Darkness draws closer...

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #18

2011-05-28T21:06:00.001+10:00

Sunday Snippets for the weeks of Sunday May 22 to Saturday May 28.

My newest addition are my favourite news-stories I've Tweeted. Check out "Tweeted".
A short prayer I wrote "Get thee behind me Satan".
This week in Albury saw some clashes go down at the abortion clinic between pro-life and pro-choice groups. Here is the real news, not the fabricated version the local media have aired/published and here is my rant on the issue.
"The Canberra Declaration" is about protecting the Judeo-Christian values Australia was built on.
A prayer for drug addicts I found in a church booklet.

Until next week, GBU!

Davie.

To abort or not to abort, that is the question.

2011-05-28T20:57:00.000+10:00

Given the recent news in the local media regarding the peaceful-protests at the Albury "Fertility Control Clinic", which the media have painted in a total wrong light, I thought I might write my own piece on the topic.

I have not always been a "pro-lifer". In fact, when I was in my late-teens, thinking that I was educated enough to form my own opinion on abortion, I was pro-choice. A womans body is her business, and if she doesn't want something growing inside of her, she has every right to have it removed, right? Wrong!

Almost anyone you ask will have a stance on abortion - either for or against - but it is not often you will find someone who doesn't care either way. The problem with this however is that unless people undertake their own research, abortion remains a pretty vague topic.

No one tells you how an abortion is carried out. More or less, a picture is painted of a Doctor simply "removing" something, not killing a human life. How can killing ever be just?

There is a scary culture rife among those in Gen-Y particularly who see abortion merely as another means of contraception as though you can rely on abortions if you forget, or simply can't be bothered, to use a condom or take the pill. Young women don't grasp the serious nature of abortion and the impacts it has on their emotional and physical health. Some think that it is such a simple process, comparable to putting on a condom, that you can book in for an abortion every couple of months to have the unwanted foetus removed.

Those are of course all terms used by pro-choice campaigners to not show off the dark side of abortion. For starters, the "unwanted foetus" is actually a human being in its earliest, and most vulnerable, part of life, and it is never simply "removed" - it is killed. Murdered.

If you were to find out that your parents wanted to abort you, how much more would you value your life? How much more would you be against abortion, for if you were aborted, you wouldn't be reading this, you wouldn't have the life you live - you would not exist. This goes against nature, for human life begins at the time of conception.

Is a cake still a cake when it isn't yet cooked? Well, not exactly a cake, but the early stages of one - it has the key ingredients which when put together harmoniously, a cake is "born" from the oven. Cakes don't just "appear", they need to be made, and that never happens by some bizarre mistake, for if you put in too much or not enough flour, it won't work.

A human is not just a mistake, but a work of art - God's art - the basic ingredients being two human beings - one male, one female - and a handful of different human fluids, combined together the right way. If you leave the egg out of the cake, it won't work, so too if there is no egg in the female human, the future human life won't work.

But if you're not religious, or don't believe in God at all, then who cares what the views of a bunch of believers is! But you must care, because though you may not be of the same view that human life begins at conception, it is still a fact. Just like you may reject the notion of gravity, doesn't mean the laws do not apply to you because you don't believe in it. The entire world would collapse!

Society, too, will collapse if everyone were to stop believing in God and doing what they see to be best. "I can't support another child" is one of many reasons people use to justify having an abortion. Well, I don't like the look of your face, does that mean I can kill you? No, that is quite absurd!
"That man killed an innocent person, so let's kill him!" but have you never heard the saying "two wrongs don't make a right"? Who are we to decide who is to live, who is to die? That goes from the youngest people - those growing inside their mothers - through to the oldest living person, and every variation in between - murderers and good decent people. Every life is unique, every human is unique, and only God has the right to choose how and when we die.

As time wears on, people will be educated even less about abortion, that eventually the world will get itself into a terrible state where parents can kill their unborn child just because they are the wrong gender or have the wrong shade of hair. It could get scarier yet, governments could choose who will live and who will not even get that chance, and those who do get to live will be genetically engineered.

Prayer for Addicts

2011-05-28T10:19:00.000+10:00

Yesterday whilst I was in town I called into St. Pat's to have some quiet prayer time. I picked up a booklet "Someone I Know Has a Drug Problem" by William E. Rabior, ACSW. This is the prayer towards the end of the booklet which I found nice.

St. Maximillian Kolbe, Saint of Auschwitz and patron of drug addicts, pray for us!

Mary our Mother, Blessed Virgin, pray for us!

* * *

LORD JESUS,

You heal hurting hearts and make lives new again.

I do not know what circumstances are causing N. to use drugs.

I only know that I feel more and more concern for him/her.

I pray for a new direction for N.

With the help of Your Grace may s/he choose healing and hope and find freedom from drugs.

I put N. in Your Hands this day, Lord Jesus.

May s/he reach out to You and receive from You all that is needed to become whole again.

AMEN.

The Canberra Declaration: Protecting our Judeo-Christian heritage and rights!

2011-05-27T21:32:00.002+10:00

The Canberra Declaration

The Preamble to the Australian Constitution contains the words, "Humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God”. As Australian citizens we continue to declare that we too put our trust in Almighty God.

For centuries, to speak of Western civilisation was to speak of Christian civilisation. The two were in many ways synonymous. The values that we have cherished and sought to strengthen are in large measure founded on the Judeo-Christian belief system. The many freedoms, advantages, opportunities, values and liberties which characterise the West owe much to the growth of Christianity with its inherent belief in the dignity of the human person as created in the image of God and the code of behaviour that flows from this belief.

The Canberra Declaration follows on from the 2009 Manhattan Declaration and the 2010 Westminster Declaration. It declares that when Christian values are respected and allowed freedom of expression, not just confined to so-called sacred spaces but in the public arena as well, society is richer and healthier.

We wish to emphasise three areas that demand particular attention in our contemporary Australian society, namely religious freedom, marriage and the family, and the sanctity of human life. Were we to undermine any one of these values, the social fabric of our nation would be seriously weakened, to our personal and collective detriment.

Religious Freedom

Religious freedom includes freedom of conscience and freedom of speech. The importance of these freedoms is shown in countries where they are threatened or absent. Police states and totalitarian nations inevitably begin with the curtailment of basic liberties, including religious freedom and the right to speak one’s mind and conscience. This includes the right to change one’s religious beliefs.

We affirm the basic necessity of freedom of conscience, having the liberty to speak publicly about one’s faith and beliefs, and having the right to practise the religion of one’s choice. If these freedoms are removed – even in the name of supposed benefits – the prized values of democracy and liberty are seriously undermined.

In Australia today these freedoms are being restricted by laws which, although appearing positive on first reading, have the potential to lead to unintended and unacceptable consequences. These laws include anti-discrimination legislation, hate crime laws and legislation on religious and sexual vilification – each of which may be interpreted in a way that effectively works as a barrier to religious freedom and freedom of speech.

Thus the signers of this declaration affirm the fundamental right of Australians to religious freedom and freedom of speech, and we oppose legislation which denies such freedoms. We likewise oppose laws subjugating our nation to foreign powers and instrumentalities which restrict these freedoms.

Marriage and Family

Another vital package of values and social benefits is the long-standing institution of the natural family resulting from marriage between a man and a woman – as affirmed by the definition of marriage in the Marriage Act: “…the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life”.

No other social institution has done so much good for people and for nations, yet marriage is being undermined, to the detriment of children, individuals, and society itself.

Lifelong marriage between a man and a woman guarantees children their biological birthright to a mother and a father and has a proven track record of providing them with protection, education, welfare, support and nurture. No other arrangement has improved upon the benefits of marriage.

In the face of competing alternatives and moves to redefine marriage, we affirm the importance and social utility of marriage between a man and a woman and the families formed thereby.

Human Life

The third important set of values revolves around the sanctity of human life which is being undermined in much of the Western world, through abortion, euthanasia, and some of the new reproductive technologies.

We believe that all human life, being made in the image of God, has intrinsic and equal value from conception to life’s natural end.

The very heart of a humane and civilised society is based on the way it treats its most vulnerable and innocent members including the unborn and the disabled. We therefore insist on the right of all persons, including those who are vulnerable or dependent, to protection from conception to natural death. We will support, protect, and be advocates for such people, since to do anything less is to weaken our humanity and despise our personhood.

We will not comply with any directive that compels us to participate in or facilitate abortion, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide, euthanasia, or any other act that involves the intentional taking of innocent human life.

Conclusion

Religious freedom, marriage and family, and the sacredness of human life have provided the foundations enabling Western democratic societies to flourish. We erode these foundations at our peril.

The faith which is at the heart of many of the values and strengths underpinning the Australian nation now compels us to speak up in their defence.

For the future of this nation, and for our children’s future, we call upon all like-minded citizens to support and sign this declaration.

Released Friday 23^rd July 2010

Now that you've read the Canberra Declaration,

would you like to sign it?

Tweeted #1

2011-05-27T01:57:00.000+10:00

Since expanding my social-media outlets into the Twittersphere, I have decided to make a new weekly addition to my blog for those of you who aren't Twit's like myself LOL.

Following in the same style as my "Sunday Snippets" I now present you my news-tweets!

Julia Youn and Our Lady of Naju, South Korea.

Not exactly "news" anymore, here is a story I picked up on today of a false prophet.

More information on Julia and Our Lady of Naju.

Finally the Decree of the Archbishop of Kwangju.

Pro-choice and Pro-life clash in Albury.

Today two opposing groups clashed at the Albury "Fertility Control Clinic".

Gay Mormons.

Article exploring the complex issues many Mormon's - and those of other faiths - face when confronted with their sexuality.

Jesus and Mary Magdalene reincarnated, apparently.

Followers buy-up in Kingaroy, Queensland.

Instruction of Summorum Pontificum.

New Vatican document released on the Tridentine Rite Mass.

English translation of "Summorum Pontificum" document.

Bhutto on Bin Laden.

Benazir Bhutto talks on Osama Bin Laden's death... yes, she did die before him, apparently.

The BBC censor Bhutto.

"Protest the Protesters"

2011-05-26T23:54:00.001+10:00

The Border media-authorities have once again done as they do best, not to report the news, but to sensationalise it.

For years now there has existed a local group, "Helpers of God's Precious Infants" who make a weekly event of attending the Albury abortion clinic - or "Fertility Control Clinic" as they like to be called - on Thursdays following mass. For the most part, these people belong to the ageing population, not many young people in sight, until today.

In two separate reports from The Border Mail and WIN News, the Helpers have used "intimidation techniques... filming from a car people entering the clinic" amongst other absolute halve-truths.

I have attended this very peaceful protest on a number of occasions over the last three-years, not once have I encountered any bullying from those amongst us pro-lifers. Some will stand there with diagrams of stages of life, others with leaflets with information, while the vast majority will stand there together praying the Rosary.

When a potential client comes by, they are offered a leaflet - not made to have it - nor does anyone hurl abuse or say anything other than the recitation of the Rosary.

Recently, a group of teens started a Facebook page to "Protest the Protesters", who made an appearance at the weekly vigil. Sadly, teens do not have the education or the life-experience to make an informed stance on abortion, particularly if their of the "pro-choice" encampment.

It has now come to the medias attention that a camera inside a parked vehicle has been used to film people entering the clinic, claiming a mass violation of privacy. This is true, there has been a camera set-up, but to the best of my knowledge, this was to combat the clinic who started the dirty game of giving false accusation to the peaceful-protestors outside, obviously detrimental to their "business" which is a very serious one indeed... a business of killing.

After the peaceful protest, one of the Doctors, assuming that one who is against life can be called a Doctor, went out to thank the protestors. This same Doctor owns another "kill clinic" in Melbourne in which a security guard assaulted a pro-life protestor. Perhaps this Doctor is paying a bunch of ill-informed teens with a somewhat skewed-life-view, as teens often have, to combat the peaceful-protests that have existed for quite some time now. Surely if you are in the business of killing, then you wouldn't be against being in the business of thuggery... I don't know of many other clinics with security-guards, other than similar "clinics".

The least the media can do is report the entire story, not the sections they see fit. "Newstainment" is a more fitting term for the media - not just locally, internationally as well.

GET THEE BEHIND ME SATAN!

2011-05-22T11:50:00.000+10:00

It's happening again...
I'm under spiritual attack...
Impure thoughts...
Evil actions...
Morally wrong deeds...
Please save me, O Lord.
Protect me from the Evil One.
Get thee behind me, Satan!
No more drugs or binge drinking.
Just holiness.
And happiness.
Jesus, I trust in You.
I love You.
I adore Your Divine Mercy.
AMEN.

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #17

2011-05-22T06:51:00.003+10:00

Sunday Snippets for the weeks of Sunday May 8 to Saturday May 21.

Head over to my website - I have a few extra additions to my spirituality page.
This week I wrote about the former Bishop of Toowoomba Diocese looking at it from two different perspectives.
A random rant about spending some more time focusing on my spiritual health.
In the past I've kept a pretty dark outlook on life. I discuss some of that here.
I am currently under spiritual attack - this is my prayer of spontaneity.
Finally I am working on a new image - a Coptic Icon style picture of Jesus. Only rough sketches so far but I hope to eventually paint it on canvas or perhaps even wood.

I'm now on Twitter @ ravenswiss so go look me up there! Until next week, GBU!
Davie.

ART: Coptic Icon

2011-05-19T02:16:00.001+10:00

Yesterday I did a rough sketch in my Spiritual Journal of Jesus... in a Coptic Icon style of drawing. I like Coptic symbology and artwork. Very different to traditional Latin Catholic artwork, even different again to other Orthodox Churches.

My plan is to work more and more on this image (not the initial sketch - that is done) then work my way up to colour before finally putting it on canvas or wood with paint, pastels and texta mostly.

I can't wait, it will sure make a great new centrepiece for my prayer table!!!

Cigarettes prices to be HALVED???

2011-05-17T18:17:00.000+10:00

Federal Health Minister Nicola Roxon.

Last month, the Government said they are pushing to make cheap, generic cigarette packets the standard - no colours, just olive-green, bigger health warning (the graphic one) and a standard font reading the brand and the variant.

The tobacco industry is in a spin, and naturally they should. The Government hope that this will stop people smoking, particularly younger people, when there are no corporate branding. The tobacco industry, however, have said that there is no proof that plain packing does anything.

They are now come out today saying they will halve cigarette prices if the Government go ahead with their plain packaging plans, because otherwise, they will lose their market to the black-market tobacco trade.

GOOD!!!

I would prefer the packets stay the way they are, but if they do get the new packets passed, at least cigarettes will be cheaper. Besides, I use a cigarette holder most the time!

Evil, evil, evil...

2011-05-11T18:40:00.000+10:00

Lurking in the depths of my computer, and in the depths of my old notebooks and display folders, I have poetry, essays, stories and random writing of evil, twisted nature. These are what I wrote when I was a teenager, when I was very annoyed at the world and everyone in it, when I felt like God was nothing more than the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus, a myth invented by parents to make kids behave that little bit more.

Thank God I grew out of that stage and then became more an agnostic than an atheist. I didn't believe, but I was open to it. Then of course I had the car-accident, experienced quite a few spiritual experiences which I could not pass off as mere coincidences, dreams or anything of the sort. Besides, if the spiritual experience is contrary to God's Love, Mercy and Justice, it is not from God. If it is nothing but His Message, and you feel at peace, then it most likely is from God.

Some of these poems/stories etc; are quite evil and even anti-Christ. One I can remember was something like "You can't judge me, only God can. But God doesn't exist, therefore no one can." I think the reason I come under spiritual attack so often is because of these evil, heretical writings. I don't need them. I don't like them. Even if I was into that still, they aren't very good pieces of writing - I was pretty young, before I was sixteen!

Time to burn them, throw them out, delete them from my computer and my backups. Nothing I want anymore, they make me sick when I see them, hence why they are packed away in old notebooks inside boxes full of things I keep, but don't neccesarily need out (I live in a very small place!).

Well, I know what to do later on tonight, if not tonight, it will have to be Friday as I have to go to court to give evidence in a matter. I'm nervous, but I will be fine! I'm not in trouble or anything, just witness :-)

Focusing on my Spiritual Health!

2011-05-11T18:03:00.001+10:00

I don't work or study at the present moment. I spend my days going to various appointments. What's that saying? Something about "idle hands is the devils playground" or something along those lines? Well I beg to differ, so long as your head is in the right place, the right materials, the right resources!

I bought St. Faustina's Diary "Divine Mercy in My Soul" a few weeks ago and I'm loving it so far. I am a sinner, like everyone on this earth, but I sin probably more than I would like to. Divine Mercy is a good message for me in that regards.

About this time last year, I stopped my Bible reading plan, which was a reading from the O.T, a reading from the Book of Psalms and a reading from the N.T each day, for one year, then you've read the whole Bible. It's a Catholic plan so it includes the Deuterocanonical books. You can use the same plan to read the Catechism of The Catholic Church in one year also!

The reason I stopped doing it was I had a lot of major stress last year. I went to the psych-wing of the hospital for about three weeks too. Very messy. Anyways, I have now picked up where I left off, and I am in front for where we are in the year - it's divided into months.

Did I also mention I live directly opposite a Catholic Church? Well I do! Very lovely Parish Priest there too!!!

So I have been trying to get to Mass more often than just Sundays - a few times during the week also. Just like one needs to focus on their physical, mental and emotional health, one much also leave a good deal of time on the spiritual health. After all, we do owe our lives to Jesus! We were created to do God's Will, not our own! The least I can do is sacrifice half and hour every few weekdays in Mass, and some more time reading my Bible, not to mention reading the Divine Mercy Journal! I'm reading that instead of reading a novel, so I should get through it pretty fast. Whether I absorb the entire message the first time I don't know, but I can always go back and read certain bits based on the footnotes, index, chronological index etc;.

Well I'm out! News time!

God bless you all!

