Gazizza.Net

Jeff the Baptist wrote a post responding to a post of Hube's about a survey indicating that a majority of Americans would not vote for an avowed atheist for President, the only group that gained a majority rejecting them. Like Jeff, I had to think about that one for a while. I was definitely uncomfortable with the idea but I couldn't quite put my finger on why. His post today, and a topic that was brought in our RCIA class tonight (the process those converting to Catholicism go through), crystallized it for me.

First, the discomfort comes from the simple fact that an atheist doesn't believe in God. If someone doesn't believe in God, what do they believe in? If there's no overarching moral law, then he's running for office just for power. If there is no external force in our lives and we're just a random collection of cells that happened to become a human person, rather than a dog, tree or a rock, who cares about other people? Why should I look out for my fellow man?

The answer can be found in the notion of natural law. Catholic teaching (and at least some Protestants as well, I believe) is that God has written on our hearts a natural law that gives us an innate sense of right and wrong, which can manifest itself in our conscience. (I'm not a natural law theologian by any means, so I may get some details wrong.) It's this natural law that leads those who deny God to still lead good lives that show they care about their fellow man. They may not believe in God, but due to following their, they are following the natural law He has written on their hearts. (Or as Jeff puts it, they "get it.")

So, I could vote for an avowed atheist who was following, even unknowingly, the precepts of natural law, which should be the basis of our civil laws in any event. A topic for another time is whether or not civil laws should extend beyond natural law.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 9:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

“The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their nation.” —George Washington

“Life is not so short but that there is always time enough for courtesy and chivalry.” —Ralph Waldo Emerson

“Forewarned, forearmed; to be prepared is half the victory. Wisdom comes of such a recognition.” —Miguel de Cervantes

“Learn all you can, but learn to do something, or your learning will be useless and your vision will depart.” —Booker T. Washington

“You can observe a lot just by watching.” —Yogi Berra

“Slowly bleeding our forces by defunding what our commanders think they need to win (the House approach) or rewording the authorization of the use of force so that lawyers decide what operations are to be launched (the Senate approach) is no way to fight a war. It is no way to end a war. It is a way to complicate the war and make it inherently unwinnable—and to shirk the political responsibility for doing so.” —Charles Krauthammer

“So far, candidates have told us very little about where they think the world is headed and what we should do about it. And they’ve shown us little to indicate that they’ve thought seriously about governance and long-term problems like Social Security and Medicare.” —George Will

“A primary job of the federal government is to unify Americans. Besides being our native tongue, English is the language of commerce worldwide. Every student should be able to speak it fluently. That’s the only way to ensure that no child gets left behind.” —Ed Feulner

Jay Leno: The state of Virginia’s General Assembly has passed a resolution apologizing for slavery. Not a moment too soon. It’s good to nip these things in the bud before any hard feelings develop. ... Speaking of that, according to a new report by genealogists, Al Sharpton’s ancestors were slaves once owned by Strom Thurmond’s relatives. And now Al Sharpton wants a DNA test to see if they are related. And somehow you know this is going to end up that Strom is the father of Anna Nicole’s baby. You know that’s going to happen.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 12:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Phillies first game is tonight at 6:05 (against Florida State) and the first official spring training game is tomorrow afternoon against the Tigers.

Oh Happy Day!

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 10:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

At least according to the History Channel....

But why did they have to say I live in France?

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 9:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Although, practically speaking, the 2008 presidential campaign began the day after the campaign of 2004 ended, it has lately shifted visibly and audibly into high gear. Make no mistake, that means trouble ahead for the Church.

It's not only that several politicians who'd like to be president are Catholics who support legalized abortion. This truly is the Church's most excruciating political problem today, but it's hardly the only one.

That was painfully clear in the recent flap — mercifully brief — over former senator John Edwards' refusal to fire two campaign staffers who made blatantly offensive anti-Catholic remarks on their blogs. When the predictable uproar erupted, both quit, apparently by their own choice.

