WHO IS SPINNING IN HIS GRAVE: SAINT JOHN FISHER, CARDINAL NEWMAN AND SAINT THOMAS MORE

*************

Muslim prayer rooms should be opened in every Roman Catholic school, church leaders have said.

The Catholic bishops of England and Wales also want facilities in schools for Islamic pre-prayer washing rituals.

The demands go way beyond legal requirements on catering for religious minorities.

But the bishops - who acknowledge 30 per cent of pupils at their schools hold a non-Christian faith - want to answer critics who say religious schools sow division.

Bishops want prayer rooms opened in every Roman Catholic school (file photo)

The recommendations were made in a document, Catholic Schools, Children of Other Faiths and Community Cohesion.

'If practicable, a room (or rooms) might be made available for the use of pupils and staff from other faiths for prayer,' the bishops said.

'Existing toilet facilities might be adapted to accommodate individual ritual cleansing which is sometimes part of religious lifestyle and worship.

'If such space is not available on a permanent or regular basis, extra efforts might be made to address such need for major religious festivals.'

The Islamic cleansing ritual, called 'Wudhu', is carried out by Muslims before they pray.

Islam teaches that Muslims are unfit for prayer if they have not performed Wudhu after breaking wind or using the toilet.

Wudhu involves washing the face, hands, arms and feet three times each, gargling the mouth three times and washing the neck and inside the nose and ears. Some Muslims also wash their private parts.

Catholic schools would need to install bidets, foot spas and hoses to facilitate such extensive cleansing rituals, Muslims say.

Daphne McLeod, a former Catholic head teacher from south London, said it would be 'terribly expensive' for the country's 2,300 Catholic primary and secondary schools to provide ritual cleansing facilities.

She said: 'If Muslim parents choose a Catholic school then they accept that it is going to be a Catholic school and there will not be facilities for ritual cleansing and prayer rooms.

'They do their ritual cleansing before they go to a mosque, but they are not going to a mosque.

'I don't think the bishops should go looking for problems. Where will it stop?'

But Majid Khatme, a Muslim who sent his children to a London Catholic school, said he was delighted by the gesture.

'It is very kind of the bishops if they give this facility for Muslims to pray,' he said.

'I would love to send a letter of thanks to the bishops, really. If they do this all Muslims in Britain will be thankful to the Catholic Church to have facilities to pray. It is very, very encouraging.'

The recommendations have been approved by Vincent Nichols, Archbishop of Birmingham and the favourite to succeed Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor as Catholic primate.

But it would be up to governing bodies of each school to decide whether to act on the guidance.

Muslim prayer rooms should be opened in Catholic schools, say church leaders

By Simon Caldwell
02 December 2008

ABORTION CAN LEAD TO MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS FOR WOMEN

*****************
Abortion and life issues in general were one of the hot topics in the recent elections in the United States. If the latest news is any indication the topic will continue to be at the forefront of attention.

According to a study published in the December issue of the British Journal of Psychiatry, women who have an abortion have a higher risk of developing mental health problems.

On Nov. 30, Medical News Today published a summary of the study, carried out by researchers from the University of Otago, New Zealand. The study was based on research with a group of over 500 women born in the city of Christchurch, located in the south island of the country.

The women were interviewed six times between the ages of 15 and 30. In addition to questions about any pregnancies and abortions they were also given a mental health assessment each time.

Out of the group there was a total of 686 pregnancies, to 284 women, before they reached 30 years of age. Out of this total there were 153 abortions, involving 117 women.

The researchers found that the women who had abortions suffered rates of mental health problems that were about 30% higher than other women.

Nevertheless, the study concluded that the effects of abortion were only responsible for a moderate effect on the mental health of women. According to the researchers the study did not support a conclusion that abortion has a “devastating” effect on women’s mental health, but it did clearly reject the pro-abortion position that abortion is without any adverse effects.

“Abortion is likely to be a stressful and traumatic life event which places those exposed to it at a modestly increased risk of a range of common mental health problems,” the authors concluded.

Conflicting studies

The issue of abortion and mental health is one that has been at the center of debate for some time. Earlier this year the American Psychological Association (APA) declared that it found no credible evidence that abortion causes mental health problems, reported the London-based Telegraph newspaper Aug. 18.

Brenda Major, chairman of the APA's task force on the issue, did acknowledge, however that the evidence of mental health risks associated with women who have multiple abortions is more uncertain.

According to the Telegraph the task force did find that some studies found women who have abortions experience feelings of sadness, grief and loss, and some may even suffer depression. At the same time they said there was no evidence that this was caused by the abortion in itself.

The conclusions of the American Psychological Association did not go unchallenged. The conclusions of the task force did not follow from the literature reviewed, declared the Family Research Council (FRC), in a press release dated Aug. 14.

"Other experts have noted that the selection criteria for including studies in the review was enormously biased, and that the report did not quantify the numbers of women likely to be affected by abortion,” commented FRC president, Tony Perkins.

“Consensus exists among many social and medical science scholars that a minimum of 10% - 30% of women who abort suffer from serious, prolonged, negative psychological consequences,” he said.

Psychologist Vincent Rue also disagreed with the American Psychological Association, according to a Sept. 9 report published by LifeNews.com.

Rue said that the APA position is at odds with a statement by the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Britain released earlier this year. The British group warned that the issue "remains to be fully resolved," that additional study was needed and that women should have access to counseling about possible consequences.

Rue also made reference to an Aug. 23 article in the British medical journal the Lancet, which cautioned that, despite the APA pronouncements of abortion being psychologically safe for women, there are risks involved.

Not trivial

The Lancet, Rue explained, said that while there is no causal link between abortion and mental ill-health, the fact is that some women do experience psychological problems after an abortion and this problem should not be trivialized.

The declaration by the Royal College of Psychiatrists referred to by Rue was even more explicit about the risks of abortion. According to an article published March 16 by the London-based Times newspaper, women may be at risk of mental health breakdowns if they have abortions.

The Royal College of Psychiatrists recommended updating abortion information leaflets to include details of the risks of depression. “Consent cannot be informed without the provision of adequate and appropriate information,” it said.