William Morris, former Bishop of Toowoomba QLD

2011-05-11T17:37:00.000+10:00

The Bishop of the Toowoomba Diocese was stepped down, or resigned, depending on who you ask - The Vatican or the Bishop, William Morris.

Here are a couple of news articles, from two different perspectives. One from a Catholic news-source, the other from "The Age", a Melbourne newspaper that, in my view, are a great source of news except for Catholic affairs... they seem somewhat anti-Catholic, anti-Papist...

Some things seem strange, like how the former-Bishop chose to wear a neck-tie instead of the Roman-collar. Sounds fine to me, he doesn't want to be "above" everyone else! However, the neck-tie was emblazoned with his episcopal coat of arms - that draws even more attention to being "above" others than the Roman-collar in my view. I don't see the Roman-collar as being "above" anyways, I see it as a thing that deserves respect, that shows who they are, that they are approachable by anyone in the community, a sign of love and humility, poverty and charity!

Here's the news from the Catholic news-site "Catholic Culture"
http://bit.ly/lRdfvj

This is the one from the Melbourne newspaper "The Age"
http://bit.ly/kkrWr9

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #16

2011-05-08T05:34:00.001+10:00

Sunday Snippets for the weeks of Sunday May 1 to Saturday May 7.

I haven't blogged too much of late, mostly because I am not using my regular laptop this week, and I have been having issues with Telstra and my phone line, thus, my new ADSL conntection too! Having said that, I should be much more active in the cyber-world given my now-active ADSL connection as opposed to the USB WiFi stick I have been using for the past two-years!

I couldn't sleep one night so decided to blog about Eastern Catholicism, Western (Roman) Catholicism, and a perhaps a reunification? I mean, the Anglicans now have an Ordinariate of the Roman Catholic Church, so what of the Eastern (non Catholic) Churches?
You may remember a few months ago I did a sketch of the Cathedral in Christchurch that was heavily damaged during the NZ quakes in Feb. This is an update on the rebuilding on the Cathedral.
Finally, keeping in the spirit of Divine Mercy (last Sunday, 1st May) a short blog about my recent addition to my library!

Enjoy the Easter Season in this lead up to Pentecost 2011!

Divine Mercy in My Soul

2011-05-08T05:26:00.001+10:00

Well, I finally have it in my hands! My very own soft-leather burgundy edition of St. Maria Faustina Kowalska's Diary, :"Divine Mercy in My Soul". There were two copies to choose from - the one I got, complete with gold-edge paper and gold imbossed image on the covers - or the much cheaper paperback copy. I decided I need to buy myself nice things, or at least start to again, and if it is spiritual, why not?

Not to my surprise, the Diary comes complete with a Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur - common known Catholic terms that say the booklet/Bible/book etc; is "doctrinally free of error". The Diary surely will be a good addition, not to my bookshelf, but on my night-table (aka: laptop desk!) with my Sunday Missal, Daily Missal and NJB Bible.

I can't wait to start reading it, perhaps today, if not, then tomorrow!

Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament Update

2011-05-08T04:52:00.000+10:00

Back in February when an earthquake struck Christchurch, New Zealand, the Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament was heavily damaged. See the 3News NZ news update on the rebuilding to take place of its main towers and large dome above the Altar.

See my sketch of this beautiful building. I drew it how the building looked before the earthquake to show its full glory!

East and West

2011-05-04T06:31:00.000+10:00

Some food for thought this morning since I've been up since 3am... it's now 6:30am... won't be getting anymore sleep, especially since Telstra are coming today to fix my phone line!!!

-----

Over recent years, there has been renewed efforts at cross-denominational understanding, even acceptance such as the new Personal Ordinariates for former Anglican's who have joined the Catholic Church. What hope, if any, does this offer for a reunion between Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic (Western) religions?

Originally, there were five Patriarchs - Jerusalem, headed by James, Antioch and Rome by Peter, Alexandria by Mark and Constantinople by Andrew. For a long time, Rome was the "first among equals" until the Great Schism. Eastern Churches didn't bow down to Rome when Rome wanted all the power, thus the split. It got quite messy with Excommunications against one another until finally, history got most of us lost to this historical form of Christianity. The Roman Catholic Church is the largest single religion in the world, followed by the Eastern Orthodox Churches.

With each of the Pentarchy's created by original Apostles of Christ, where does that leave us all in a world full of various teachings and denominations, many of which have been around a mere 600-years?

In the modern world, let us ponder a few things...

"So I now say to you: You are Peter and on this rock I will build My Community." - Matt 16:18 NJB.

Though there were five main cities, there was only ever one chosen by Christ Himself, being St. Peter. Still, if St. Peter also headed the Church of Antioch, don't they have a claim to Patriarchal Superiority, like Rome? Not really, considering Peter made Rome his main port, he was crucified there, his bones are said to be buried there also.

The Eastern Orthodox Churches will never enter into one common Church until many things are understood from both perspectives. How long did it take for the Anglican Communion to have internal schisms between Liberal Anglican's and Traditional Anglican's? How much longer the schism has occurred?

Though there are no theological barriers to the reunification of the East and West, there are barriers such as the idea which many Roman Catholic's believe, that the Pope is infallible. This creates a divide as it is basically saying that Rome - The Pope - is number one, with the other Patriarchs as number two's.

Even though the Roman Church is built on the legacy of St. Peter, none of the Pope's since him have been him, just successors, so what's stopping the bringing together of the five-patriarchs in one common group, all equals?

It is an interesting concept...

However, even greater barriers are to be fought - accepting wrongdoing on each parties side, accepting that one if not superior over the other, accepting difference in worship because of cultural and historical reasons, acceptance of a different Canon of Scripture, acceptance of different languages etc; etc;.

Still, if Anglican's may join the Roman Church, still keeping part of their identity, I'm sure the greatest barrier between East/West relations is more of a historical one than anything else... as discussed, there are no great "theological" barriers keeping the two apart!

Instead of having one religion with the Pope seen by the world as the most authoritive figure in Christianity, would be not be better with a religion headed by five Patriarchs, the Roman one being superior in only one way - the Christian Palace of Vatican City?

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #16

2011-05-01T09:48:00.001+10:00

Sunday Snippets for the weeks of Sunday April 24 to Saturday April 30.

Since the year 2000, the Sunday after Easter Sunday has been designated as Divine Mercy Sunday. Most of my posts for this week are all about that, or linked to it in some way.

A little bit of info on Divine Mercy and the Divine Mercy image.
There are a couple of items I want to purchase from the local Catholic shop, both of which are Divine Mercy in origin. See them here!
The powerful prayer to St. Michael the Archangel.
An article on Divine Mercy Sunday from Zenit.

I hope you all have a Happy and Holy Easter season this 2011!

Shadow of Peter, Touch of Thomas and Divine Mercy

2011-05-01T00:12:00.002+10:00

By Father Thomas Rosica, CSB

TORONTO, APRIL 4, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Today’s first reading from the Acts of the Apostles (5:12-16) offers us a vivid insight into the early Christian community in Jerusalem. Luke has already mentioned the rapid growth of the early church (2:41, 47, 4:4; 6:1, 9:31). In today’s reading from Acts he wants to add the fact that large numbers of women as well as men were being baptized and becoming disciples (5:14). Signs and wonders are the visible result of some of the gifts of the Spirit such as "the working of miracles" and "deeds of power" (I Corinthians 12:9, 28).

A powerful image of Peter is presented to us (vs. 15-16): “They even carried the sick out into the streets and laid them on cots and pallets, so that when Peter came by, at least his shadow might fall on any one of them. Also the people from the cities in the vicinity of Jerusalem were coming together, bringing people who were sick or afflicted with unclean spirits, and they were all being healed."

The shadow of Peter

I have always been moved by the image of the shadow of Peter passing over the sick and afflicted. People who passed within Peter’s shadow were healed, not by Peter’s shadow, but by God’s power working through Peter. These miracles of healing attracted people to the early Church and confirmed the truth of the teachings of the Apostles and the fact that the power of God was with them. We also learn that the religious leaders who were jealous of Jesus’ power and authority saw the Apostles as a continued threat and demanded respect for themselves. The apostles weren’t demanding respect for themselves. Their goal was to bring respect and reverence to God. The Apostles had acquired the respect of the people, not because they demanded it, but because they deserved it.

Pope Benedict among us

As I reflect on today’s first reading, I cannot help but call to mind the powerful images of Pope Benedict XVI as he moved among hundreds of thousands of people during his Apostolic Visit to the United States of America two years ago this month. The authentic shepherd, who models his or her life on Jesus, must love the people entrusted to him and imitate Jesus. Pope Benedict has done that very well.

Over the past weeks, the world has witnessed the scourge and pain of sexual abuse of minors and the vulnerable erupt in many European countries. The abuse is evil, devastating, and sinful. A small portion of priests and religious, who promised to protect, defend and love children, have brought disgrace upon the Church and upon society. Some people have tried to blame Pope Benedict for inaction, covert behavior, and blatant dishonesty in dealing with the sexual abuse of minors. Such blame is unjust, unacceptable, and extremely harmful to the Church, to victims, and to society in general.

I recall Pope Benedict’s visit to the USA two years ago with deep emotion and profound gratitude. During that visit, the shadow of Peter came upon America, as it has done wherever this Pope has visited over the past five years. And that shadow, which is God’s healing touch, covers us all with mercy, healing and peace. When Pope Benedict walked among us, he did more than connect with us. He bonded. He moved multitudes. He showed remarkable courage, wisdom and compassion.

The media did not miss the deep significance of the Holy Father’s private and moving meeting with victims of clerical sex abuse at the Vatican Embassy in Washington. The Pope was unafraid then and remains unafraid now to enter into the pain, confusion, sadness and evil of the abuse crisis. He let people know that he listened and understood and that the Pope will continue to act so that such a disaster would never repeat itself.

Ubi Petrus ibi ecclesia

An ancient Latin expression, first used by St. Ambrose in the fourth century, came to my mind in April 2008, during several moments of the historic papal visit to the USA: Ubi Petrus ibi ecclesia, which translated means: Wherever Peter is, there is the Church. Peter was in America two years ago, and his gentle smile and obvious serenity ignited a nation, a Church and a continent with hope in the midst of cynicism, despair and many who would like to hasten death for a Church that is alive and young. Only time, reflection and prayer will reveal if the healing of two years ago will bear fruit for the Church in America.

One thing is certain: In Pope Benedict XVI, the shadow of Peter fell on millions of people in America in 2008 and continues to fall on millions around the world to this day, especially upon those who are wounded and hurting from the evil actions of sexual abuse of children. Let us never forget that in Pope Benedict, Peter is still among us.

The touch of Thomas

John's Resurrection story (Chapters 20-21) is a series of encounters between Jesus and his followers that reveal diverse faith reactions. Whether these encounters are with Simon Peter and the Beloved Disciple, Mary Magdalene, the disciples or Thomas, the whole scenario reminds us that in the range of belief there are different degrees of readiness and different factors that cause people to come to faith and help them in turn to become witnesses and teachers.

John’s story of Jesus and Thomas (John 20:19-31) records the first post-resurrection appearance of Jesus and provides us with an archetypal experience of doubt, struggle and faith. Herein lies every Christian's experience: to believe without having seen. In this Gospel passage, we have a story within a story: the resolution of Thomas' doubts during Jesus' appearance to encourage the fearful disciples. Thomas only believes when he hears the Lord's call to belief.

Thomas is not the eternal skeptic, nor the bullish, stubborn personality that Christian tradition has often painted. The Greek lexicon translates the word "skepsis" as "doubt, misgiving, hesitation, and disbelief." Thomas, the doubter, was permitted to do something that we would all like to do. He was allowed to touch and "experience" something that by human means was not possible. For us it is more difficult. We need to begin with faith and then blindly touch our way to the heart of our lives.

Though we know so little about Thomas, his family background and his destiny, we are given an important hint into his identity in the etymology of his name in Greek: Thomas (Didymous in Greek) means "twin". Who was Thomas' other half, his twin? Maybe we can see his twin by looking into the mirror. Thomas' other half is anyone who has struggled with the pain of unbelief, doubt and despair, and has allowed the presence of the Risen Jesus to make a difference. When this happens, the ice of skepticism thaws. Thomas and his twins throughout the world risk everything in Jesus and for Jesus and become sources of blessing for others, in spite of their doubts and despair and because of their doubts and despair.

Divine Mercy Sunday

Divine Mercy Sunday is not a new feast established to celebrate St. Faustina Kowalska’s (1905-1938) revelations. In fact it is not about St. Faustina at all! Rather the feast recovers an ancient liturgical tradition, reflected in a teaching attributed to St. Augustine about the Easter Octave, which he called "the days of mercy and pardon," and the Octave Day itself "the compendium of the days of mercy."

There is no need to force a link between Divine Mercy and the Gospel story of Thomas and the Risen Jesus. The celebration of Divine Mercy Sunday does not compete with, nor endanger the integrity of the Easter Season, nor does it take away from Thomas' awesome encounter with the Risen Lord in today's Gospel. Divine Mercy Sunday is the Octave Day of Easter, celebrating the merciful love of God shining through the whole Easter Triduum and the whole Easter mystery.

At St. Faustina's canonization on April 30, 2000, Pope John Paul II said in his homily before more than 200,000 people in St. Peter’s Square: "Jesus shows his hands and his side [to the Apostles]. He points, that is, to the wounds of the Passion, especially the wound in his heart, the source from which flows the great wave of mercy poured out on humanity."

Several years ago, when I was having difficulty in seeing the internal links between the Second Sunday of Easter, my patron saint, Thomas the Apostle, and Sr. Faustina's revelations, I came across this quote by St. Bernard (Canticle 61, 4-5: PL 183, 1072): "What I cannot obtain by myself, I appropriate (usurp!) with trust from the pierced side of the Lord, because he is full of mercy. Thomas' encounter with the Risen Lord gave me a whole new perspective on the meaning of mercy. Then I understood what this day is all about. Now more than ever in the Church and in the world, we need mercy.

Mercy within mercy within mercy

Canada’s most recent shepherd, Bishop Donald Bolen of Saskatoon, was ordained to the episcopacy on March 25, 2010. Bishop Bolen, a priest of the Archdiocese of Regina in Western Canada, and former official of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity at the Vatican, chose as his episcopal motto “Mercy within mercy within mercy.” The quotation is from Thomas Merton’s 1953 book “The Sign of Jonas,” wherein Merton has God saying: “I have always overshadowed Jonas with my mercy. Have you not had sight of me, Jonas, my child? Mercy within mercy within mercy.”

At his ordination ceremony on the Feast of the Annunciation this year, Bishop Bolen said: “The Word which Mary welcomes with her ‘fiat,’ the Word which becomes incarnate in Jesus of Nazareth, the Word who gives himself to us completely, even unto death, but which death cannot contain: what that Word speaks is mercy within mercy within mercy. If ever there was an episcopal motto that sums up a bishop’s life, it is this motto for a remarkable young bishop and leader of the Church in Canada who models mercy in high density!

As we continue to bask in the afterglow of the resurrection of the Lord, let us not cease praying that Peter’s shadow of healing and peace cover the Church, and let us beg the Lord that our lives be steeped in mercy within mercy within mercy.

Divine Mercy presents!

2011-04-30T22:59:00.000+10:00

As well as the Divine Mercy journal, I plan to buy these other two pieces of Divine Mercy once I get some money together! I'm going to wear the watch, and hang the blanket on a wall :-)

Prayer to St. Michael the Archangel

2011-04-30T22:48:00.000+10:00

Prayer to Saint Michael the Archangel

Saint Michael, Archangel, defend us in battle. Be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray. And you, Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God, thrust into Hell Satan and the other evil spirits who prowl the world for the ruin of souls. Amen.

The Image of Divine Mercy

2011-04-30T22:39:00.001+10:00

With a week since Easter Sunday, it is less than two weeks to Divine Mercy Sunday, a Feast of The Church on Jesus' Divine Mercy - veneration of the Image of Divine Mercy and recitation of the Chaplet of Divine Mercy. It is something I personally like because I sometimes know that I am not living life the right way, so I find comfort in Jesus' Divine Mercy and His promises. I plan to buy the Diary of Divine Mercy in about a week - a few days before Divine Mercy Sunday - which will give me a few days at least to read up a little more than I already know.

It is also a perfect example of the All Loving God we have, and especially of the Risen Christ, quite appropriate being after Easter Sunday but before Pentecost. The late Pope John-Paul II had particular devotion to the Divine Mercy, the Divine Mercy Apostle being Polish as well. He canonised her and instituted Divine Mercy Sunday. He also passed on to Heaven the day before Divine Mercy Sunday! He will be beatified by Pope Benedict XVI on Divine Mercy Sunday, making him a Blessed.

Read more about the Divine Mercy below!

Source: Divine Mercy Sydney
Divine Mercy Sunday - 1st May, 2011.

The earliest element of the Devotion to the Divine Mercy revealed to St. Faustina was the Image. On February 22nd, 1931 Jesus appeared to her with rays radiating from His heart and said,

Paint an image according to the pattern you see, with the signature: Jesus I trust in You. I desire that this image be venerated, first in your chapel, and throughout the world. (Diary 47)

I promise that the soul that will venerate this image will not perish. I also promise victory over its enemies already here on earth, especially at the hour of death. I myself will defend it as My own glory.

I am offering people a vessel with which they are to keep coming for graces to the fountain of mercy. That vessel is this image with the signature: "Jesus, I trust in You." (Diary 327)

The two rays denote Blood and Water. the pale ray stands for the Water which makes souls righteous. The red ray stands for the Blood which is the life of souls. These two rays issued forth from the very depths of My tender mercy when My agonized heart was opened by a lance on the Cross. These rays shield souls from the wrath of My Father. Happy is the one who dwell in their shelter, for the just hand of God shall not lay hold of him. (Diary 299)

Not in the beauty of the colour, nor of the brush, lies the greatness of this image, but in My grace. (Diary 313)

By means of this image I shall grant many graces to souls. It is to be a reminder of the demands of My mercy, because even the strongest faith is of no avail without works. (Diary 742)

In these texts the Church's doctrine on images, justification and grace are explained. First, by itself an image is merely a painting, no matter how beautiful and expressive. Yet, it can point us the mysteries of the faith and dispose us to grasp and receive what it represents, in this case the Divine Mercy. It is thus a vessel, not the source, a reminder, not the reality.

