this post was taken from http://marysaggies.blogspot.com/2010/11/catholic-church-and-condoms.html
I want to make sure I am very clear – DO NOT LISTEN TO THE MEDIA WHEN THEY TELL YOU THE CHURCH IS CHANGING A DOCTRINE!!!
They don’t have any clue about what the Church teaches in the fist place, nor do they have any care for telling us the full truth. They want to make money and create sensational headlines.
If you want to know what the Catholic Church really teaches, it is going to take a bit more work than reading one bad article.
So, here is the deal – the Pope is NOT saying that condoms are a moral choice.
Jimmy Akin has the best summation of the nuances that the Pope is talking about, so I highly recommend you read his post here.
As for other stories:
**Vatican clarifies statements on condoms
**Some call for Vatican newspaper editor to be fired for gaffe on condoms.
**Ed Peters argues that the problem is in the communication of the message, not the message itself.
**Amy Welborn has read the book and has a bunch of comments.
**Thomas Peters explains it all in this video:
The holiday and its customs are completely Christian, and some are uniquely American.
We’ve all heard the allegations: Halloween is a pagan rite dating back to some pre-Christian festival among the Celtic Druids that escaped church suppression. Even today modern pagans and witches continue to celebrate this ancient festival. If you let your kids go trick-or-treating, they will be worshiping the devil and pagan gods.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The origins of Halloween are, in fact, very Christian and rather American. Halloween falls on October 31 because of a pope, and its observances are the result of medieval Catholic piety.
It’s true that the ancient Celts of Ireland and Britain celebrated a minor festival on October 31–as they did on the last day of most other months of the year. However, Halloween falls on the last day of October because the Feast of All Saints, or “All Hallows,” falls on November 1. The feast in honor of all the saints in heaven used to be celebrated on May 13, but Pope Gregory III (d. 741) moved it to November 1, the dedication day of All Saints Chapel in St. Peter’s at Rome. Later, in the 840s, Pope Gregory IV commanded that All Saints be observed everywhere. And so the holy day spread to Ireland.
The day before was the feast’s evening vigil, “All Hallows Even,” or “Hallowe’en.” In those days Halloween didn’t have any special significance for Christians or for long-dead Celtic pagans.
In 998, St. Odilo, the abbot of the powerful monastery of Cluny in southern France, added a celebration on November 2. This was a day of prayer for the souls of all the faithful departed. This feast, called All Souls Day, spread from France to the rest of Europe.
So now the Church had feasts for all those in heaven and all those in purgatory. What about those in the other place? It seems Irish Catholic peasants wondered about the unfortunate souls in hell. After all, if the souls in hell are left out when we celebrate those in heaven and purgatory, they might be unhappy enough to cause trouble. So it became customary to bang pots and pans on All Hallows Even to let the damned know they were not forgotten. Thus, in Ireland at least, all the dead came to be remembered–even if the clergy were not terribly sympathetic to Halloween and never allowed All Damned Day into the church calendar.
But that still isn’t our celebration of Halloween. Our traditions on this holiday center on dressing up in fanciful costumes, which isn’t Irish at all. Rather, this custom arose in France during the 14th and 15th centuries. Late medieval Europe was hit by repeated outbreaks of the bubonic plague–the Black Death–and it lost about half its population. It is not surprising that Catholics became more concerned about the afterlife.
More Masses were said on All Souls Day, and artistic representations were devised to remind everyone of their own mortality. We know these representations as the
or “dance of death,” which was commonly painted on the walls of cemeteries and shows the devil leading a daisy chain of people–popes, kings, ladies, knights, monks, peasants, lepers, etc.–into the tomb. Sometimes the dance was presented on All Souls Day itself as a living tableau with people dressed up in the garb of various states of life.
But the French dressed up on All Souls, not Halloween; and the Irish, who had Halloween, did not dress up. How the two became mingled probably happened first in the British colonies of North America during the 1700s, when Irish and French Catholics began to intermarry. The Irish focus on hell gave the French masquerades an even more macabre twist.
But as every young ghoul knows, dressing up isn’t the point; the point is getting as many goodies as possible. Where on earth did “trick or treat” come in?
