Got an e-mail from a protestant friend (it was part of a blast e-mail to acquaintances of his) It was a long e-mail concerning final judgment quoting various Biblical verses. I thought it wasn’t bad but was incomplete in several ways. Here is the reply I sent:
A good passage but never forget that everyone will face their own judgment day at the hour of their death. It is more important to remember to prepare for that day. If you look too far ahead you can trip.
Also don’t forget that two other passages that are significant:
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, 10 but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name? Did we not drive out demons in your name? Did we not do mighty deeds in your name?’ Then I will declare to them solemnly, ‘I never knew you. 11 Depart from me, you evildoers.’ 12 “Everyone who listens to these words of mine and acts on them will be like a wise man who built his house on rock. The rain fell, the floods came, and the winds blew and buffeted the house. But it did not collapse; it had been set solidly on rock. And everyone who listens to these words of mine but does not act on them will be like a fool who built his house on sand. The rain fell, the floods came, and the winds blew and buffeted the house. And it collapsed and was completely ruined.” Matt (7:22:27)
And Paul echoes Christ in terms of action:
Do you not know that the runners in the stadium all run in the race, but only one wins the prize? Run so as to win. Every athlete exercises discipline in every way. They do it to win a perishable crown, but we an imperishable one. Thus I do not run aimlessly; I do not fight as if I were shadowboxing. No, I drive my body and train it, for fear that, after having preached to others, I myself should be disqualified. 9 (1 Cor 9 24-27)
Both Christ and Paul are not talking about physical death; that happens to all men (and I of course use men in it’s broadest sense as the species) So one should remember to follow up. Remember it was the apple of the tree of knowledge of good and evil that caused Adam and Eve to be ejected. Once they understood the difference the responsibility of salvation fell on them. That is why the paragraph concerning judgment begins with those who obey the gospel. When you know something you have a greater responsibility that if you don’t.
Now here is the e-mail I received. My comments are in Bold italic: Continue reading “Lets talk “the end times””
First of all of course President Obama is going to pick a liberal jurist to the court. With the more of Sen Specter there is absolutely no chance of blocking it even if they wanted to. He could pick Ward Churchill or Bill Ayers and we couldn’t block him.
It is inconceivable that this pick will not enrage and energize conservatives and republicans. If I wrote the worm turning post today it would be the newest item.
Second of all it demonstrates that elections matter! John McCain was not the ideal candidate but I held a sign for him for 7 hours on election day and I’m proud of it. If you are a conservative that stayed home or voted for President Obama remember if this liberal pick stays on the court for 30 years…you helped do this.
Third of all in terms of an indirect proof. This is going to highlight the pro abortion credentials of President Obama in the strongest terms possible. It is the single biggest disaster for Fr. Jenkins at Notre Dame that could happen. This highlights the unsuitability of President Obama for ND. It also puts Doug Kimec and the phony Catholics at Catholics United in the limelight, what will they say.
This is the type of thing that God does, he gives people opportunities to aid in their salvation. A situation is given where people have a chance to make the right choice. Catholics United, Doug Kimec, Fr. Jenkins and even President Obama have all been given the chance to do the right thing. That chance is a gift from God (all those ND Rosaries didn’t hurt either)
What is done with that chance is where the rubber meets the road.
Now this is interesting. Specter could allow a nominee out of committee if Specter was a member of the Republican minority, but as part of the majority, he’s just another vote. Here are the other Republicans: Orrin Hatch, Chuck Grassley, Jon Kyl, Jeff Sessions, Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn, and Tom Coburn.
The weak link is Lindsey Graham, who was a member of the Gang of 14. If Graham says the course, the Republicans may not be able to stop runaway spending, military retrenchment, and an interrogation witch hunt. But Specter may have handed Republicans a gift.
Has Specter’s changeover become official? Can republicans pull him from the committee because of his announced change. It will be interesting to find out.
At the American Papist a poll went up concerning the best solution to the Notre Dame situation. I left the following comment:
The actual best solution would be for the Whitehouse to find a reason why they can’t attend and pull ND’s fat out of the fire.
Imagine my surprise to see Kathleen Parker echo me:
Obama might consider following Glendon’s lead. Although he supports choice, the president also recognizes the moral complexity of those decisions. Out of respect for pro-life Catholics and their beloved institution, he should politely bow out.
This of course assumes a respect for something beyond his own self importance. Parker seems to be very taken by Glendon’s act:
Here on planet “What About Me,” principled people are so rare as to be oddities. Thus, it was a head-swiveling moment Monday when Mary Ann Glendon, the former U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, quietly declined Notre Dame’s Laetare Medal.
Kathleen Parker hasn’t been very right lately, but she recognizes an act of principle when she sees one.