It’s not only women who can suffer following an abortion. At the beginning of the year a conference of pro-life activists in San Francisco heard about the effects of abortion on men, reported the Los Angeles Times on Jan. 7.

The most striking session, the article said, featured the testimony of men whose partners aborted. Jason Baier told the crowd he suffered years of depression and addiction. "I couldn't get the thought out of my head about what I had lost."

"The lived truth of peoples' experience is very hard to dismiss," said Vicki Thorn, who runs post-abortion counseling programs for the Catholic Church. "It's time we ... affirm the pain that fathers feel," she said, according to the Los Angeles Times.

Side effect myths

Depression isn’t the only controversial issue regarding the side effects of abortion. Anti-life pressure groups often argue in favor of allowing abortion in order to prevent women from the risk of dying as a result of illegal abortions.

This is a false myth according to Father Thomas J. Euteneuer. In an article he published June 6 by LifeNews.com, he recounted the experience of Nicaragua, where abortion was made illegal in 2006.

At the time pro-abortion activists argued this would mean more women dying due to back-street abortions, but in fact data from Nicaragua’s Ministry of Health show a decline in maternal mortality.

In 2007 there were just 21 maternal deaths, compared to 50 maternal deaths the year before.

Father Euteneuer explained that along with prohibiting abortion authorities increased prenatal services for pregnant women, along with greater medical attention during childbirth.

Wounded

Benedict XVI addressed the topic of abortion when on May 12 he spoke to members of Italy’s pro-life movement. The three decades of legalized abortion in Italy has led to a decrease in respect for the human person, he declared.

The Pontiff acknowledged that there are many complex causes that can lead to the painful decision of proceeding with an abortion. At the same time, he continued, the Church continues to proclaim that every human life is sacred.

Allowing abortion has not solved the problems women face, the Pope argued, instead it has only added another wound to an already suffering society.

Benedict XVI called for increased support of mothers and families, along with continued efforts to defend human life.

“For Christians, in this fundamental context of society, an urgent and indispensable field for the apostolate and for Gospel witness is always open: to protect life with courage and love in all its stages,” he stated.

Every person is known, loved, and wanted by God, the Pope noted.

“Whoever profanes man, profanes the property of God,” he added. A sobering thought indeed, given the millions of abortions that have taken place in recent years.

Abortion's AftermathDangerous Side Effects Amid a Heated Debate

By Father John Flynn, LC

ROME, DEC. 7, 2008 (Zenit.org).-

MUMBAI GUNMEN WERE JUST KIDS MISBEHAVING

*******************

Shortly after the London Tube bombings in 2005, a reader of Tim Blair, The Sydney Daily Telegraph's columnist wag, sent him a note-perfect parody of a typical newspaper headline:

"British Muslims Fear Repercussions Over Tomorrow's Train Bombing."

Indeed. And so it goes. This time round – Mumbai – it was the Associated Press that filed a story about how Muslims "found themselves on the defensive once again about bloodshed linked to their religion".

Oh, I don't know about that. In fact, you'd be hard pressed from most news reports to figure out the bloodshed was "linked" to any religion, least of all one beginning with "I-" and ending in "-slam." In the three years since those British bombings, the media have more or less entirely abandoned the offending formulations – "Islamic terrorists," "Muslim extremists" – and by the time of the assault on Mumbai found it easier just to call the alleged perpetrators "militants" or "gunmen" or "teenage gunmen," as in the opening line of this report in The Australian: "An Adelaide woman in India for her wedding is lucky to be alive after teenage gunmen ran amok."

Kids today, eh? Always running amok in an aimless fashion.

The veteran British TV anchor Jon Snow, on the other hand, opted for the more cryptic locution "practitioners." "Practitioners" of what, exactly?

Hard to say. And getting harder. For the Wall Street Journal, Tom Gross produced a jaw-dropping round-up of Mumbai media coverage: The discovery that, for the first time in an Indian terrorist atrocity, Jews had been attacked, tortured and killed produced from the New York Times a serene befuddlement: "It is not known if the Jewish center was strategically chosen, or if it was an accidental hostage scene."

Hmm. Greater Mumbai forms one of the world's five biggest cities. It has a population of nearly 20 million. But only one Jewish center, located in a building that gives no external clue as to the bounty waiting therein. An "accidental hostage scene" that one of the "practitioners" just happened to stumble upon? "I must be the luckiest jihadist in town. What are the odds?"

Meanwhile, the New Age guru Deepak Chopra laid all the blame on American foreign policy for "going after the wrong people" and inflaming moderates, and "that inflammation then gets organized and appears as this disaster" in Mumbai.

Really? The inflammation just "appears"? Like a bad pimple? The "fairer" we get to the, ah, inflamed militant practitioners, the unfairer we get to everyone else. At the Chabad House, the murdered Jews were described in almost all the Western media as "ultra-Orthodox," "ultra-" in this instance being less a term of theological precision than a generalized code for "strange, weird people, nothing against them personally, but they probably shouldn't have been over there in the first place."

Are they stranger or weirder than their killers? Two "inflamed moderates" entered the Chabad House, shouted "Allahu Akbar!," tortured the Jews and murdered them, including the young rabbi's pregnant wife. Their 2-year-old child escaped because of a quick-witted (non-Jewish) nanny who hid in a closet and then, risking being mowed down by machine-gun fire, ran with him to safety.

The Times was being silly in suggesting this was just an "accidental" hostage opportunity – and not just because, when Muslim terrorists capture Jews, it's not a hostage situation, it's a mass murder-in-waiting. The sole surviving "militant" revealed that the Jewish center had been targeted a year in advance. The 28-year-old rabbi was Gavriel Holtzberg. His pregnant wife was Rivka Holtzberg. Their orphaned son is Moshe Holtzberg, and his brave nanny is Sandra Samuels. Remember their names, not because they're any more important than the Indians, Britons and Americans targeted in the attack, but because they are an especially revealing glimpse into the pathologies of the perpetrators.