“Treat or treat”
“Treat or treat” is perhaps the oddest and most American addition to Halloween and is the unwilling contribution of English Catholics.
During the penal period of the 1500s to the 1700s in England, Catholics had no legal rights. They could not hold office and were subject to fines, jail and heavy taxes. It was a capital offense to say Mass, and hundreds of priests were martyred.
Occasionally, English Catholics resisted, sometimes foolishly. One of the most foolish acts of resistance was a plot to blow up the Protestant King James I and his Parliament with gunpowder. This was supposed to trigger a Catholic uprising against the oppressors. The ill-conceived Gunpowder Plot was foiled on November 5, 1605, when the man guarding the gunpowder, a reckless convert named Guy Fawkes, was captured and arrested. He was hanged; the plot fizzled.
November 5, Guy Fawkes Day, became a great celebration in England, and so it remains. During the penal periods, bands of revelers would put on masks and visit local Catholics in the dead of night, demanding beer and cakes for their celebration: trick or treat!
Guy Fawkes Day arrived in the American colonies with the first English settlers. But by the time of the American Revolution, old King James and Guy Fawkes had pretty much been forgotten. Trick or treat, though, was too much fun to give up, so eventually it moved to October 31, the day of the Irish-French masquerade. And in America, trick or treat wasn’t limited to Catholics.
The mixture of various immigrant traditions we know as Halloween had become a fixture in the United States by the early 1800s. To this day, it remains unknown in Europe, even in the countries from which some of the customs originated.
But what about witches? Well, they are one of the last additions. The greeting card industry added them in the late 1800s. Halloween was already “ghoulish,” so why not give witches a place on greeting cards? The Halloween card failed (although it has seen a recent resurgence in popularity), but the witches stayed.
So too, in the late 1800s, ill-informed folklorists introduced the jack-o’-lantern. They thought that Halloween was Druidic and pagan in origin. Lamps made from turnips (not pumpkins) had been part of ancient Celtic harvest festivals, so they were translated to the American Halloween celebration.
The next time someone claims that Halloween is a cruel trick to lure your children into devil worship, I suggest you tell them the real origin of All Hallows Even and invite them to discover its Christian significance, along with the two greater and more important Catholic festivals that follow it.
Father Augustine Thompson, O.P., is an associate professor of religious studies at the University of Virginia.
By Joel Achenbach | September 30, 2010; 8:07 AM ET on the Washington Post
Finally, astronomers have found a planet in the Goldilocks position — not too hot, not too cold, not too big, not too eccentric, not too young, not too stupid, not too self-involved, not too prone to staying out until 3 a.m. with unsavory characters, etc. A nice little planet in a good neighborhood. This is pretty huge, and congrats to Vogt and Butler, the astronomers, for teasing this thing out of the data.
But can I just point out that there’s a difference between “habitable” and “somewhere you, or anyone else, or any creature, would actually want to live.”
This would not be like Earth. For one thing the sun would always be on the horizon, just hanging out. (You call it a sunset, but I, the optimist, say it’s a sunrise.)
We don’t know the atmospheric chemistry (assuming it has an atmosphere). We don’t know if it has plate tectonics to recycle the carbon. We don’t know if it has water (though wouldn’t it, just from comets?).
As I understand planet-hunting technology, it’s not possible to get a spectrum of this planet to learn anything about it directly. We see it entirely though Doppler shifts in the light of the parent star. It’s like backpacks, shoes and empty lunch bags in the foyer: You know the kids are home from school even though you do not actually see them.
The biggest thing we don’t know is how life originates. That’s a question you can argue round or square. Seems to me it emerges naturally from the chemistry of the universe, but Paul Davies thinks not. (See my discussion of Davies vs. Morowitz.)
The fact that Gliese 581g is relatively close and was found relatively soon in the process does suggest strongly that the galaxy is lousy with Goldilocks planets.
So it’s a good day for the Sagan scenario. If life is common (big if), and habitable planets are common, then you’re looking at night into an extremely biological universe.