Politically the president must be thanking his lucky stars for Sen Specter, the 100 days to distract public attention from Mary Ann Glendon. There is nothing like the shock of reality (planes over NY) to make people see things for what they are, and reality is the biggest danger to the political future of the current administration.
In all the news about the president at Notre Dame the fact that a strong person in the pro-life movement Mary Ann Glendon was supposed to receive the Laetare Medal was supposed to be a counterpoint to affirm the pro-life identity of the college.
However it appears that they didn’t count on the actual faith of Mary Ann Glendon:
Then I learned that “talking points” issued by Notre Dame in response to widespread criticism of its decision included two statements implying that my acceptance speech would somehow balance the event:
* “President Obama won’t be doing all the talking. Mary Ann Glendon, the former U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, will be speaking as the recipient of the Laetare Medal.”
* “We think having the president come to Notre Dame, see our graduates, meet our leaders, and hear a talk from Mary Ann Glendon is a good thing for the president and for the causes we care about.”
A commencement, however, is supposed to be a joyous day for the graduates and their families. It is not the right place, nor is a brief acceptance speech the right vehicle, for engagement with the very serious problems raised by Notre Dame’s decision—in disregard of the settled position of the U.S. bishops—to honor a prominent and uncompromising opponent of the Church’s position on issues involving fundamental principles of justice.
Finally, with recent news reports that other Catholic schools are similarly choosing to disregard the bishops’ guidelines, I am concerned that Notre Dame’s example could have an unfortunate ripple effect.
It is with great sadness, therefore, that I have concluded that I cannot accept the Laetare Medal or participate in the May 17 graduation ceremony.
In order to avoid the inevitable speculation about the reasons for my decision, I will release this letter to the press, but I do not plan to make any further comment on the matter at this time.
To say this is a bombshell is the understatement of the year. Hot air comments:
…she’s right to reject that exploitation, as Notre Dame used Glendon in a way that all but said, “Why, some of our best friends are Catholic!”
The public scolding and rejection leaves Notre Dame twisting in the wind. The Laetare Medal is quite prestigious in the Catholic community, and Glendon’s rejection of it will make Rev. Jenkins look even more foolish. Glendon refuses to allow the award to be demeaned into a tool for political purposes, which demonstrates more integrity than Fr. Jenkins has shown in this sorry episode.
Ed Peters is impressed.
The evil that ND President Jenkins and his Board of Trustees committed has, Deus laudetur, occasioned one of the most striking displays of episcopal fortitude I can remember, mobilized hundreds of thousands of American Catholics against another quiet surrender to the Culture of Death, and effected notice to several once great Catholic institutions that it’s time, finally, to decide where they stand.
Fr De Souza is impressed:
It could not have been easy for Glendon to decline the Laetare Medal — after all, she is deserving of it, and the people who nominated her for it are now put in an awkward position. Glendon is proud of her Notre Dame connections, including the 1996 honorary degree that she was awarded. No doubt she is proud of her former student Barack Obama for his laudable achievements. No doubt she would have preferred a quieter honor, one which would not have forced her to choose sides. It is to Father Jenkins’s shame that he tried to use Glendon. It is to her great credit that she refused to be used.
In her life of extraordinary accomplishments, the witness given by Glendon by not going to Notre Dame next month is something of a crowning achievement. It matters a great deal that a celebrated laywoman is rejecting this honor. Notre Dame long ago learned how to disregard the advice, admonishment and even the explicit will of the American bishops. For this they paid no apparent price, as there were always those who were willing to take what Notre Dame was offering, including successive presidents of the United States.
Now someone has finally said No. And not just someone, but a woman who has ennobled everything she has lent her name to. It will be noticed on May 17 that someone thought some things more important than Notre Dame’s honors; that someone thought some things more important than basking in the glow of a popular president; that someone thought 25 years of deliberate confusion, evasion, equivocation and deception from Notre Dame on abortion politics was enough.
Glendon will not collect her Laetare Medal. In not doing so, she has proved worthy of the honor; please God, her courageous decision will make Notre Dame more worthy of the honors it seeks to give.
I say, God bless Ambassador Glendon.
The previous paragraphs are a real indictment of the university to this point.
Fr Powell is impressed:
The most telling element of this letter is Prof. Glendon’s assertion that she is declining the medal and the invitation b/c Jenkins used her attendance in his “talking points” to cloud the issue of The One’s invitation with a thin veneer of “balance.” She also spanks him for ignoring the USCCB’s guidelines on not inviting and honoring pro-abortion speakers on Catholic campuses.
Good for her!
