Wednesday, April 13, 2005

Will America ever be Christian again?

"Will America ever be Christian again?” is the teaser over at World Net Daily. I’d respond, but it’s sort of like back when you were in junior high school and the older kids would come around asking the younger kids “if there was a [insert term here that the Brits use to refer to cigarettes] on your back, would you beat him off?” Or, how about, “Did you ever stop beating your wife?” In other words, the question itself is just so wrong.

Talk about our individual heritages all you want, talk about the faith and beliefs of the Founding Fathers all you want, talk about the roots of our culture and form of government all you want. But please, don’t invent history. Leave that to the Democrats.

It is true, we are not now a “Christian” nation. Guess what, we never have been. The purpose and orginal meaning of the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion”, was that the United States of America would never be anything but a Nation. Not a Christian nation, or a Catholic, or Jewish, Muslim, Bhuddist, or anything but your plain old vanilla variety secular nation.

This type of idiot journalism just discredits what would be otherwise valid points.

Monday, April 04, 2005

Hey, Don’t Bogart the Pope

Commentators as having been very conservative are describing the Pope. While a case could be made for him being a “conservative” Pope, the truth is more complex that that. Eric Boehlert, the writer for Salon, wants to be sure that we know that this isn’t true--at least, not completely. In fact, it seems to offend him that people might believe that there was a kind of close relationship between the Pope and President Bush. So Boehlert sees fit to make a series of statements starting with the obvious and unnecessary, and ending with the childish and rude.

Read the Rest...

More Thoughts on the Pope

When you’ve finished reading Jo’s wonderful post below, you might want to take a moment some selected readings. Patrick has put together a number of posts with some of Pope John Paul II’s thoughts, so just start at the top and work your way down.

Friday, April 01, 2005

The Pope Has Passed Away

The Roth Report is reporting that the Pope has died. His was a good, long life, well-lived, and he touched hearts around the world. He will exist in our memories--and in history--as an exemplary man who lived a life devoted to helping others and according to his convictions.

Rest in peace. The world was a better place for his place in it.

Michelle Malkin has wonderful links to information about the Pope. I’m sure she will also be a good source of information since the information coming about the Pope’s condition is contradictory. I’ll write more about this later.

Sunday, March 27, 2005

Poetry Corner

Doc gives us Easter poetry. And it is perfect.

Happy Easter, all.

Saturday, March 26, 2005

Jay’s Sunday Sermon #2

I am not sure if Easter Sunday is welcomed by Catholics in America with a midnight Mass the way we used to in the Philippines. The Filipino term, Pasko ng Pagkabuhay literaly translates as the "Christmas of Rebirth," which reads more and more like a geeky recursive acronym. Beyond the fertility fun associated with bunnies, eggs, and Ostara, this is the day when we try to contemplate on the fullness of the mystery of Jesus of Nazareth's resurrection and subsequent Ascension.

Without this miracle, He'd be just some madman spewing forth heresies against the establishment of His time. I doubt He'd even have been remembered were it not for this.

Stripping away thousands of years of theology and philosophy, piled on from discipline after various discipline, His life, death and resurrection are the core of a Christian's faith.

There is little room to sermonize on a day like this. Happy Easter, everyone.

Friday, March 25, 2005

Judaism vs. Christianity

I read this article at Dean Esmay’s place this morning, and with some obvious exceptions, I think you could substitute “Catholic” for Jewish and “Protestant” for Christian, and the essay would lose little meaning.


Wednesday, March 23, 2005

Is Intelligent Design more intelligent than we thought?

What he said:

My argument about evolution* is and will always be, that all you loud mouth people who accept as some sort of fact etched in stone that man evolved from some primordial ooze are just as religious as the people you bash.

The truth is --though you are loath to admit it-- that we don’t know jack about the origin of the species. If there is indeed some mechanism built into organisms to repair flawed genes, the whole theory -which is already mathematically astronomically improbable- is now a few dozen more orders of magnitude more improbable. There is something other than DNA that apparently carries some sort of genome and we don’t even have a name for it yet, much less understand it!

I agree, but am open to beng unconvinced. I do feel it is our God-given responsibility to understand as much about life and its origins as we can. I also feel that it is our our God-given responsibility to unlock the secrets of life, and if that requires trying to create it, then lets get on with it. Of course, absent a laboratory and some needed skills, I’ll just have to settle for arguing about it.

Sunday, March 20, 2005

Jay’s Sunday Sermon #1

Welcome to the first issue of my Sunday Sermon, my weekly write-up here on Resurrection Song where I discuss with full-blown pedantic and didactic tone my views on issues ranging from the moral and cultural, to the scientific and intellectual. This week, quite appropriately, I've prepared to explore the concept of self-denial, abstinence, and mortification.

It is only right to introduce the origins of my ethics and moral background. I am a recovering Catholic. I decided in my late teens that I am not going to participate in an organized religion in the sense of the series of rites and services, and as my first act of defiance I chose not to engage in the Confirmation sacrament. Today, I find it no longer important to tell people why I thought that it is not right for me to participate in religion; I have made my peace with my choice and I am happy in my personal relationship with the God that I have discovered of my own faculties.

The origin of my morals can therefore best be described as an amalgamation of Vatican II catechism, RCC traditional theology, a little smidgen of ecumenical thought, and a whole lot of rational epistemology. I state the schema of my morals because when one engages—or invites others to engage in—evangelical discussions, it is important to see where others are coming from. Altogether I do not consider myself a conservative or abiding Roman Catholic Christian Moralist. I do, however, ascribe the ontology of my morals to something greater than sheer rational faculties alone. (Here's something by Joe Carter on that almost irrational preceding sentence.)

Read the Rest...


Add to Google Reader or Homepage


Advanced Search

© 2005 by the authors of ResurrectionSong. All rights reserved.
Powered by ExpressionEngine