For Catholics, the genuinely problematic aspect of the episode concerned not the two staffers but the candidate. Edwards, a Methodist, may be a decent fellow, but his obtuseness about Catholic feelings in response to severe provocation leaves a bad taste in many mouths.

And to think — the campaign has just begun!

It's not a fun time for Catholics in the political world. The most prominent Catholic politicians dissent from the Church on very grave issues. (I'm reminded of one thing I read that argued the surest way to promote Catholic values in the political is to not vote for Catholic politicians,) Given the candidates who are likely to be the nominees in the two major parties, it'll be tough to choose come November 2008.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 1:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

HowManyOfMe.com

There are: 14,349 people with my name in the U.S.A. How many have your name?

There are 14,349 people in the U.S. named Paul Smith.

Additional facts about my name:

There are 1,426,351 people in the U.S. with the first name Paul.
Statistically the 17th most popular first name.
99.68 percent of people with the first name Paul are male.

There are 3,017,684 people in the U.S. with the last name Smith.
Statistically the 1st most popular last name.

Hat Tip: FIrst State Politics

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 8:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

IISI Books is having a 60% off sale on their catlog of books thourgh the end of March. I just received 8 books in the mail and, including shipping, spent just over seventy bucks. Definitely worth a look if you enjoy history, culture, politics, science, religion, etc.

The books I got:
What the Catholic Faithful Can Do
Edumund Burke: A Genius Reconsidered by Russell Kirk
Humane Economy by Wilhelm Ropke
Start the Preses by Stan Ridgely (Ryan, I need to pass this book off to you)
The Devil Knows Latin: Why America Needs the Classical Tradition
Solzheniutsyn Reader
Small is Still Beautiful by Joseph PEarce
The Conservative Intelliectual Movement in American since 1945

There are plenty of other great books. I highly recommend Ruseel Kirk's The Roots of American Order. It changed the way I think about politics completely.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 5:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Joe Lieberman writes a thoughtful article:

I understand the frustration, anger and exhaustion so many Americans feel about Iraq, the desire to throw up our hands and simply say, "Enough." And I am painfully aware of the enormous toll of this war in human life, and of the infuriating mistakes that have been made in the war's conduct.

But we must not make another terrible mistake now. Many of the worst errors in Iraq arose precisely because the Bush administration best-cased what would happen after Saddam was overthrown. Now many opponents of the war are making the very same best-case mistake--assuming we can pull back in the midst of a critical battle with impunity, even arguing that our retreat will reduce the terrorism and sectarian violence in Iraq.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 12:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.” —Patrick Henry

“Unless God has raised you up for this very thing, you will be worn out by the opposition of men and devils. But if God be for you, who can be against you? Are all of them together stronger than God? Oh, be not weary of well-doing. Go on in the name of God and in the power of His might.” —John Wesley to William Wilberforce

“[For over two decades, William Wilberforce] fought tenaciously until the slave trade was finally outlawed. And then he fought for another twenty-five years, despite failing health, for the emancipation of all slaves in 1833. The battle had taken forty-six years. Forty-six years! Today, we are tempted to throw up our hands and go home if we lose a single election. In our campaigns against modern moral evils, we are too easily discouraged; we have forgotten how to persevere. Of course we will have fierce opposition; sometimes the opponents will play dirty, as they did with Wilberforce. But that is no excuse to give up. Who do we think we are working for?... In our own era, the campaign to eliminate the killing of unborn children has already taken thirty-four years. And that is just one battle: Christians are fighting as well modern slavery, embryo-destructive research, and the attack on marriage. We had better take a lesson from Wilberforce (and Wesley) and roll up our sleeves—permanently, if necessary... persevering until the battle is won.” —Chuck Colson

“We have to recognize that in this country ‘ideology’ is a scare word. And for good reason. Marxist-Leninism is, to give but one example, an ideology. All the facts of the real world have to be fitted to the Procrustean bed of Marx and Lenin. If the facts don’t happen to fit the ideology, the facts are chopped off and discarded. I consider this to be the complete opposite to principled conservatism. If there is any political viewpoint in this world which is free from slavish adherence to abstraction, it is American conservatism.” —Ronald Reagan

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 11:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Amy Welborn has some take downs on the "discovery" of Jesus' tomb.

