Coffee Bowl Browsing

Obama's bizarre definition of "publicity": $330,000 publicity pics will not be published

Fighting Leftist GroupThink in Canada and winning (the vids are the best part!)

Most Catholics support torture? Not quite.

The One de-funds Charter Schools, supports public schools, and yet sends his daughters to a private school. . .Why?

What's appropriate for a bride to wear on her wedding day? (I've never had to address this problem; however, I make a point of announcing that flash photography during the liturgical celebration is absolutely forbidden.)

Feminist outrage & the banality of abortion (UPDATED)

NB. I have edited this posted to eliminate my inflammatory language. A commenter correctly pointed out that my description of the author is less than charitable (not in those words but close enough). My apologies to the author. I'm not going to lie and say I didn't intend to offend. That's exactly what I intended to do, and by doing so, I distracted from the real issues. Having been a pro-abortion proponent for years, including a stint as a NOW escort at one of the south's largest abortion clinics, and having worked for a rape crisis center, a battered women's shelter, and a hospital for sexually abused children, I have seen the emotional and spiritual devastation that abortion causes women who have been encouraged to kill their children because not doing so would be taken as a sign that they have capitulated somehow to male dominance. My opposition to the radical feminist agenda is not simply a knee-jerk Catholic reaction to an ideology that rejects the Church. I was a radical feminist and Marxist for years. Up-close and personal, I've seen their agenda destroy lives. The obstinate refusal to recognize what abortion does to women is not only a political blindness, it is a willed evil as well. From the inside, I know that the "pro-choice" movement is anything but supportive of a woman's right to choose to have children. The pressure to abort unwanted preganancies is overwhelming. And the rhetoric of the pro-aborts is designed to de-humanize the child using medical terminology so that the woman is numbed to the reality of what she is choosing to do. In my experience, women who have been raped and choose to carry the child to term are characterized as "gender traitors" and seen by the feminist community as enablers of male dominance. They would rather see a child murdered than see their ideology challenged by a traitor who refuses to sacrifice her child for the good of the cause. A note on comments: I simply don't have time to respond to everyone's objections. But please continue commenting. . .just sign a name!

I've been asked in one of the com-boxes to comment on the following anti-Catholic polemic from a pro-abortionist:
___________________________________

In Brazil, there is a horrific story of a 9-year-old girl who was raped and impregnated. It’s believed that the rape was committed by her step-father. The girl was not only pregnant at that young age, but also pregnant with twins. And so, as makes perfect sense, she had an abortion [Of course! It makes perfect sense to add double homicide to this horror]. Because she was raped, because she was much to young to have a child, and because the stress of having twins would of course have been far too much for a 9-year-old’s body to handle. And she could have died.

Now, the Catholic Church has excommunicated both the girl’s mother and the doctors who performed the abortion, which likely saved the girl’s life [and killed two other people in the process].

[NB. Notice that the author of piece never once acknowledges the humanity of the children much less their personhood. The children are simply disposal by-products of a violent rape. Also note that there is never a peep about the possible mental trauma a forced abortion might cause a pregnant nine-year old.]

Well then. At least they didn’t excommunicate the girl, right? Maybe they decided that she was much too young to have made the decision to have the abortion on her own, or to understand what was happening [and yet Planned Parenthood and other pro-aborts ruthlessly oppose any and all attempts to require parental notification for underage girls, and they illegally encourage the statutory rape of underage girls by telling them to lie about the father's age when the girls seek abortions]. But not too young, apparently, to be forced to give birth to the twins caused by her rapist. Not too young to quite possibly die in the process [and apparently not too young to be forced to get a double abortion].

In defending the decision, the Church’s lawyer has said:

“It’s the law of God: Do not kill. We consider this murder,” Miranda said in comments reported by O Globo.

But rape, apparently, is a-okay [yes, exactly. . .b/c the Church opposes murder, it must necessarily follow that the Church supports rape]. After all, I don’t see the step-father, who allegedly admitted to having raped the girl since the age of 6, being excommunicated [raping a child is beyond horrible, but does it rise to the level of killing her?]. Killing a fetus is apparently worthy of such censure and shunning. Horrifically violating a small child, though? Well, we all make mistakes [in so far as the father has committed rape he is in effect excommunicated. . .he may not "worthily receive" the sacraments until he has repented and received absolution]. And this stance is of course nothing new.

