jump to navigation

I agree with this! May 31, 2011

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, Dallas Diocese, Ecumenism, episcopate, foolishness, General Catholic, North Deanery, scandals, silliness.
comments closed

From Rorate Caeli, which at times descends into scorn but often strikes just the right sardonic tone:

Summary: In the most liberal religious building in Italy, the most useless debate society in history keeps on as if nothing had changed.
From the Holy See Press Office:
The Anglican – Roman Catholic International Commission has completed the first meeting of its new phase (ARCIC III) at the Monastery of Bose in northern Italy (May 17-27, 2011). The Commission, chaired by the Most Reverend David Moxon (Anglican Archbishop of the New Zealand Dioceses) and the Most Reverend Bernard Longley (Roman Catholic Archbishop of Birmingham) comprises eighteen theologians from a wide range of backgrounds across the world. [If you wish to waste your time, keep reading it here.]
The Anglican side included a delightful provocation: a “bishopess” (the “Right Reverend” Linda Nicholls, Area “Bishop” for Trent-Durham, “Diocese” of Toronto) and a “canoness” (“Canon” Alyson Barnett-Cowan, pictured above in Saint Peter’s with another Anglican “canon”- image source). The ladies, of course, helped the number of ordained clerics on the Anglican side reach the total of zero.
And on that, I’m out for the day!  I’m sick as a dog, I have no voice!  We were all sick all weekend!  A little suffering for the Lord!

Please pray for this family! May 31, 2011

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, General Catholic, Interior Life, Latin Mass, sadness.
comments closed

My readers who assist at Mater Dei will already know this very sad story, but for those who don’t……..A traditional Catholic family who assists at the FSSP parish in the Oklahoma City area was given a great Cross as the tornados tore through that part of the country.  The mom got herself (pregnant, 4 mo.) and her three children in the bathtub, but it was a powerful tornado and the bathtube wasn’t enough.  The 15 month old died, as did the 3 year old boy.  The 5 year old girl and mom are in the hospital (or were, I don’t have an update since Sunday).  Dad was away running his harvesting business, likely making the great trek that runs from south Texas in April to Saskatchewan in September.

Please pray for this family, the Hamil’s.  They attend St. Damien’s FSSP parish in Edmund, OK. 

WOW!!!!!! May 31, 2011

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, foolishness, North Deanery, sadness, scandals.
comments closed

And I mean, WOW!!  Voris pulls no punches in addressing certain individuals in Catholic media who allow themselves to be heavily constrained in what they say or report by the USCCB or various bishops.  I know some back story on this that I cannot reveal, but Voris is not just talking about the Distorter or America Magazine – he’s talking about people you hear on EWTN alot and see at many conferences.  I can also say that I have independent confirmation that what Voris addresses, especially from about 4:15 on in the video, is very true.

I think it needs to be said that there is an ongoing, concerted effort to silence Michael Voris and his media company, St. Michael’s media.  I can’t say more now, hopefully I can, later.  Michael Voris is like an Old Testament prophet, he is shining a light on aspects of the Church that have been very damaging but little talked about.  He is goring some very sacred cows.  And there is getting to be more and more pushback.  If you value his work, some prayers for his apostolate would definitely be in order.

And there are also elements in the Episocpate in this country, and elsewhere, who strongly support Voris’ work.  So, to some extent, this conflict between Michael Voris and others in the media can be seen as a proxy fight between bishops over the present status and future direction of the Church, between the status quo and the burgeoning new orthodox movement.  As Voris says, you may want to be careful who you listen to or read.  My personal view is that one is far better off reading the Saints, or great treatments on our Faith from the 19th Century or prior, than reading most current day authors.  The Saints we know are in Heaven, while writers like Gueranger and Lasance are very well proven.

Ecclesia Semper Reformanda

Oh, one final note.  It’s always a difficult situation when one makes a livelihood from the Church as a lay person.  Motives can get confused.  What is good for one’s pocketbook can influence how the Faith is then presented.  If some of these media folks seem to have ignored some critical issues because it is in their economic interest, that may not be a conscious decision.  It’s always difficult to keep our motives pure.  There are some folks in the Catholic media who are bought and paid for, in my opinion (think Michigan, and crappy pizza), and who thus don’t have alot of credibility with me.  But there are others who I think try to do a good job but who may allow their motives to get confused by just those issues Voris mentioned – access to lucrative conferences, support from key ecclesial elements, etc.  It could make a difference of tens of thousands of dollars a year, perhaps much more than that, to their livelihoods.  And that can exercise a powerful influence over which topics one chooses to address, or not.