Some highlights:
"Because, you know - using DNA tests to determine if remains belong to Jesus, Mary or Mary Magdalene is...totally doable. And of course, Jesus (Yeshua, Joshua...etc..etc..) or Mary (actually Miriam...) weren't common names in the 1st century. Or, as my husband pointed out last night, "It's not like Judah wasn't the name of the whole, you know..people..." "

Quoting Scripture Scholar Ben Witherington: "there is no independent DNA control sample to compare to what was garnered from the bones in this tomb. By this I mean that the most the DNA evidence can show is that several of these folks are inter-related. Big deal. We would need an independent control sample from some member of Jesus' family to confirm that these were members of Jesus' family. We do not have that at all. ... Several of these ossuaries have very popular and familiar early Jewish names. As the statistics above show, the names Joseph and Joshua (Jesus) were two of the most common names in all of early Judaism. So was Mary. Indeed both Jesus’ mother and her sister were named Mary. This is the ancient equivalent of finding adjacent tombs with the names Smith and Jones. No big deal. "

Quoting Archaeologist Dr. Leen Ritmeyer:

Will the world take heed to the comments of Amos Kloner, quoted in the Jerusalem Post who said that the documentary’s claims were “impossible” and “nonsense” and that there was “no likelihood that Jesus and his relatives had a family tomb in Jerusalem”? Jesus and his family hailed from Nazareth in Galilee, as anyone with a shred of Bible knowledge knows and there was no reason for them to have a family tomb in Jerusalem. It is worth knowing that Jacobovici and Cameron are not original in their claim. The assertion that the family tomb of Jesus has been located was made in James D. Tabor, “The Jesus Dynasty, The Hidden Story of Jesus, His Royal family, and the Birth of Christianity” (2006).

Watch this theory go the way of all such contrived “sizzling” and “staggering” “discoveries”!

As Amy points out, the surest sign of Easter approaching is someone claiming to debunk Christianity!

UPDATE (10:56 AM): Check out this Breitbart article where scholars give this "discovery" no credibility at all. As the article notes, this exact claim had already been debunked.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 10:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

"Citizens by birth or choice of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you, in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of Patriotism, more than any appellation derived from local discriminations."

-- George Washington (Farewell Address, 19 September 1796)

Reference: George Washington: A Collection, W.B. Allen, ed. (515)

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 9:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I went to the Rite of Election of Catechumens and Call to Continuing Conversion of Candidates in Dover this morning. Despite the long and confusing title, it's merely the ritual in which those entering into full Communion with the Catholic Church are presented to and accepted by the Bishop.

In his closing remarks at the end of the service, Bishop Saltarelli thanked and welcomed those coming into the Church and then asked "But what's wrong with you? Don't you read the papers?" He went on to discuss how those entering into Church at a time when She has so many wounds and issues, and largely self-inflicted ones at that, are showing great faith, not in a person or a human institution, but in Jesus Christ by seeking to become part of His Church.

For me, that sums up part of why I believe in the Catholic Church so strongly. Forget all the enemies the Church has over the years and look at all the damage we've done to ourselves, and yet we're still here. We're still the largest Christian Church in the world; we're still teaching the same doctrine as we were when we were first founded. All of this has been accomplished despite so many self-inflicted wounds: becoming too involved in secular matters, some horrible Popes, covering up of crimes against children, just to name a few obvious failings. And yet we're still here, approaching 2000 years of existence. As I've said to friends before, if that doesn't prove God's watching over us, what can?

It was also encouraging today to see the number of young people entering Church. I'm not just talking young adults. (The candidate I'm sponsoring is just 22, less than a year out of college.) There were teenagers (and even younger) signing their name in the Book of the Elect, meaning they were unbaptized and seeking to enter the Church.

