Reformation Day

Today is the day Protestant’s refer to as "Reformation Day".  I wonder what Martin Luther would think of the world today 491 years later when he supposedly nailed the 95 Theses to the door of the church in Wittenburg, Germany


Luther had some legitimate issues with how the church was operating in his day.  But his mistake of leaving the church has cascaded in millions of self appointed “popes” hundreds of years later.  I think it’s an example how the decisions we each make can cause tremendous change in our world over time. 


If the church is off course we need to correct it, but from within and through prayer.  There are always some within the church that would like to change teachings or aspects of the church but this does not mean that we can change its dogma or doctrine if we just put up a good and righteous fight.  We may change its discipline but first we should educate ourselves with what type of classification each teaching within the church has, and then we can determine if the problem might be with the Church or more likely with ourselves.

Continue reading Reformation Day

What same-sex “marriage” has done to Massachusetts

What Gay Marriage has brought to Massachusetts. I have not confirmed everything in this article but it is very alarming if just half of it is true.

Continue reading What same-sex “marriage” has done to Massachusetts

Contraceptive Devistation

I read an interesting article over at the blog “Standing on My Head” It points out an interesting view of the simple supply and demand economics in the real estate market. Through history man seems always to have wanted bigger and better homes, along with extending that want to the desire for multiple homes in different locations. This demand along with a steady supply of people to buy homes has made the real estate market rise. After all they aren’t making anymore land these days, except in the city of Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

Also for the past decade there was an increase in the number of people who could seemingly afford homes with the removal of previously held credit worthiness requirements. This additional group added even more people to the demand side of the real estate market helping to drive the prices up at a much faster rate.

Now much of the US is over extended with credit making it difficult to keep up with mortgage payments on high cost homes while still covering daily expenses of fuel, food, and clothing. Living paycheck to paycheck has caused many of the new market entrants to be removed from their homes at the advent of any economic blip in their life. Then when the adversity hits they are forced into a quick sale or eventual foreclosure, forcing them to address their shelter needs down other avenues. This overall change in the economic landscape has reduced the demand in the overall real estate market.

Also adding to this economic bust is a steady decline of real estate market entrants due to the countries reduced birthrate caused by contraception and abortion. The United States is barely at a replacement birthrate. Immigration could fill the gap but is not likely since it’s a hot button issue and most people looking to immigrate are not in an economic class that can afford single family homes upon their arrival. These issues will likely cause home appreciation to remain flat and possibly decrease in the foreseeable future.

The issue of contraception and abortion play directly into simple supply and demand economics. Just look at Europe. The once Christian Europe now has a replacement birthrate crisis. People are having barely 1 child per couple in many European countries well below the replacement rate. Causing a labor gap, which is currently being filled by Muslim immigrants, who as a culture, have a much greater birthrate than the Europeans. This gap in birthrate between the two cultures is slowly but surely helping Europe to lose its Christian heritage at a much quicker pace.

Contraception may be “helpful” in allowing one to have meaningless sex inside or outside of the sacrament of marriage. It will give you a 90% chance of not being confronted with the creation of a child. Although any perceived failures of the contraception will result in the creation of a child, which will be considered burdensome or inconvenient since it was conceived in the confines of a meaningless sexual act. But what contraception is really good at is causing one’s culture to be devastated both morally and economically. It just takes the average citizen half their lifetime to see the consequences, provided they are honest enough to face the blatant facts.

God save use from the evils of contraception, change the hearts in our culture to see the value of life and the design of your creation.

Ensure your conscience is properly formed first.

Continue reading

The Catholic Vote

Below is a good article at this time where hopefully we will be using our properly formed consciences to vote. If you feel like the Catholic clergy is telling you how to vote this you may want to consider whether or not you truly understand Catholic teaching when it comes to abortion and its gravity in relationship to other issues. If you disagree with what you’ve been hearing from some Priests and Bishops about voting for a Pro-Abortion candidate even though you yourself are Pro-Life then I think you need to spend some more time truly studying the Catholic position on the existing situation with an open mind. In this situation of faith and morals those clergy who are showing their flock the reasons why they cannot support Obama are 100% correct. This issue is within their realm of expertise and authority. Below is an article by Fr. Euteneuer. I have bolded some of the comments below which I think we should all consider always and especially 8 days away from the election.

I have been asked by many people to help clarify Catholic teaching on exercising one’s voting rights, especially with respect to the abortion issue. There are many candidates across the nation running on many issues, and Catholics are trying to sort through them all, so I will state the Church’s position as unequivocally as possible for the education of the faithful and not as an endorsement of any particular candidate or candidates: true Catholics are not "single-issue" voters – we are principled voters. That determines which candidates we give our vote to and it determines the state of our souls after we vote.

With respect to the abortion issue, the principle in question is the moral impossibility for a Catholic to cooperate in an act or an institution that is "intrinsically evil." Now, something that is "intrinsically evil" is not just a bad thing – it is a heinous thing, trumping all other moral considerations, and we can never legitimately commit the act ourselves or approve of it in anyone else. Casting a vote for a candidate who forcefully advocates the killing of innocent unborn babies shows approval or unacceptable toleration of that heinous crime against humanity, and Catholics can never do it in good conscience. The Catechism of the Catholic Church calls such an attitude and action "formal cooperation" in evil (#2272). This does not mean that I commit the evil myself. It means that I agree with it and have made it possible for a person in public office to continue and/or advance that evil in my society.