The reality is the merciful fountain of grace flowing from the pierced Heart of Christ on the Cross, and flowing out visibly to represent the visible, that is the sacramental, signs of grace, Baptism and Eucharist, standing for all the sacraments of the Church. Thus, St. John in his first letter insists on the presence of the invisible with the visible, the Spirit with the water and the Blood.

The image also reminds us that salvation is not just by faith, but by works of charity also. It takes faith to see and believe in what the Image signifies, Divine Mercy poured out from Christ upon the Cross, but it takes mercy, love going beyond the strict requirements of justice, in order to draw down mercy on oneself. "Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us" (Mt 6:12) and "the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you" (Mt 7:2) The Image of the pierced side of Christ pouring out blood and water reminds us that the Cross, love in action, is the price of mercy. "As I have loved you so also should you love one another." (Jn 13:34)

1931: Our Lord appeared to St Faustina and asked her to paint His image.

Our Lord Jesus said that His gaze is that the same gaze when He was on the cross.

Our Lord Jesus described the Two Rays of Blood and Water from His pierced Heart.

His Divine Mercy

2011-04-30T22:38:00.000+10:00

I am spiritually sick, wounded, and in need of aid, which I think I have found in the Divine Mercy. Most people who pass through here are Catholic, but there are others who pass by that aren't, so perhaps I will firstly add that Divine Mercy isn't veneration of "yet another bloody saint!" but of a very well known and someone ought to be praised - worshipped in fact - and that is The Risen Christ, with His Promises of Mercy.

I was going to buy the Divine Mercy Journal during the week, read up on it a little before Sunday, but too late now, which I am a little disappointed at. There's still next week, and the part of the year we are in, the creep up to Pentecost, Divine Mercy is even more appropriate!

On Good Friday, Jesus goes through all the pain and suffering for US! Easter Sunday He has risen, but Divine Mercy Sunday, He is wanting His children to come to known Him closer yet, by giving them mercy from their sins!

"Souls perish in spite of My bitter Passion. I am giving them the last hope of salvation; that is, the Feast of My Mercy." (Diary 965).

I must made inventory of my sins so I can take them to God - be it in prayer or if I see the need to confess them to a priest. Make more of a commitment to my prayer and spiritual life. Change things in my everyday life.

If God is Love, and Jesus is Love, then Divine Mercy is Love! Happy Easter Season!

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #15

2011-04-24T06:13:00.001+10:00

Sunday Snippets for the weeks of Sunday March 6 to Saturday April 23.

I have been inactive on the internet for a while, so I haven't blogged too much, but I have been getting into some other activities, notably reading and drawing!

I drew my own version of The Divine Mercy and Christux Rex (Christ the King).
My little ramblings on the apocalypse.
In these two pieces I talk about being Catholic and why I'm Catholic.
A little thinking on Sola Fide - by faith alone.
As Easter draws closer I talk on Confession.
Finally, a prayer for World Youth Day 2011, Madrid!

I hope you all have a Happy and Holy Easter this 2011!

Friend and Lord Jesus Christ

2011-04-19T09:45:00.000+10:00

This is a prayer for World Youth Day Madrid, Spain, held in August 2011. Though I will not be able to go as I barely have enough money to survive on let alone save to go overseas, I went to the last World Youth Day in 2008, Sydney. I loved it, it was great and I got quite a lot out of it, including friendships (which are mostly simply gone as I had a period of inactivity, many people I haven't managed to find again due to moving away etc;).

This is a nice prayer anyways, applicable for anytime, particularly for young people such as myself! Have a read and meditate on it, you should enjoy you as I did I trust :-)

Source: WYD 2011 Madrid

Friend and Lord Jesus Christ, How great You are! With Your words and Works You have revealed to us Who God is, Your Father and our Father, and Who You are: our Savior. You call us to be with You.

We wish to follow You wherever You go. We thank You for Your Incarnation. You are the Eternal Son of God, but You humbled Yourself and became man. We thank You for Your Death and Resurrection. You obeyed the Father's will to the extreme

and for this reason You are the Lord of all persons and things. We thank You for having remained amongst us in the Eucharist. Your Presence, Your Sacrifice, Your Banquet

Invite us to remain always united to You. You Call us to work with You. We wish to go wherever You send us: to announce Your name, to heal in Your Name, to bring all of our brothers to You.

Grant us Your Holy Spirit, to enlighten and strengthen us. The Virgin Mary, the Mother You gave us on the cross, always encourages us to do what You say. You are our Life. May our thoughts,

our love and our actions always be rooted in You! You are our Rock. May our faith in You always be the solid foundation of our life!

We pray for Pope Benedict XVI, for the Bishops and for all those who are preparing the next World Youth Dayin Madrid. We pray for our family and friends and especially for all the young people who will get to know you in this encounter, thanks to the firm and joyful testimony of the faith.

Confession

2011-04-19T09:10:00.000+10:00

As with every Holy Week, I get more involved in the Church, trying to revitalise my faith. Confession is on tonight, then not much until Holy Thursday, then two things on Good Friday - Ecumenical Station of The Cross, then later in the day, Good Friday Mass. Saturday is of course the Easter Vigils, and Sunday is Easter Sunday Mass. Back to Confession...

I'm not sure what type of Confession it is, which Rite - One, Two or Three. One of them is one-on-one in the Confessional Booth, another is personal but in the Church with several priests, people just lining up, and the other is a general absolution, not actually confessing to anyone but God - I think they are in that order, One, Two, Three, I'm not sure though! Let me know LOL.

So I am a little nervous, I haven't gone in a while, and I have done some bad things to myself and to others... perhaps that is why I didn't get too involved in Adoration when I FINALLY got to it, after planning to go for two or three weeks but never getting off my butt to go!!! Hmm... a good thing they stress Confession during Lent, especially Holy Week, by Good Friday!

Sola Fide: By Faith Alone

2011-04-19T08:56:00.000+10:00

This is another reason why I am Catholic...

Sola Fide - By Faith Alone - a teaching the Protestant Churches adhere to, meaning that they receive guaranteed salvation by faith alone, not through good works as well, such as the Catholic Church teach. I believe that you must do good works as well as have a good spiritual life in order to get salvation.

Think of it this way... you may have strong faith in Christ, yet a strong animalistic instinct to murder or torture or rape - anything that is morally wrong - yet because of "Sola Fide" and your strong faith, you still have salvation, even though you do nasty things, and don't do anything such as Confession and Penance!

That's my two-cents worth!!!

Christus Rex

2011-04-19T08:00:00.000+10:00

A picture I drew a few weeks ago, "Christus Rex", or "Christ the King".

Catholic: Here to stay!

2011-04-19T00:46:00.000+10:00

There are a many things about the Catholic Faith that I still do not understand fully, some not at all, so I have decided I need to learn more about MY faith before I look at other faiths - which is out of mere boredom and curiosity... to start with!!!

I plan on buying the Divine Mercy Diary of St. Faustina on Wednesday week, give me time to start reading it before Divine Mercy Sunday!

This being Holy Week will be pretty full on. I'm going to Thursday Mass in town then have coffee, then I'm going to the Lords Supper at 7pm across the road. I'm thinking of doing the Eccumenical Way of The Cross - between Anglican, Uniting, Salvo's and Catholic Church - on Friday, then a Catholic Mass at 3pm. Then there's the Vigil on Saturday. Oh I think there is a Rite of Confession tomorrow which I might go to. Not sure which Rite, I hope it is the one which is either general absolution communally, or a number of priests... I still don't feel 100% comfortable confessing to priests I know well, like Fr. Flanagan! So, a busy week, as Holy Week usually is. Hopefully this revitalises my passion for the Lord!

Catholic... but why?

2011-04-19T00:14:00.001+10:00

Since my "spiritual awakening" of 2005, I have dibbled and dabbled with a few other religious-denominations... it never lasted though. After going to the Catholic Church which I was comfortable with, I started going to different places, starting with the Pentecostal Church in Wodonga, Faith City. I met nice people there, who were very happy to meet me I may add, odd I thought, but anyway. I didn't go there many times, I found the people TOO eager and happy, besides I guess I didn't know too much about the difference between Catholicism and Protestantism, such as the views on Saints, the Virgin Mary etc;.

I since learnt, but before long I was caught up with the Jehovah's Witnesses. At first it was to look at certain Bible passages and how the Bible predicted things etc;. I was looking at it from my own New Jerusalem Bible, a Catholic one, so sometimes it was right, such as the world being round (I cannot remember the scriptural reference here, someone comment it if they can help!). After a while though, I started using their "New World Translation" and went to one of their meetings. Still, not for me.

Finally, Mormon Missionaries came around. I ordered a "Book of Mormon" several years back, but didn't have much to do with them - I was constantly intoxicated and always smokings, two things that are banned in their Church, smoking and drinking. Anywho, this time I met them on a number of occasions and attended their Church a number of times. I suppose they appealed to me because they were so happy all the time, yet not too eager to know you either! I eventually worked them out to be a lie... still I am somewhat drawn to them. Anyways...

The Mormon Angel Moroni which adorns most LDS Temples.

So the Catholic Church have many things that I don't agree with, however, as a lay-person, does it matter when there are priests out there who engage in this behaviour anyway, it is just "hush hush" or when there are Cardinals out there who are more on the Liberal-left in Catholic politics?

Besides, on a whole, there are many reasons I like to remain Catholic.

Number one, ("And I say to thee; That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build My Church" - Matt 16:18).
Number two, we are the only church who believe in Mary as the Mother of God.
And three, there was always going to be uprise against His True Church, which is happening now more than ever! Many Fundamentalist, and mainstream-Protestants, liken His Church to "The Whore of Babylon!"

Apocalypse now?

2011-03-28T12:38:00.000+11:00

There has been a great many number of disasters occur in this year 2011, and we are not even three months in! Floods in North QLD, earthquakes in Christchurch, as well as tsunamis on top of that in Japan, now resulting in nuclear meltdowns and radiation! All that only this year, what of the Haiti quake in 2010, the NZ and Chile mining disasters? I for one think the world is in its final spins... Too much happening down there, and up here with Libyan dictators killing their own people, or, closer to home, brother turning against brother, like it says in the Bible, which is the case in the last few weeks with Kyle, my best friend. Anywho, I shall ellaborate more on my theory when I am online on a computer, not my phone LOL.
--- via Blackberry.

Divine Mercy sketch

2011-03-22T19:43:00.000+11:00

Just finished my own personal sketch of The Divine Mercy.
--- via Blackberry

Just testing!

2011-03-19T20:17:00.000+11:00

Using email on my BBerry, just seein if it works ;-)

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #14

2011-03-06T15:34:00.000+11:00

Sunday Snippets for the week of Sunday February 27 to Saturday March 5.

I finished a sketch of the Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament, the Catholic Cathedral in Christchurch, NZ, that was badly damaged in the recent earthquakes.
I have a short ramble on how my spirituality needs a refill and another short petition asking for strength.
A special card I picked up from a Christian shop a few years ago, celebrating 400yrs of the discovery of "La Australia del Espiritu Santo" by Portuguese Captain Fernandez de Quiros.
The first piece of personal writing I have done in a while, talking about prayer, what it is, how to do it.
I also started another new page on my website all about spirituality. Have a look at ravenswiss.com.

Go to the "Sunday Snippets" blog.

Pray, Pray, Pray!

2011-03-05T13:17:00.000+11:00

Prayer - what is it? How do you do it? Am I doing it right?

Many people are perplexed by this word, others simply have a very narrow outlook on what it is to pray. Let me start off with what it is not. It is not simply saying the right words strung together in a sentence, though that is the most common-known methods of prayer. It is more than that. It is a conversation with God that cannot take the form of words. Simply put, prayer is the language of the soul. Those little niggling thoughts we have at times, usually when deep in thought or conversation with God, those spontaneous ideas that are "God-given" - are all the fruits of prayer.

Some people find themselves thinking too much when it comes to prayer. Some make long lists of prayers to say then wonder why they are failing in making a commitment to keep up their "spiritual health". Isn't it always the way - the things that seem so simple, we end up complicating by thinking about it too much.

The dishes need washing, but perhaps if I leave it another day, I can save that little bit of time filling the sink with water now and do it tomorrow! Tomorrow does come, but no sooner is it here, we make yet another "tomorrow". Before we know it, the sink is full of dishes and you have forgotten what colour your bench-top is and you are overwhelmed with all these dishes that need washing and will require filling and emptying the sink numerous times!

Prayer does not need to be hard, that is the beauty of it! Anyone can pray - from the most educated of us through to the youngest, the frailest, most un-educated or even mentally-disabled. All prayer is, is a conversation with God. Because a typical conversation is made up of words, most people stumble in their definition of prayer.

Prayer can be writing in a journal, drawing a picture, looking at the sunrise - almost anything imaginable that will open your mind, soul and body to God. When you are doing something that you enjoy rather than simply trying to connect to someone (God) whom you cannot physically hear, it can open your mind up even more!

Think of something you love doing - for me it is drawing or writing - then think of the amount of inspiration that can give you, how your thoughts whilst partaking in that activity can lead to great things. Effectively, you are talking to God, though you may not notice it. You may think that you are simply having a conversation with your sub-conscious. At times, you are, but at other times, it can work like a one-way-deposit-system from God. You are relaxing, taking time to enjoy what you do, you are more open to new things, and God can plant a mustard-seed in you that one day will bloom!

Next time you struggle with praying, think of some different ways you can go about it! Reading the Bible (Lectio Divina), drawing, writing, even singing! There is no right or wrong way, just give anything a try! You can only love it and go back for more, decide it wasn't the right style for you, or perhaps it needs a little perseverance. Either way, you will be on your way to creating a fruitful, more varied prayer life.

La Australia del Espiritu Santo

2011-03-03T11:04:00.001+11:00

Before Captain Cook, there was Captain Fernandez de Quiros, a Portuguese navigator. He travelled to the "mythical southern land" we now know as Australia. Read more about him here. The card below was to commemorate 400-years (this was 2006).

Give me strength, O Lord.

2011-03-03T10:54:00.000+11:00

Please Lord give me strength today as I am faced head-on with temptation. Perhaps by starting the day off by watching Daily Mass, then reading the reflective pieces in WAU. I believe it has given me the strength to so far keep my temptation at the low. Only time will tell if this is the start of a new lifestyle of not writing myself off at these times...

This can be my Guardian Angel... looks a lot like Samantha, actually!!!

My glass needs a refill

2011-03-03T10:45:00.001+11:00

Back in 2008, I was introduced to a monthly magazine, "The Word Among Us", which has reflections on the Daily Mass, as well as articles. It was a lady from the Wodonga Parish, a Charismatic Catholic. She gave me a copy and I found it quite useful. Towards the middle of the year, during World Youth Day, us pilgrims were given a copy of the magazine, amongst many other things.

This year I decided to purchase a subscription to it, however I have not been using it as often as I would like. I have not been to Mass in quite some time, early January I think. However, I am now going to make a set time to read the readings, then reflect on them. Better yet, I could try get to Mass over the road, three-days a week.

I found a video-podcast in iTunes, which is the Daily Mass. It is from "CatholicTV". So I can even use that as a tool to concentrate more on the days Daily Mass isn't on, or even as a tool to help me refill my glass of faith!

There's also one last booklet/magazine I wouldn't mind getting - "Magnificat". This one is much thicker than "The Word Among Us". It is somewhat like a monthly missal, but only it has articles in it as well. Perhaps one day once my faith has been reinvigorated I will get a subscription to that also. Does anyone have "Magnificat"? What did you think of it?

Finally, I have to pick up a copy of the Divine Mercy book... it's only $15 - bargain if you ask me! Quite an appropriate book for Lent. Besides, I haven't read a book for quite a few months now.

Sketch of the Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament, Christchurch NZ

2011-02-28T19:19:00.000+11:00

I have finished my first sketch of the Christchurch Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament. Check it out below!

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #13

2011-02-27T18:28:00.000+11:00

Sunday Snippets for the week of Sunday February 20 to Saturday February 26.

Meditation method to quiet your mind and an article on the existence of God, both thanks to "The Voice for Love".
The Vatican have launched a new campaign aimed at educating people on the truth of the Islam religion. Christian's, Muslim's and Jew's alike will be surprised, and it is quite interesting and well over-due!
Finally, I have got back into some art after twelve-months of inactivity. In the recent Christchurch Earthquakes in New Zealand, the Catholic Cathedral was damaged. Given it was such a lovely building of Renaissance Italian style, I decided to start work on a piece. It's not finished, just a rough for now!

Go to "Sunday Snippets" blog.

Go to "This That and the Other Thing: Sunday Snippets" blog.

Artistic Inspiration from an Unlikely Place

2011-02-23T00:29:00.001+11:00

I really want to get back into my artwork. I haven't really done any art for almost a year now. Sure, I have picked up a sketchpad, even a digital one to use on my computer - but there is just nothing flowing through me. No inspiration. I find it hard this past year to get inspired. I did start the TAFE course in February, 2010, but I gave that up after I had a bit of a breakdown.

Once I was over that, it had just been so long since I'd attended, I hadn't told my course-coordinator what was going on, so I guess there was just too much anxiety inside of me to "face the crowd", so to speak. Which is stupid. I wasn't "slacking off" or anything, I had a legitimate reason! I even spent two or three weeks in Nolan House, the psychiatric-wing of Albury Base Hospital!!