Bright days are ahead for the Church. I've long felt that. We're going through a rough patch right now and things can only get better. Seeing those entering the Church and how happy they were to be doing so just reaffirmed that feeling all the more.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 2:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

OpinionJournal - Potomac Watch

Mr. Lott's beachfront property in Pascagoula--one of three homes he owned--was swept away entirely by Hurricane Katrina's waters. Like many Gulf Coast residents, Mr. Lott was soon reminded by his insurer, State Farm, that his policy only covered wind damage--not flood damage. The senator surely knew that, which is why he'd also purchased federal flood insurance. According to his flood policy that was in effect when Katrina hit, he was covered up to $350,000 in flood damages, and he presumably collected in full. (Sen. Lott's office didn't return my call.)

State Farm, however, refused to cough up, inspiring Mr. Lott to embark on a campaign ripped straight out of the Democratic playbook. First was to pay a call to the favorite mob squad of the left, the plaintiffs' bar. Quicker than you can say "tort reform," Dickie Scruggs, the legal kingpin who engineered Mississippi's tobacco shakedown, was representing Mr. Lott in a high-profile lawsuit against State Farm.
Mr. Lott probably didn't have to do much special pleading, since Mr. Scruggs is his brother-in-law, and had also suffered Katrina damage. Mr. Scruggs is also a pal of Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood, who within a few weeks of Katrina had filed a lawsuit against insurers over their "unconscionable" decision to not pay for damage they didn't cover. By December of 2005, the Lott-Scruggs-Hood triangle was proving a gale force storm for insurers.

For his part, Mr. Lott has been busy cranking up the pressure in Washington. Not that he didn't give fair warning. In July of last year, he placed a call to Chuck Chamness, the CEO of the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, to let the industry know what was coming. Mr. Chamness later sent a letter to Mr. Lott, summing up the call. The key passage: "Your comment that you will dedicate your next term of office to 'bringing down State Farm and the industry' through all means available to you, including legislation designed to harm the property/casualty insurance industry, was very unsettling, to say the least."

Mr. Lott has proven as good as his word. Since Katrina, he's slipped legislation into a Homeland Security bill requiring the inspector general of that agency to investigate insurers. He's put forward a bill requiring insurers to "state clearly" on their policies' "front page" what they don't cover. He's dropped another bill that would compel insurers to release more information about vehicles damaged by Katrina. Word is he's even been looking into the industry's tax rates.

But his big bomb came last week, when he introduced legislation that would end the insurance industry's exemption from certain federal antitrust regulations. Mr. Lott suggests this is to keep big insurance players from conspiring to do evil things, though the reality is that the exemption mainly benefits small insurers who use it to pool statistically reliable data. So in his wrath, Mr. Lott may end up kneecapping many of the hundreds of small insurers who offer some real competition to the so-called conspiring giants.

This shows at least three things: the damage big government can do to private industry, how vindictive malicious politicians can be with that power and that I was right to have never trusted Trent Lott.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 4:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Townhall.com::The Democrat's Infectious Disease::By George Will

This editorial ran in this morning's News-Journal and I just wanted to make sure people saw it. I found it really excellent, including the first god defense of the deal cut with North Korea regarding their pursuit of nuclear weapons. I still think they'll violate it now, but at least there's a good deal of stick in there to go along with the carrot:

The new agreement might not bring Pyongyang to heel. It is, however, unlike that of 1994, in three particulars.

First, China was infuriated by North Korea's October nuclear test which fizzled but expressed defiance of China. So now China seems amenable to serious pressure on its mendicant neighbor, which is substantially dependent on China for food and energy.

Second, the new agreement, like the 1994 pact, is an attempt to modify behavior using bribery. But under the 1994 agreement, North Korea got the bribe -- energy assistance -- before being required to change its behavior. Under the new agreement, North Korea will receive just 5 percent of promised oil -- 50,000 of 1 million tons of heavy fuel oil -- before it must fulfill, in 60 days, the first of the many commitments it has made.