More at Wikipedia
I did it to make the blog look a little more like me. But I’m not yet happy with it. I like it but I think there is still something missing, I think it’s still too dark. But I liked the fact that now it’s easier to find older posts. There is a search engine (on the side bar, you have to scroll down a little to find it but it’s there).
There is this painting from the Sistine chapel that shows a lot of what I want to say. I make a little effort to reach God and He stretches out to touch me. But He gives me freedom to touch Him or not. Did you know that there are exactly 3 centimeters of distance between their fingers on the real scale? I always think of this as the space for freedom the Lord gives us to find Him or not.
Well I hope you like it and I wait for your comments.
I’ll be trying a couple other backgrounds in the days to come so I need your feedback.
While I try to do some changes try to find in the older post something you may like, I wrote a lot before my blog started to be “famous”. So if you are a new visitor I invite you to take a look around.
From Catholic Culture
Brother Guy Consolmagno of the Vatican Observatory is downplaying apocalyptic scenarios associated with the 2013 solar storm, which may disrupt cell phone and wireless communication.
Recalling that a similar storm in the 1960s shut down the power grid in Quebec for a day, the Detroit-born Jesuit brother said that while “everything is possible, whether it’s likely is another issue.” Nonetheless, Consolmagno cautioned that it is important to have “more than one way of communicating so we don’t have all our eggs in one basket.”
Consolmagno’s seven-minute interview with Vatican Radio is particularly helpful because he explains solar storms and other solar phenomena in layman’s terms.
He got the courage to do it! let’s pray for him!
I suggest you to see the videos of another post:
Today’s carbon-spewing power plants and vehicles won’t raise the global temperature to dangerous levels by 2060 even if they’re allowed to keep operating to the end of their normal lifespans, a new study predicts.
The bad news is that that prediction will only hold if we stop building additional carbon dioxide-emitting devices immediately, said the study published in Science Thursday.
Still, Damon Matthews, a climate scientist at Concordia University in Montreal, who co-authored the paper, feels the conclusions are optimistic because they counter the widely held belief that major climate change is already inevitable.
“Yes, climate change is inevitable, but that’s because of the decisions that we’re making,” he said Thursday. “What types of technology we’re currently building [are] going to make a big difference to the state of the future climate.”
Climate scientists have long recognized that even if man-made carbon emissions stopped today, warming would continue for some time because of the “inertia” of the existing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Steven Davis, a senior research associate at the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, Calif., wanted to find out how much warming could arise from “technological inertia” — the future emissions of the cars, power plants and other emitters that are already built.
He did some research and managed to dig up the ages, average lifetimes and average emissions of power plants, vehicles and other carbon-emitting machines and facilities around the world.
Then Matthews plugged the data into a climate computer model and discovered that such existing emissions would push the temperature 1.3 degrees Celsius higher than pre-industrial temperatures.
0.7 degrees below threshold
That’s about half a degree higher than the warming that’s occurred so far. It’s also 0.7 degrees lower than the two-degree temperature increase that many scientists consider the threshold for some of the more dangerous effects of global warming, such as a significant rise in sea levels.
Matthews said it’s also “a big deal politically” because the focus of negotiations at the Copenhagen climate summit in 2009 had been to stay under the two-degree threshold.
However, Matthews acknowledged that there is always uncertainty in models that could result in errors. For example, scientists aren’t sure exactly where the carbon emitted goes and exactly how global temperatures respond to increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide.
In any case, Matthews said, the biggest challenge right now technologically is what to replace CO2-emitting infrastructure with.
“There isn’t a single obvious choice,” he said.
He said he’s interested in modeling what might work as a technological path toward zero emissions. “Is it wind? Is it solar? Is it all of the above?”
In the meantime, Davis cautioned against any policies that would encourage the lifetimes of existing infrastructure to be extended.
Very interesting discussion but you MUST read it until the end to understand Why I’m interested. I do believe in God. I agree with the scientist from Cambridge that Hawking is trying to fight against the god of the easy explanations if I can’t explain or justify is because god wanted. I agree with Him in this point we can’t stop thinking because we have such a good excuse as god. I do believe in God who gave me intelligence to search and to learn. I think I have a lot more to talk about.
