Okay, first the Secularists tell us that we can't display certain symbols of Christmas because they are religious. Let me get this straight:
Christmas celebrates an actual historical event, the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. Whether you believe He is God or not, the fact that He lived is indisputable.
Christmas is a Federal holiday.
However, it is against the law to show representations of a historical event which is so important that it is a Federal holiday.
How many Federal holidays are there? Not that many. I think New Year's, the birth of Martin Luther King, Jr., Washington's Birthday, Memorial Day, 4th of July, Labor Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving and Christmas. I come up with 9. Did I miss any? And why is it a Federal holiday? Because the great majority of citizens (and illegal aliens I imagine) celebrate this day.
So, Christmas is part of an elite group of Federal holidays yet we cannot put a Nativity scene on public property unless certain conditions are met. Well, some say if we do that, we are endorsing a religion. Not so! We are merely saying that this is what happened on Christmas, the Federal Holiday. No one is saying you have to believe this or worship Jesus. No one should be offended either.
Then, we have the other extreme. Before Thanksgiving, all the towns had their Christmas decorations up. This is disturbing to those of us who are religious. We have not even entered the season of Advent. This season is for reflection and getting ready for the birth of the Christ child. The actual season of Christmas is from Dec. 25 until at least Jan. 6. It is insulting that the towns don’t even respect the holiday enough to celebrate it when it should be. It is ludicrous (as ludicrous as those who so dearly want to be politically correct that they put up Menorahs for weeks and weeks, often long after the holiday has passed). And when it is time to celebrate, the decorations are down! Go figure.
I guess we can only pray that America will return to its roots and Christmas will be celebrated properly.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Sunday, November 25, 2007
A Forgotten Sin
Next Sunday is the First Sunday of Advent. Unfortunately, most people today do not observe Advent and start to party at Thanksgiving (some at Halloween!) and do not stop until Super Bowl Sunday.
All of this causes us to commit the sin of gluttony. The Catholic Encyclopedia defines it as “the excessive indulgence in food and drink.” The Catholic Church classifies gluttony as a capital sin:
1866 Vices can be classified according to the virtues they oppose, or also be linked to the capital sins which Christian experience has distinguished, following St. John Cassian and St. Gregory the Great. They are called "capital" because they engender other sins, other vices. They are pride, avarice, envy, wrath, lust, gluttony, and sloth or acedia.
Which makes one wonder why this isn’t spoken about more frequently. Probably all of us are guilty of this sin at one time or another especially during the holiday season. Do you think it is because our ministers and priests do not want to talk about it because then we can all point and say, “You are just as guilty. You should be setting an example for us”. After all, no one wants to admit their own faults.
This also begs the question of why overeating is such a big deal. As usual, God knows us better than we know ourselves. He knows that this over indulgence is bad for us. Too many rich foods and too much alcohol are just not healthy. This is connected to the Firth Commandment of not to kill. When we abuse our bodies, we are “killing” ourselves. Plus, using a little self-control is good for our souls.
Before the next party, think about gluttony.
All of this causes us to commit the sin of gluttony. The Catholic Encyclopedia defines it as “the excessive indulgence in food and drink.” The Catholic Church classifies gluttony as a capital sin:
1866 Vices can be classified according to the virtues they oppose, or also be linked to the capital sins which Christian experience has distinguished, following St. John Cassian and St. Gregory the Great. They are called "capital" because they engender other sins, other vices. They are pride, avarice, envy, wrath, lust, gluttony, and sloth or acedia.
Which makes one wonder why this isn’t spoken about more frequently. Probably all of us are guilty of this sin at one time or another especially during the holiday season. Do you think it is because our ministers and priests do not want to talk about it because then we can all point and say, “You are just as guilty. You should be setting an example for us”. After all, no one wants to admit their own faults.
This also begs the question of why overeating is such a big deal. As usual, God knows us better than we know ourselves. He knows that this over indulgence is bad for us. Too many rich foods and too much alcohol are just not healthy. This is connected to the Firth Commandment of not to kill. When we abuse our bodies, we are “killing” ourselves. Plus, using a little self-control is good for our souls.
Before the next party, think about gluttony.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
This Isn’t Heaven
We are so blessed in this country. We have plenty of food. Yes, we have homeless people but none of the beggar filled streets you find in other countries. But who among us does not desire more? Who does not think his life is as good as it could be?