Third, the administration believes it found, in Banco Delta Asia, a lever that moved Pyongyang. The Macau bank was pressured into freezing 52 accounts holding $24 million -- yes, million, not billion -- of North Korean assets because Pyongyang has been using them for illicit purposes. If Pyongyang flinched from being deprived of $24 million -- less than Americans spend on archery equipment in a month -- Pyongyang's low pain threshold suggests how fragile, and hence perhaps how containable, that regime is.

Given that George Will is far from a Bush apologist (he seems to dislike the whole family), this is meaningful and gives me hope that perhaps some good will come of the deal.

On the Democrats and Iraq, Will writes:

Regarding Iraq, the Democratic-controlled Congress could do what Democrats say a Democratic president would do -- withdraw U.S. forces. A president could simply order that; Congress could defund military operations in Iraq. Congressional Democrats are, however, afraid to do that because they lack the courage of their (professed) conviction that Iraq would be made tranquil by withdrawal of U.S. forces.

So they aim to hamstring the president with restrictions on the use of the military. The restrictions ostensibly are concerned with preparedness but actually are designed to prevent deployments to Iraq.
...
In that welter of criteria there are reasons why the court will not rescue congressional Democrats from facing the logic of their posturing. They lack the will to exercise their clearly constitutional power to defund the war. And they lack the power to achieve that end by usurping the commander in chief's powers to conduct a war.

If the Democrats had the courage of the convictions, they'd defund the operations in Iraq. Since military power, beyond the power of the purse, is given exclusively to the President, the Democrats have two choices: cut off funding for the war or pass meaningless resolutions that create the appearance of doing something, but accomplish nothing beyond the killing of trees. Given their performance up to now, I have little reason to suspect that the Democrats will contribute anything more to this situation than further Amazonian deforestation, making Al Gore even angrier.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 4:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

There are claims that the story of Amillia Taylor surviving despite being born after only 21 weeks gestation will transform the debate over abortion in America. I wish I was as optimistic about that as those who make that claim.

I've felt for a long time that the debate over abortion is not about the right to life of the child as much as about the benefits it provides to the mother or other people in the child's life. (I say "other people" because of the number of abortions that happen due to pressure from the child's father, or the recent story of the 13 year old in Italy who was forced to have an abortion, against her will, by her parents.)

I read an article a long time ago that compared attitudes toward abortion and slavery. Essentially the author argued that those in support of legal slavery were aware of the inhumanity and cruelty inherent in the institution of slavery, but supported it due to the benefits it provided. They had a problem with slavery, but liked the lifestyle it made possible, so they looked away from the negative side of it. The author (I completely forget who) argued that a similar attitude exists towards abortion: people who stop to think about it know it's wrong, but like what abortion makes possible: greater career options for women, more sexual freedom, etc. So they look away from the obvious fact that a child (at least one) is losing their life in every abortion.

It's this attitude that pro-lifers have to overcome. And that's something I don't know how to do. That sense of entitlement/selfishness (for lack of a better word) is very ingrained in our society. From fast food to the Internet, we want what we want and we want it now and we won't let anything get in the way of it. (I know I'm certainly guilty of that problem.) Abortion is a symptom of that greater issue of our culture. We need to fix that root problem before we have any hope of converting people's hearts and minds on the rights of unborn children.

Cross posted at Friends of Catholic Exchange

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 3:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

"... [The Judicial Branch] may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments."