Please read it until the end.
By Richard Allen Greene, CNN
LONDON, England (CNN) — God did not create the universe, world-famous physicist Stephen Hawking argues in a new book that aims to banish a divine creator from physics.
Hawking says in his book “The Grand Design” that, given the existence of gravity, “the universe can and will create itself from nothing,” according to an excerpt published Thursday in The Times of London.
“Spontaneous creation is the reason why there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist,” he writes in the excerpt.
“It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper [fuse] and set the universe going,” he writes.
His book — as the title suggests — is an attempt to answer “the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything,” he writes, quoting Douglas Adams’ cult science fiction romp, “The Hitch-hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.”
His answer is “M-theory,” which, he says, posits 11 space-time dimensions, “vibrating strings, … point particles, two-dimensional membranes, three-dimensional blobs and other objects that are more difficult to picture and occupy even more dimensions of space.” He doesn’t explain much of that in the excerpt, which is the introduction to the book.
But he says he understands the feeling of the great English scientist Isaac Newton that God did “create” and “conserve” order in the universe.
It was the discovery of other solar systems outside our own, in 1992, that undercut a key idea of Newton’s — that our world was so uniquely designed to be comfortable for human life that some divine creator must have been responsible.
But, Hawking argues, if there are untold numbers of planets in the galaxy, it’s less remarkable that there’s one with conditions for human life.
And, indeed, he argues, any form of intelligent life that evolves anywhere will automatically find that it lives somewhere suitable for it.
From there he introduces the idea of multiple universes, saying that if there are many universes, one will have laws of physics like ours — and in such a universe, something not only can, but must, arise from nothing.
Therefore, he concludes, there’s no need for God to explain it.
But some of Hawking’s Cambridge colleagues said the physicist has missed the point.
“The ‘god’ that Stephen Hawking is trying to debunk is not the creator God of the Abrahamic faiths who really is the ultimate explanation for why there is something rather than nothing,” said Denis Alexander.
“Hawking’s god is a god-of-the-gaps used to plug present gaps in our scientific knowledge.
“Science provides us with a wonderful narrative as to how [existence] may happen, but theology addresses the meaning of the narrative,” said Alexander, director of The Faraday Institute for Science and Religion.
And Fraser Watts, an Anglican priest and Cambridge expert in the history of science, said that it’s not the existence of the universe that proves the existence of God.
But, he said, “a creator God provides a reasonable and credible explanation of why there is a universe, and … it is somewhat more likely that there is a God than that there is not. That view is not undermined by what Hawking has said.”
Hawking’s book will be published on September 7 in the United States and September 9 in the United Kingdom.
For two hours a grieving mum cradled the apparently lifeless body of her newborn son – and all her caresses and whispered words were rewarded when the baby suddenly began to move.
Born prematurely at 27 weeks and weighing just one kilo, doctors said that Jamie Ogg had no chance of survival.<
Unlike his twin sister Emily, he was not breathing and after 20 minutes of trying to resuscitate him Jamie was declared dead.
His limp little body was handed to his mum Kate and dad David so they could grieve and say their goodbyes to him in private.
But after two hours of being spoken to, touched and cuddled, he began showing signs of life. And after being given breast milk on Kate’s finger, he began breathing regularly.
Delighted mum Kate said yesterday: “He’s a little fighter, as is his sister, and they are both doing amazingly well.”
She added: “I took my gown off and arranged Jamie on my chest and just held him.
“He wasn’t moving at all and we just started talking to him. We told him what his name was and that he had a sister. We told him the things we wanted to do with him throughout his life. After just five minutes I felt him move as if he were startled, then he started gasping more and more regularly.
“I thought, ‘Oh my God, what’s going on?’ A short time later he opened his eyes. It was a miracle. Then he held out his hand and grabbed my finger.
“He opened his eyes and moved his head from side to side.”
Australian Kate said they got a message to their doctor, insisting Jamie was showing signs of life, but he sent back a midwife who told them these movements were natural reflexes and that there was no way Jamie could still be alive.
But Kate and David, who live in Sydney, refused to give up on their baby boy.