Formal cooperation in the evil act of another is a sin, and depending on the gravity of the person’s evil act, formal cooperation in it can be a mortal sin. Since procured abortion is an intrinsically evil act, and all promotion of it fits into the same moral category, voting for a person who forcefully advocates it must be a mortal sin. Add to the sin of formal cooperation in evil the sin of disobedience to legitimate Church authority. To date the USCCB and more than a dozen US bishops and state bishops’ conferences have clarified these principles for Catholics, and their teachings couldn’t be clearer.

Further, add the sin of scandal that a regrettable number of priests and religious are giving by their appalling disingenuousness about Church teachings both in and out of the pulpit. Catholic parents and teachers equally give scandal when they do not teach their children the principles that undergird moral behavior or properly form their consciences according to the Truth that is in Christ.

Some ask if a Catholic may vote for someone whose policies would advance an agenda that is mostly in line with the Catholic Church’s teaching? Also, what if the Catholic disagrees with the candidate’s position on abortion but still wants to vote for this candidate for other reasons consistent with our values? Here the Church uses the term "proportionate reason" to indicate that there must be some kind of balance in the candidate’s position that indicates it is likely that a greater good would be accomplished for society despite the evil he or she advocates. Proportionate reasoning usually has to do with positions that are not intrinsically evil in themselves or that, if they are, would constitute such a minimal part of the platform that they would be "outweighed" somehow in the grand scheme of the candidate’s public service. According to the above principle, however, the degree to which the candidate would promote something as heinous as abortion can literally nullify all the other "good" that he or she would do for humanity! When the fundamental right to life is denied in society, all other rights and goods are therefore threatened. The very moral foundation of a people is eroded. So the answer has to be no, it is not legitimate to disagree on abortion and still vote for a radical abortion candidate.

May a Catholic vote for an "imperfect" candidate if the radical abortion candidate is worse? The Church says yes, but only if the vote is not expressed as an agreement with the "imperfect" elements of the candidate’s policies and only if the vote is intended to limit the evil that other candidate would inevitably do.

It is truly regretful that we have gotten to the point where we might have to surrender some of our basic values in the voting booth because we have not successfully insisted on the very best candidates for public office to serve the common good. That is a discussion for another day, but I anticipate that if Catholics do not assert Catholic values forcefully in elections and public policy from here on out, we may be faced in future elections with no choice whatsoever that can morally satisfy the Catholic conscience. Heaven help and guide us all on November 4th.

Sincerely Yours in Christ,
Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer,
President, Human Life International

Continue reading The Catholic Vote

Modern Day Noah

Continue reading Modern Day Noah

Got Change?

Found out in the Catholic Blogosphere.

Continue reading Got Change?

What You Are Not Hearing

If you listen to the mainstream media which some call refer to as the MSM you will will be feed with news of how Obama is starting to walk away with the election. Well there are differing views of reality when you deal with the mainstream media. Check out the Investors Business Daily polling. I would consider the IBD outside the MSM as close to non-partisan as you can find. Notice the youth vote. Also Gallup has released a poll that says 11% of likely voters have already cast their ballots and they are split evenly. Lastly look at the last line in the IBD blub. -11 to +9 among Catholics. While I’m not a fan of McCain, I am a fan of Life.

Continue reading What You Are Not Hearing

The Gay Marriage Inferno

It only takes a spark to start a fire that turns into an inferno, which become difficult to put out.

November 18
: United States: Massachusetts: decision in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health

February 12
: United States, California: Newly-elected San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom issues the first same-sex marriage certificates in the US, purely as an exercise of executive power. These certificates were later nullified by the California Supreme Court.
February 20: In New Mexico, Sandoval County clerk Victoria Dunlap issues marriage licenses to more than 60 same-sex couples until stopped by the state attorney general later that day, declaring them invalid; 26 couples were married by local pastors on the courthouse steps that day, and most of the other couples who received licenses married elsewhere. A district court later issued an injunction prohibiting Dunlap from issuing licenses to same-sex couples. Dunlap’s motion to the state supreme court to lift the restraining order was rejected on July 8.
May 17: United States: Massachusetts – first legal same-sex marriages in the US performed.
September 18: United States: Louisiana voters ratified a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as only between a man and a woman.
October: United States: Louisiana – District Judge William Morvant of Baton Rouge struck down the amendment, approved by voters in September, on the grounds that it violated a provision of the state constitution requiring that an amendment to cover only one subject; the amendment prevented the state from recognizing any legal status for common-law relationships, domestic partnerships and civil unions between both gay and heterosexual couples.
November 3: United States Results of November 2 vote confirms that state constitutional amendments prohibiting same-sex marriage are passed in eleven states: Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Ohio, Oregon, and Utah. The measures in Oregon, Mississippi, and Montana bar same-sex marriage only; those in the other states bar civil unions and domestic partnerships as well; and Ohio bars granting any benefits whatsoever to same-sex couples.