-- Alexander Hamilton (Federalist No. 78, 1788)

Reference: The Federalist

I foudn this quote interesting given that Hamilton was the Founding Father generally most in favor of a large and powerful central government. I wonder how he'd react to the Judicial Branch's powers nowadays.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 3:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Sports is a better form of entertainment than Science Fiction

His points summarized:

1) Sports is real time.
2) Sports has a larger fan base which provides for more interaction between fans.
3) Sports has better rivalries.
4) Sports has more constancy. (This one's a little weak now, with people writing sequels to other author's works. For example, how many Foundation series books have come out since Asimov's death?)
5) Sports is pointless.
6) Sports does promote mind exercise. (He admits sci-fi likely wins this point, but sports is not bereft of it with the focus on statistics.)
7) Sporting events have a stand-alone quality
8) Sports has better public displays of affection. (Not a reference to players patting each other on the butt. Rather, a discussion of baseball caps and the like worn by fans.)
9) Sports has better spin-off entertainment.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 3:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I just removed a post from yesterday where I unintentionally offended a friend. I am sorry for that. I can only assure him that no offense was intended and that it was merely a poor attempt at a joke which went horribly wrong.

As I've said many times in my life, "I'm an idiot, not a jerk." I'm sorry.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 10:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Today the Catholic Church celebrates the feast of the Chair of Saint Peter, remembering Christ choosing Peter as the apostle who would lead His Church.

Naturally, the Gospel for today's Mass is Matthew 16:13-19, the story of Simon declaring Jesus to be the Messiah, the Son of the Living God, Jesus renaming Simon to Peter and declaring that He would build His Church on Peter.

It's sometimes argued that the Rock Jesus refers to is not Peter himself, but his statement of faith that Jesus is indeed the Messiah and Son of God. This fails for a few reasons. One, Jesus renames Peter. In the Old Testament, this is a sign of a new Covenental relationship. (Think Abram becoming Abraham or Jacob becoming Israel.) Also, Peter was a brand new name at the time and Peter means "rock." (Jimmy Akin has some good articles on this front, as well as some helpful links to other articles on the same topic. See here and here.)

Another point in favor of the uniqueness of the Petrine ministry is Christ's promise of the Keys of Heaven to Peter alone, as noted in the above Gospel reading. While he makes a promise to Peter in Mt 16:19 that "Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven," he also makes a similar promise to all of the apostles in Mt 18:18: "Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (This one of the biblical supports for the sacrament of Confession.) Only Peter, though, is promised the Keys of Heaven.

What do the Keys of Heaven signify, though? I think popular culture would immediately think of Saint Peter standing in front of the Pearly Gates seeing who does and doesn't get it, a kind of Heavenly bellhop. A good idea when interpreting the Bible, though, is to see where else a similar notion is contained in the Bible. Where do we see keys a symbol?

Isaiah 22:19-22:

I will thrust you from your office and pull you down from your station.

On that day I will summon my servant Eliakim, son of Hilkiah;

I will clothe him with your robe, and gird him with your sash, and give over to him your authority. He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah.

I will place the key of the House of David on his shoulder; when he opens, no one shall shut, when he shuts, no one shall open.

The keys of the House of David are clearly a reference to the authority of the House of David. We can see that Peter, and Peter alone, separate from the other Apostles, is being given the authority of Heaven. In fact, this reading is used as the Mid-morning reading for Daytime Prayer in the Liturgy of the Hours on this feast.

Additionally, naming Simon "The Rock" in some way unites Peter with the mission of God. In Deuteronomy 32 alone, God is referred to as "Rock" at least five times. Jesus must have had a special calling for Peter to give him such a name that those familiar with the Torah would immediately associate with God.

Further, when reading the Gospels and Acts, Peter is always listed first among the Apostles, speaks for them, and clearly has a leadership role among them. That leadership role is continued today by his successors who sit upon the Chair of Peter.

Read more about the Chair of Peter:
Catholic Encyclopedia
Pope Benedict's General Audience Address last year on this feast

Crossposted at Friends of Catholic Exchange

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 12:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

How do cats know who doesn't like them?

More Get Fuzzy

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 9:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Today is George Washington's actual birthday, although we celebrated it on Monday. (It's not President's Day, people. It's Washington's Birthday.) I know I beat this to death, but it's true that without George Washington, there would not be a United States today. No one else could have united the Continental Army, or kept the country together during its tumultuous beginning. No one had the stature or the trust of the American people. He truly was The Father of our Country and the Indispensible Man.