The lawyer also argued that the girl just should have carried to term and had a cesarean section. Because obviously a lawyer knows the girl’s condition better than her own doctor. And obviously the girl’s mental well-being doesn’t count for a damn thing [because avoiding even the possibility that the girl might suffer mentally from giving birth is worth the lives of two children. What about the damage a forced abortion will cause this girl?].

Who knows what a cesarean section would have done for the girl [precisely, who knows? On the other hand, we know exactly what abortion does to children], since the doctors didn’t present the issue of her giving vaginal birth as being the main health concern here. But oh well. God says. Clearly, if this child died in the course of fulfilling “God’s wishes,” it would have been a lesser tragedy than the cold-blooded murder of those innocent little fetuses [no, it would have compounded this tragedy even more. . .]. After all, in other extremist Catholic doctrine, a woman is better off dead than raped anyway [yup, got us again. . .this interpretation of Catholic doctrine seems to square quite well with paragraph 2356, of the Catechism, which reads: "Rape is the forcible violation of the sexual intimacy of another person. It does injury to justice and charity. Rape deeply wounds the respect, freedom, and physical and moral integrity to which every person has a right. It causes grave damage that can mark the victim for life. It is always an intrinsically evil act. Graver still is the rape of children committed by parents (incest) or those responsible for the education of the children entrusted to them." Did you catch that: like abortion, rape is always an "intrinsically evil act."

RH Reality Check asks: Is this what religious objection to abortion looks like [No. But this woman's post is what anti-Catholic bigotry looks like]? Seeing as how the point of the entire anti-choice movement is indeed to erase any and all concern for the woman in question, in fact to erase her very existence if at all possible [again, right on! And the fact that the Catholic Church is the single largest non-governmental donor of charitable funds to social service organizations in the world is entirely besides the point. . .also ignored in this piece is the fact that the Catholic Church in the U.S. provides free pre-natal care, free adoption services, and even free recovery services to any pregnant woman who wants them. . .let's see, I think Planned Parenthood charges $350 per abortion] . . . clearly, yes. In an extreme nutshell, this is exactly what it looks like.
___________________________________

Folks, this is what the Church is up against. The sheer irrationality and venom of this post is incredible. The author sees no moral dilemma here, no horror in aborting the girl's children. She takes no stand against forcing a nine-year old, already traumatized by rape, to undergo an abortion. Abortion, after all, is the Feminist Sacrament. The real kicker is that she directs her outrage at the Church for announcing the excommunications of the mother and doctor. . .excommunications that happened long before the Church even knew the abortions had taken place. The Church did not excommunicate these people. They excommunicated themselves by committing a double-murder. And, AND! These excommunications are really quite simple to lift. Those babies are still dead. And always will be.

I don't know the all the circumstances of this case. I don't need to know the circumstances to call an abortion murder. If it became apparent later in the pregnancy that carrying and giving birth to the twins would kill the girl, then an extraordinarily difficult decision would have to be made. And even if the girl's mother and doctor opted to abort the children, we could never call it good. It would be an evil regardless of circumstance or intent. The only thing that we might say is that culpability for the murders would be somewhat mitigated by circumstances and intent. The object of abortion. . .the ONLY object of abortion. . .is the death of an innocent human person. When can we say that this is a Good Thing? Never.

NOTE: Sign a name to your comments or they will be deleted. HancAquam does not tolerate anonymous hit and run cowards in its com-box!

Coffee Bowl browsing. . .

And yet even more eco-hypocrisy. . .

Lots of Top Ten Lists

Bishop Blair and friend of the CDF Theological Assessment team confront the LCWR

And don't forget to vote for HancAquam in the 2009 Cannonball Blog Awards. . .make ACORN proud and vote as many times as you like.

Big "C" Catholic

Click over to Big "C" Catholic and welcome them to the Papist Blogosphere. . .

They are re-posting installments of my piece, "Put Down the Missalette!"

This was one of my first non-homily postings on HancAquam. . .it caused quite a stir in the comment boxes.

Come on, Jesus! Just tell us!