January 19
: United States: The Louisiana Supreme Court reinstated the anti-gay marriage amendment that had been struck by a District Judge in October, 2004.
March 14: United States: Judge Richard Kramer of San Francisco County Superior Court said California’s ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional.
April 7: United States: New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg orders city agencies to recognize legal same-sex marriages from other states and countries. This order will give same-sex couples who married in places such as Massachusetts or Canada rights that couples recognized under the city’s existing domestic partnership law do not have, including the power to make life-or-death medical decisions. Same-sex spouses will also be able to collect worker’s compensation if a partner dies.
April 7: United States: The Connecticut State Senate passes legislation that legalizes same-sex civil unions. On April 13, the bill is passed through the Connecticut House of Representatives with the added "marriage is between a man and a woman" definition. The bill is sent back to the Senate for approval. Finally, on April 20, the State Senate approved the amended bill by a vote of 26-8 and Republican Governor Jodi Rell signed the same-sex civil union bill into law.
May 12: United States: A federal judge in Omaha strikes down Nebraska’s sweeping ban on same-sex marriages, civil unions, domestic partnerships, and other same-sex relationships. U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon ruled that the ban, known as Initiative 416, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. This is the first state constitutional provision banning same-sex marriage to be ruled unconstitutional.
November 8: United States: Texas becomes the 18th state to write a ban on same-sex marriage into its constitution, defining marriage as "the union of one man and one woman" and prohibiting the state from "creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage," when voters approved the amendment in the November elections.

July 6
: New York State Court of Appeals rules that the NYS Constitution does not mandate recognition of same sex marriage.
July 26: Washington State Supreme Court issues its decision upholding state DOMA laws
October 25: New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously rules in favor of marriage equality; 4–3 say decision whether to rewrite marriage law or write civil union law for homosexuals (separate but equal debate) is left to the legislature in the next six months. The three dissenting justices dissented because they believed same-sex couples should have the full right to marry.
November 7: In the U.S. elections, Arizona rejects an initiative banning gay marriage. The first state in the country to do so. However, seven other states pass marriage amendments.

April 21
: The state of Washington legalizes domestic partnerships. The law went into effect on July 22, 2007.
May 9: The state of Oregon legalizes domestic partnerships. The law will go into effect on January 1, 2008 (but was delayed 48 hours prior to coming into affect, then after a Court Case in February it was allowed to come into affect from 1 February 2008).
May 31: The state of New Hampshire legalizes civil unions, to take effect on January 1, 2008.
June 14: In the Massachusetts legislature, a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriage is defeated in a vote of 154 against and 46 in favor. 50 votes in favor would have been required for the amendment to go on the ballot for a popular vote in the 2008 elections.
August 30: Iowa’s Defense of Marriage Act was struck down as unconstitutional as a result of a legal challenge. The state has announced plans to appeal, but couples began applying for marriage licenses immediately in anticipation of an injunction. About 20 couples obtained marriage licenses and one couple married before the judge issued a stay of his ruling pending appeal.
September 18: Maryland Court of Appeals upholds state law banning same-sex marriage, overturning a lower court ruling.

January 1: Civil unions in New Hampshire take effect.
February 1: Domestic partnership in Oregon take effect after court rescinds injunction.
May 15: Supreme Court of California legalizes same-sex marriage in the landmark In re Marriage Cases ruling.
May 22: Maryland governor Martin O’Malley signs into law two bills establishing limited domestic partnership rights in that state.
June 16: California state supreme court’s ruling on Same-sex marriage in becomes effective at 5:01 pm.
July 1: Maryland domestic partnership laws become effective.
October 10: Supreme Court of Connecticut legalizes same-sex marriage


Continue reading The Gay Marriage Inferno

Former Episcopal Bishop Describes the ‘Joy’ of Being Catholic

by Elizabeth Ela (

Converts from the Anglican tradition to Roman Catholicism are nothing new, whether among laity or clergy. However, as former bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande, Jeffrey Steenson, D.Phil., stood out among the rest last Advent when he was received into the Catholic Church in Rome’s Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore.

Steenson and his wife, Debra, are currently in Italy, where Steenson is taking classes in preparation for his ordination to the Catholic priesthood under Pope John Paul II’s Pastoral Provision for married Anglican clergy. His ordination is expected to take place later this year.

Headline Bistro conducted a written interview with Steenson, asking him about his journey to the Catholic Church, how elements of Anglicanism will affect his ministry as a Catholic priest and his thoughts on the future of Anglican-Catholic dialogue.

Steenson’s insights are timely, especially with the recent news of the Episocopal Diocese of Pittsburgh’s decision to split from the Episcopal Church of the United States of America (ECUSA) and join the more traditional Anglican Province of the Southern Cone. At least two other Episcopal dioceses are considering similar moves later this year, reflecting an internal struggle over the denomination’s direction.

Read The Q&A Here

Continue reading Former Episcopal Bishop Describes the ‘Joy’ of Being Catholic