He was elected President in 1789 and considered refusing re-election before the election of 1792, but it was made clear to him that his country still needed him. He retired again after his Vice President John Adams was elected to succeed him in 1796. Without Washington's calming influence, the nation became very divided again, to the point that he considered coming out of retirement again for the election in 1800. He was told that not even his presence could calm the country at this point, so he dropped the idea. This was rendered moot by his death in 1799.

The leader of a nation voluntarily stepping down had rarely been seen. Someone with that power giving it up without coercion or pressure sent a strong reminder that the power in this government rested with the people, not with any one man. So powerful was this example that no President was so arrogant as to run for a third full term for almost 150 years after Washington's stepping down, despite there being no formal barrier to doing so. (So strong was the outrage over this break with tradition, that a constitutional amendment was passed to prevent any one from running for a third full term.)

There may be no greater example of service to country than George Washington. We wouldall profit from more closely following his example.

If you ever get the opportunity, be sure to visit Mount Vernon, George Washington's home to learn more about him as a leader and as a man. They recently opened some new exhibits that provide a great deal of detail about the man.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 12:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

It will always be my principle, in all spheres of religious knowledge and in all theological or biblical questions, to find out first of all the traditional teaching of the Church, and on this basis to judge the findings of contemporary scholarship.

--Blessed John XXIII

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 5:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I attended Mass this morning for Ash Wednesday and the priest gave an interesting homily discussing how Lent is really a compression of our entire lives into a few weeks.

Ash Wednesday serves not just as a reminder of our future death, but also of our birth. "Dust thou art, and to dust thou shalt return..." We rise from the "dust" of this earth, only to return to it again after our death. So, in a sense Ash Wednesday represents our birth.

During the time of Lent, we live our life and walk with Christ on his Way of the Cross, making sacrifices for others, trying to go more in union with God and His Will for us. It's why the Church requires abstinence from meat and fasting on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday, and abstinence from meat on all other Fridays in Lent. We're also encouraged to make some additional efforts to improve ourselves during this time. While many people focus on the sacrificial aspect of this, "giving something up" for Lent, it can also be done positively. Pray more, give more alms to the poor, focus on a positive character trait and try to bring it out more. We try to improve ourselves through the season of Lent as we try through our lives. Just as Christ made sacrifices for others throughout His life, so we too must do so in our lives.

We come to Good Friday, where we remember Christ's Passion and death on the Cross. We fast and abstain from meat on this day, dying to ourselves, to remind ourselves again of what He underwent for us. Good Friday and Holy Saturday are the only days of the year when Mass and the other sacraments are not offered (with an exception for those preparing to enter the Church at the Easter vigil), as Christ is in the tomb, cut off from Man due to our sins.

The Church returns resplendently at the Easter Vigil, supposed to begin after dark as Christ rises from the tomb and enters his glorified body, just as we will gain glorified bodies after He returns again and creates a new Heaven and a new Earth. And if you haven't ever done it, go to an Easter Vigil Mass, preferably somewhere cut off from civilization and somewhere that does the full list of readings, so you can get the strongest effect. The readings selected are just amazing, and really do lay out all of salvation history. If you don't get it after reading them, you may just never get it.

So, even though Lent is rightly seen as a time of mourning and penance, it still points us joyfully toward Easter Sunday: the day when all is made new again and our penance and sacrifices will be rewarded.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 2:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

18 Doughty Street : Politics for Adults | On Demand

Use link above if embedding doesn't work for you

Hat Tip: The Corner

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 12:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Leading Atmospheric Scientist: Earth Was Warmer and Seas Higher 125,000 Years Ago | NewsBusters.org

Approximately 125,000 years ago, the Earth was around three to five degrees Celsius warmer on average than it is today and sea levels were four to six meters higher. The ice sheets covering Greenland's land mass have trapped a significant amount of that water that used to be in the sea, thereby lowering sea levels, Susan Solomon, senior scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (and the co-chair of the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) told attendees at the American Association for the Advancement of Science taking place in San Francisco.