4th Week of Easter (T): Acts 11.19-26; John 10.22-30
Fr. Philip Neri Powell, OP
Convento SS Domenico e Sisto, Roma

Those among the Jews who flock around Jesus at the Portico of Solomon sound very much like my literature students when we begin reading modern poetry: “Just tell us plainly what all this means!” Growing increasingly impatient with the ambiguity of his metaphors and parables, those following Jesus around town want a straight-forward, plain-spoken declaration that can either be rejected as false or accepted as true. No more vague hints. No more esoteric gibberish. No more stories within stories that excite imagination so that the heart might believe. Like my poetry students, Jesus’ followers want The Answer because they know it’s going to be on The Test. Truly, who can blame them? Unlike my students, however, those among the Jews who have been captivated by our Lord’s preaching and miraculous works are risking their places in heaven by listening to this Nazarean upstart. He is leading them away from the surety and comfort of the temple and the into the potentially deadly desert of faith alone. So, they clamor after him, crying out in frustration: "How long are you going to keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly." As simply and as plainly as he can, Jesus answers: “I told you and you do not believe. The works I do in my Father's name testify to me […] The Father and I are one.”

As the philosopher in the crowd, I would be the one to ask those pestering Jesus for clarity: “Um, he says he and the Father are one. But why would you believe that? You are asking the would-be King to declare himself King so that you might know who is King.” One would hope that there is at least one soul in the crowd who would point out, “He says he and the Father are one. He also acts in a way that shows he and the Father are one.” Even the most hard-headed, cold-hearted philosopher would have to admit that an empirically verifiable demonstration of divinity is worth consideration! But demanding such a demonstration misses the point entirely.

Those demanding clarity from Jesus have witnessed his miracles. They have much more than his allegedly flighty stories on which to base their faith. Jesus tells them that it is not a lack of empirical evidence or verbal clarity that impedes their acceptance of his claim to be the Messiah. What’s preventing them from coming into the fullness of his revelation is their lack of belief. They cannot see his works for what they are because do not believe in their Father’s promises. Jesus says, “My sheep hear my voice; I know them, and they follow me.”

First, we must hear the Lord’s voice, then we come to believe. Once we believe, empirical evidence supporting the truth of our belief is irrelevant to our relationship with God. We do not base our love for friends and family on verifiable evidence. Jesus did not perform his miracles as evidence for us to witness, evaluate, and then either accept or reject as proof of his divinity. He cured the sick, fed the hungry, and raised the dead out of compassion, out of love for those who suffer. The question that Jesus’ entire life and ministry—from his virgin birth to his sacrificial death and resurrection—the question he poses to us is this: will you follow me to the cross and suffer for the love of your neighbor? That, brothers and sisters, is an unambiguous question. Now, how do you answer?

Angels, Demons, Liars & Thieves

Excellent review of the movie adaptation of Angels and Demons. . .this is the latest piece of hateful flotsam to be produced by anti-Catholic bigot and Know-Nothing harpie, Dan Brown. Tom Hanks' participation in this farce is disappointing. Note the liberal cowardice of the movie's producers who change the distinctly Muslim/middle eastern name of the assassin in the book to something less potentially offensive to our fatwa-prone friends. Obviously, the producers aren't all that worried that the violent minions of the Evil Catholic Church will kidnap them and make a Youtube video of their beheading.

During the fracas over The DaVinci Code, I was asked many times if Catholics should go see the movie or read the book. My advice then remains the same for Brown's latest excretion: if you want to give your hard-earned money to someone who is willing to lie about the Church to make a profit, do so.

One could argue that Brown's books and their movie adaptations are immoral in themselves. I won't argue this point. I will say, however, that giving Brown your cash is not unlike an Israeli citizen giving a sweet donation to Hamas. To what degree would you be culpable in any anti-Catholic violence that might result from the hatred puked up by Brown's twisted imagination? Your moral cooperation would be remote at best, but why put yourself in the position of even having to ask the question?

The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed an incredibly dangerous "hate crimes" bill. Federal prosecutors will be allowed to investigate and prosecute as "thought criminals" anyone who is suspected of inducing by means of "hate speech" a violent act against a member of an enumerated, protected class of citizens, This bill is modeled on similar laws in Canada that have already been used to arrest and charge clergy who preach against same-sex marriage.

Setting aside the obvious First Amendment objections, this bill violates the Fourteenth Amendment by giving selected citizens more protection under the law than others. Anyone remember this: "Some animals are more equal than others?" Violence against someone due to animus toward their religious beliefs is one of the enumerated crimes.

My question: when some whacko vandalizes a Catholic Church, will the Feds go after Brown for his obvious anti-Catholic "hate speech"?