She recalled: “I said to my husband, ‘What if he lives? We could be the luckiest parents in the world’.
“I gave Jamie some breast milk on my finger, he took it and started regular breathing. At that point the doctor came back, got a stethoscope, listened to Jamie’s chest and just kept shaking his head. He said, ‘I don’t believe it, I don’t believe it’.”
David told Aussie TV show Today Tonight: “Luckily, I’ve got a very strong, very smart wife. She instinctively did what she did.
“If she hadn’t have done that, then Jamie probably wouldn’t be here.”
The doctor who delivered Jamie in March refused to be interviewed for the show.
Kate, who gave birth after a threehour labour, has now told how vital “skin-on-skin” care, or “kangaroo touch” as it is known Down Under, can be for a sick baby.
I’d like to make a review of what we have seen so far on this blog cause many people started seeing it after it was launched…
My very first post was a video What is your inner music?
One of my favorite post was Fr Joe’s “Is it ok to believe in space aliens?”.
My need for beauty was something I enjoyed talking about but I have a feeling that I need to continue to talk about.
I shared some videos that made me proud to be catholic, some about priesthood and one about the church.
After this comes a series of “confessions” stuff I don’t have an opinion but I let my heart speak. It was global warming (actually I don’t think is was a good post but it’s there anyways) . The other was about friendship.
I realize as I write this post that there was a series of post about Christian every day life quite interesting. The list: Living a Christian life, No pain no gain, my favorite prayers for everyday, He never let me lack of anything(I took as my own confession this translation to English of this very good post of my friend Denise), a story about the sign of the cross. The fish came a bit after but I have to include it on this list together with the post about the Catholic actor fired for not shooting sex scenes. the last post in the same context is another text from Fr Joe about being a good catholic.
And to fish a story I’ve found on the Toronto star about a video that wasn’t quite what everybody thought it was. Do you believe in everything you find in the web?
Well I’m not Michael Jackson but this is it! All I have written until now I hope you have enjoyed. I accept suggestions for further posts.
Please leave a comment after reading a post, it’s nice to have some feed back!
Peace be with you!
This is the link to the news on The Star.
Sometimes it is too easy to believe in what people say. This is an example of how we need to investigate a little more before getting exited about something we see over the net.
What happened was people watched a video on YouTube and started to jump into conclusions, most of them against the Christians (even though some Christians actually do what people think when they watch this movie).
But no we are not all like this and this is not What Christ told us to do.
Back to the theme, don’t believe in everything you see on the net…
GENEVA—Scientists say they’ve discovered five, six, or maybe seven planets orbiting a sun-like star more than 100 light-years away.
It’s the richest planetary system so far discovered and may contain at least one planet nearly as small as the Earth — which would make it the smallest planet found outside the solar system. One astronomer says it’s part of a growing body of evidence that the universe is full of planets — and that a bunch of them could similar to our own.
“The really nice thing about finding systems like this is that it shows that there are many more out there,” said Alan Boss, of the Washington-based Carnegie Institution for Science, who wasn’t involved with the find. “Mother Nature really had fun making planets.”
Although most of the planets identified are large — about 13 to 25 times the mass of our home — those behind the discovery, announced Tuesday at an international conference in France, say they’re nearly certain they’ve identified one only 1.4 times the size of Earth.
Scientists have been spotting planets beyond our solar system for the past 15-odd years, and they’ve now catalogued some 450. But most finds have been limited to one or two or three planets, usually gargantuan balls of gas similar to Jupiter or Saturn.
But at up to seven planets, the new discovery is almost as rich as our own solar system, which counts eight.
Christophe Lovis of Geneva University, one of the scientists behind the find, said the first five were most comparable to Neptune.
“They are made essentially of rocks and ice. They have a solid core. But on top of that is a layer of gas, of hydrogen and helium most likely,” he said. “They are probably not habitable.”
The sixth is a possibly a Saturn-like planet, while the seventh, the smallest, would be so close to its star that its “year” would take just over a day.