William is impressed:
This is one brave Catholic Woman…
The Curt Jester is impressed:
Now it will be interesting to see if Notre Dame decides to award this to someone else or to just not issue it this year. I think they would have a hard time finding somebody authentically pro-life that would accept this as she has declined it. So I would guess that it is not issued this year. It would add another scandal if they picked someone nominally pro-life as they did last year with Martin Sheen. I protested his pick last year since while he calls himself pro-life he does nothing to advance the cause and solidly supports pro-abortion Democrats. So will they be calling Doug Kmiec? — I hope not.
Personally I am very proud. It is so easy to just give in, that is the biggest advantage of sin, it just flows so calmly that you don’t see the gates until you are through them. To do the right thing is always hard, and it will cost her a lot, but that price won’t include her soul.
Pray for her.
Update: At the corner Mike Potemra is disappointed:
If anyone could have made the pro-life case on a podium that would be — on that day, at least — the World’s Greatest Platform, it would have been Mary Ann Glendon. It would have been a tough task — to express a serious disagreement with the most famous man in the world, in his presence, while at the same time not coming across as bullying, confrontational, or point-scoring — but I think she could have done it better than just about anyone else I could imagine. The day is coming when the taking of innocent human life at the fetal stage will be illegal in this country, and I think Ambassador Glendon’s speech could have helped bring that day closer. Are we pro-lifers confident that the pro-life witness at the commencement ceremony will be anywhere near as impressive as her remarks would have been?
The Anchoress seconds the motion:
But part of me wishes Glendon had not pulled back. I had a hope -call me a whimsical dreamer- that somehow the Holy Spirit would use the event, and the shared dais, to give us a real contrast between the Culture of Life and the Culture of Death. And I had also hoped that upon meeting Glendon, President Obama would go all “post-partisan” like he said he would and realize she was a terrific Ambassador to the Vatican and send her back there.
Faith in the Holy Spirit is good and I suspect it is that faith that made her decide not to go.
Update 2: Don Surber takes the majority view:
As a Methodist, I am struck by the respectful way people are protesting his speech.
Hey Don we’d be happy to have you anytime.
Update 3: Missed powerline:
The Bishop of South Bend has aleady said he will not attend Norte Dame’s commencement, the first one he has missed in 25 yeras. The Bishop suggested that, by inviting Obama, Notre Dame had placed “prestige” over “truth.” Mary Ann Glendon has demonstrated that, by contrast, she places the fundamental truths of her religion above prestige.
You know there was a time long ago when I would have never missed powerline.
You likely remember George Carlin’s old joke about someone still being in hell on a meat rap.
What Carlin forgot and what most Catholic’s ignore is that the prohibition on meat WASN’T lifted. You are allowed to substitute some other kind of penance but you still can’t have meat on Friday’s if you don’t.
Well via American Papist it looks like the Diocese of Steubenville under Bishop Conlon has decided to go back to the old ways:
The resumption of year-round abstinence in the Diocese of Steubenville will begin after this coming Easter, one week after Good Friday (April 17). Although the practice will not be a requirement of law, and failing to keep it will not constitute a sin, I hope every one who is old enough to receive Holy Communion and well enough to come to church will take it seriously. Our parishes, schools and organizations should provide meatless food at their Friday activities.
Until 1966, Catholics around the world were required to abstain from meat on all Fridays. That year, Pope Paul VI determined that the rules for fasting and abstinence should be set by the various episcopal conferences according to local circumstances. At the same time, he reminded us that doing penance was commanded by Christ himself and is an important part of our spiritual life.
The bishops of the United States eliminated mandatory abstinence from meat on Fridays except during Lent. However, they insisted that all Catholics should observe some penitential practice on Fridays, in remembrance of the Lord’s passion and death, and they highly recommended continuing abstinence from meat.
So, the present challenge to the people in our diocese is not really radical. It is a call to what many if not most of us have put aside. And it is a way for us, like the apostles, to give up a little food and help Jesus feed the world.
The Papist approves.
What a wonderful idea – and it need not be limited to Catholics living in the diocese of Steubenville, either! Their fine witness, and the words of their bishop, can inspire us to do the same.
Hey that have great fish at the corner coffee shop every Friday.
I don’t have a problem with the president giving an economic talk at a Catholic University, it was certainly not inappropriate for Georgetown to welcome him for his speech but I do object to this:
Georgetown University says it covered over the monogram “IHS”–symbolizing the name of Jesus Christ—because it was inscribed on a pediment on the stage where President Obama spoke at the university on Tuesday and the White House had asked Georgetown to cover up all signs and symbols there.
National Review is not impressed.
What was that verse?
Everyone who acknowledges me before others I will acknowledge before my heavenly Father. But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father.Matt 10:32-33
You know the more I read about Catholic Colleges the better Fitchburg State keeps looking.
Update: There can be only one!
Update 2: Don Surber notices and more importantly (Sorry Don) does Drudge.