So, you say you want lay leadership of the Church? May 31, 2011

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, foolishness, General Catholic, North Deanery, Papa.
comments closed

There are voices in the Church who demand that the Church radically its model of Authority.  They demand that bishops be ‘elected’ by popular vote of the laity, the same for the Pope, they want ‘pastors to be accountable to the laity, etc.’  This view is ignorant of history.  For, during much of the early Middle Ages, this was exactly the model of Authority the Church had, and it was a disaster!  The popular election of the Pope in Rome led to massive simony, or the buying and selling of Church offices.  The same was repeated at numerous bishoprics around Europe, where princes and potentates would sell Sees to the highest bidder.  It led to corruption, collapse of respect for Church leadership, and left the Papacy virtually destitute from roughly AD 900 until 1050.  This is the timeframe where many of the darkest tales of corruption and scandal in the Papacy, and the entire Episcopacy, come from.  After great struggle, two very holy Popes, St. Leo IX and Gregory VII, managed to change the election of Popes to being based on the College of Cardinals.  Simony took longer to stamp out in the broader episcopacy – it was still ongoing in various degrees throughout the Middle Ages.  It was a precipitate factor in the protestant revolt.

The reason why there are calls for this return to a failed model of Authority is that those doing the calling imagine that the Church they will wind up will be more to their liking.  I suspect they would be severely disappointed.  For, no matter how many bishops apostasize, or fail to live up to the high standards of their office, the Truth Christ reveals through His Church does not change.  God’s Grace has a way of winning out in spite of human corruption and our fallen nature.  And God has a way of working miraculous recoveries from the most destitute of circumstances.  The Church and Papacy looked almost broken at various times in the early Middle Age (or Dark Age), but God always raised up a Saint or an Abbot or Pope who would completely transform the situation. 

So, go on, prattle on about a more “representative church” with women bishops and fornicating priors and a Papacy brought low (made more “open and responsive”).  It’s been tried, failed, and did massive damage to the Church and to who knows how many individual souls.  I believe it is Divine Revelation, this present model of Church Authority that was developed centuries ago.

Increasing hostility towards Catholic homeschoolers? May 31, 2011

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, foolishness, General Catholic, North Deanery.
comments closed

There appears to be a growing hostility in certain quarters of the Church towards Catholic parents homeschooling their children.  Earlier this year, an official with the Diocese of Austin stated that Bishop Vasquez regarded homeschooling as a threat to Catholic schools.  Very recently, an article at Our Sunday Visitor quoted Fr. Peter Stravinskas, who made several dubious claims regarding Catholic education while attacking homeschooling.  These statements include:

  • Father Stravinskas told Our Sunday Visitor, including that the Church Fathers made clear that catechesis is the job of the whole Church, with the main responsibility resting on the shoulders of the pastor, not the parents [In today’s Church, this statement is patently false.  When it comes to the education of children, the catechesis the pastor may perform is almost universally outsourced to CCD staff or teachers in Catholic schools.  Over the last several decades, this is where we have seen the breakdown, where catechesis has been almost uniformally abysmal.  Many Catholic parents, fulfilling their responsibility to insure the Faith is transmitted to their children, have had to step into the breech.  If we had a situation as existed many years ago, with a parish priest leading and teaching Christian education of children, that would be one thing, but that situation has not existed in years.]
  • And Catholic parents who choose to home-school when there is a Catholic school available at least implicitly send the message that they do not trust the Church to educate their children properly, and the children get that message. [Sorry, we Catholic parents have seen too many children emerge from Catholic schools with a 2nd grade view of the Faith, if they are not actively turned against the Faith by teachers with a dissenting agenda.  I could quote numerous examples, but won’t, because we all know them.  But there are many other reasons not to send kids to Catholic schools other than concerns over the catechesis they will receive, cost being one, as well as exposure to certain elements that parents don’t wish their children to be exposed to.  How many Catholic schools teach sex ed and discuss contraception?]