In a well-planned attack on iconic Mumbai landmarks symbolizing great power and wealth, the "militants" nevertheless found time to divert 20 percent of their manpower to torturing and killing a handful of obscure Jews helping the city's poor in a nondescript building. If they were just "teenage gunmen" or "militants" in the cause of Kashmir, engaged in a more or less conventional territorial dispute with India, why kill the only rabbi in Mumbai? Dennis Prager got to the absurdity of it when he invited his readers to imagine Basque separatists attacking Madrid: "Would the terrorists take time out to murder all those in the Madrid Chabad House? The idea is ludicrous."

And yet we take it for granted that Pakistani "militants" in a long-running border dispute with India would take time out of their hectic schedule to kill Jews. In going to ever more baroque lengths to avoid saying "Islamic" or "Muslim" or "terrorist," we have somehow managed to internalize the pathologies of these men.

We are enjoined to be "understanding," and we're doing our best. A Minnesotan suicide bomber (now there's a phrase) originally from Somalia returned to the old country and blew up himself and 29 other people last October. His family prevailed upon your government to have his parts (or as many of them as could be sifted from the debris) returned to the United States at taxpayer expense and buried in Burnsville Cemetery. Well, hey, in the current climate, what's the big deal about a federal bailout of jihad operational expenses? If that's not "too big to fail," what is?

Last week, a Canadian critic reprimanded me for failing to understand that Muslims feel "vulnerable." Au contraire, they project tremendous cultural confidence, as well they might: They're the world's fastest-growing population. A prominent British Muslim announced the other day that, when the United Kingdom becomes a Muslim state, non-Muslims will be required to wear insignia identifying them as infidels. If he's feeling "vulnerable," he's doing a terrific job of covering it up.

We are told that the "vast majority" of the 1.6 billion to 1.8 billion Muslims (in Deepak Chopra's estimate) are "moderate." Maybe so, but they're also quiet. And, as the AIDS activists used to say, "Silence=Acceptance." It equals acceptance of the things done in the name of their faith. Rabbi Holtzberg was not murdered because of a territorial dispute over Kashmir or because of Bush's foreign policy. He was murdered in the name of Islam – "Allahu Akbar."

I wrote in my book, "America Alone," that "reforming" Islam is something only Muslims can do. But they show very little sign of being interested in doing it, and the rest of us are inclined to accept that. Spread a rumor that a Quran got flushed down the can at Gitmo, and there'll be rioting throughout the Muslim world. Publish some dull cartoons in a minor Danish newspaper, and there'll be protests around the planet. But slaughter the young pregnant wife of a rabbi in Mumbai in the name of Allah, and that's just business as usual. And, if it is somehow "understandable" that for the first time in history it's no longer safe for a Jew to live in India, then we are greasing the skids for a very slippery slope. Muslims, the AP headline informs us, "worry about image." Not enough.

Friday, December 5, 2008

Mark Steyn: Jews get killed, but Muslims feel vulnerable

By MARK STEYN

Syndicated columnist

©MARK STEYN

IN TEXAS "FRIENDSHIP" EXTENDS TO THE UNBORN CHILD

******************
The Texas state motto is friendship,
http://www.statesymbolsusa.org/Texas/Motto.html
a single word that is loaded
with immense meaning in view of recent news from the state.
It would appear
that a deeper affection for the preborn child is affecting the way Texans
think and act.

Just a few days ago in Corpus Christi, pro-life activists took to the
streets to protest the killing of preborn children.
http://www.kristv.com/global/story.asp?s=9357200 It all started at St.
Joseph's Catholic Church, and according to news reports, "hundreds of
Catholics filled the streets." In fact, the news item was so heartening that
that it reminded me of the old days when protests were in their prime and
the media was hard-pressed to ignore them.

Three days after this report appeared on the local news, another report came
across the airwaves announcing that http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27792412 a
$30,000 grant earmarked for Planned Parenthood would not be made. One
councilwoman made it perfectly clear: "It's inappropriate to use taxpayer
money." After the councilwoman made this simple statement, applause is
reported to have filled the council chamber.

A local Episcopal priest, however, spoke in defense of Planned Parenthood,
telling the council, "If you don't want Planned Parenthood to talk to your
children about sex, then you talk to them. ...To not fund Planned
Parenthood, doing the job that we as a community are failing to do, puts
more children in danger."

The majority of those who spoke to the council were in complete agreement
with the removal of the grant. In fact the city council vote against Planned
Parenthood was unanimous!

And here's the kicker!

The people of Corpus Christi who care about their children and the preborn
called American Life League's Stop Planned Parenthood office to say
http://www.all.org/article.php?id=11700 , "I just had to call and let you
know your plan works! We did everything just the way you said and we won!
Thank you!"

The STOPP Report says it all:


On February 15, ALL vice president Jim Sedlak, and ALL's Rock for Life
director, Erik Whittington, traveled to Corpus Christi to give pro-life
talks and attend a daylong Rock for Life event sponsored by the local RFL
chapter. During that visit, the pro-lifers asked how they could stop
taxpayer funding of PP.

We described, in detail, our plan to defeat public funding of PP. It is
section three of our overall Plan for Defeating Planned Parenthood, which
can be found at http://www.stopp.org/plan.htm#three. The plan provides a
31-step process, which begins with explaining how to obtain information on
PP's funding in your local area and then describes how to activate the
community to get funding taken away from PP.

Of course, the real thanks for this victory go first to God and then to
the dedicated people of Corpus Christi, who painstakingly executed the plan
and brought about victory in a very difficult situation. They overcame many
obstacles and are still fighting to stop other taxpayer money from going to
PP in the community. They are also following our plan to get PP out of the
local schools.

If you want to successfully fight PP in your community, read the plan at
the link above. Jim Sedlak is willing to travel to your community to help
get things organized. Just contact him at jsedlak@all.org .


On the same day, we learned about the fabulous work being done by the Corpus
Christi Hope House http://www.cchope.org/, which is a home for mothers
facing crisis pregnancies. The babies who have been saved adorn the web site
for this amazing ministry, which served 3,000 clients in 2007 alone! Now
that's friendship!

