Points to Ponder:
With the passing of Pope John Paul II a few hours ago, it seems fitting to post some of his words as the 140th installment of the "points to ponder" series at Rerum Novarum. With that in mind, here is the text from his final Easter message (delivered for him by Cardinal Angelo Sodano) circa March 27, 2005:
"Mane nobiscum, Domine!" Stay with us, Lord! (cf. Luke 24:29). With these words, the disciples on the road to Emmaus invited the mysterious Wayfarer to stay with them, as the sun was setting on that first day of the week when the incredible had occurred. According to his promise, Christ had risen; but they did not yet know this. Nevertheless, the words spoken by the Wayfarer along the road made their hearts burn within them. So they said to him: "Stay with us." Seated around the supper table, they recognized him in the "breaking of bread" -- and suddenly he vanished. There remained in front of them the broken bread. There echoed in their hearts the gentle sound of his words.
Dear brothers and sisters, the Word and the Bread of the Eucharist, the mystery and the gift of Easter, remain down the centuries as a constant memorial of the passion, death and resurrection of Christ! On this Easter Day, together with all Christians throughout the world, we too repeat those words: Jesus, crucified and risen, stay with us! Stay with us, faithful friend and sure support for humanity on its journey through history! Living Word of the Father, give hope and trust to all who are searching for the true meaning of their lives. Bread of eternal life, nourish those who hunger for truth, freedom, justice and peace.
Stay with us, Living Word of the Father, and teach us words and deeds of peace: peace for our world consecrated by your blood and drenched in the blood of so many innocent victims: peace for the countries of the Middle East and Africa, where so much blood continues to be shed; peace for all of humanity, still threatened by fratricidal wars. Stay with us, Bread of eternal life, broken and distributed to those at table: give also to us the strength to show generous solidarity towards the multitudes who are even today suffering and dying from poverty and hunger, decimated by fatal epidemics or devastated by immense natural disasters. By the power of your Resurrection, may they too become sharers in new life.
We, the men and women of the third millennium, we too need you, Risen Lord! Stay with us now, and until the end of time. Grant that the material progress of peoples may never obscure the spiritual values which are the soul of their civilization. Sustain us, we pray, on our journey. In you do we believe, in you do we hope, for you alone have the words of eternal life (cf. John 6:68). "Mane nobiscum, Domine!" Alleluia! [Pope John Paul II (1920-2005 RIP)]
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
Miscellaneous Mutterings:
(On Terri Schiavo's Situation, So-Called "Christian Fascism", and Communist Supporters of the Culture of Death)
It is good at the very least that Monsignor Malanowski was able to not only give Terri Schiavo Viaticum the other day but also the Sacrament of Anointing according to a recent piece by David Sommer. Let us pray that she is able to be saved before it is too late.
In other news, it seems that those who are protesting the treatment of Terri Schiavo have attracted people who are protesting them. To quote from Sommers' article briefly:
A handful of counterdemonstrators holding signs touting the ``Revolutionary Communist Party'' decried what they said was ``Christian fascism.''
As these vestiges of human debris parrot the common notion of fascism being the opposite of communism, it seems appropriate to remind the readers of Rerum Novarum that your host destroyed this putrid prevarication last year in a post to this very weblog. That point being noted, let us make a few more notations on this subject of so-called "Christian Fascism."
---There is nothing whatsoever that is "fascistic" about protesting the killing of an innocent human being.
---There is nothing whatsoever that is "fascistic" about a government seeking to protect the life of an innocent and defenseless person.
Indeed, though the Men Behind Hitler series was suspended at this weblog, the readers are reminded that what was covered already from that series is adequate to refute the kinds of idiocies being parrotted by the brainless twits of the Revolutionary Communist Party.
In reality, the only thing resembling fascism is the brownshirt brigage of judicial termites and judicial whores who are out to kill an innocent and defenseless woman. And that sort of violence to advance a cultural agenda happens to be the very raison_d'etre of communism and socialism which is communism before it reaches full development.{1} And as communism has failed every time it has been tried -and it only succeeds for a time by the violent destruction of those who are viewed as political "enemies", it makes perfect sense that these Revolutionary Communist Party sorts (who are worshippers of a cult of death) would be protesting those who would protest the killing of an innocent and defenseless woman!!! This writer cannot think of a more damning indictment than that so no more will be said on it at the present time.
Note:
{1} [P]rotectionism, socialism, and communism are basically the same plant in three different stages of its growth. [Claude Frederic Bastiat: From The Law (circa 1850)]
(On Terri Schiavo's Situation, So-Called "Christian Fascism", and Communist Supporters of the Culture of Death)
It is good at the very least that Monsignor Malanowski was able to not only give Terri Schiavo Viaticum the other day but also the Sacrament of Anointing according to a recent piece by David Sommer. Let us pray that she is able to be saved before it is too late.