Update 3: The Green Room notices and asks…
Imagine if Obama were to give a speech at the Islamic Center of Washington, DC. Would members of that community approve the covering of the Shahada?
Inside Catholic has a first rate article on the 10th commandment and the sin of covetousness, an excerpt:
In a world filled with tremendous greed and the celebration of wealth amassed by wicked people using unscrupulous means, it becomes extremely easy to justify covetousness. But covetousness is perhaps the most fruitless form of sin there is. With greed, you at least experience possession (though not real enjoyment) of the thing you own. With lust, you at least get sexual pleasure now and then, though not love. With gluttony, you get the taste of food, though not the satisfaction. But with covetousness, you get only the raw envy of the other, with no compensation at all. A jealous man can at least use his jealousy to go out, work hard, and get the same car his neighbor has. An envious man sits there doing nothing, waits till it is night, and then slashes the tires on his neighbor’s car instead of lifting a finger to accomplish any good at all. Jealousy can be redeemed. Envy must simply be destroyed.
Hell is an equal opportunity landlord. As the article says:
The sin of covetousness is typically the sin of the poor and weak, just as the sin of greed is typically the sin of the rich and powerful.
Both are wanted down below. The good move is to decline the invitation.
I think a better example would be the a Leni Riefenstahl Chair for film excellence. After all she was clearly a genius and an important person in film history. So she was friend with Hitler and company and her greatest film was a piece of Nazi propaganda.
Meanwhile rather than simple mockery that I am using Edward Peters actually addresses this nonsense:
It is paradigmatic of the theological Left to ignore canon law when it poses the slightest inconvenience for its plans, but to hide behind canons (or at least behind canonists, even anonymous ones) when they afford some cover (however thin) for obvious blunders or malfeasance. And so Jenkins, invoking unidentified canon lawyers, holds that the USCCB’s 2004 statement, “Catholics in Political Life”, merely restricts Catholic institutions from honoring Catholics whose public record evidences disdain for fundamental moral principles.
Is the man serious?
Does Jenkins really think that Catholic bishops would countenance a Catholic institution honoring a philanthropic murderer, or a free-speech crusading pornographer, or a right-to-privacy pimp, provided merely that the awardee was not a Catholic? Really, that’s too bizarre for words.
I think the problem now is the sin of pride. Any retreat would be an embarrassment for Fr. Jenkins and that embarrassment trumps theology. Peters an expert of Canon Law has a solution:
Seriously, what I wonder is, why, amid the canon lawyers Jenkins claims to have consulted, not one, it seems, pointed out the most obvious solutions to their client’s problem:
The USCCB’s statement applies only to “Catholic institutions”, right? Well, all Jenkins and the ND board need do is declare that Notre Dame is not a “Catholic institution”, and poof! all these problems disappear. Notre Dame could confer honorary doctorates in law on anybody it wants after that, even on people who have built a career out of denying unborn babies the protection of law, and nary a bishop would say a word about it.
Of course then ND just becomes a college with a declining football program.
…at least if you work for CNN. If you do apparently that basic Christian belief that prayer makes a difference and can change hearts and minds is not something that you can handle:
ROESGEN: A spokesman for the university says there no plans to un-invite the president, but protesters say they will say one million rosaries until graduation day — praying that the president will become pro-life.
ROESGEN: Can you believe that, Wolf, they’re actually praying that God will change the heart and mind of President Obama to make him pro-life?
Oddly enough after confession today I was chatting with my confessor and we talked about how we are laughed at by society today. He was very distressed and adamant about it as he was born in Vietnam and had to deal with a dictatorship. He commented that compared to US society it was easier to keep the faith there.
Ms. Roesgen should rejoice in the freedom that America gives to her to publicly ridicule Catholics’ on national television and be well paid for it. She has the rest of her life to continue to do so…
…after that she is on her own, but before that point I think a prayer or two for her is in order. They apparently are very much needed.
By an odd coincidence here is an excerpt from the Pope’s sermon yesterday:
‘Jesus is humiliated in new ways even today – when things that are most holy and profound in the faith are being trivialised, the sense of the sacred is allowed to erode,’ he said.
‘Everything in public life risks being desacralised – persons, places, pledges, prayers, practices, words, sacred writings, religious formulae, symbols, ceremonies. Our life together is being increasingly secularised.
‘Religious life grows diffident. Thus we see the most momentous matters placed among trifles, and trivialities glorified.
‘Values and norms that held societies together and drew people to higher ideals are laughed at and thrown overboard. Jesus continues to be ridiculed.’
The Pope, who turns 82 later this month, prayed that Christians would respond to the problem by growing in faith.
‘May we never question or mock serious things in life like a cynic,’ he said.