And as if all this good news was not enough, we just learned that an
appellate court in Texas has upheld a lower court ruling affirming
personhood for a preborn baby who, along with his mother, was murdered.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08112703.html Please take note of
the significant point raised and defended by the court regarding the harmony
that exists between a secular law and a religious ideal:


Jacob Eguia, who was convicted of the capital murders of a woman and her
nearly eight months gestation unborn child, challenged the court's ruling on
several points. He argued that finding him guilty of the unborn child's
death violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution and Art. I,
Sec. 6 of the Texas Constitution, which bars giving preference by law to a
religion.

In the Texas Penal Code, as the court noted, "'Person' means an
individual," and "individual" may refer to "an unborn child at every stage
of gestation from fertilization until birth"; and "'death' includes, for an
individual who is an unborn child, the failure to be born alive."

According to the court's published opinion, Eguia complained that "the
State's definition of 'individual' 'has the effect of endorsing religion as
it is based solely upon a religious belief that life begins at conception.'"

Justice Elsa Alcala concluded that, because a statute does not violate the
Establishment Clause when serving a secular purpose, "the definition of
'individual' serves the State's legitimate secular interest in protecting
unborn children from the criminal acts of others."

The court also cited precedent to affirm that, "a statute is not
automatically rendered unconstitutional simply because it advances ideals
that harmonize with religious ideals."


Clearly, the point we have been making for years regarding the personhood of
the child, based on the scientific fact that a human being exists from the
point of creation is beginning to be taken seriously, at least in the
friendly state of Texas.

Finally we want to publicly express our gratitude to Diocese of Tyler Bishop
Alvaro Corrada, S.J. for his courageous public statement
http://www.dioceseoftyler.org/documents/CathhospNovStatement.pdf condemning
the sterilizations that had been taking place in Catholic hospitals. He
said, in part:


I wish to address the matter of direct sterilizations in Catholic
Hospitals in the Diocese of Tyler. Last June it was reported by anonymous
researchers that a large number of tubal ligations performed in Catholic
Hospitals in the state of Texas. Initially both Catholic hospitals in the
Diocese of Tyler responded that they were in compliance with the Ethical and
Religious Directives for Catholic Health Services. Sadly, subsequent
investigation reveals that there had been a serious mis-interpretation of
the ERDs and that in fact many direct sterilizations had been done and
continued to be done at the time of the article. As a Bishop, I am deeply
saddened and upset by this news. As Bishop of the Diocese of Tyler, I have
to admit my failure to provide adequate oversight of the Catholic Hospitals
as regards their protection of the sacred dignity of each human person.


It is so encouraging to read these words and to know that Tyler is blessed
with a Catholic bishop who is diligent, humble and committed to defending
human dignity. A thank you can be sent to him at
bishopoffice@dioceseoftyler.org

Friendship expresses itself in many ways, but it is heartening to realize
that in the great state of Texas, friends are being made with the most
vulnerable people in our midst, principles are being defended, and lives are
being touched through the goodness of shepherds, activists and judges. May
such friendship spread across our land.

December 5, 2008
Texas takes friendship to a new level
By Judie Brown

© Judie Brown

EVIDENCE OF THE HYPOCRISY OF LEFT LIBERALS: THEY SEND THEIR KIDS TO ELITE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS

******************

If money were the key to great education, Sasha and Malia Obama might be getting ready to transfer next month to the Francis-Stevens Education Center, the Washington, D.C., public school assigned to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., which will be the girls' new address as of Jan. 20.

The District of Columbia, after all, boasts one of the most amply funded school systems in America. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the DC public schools spend roughly $13,700 per pupil. That is a level of funding more lavish than in 48 states -- only New Jersey and New York spend more -- and half again as generous as the national per-pupil expenditure of $9,150. And even that may be understating it: When all sources of funding for K-12 education are accounted for, notes Andrew Coulson of the Cato Institute’s Center for Education Freedom, the real per-pupil costs of the D.C. public schools is $24,600.

But bigger budgets, alas, don't guarantee educational excellence. Its abundant spending notwithstanding, D.C.'s public school system ranks among the worst in the nation.

“In reading and math, the District's public school students score at the bottom among 11 major city school systems, even when poor children are compared only with other poor children,” The Washington Post reported last year. According to the authoritative National Assessment of Education Progress, only one in seven fourth-graders is ranked at grade-level (“proficient”) or better in reading and math. Among eighth-graders, only one in eight is proficient in reading; only one in 12 can handle eighth-grade math.

So to no one's surprise, the Obama girls will not be attending public school in Washington. Barack and Michelle Obama have decided to enroll their daughters in Sidwell Friends School, the same private academy that Chelsea Clinton attended when she was First Daughter in the 1990s.

The president-elect has taken a bit of heat for rejecting public education for Sasha and Malia. Critics point out that Obama cast himself as a staunch supporter of public schools during the presidential campaign. “We need to fix and improve our public schools,” he told the NAACP convention in July, “not throw our hands up and walk away from them.” When Time magazine asked the candidates whether parents should be given vouchers to enable them to send their children to better schools, Obama’s reply was adamant: “No. I believe that public education in America should foster innovation and provide students with varied, high-quality learning opportunities.”

Now in fairness to the Obamas, an ideological commitment to public schools hardly obliges them to send their kids to one -- especially when the local school system is as wretched as Washington, D.C.'s. The Obamas' first and deepest responsibility is to their daughters; to have enrolled the girls in the District's failing public system just to make a political point would have been appallingly irresponsible.

But in fairness to the critics, why doesn't Obama want other parents -- poorer parents -- to be able to do better by their children too? Candidates have been promising to “fix and improve our public schools” for decades, and for decades the schools have remained stubbornly mediocre, hefty spending increases notwithstanding. More promises won't do anything for the parents whose kids are stuck in the public schools Sasha and Malia will be spared. Vouchers, on the other hand, would.

Artist's rendering of the Sidwell Friends middle school

campus in Washington, D.C.

Not every school can be a Sidwell Friends, but every school ought to have something Sidwell Friends benefits from every day. Money isn't the root of Sidwell Friends' success. Neither is the size of its classes, or its well-appointed facilities, or its loyal alumni. Sidwell Friends thrives because it has competition -- and DC's public schools stagnate because they don't. Public education is essentially a monopoly, and monopolies tend to be expensive, unimaginative, and largely indifferent to their customers' satisfaction. Private and parochial schools, by contrast, cannot succeed if they lose the goodwill and confidence of the parents who choose them to educate their children.

