17 August 2012

Coffee Cup Browsing

A two-step program to help "consensus-chic, testosterone-free liberals" overcome their disillusionment with B.O.  Of course, the first step is to admit that you have a problem.

Gunman at conservative Christian lobbying group was a "gay activist."  Do the Switcheroo-Tango with ideological labels and wonder how this story would've been reported differently.

If you support marriage, you could be a member of a Hate Group.  This is how it all ends, folks.

Also. . .praying for Mom and Dad in France outrages outrageous Outrage Professionals.

Dems won't even acknowledge their Pro-Life colleagues. . .no "differing positions" allowed when it comes to the Most Unholy Sacrament of Child Killing.

God's Wrath vs. God's Love.  No, God is not moody; it's all about what we are prepared to experience.

"Nuanced Plagiarism"?  No.  Stealing is stealing.  Identifying plagiarism isn't difficult.

I don't think that word means what you think it means:  finding non-existent "violence" in the CDF assessment of the LCWR.  "Violence" now means "disagreeing with me."

Follow HancAquam and visit the Kindle Wish List and the Books & Things Wish List

Click on St. Martin and donate to the Dominicans!  ----->


  1. Had to get my husband to translate the LCWR article to me :-) - and to think I used to write such tripe myself when I was an undergrad philosophy/drama major (especially the semester of Feminist Philosophy/Literature/History).

    The Most Unholy Sacrament is flourishing out here in the People's Republic of Washington State -- no child, of any age, EVER needs to have parental knowledge or consent if they wish to procure an abortion. We also cannot release certain medical information to parents (psych/STD/pregnancy/drug-alcohol)once the child reaches 14 years of age ... without the CHILD's permission! In what kind of a crazy world are we living?

    1. Shelly, this makes perfect sense in an ideology that's designed to destroy the family and replace it with the bureaucrats of the Nanny State.

  2. Fathe I have a question for you if you are still taking questions: how would you respond to someone that says Vatican 2 was a valid council but not a fruitful council and should be consider to have the same value as the 5th Lateran council

    1. First, I'd have to know what they mean by "fruitful Council."

      Second, I'd wonder if they were willing to distinguish btw the Council itself (i.e. the documents and the magisterial teaching on the documents) AND the goofy interpretations of the Council that followed it.

      Third, I'd want to know if they thought VC2 had been implemented yet.

    2. Trent or 2nd Nicaea would be considered a fruitful Council and a council like the Lateran's, Constance or Chalcedon (since it cemented the first major christian schism because the Copts and Byzantines could not understand each other.)

      And let's say there is a difference between council docs and it actuals interpretations but wouldn't that be a sign the council is unfruitful since so many people have hijacked it with their interpretations.

      And maybe it can't really be implemented anyways because the council lends itself to so many possible goofy interpretations.

      So we may need a new council, 1st Holy Ecumenical Council of Toledo or 'Holy Toledo' for short. And while Vatican II just closed only 40 plus years ago, we should remember 1st Constantinople opened in 381, only 56 years after Nicaea and 1st Ephesus opened in 431 only fifty years after 1st Con and Chalcedon opened in 451 only 20 years later. In less than 150 years after Christianiaty became legal we had four councils. In fact from Nicaea to Trent in a span of appx 1200 years we had 19 councils or a council every 63 years. The fact the church did not hold a council for over 300 years between Trent and Vat 1 seems to be a aberration. So it may be a good idea to start planning Holy Toledo 1 so it can give us a legitimate interpretation of Vat II and stop the heresies and heretical groups that are plaguing are church.

  3. Fr Phillip

    I have a question I'd like to ask you about reconciliation, not related to this post at all, but couldn't find an email for you. Would you mind answering it?

    1. Of course. . .email me at neripowell(at)yahoo(dot)com