Besides, when I first started the course, I told myself that I was primarily there to interact with people, get back into the world and have something to occupy my time. I was NEVER doing it seriously thinking of what certificate I would receive at the end.

I have been throwing a few ideas around my head, however, thinking of what I like to draw, what inspires me... and I think I may have found my next subject! I enjoy drawing buildings - old buildings, predominantly Churches - so that is what I will do. Not any old church, however, but ones that may have a little more significance... and I have three in mind at the moment.

Christchurch Anglican Cathedral, NZ.

Image: Wikipedia

Given the recent events of the past twelve-hours - the 6.3 magnitude earthquake in our neighbouring country of New Zealand - I am thinking of drawing the Anglican Cathedral of Christchurch after seeing photos of the damage done to it. However, I have also read reports that the Catholic Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament, or the Basilica, has been damaged in the earthquakes last year, which were still being repaired in early February, and has again been damaged by this most recent quake.

Christchurch Basilica, NZ.

Image: Wikipedia

The third idea is the Catholic Cathedral of Our Lady of the Assumption, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, that was destroyed in January 2010, even killing Archbishop Joseph Serge Miot instantly, the Vicar General, Charles Benoit dying later.

Our Lady of the Assumption, Port-au-Prince, Haiti.

mage: Wikipedia

Why these things though, all of which have been destroyed or heavily damaged? Is it some sick, sadistic idea of sorts? No, I see it more as a dedication, a remembrance, of the former glory of these buildings, which will never be the same. Sure, the Anglican Cathedral will put a new spire on, the Catholic Basilica will get fixed up again, hopefully, and perhaps in time when the governments of the world who pledged money to Haiti actually come through with their support, Port-au-Prince will find a new place to build a new Cathedral.

Vatican launches new tactic RE: Islam

2011-02-22T18:19:00.000+11:00

The Vatican is working on a document for Christians, all about Islam, explaining away many misconceptions of Islam - from the dispute over the word "Allah" to admitting that we, the Christians, have been the instigators at times in history.

It is good so people can come to know that Islam and Muslims are not that different to us - the extremists are nothing like us, but they are just like Christian extremists, even mildly like bigotted-Christians who hurl abuse at people they don't approve of, from homosexuals to abortion-clinics. There is never a time that behaviour should be tolerated in this day and time, from anyone, be they Muslim, Jew, Christian or otherwise!

The images here are screenshots from the video I watched on FaceBook about the document. It goes for nine-minutes, click here to view it.

The Existence of God

2011-02-22T08:10:00.000+11:00

I found this website after reading another link on meditation (my previous blog entry) and found this page on the existence of God - does He exist or not? It was quite an interesting read, making quite a few points - some may call it lateral thinking, but it is also literal thinking, of sorts.

"We've taught this process to Christians, Buddhists, agnostics, atheists, scientists, people who've been on a spiritual path for years, and people who have never done anything spiritual in their lives. It honestly doesn't matter who you are, what you believe, or anything else. Our five step process for hearing God's voice works for anybody."

It wasn't until I got the the end of the article that it asked for money, which I don't have enough of to fork out on these videos/CDs/or whatever! It does sound good, and offers a full-refund if you're unhappy. Still, this article makes some good points, showing a little bit of how to "think differently" in order to try prove to yourself whether God exists or not. Check it out!

Meditation Method for Quieting Your Mind

2011-02-22T07:51:00.002+11:00

Source: The Voice For Love

A quiet mind is a peaceful mind. A peaceful mind is a mind that is joined in awareness with its Source.

There are many ways to quiet your mind to become aware of your Source—to become aware of the Presence of Love within you. Some of the methods we typically hear about include: doing what we love, listening to music, being in nature, being present with another or with an activity we are engaged in, and consciously breathing. All of these examples, and any other example that helps us to quiet our minds, have something in common—they are all demonstrations of relating with love.

When we relate to anything with love, we are joined in awareness with Holy Spirit, the Voice for Love within each of us. When we relate in a loving way to any thought, feeling, sensation, person, circumstance or any other "thing" we can identify or "label" in any way, we are joined in awareness with the Love of God within us. The mere fact of relating with love immediately restores our awareness to its true nature.

In this moment, you can pick anything that you are aware of to practice this. You can pick something that you see with your eyes, something you hear with your ears, something you feel emotionally or physically, something you visualize within your mind, or any other thought or belief that you become aware of within you, take any one of those items and simply relate to it in a loving way. Relate to it with compassion, understanding, kindness, acceptance, a blessing, gratitude, or any other "flavor of love" you can imagine. When you do do, you are in fact joining with the Source of all Love within you, which is God.

When you join with God in this way—consciously, with intention, and an open heart—your mind will become quiet because you are thinking with the Holy Spirit. When you relate with love, you’re relating with the consciousness of Holy Spirit. When you are joined with that consciousness, the ego becomes quiet and you quickly find yourself in that quiet place within where God’s voice can be heard.

You can practice this process with your eyes closed in "meditation," or you can practice this with your eyes open while moving about the world, relating to whatever you notice in a loving way.

Practice relating to what you become aware of in the world in this loving way, and see what happens when you do. Notice if your mind quiets down when you relate with love. Notice what happens to your judgments, fears, and resistance the moment you open your heart and relate to anything with love. Love is the one element that heals all things. If you are looking to heal your mind and restore yourself to that quiet place within, relate to yourself, your mind, and everything you become aware of with Love, and watch the miracles unfold.

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #12

2011-02-20T08:33:00.000+11:00

Sunday Snippets for the weeks of Sunday February 13 to Saturday February 19.

Continuing from last weeks theme, here is an article on well-known Melbourne Priest, Fr. Bob, and his thought on gay-marriage. Go Fr. Bob - good to see someone from our camp within the church!
Theologians within the church are revolting, coming out with their own personal opinions on same-sex-marriage, not just "blindly" following the church!
Some interesting bits revealed from the upcoming new edition of the missal!
A plea for help from an Afghani Christian-convert who is to be executed... for becoming a Christian!
I plan to start reading St. Faustina Kowalska's Diary - Divine Mercy in My Soul.
This week I close with an interesting statement I copied/pasted from a friend on FaceBook... quite true! All to do with racism.
Go to "This That and the Other Thing: Sunday Snippets" blog.

Racist much?

2011-02-18T18:48:00.002+11:00

Your car is German. Your vodka is Russian. Your pizza is Italian. Your kebab is Turkish. Your democracy is Greek. Your coffee is Brazilian. Your movies are American. Your tea is Tamil. Your shirt is Indian. Your oil is Saudi Arabian. Your electronics are Chinese. Your numbers Arabic, your letters Latin. And you complain that your neighbor is an immigrant? Pull yourself together. Copy if you're against racism.

Divine Mercy: A Book for Lent

2011-02-18T16:12:00.000+11:00

Last year I bought the second book in the "Christ Our Lord" series by Anne Rice and read it during the Lenten period. I thought it was an appropriate title since it traced the life of Jesus as an adult. This year, I plan to buy "Divine Mercy: In My Soul" the "Diary of St. Maria Faustina Kowalska".

The Feast of the Divine Mercy was declared by the late Pope John-Paul II in the year 2000, the same day that St. Faustina was canonized. Divine Mercy Sunday falls on the first Sunday after Easter Sunday, and this year, JP2 will be beatified on that day by Pope Benedict XVI, which is the first milestone on the way to Sainthood.

Divine Mercy is just that - mercy from the divine, and St. Faustina's diary records the messages she received from Jesus. It is closely tied in with the Sacrament of Reconciliation, and those who are devoted to the Divine Mercy will receive the mercy of Him at the End Times.

It will surely make an interesting edition to my already over-flowing-library of books!!!

Afghan Christian-converts plea for help

2011-02-16T18:29:00.000+11:00

Source: National Catholic Register

An Afghanistan Christian and father of six, is imprisoned and scheduled to die. His crime? He believes Christ is his Savior. And he is scheduled to die because of it. No defense lawyer will take his case for fear of retribution. And he has been told that if he renounces Christ things would go easier. But he doesn’t. He won’t.

Said Musa, who lost his leg from a landmine in the 1990’s and has worked since then as a medical worker for the Red Cross fitting children with prosthetics, has been in jail for eight months. According to a public letter written by him and addressed to our President and the world community, he has been brutally tortured and abused in every way possible, both by guards and inmates.

As of yet the media and the world seem to have taken little notice of Said Musa. There are currently less than 100 mentions of Musa in the news and most of them are not considered part of the mainstream media, other than the Wall Street Journal.

Musa wrote a public letter which I will excerpt here, courtesy of The Barnabus Fund. The English is rough but I think you’ll understand what he’s saying:

“To the international church of world and to the President Brother Barak Obama President of the United States and to the head of ISAF [International Security Assistance Force] in Afghanistan!

“My name is Said Musa 45 years old. I have been working since 15 years as a Physiotherapist in I-C-R-C [International Committee of the Red Cross] orthopaedic centre in Kabul, Afghanistan. About four and a half months before by security force of Afghanistan I [was] captured, due to faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, Saviour of the world.

...Since that time I am in jail. The authority and prisoners in jail did many bad behaviour with me about my faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. For example, they did sexual things with me, beat me by wood, by hands, by legs, put some things on my head, mocked me ‘He’s Jesus Christ’, spat on me, nobody let me for sleep night and day. Every person spat on me and beat me. Also the prosecutor wrote something wrong against me. He told from himself something wrong against me on my file.

“He is stimulating every day the prisoners against me, ‘He is also in jail due to spy for Iran country’, to reveal the church in Kabul. I’m in a very and very bad condition in the jail.

“I agree with long imprisonment about my faith even for long life. Because I’m the sinnest person in the world. Because sometimes they treated for died I refuse my faith due to died. Sometimes I tolerate the persecution but immediately I acknowledge my sin before Lord Jesus Christ: ‘Don’t refuse me before your holy angels and before your Father.’ Because I am very very weak and sinful man…

I am alone between 400 handlers of terrible values in the jail like a sheep. Please, please, for the sake of Lord Jesus Christ help me. Please send a person who should supervise my document and my file, what I said in it. My prosecutor has told something wrong to the judge because he asked [for] money but I refused his request. Please, please you should transfer me from this jail to a jail that supervises the believers. I also agree with died on cross of my pride. I also agree with the sacrifice [of] my life in public, I will tell the faith in Lord Jesus Christ son of God and other believers will take courage and be strong in their faith. Hundred percent I am stable to my word. I have family of seven - one wife, three daughters and three sons. My big son [is] about eight years old. One of my daughters can’t speak, she has some mental problems.

“This is a request from me to all over the world, people please help me. I could not have any person to help. For [the] sake [of] Lord Jesus Christ please pray and immediately help me and rescue me from this jail. Otherwise, they will kill me, because I know they’re very very very cruel and hard hearted!

“Your destitute brother in the world.

“Please my English writing is not enough good. If I did some mistake please forgive me! From Kabul Provincial jail.”

I have to wonder how this can be going on when American troops are in Afghanistan.

The Wall Street Journal reported that U.S. embassy officials have said they’ve called for his release as and have expressed their “strong concern.”

But Afghani officials have insisted that “the sentence for a convert is death and there is no exception.”

The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops has urged the Canadian government to stand up for Said. Writing on the bishops’ behalf, Archbishop Brendan O’Brien of Kingston, chairman of the CCCB Human Rights Committee, wrote:

We urge the Government of Canada to express its condemnation of this religious persecution, and to intervene with the Government of Afghanistan for mercy and clemency for Mr. Sayed.

Pope Benedict XVI recently decried the persecution of Christians throughout the world as well, bringing attention to the issue.

I have always supported America’s mission in Afghanistan but if we do nothing while the country we’re fighting for puts a Christian to death simply for being a Christian, I can’t think of how we can continue to support the mission. This is not a fringe element imprisoning Musa. This is the government of Afghanistan which we are propping up with our military presence. Our young men and women are dying for this mission while the Afghani government may be set to kill a man for the crime of being Christian?

I pray to God that our President, his administration, and world leaders are working behind the scenes to ensure that Said Musa is not put to death for his Christianity. I pray that he is not forgotten. I pray for strength for Said Musa. I pray that I too would have the faith he has shown by recently saying, “My body is theirs to do what they want with. Only God can decide if my spirit goes to hell.”

I am in awe of such faith. And all I can do is pray for him and ask others to pray that President Obama and other world leaders will do all they can possibly do to cease the killing of Said Musa and persecuted Christians all around the world.

Theologians Revolt

2011-02-15T15:35:00.001+11:00

Source: Star Observor
One third of the Catholic theology professors in Switzerland, Germany and Austria have called on the Vatican to allow the ordination of women, for priests to be allowed to marry, for congregations to have greater input into the selection of bishops and to not exclude same-sex couples or people who have remarried.

The theologians said they could no longer stay silent in the wake of a wave of sex abuse scandals involving Catholic priests that erupted last year.

Close to 100 priests and lay members of the church were suspected of having abused children and adults in Germany alone, and a German hotline to report sex abuse set up by the church received more than 2500 calls in its first three days.

The 144 professors signed a document outlining the reforms they are calling for. They hope to begin a dialogue with the church.

“We have the responsibility to contribute to a new start,” the document states.

Third Edition Roman Missal

2011-02-15T15:26:00.001+11:00

In this, the year 2011, a new missal will come out which aims to restore the mass closer to its true Latin meanings. This will be the first major change in liturgy since Vatican II. Many people in the Church are for, many against it, but here are some of the most notable changes thus far, thanks to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Many are for it because the wording has more meaning, whilst others are opposed, believing it is going back on the progression of Vatican II. I think while it will get some getting used to, it will be a welcome change in my eyes! What do you think?

PART OF MASS	PRESENT TEXT	NEW TEXT
Greeting	Priest: The Lord be with you. People: And also with you.	Priest: The Lord be with you. People: And with your spirit.
Penitential Act, Form A (Confiteor)	I confess to almighty God, and to you, my brothers and sisters, that I have sinned through my own fault, in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done, and in what I have failed to do; and I ask blessed Mary, ever virgin, all the angels and saints, and you, my brothers and sisters, to pray for me to the Lord, our God.	I confess to almighty God and to you, my brothers and sisters, that I have greatly sinned in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done and in what I have failed to do, through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault; therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin, all the Angels and Saints, and you, my brothers and sisters, to pray for me to the Lord our God.
Penitential Act, Form B	Priest: Lord, we have sinned against you: Lord, have mercy. People: Lord, have mercy. Priest: Lord, show us your mercy and love. People: And grant us your salvation.	Priest: Have mercy on us, O Lord. People: For we have sinned against you. Priest: Show us, O Lord, your mercy. People: And grant us your salvation.
Gloria	Glory to God in the highest, and peace to his people on earth. Lord God, heavenly King, almighty God and Father, we worship you, we give you thanks, we praise you for your glory. Lord Jesus Christ, only Son of the Father, Lord God, Lamb of God, you take away the sin of the world: have mercy on us; you are seated at the right hand of the Father: receive our prayer. For you alone are the Holy One, you alone are the Lord, you alone are the Most High, Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit, in the glory of God the Father. Amen.	Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to people of good will. We praise you, we bless you, we adore you, we glorify you, we give you thanks for your great glory, Lord God, heavenly King, O God, almighty Father. Lord Jesus Christ, Only Begotten Son, Lord God, Lamb of God, Son of the Father, you take away the sins of the world, have mercy on us; you take away the sins of the world, receive our prayer; you are seated at the right hand of the Father, have mercy on us. For you alone are the Holy One, you alone are the Lord, you alone are the Most High, Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit, in the glory of God the Father. Amen.
Nicene Creed	We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered, died, and was buried. On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the Prophets. We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.	I believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages. God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven, and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate, he suffered death and was buried, and rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end. And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets. And one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.
Apostles' Creed	I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth. I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord. He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary. He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended to the dead. On the third day he rose again. He ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.	I believe in God, the Father almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried; he descended into hell; on the third day he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty; from there he will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting. Amen.
Suscipiat Dominus	May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of his name, for our good, and the good of all his Church.	May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of his name, for our good and the good of all his holy Church.
Preface Dialogue	Priest: The Lord be with you. People: And also with you. Priest: Lift up your hearts. People: We lift them up to the Lord. Priest: Let us give thanks to the Lord our God. People: It is right to give him thanks and praise.	Priest: The Lord be with you. People: And with your spirit. Priest: Lift up your hearts. People: We lift them up to the Lord. Priest: Let us give thanks to the Lord our God. People: It is right and just.
Sanctus	Holy, holy, holy Lord, God of power and might. Heaven and earth are full of your glory. Hosanna in the highest. Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest.	Holy, Holy, Holy Lord God of hosts. Heaven and earth are full of your glory. Hosanna in the highest. Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest.
Mystery of Faith (formerly the Memorial Acclamation)	Priest: Let us proclaim the mystery of faith: People: A – Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again. or B – Dying you destroyed our death, rising you restored our life. Lord Jesus, come in glory. or C – When we eat this bread and drink this cup, we proclaim your death, Lord Jesus, until you come in glory. or D – Lord, by your cross and resurrection, you have set us free. You are the Savior of the World.	Priest: The mystery of faith. [People: Christ has died… a U.S. adaptation yet to be decided by Holy See] A – We proclaim your death, O Lord, and profess your Resurrection until you come again. or B – When we eat this Bread and drink this Cup, we proclaim your death, O Lord, until you come again. or C – Save us, Savior of the world, for by your Cross and Resurrection, you have set us free.
Sign of Peace	Priest: The peace of the Lord be with you always. People: And also with you.	Priest: The peace of the Lord be with you always. People: And with your spirit.
Ecce Agnus Dei	Priest: This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Happy are those who are called to his supper. All: Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed.	Priest: Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sins of the world. Blessed are those called to the supper of the Lamb. All: Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.
Concluding Rite	Priest: The Lord be with you. People: And also with you.	Priest: The Lord be with you. People: And with your spirit.