The DC school system spends $13,700 per student, and most of those students can't even read or do simple math. Imagine what would happen if that money were channeled to parents instead, through vouchers that would let them freely choose their kids' schools. Imagine the energy and innovation and diversity such competition would beget. Imagine the accountability and excellence it could lead to. Imagine the improvement in the lives of Washington's children. Imagine -- 54 years after Brown v. Board of Education -- achieving educational equality at last.

Public education doesn't have to be a lethargic and mediocre monopoly. Let vouchers stimulate competition, and American education would be revolutionized. If that isn't change worth believing in, Mr. Obama, what is?

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/12/03/how_obama_can_fix_education/

(Jeff Jacoby is a columnist for The Boston Globe.)

HOW OBAMA CAN FIX EDUCATION

By Jeff Jacoby

The Boston Globe

Wednesday, December 3, 2008

MORALITY DOES NOT DEPEND ON YOUR WHIMS AND PREJUDICES

*************

Vatican Official Considers Aquinas' Comeback

Recalls How Morality Was Scorned in the 60s

By Antonio Gaspari

ROME, DEC. 3, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Moral theology based on St. Thomas Aquinas is among one of theology's most popular branches today, says a Vatican official, but this popularity has come about only after decades of disdain.

Archbishop Jean Louis Bruguès, secretary of the Congregation for Catholic Education, spoke about his journey with moral theology when he delivered an address at a conference last Friday in Rome, which marked the 30th anniversary of the St. Thomas Aquinas International Society.

Archbishop Bruguès contended that "after May of '68, moral theology, at least in France, fell into profound neglect."

"During two years, the seminarians of Toulouse received no classes on this subject, considered disagreeable and boring, as no one was found who was willing to teach them," he said. It fell to then Father Bruguès, a young priest with a doctorate in morality, to take up these courses.

The prelate recalled that his spiritual assistant, Father Michel Labourdette, tried to encourage him with these words: "You are concerned with a subject that today is disparaged, but have patience: The day will come when it will be envied by others."

Indeed, Archbishop Bruguès noted, by the beginning of the 80s, many issues referring to ecology and the development of medical techniques began to be at the center of attention of bioethics.

"So, from one day to another, ethicists -- that dreadful neologism coined to avoid saying 'moralist,' as the word 'morality' still caused fear -- were in demand everywhere," he said. "My professor had understood [the situation] well. Moral theology was becoming the most appreciated subject, the only branch of theology that was really taken into account in a secularized society."

Archbishop Bruguès pointed out that in the 60s students were characterized by an essentially critical mentality.

"The very idea of making reference to the masters of Tradition stirred in them allergic reactions," he quipped. "It was impossible even to mention the name of Thomas Aquinas: One ran the risk of having people plug their ears."

Father Labourdette also offered advice in this regard, the Vatican official remembered, encouraging him to "always teach [Aquinas] but without mentioning his name."

"Hence, for years I practiced so to speak an 'amphibious Thomism," recalled the archbishop, until "finally, one day […] they asked me for classes on the moral theology of St. Thomas: The time of 'clandestine' Thomism had ended."

Archbishop Bruguès commented that "the generation of May '68, which described itself as critical, rejected the transmission of Christian culture and tradition. The following generation was practically deprived of any Christian culture -- it knew that it didn't know. This led to not sharing the prejudices of their predecessors; now we can start again and share the great masters."

The prelate proposed the Catechism of the Catholic Church as the text that best reflects this change.

The "Catechism is based on a conviction that further reflection is necessary: The great institutions of St. Thomas' morality are the best instrument of critical dialogue with modernity," continued the secretary of the Congregation for Catholic Education.

"The theory of virtue will stimulate a renewal of moral theology," he affirmed, and thus "the teaching of moral theology stemming from the great institutions of Thomism, still has a luminous future before it."

ZE08120308 - 2008-12-03

Permalink: http://www.zenit.org/article-24458?l=english

****************************

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/catholicteaching/philosophy/thomast.htm

THE 24 THOMISTIC THESES

A number of popes and church lawa direct that the method, doctrines, and principles of St. Thomas Aquinas be taught in schools and especially in seminaries. After a special statement on this matter by Pope Pius X (Motu Proprio Doctoris Angelici June 29, 1914) a number of philosophy professors met, drew up a list of the principles and major tenets of St. Thomas, and submitted the list to the Sacred Congregation of Studies. On July 27, 1914, this Congregation declared that in their judgment this list contained the principles and major tenets of St. Thomas' philosophy, especially in metaphysics.

The Congregation itself, in 1916, declared that these were safe, directive norms. Though the list often does not give the exact wording of St. Thomas, it is sure that the ideas are St. Thomas'. Hence, if St. Thomas is the safe, approved teacher of philosophy for Catholics, his ideas must be safe and approved norms. A philosopher who intellectually accepts all of these theses is named a Thomist; and this meaning of the term Thomist is about the only definite meaning that can be assigned to it. The theses are given here for convenient reference.

"We admonish professors to bear well in mind that they cannot set aside St. Thomas, especially in metaphysical questions, without grave disadvantage". --Pope St. Pius X (1903-1914), Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907

These 24 propositions are a concise guide of the whole philosophy and can be divided as follows:

Ontology (Th. 1 – 7) ; Cosmology (Th. 8 – 12) ; Psychology (Th. 13 – 21) ; Theodicy (Th. 22 – 24)

ONTOLOGY

1 . Potency and Act divide being in such a way that whatever is, is either pure act, or of necessity it is composed of potency and act as primary and intrinsic principles.[1]

2. Since act is perfection, it is not limited except through a potency which itself is a capacity for perfection. Hence in any order in which an act is pure act, it will only exist, in that order, as a unique and unlimited act. But whenever it is finite and manifold, it has entered into a true composition with potency.[2]

3. Consequently, the one God, unique and simple, alone subsists in absolute being. All other things that participate in being have a nature whereby their being is restricted; they are constituted of essence and being, as really distinct principles.[3]