Yea. I'll sit here and hold my breath.

Vote for Me!

Bring Hope and Change to sinners!

Vote for HancAquam in The Crescat's 2009 Blog Awards!

HancAquam has been nominated in the following categories:

Best Blog By a Religious Who Is Not Fr. Z.
Best Political Blog (not the American Papist)
Best Church Militant Blog

HancAquam promises not to raise your taxes. . .
Not to torture anyone. . .well, maybe the occasional Moonbat. . .
Not to disclose national secrets to terrorists. . .
Not to nominate pro-abortionists to the judiciary. . .
And not to drool on its followers!*

A book on every shelf. . .a Coffee Bowl in every pantry!

*Campaign promises are subject to revision once HancAquam actually reads the memos and knows what it is talking about.

A prayer for The Won's Supreme Court appt.

This prayer won't be in my book, but it is too good not to pass on:

O Dark Gods of Politics, Thou who Dwell under Rocks, please visit upon them that which Thou so cruelly visited upon Bush the Elder, when he who was called Sununu pronounced the appointment of a stay-at-home momma’s boy sheep farmer a “home run,” and Thou made of him a Flaming Lib.

I know this is asking a lot, O Vile Lords of Contrariness, Stupidity, Corruption, Vice, Narrow Self-Interest and Betrayal, Wretched be Thy Names, for Thou hath ordained of late that door shall swing mainly in the other direction. Find for him, Thy Anointed Won, a lefty handwringer who legislates most stridently from the bench, a champion of absurdity, let us see this scoundrel exalted, and then dispatch the Winged Monkey of Thy Perversity to throw his Righteous Wrench into those works!

This is my earnest prayer, O Frightful Ones, who have so capriciously visited wide stances, no WMD, and the likes of Specter and Powell upon us, lo, these many years!

I almost (almost!) dropped The Coffee Bowl at "Winged Monkey of Thy Perversity"! Hilarious.

Mille grazie! Grazie mille!

Though some of my more skeptical brothers seriously doubt this, this blog would exist if no one ever even looked at the WISH LIST.

That readers not only look at the list but also purchase books and send them to me is Pure Gravy. I am consistently amazed at the generosity of the God's People! There is almost nothing more useful to a Dominican preacher/student/professor than a good book. . .especially when EU book prices are sometimes double what they are in the U.S. Factor in the exchange rate. . .well, you can do the math.

I've also received offers of financial help and technical assistance with a new laptop when my trusty DELL needs replacing. . .offers of assistance in getting back to the U.S. in this summer. . .offers for home-cooked meals and an evening's visit. . .even an offer to help me with my luggage and a ride home when I make it back!

So, once again, I am granted the opportunity to express my thanks to God and His people for His generosity and the resulting generosity of those who find something useful in my little blog-ministry.

Daily, I receive assurances of prayer and fasting for my personal intentions and the health of my family back in the boonies of Mississippi. There's no expressing my gratitude for this. I can only admit to being awed by the movement our Lord's Spirit among His people.

Despite my all-too-frequent lapses into crankiness, I live in hope, trusting fully in the promises of God that Christ's victory over darkness and despair is complete. As we move inexorably into more and deeper conflicts with the powers of this world, we must keep squarely in front of us the sure knowledge that the battle is won. The race is over. Laying claim to this victory and then behaving accordingly is not only the key to our survival but our baptismal duty. . .and I daresay, our privilege.

So, a thousand Thank You's to HancAquam readers, Book Benefactors, commenters, fellow-cranks, and lurkers. We got nothing to lose b/c the battle is won!

God bless, Fr. Philip, OP

A few titles from the upcoming prayer book

The book manuscript is slowly approaching its First Draft Form. . .almost ready to be sent to my lovely editor, Deb, at Liguori!

I thought I would share a few titles from the table of contents:

Three Mystical Novenas (Via Negativa, Via Positiva, Via Sophia)
Litany to Mary, Co-redemptrix
Novena of the Lord's Prayer
Litany to the Unsayable God
Novena Sacramentum caritatis (as in Pope Benedict's post-synodal exhortation)
Litany on the Way
Psalm Novena for Growing in Holiness
Novena for the Discernment of a Priestly Vocation

How's that sound?

Coffee Bowl Browsing...

Home security tips for that summer vacation

Coup at the U.N.!