I'd marry gay couples, just not in a church - Fr Bob Maguire

2011-02-15T05:48:00.000+11:00

Source: News.com.au

Feb 15 2011

Priest happy to wed same sex couples
Admits it's his duty, despite church opposition
Civil ceremonies allowed in UK churches

PROMINENT Melbourne priest Bob Maguire has revealed he is open to performing civil union ceremonies for gays.

Father Maguire said he would perform a civil ceremony for a homosexual couple - but not in a church. It follows moves in the UK to change laws so gay civil ceremonies can be carried out in churches. Other Melbourne churches rejected the idea yesterday, despite opinion polls showing a majority of Australians support gay marriage.

Pope Benedict last year labelled gay marriage as "among some of the most insidious and dangerous challenges facing the common good today". Fr Maguire said he does not have a personal view on gay civil unions. The 75-year-old said he understood Catholic leaders would not want a gay ceremony in a Catholic church so he would arrange a private event.

"I'd probably consult the bosses and then I'd go back to the clients and tell them we can't do it in here - it's not personal, it's institutional," he said. Fr Maguire said it was "his duty" to help people in need, including gay couples.

"Not only do I have an administrative responsibility but I have also pastoral responsibility and pastoral care would be taking care of the two people involved and their friends and their associates," he said. In Victoria, gay couples can register their relationships with the State Government. The Catholic church yesterday reiterated its opposition to gay civil unions.

The Vicar General of the Archdiocese of Melbourne, Bishop Les Tomlinson, said civil union ceremonies involving homosexual couples were not allowed in any of its Melbourne's churches. The church believed "marriage is a union between a man and a woman".

"Priests are authorised to officiate at weddings according to the Catholic rite and therefore any marriage performed by a Catholic priest must be conducted in accordance with Catholic teaching," he said.

An Anglican Church spokesman said none of its priests are allowed to perform gay civil ceremonies. Uniting Church general secretary Reverend Rob Brown said it had no policy on gay civil unions being performed in its churches.

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #11

2011-02-14T12:55:00.000+11:00

Sunday Snippets for the weeks of Sunday February 6 to Saturday February 12.

The articles in this week may not be everyones cup of tea, but there are quite a number of gay people out there who do believe in God, many just don't know which denomination to turn to.

In a three-part series from "Gay Christian Fellowship" I have "The Clobber Passages" which explores the references in the Bible dealing with homosexual-sex. Read part one, part two and part three!
I have the full speech of the Marriage Equality Bill from the South Australian Greens Member, Tammy Franks.
On to more mainstream-religious topics, there is a new iPhone App out that acts as a preperation for the Sacrament of Confession - complete with an imprimatur.

Go to "This That and the Other Thing: Sunday Snippets" blog.

iPhone Confessional

2011-02-11T20:23:00.000+11:00

Applications for the iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch aimed at Catholics is no new concept. I own several different applications, from eBook-style apps showing a history of The Church and the Popes from the time of Saint Peter up to Pope Benedict XVI; another app is the Catholic Missal, the book used for daily mass with the readings and prayers to be recited. There are many, many more, some good, others not so brights. Some fun, others serious.

In late December, 2010, a new app, "Penance", was created, but it is more of an anti-Catholic app, basically making a joke of the Sacrament of Penance. In this app, users can confess their sins to everyone else using the app, but they can also absolve others since. You gain points - halos - as you move up in the world of "Penance", gaining differnt titles, such as "Cardinal" and so forth. Read about "Penance" here!

Another new confession app has hit the iTunes Store now, but this one sounds much, much better. When I get my iPod back in a couple of weeks, I will be downloading this new app, along with several other new apps I've found.

Basically, it is an app designed to help you prepare for the confessional. It is also the first app to receive an imprimatur - Latin for "let it be printed" - which is granted by a Bishop, declaring the work contains nothing damaging to faith and/or morals.

Read about the new app here!

Marriage Equality Bill Speech

2011-02-10T17:44:00.000+11:00

Marriage Equality Bill Speech
byTammy Franks (SA Greens)

This is my second reading speech on the Marriage Equality Bill, delivered yesterday in the Legislative Council:

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (16:05): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to provide for marriage between adults of the same sex. Read a first time.

The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (16:07): I move:
                That this bill be now read a second time.

I rise today to put before this place a bill for marriage equality for South Australian adult consenting couples of the same sex. As we would be aware, the Marriage Act is a federal act in Australia, and it is not typical that we discuss matters related to marriage in this place in terms of the legislation and protections and rights to our citizens in South Australia specifically. However, we do so because of the situation that has presented itself before us at a federal level.

            I am proud to stand here as a Greens member moving this bill. I am just as proud to be fully in support of the federal bill that Greens senator, Sarah Hanson-Young, has moved for marriage equality in the federal parliament to beat us to the punch, should that occur. Senator Sarah Hanson-Young has worked on this issue tirelessly for many years, but she is certainly not alone in that. Of course we saw in the federal parliament the issue of same-sex marriage first canvassed under prime minister John Howard.

            We saw rushed moves through that federal parliament to ban same-sex marriages as couples began to marry overseas and come back to Australia and sought to have that status recognised here in this country. At the time, then Senator Natasha Stott-Despoja of the Democrats first moved a bill to establish marriage equality for same-sex couples in this country. That bill was never debated before the federal parliament, but I am pleased to see that Sarah Hanson-Young has continued that work.

            We have also seen thousands of people in the streets supporting the concept of marriage equality in legislation in South Australia. In fact, last year was earmarked as the Year for Marriage Equality. We saw many thousands of people on the streets in Sydney, Melbourne, Hobart and Adelaide, and we certainly saw them in force at the ALP state conference late last year. I am pleased to note that at that ALP state conference we also saw a motion from the Labor Party, with its internal party structures in support of same-sex marriage, so I hope that that would see some sea change within that party.

            We also know that those rallies and that that particular motion of the state ALP party here in South Australia reflect community attitudes.

Community attitudes on this issue have been changing. Increasingly, they have been changing in support of acceptance of same-sex marriage. That is in Australia, of course, and we see that over 60 per cent of Australians in fact do believe that same-sex consenting adults should be able to marry each other if that is what they wish, but also around the world we have seen attitudes to this changing because couples were marrying overseas and sought to have that relationship recognised.

            We are often told by the nay-sayers and the scaremongers on this issue of same-sex marriage equality that the sky might fall in and that the state will grind to a halt should we accept such a thing. I would note that the Netherlands has had same-sex marriage since 2001; in Belgium, since 2003; in Canada, since 2003-05; in Spain, 2005; South Africa, 2006; Norway, 2009; Sweden, 2009; Mexico City and Mexico, since last year, 2010; and Portugal, Iceland and Argentina also since 2010.

            In California, it was the law between 2007 and 2008 before it was repealed. Iowa, Vermont and Washington have had this law since 2009, and in New Hampshire in the US, since 2010. The sky has not fallen in any of these places. They have continued to function; they have continued to be just as prosperous or to have such a lack of prosperity as they did before or after this bill was introduced. However, they have given citizens who wish to marry each other and are of the same sex the ability to do so, and so I think they are brighter places.

            There are places where same-sex marriages are recognised but not performed. These include: Israel, which has had that recognition since 2006; Rhode Island in the United States, since 2007; New York since 2008; and Mexico since 2010. California had that recognition for the year 2007-08; Maryland in the US since 2010; and, most notably, Tasmania since 2010. I am proud to say that that was also a Greens-instigated bill that now recognises marriages that are conducted in other jurisdictions by same-sex couples to be marriages in Tasmania. In Finland, Slovenia and many other places around the world, we are seeing the march towards equality, also. We are seeing same-sex couples being recognised in the laws.

            Same-sex partners will not have legal equality under the Marriage Act until it is amended to make sure that they have the same recognition as opposite-sex couples. Until this happens, they will face practical legal problems because they are not able to marry. In the absence of a marriage certificate, they can have problems proving their legal entitlements. This can be a problem in medical emergencies and where a partner has a decision-making role for the other. I would draw members' attention to a story of one particular person who had married her partner overseas. This is Julianne Clark's story:
                I married my partner of the same-sex overseas in 2006. But the moment I stepped back onto Australian soil, my marriage was not recognised. My partner was hospitalised in 2007 and I was informed I had no more rights than a friend, hence I was only allowed in during visiting hours.

That might seem trifling to some people, but when a loved one is sick and when they are your wife or husband, of course you want to be able to visit them at whatever hours, and hospital policies (as we know) change the rules for those who are in a marriage. That right should have been afforded to that particular couple in that case. It is a tragedy that it was not.

            There is no substitute for marriage. I often hear people say, 'Why can't people have civil unions? Surely that should be good enough.' Beth Robinson, the US activist, has summed it up best: 'Nobody writes songs about civil unions.' When you want to introduce your partner or your son-in-law or daughter-in-law, you do not say, 'Here is my civil union partner.' It does not quite have the same ring to it. You do not dream, when you are a child, of growing up one day and 'civil unioning' the one that you find to be your one true love.

I have not ever seen in the fairytale books the idea of the prince and the princess 'civil unioning' and living happily ever after.

            Studies in Britain and the US have shown that, where there are alternative forms of relationship recognition—and these are often called things like civil unions, civil partnerships, registered relationships, domestic partnerships—they are no substitute for marriage equality. They do not have the same level of recognition as marriage, are misunderstood and considered the gay option, perhaps, or dismissed as second-best.

            This means the legal rights of those couples in those unions are sometimes not respected. In the absence of marriage equality, other schemes for recognising same-sex relationships effectively label these relationships as lesser or different, and they reinforce the second-class status marriage equality is just designed to overcome. We know that we have a sad history in this country of discrimination against those people who are same-sex attracted.

            I am very proud that, in South Australia, we were, in fact, leaders in the decriminalisation of homosexuality—I was going to say homosexual activity, which is what they used to term it as—but homosexuality. I am very proud of that history that we have here in South Australia, and I would be just as proud to see us lead the way in seeing marriage equality here in South Australia as well.

            I think that there are a few furphies out there that get raised around the equal love and marriage equality debate. The first is that same-sex couples already have enough rights. We have seen a lot at the federal level where the Labor government, to its credit, has come a long way in a very short time just recently in recognising same-sex couples, whether that be through our welfare system with superannuation and with entitlements and so on, and I welcome that, but I say it has not gone far enough.

            Same-sex de facto couples have trouble proving these rights when challenged, and the rights of partners in civil unions or in de facto relationships are often not widely understood or respected. Only marriage equality will provide same-sex couples with their full legal equality and full recognition of their spousal rights.

            We also hear the furphy that marriage will be demeaned. There is no evidence that heterosexual marriages suffer or that marriage is held in lower esteem in countries where those same-sex couples have been allowed to marry. I would also point to Elizabeth Taylor's many, many marriages or Britney Spears' very short marriage, and note that they have not demeaned the institution of marriage.

            The same argument used to be made against interracial couples being allowed to marry and, of course, I do not think that anyone would contend in this day and age that interracial couples should not be allowed to marry, and certainly those couples do not demean marriage.

            We also hear that it will be a slippery slope, that it will open the gate for human and animal marriages, or human and inanimate object marriages. I have had some correspondence on this recently where I have been asked why I am standing up for homosexual couples when I am not standing up for incest, or I am not standing up for the rights of people to marry their pets, or a whole range of quite abhorrent suggestions. I would say to those people that it simply proves their homophobia. I think that that sort of argument demeans the institution of marriage.

            We have also heard that marriage is unchanging. Marriage laws once used to prohibit divorce. They made wives the property of their husbands and they banned interracial unions. This, of course, has quite rightly changed to ensure greater equality. Marriage equality for same-sex partners will actually make marriage more relevant to a society increasingly accepting of homosexuality.

            Same-sex relationships, we are told, are very short lived but, in countries that allow same-sex marriages, divorce rates are the same for opposite and same-sex couples—no better and no worse—and certainly those are words that we hear a lot with regards to marriage. Large-scale studies of same-sex couples show that their relationships are of just the same quality and the same duration as other couples. As I say, no better and no worse, and certainly just as diverse.

            We also hear that there is a problem with religion and marriage, because marriage is seen to be a religious institution. I would point to the fact that in Australian law there has always been a clear distinction between civil and religious marriages, and today two-thirds of Australian marriages performed by civil celebrants and not in churches.
This distinction is why the law allows marriages between people of different faiths or of no faith, it is why the law allows divorce, although some Christian teachings condemn it, and why polygamy and child betrothal is not allowed, even though they are common in the Old Testament.

            Denominations such as the Quakers and individual celebrants of other faiths already marry same-sex couples. In fact, I was most touched by one of the 27,000 submissions to this bill in the federal parliament from an ACT-based church, which had two members of its congregation who were dearly loved and who wanted to marry. That church contended that its freedom of religion was being violated because it was unable to marry those two members of its congregation and that it would dearly love to. Anyone who has been to any of the marriage equality rallies here in South Australia would know that we have quite a few similar cases within the Uniting Church and other churches in this state.

            Why would same-sex couples want to marry? I point out that this is not going to force any same-sex couples who do not want to marry to marry. So, when the argument is put to me, 'I know a same-sex couple and they don't want to get married', they do not have to and nobody is going to make them, but for those who want to it should be an option that is open to them. They will decide to marry for all the same reasons that other couples marry, perhaps not for a Green Card, but we will see—not that that applies here in Australia—but for a Visa, for legal security, to publicly celebrate their commitment, to provide greater legal protections for their children or simply because they are in love.

            Marriage remains the most important way that we celebrate love and commitment in our society. Terms such as 'husband' and 'wife' are universally recognised as connoting love, commitment and a shared life together. When same-sex partners are told that they cannot share in such an important and universal institution, they are effectively being told that their love and commitment is of a different and lesser quality. This is not true. Same-sex partners love each other and make sacrifices for each other in the same way that all partners do and it is time for our laws in South Australia, and Australia, to acknowledge this.

            Globally where same-sex marriages have been allowed: the statistics that I read out of other countries that have so far enabled same-sex marriages, those are growing very quickly and, in fact, I am sure that they will be joined by some more soon. Economically, we have seen some really significant issues emerge where marriage, according to The Economist magazine, remains an economic bulwark. Single people are actually economically vulnerable and much more likely to fall into the arms of the welfare state. For those readers of Ayn Rand, you perhaps might like to refer to that argument in support of marriage equality. Furthermore, those who are not married call sooner upon public support when they need care. Married people, the statistics show, are not only happier, they are often healthier.

            It has been estimated that if 55 per cent of Australian same-sex couples who wish to marry spent the national average on their wedding, that would be $7 billion injected into the Australian economy. I would point out that the Sunday Mail raised this issue quite early on in the piece. Should South Australia lead the way in this that would be quite a chunk of that $7 billion coming towards South Australia's economy. Not that I think that is the main reason to do this, but it certainly would not hurt.

            Many private institutions and corporations, such as the Commonwealth Bank, the ANZ, Westpac, St George, IBM, Qantas, ING and Seek have all come out in support of same-sex marriage and certainly support their employees who are in same-sex relationships.

            At this point I would note that, as I mentioned before, we are seeing a marriage bill before us which would normally be a consideration of the federal parliament, but given the blockages presented at the federal level we are in fact not only seeing marriage equality bills presented in South Australia, but we are seeing them in Tasmania, we will see them in New South Wales and we are seeing them in Victoria. These have all, of course, had some input by the Greens but also other members.

I note that I am on record as being joined as a co-sponsor of this bill by the Hon. Ian Hunter of the Labor Party. I also note that, in Western Australia, we are seeing moves by the National Party towards marriage equality, although at a civil union level to start with.

            We have seen people come out on this issue from all sides of politics—the Greens, of course, Liberals, Labor, the Nationals and Independents. The reason for this is that it is not a party political issue; clearly, it is a deeply personal issue for many, many people. I think the logic of it actually transcends our party politics, and I certainly hope that is the case when we are considering the issue in this debate.

            The reason we are seeing the issue raised at a state level is largely due to some formal opinion, provided to the Tasmanian Greens initially, on the constitutionality of this move, from Professor George Williams, a constitutional law expert from the University of New South Wales. I am happy to circulate this legal advice to members. In summary, at a federal level we have seen moves to discriminate against a certain category of people, being consenting adult couples of the same sex, by preventing them from being able to marry, and that, in fact, has opened up the door for states to legislate in this area to address that discrimination, and I hope we take up that baton.

            Another person who I think would be cheering us on (and I would draw the particular attention of Labor members of the parliament to this but, as I have said, this is an across-party issue) is Bill Hayden, who writes in support of marriage equality, as follows:
                Yes, homosexual love is now tolerated by the law, but not marriage. There is a 'relationship certificate' available for them in Victoria, Tasmania and the ACT, the short end of the leash, civil partnerships. These offer some protections but do not pass muster as real equality for gays which requires the provision of marriage rights.

                If an Australian same-sex couple go, say, to Canada they can get a marriage certificate which is universally recognised and understood as symbolising the solemn commitment between two people.

                The Labor Party had the chance to do something meaningful on this at its last national conference but squibbed it. Has it lost the belly fire for the big challenges of major progressive reform and the enshrinement of basic liberties for which I have so long admired it?

                It is not as if Labor is uncaring. In 2008 it did remove discrimination against same-sex couples in some 85 laws. But it is the big one, full recognition of gay people's marriage rights, which will really establish the depth of Labor's commitment to the principle of people's entitlement to be different but still fully valued law-abiding members of our society.

That is Bill Hayden AC, former Governor-General and, of course, as we know, former leader of the federal Labor Party. I would hope that, as the Labor Party gears up for its next national conference, this issue will be fully and firmly on the table. I dearly hope that it follows the lead of the South Australian Labor Party in moving towards acceptance of marriage equality but, more than simply accepting it in theory, I hope it would be working hard to make it a reality.