4. A thing is called a being because of being ("esse"). God and creature are not called beings univocally, nor wholly equivocally, but analogically, by an analogy both of attribution and of proportionality.[4]

5. In every creature there is also a real composition of the subsisting subject and of added secondary forms, i.e. accidental forms. Such composition cannot be understood unless being is really received in an essence distinct from it.[5]

6. Besides the absolute accidents there is also the relative accident, relation. Although by reason of its own character relation does not signify anything inhering in another, it nevertheless often has a cause in things, and hence a real entity distinct from the subject.[6]

7. A spiritual creature is wholly simple in its essence. Yet there is still a twofold composition in the spiritual creature, namely, that of the essence with being, and that of the substance with accidents.[7]

8. However, the corporeal creature is composed of act and potency even in its very essence. These act and potency in the order of essence are designated by the names form and matter respectively.[8]

COSMOLOGY

9. Neither the matter nor the form have being of themselves, nor are they produced or corrupted of themselves, nor are they included in any category otherwise than reductively, as substantial principles.[9]

10. Although extension in quantitative parts follows upon a corporeal nature, nevertheless it is not the same for a body to be a substance and for it to be quantified. For of itself substance is indivisible, not indeed as a point is indivisible, but as that which falls outside the order of dimensions is indivisible. But quantity, which gives the substance extension, really differs from the substance and is truly an accident.[10]

11. The principle of individuation, i.e., of numerical distinction of one individual from another with the same specific nature, is matter designated by quantity. Thus in pure spirits there cannot be more than individual in the same specific nature.[11]

12. By virtue of a body's quantity itself, the body is circumscriptively in a place, and in one place alone circumscriptively, no matter what power might be brought to bear.[12]

13. Bodies are divided into two groups; for some are living and others are devoid of life. In the case of the living things, in order that there be in the same subject an essentially moving part and an essentially moved part, the substantial form, which is designated by the name soul, requires an organic disposition, i.e. heterogeneous parts.[13]

PSYCHOLOGY

14. Souls in the vegetative and sensitive orders cannot subsist of themselves, nor are they produced of themselves. Rather, they are no more than principles whereby the living thing exists and lives; and since they are wholly dependent upon matter, they are incidentally corrupted through the corruption of the composite.[14]

15. On the other hand, the human soul subsists of itself. When it can be infused into a sufficiently disposed subject, it is created by God. By its very nature, it is incorruptible and immortal.[15]

16. This rational soul is united to the body in such a manner that it is the only substantial form of the body. By virtue of his soul a man is a man, an animal, a living thing, a body, a substance and a being. Therefore the soul gives man every essential degree of perfection; moreover, it gives the body a share in the act of being whereby it itself exists.[16]

17. From the human soul there naturally issue forth powers pertaining to two orders, the organic and the non-organic. The organic powers, among which are the senses, have the composite as their subject. The non-organic powers have the soul alone as their subject. Hence, the intellect is a power intrinsically independent of any bodily organ.[17]

18. Intellectuality necessarily follows upon immateriality, and furthermore, in such manner that the father the distance from matter, the higher the degree of intellectuality. Any being is the adequate object of understanding in general. But in the present state of union of soul and body, quiddities abstracted from the material conditions of individuality are the proper object of the human intellect.[18]

19. Therefore, we receive knowledge from sensible things. But since sensible things are not actually intelligible, in addition to the intellect, which formally understands, an active power must be acknowledged in the soul, which power abstracts intelligible likeness or species from sense images in the imagination.[19]

20. Through these intelligible likenesses or species we directly know universals, i.e. the natures of things. We attain to singulars by our senses, and also by our intellect, when it beholds the sense images. But we ascend to knowledge of spiritual things by analogy.[20]

21. The will does not precede the intellect but follows upon it. The will necessarily desires that which is presented to it as a good in every respect satisfying the appetite. But it freely chooses among the many goods that are presented to it as desirable according to a changeable judgment or evaluation. Consequently, the choice follows the final practical judgment. But the will is the cause of it being the final one.[21]

THEODICY

22. We do not perceive by an immediate intuition that God exists, nor do we prove it a priori. But we do prove it a posteriori, i.e., from the things that have been created, following an argument from the effects to the cause: namely, from things which are moved and cannot be the adequate source of their motion, to a first unmoved mover; from the production of the things in this world by causes subordinated to one another, to a first uncaused cause; from corruptible things which equally might be or not be, to an absolutely necessary being; from things which more or less are, live, and understand, according to degrees of being, living and understanding, to that which is maximally understanding, maximally living and maximally a being; finally, from the order of all things, to a separated intellect which has ordered and organized things, and directs them to their end.[22]

23. The metaphysical motion of the Divine Essence is correctly expressed by saying that it is identified with the exercised actuality of its won being, or that it is subsistent being itself. And this is the reason for its infinite and unlimited perfection.[23]

24. By reason of the very purity of His being, God is distinguished from all finite beings. Hence it follows, in the first place, that the world could only have come from God by creation; secondly, that not even by way of a miracle can any finite nature be given creative power, which of itself directly attains the very being of any being; and finally, that no created agent can in any way influence the being of any effect unless it has itself been moved by the first Cause.[24]

In 1917, publishing the Canon Law, Pope Benedict XV ordered the method, doctrines and principles of St Thomas to be followed (Code, can. 1366, § 2) and gave as reference the decree of the Sacred Congregation approving the 24 Thesis.

Acta Apostolicae Sedis, Vl (1914), 383­86, is the source of the list of theses. It evaluates them as a good statement of the principles and major views of St. Thomas' philosophy. The same Acta, VII (1916), 157­58, refers to them as safe, directive norms.