What we often forget is that this life is not supposed to be without trials and tribulations. We pray to the Blesses Mother, “to thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve”. Banished. Who would even think we are banished? Banished from where?
What that means is that we are not in heaven and have not had the Beatific Vision. We have to live our life here and suffer until that day when we are called to our glory. We are sinners and not worthy of being in the presence of God.
But we have become spoiled children and want everything and want it now. We do not want to carry the cross, which the Father gives us for our own good. We have to focus on the fact that we aren’t in heaven yet.
What we often forget is that this life is not supposed to be without trials and tribulations. We pray to the Blesses Mother, “to thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve”. Banished. Who would even think we are banished? Banished from where?
What that means is that we are not in heaven and have not had the Beatific Vision. We have to live our life here and suffer until that day when we are called to our glory. We are sinners and not worthy of being in the presence of God.
But we have become spoiled children and want everything and want it now. We do not want to carry the cross, which the Father gives us for our own good. We have to focus on the fact that we aren’t in heaven yet.
Sunday, November 04, 2007
A-Rod, We Hardly Knew Ye
The big story this past week around here has been, “Where will A-Rod end up?” The speculation has been endless.
Now, I understand why ballplayers want to make as much money as possible. Who doesn’t? But I really find all this moving from team to team to team to be quite disconcerting. It’s gotten to the point where DHL made a commercial based on just this. The player in question is Kenny Lofton.
I miss the days when a player stayed with their team for most of their career. Of course, this would mean that maybe some players would make a couple of million less a year in some circumstances. It could also mean that some owners might have to dig a little deeper to keep their stars. I also understand that some franchises in smaller markets just don’t have the resources to keep their top stars.
However, in the long run, I think it would benefit the game if players moved around less. How can fans become emotionally invested in a team and individual players when they don’t know who will be around the next season? How can you cheer for Player Doe and then next year Player Doe is on your archrival’s team? And vice-versa. As a Met fan, I don’t know how I would react emotionally if Alex Rodriguez signed with the Mets. I was booing him this past season and now I should cheer him? Very strange feelings arise.
I am glad that some teams are trying to make their young stars happy. The Mets gave David Wright and Jose Reyes very good contracts in the hopes of keeping them around for years. I believe the Phillies have done the same thing with Ryan Howard and Chase Utley.
I sure don’t want to go back to the days of no free agency. I just want some give and take on both sides so we can say, “David Wright is in his 15th season as a Met. David Wright is retiring after playing for the Mets for his entire career”. Aren’t those words sweet?
Now, I understand why ballplayers want to make as much money as possible. Who doesn’t? But I really find all this moving from team to team to team to be quite disconcerting. It’s gotten to the point where DHL made a commercial based on just this. The player in question is Kenny Lofton.
I miss the days when a player stayed with their team for most of their career. Of course, this would mean that maybe some players would make a couple of million less a year in some circumstances. It could also mean that some owners might have to dig a little deeper to keep their stars. I also understand that some franchises in smaller markets just don’t have the resources to keep their top stars.
However, in the long run, I think it would benefit the game if players moved around less. How can fans become emotionally invested in a team and individual players when they don’t know who will be around the next season? How can you cheer for Player Doe and then next year Player Doe is on your archrival’s team? And vice-versa. As a Met fan, I don’t know how I would react emotionally if Alex Rodriguez signed with the Mets. I was booing him this past season and now I should cheer him? Very strange feelings arise.
I am glad that some teams are trying to make their young stars happy. The Mets gave David Wright and Jose Reyes very good contracts in the hopes of keeping them around for years. I believe the Phillies have done the same thing with Ryan Howard and Chase Utley.
I sure don’t want to go back to the days of no free agency. I just want some give and take on both sides so we can say, “David Wright is in his 15th season as a Met. David Wright is retiring after playing for the Mets for his entire career”. Aren’t those words sweet?
Thursday, November 01, 2007
New Terminology
I have decided that the expression “pro-choice” and the word abortion are just too ambiguous. From now on I will say that someone is in favor of letting women kill their unborn child. Abortion will be killing an unborn child. If there is nothing wrong with this, why not say what it really is.
Planned Parenthood can advise women, “Don’t worry; we can kill your unborn child”. Just say it. What are you afraid of?
Planned Parenthood can advise women, “Don’t worry; we can kill your unborn child”. Just say it. What are you afraid of?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