            As I have mentioned, I look forward to working with the Hon. Ian Hunter on this bill, but I would also welcome any other members of this chamber or the other place supporting us in raising this incredibly important issue and getting it to the forefront. People have waited long enough for equality.

            When I was listening to the Social Development Committee the other day, one of the most poignant statements I heard was that, where discrimination continues to exist, it is all very well to say that we have a problem with homophobic bullying in our schools or in other places in our society but, if we as a legislature are endorsing a difference and lacking in that acceptance of the diversity and not ascribing equal rights to all of the members of our community, we are perpetuating that bullying and that homophobia by simply not doing enough to stop it.

            Showing leadership at the top levels will, of course, be the way that we can address that discrimination. I would like to sum up with some personal reflections on how I think marriage is more important than a civil union. As I have said before, you certainly do not dream of growing up one day and 'civil unioning' your long-awaited partner.

Should I have a child who were gay, I hope that one day, if that child fell in love and wanted to marry, I would be able to call somebody my son-in-law or my daughter-in-law, certainly not my son or daughter's civil union partner.

            I believe marriage is not just about the two people who make that commitment to each other; it is also about creating family, and family, of course, is the basic building block of our society and a strong community. When you deny people the right to be sisters and brothers, mothers and fathers, then you deny far more than simply two people who love each other being able to make that commitment in public. With that, I commend the bill to the house.

            The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (16:30): I move:
                That standing orders be so far suspended as to enable the bill to pass through its remaining stages without delay.
            Motion carried.

The Clobber Passages: Part 3

2011-02-08T07:40:00.000+11:00

Source: www.gaychristianfellowship.com
by Pastor Romell D. Weekly
February 9, 2010

The vice lists of the apostle Paul are two passages most commonly used by opponents of affirming theology in their condemnation of homosexuality. At face value, most English translations certainly seem to back up their assertion that homosexuality is condemned in Scripture; but as we have seen with the previous examinations in this series, face value has too often led to misinterpretations and misapplications of Scripture. So, let's reexamine these vice lists in detail and determine whether or not Paul is, in fact, condemning homosexuality (as an orientation) and/or same-sex sexual activity.

"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate [malakoi], nor abusers of themselves with mankind[arsenokoitai], [10] Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

1Corinthians 6:9-10

"Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, [10] For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind [arsenokoitais], for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine"

1Timothy 1:9-10

In this installment, we're going to examine two passages in conjunction with one another. As with Lev. 18:22 and 20:13, these passages so closely mirror one another that it makes sense to consider them together.

As you can see, there are two terms present that are often used by Christians to condemn homosexuals and/or homosexuality—malakoi in 1Co. 6, and arsenokoitai(s) in both passages. While it's to the entire Church's benefit to ensure that the traditional translation and interpretation of these terms is accurate, it's especially important for those who have same-sex sexual attractions to know precisely what Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, is condemning here. Consequently, we will reexamine the traditional translations and interpretations to see if, in fact, they are consistent with Paul's intentions.

What Does arsenokoitai(s) Mean?

Because arsenokoitai(s) is used in both passages, we'll begin there. It's important to note right out of the starting gate that arsenokoitai is an exceedingly uncommon term. In fact, many scholars believe that Paul coined the term because there's no evidence in any ancient documents that the term was used before Paul's usage.

Let's start by examining how the most common English translations render this obscure term.

NOTE: Place your mouse pointer over the Bible version abbreviation for the full version name.

Version	Translation (1Co. 6:9)	Translation (1Ti. 1:10)
KJV	abusers of themselves with mankind	them that defile themselves with mankind
NKJV	sodomites	sodomites
NIV	homosexual offenders	perverts
NASB	homosexuals	homosexuals
AMP	those who participate in homosexuality	those who abuse themselves with men
NLT	those who... practice homosexuality	people... who practice homosexuality
CEV	one who... behaves like a homosexual	people... who live as homosexuals
NCV	men who have sexual relations with other men	people... who have sexual relations with people of the same sex
HCS	homosexuals	homosexuals
ESV	combined with malakoi as "men who practice homosexuality" (footnotes as "the passive and active partners in consenual homosexual acts")	men who practice homosexuality
YLT	sodomites	sodomites

Arsenokoitai(s) - Identifying the Problem

For the most part, this word has been translated consistently from one version to another, and from one passage to another; but there are a few very important exceptions. Before considering them, it's important to note that these two passages are the only places in the Bible where arsonokoitai(s) is used. So, the fact that these exceptions exist is quite telling in relation to how sure the translators were in deriving the accurate translation of this word.

The New International Version translates arsenokoitai(s) as "homosexual offenders" in 1Co. 6:9, but as the very general term, "perverts", in 1Ti. 1:10. Now, I'm sure that some Christians are content to consider these terms synonyms; but such a conclusion does not suffice a serious student of Scripture. I was recently told by a friend who worked in a hospital of a young girl who was brought in, pregnant with the child of her grandfather. This filthy man certainly qualifies as a pervert, so is that the type of person Paul was condemning; and if so, should the word have been translated as pervert in 1Co. 6:9, as well, rather than as "homosexual offenders"? Which interpretation is correct; and with such a serious inconsistency, why should we trust either NIV translation?

The Amplified Bible provides a similar inconsistency. It translates arsenokoitai(s) as both "those who participate in homosexuality", as well as "those who abuse themselves with men". But, how is the reader to know what kind of "abuse" Paul is referring to? Don't female prostitutes abuse themselves with men? As with the NIV, we're left to wonder which translation is accurate, and what basis we have to believe either one.

Also, the New Century Version has a gender ambiguity between the two passages. In one, only male-male sex is condemned (similar to what we saw in Lev. 18:22 and 20:13). In the other, all same-sex sexual activity is condemned. Now, this may not seem like a pertinent distinction to the casual reader; but to someone who is after the truth, and especially to someone to whom these condemnations would apply, I think the ambiguity is, at the very least, just cause for a deeper examination.

A final problem with the way these translations render our term is that from one translation to another, they can't seem to agree on whether those with a same-sex sexual orientation (homosexuals) are being condemned, or only those who engage in same-sex sexual activity. Once again, we see a distinction that, quite regrettably, wouldn't concern many Christians, but which is more than concerning for those of us who are gay, and for those of us (despite sexual orientation) who do not want to unjustly terrorize or condemn people for being who they are. While such a consideration should apply to every Christian, it's an unfortunate reality that it most certainly does not.

The most disappointing part of this is the fact that the vast majority of Christians have no idea what the Greek term actually is, or where else it was used in Scripture. All they know is what's printed on the pages of their Bibles. They're trusting that what they're reading is accurate; and as we can see, that's not always the case. Even when a single word is translated only twice in the entire Bible, the translation isn't always consistent. Yet, we're told to simply trust the "scholars" because they know the biblical language better than we.

Rather than putting my confidence in man, I'll take God's advice. I'll "study to shew [myself] approved", so that I can "rightly [divide] the word of truth" (2Ti. 2:15). I strongly encourage you to do the same.

Arsenokoitai(s) - Finding the Correct Translation

Determining the correct translation of arsenokoitai(s) is not as easy as it may seem. One might choose to simply play a numbers game, and conclude that since the majority of common translations render the word "homosexuals", we should do the same. But, that doesn't suffice me. Having seen the damage that majority rule has done to the Church time and time again throughout history, I'm inclined to rid myself of the translations offered in the text, and try to construct the proper translation from the ground up. It's certainly better than putting my trust in scholars who have already demonstrated that they weren't as absolutely sure about the meaning of this term as so many Christians, by default, believe.

PLEASE NOTE: My intention here is not to besmirch the work done by linguistic and biblical scholars in the translation of these various Bible versions. I don't doubt that they worked very hard to provide a translation that was, if nothing else, more than adequate for instruction in the things of God. My intention is only to point out the undeniable inconsistencies and inaccuracies in these translations, not to call into question the credentials or intentions of those who served on the translation committees.

The first thing that should be considered with regard to this word's meaning is that arsenokoitai is a compound word. Paul combines the Greek word for male (arsen) with the word bed (koitus), which is often used as a euphemism for sex, as the verb form of "bed" is used in English. So, the constituent words of arsenokoitai can be translated as meaning "those who have sex with men" or "men who have sex". Most likely, what is meant is those who have sex with men, male-bedders, as it were.

PLEASE NOTE: The meaning of a compound word cannot always be derived by examining the meaning of its constituent words. For example, a hallmark is not a mark in a hall. A butterfly is not a stick of butter that flies. A ladykiller is not a person who kills ladies, nor a lady who kills people.

But, we have to derive a more precise meaning for this term; because even if male-bedder is an accurate generic simplification of this term, it's not specific enough to be helpful in interpreting Paul's intended target. For example, heterosexual wives are male-bedders. Is it Paul's intention to condemn them, as well? It's obvious that a more precise meaning must be derived. What type of male bedder is being condemned?

Under most circumstances, the context of a difficult word would give us enough clues to ascertain its meaning. It's a lesson we learned in reading class. Now, at first glance, we might get a little discouraged when looking at the context of arsenokoitai(s) in these two passages because both passages contain seemingly arbitrary lists of sinful activities. However, let's not form that conclusion too quickly.

In 1Timothy, Paul grouped the terms in his vice list in such a way as to provide just enough clues to derive the target of "male-bedders" with absolute precision and certainty—and we'd better thank God for this, otherwise we'd have to relegate ourselves to a "best guess", as so many of our English translations erroneously did.

Think about grouping like this... When I'm preparing to go grocery shopping, I often group my items together so that when I'm in the store, I can find what I'm looking for more quickly. I group all of the dairy products together, all of the meats, all of the vegetables, etc. That way, I don't have to search my list when I arrive in a particular section of the store, nor do I have to keep going back and forth when I come across another product that I forget to get while I was in a particular section.

Paul uses this very same tactic when addressing his vices in 1Ti. 1:9-10. By examining these groups, we can discern the proper meaning of arsenokoitai(s) once and for all.

1Timothy 1:9-10

Grouping Analysis
Terms	Type of Group
lawless and disobedient	synonyms for lawbreakers
ungodly and sinners	synonyms for people who transgress God's word
unholy and profane	synonyms for the sacrilegious; those who dishonor the sacred
murderers of fathers/mothers, and manslayers	related terms; types of killers
whoremongers [pornois], male-bedders [arsenokoitais], and menstealers [andropodistais]	(we'll examine the connection below)
liars and perjured persons	synonyms for people who speak untruths

As you can see, Paul clearly grouped his terms together. Consequently, the question we have to ask ourselves is: What do whores, "male-bedders", and menstealers have in common? If we can answer this question, we can be fairly certain that we've found the definition of arsenokoitais.

Obviously, since we don't know what type of male-bedders are being condemned—nor do we even know for certain that arsenokoitai(s) can be properly broken apart into its constituent words—we need to focus on finding the link between whores and menstealers first. Then, we'll be in a better position to discover the role that male-bedders play in this group.

The word translated "menstealers" in the KJV, andropodistais, is translated in other common translations as kidnappers and slave traders. So, we're basically looking at people who forcibly exploit others, usually for financial gain. Now, the fact that whores (prostitutes) are being condemned in this group indicates that the type of exploitation being spoken of here is sexual exploitation.

So, we have Paul condemning both prostitutes, and those who exploit them for financial gain. Considering modern prostitution, it takes only a small awareness of the industry to quickly identify those who exploit prostitutes. We call them pimps.

Seeing that Paul is, indeed, condemning the participants in a prostitution ring—considering that he condemned both the prostitutes, as well as those who profit from their exploitation—we have to ask one more simple question: Who is the third player in a prostitution ring? Quite obviously, the industry would not exist if it were not for one of its more important players—the customer! So, in this 3-player group in which prostitution is condemned, Paul condemns the prostitutes (pornois), the pimps (andropodistais), and those who "bed" the prostitutes—the customers (arsenokoitais).

Some believe that male-male prostitution, specifically, is what's actually being condemned here. This is certainly possible when we consider the culture Paul lived in. Pederasty—the sometimes forced sexual relationship between an older and a younger person—most often took a male-on-male form in ancient Greco-Roman culture. So, it's perfectly consistent with the cultural environment to conclude that Paul was condemning male-male pederastic prostitution. The inconsistency comes into play once we take it upon ourselves to translate and/or interpret this passage as in any way condemning homosexuality in general. Such a leap would be as abusive of the text as seeing a condemnation of opposite-sex prostitution and translating or interpreting it as a condemnation of heterosexuality!

What Does malakoi Mean?

As with arsenokoitai(s), the first thing we need to do is determine whether a reexamination of the meaning of malakoi is justified. Is there sufficient cause to question the translation of this term? To answer this question, we'll do the same thing we did with arsenokoitai(s)—compare the ways our modern English translations render this term.

Version	Translation
KJV	effeminate
NKJV	homosexuals (footnoted as "catamites")
NIV	male prostitutes
NASB	effeminate (footnoted as "effeminate by perversion")
AMP	combined with arsenokoitai as "those who participate in homosexuality"
NLT	male prostitutes
CEV	pervert
NCV	male prostitutes
HCS	male prostitutes
ESV	combined with arsenokoitai as "men who practice homosexuality" (footnoted as "the passive and active partners in consenual homosexual acts")
YLT	effeminate

It doesn't take long to realize that a reexamination the translation of malakoi is more than called for. Contrary to what many people would have us believe, it's exceedingly obvious that the translators were not sure of the proper translation of this term within this context.

Out of the 11 translations considered, 4 completely different terms are used:

effeminate (KJV, NASB, YLT)
some variation of homosexuals, either by orientation or activity (NKJV, AMP, ESV)
male prostitutes (NIV, NLT, NCV, HCS)
perverts (CEV)

Excuse my candor, but this is absolutely ridiculous. These translations are all over the place. In just 11 translations, the word was translated in four completely different ways. That's an average of a different translation for every two Bible versions. If we made a distinction between the condemnation of "homosexuals" and the condemnation of "homosexual activity" we'd have to add yet another variant translation. If there were ever evidence that a word's translation requires reexamination, this is it!

Unlike arsenokoitais, malakoi was used elsewhere in Scripture, which allows us to take into consideration its usage in a non-list context. In Matt. 11:8 and Luke 7:25, it (malakois) was used to describe John the Baptist's clothing. It was translated as "soft" in these verses.

The root word, malakos, actually means soft or feminine. Think of its usage in the gospels as referring to soft apparel, which may seem feminine, like silk. From this perspective, "effeminate" is a fairly accurate rendering of the term in 1Co. 6, in a literal sense. Still, it doesn't really convey the specific way in which Paul used it. For example, was he intending to condemn anything soft, like the aforementioned clothing worn by John the Baptist? As we had to do with male-bedder, we have to try to identify the specific type of femininity that is being condemned here; for example, all women are, by definition, feminine in one way or another, and we certainly don't want to think Paul was condemning them.

Now, we saw in the 1Ti. 1 vice list that Paul grouped his terms together. While there's no evidence that he did the same in 1Co. 6, the fact that malakoi appears in conjunction with arsenokoitai may lead us to the proper translation of the word.

In fact, it does! Considering that arsenokoitai(s) refers to the customers of prostitutes, it makes perfect sense that Paul would also condemn the prostitutes themselves whenever he condemns their customers. Indeed, as was the case in 1Co. 6, it makes sense that he would condemn the prostitutesbefore he condemned their customers.

Think about modern styles of speech. If I was pastoring a church and condemning certain behavior in a particular sermon, I wouldn't say, "The customers of prostitutes, and also prostitutes are in sin." What I would say is, "Prostitutes and their customers are in sin." The primary subject in such a consideration is the prostitute. Their customers are an extension of them; so it makes sense that in both 1Co. 6 and 1Ti. 1, Paul would condemn prostitutes before he'd condemn their customers—and that's exactly what he did.

Unlike the English translations' renderings of arsenokoitai(s) (in which every single translation got it wrong), 7 versions got the translation of malakoi correct (even if not precise), including the KJV, NASB, and YLT (which correctly, albeit imprecisely rendered the term "effeminate"), as well as the NIV, NLT, NCV, and HCS (which more accurately rendered the term "male prostitutes").

Now, if you're thinking through this information critically, your next question is likely, Why would Paul refer to male prostitutes by calling them feminine? The answer is found in the type of male-male prostitution Paul was likely condemning—pederasty. The prostitutes were always younger boys, even prepubescent. They would certainly be considered feminine, not only in that they would take the submissive role sexually, but also in that their prepubescent skin was smooth and "soft" (malakos), their voices higher, and their mannerisms not markedly macho.

The Conclusion of the Matter...

Without a doubt, the terms often translated as having something to do with homosexuality, malakoiand arsenokoitai(s), actually have nothing to do with it (in any general sense). To the contrary, what is condemned in these passages is pederastic prostitution, which, although male-male in nature, cannot be seen as in any way analogous to homosexuality in general. Paul was condemning behavior that was familiar to himself and to his readers, and it's exceedingly unfortunate that our modern English translations have not faithfully preserved his words.

Often hailed as one of the smoking guns of antigay theology, these two Pauline vice lists are an ever-present reminder of the dire need to engage in study before making a theological pronouncement. What's so sad is that the lists in and of themselves are actually fairly straight-forward. Rather than Paul's words being the problem, it's the translation of his words that has held the Church captive to ignorance for so long. But, in the words of Jesus Christ, "You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free!"

The Clobber Passages: Part 2

2011-02-08T07:39:00.000+11:00

Source: www.gaychristianfellowship.com
by Pastor Romell D. Weekly
December 25, 2009

Romans 1:26-27 is one of the few Bible passages commonly used to condemn homosexuality. But, unlike the other "clobber passages" (as they've come to be called), this is the only passage in the entire Bible that condemns both male-male and female-female sexual activity. As such, it's the only one that can, in any way consistent with its language, be legitimately interpreted as condemning same-sex sexual activty in any general or universal way. But, just because an interpretation is legitimate does not mean that it is correct. Consequently, the passage still requires careful and thoughtful deliberation.