In other news, it seems that those who are protesting the treatment of Terri Schiavo have attracted people who are protesting them. To quote from Sommers' article briefly:
A handful of counterdemonstrators holding signs touting the ``Revolutionary Communist Party'' decried what they said was ``Christian fascism.''
As these vestiges of human debris parrot the common notion of fascism being the opposite of communism, it seems appropriate to remind the readers of Rerum Novarum that your host destroyed this putrid prevarication last year in a post to this very weblog. That point being noted, let us make a few more notations on this subject of so-called "Christian Fascism."
---There is nothing whatsoever that is "fascistic" about protesting the killing of an innocent human being.
---There is nothing whatsoever that is "fascistic" about a government seeking to protect the life of an innocent and defenseless person.
Indeed, though the Men Behind Hitler series was suspended at this weblog, the readers are reminded that what was covered already from that series is adequate to refute the kinds of idiocies being parrotted by the brainless twits of the Revolutionary Communist Party.
In reality, the only thing resembling fascism is the brownshirt brigage of judicial termites and judicial whores who are out to kill an innocent and defenseless woman. And that sort of violence to advance a cultural agenda happens to be the very raison_d'etre of communism and socialism which is communism before it reaches full development.{1} And as communism has failed every time it has been tried -and it only succeeds for a time by the violent destruction of those who are viewed as political "enemies", it makes perfect sense that these Revolutionary Communist Party sorts (who are worshippers of a cult of death) would be protesting those who would protest the killing of an innocent and defenseless woman!!! This writer cannot think of a more damning indictment than that so no more will be said on it at the present time.
Note:
{1} [P]rotectionism, socialism, and communism are basically the same plant in three different stages of its growth. [Claude Frederic Bastiat: From The Law (circa 1850)]
Tuesday, March 29, 2005
Miscellaneous Threads of Possible Interest:
Terri Schiavo: Judicial Murder (Nat Hentoff circa March 29, 2005)
Nat Hentoff of The Village Voice explains precisely what we are dealing with in the Terri Schiavo case: judicial murder. While We at Rerum Novarum have differences with Mr. Hentoff on some other issues; nonetheless, it is pleasing to see him in such fine form on this issue. For that matter, this writer would be remiss in not noting that Democratic Senator Harry Reid of Nevada (Minority Leader in the Senate), Ralph Nader, Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sr., Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr., Senator Joe Lieberman, and Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa are among those whom are often are at odds with the present writer but nonetheless he is pleased to have as allies in this fight.
Terri Schiavo, Requiescat in Pacem (By John Armor circa March 26, 2005)
It is practically a formality now; nonetheless, John Armor's article is also well worth a read.
Neurologists Say: Recording of Terri Shows She's Not PVS (By Rev. Reverend Robert Johansen circa March 25, 2005)
Please read Fr. Rob's most recent weblog posting above. Basically, he outlines why the assertion that Terri was in a "persistive vegetative state" (PVS) -something that the MSM asserted as a matter of fact throughout this whole ordeal- is a bald faced lie. While not the occasion to crow at yet another piece of evidence which discredits the MSM{1}, nonetheless this is something that cannot go without at least a mention in passing.
It's a Brave New World After Terri Schiavo Dies (By Timothy Birdnow circa March 28, 2005)
The above article{2} (courtesy of Kevin Tierney) points out certain movements which are remarkably silent in the face of what is happening to Terri Schiavo: movements that should be supporting her if they are interested in what they claim to be interested in.
And finally, The Rerum Novarum Miscellaneous BLOG has been updated as of today. The subject covered in that new thread pertains to the Terri Schiavo case in a more indirect manner. Nonetheless, what is covered there is common to the kind of solipsisms which are put forward by so-called "progressivists" to justify their appeal to illogical emotional premises over and above fundamental logic and reasonable argumentation. For that reason, it seemed appropriate to deal with it at the present time.
In the coming days, there will be a new installment of the Framers Know Best thread (the first since July of 2003) added to Rerum Novarum along with an audipost on the Terri Schiavo situation and a few other tidbits as time allows for them.
Notes:
{1} To everything there is a season and this is not the season for celebrating more evidence of the MSM's slide into irrelevancy.
{2} The fact that Aldous Huxley saw Brave New World as being an increasing concrete reality in the 1950's (ergo his 1958 sequel Brave New World Revisited) aside for a moment of course.
Terri Schiavo: Judicial Murder (Nat Hentoff circa March 29, 2005)
Nat Hentoff of The Village Voice explains precisely what we are dealing with in the Terri Schiavo case: judicial murder. While We at Rerum Novarum have differences with Mr. Hentoff on some other issues; nonetheless, it is pleasing to see him in such fine form on this issue. For that matter, this writer would be remiss in not noting that Democratic Senator Harry Reid of Nevada (Minority Leader in the Senate), Ralph Nader, Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sr., Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr., Senator Joe Lieberman, and Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa are among those whom are often are at odds with the present writer but nonetheless he is pleased to have as allies in this fight.