...
If the land ice on Greenland were to melt completely, the sea levels could rise six or seven meters again, but the current scientific models indicate it will take thousands of years. Both land and sea ice around Greenland are currently melting. (Sea ice is also melting, but it doesn't raise sea levels because it's already in the water.)

...
"It would take centuries, if not millennia, to get a four to six meter rise" in sea levels, she said. Global temperatures would have to be raised by 1.9 to 4.6 degrees Celsius and be kept that way for several centuries, she added.

Talk about your Inconvenient Truths!

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 11:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

"His Example is now complete, and it will teach wisdom and virtue to magistrates, citizens, and men, not only in the present age, but in future generations, as long as our history shall be read." - John Adams on George Washington

"Speak when you are angry, and you will make the best speech you will ever regret." - Ambrose Bierce

"Make yourself an honest man, and then you may be sure that there is one less scoundrel in the world." - Thomas Carlyle

"Principle - particularly moral principle - can never be a weathervane, spinning around this way and that with the shifting winds of expediency. Moral principle is a compass forever fixed and forever true." - Edward R. Lyman

"If there is one thing upon this earth that mankind love and admire better than another, it is a brave man - it is the man who dares to look the devil in the face and tell him he is a devil." - James A. Garfield

"I do not condemn Clinton and other Democratic presidential candidates - Chris Dodd, Joe Biden and John Edwards - for voting for the war because I would have done the same. I fault them, though, for passing the blame to Bush as the guy who misled them. They all had sufficient knowledge to question the administration's arguments, and they did not do so." - Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen

"There was one refreshing aspect to [Barack] Obama's announcement: It was nice to see a man call a press conference this week to announce something other than he was the father of Anna Nicole Smith's baby." - Ann Coulter

"Of course, we wouldn't need oil at all if there were a law mandating that auto makers manufacture perpetual-motion machines!" - James Taranto

Jay Leno: [Monday was] Presidents' Day - or for those of you in California, el Presidente Day! ... Al Gore will be speaking at this year's Democratic Convention - or as we call it, the Oscars. ... When Al Gore presented the "Best Album" award to the Red Hot Chili Peppers at the Grammys, Al Gore said because of global warming, the Chili Peppers are now 20 percent hotter than they were 20 years ago. ... In the latest count, there are now 25 politicians running for president - and 15 of them also claim to be the father of Anna Nicole Smith's baby. ... Al-Qa'ida released another video tape from their number-two man. This one had a shocking revelation: "The great Satan will soon taste unspeakable suffering from our hands. Oh, and by the way, I am the father of Anna Nicole's baby." ... Congress is now trying to pass a bill that would require health insurers to cover more costs for the mentally ill. Once again, Congress looking out for themselves. So typical!

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 11:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Thursday, March 1st: Dawn Eden - Journey towards Understanding: Our Sexuality as Gift

Dawn Eden is a deputy news editor at the New York Daily News. A former rock historian, Eden has her own blog, The Dawn Patrol, and her writings have appeared in numerous national publications. The Thrill of the Chaste is Eden's first book.

7:00 pm Gathering/Social Time
7:30 pm Presentation
8:15 pm Discussion/Q&A

Location: Catherine Rooney’s, Trolley Square, Wilmington

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 11:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Happy Day after Washington's Birthday!

"His Example is now complete, and it will teach wisdom and virtue to magistrates, citizens, and men, not only in the present age, but in future generations, as long as our history shall be read."

-- John Adams (message to the U.S. Senate, 19 December 1799)

Reference: Life of Washington, John Marshal, vol. 5

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 8:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

(Feb 15th) 1643 Lt. Col. Johan Printz, described as "weighing 400 lbs. and taking 3 drinks at every meal", arrived in Wilmington as Governor of New Sweden. Also described as being between six and seven feet tall, the Indians called him "Big Tub".

No real purpose to posting this. I jsut found it amusing.

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 5:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

For the lovely Miss Anonymous Opinion

Posted by Paul Smith Jr at 2:13 PM | Permalink |