So, let's dive right in and see just what this passage is about.

"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: [27] And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet."

Romans 1:26-27

The language couldn't be more clear. Both male-male and female-female sexual activity were condemned as vile, against nature (unnatural), and unseemly. Not only were the activities condemned, but the assertion of their appropriate punishment ("recompense... which was meet")—which is often interpreted as sexually transmitted diseases—reinforces just how bad these activities were considered.

As apparent as the language of this passage may seem, however, it behooves us to consider the textual and cultural contexts within which these verses reside. We'll then be in a much better position to interpret and apply the language of the verses in a manner most consistent with their original intent.

The best way to begin is to examine the greater textual context for clues as to what brought on this serious condemnation of same-sex activity. Was it just a random thought that Paul wanted to be sure to address, or what it a part of a bigger discourse on some other issue? To answer these questions, we'll begin with verse 18, and read through until the end of the chapter. I do, however, encourage you to read the entire chapter when time permits.

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; [19] Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. [20] For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: [21] Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. [22] Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, [23] And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. [24] Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: [25] Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. [26] For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: [27] And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. [28] And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; [29] Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, [30] Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, [31] Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: [32] Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them."

Romans 1:18-32

By considering verses 26-27 in isolation from their surrounding context, we could easily make the mistake of believing that the subject of his message was homosexuality. In fact, this was not the case. When homosex sexual intercourse was mentioned, it was specifically related to his message concerning people who were thwarting the revelation of God by engaging in idolatrous practices.

In verse 18, Paul transitioned into a discussion about a certain group of people against whom God's wrath was revealed. He described the effects of their sin in verses 19-22, and then identified the group in verses 23 and 25. He was speaking about idolaters—people who changed the glory of God into fashioned images that resembled men and animals. These images are called idols, and it is from the worship of these idols that we get the word "idolatry". And the worship of idols was exactly what the people Paul was referring to engaged in (v. 25).

Now that we've determined the context of Paul's statement, we're in a much better position to interpret and apply his words in a manner consistent with the original intent. Ultimately, the accurate interpretation boils down to the answer to a simple question: Does Paul's condemnation of homosex sexual acts in verses 26-27 apply to any such acts in general (a moral pronouncement that is universally applicable), or does it only apply to such acts engaged in within the socio-religious framework of idolatry?

Most people will be quick to answer this question one way or the other, depending on where they already fall in their theological beliefs concerning homosexuality. They'll choose to interpret the passage in a manner consistent with their existing beliefs. But, such an approach won't serve us here because rather than looking to validate existing beliefs, we want to allow Scripture to speak for itself. Consequently, we have to look into the text itself to see if it provides any hints as to the answer to this pertinent question.

First, it's important to acknowledge that a surface-level reading of the text can easily justify either conclusion. On one hand, the subject of Paul's discourse is idolatry, not sexuality. The homosex sexual acts are only an extension of the idolatrous practices that are at the heart of the matter. As a result, a case can be made that homosex sexual acts engaged in outside of the realm of idolatrous worship would not fall within the scope of Paul's condemnation.

But on the other hand, a case can also be made that although it's clear that the subject of Paul's message is idolatry, the homosex sexual acts that extended from that idolatry were still described in language that indicates a divine perspective on the acts themselves, whether idolatry is involved or not. In fact, vile (v. 26), against nature/unnatural (vs. 26 and 27), and unseemly (v. 27) were all words Paul used to describe the acts themselves, not the idolatry that they found their source in.

Such interpretational problems are a perfect case in point. Scripture is not to be used to validate doctrine. Rather, we should use it to formulate doctrine (2Timothy 3:16). If we start off reading a passage with an absolute certainty of what it means, it is ever-so-easy to read into the text a validation of those beliefs—whether the text itself actually supports those beliefs or not. I strongly encourage you to remain mindful of this when engaging in biblical study, especially when it involves issues with implications as serious as those surrounding sexual orientation.

So, which of these interpretations is correct? The only way a certain answer can be derived is by examining the text itself, as well as related passages, for clues. One very important rule of interpretation is that Scripture interprets Scripture. Let's employ this rule and determine exactly what Paul is condemning.

The first thing that must be acknowledged is that the subject of this passage was, indeed, idolatry, not sexuality. Not only is this borne out by the verses preceding verses 26-27, but also, Paul made an explicit link between the idolatry that was his subject matter and the homosex sexual activity. In verses 23-24, Paul identified these people as idolaters (verse 23) and then said, "wherefore" (or "therefore") in relation to God giving them up to sexual uncleanness (verse 24). Clearly, he was saying that their same-sex sexual acts were a result of their idolatry.

This isn't where the connection ends, though. It's interesting that people love to read verse 26 in isolation from verse 25; yet the very beginning of verse 26 states, "For this cause" (or "for this reason"). Well, for what reason? Seeing that God gave them over to "vile affections" (which were identified as same-sex sexual affections), what exactly was the reason? Was it because they were born that way? Was it because they were molested during adolescence? What exactly was the reason these people engaged in same-sex sexual activity? Well, if we back up to verse 25, we discover the reason. Paul explicitly told us that they "changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever." Again, Paul identified idolatry as the cause of their same-sex sexual activity.

So then, the first thing we must drill into our minds is that Paul looked at these sexual acts through a specific lens. It wasn't the lens of whether someone is born gay. It wasn't even the lens of whether they become gay because of upbringing or traumatic sexual experiences during childhood development. He wasn't even talking about sexual experimentation or feelings that just seem to develop over time. He was specifically talking about sexual activity being engaged in as a direct result of idolatry. To deny this explicit link to idolatry is to deny the language that God saw fit to inspire Paul to use, not once (in verses 23-24), but twice (also in verses 25-26).

In fact, we find this connection to idolatry emphasized a third time in this passage. Immediately after Paul condemned the sexual activity in verses 26-27, he once again stated that God's judgment was a result of their idolatry. In verse 28, he said, "And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind..." If you look at other common translations, it reads something like, "And because they did not..." or as "Since they did not..." Again, this judgment was not the result of the sexual activity. It was the result of their idolatry. Because they rejected the worship of the one true God, God gave them over.

The obvious question is: Why was their homosex sexual activity an extension of idolatry? What was it about the context of their sexual acts that connected them to idolatry in so explicit a way as to make Paul draw this connection not once or twice, but three times? I'm telling you... If we fail to consider this link, we will fail to properly interpret this passage.

Before considering this link, however, let's examine the words Paul used to describe the sexual activity itself. Let's determine whether or not Paul's description of the activity as vile, against nature, and unseemly is subject to the activity's relation to idolatry, or if it describes the activity irrespective of its context within idolatrous custom.

Term	Greek Transliteration	Meaning
vile	atimias	Strong's G819 - infamy, that is, (subjectively) comparative indignity, (objectively) disgrace: - dishonour, reproach, shame, vile
against nature	para phusin	Strong's G3844/G5449 - beyond or opposed to native disposition, constitution or usage
unseemly	aschêmosunên	Strong's G808 - an indecency

Two of these Greek words—atimias and aschemosunen—have meanings that are apparently subjective. For example, the World War II attack on Pearl Harbor is infamous in American history, but likely famous in Japanese history. Likewise, what is considered disgraceful, dishonorable, shameful or indecent is subject to the particular culture within which the acts involved are perceived. It is disgraceful, for instance, to show one's back to a ruler in many monarchistic societies, whereas such a thing is not given a second thought in the United States.

Not so obviously subjective is the meaning of para phusin—beyond or opposed to native disposition, constitution or usage. At face value, it seems almost certainly objective. Still, it would serve us well to consider other biblical usages of these terms. If we cannot be absolutely certain of their objectivity or subjectivity by considering this isolated usage, a wider perspective of the biblical writers' use of these terms (with special emphasis on Pauline usage) will almost certainly indicate whether or not his description is subject to the society in which he lived.

Let's start with atimia—translated as "vile" in verse 26. Does Paul use the term elsewhere in Scripture in a subjective way?

"Doth not even nature [phusis] itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame [atimia] unto him?"

1Corinthians 11:14

In this passage, Paul actually uses two of our terms—phusis (the root of phusin) and atimia. We'd be hard-pressed to find a person within the modern Church who believes that this passage establishes a universal principle concerning hair lengths on men. Only in the most legalistic mind would a person believe that God is the least bit concerned with how long a person's hair is. To the contrary, what He is concerned about in passages such as this one is what long hair on a man represents; and what it represented within the ancient Greco-Roman society (femininity; a rebellion against the prevailing patriarchal social order) is very different from what it represents in modern Western society (absolutely nothing). Consider Native American Christians. Should we demand of them that they cut their hair to a certain length, despite the fact that their ethnic culture has no such stigma on men with long hair?

When we fail to understand why a command was given in the first place, we can find ourselves applying it to people and situations to which it was never intended to apply. This may certainly be aneasier approach to Scripture—for it doesn't require a person to think beyond what they read on the page—but it certainly isn't the way to honorably approach God's word, which can only maintain its holiness and efficacy if applied in a manner consistent with its original intent.

Let's take our examination a step further. As with every language, Greek is not absolutely precise. People often employ synonyms in different contexts, although the overall point being made is the same. So, although Paul used both atimia and phusis in 1Co. 11, does he describe culturally subjective things in Scripture using synonyms of these words, or of aschemosunen (unseemly, indecent)? Actually, he does.

"Judge in yourselves: is it comely [prepon (G4241) - suitable, proper, fitting, becoming] that a woman pray unto God uncovered?"

1Corinthians 11:13

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame [aischron (G149) - a lack of decorum] for women to speak in the church."

1Corinthians 14:34-35

It's clear that Paul certainly used these words in a manner reflective of the culture within which he lived. Consequently, the application of his descriptions would necessarily have to reflect changes within those cultural perceptions.

Even Paul's appeal to nature in Romans 1:26-27 does not necessarily indicate a divine pronouncement, or some type of universal principle. We certainly don't consider his appeal to nature in 1Co. 11:14 as a universal, divine pronouncement concerning hair lengths on men (and, consideringverse 15, hair lengths on women).

Since it cannot be our default belief that homosex sexual activity is still "vile", "against nature", or "unseemly"—seeing as Paul used the same (and synonymous) words to describe culturally subjective things elsewhere in Scripture—we have to consider why he said what he said. Uncovering his purpose in describing the acts the way he did will help us determine whether or not the description still applies.

This is where the textual and cultural context is vitally important. It is only through understanding Paul's socio-religious location, as well as the overall argument he was making in this passage of Scripture, that we will be able to properly apply his words within the modern socio-religious context—a context that is substantially different than the one Paul originally addressed.

We've already determined that the textual context dealt not with human sexuality but with idolatry. Paul's language in the text expressly indicates that the sexual activity being condemned was absolutely an extension of the idolatrous worship that was the subject of his discourse. Remember that he, three times, connected the judgment of God in relation to the sexual activity to their idolatry. He said, "wherefore/therefore", "for this cause/reason", and "as they did not/because they did not". The sexual activity cannot be considered in isolation from the idolatry that it resulted from. To do so would be to detach verses 26-27 from their context, thereby twisting God's word.

Now, I previously raised the question of why Paul would state three times that the sexual activity these people engaged in resulted from idolatry. The answer to this question is very easily found by considering the culture within which Paul lived (Greco-Roman), and the particular people to whom he addressed his epistle (the Romans).

From the cultural perspective, the ancient Greco-Roman world was known for its open sexuality. One mustn't dig deep into history to discover that the Greco-Romans engaged in activities as sexually liberal as temple prostitution and orgies, particularly in religious contexts associated with the worship of the Roman god, Bacchus (called Dionysus by the Greeks). Considering the textual association of the same-sex sexual acts with idolatry, it is almost certain that this type of cultic sexual activity was what he was referring to. To his Jewish eyes, such acts were directly associated with idolatrous worship, and had been considered so for almost 1,500 years (Lev. 18:1-3, 22; 22:1-8, 13). The fact that those within his culture who engaged in the activity often did so within the framework of their idolatrous beliefs only cemented his view that those acts were vile, unnatural, and unseemly.

It was the activity's association with the idolatrous Greco-Roman society that colored Paul's view of the acts in general. As far as he was concerned, all same-sex sexual acts were a symptom of idolatry—much like we consider the swastika or burning cross hateful, even though it is actually what they represent that is what's hateful. Still, when we see such things, we don't stop and think, What's the context here? The images immediately invoke a certain negative reflexive emotion. As a Black man, I have the same revulsion at the very sight of the Confederate flag , which some people still don't seem to understand.

Following this logic, it is not only appropriate but vital to proper hermeneutics (methods of interpretation) to consider the association of the images described when determining whether the description is relevant or applicable to our modern society. Is same-sex sexual activity still deeply intertwined with idolatrous culture and/or worship? The answer is: Absolutely not. As is the case with heterosexuality, there are certainly homosexuals who are not Christians, and some who likely subscribe to idolatrous beliefs (worshiping images and icons); however, no sincere person can possibly conclude that homosexuality has anything to do with idolatry within the modern world. Even the most ardent opponents of homosexuality don't immediately think "idolater" when they think "homosexual". Instead, they likely think, "Nasty bastard!" No one is imagining homosexuals bowing to a statue of Bacchus, yet that's precisely what Paul envisioned when condemning same-sex sexual activity in Romans 1.

This is not a guess by Pastor Weekly. Three times, Paul explicitly linked the sexual activity (and God's releasing them unto it) to their idolatry. These were not people who were faithful servants of Christ. These were not people who had committed their lives to serving Christ and who never bowed to another god. These were not people who wanted lifelong, monogamous (marital) relationships with people of the same-sex, based on inner attractions having absolutely nothing to do with idolatry. These were idolaters, plain and simple, and the sex they engaged in was prompted by their idolatry. Such is absolutely not the case in modern society, and it certainly isn't the case when it comes to gay Christians, who would sooner die than worship someone or something other than the Lord Jesus!

Now, I understand that people can sincerely read verses 26-27 and misinterpret them. They can even read the greater context and miss the links Paul made and the reason he made those links simply because they're reading into the text what they've been taught down through the years. Still, in the here and now, we have to make a decision. Either we'll let the text speak to us afresh, or we'll cling to that old rugged doctrine. Either we'll accept the fact that Paul clearly condemned this sexual activity within the context of idolatry, or we'll continue to consider these passages an everlasting condemnation of homosexuality in general, directly contradicting the inspired language of the text itself, as well as an objective consideration of the culture that prompted the language.

Taking into account all that we have considered, it would be wholly inappropriate to hold modern people to Paul's ancient worldview. While he rightly condemned the activity he witnessed within the idolatrous Greco-Roman culture—much like I, as a pastor, might condemn the inverted pentagram, swastika, and other images or acts associated with evil things within our society—that condemnation is now wholly obsolete because the sexual activity is no longer culturally intertwined with and representative of idolatry, and it most certainly is not being engaged in by people as an extension of idolatrous beliefs or practices. Applying it to 21st century humanity is as ridiculous as condemning a modern woman for wanting to wear her hair short (1Co. 11:15), which, regretably, a few fringe churches still do—God help us!

The Clobber Passages: Part 1

2011-02-08T07:38:00.000+11:00

Source: www.gaychristianfellowship.com
by Pastor Romell D. Weekly
July 6, 2009

Leviticus contains two of the most oft-quoted passages dealing with homosexuality. Their language is clear, their prescribed penalty severe, making them the perfect weapon to use in establishing homosexuality as one of, if not the most horrible sin one can commit against God.

In this first installment in our Clobber Passages series—so called because homosexuals are often metaphorically beaten over the head with these passages—we'll determine the proper interpretation and application of these two well-known verses. We're examining them together in one study because they are so similar in content, as well as context. Indeed, they're practically a repetitive emphasis of the self-same command.

"Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

Leviticus 18:22

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

Leviticus 20:13

In relatively recent years, the common interpretation of these two passages has been brought into question. The Hebrew word-arrangement in the verses is quite weird (for lack of a better term), leading to multiple alternative translations.

Hebrew Transliteration of 18:22: Ve'et zachar lo tishkav mishkevey ishah to'evah hi.

Literal Translation: And with a male you shall not lay lyings of a woman. It is an abomination (detestable).

As this literal translation demonstrates, the language of the text is anything but absolutely clear. While it may seem obvious to some on the surface, it can be interpreted in a few substantially different ways. For example:

Possible Interpretation #1: And with a male you shall not lay as the lyings of a woman,which can indicate that what's being condemned is male-male penetrative sex (a male having sex with another man as he would with a woman).

Possible Interpretation #2: And with a male you shall not lay as the lyings of a woman, which can also indicate that what's being condemned is heterosexual males engaging in male-male penetrative sex (a male having sex with another man as he would normally have sex with a woman).

Possible Interpretation #3: And with a male you shall not lay in the lyings of a woman, indicating that what's being condemned is male-male sex within a woman's bed.

What is obvious is that these two passages are condemning male-male sexual intercourse in some way. What is not so obvious is whether all male-male sexual intercouse is being condemned, or simply that which is committed in a certain way (e.g. by a heterosexual male, or in a woman's bed).

Unfortunately, there is no way to derive the proper translation based on the Hebrew words alone. We're going to have to yield to a logical review of the text in order to discern which translation makes the most sense within the cultural and textual context.

Beginning at verse 6 and continuing to verse 20, a veritable laundry list of sexual acts are prohibited. In the parallel passage in chapter 20, the context also includes various sexual proscriptions. I don't think that any sincere inquisitor subscribes to the notion that these various and sundry proscriptions are anything but universal in their intent. For example, no reasonable student of Scripture would conclude that incest is only being condemned within a limited context or scope.

Given the universal condemnation of other sexual activity in the previous verses, the rule of interpretational consistency leads me to believe that this verse is saying exactly what it appears to be saying—that under any and all circumstances, male-male penetrative sex is to be condemned.

Why Is Male-Male Sex Condemned?