Terri Schiavo, Requiescat in Pacem (By John Armor circa March 26, 2005)
It is practically a formality now; nonetheless, John Armor's article is also well worth a read.
Neurologists Say: Recording of Terri Shows She's Not PVS (By Rev. Reverend Robert Johansen circa March 25, 2005)
Please read Fr. Rob's most recent weblog posting above. Basically, he outlines why the assertion that Terri was in a "persistive vegetative state" (PVS) -something that the MSM asserted as a matter of fact throughout this whole ordeal- is a bald faced lie. While not the occasion to crow at yet another piece of evidence which discredits the MSM{1}, nonetheless this is something that cannot go without at least a mention in passing.
It's a Brave New World After Terri Schiavo Dies (By Timothy Birdnow circa March 28, 2005)
The above article{2} (courtesy of Kevin Tierney) points out certain movements which are remarkably silent in the face of what is happening to Terri Schiavo: movements that should be supporting her if they are interested in what they claim to be interested in.
And finally, The Rerum Novarum Miscellaneous BLOG has been updated as of today. The subject covered in that new thread pertains to the Terri Schiavo case in a more indirect manner. Nonetheless, what is covered there is common to the kind of solipsisms which are put forward by so-called "progressivists" to justify their appeal to illogical emotional premises over and above fundamental logic and reasonable argumentation. For that reason, it seemed appropriate to deal with it at the present time.
In the coming days, there will be a new installment of the Framers Know Best thread (the first since July of 2003) added to Rerum Novarum along with an audipost on the Terri Schiavo situation and a few other tidbits as time allows for them.
Notes:
{1} To everything there is a season and this is not the season for celebrating more evidence of the MSM's slide into irrelevancy.
{2} The fact that Aldous Huxley saw Brave New World as being an increasing concrete reality in the 1950's (ergo his 1958 sequel Brave New World Revisited) aside for a moment of course.
Monday, March 28, 2005
Points to Ponder:
(From a fellow student of Claude Frederic Bastiat's The Law)
The first principle of a free society is that each person owns himself. You are your private property, and I am mine. Most Americans probably accept that first principle. Those who disagree are obliged to inform the rest of us just who owns us, at least here on earth.
This vision of self-ownership is one of those "self-evident" truths to which the Founders referred to in the Declaration of Independence, that "All Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." Like John Locke and other philosophers who influenced them, the Founders saw these rights as preceding government, and they said, "That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted."
The Framers of the Constitution recognized that while government was necessary to secure liberty, it was also liberty's greatest threat. Having this deep suspicion of government, they loaded our Constitution with a host of anti-congressional phrases, such as: "Congress shall make no law," "shall not be infringed" and "shall not be violated."
Once one accepts the principle of self-ownership, what's moral and immoral becomes self-evident. Murder is immoral because it violates private property. Rape and theft are also immoral -- they also violate private property.
Here's an important question: Would rape become morally acceptable if Congress passed a law legalizing it? You say: "What's wrong with you, Williams? Rape is immoral plain and simple, no matter what Congress says or does!"
If you take that position, isn't it just as immoral when Congress legalizes the taking of one person's earnings to give to another? Surely if a private person took money from one person and gave it to another, we'd deem it theft and, as such, immoral. Does the same act become moral when Congress takes people's money to give to farmers, airline companies or an impoverished family? No, it's still theft, but with an important difference: It's legal, and participants aren't jailed. [Dr. Walter E. Williams (circa May 7, 2003)]
(From a fellow student of Claude Frederic Bastiat's The Law)
The first principle of a free society is that each person owns himself. You are your private property, and I am mine. Most Americans probably accept that first principle. Those who disagree are obliged to inform the rest of us just who owns us, at least here on earth.
This vision of self-ownership is one of those "self-evident" truths to which the Founders referred to in the Declaration of Independence, that "All Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." Like John Locke and other philosophers who influenced them, the Founders saw these rights as preceding government, and they said, "That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted."
The Framers of the Constitution recognized that while government was necessary to secure liberty, it was also liberty's greatest threat. Having this deep suspicion of government, they loaded our Constitution with a host of anti-congressional phrases, such as: "Congress shall make no law," "shall not be infringed" and "shall not be violated."
Once one accepts the principle of self-ownership, what's moral and immoral becomes self-evident. Murder is immoral because it violates private property. Rape and theft are also immoral -- they also violate private property.
Here's an important question: Would rape become morally acceptable if Congress passed a law legalizing it? You say: "What's wrong with you, Williams? Rape is immoral plain and simple, no matter what Congress says or does!"
If you take that position, isn't it just as immoral when Congress legalizes the taking of one person's earnings to give to another? Surely if a private person took money from one person and gave it to another, we'd deem it theft and, as such, immoral. Does the same act become moral when Congress takes people's money to give to farmers, airline companies or an impoverished family? No, it's still theft, but with an important difference: It's legal, and participants aren't jailed. [Dr. Walter E. Williams (circa May 7, 2003)]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)