For all you science-geeks and science-geeks-wanna-be's (like me!)

Isn't "skeptical Christian" an oxymoron?

Links to canonical and non-canonical writings of the early Church

Basic answers to basic questions about the Catholic faith

Why do we put-up with Catholic-bashing?

Manly athletes behaving manly (or, "Spirit of Vatican 2 theologians react to papal encyclical")

For when you are too busy for the hot tub

I need a new desk chair!

For the smart-mouths among us (hilarious)

The coming zombie apocalypse: biblical proof!

Red State rebellion based on the 10th Amendment

How Obama got elected: media malpractice

Great media site for commentary on the Obamanation

Motivational poster for philosophers!

Goofing off...

Toldjah it was a religion. . .His Immenseness Pope Gore I must be so proud.

Why does this sort of thing drive me nuts?

OK. . .my day doesn't seem quite so bad now.

After I get a new laptop, I'm gonna get one of these.

I have enough trouble with the alphabet we use now!

Back to work!

$328,825 for a photo

Drudge is reporting that the Air Force One joyride over Manhattan--the one that Obama knew N.O.T.H.I.N.G. about--costs us $328, 825.

I suppose we should be thankful. The Abortionist-in-Chief could have sent those taxpayer dollars to Mexico and paid for 1,096 abortions (assuming that Moloch charges the going rate in the US south of the border: $300 each).

So, the "publicity stunt" over Lady Liberty quite possibly saved the lives of almost 1,200 kids.

Ah, Hope and Change. . .Change and Hope.

Painting Obama as the crucified Christ not intentional

Update on the painting of the Obamessiah:

from Michael D'Antuono, the painter of the piece:

"The idea of the piece, or the reaction that I'd hoped for, was to highlight our nation's deep partisan divide and how our interpretation of the truth is really prejudiced by our political perspective and I think that to a large degree we are being manipulated by the media. I miss the old day when we just have the facts. Now we have pundits and spin and strategists.

I just thought that through that painting people would see different things. The right and the left would have different interpretations of it based on their political lens. But I have to admit I was very surprised that instead of that I got thousands of email complaining on the religious front. And that was not my intent at all. I wanted to create a dialog politically but not religiously. I didn't mean to make fun of anybody's religion; maybe I did so naively but I didn't mean it that way. In the bible Jesus is The Truth and comparing Obama that way isn't something I meant to do at all.

Apparently, I've upset a lot of people. And I've decided that's not what I wanted to do and I'm not going to display it in the park on Wednesday ... art is meant to be somewhat provocative but the religious element went way farther than I had anticipated."

OK. . .first, I'm very glad that people let this guy know what they thought about his painting. Second, though I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, I find it extraordinarily difficult to believe that he didn't know what he was doing when he chose the crucifixion as his model. Third, I am amazed at his thoughtful response to the public's criticism. Normally, artists long for the sort of public ridicule that this sort of painting receives. Great for publicity. Great for the artist's self-delusion that they are "cutting-edge." Great for raising one's creds in the art world as a self-anointed martyr.

Question: should he have withdrawn the painting from exhibition?

I'm not a conspiracy theorist but. . .

Now. . .if I were one of those tinfoil-hat-wearing-New World Order-ruled-by-alien-reptiles conspiracy types, I would be foaming at the mouth right now. . .

Test run for the next 9/11: just making sure!

Scaring up some pretext for martial law?

Run it up the flagpole and see who genuflects. . .or doesn't.

Laying the groundwork for an anti-Church?

The Unblinking Eye watches you watching It

The gospel of Global Peril frightens children, pets, and old ladies

The fastest way to a man's tinfoil hat is through his stomach

Taliban peace-lovers going nuclear?

The battle plan in three parts: American EU, The One's Deception, the Grand Strategy

Christian teaching becoming thought-crimes

No worries! He's coming. . .to take care of us all.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist. Nor do I believe that This is the End of the World as We Know It. What I do find fascinating is the sharp uptick in stories and commentaries that use apocalyptic language and images to convey basic political disagreements. Both the Left and the Right indulge in this sort of hyperbolic rhetoric. Perhaps this is a remnant of our evangelical Protestant history. Perhaps it just makes good reading on the internet.

Or perhaps I'm an unwilling dupe of our Reptilian Overlords and vehement denial by seemingly rational, well-educated people is all part of the conspiracy!

Back to work. . .