CATHOLIC APOLOGETICS INFORMATION

[1] St Th. I^a. Q.77, a.1 ; Metaph. VII, 1 and IX, 1 and 9

[2] St Th. I^a. Q.7, a.1-2 ; Cont. Gent. I, c.43 ; I Sent. Dist.43, Q.2

[3] St Th. I^a. Q.50, a.2, ad 3 ; Cont. Gent. I, c.38,52,53,54 ; I Sent. Dist.19, Q.2, a.2 ; De Ent. et Ess. c.5 ; De Spir. Creat. a.1 ; De Verit. Q.27, a.1, ad 8

[4] St Th. I^a. Q.13, a.5 ; Cont. Gent. I, c.32,33,34 ; De Pot. Q.7, a.7

[5] St Th. I^a. Q.3, a.6 ; Cont. Gent. I, c.23 ; Cont. Gent. II, c.52 ; De Ent. et Ess. c.5

[6] St Th. I^a. Q.28, mainly a.1

[7] St Th. I^a. Q.50 and ff ; De Spirit. Creat. a.1

[8] St Th. De Spirit. Creat. a.1

[9] St Th. I^a. Q.45, a.4 ; De Pot. Q.3, a.5, ad 3 ;

[10] St Th. Cont. Gent. IV, c.65 ; I Sent. Dist. 37, Q.2, a.1, ad 3 ; II Sent. Dist. 30, Q.2, a.1

[11] St Th. Cont. Gent. II, c.92-93 ; I^a. Q.50, a.4 ; De Ent. et Ess. c.2

[12] St Th. III^a. Q.75 ; IV Sent. Dist. 10, a.3

[13] St Th. I^a. Q.18, a.1-2 and Q.75, a.1 ; Cont. Gent. I, c.97 ; De Anima everywhere

[14] St Th. I^a. Q.75, a.3 and Q.90, a.2 ; Cont. Gent. II, c.80 and 82

[15] St Th. I^a. Q.75, a.2 and Q.90 and 118 ; Cont. Gent. II, c.83 and ff. ; De Pot. Q.3, a.2 ; De Anim. a.14

[16] St Th. I^a. Q.76 ; Cont. Gent. II, c.56, 68-71 ; De Anim. a.1 ; De Spirit. Creat. a.3

[17] St Th. I^a. Q.77-79 ; Cont. Gent. II, c.72 ; De Anim. a.12 and ff. ; De Spirit. Creat. a.11

[18] St Th. I^a. Q.14, a.1 and Q.74, a.7 and Q.89, a.1-2 ; Cont. Gent. I, c.59 and 72, and IV, c.2

[19] St Th. I^a. Q.79, a.3-4 and Q.85, a.6-7 ; Cont. Gent. II, c.76 and ff. ; De Spirit. Creat. a.10

[20] St Th. I^a. Q.85-88

[21] St Th. I^a. Q.82-83 ; Cont. Gent. II, c.72 and ff. ; De Verit. Q.22, a.5 ; De Malo Q.11

[22] St Th. I^a. Q.2 ; Cont. Gent. I, c.12 and 31 and III c.10-11 ; De Verit. Q.1 and 10 ; De Pot. Q.4 and 7

[23] St Th. I^a. Q.4 , a.2 and Q.13, a.11 ; I Sent. Dist. 8, Q.1

[24] St Th. I^a. Q.44-45 and 105 ; Cont. Gent. II, c.6-15 and III c.66-69 and IV c.44 ; De Pot. mainly Q.3, a.7

QUESTIONS PERSIST ABOUT OBAMA'S BIRTH CERTIFICATE

**********************
The media bought it.
The voters bought it.
And now some in Congress are resisting the idea of congressional hearings because they believe that Barack Obama's "birth certificate" has been posted online.

Not so.

What was posted was not a birth certificate,
but something that resembles a "Certification of Live Birth" or COLB,
which, even if authentic, does not prove "natural born" U.S. citizenship.

You see, in Hawaii, a Certification of Live Birth is issued within a year of a child's birth to those who register a birth abroad or one that takes place outside a hospital.

It's Rathergate all over again with more amiss than a 1970s Selectric typewriter. But before I tell you what the experts found, let me ask you a few questions:

If you were a natural born American citizen and had it within your means to quiet all the lawsuits and questions with proof, would you do it?

If you were a natural born American citizen, would you spend thousands of dollars to fight the legal cases against you, or would you simply answer the legitimate question of whether you meet the constitutional requirements for office?

If you were a natural born American citizen, would you forge a document called a "Certification of Live Birth" and tell the public it was a real "birth certificate"? If someone were to violate the law by manufacturing a forgery in order to trick the public, would that be enough evidence for members of Congress to conduct hearings and for a court to issue an order for the critical records, including the original long-form birth certificate (signed by the doctor) to ensure that the U.S. constitutional requirements for office were not violated? After all, Congress is sworn to uphold and defend that Constitution, and the justices on the U.S. Supreme Court are "guardians" of the Constitution. That's their job, isn't it?

Ron Polarik, who holds a Ph.D. in Instructional Media
and specializes in computer graphics with over 20 years experience with computers, printers and typewriters, has come forth with more definitive evidence than the word processor that tried to simulate a 1970s Selectric typewriter.

Polarik has submitted a signed affidavit and has now released his findings on video at www.ObamaForgery.com with his identity masked and voice altered to guard against the carrying out of threats, which he has already received.

The Summary: The Certificate of Live Birth documents posted on Mr. Obama's website www.fightthesmears.com, Daily Kos (a pro-Obama blog) and factcheck.org, (a pro-Obama political research group), were found to be altered and forged.

But beyond the birth certificate issue,
there's the matter that Obama traveled to Indonesia, Pakistan, Southern India and Kenya in 1981. He said he went to Indonesia to see his mother. This seemed plausible, except for the fact that his mother returned to Hawaii in August of 1980 to file for a divorce from her second husband, Lolo Soetoro. Unless she went back to pal around with the man she divorced, she wasn't there at the time of Obama's visit.

There's another problem. No record of Obama holding an American passport prior to the one he received once becoming a U.S. senator has been found. If he traveled to Pakistan with an American passport, he wouldn't have been allowed in – since Pakistan was in turmoil in 1981 and under martial law. It was also on the State Department's travel ban list for U.S. citizens.

If he couldn't get into Pakistan with a U.S. passport, perhaps he went there with an Indonesian passport. But the only way you can get one of those is if you are an Indonesian citizen.

That's quite possible since under Indonesian law, when a male acknowledges a child as his son, it deems the son – in this case Obama – to be an Indonesian state citizen, which was also recorded by Obama's school record.