Lovis and his team haven’t been able to observe the planets directly, which is typical. Few planets can be seen against the blazing light given off by their much more massive parent stars. The European Southern Observatory compares the challenge to “spotting a dim candle in front of a raging forest fire.”
So the scientists used the observatory’s 3.6 metre telescope at La Silla, Chile, to study the planets’ parent star, known as HD 10180. Over six years, they took 190 measurements, checking the star for the telltale wobbling caused by the gravitational forces of nearby planets.
Boss noted that the method was “biased toward finding the big guys” because the greater the planet, the greater its gravity and the more it made its parent star wobble. But he said the discovery showed that finding smaller planets was still possible.
“This field has gone from zero to close to 500 planets in just 15 years,” he said. “Fifteen years we did not know about the big guys. Earth-like planets are going to be quite commonplace.”
The find was made by researchers from Switzerland, France, Germany, and Portugal and has been submitted to the journal Astronomy and Astrophysics.
from: The Star
Neal McDonough, who was reportedly fired from ABC’s ‘Scoundrels’ for refusing to film sex scenes because of his religious beliefs, has found a new role in ‘Vigilante Priest’ on Starz.
According to Deadline Hollywood, McDonough, of ’Desperate Housewives’ and ‘Band of Brothers’ fame, was sacked from ABC’s summer series ‘Scoundrels’ for his refusal to act out sex scenes. Now, the Catholic actor is taking his religious beliefs to Starz for ‘Vigilante Priest,’ a series he co-created with ‘Law and Order’ veteran Walon Green.
McDonough will play, well, a vigilante priest — a former police officer-turned-man of the cloth who takes law enforcement into his own hands.
On past shows such as ‘Boomtown’ and ‘Desperate Housewives,’ McDonough has not acted in sex scenes. When he signed on for ‘Scoundrels,’ ABC reportedly knew of his beliefs.
McDonough will also serve as an executive producer on the new series, along with Green and John Avnet. The actor is currently filming Marvel’s ‘Captain America’ flick in London.
Tell me: Do you applaud Neal McDonough for standing by his beliefs?
I had a short conversation this morning with my colleagues in the training I’m doing at wizard (to be an English teacher). We talked about climate change and how we don’t have a formed opinion about it.
I was going to make some research on the web but as I’m tired and tomorrow I have to be there again early I’m talking what I think and after, if I feel like doing it (or if I get comments asking for it) I may publish some findings.
Well that makes me think is that among scientist global warming isn’t unanimous, but for the media it is already scandal and urgent and the end of the world. Ok we produce a hole lot of CO2 but it is enough to change the temperature of the planet? I really don’t know… I’m not saying that it isn’t I’m only saying I don’t know… how much CO2 the Amazon jungle produces at night? not to talk of the forests of pine trees on Siberia during the winter… isn’t that a lot too?
People talk about the ice that is melting on the poles, that a part of the planet will sink. Come on guys, Netherlands is surviving for centuries under the level of the sea, do you really think all those companies that have brokers in NY will let it be flooded?
I’m not saying we shouldn’t do something or the clime isn’t changing I’m only saying the world is not going to end in 2012… Humanity has been finding ways to adapt… If it is irreversible lets deal with a little less of anxiety, if there is something we can do lets do it. This is also part of the commandment “You shall not steal”. Let’s not steal the natural resources of our planet from the future generations.
First of all welcome to my blog!
Well, before people start to ask I’m going to answer, this blog is in English so more people can read and share their point of view. When it was still a project I was talking to someone about it and the answer that came the first to my mind was: “Because the Gospel was written in Greek”. I know that I have to explain the phrase. Greek was the language use to everyone by the time of the apostles (even though the Romans ruled the world it was Greek they spoke to the conquered peoples) so they had to write in Greek in order to speak to the whole world.
In my point of view something like it is just about to happen; in a few years the US will no longer be the greatest economy of the world but people will continue to speak English as an international trade language. So I wanted to use this tool (the language) to have a point of unity to talk to as many people as I can about my points of view. Which aren’t only mine because I share and learn from the Roman Catholic Church.
I’m going to talk about a lot of things, not only christian stuff but everything that’s part of my daily life, and some of my points of interest.