

“On June 14, 2007, at least 16 members of the K of C in the legislature defeated the efforts of 170,000 signatories to put traditional marriage on the 2008 ballot. 170,000 signatures far exceeded the required number to place the question on the ballot! Seven of these K of C politicians have the highest ratings from the USA 's biggest abortionists, Planned Parenthood, who performed 289,000 abortions in 2006. On 4/May/08, Supreme Advocate (lawyer) Paul Devin, who gave money to Pro-Abortion politicians Ted and Joe Kennedy (OpenSecrets.org), ruled that a State Convention resolution by Grand Knight Joe Craven to suspend pro-abortion and pro-gay politicians was 'unconstitutional'."

This is a disgrace should any of it be true; though, I am hardly surprised by it. Groups like the Knights of Columbus may have been relevant in the 1950s and 1960s, but by the late 1970s and the 1980s they were virtually non-existent in many neighborhoods. The people of my generation probably knew more about Ralph Kramden’s raccoon lodge then we did about Catholic men’s clubs like the K of C. In fact, despite being a loyal Sunday churchgoer, I wasn’t even aware that the Knights of Columbus was a Catholic organization until I was in my late teens. What does that tell you about how it promotes itself as a Catholic organization?

Come to think of it I cannot remember a single time when the words “Knights of Columbus” were ever uttered by a priest before, during, or after Mass.


Donald Tremblay

Sin and Mental Illness

ABCNews.com has an article about a man who is obsessed with trains—so much so that he has been arrested over 20 times for various acts involving trains, none of which were intended to harm anyone. (http://abcnews.go.com/Health/AutismNews/story?id=5483969&page=1) On June 14 Darius McCollum was arrested for the 14th time in NYC for criminal trespassing in the subways. Since the age of four McCollum has been fixated on trains, says his mother: "He knew about tracks, and could tell you about yardage and everything. It's unbelievable. ... He knew that underground system better than he knew his name." McCollum has been diagnosed with Asperger syndrome, a condition that “’is a close cousin of autism,’ says Ami Klin, director of the Autism Program at the Yale Child Study Center at Yale University School of Medicine.” Klin adds that the “disorder makes it difficult for people to judge others' feelings, thoughts and intentions.” The question asked in the headline of the piece, “Can Stealing Buses, Trains be a Sickness?” is an appropriate one considering how today’s scientific advancements have blurred our ability to distinguish between sin and mental illness.

The word sin is judgmental and in today’s climate that label is akin to wearing the Scarlet Letter. But the truth is that sin is very real and it is important that we define it correctly. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says,

“Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.” (Catechism, 1860)

So how do we determine imputability? In the case of a kleptomaniac who feels an irresistible urge to steal a blouse from Walmart, the stakes aren’t high. However, there are instances when an individual’s soul hangs in the balance between eternal torment and eternal happiness. As an extreme example, take the cases of madmen like Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin. Most would consider these men psychotics or psychopaths. Would these men have done what they did if they’d had access to the psychiatric drugs available today? Or were these men simply evil and regardless of psychiatric assistance they would have still committed their crimes against God and humanity. Years ago I read a book by Ron Rosenbaum, Explaining Hitler, in which various historians and journalists tried to explain why Hitler became the man he did. The problem many of these intellectuals found is that it is almost impossible to explain Hitler without in some way excusing Hitler. As Emil Fackenheim says, “There will never be an adequate explanation . . . The closer one gets to explicability the more one realizes nothing can make Hitler explicable.” (Explaining Hitler: The Search for the Origins of his Evil - Random House, 1998, pg vii)

I don’t know how to determine imputability. Nevertheless, I do believe that finding the solution is probably the greatest ethical and moral challenge of our time because without it we are left morally adrift, as can be seen today by the virtual absence of all-too-real concepts like sin and evil. How can we expect people to walk the straight and narrow path if we can’t even locate the path?


Donald Tremblay