So, if he didn't go to Indonesia in 1981 to visit mom (who had returned to Hawaii by then), might it have something to do with the fact that Indonesian passports expire every five years and it was time for renewal?

Why does that matter?

If Obama would have been a U.S. citizen, 8 USC §1481(a)(2) provides loss of nationality by native born citizens upon "taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state ... after having attained the age of eighteen years," in violation of 8 U.S.C. §1401(a)(1). Simply put, since Indonesia did not allow for dual citizenship, if Obama got that passport in 1981, when he was 20 years old, he effectively renounced any U.S. citizenship he may have had.

So, if the experts are right, SOMEONE forged a Certification of Live Birth to fool America. In addition to the automatic Indonesian citizenship granted to a child acknowledged as a "son" by an Indonesian male citizen, and the Indonesian citizenship listed in Obama's school records, Obama then traveled to a place where Americans weren't allowed to go, but citizens of Indonesia were. If he obtained an Indonesian passport on his trip in 1981, he effectively renounced any American citizenship he may have had and cannot serve as president (or "rule" as president, as members of his campaign have stated). These are serious questions that must have answers.

If Obama gets into office without verification that he has met the requirements of the U.S. Constitution, if you care about life, liberty or the family, you're going to have to make hundreds of calls to try and fight an agenda that seeks to silence you.

There is a way to help prevent this. Our founders sacrificed their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor. I'm asking you to do three things.

Fast and pray for all the hidden things to come to light.

Call the Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee – in their district offices while they're home this week for Thanksgiving. Ask them to "Please hold congressional hearings to investigate whether Barack Obama meets the basic constitutional requirements for the highest office of the land."

Write a letter to the nine Justices of the United States Supreme Court (names are listed below) and put them in a FedEx (or other overnight) envelope to: U.S. Supreme Court
1 First Street, N.E
Washington, D.C. 20543

Our Constitution matters and defending it is going to take an outcry from the public. The electors vote on Dec. 15. The numbers are below and your immediate action is critically needed right now. Do it before defending our liberties costs a lot more than making some phone calls and writing a few letters.

The Republican House Judiciary members: Call them at 202-225-3121, AND most importantly reach them in their district offices:

Lamar Smith (Texas), ranking member, critical in any hearings: 512-306-0439 Austin, 830-896-0154 Kerrville, and 210-821-5024 San Antonio.

James Sensenbrenner (Wisconsin) 800-242-1119 or 262-784-1111 Brookfield

Howard Coble (North Carolina) 336-333-5005 Greensboro, 336-626-3060 Asheboro, 336-886-5106 High Point, 226-229-0159 Graham, 704-209-0426 Granite Quarry

Elton Gallegly (California) 800-423-0023 or 805-497-2224 Thousand Oaks, 805-686-2525 Solvang

Bob Goodlatte (Virginia) 540-432-2391 Harrisonburg, 434-845-8306 Lynchburg, 540-857-2672 Roanoke, and 540-885-3861 Staunton

Steve Chabot (Ohio) 513-684-2723 Cincinnati

Dan Lungren (California) 916-859-9906 Gold River

Chris Cannon (Utah) 800-571-2971 Provo, 801-569-5125 West Jordan

Ric Keller (Florida) 407-872-1962 Orlando, 888-642-1211 Eustis, 888-642-1211 Ocala

Darrell Issa (California) 951-693-2447 Temecula, 760-599-5000 San Diego

Mike Pence (Indiana) 765-640-2919 Anderson, 765-962-2883 Richmond, 765-747-5566 Muncie

Randy Forbes (Virginia) 757-382-0080 Chesapeake, 804-526-4969 Colonial Heights, 434-634-5575 Emporia

Steve King (Iowa) 641-782-2495 Creston, 712-580-7754 Spencer, 712-325-1404 Council Bluffs, 712-224-4692 Sioux City, 712-732-4197 Storm Lake

Tom Feeney (Florida) 386-756-9798 Port Orange, 407-208-1106 Orlando, 321-264-6113 Titusville

Trent Franks (Arizona) 623-776-7911 Glendale

Louie Gohmert (Texas) 866-535-6302 Lufkin/Marshall/Nagadoches, 903-236-8597 Longview, 903-561-6349 Tyler

Jim Jordan (Ohio) 419-522-5757 Mansfield, 419-999-6455 Lima, 419-423-3210 Findlay

Supreme Court Justices

Chief Justice John Roberts

Associate Justices:

Samuel A. Alito
Clarence Thomas
Antonin Scalia
Anthony M. Kennedy
David H. Souter
John Paul Stevens
Stephen G. Breyer
Ruth Bader Ginsberg

How important is the Constitution to you? Forward this to all you know.

Robert Quinn
Tue 12/02/08 10:12 AM
bquinn@pngusa.net

IF YOU THOUGHT WE HAD HIT BOTTOM, YOU WERE MISTAKEN

*******************

PLANNED PARENTHOOD
CHRISTMAS GIFT CERTIFICATE

Complete with Attractive Gift Card Showing Baby-free Manger!

What to get for the girl who doesn't want to have anything?
The Planned Parenthood Christmas gift certificate:

"Looking for an unusual, yet practical gift this holiday season? Planned Parenthood of Indiana (PPIN) is now offering gift certificates for services or the recipient's choice of birth control method," the abortion business says.

The gift certificates can be purchased in increments of $25 online at the group's web site or for any amount at some of PPIN's 35 statewide facilities.

While PPIN president and CEO Betty Cockrum says they can be redeemed for contraception, birth control and legitimate medical services like breast exams and Pap tests, they can also be used to pay for abortions.

"Why not buy a loved one a gift this holiday season that they really need," Cockrum says in a press release LifeNews.com obtained. "The gift certificates are also a wonderful idea for that person in your life who puts everyone else first."

Do they have musical cards that play "When A Child Isn't Born"?

by Mark Steyn

THE CORNER
THE NATIONAL REVIEW

26 November 2008


To express your opinion on Planned Parenthood gift cards contact:

Planned Parenthood of Indiana
200 South Meridian Street
Post Office Box 397
Indianapolis, Indiana 46206
Phone: 317-637-4343
Fax: 317-637-4344
Email: kate.shepherd@ppin.org