Although we now have an understanding of what these two verses are saying, it's exceedingly important that we do not stop there. A grand mistake Christians make in interpreting a particular verse is in failing to realize that interpretation is only half of the task. When we fail to seek out whya particular command of Scripture is given, we run the risk of obeying or applying the command in a manner that is inconsistent with its original intent.

Consider the example of hair lengths. In 1Co. 11:14-15, the apostle Paul states that it's shameful for a man to have long hair. He also implies in verse 15 that it's inappropriate for a woman to have shorthair. Those who fail to understand why these things are said regarding hair lengths would mistakenly apply these proscriptions to modern Christians, despite the fact that they are wholly obsolete!

You see, hair lengths meant something to the world/culture Paul lived in and addressed that it doesn't mean to us today. Long hair on a man symbolized culturally undesirable feminine qualities in a way that it no longer does. In addition, we no longer view women as property or subservient people who need a "covering" (a symbolic representation of her submission to patriarchal authority). As the world changed, so did the application of these proscriptions, which, although not obvious from the verse itself, contain a socio-religious worldview—applicable in its own place and time, but not in ours.

This potential to misapply properly translated and properly interpreted passages is why it's so important to ponder what we read—to consider not only what it says, but also why it says it. It's essential that we apply this rule to our examination of Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13.

The key to getting a fuller picture of the intent of a passage is to consider the cultural and textual context within which it is written. These verses in Leviticus were recorded during a time when the children of Israel were in grave danger of falling into idolatry. Not only had they mischievously exported idolatrous beliefs and practices after their deliverance from enslavement in Egypt (remember the golden calf they made while camped at the foot of Mount Sinai—Ex. 32), but they were also in danger of adopting the idolatrous beliefs of the Canaanite people, where God was bringing them to.

God expressed this concern at the beginning of each respective chapter where these proscriptions are found.

"And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, [2] Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, I am the LORD your God. [3] After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do: and after the doings of the land of Canaan, whither I bring you, shall ye not do: neither shall ye walk in their ordinances. [4] Ye shall do my judgments, and keepmine ordinances, to walk therein: I am the LORD your God. [5] Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the LORD."

Leviticus 18:1-5

"And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, [2] Again, thou shalt say to the children of Israel, Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel, that giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death: the people of the land shall stone him with stones. [3] And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people; because he hath given of his seed unto Molech, to defile my sanctuary, and to profane my holy name. [4] And if the people of the land do any ways hide their eyes from the man, when he giveth of his seed unto Molech, and kill him not: [5] Then I will set my face against that man, and against his family, and will cut him off, and all that go a whoring after him, to commit whoredom with Molech, from among their people. [6] And the soul that turneth after such as have familiar spirits, and after wizards, to go a whoring after them, I will even set my face against that soul, and will cut him off from among his people. [7] Sanctify yourselves therefore, and be ye holy: for I am the LORD your God. [8] And ye shall keep my statutes, and do them: I am the LORD which sanctify you."

Leviticus 20:1-8

[all emphases mine]

In both of the relevant chapters, God expressly laid out His reasons for the proscriptions that would follow; and in both chapters, those reasons are ultimately identical. He desired for His people to be culturally and religiously separated from the world around them. He didn't want them exporting Egyptian idolatry, or assimilating into the socio-religious culture of the Canaanites. They were Hispeople, and the best way for that to be demonstrated was for them to maintain complete separation from the world/cultures around them.

This explains why only male-male sex was condemned, not female-female sex. Homosexuality (or more precisely, same-sex sexual intercourse) was not being condemned in these passages. What was being condemned was activity that was taking place within the idolatrous cultures of Egypt and/or Canaan. Within the idolatrous worship beliefs and practices of these cultures, men would have sexual intercourse with the male priests of the idol temples (who were often eunuchs) as an act of worship, for the intercourse symbolized the coming together of the idol fertility goddes, Astarte, and the fire god, Molech, who was the male counterpart of Astarte. The sexual intercourse was done for the agricultural blessing of the coming years' harvest—if Molech, the part played by the male worshiper, planted his seed (semen) within the fertility goddess, Astarte, it would promise a good harvest of crops that year.

Since women did not play a part within this paticular cultic worship practice, it perfectly explains why they were not mentioned in these particular pasasges. Keep in mind that women were mentioned alongside men in the verses preceeding and succeeding the verses in question. But, when it came to these specific proscriptions, they were nowhere to be found. This is the only logical interpretation of the text, which corresponds perfectly to the overall context of God's intention to keep the Israelites sanctified (separated from the idolatrous beliefs and practices around them).

Cultic Worship, Not Homosexuality? Are You Sure?

How sure can we be that the proscriptions contained in these two verses (18:22 and 20:13), both of which include proscriptions of male-male sex, are referencing cultic worship rites and not all same-sex sexual activity? Well, first of all, one would have to explain why only male-male sex was condemned, if all same-sex sexual activity was supposedly ungodly in the eyes of God.

To claim that the textual intent was to imply condemnation of both sexes engaging in same-sex activity is to stretch the text beyond its expressly stated scope. Remember, women were specifically mentioned in proscriptions prior to and after these specific verses. If the intent was to condemn homosexuality in general, we would expect to see both sexes condemned within these particular verses.

Second, we must remember that God specifically laid out the reasons for these proscriptions in the first few verses of each respective chapter. If we ignore this expressly stated intent, and apply His words more broadly then He originally intended, we will be purposefully twisting Scripture in order to validate our traditional beliefs. I'm not willing to do that. Are you?

Third, not only did God lay out the intent of the text in the first few verses of each chapter, but the worship of idol gods is clearly within the mind of the author (and Author) within these contexts—for in chapter 18, right in the midst of this list of proscribed sexual acts, child sacrifice unto Molech is also condemned. In fact, the text breaks from a listing of proscribed sexual acts, talks about a specific act of Molech worship, and then condemns male-male sex in the very next verse. Remembering that Scripture was not originally written in verses, it's clear that this is a flowing thought. It flows from the first verses down through the condemnations of male-male sex, including specific mentions of Molech worship in both chapters (18:21, 20:2-5). Clearly, idol worship is in the mind of the writer.

So, male-male sexual activity was representative of idolatrous peoples. As such, they served as symbols of cultural similitude that God was trying to avoid in keeping the Israelites sanctified from the world around them. That is why the acts were condemned within this Leviticus context. To maintain the intent of the text is not to twist or disobey Scripture. In fact, it's the highest means of ensuring that God's holy word is not abused or misused.

Does This Mean That All of the Activity Proscribed Here Is Okay Today?

This is a very legitimate question, and I think that the answer is helpful in ensuring that we continue to apply God's word in a manner consistent with its intent. Here's the deal. If I condemn activity within a specific context, it should only be viewed as condemnable within that context. That would mean that none of the condemnations within these contexts should be applied outside of the context of idolatrous socio-religious practices. Where such practices are not culturally steeped in idolatry, it would be inconsistent to apply the proscriptions, including those related to incest and other sexual sins listed in these verses.

But, that doesn't automatically mean that the activities proscribed are perfectly okay today. It only means that we must look elsewhere in Scripture to see if the activity should be condemned universally, because these particular verses clearly and only apply to activity engaged in within the socio-religious cultures of idolatrous people.

As an example, consider racial hate crimes. Now, a law may exist within hate crimes legislation that the murder of an individual for racial reasons is unlawful. Would this mean that murdering someone for non-racial reasons is okay? Of course not! However, we would be forced to look outside of the hate crimes legislation to find legal backing for our case, for those particular provisions are only applicable within a framework of race-based crimes. No court of law would apply the Levitical proscriptions to a modern population, in which idolatrous cultural worship practices are now wholly obsolete (culturally speaking). To do such would be to apply the laws within contexts that they simply do not apply. Secular judges would see this, but studied Bible scholars, pastors, and teachers of Scripture seem to only remember it when the subject isn't homosexuality!

How Does This Apply To Modern Christians?

We've already dealt with the fact that these verses do not apply outside of the context of cultures deeply intertwined with idolatrous activity. However, the reasons behind the inapplicability of these passages do not end there. We also need to consider an important biblical principle that applies to the entire Mosaic Law, and to all the laws contained therein.

In the apostle Paul's epistle to the Galatian church, he makes as good a case as can be made regarding a Christian's relationship to the Mosaic Law. I strongly encourage you to read the entire epistle; but the point of Paul's teaching was that the Law served a purpose during a specific place and time, and for a specific people. When Christ came and died on the cross, the era of the Law was brought to a conclusion. Every single provision of the Law is now, therefore, null and void, just as much as ancient Egyptian law is null and void in 21st century America.

The Law was right and good during the time that it was in force; but for a believer in Christ to live under any provision of it is to, by implication, reject the death of Christ—the horrible price He paid in order to free us from bondage to the Law and deliver us into the liberty of the sons of God. Christians who turn to the books of the Law to determine the code by which we should live are guilty of one of the most egregious errors a Christian can commit. In fact, God considers it spiritual adultery for a person to submit to any portion of the obsolete Law.

"Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? [2] For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. [3] So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. [4] Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God."

Romans 7:1-4

What makes this error even more treasonous is that the majority of Christians who turn to the Law to prove that homosexuality is a sin are well aware of the fact that we are no longer under the Law (Ro. 6:14). Yet, they ignore this reality in an attempt to validate their beliefs. Such a blatant and purposeful abuse of Scripture is antithetical to what it means to be a follower of Christ, who is, Himself, the living Word. I pray that God calls this error to their attention, so that they can repent of enforcing a Law that Christ died to fulfill and bring to a conclusion.

For a more comprehensive analysis of Levicus 18:22 and 20:13, as well as a more detailed examination of a Christian's relationship to the Mosaic Law, I encourage you to order your copy ofHomosexianity now. Lives are being touched by the truths revealed therein. Add your name to the list!

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #10

2011-02-06T15:35:00.000+11:00

Sunday Snippets for the weeks of Sunday January 23 to Saturday February 5.

This week I have a homily from recently deceased Bishop Joe Grech, Bishop of Sandhurst Diocese, as well as a link to some highlights from his funeral.
An interesting article on the movie "The Rite" and the certain theological mistakes that some people still make in their beliefs about the Catholic Church.
I recently watched this movie, "Prayers for Bobby" which is based on the true story of a Presbyterian mother who rejects her gay son, and the journey that follows her to be one of the biggest gay activists after the suicide of her son.

Go to "This That and the Other Thing: Sunday Snippets" blog.

Prayers for Bobby

2011-02-03T08:10:00.000+11:00

This is a movie that should be watched by anyone who is queer, or who knows people who are! It is based on the true story of Bobby Griffin who eventually killed himself when he was 20 by jumping from a bridge, all because of the religious intolerance his family showed when they found out he was gay.

After the point where Bobby suicides, the movie then goes through the journey his mother Mary has on a path of discovery of homosexuality from the perspective of a loving God.

It shows just how much damage hatred and intolerance can do, particularly when it comes from where you once felt so safe: the family home. The recent suicides of many other gay youths is yet another reason people should see this film and see the impact homophobia has on LGBT people.

Mary has since become one of the USAs biggest PFLAG (Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) supporter.

The movie stars Sigourney Weaver and Ryan Kelley.

Cyclone Yasi

2011-02-03T01:12:00.000+11:00

Summer 2011, Queenslanders has seen absolute devestation with wide-spread flooding to 75% of the state, and now, midnight Queensland-time, the eye of the storm is passing the coast as Cyclone Yasi hits. This is a category 5 storm, the biggest and most powerful in Australia's history. Just as the majority of the state are cleaning up after floods, those in North Queensland are now facing yet another threat. The mass exodus of patients to Brisbane Hospital is the largest in Australia.

Those in Queensland, affected by floods, cyclone or both, my thoughts and prayers are with you.

Out with the old...

2011-02-02T16:06:00.000+11:00

I am making a heap of life-changes at the moment. Cutting people out of my life, looking to a brighter future - and now I am starting with the first of many changes (other than a mass-cull of my "friends" on FaceBook!) which is a new anti-depressant.

Currently I'm on Efexor (Venlafaxine) but I am switching over to Pristiq (Desvenlafaxine), which is what Efexor "metabolises" into... basically, the "newer" version. I don't know if it will work better, the same, or not as good, but only one way to find out!

MovieGuide gets exorcism movie Rite, Catholic teaching wrong

2011-02-02T07:07:00.000+11:00

BY STEVEN D. GREYDANUS

NATIONAL CATHOLIC REGISTER

Even savvy Catholics used to bizarre distortions of Catholic teaching by non-Catholics might be startled by the howler in a review of this weekend’s top movie, The Rite, at the Christian movie review site MovieGuide.org.

It should be noted that MovieGuide’s blunder seems notto reflect any kind of obvious anti-Catholic bias. On the contrary, to their credit MovieGuide typically treats Hollywood anti-Catholicism as anti-Christian, and positive images of Catholicism as pro-Christian.

You can see this in their review of The Rite, which their anonymous review credits with a “very strong Christian, moral worldview set in Roman Catholic world.” According to MovieGuide, The Rite “portrays a genuine Christian faith that ultimately is triumphant.” So MovieGuide appreciates the positive depiction of Catholicism in The Rite—and I appreciate that.

Even so, it’s pretty stunning to read the following:

Played out within the context of a Roman Catholic theology, elements of the story seems to be more Protestant, in contrast to a Catholic theology that believes an ordained priest cannot sin in his official position. Thus, the priest in this story is flawed, vulnerable and even falls prey to the enemy.

WHAT?!?

Catholic theology believes that “an ordained priest cannot sin in his official position”?! What does that even mean?

This goes way beyond the common Protestant confusion between impeccability, or sinlessness, and infallibility, or freedom from error, particularly as it applies to the Pope acting in his official capacity solemnly defining Catholic dogma. Catholics are used to answering that one: No, the pope is not impeccable—he sins just like everyone else, and goes to confession just like other Catholics (frequently, in fact).

But even after over a quarter century of involvement in Catholic–Protestant dialogue, I’ve never heard anyone raise the possibility that parish priests, or even bishops, might be thought to be infallible, let alone impeccable, whether acting “in their official position” or any other way. In the annals of non-Catholic confusion over Catholic teaching, this is a remarkable new addition.

That’s not MovieGuide’s only theological blunder. They also say that the movie depicts “a Christian … becoming demon possessed, which contradicts Christian and special Catholic doctrine.”

Not exactly. It is generally thought in Catholic belief that Christians in the state of grace are immune from full-blown demonic possession (though not necessarily from varying levels of demonic oppression). However, the idea that Christians are automatically immune from demonic possession is probably a corollary of the Protestant notion of “once saved, always saved” (which is not the historic Christian teaching).

Baptism does provide powerful protection from the devil; in fact, Catholic baptism includes prayers of exorcism. But the Church teaches the possibility of falling from grace, and while mortal sin by itself certainly doesn’t automatically make one vulnerable to demonic possession, other acts may, such as occult involvement. (In the case of the film character in question, perhaps ongoing involvement in direct spiritual warfare against demonic possession without sufficient protection from a strong faith could provide an opening for the devil.)

That’s small beer, though, compared to the notion of sinless priests. How does an error like that get published? Doesn’t MovieGuide have editors who know more about Catholic theology than that after all these years? Or at least a modicum of common sense, and the editorial standards to double-check such an extraordinary idea? Don’t they know any priests or Catholics they could call if they weren’t sure?

Hey MovieGuide, for future reference, if you have any Catholic teaching questions, feel free torun them past me. I’ll be happy to help if I can.

P.S. I’ve mentioned some of the pros and cons of MovieGuide before. Also, see my review ofThe Rite and my essay on The Rite in relation to earlier Hollywood exorcism movies.

Highlights from Bishop Joe's funeral

2011-01-31T04:47:00.000+11:00

Funeral for Bishop Joe Grech, Sacred Heart Cathedral, Bendigo Australia. 6th January, 2011.

Darkness draws closer...

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #18

To abort or not to abort, that is the question.

Prayer for Addicts

The Canberra Declaration: Protecting our Judeo-Christian heritage and rights!

Religious Freedom

Marriage and Family

Human Life

Conclusion

Tweeted #1

"Protest the Protesters"

GET THEE BEHIND ME SATAN!

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #17

ART: Coptic Icon

Cigarettes prices to be HALVED???

Evil, evil, evil...

Focusing on my Spiritual Health!

William Morris, former Bishop of Toowoomba QLD

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #16

Divine Mercy in My Soul

Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament Update

East and West

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #16

Shadow of Peter, Touch of Thomas and Divine Mercy

Divine Mercy presents!

Prayer to St. Michael the Archangel

The Image of Divine Mercy

His Divine Mercy

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #15

Friend and Lord Jesus Christ

Confession

Sola Fide: By Faith Alone

Christus Rex

Catholic: Here to stay!

Catholic... but why?

Apocalypse now?

Divine Mercy sketch

Just testing!

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #14

Pray, Pray, Pray!

La Australia del Espiritu Santo

Give me strength, O Lord.

My glass needs a refill

Sketch of the Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament, Christchurch NZ

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #13

Artistic Inspiration from an Unlikely Place

Vatican launches new tactic RE: Islam

The Existence of God

Meditation Method for Quieting Your Mind

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #12

Racist much?

Divine Mercy: A Book for Lent

Afghan Christian-converts plea for help

Theologians Revolt

Third Edition Roman Missal

I'd marry gay couples, just not in a church - Fr Bob Maguire

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #11

iPhone Confessional

Marriage Equality Bill Speech

Marriage Equality Bill SpeechbyTammy Franks (SA Greens)

The Clobber Passages: Part 3

The Clobber Passages: Part 2

The Clobber Passages: Part 1

Sunday Snippets: A Catholic Carnival #10

Prayers for Bobby

Cyclone Yasi

Out with the old...

MovieGuide gets exorcism movie Rite, Catholic teaching wrong

Highlights from Bishop Joe's funeral

Marriage Equality Bill Speech
byTammy Franks (SA Greens)