    “On the same property where they go to church on Sunday is a school where the parents don’t wish to send them,” he said. 


    That leads to a subtle anti-clericalism, he said, because the children learn that priests cannot be counted on to hand on the faith.  [Once again, it’s not the priests handing on the Faith, but those delegated by the priest to do so.  Give me a break.  Shall I mention the local teacher who stated the reason the Church did not have women priests is because “the Pope is a male chauvinist pig?”  Or those who reject Church doctrine on contraception?  Or those who dress completely inappropriately at a school Mass?  Or those who state that the Church prior to Vatican II was very, very bad, but since then is getting better, more like protestants, who essentially have it right?  Shall I go on?  Regarding anti-clericalism, Stravinsky is making a huge assumption, apparently given the divine gift to peer into souls and know what parents are transmitting to their children.]

  •  It shows in what he sees as a dearth of vocations from home-school families. [Another patent falsehood.  I know of 5 men well advanced in seminary from local families alone, and that is just those I know, personally.  This Diocese already has one home school priest and is about to receive another.]
  • He also believes it is psychologically unhealthy for mothers to spend 24 hours a day with their children as they get older, and it’s academically nearly impossible for one person to teach all that is included in a modern high school curriculum [Both of these tired, ridiculous canards have been completely refuted by the evidence.  Homeschooled children are more well adjusted than their peers, and outperform their peers academically.  These statements are nothing more than bias.]

Now, obviously, Stravinsky has a bias, because he is head of the Catholic Education Foundation, an organization dedicated to supporting Catholic schools.  What is odd to me, however, is that in his statements ostensibly in support of Catholic schools, he could come up with few good reasons for parents to send their kids to those schools, and instead chose to focus on the alleged deficiencies of homeschooling.  But is this part of a broader effort?  There is no question that Catholic homeschooling is growing rapidly. It is difficult to find hard numbers, but it is estimated that of the 2 million children homeschooled in the US, one quarter are Catholic.  These children typically come from some of the most faithful Catholic families, many of whom would otherwise likely have sent their children to Catholic schools if they could afford it.  So, from the Catholic Education Foundation’s perspective, homeschooling is “robbing them” of 500,000 tuition paying students.  That’s $1.5 to $3 billion in “lost” revenue a year.  Given that poor financial condition of many Catholic schools today, that “lost” revenue could weigh heavily on some administrator’s minds.

But even more than that, is the issue of control.  I had written alot here, but I’ll just state that I am certain many of my homeschooling readers know what I mean by this.  It is very difficult for homeschooling parents to approach most parishes and ask that their child, who has not participated in the parish formation programs, to receive the Sacraments.  There are certain source materials used that, if mentioned, will immediately elicit a very hostile response, even though these materials were used for decades and are rock solid orthodox.  That raises the issue of just what is trying to be controlled, and what kind of Faith certain religious education directors and other staff are trying to communicate to children.  Unfortunately, there is serious division in the Church.  There are those who strive to adhere to all the Doctrine of the Faith, and those who do not, and many of those who do not hold positions of authority in parishes and chanceries.  And that is the root cause for many parents educating their children in the Faith.  That, and the dictum that comes from God that the prime duty of parents is to raise up new Saints for Him.  I take that duty deadly seriously.

I will note one final irony – there are certain voices in the Church who judge the ‘primacy of the individual conscience’ to be the highest moral authority, even to the extent that one’s conscience may arrive at a conclusion completely opposite from what the Church believes.  So, many parents have, after prayer and soul-searching, determined that homeschooling is the best for their children.  Isn’t that following their conscience?  Shouldn’t that be trumpeted?

h/t culturewarnotes

But I thought they LOVED the poor? May 27, 2011

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Basics, Dallas Diocese, disaster, episcopate, General Catholic, horror, sadness, scandals, sickness, Society.
comments closed

Isn’t the conventional wisdom that we are told by the media, but academia, by all our self-appointed ‘elites,’ including millions of those who show up at Mass on Sunday, is that the Democrats love the poor, and the Republicans hate them?  Isn’t the story that voting for a Republican is tantamount to desiring the mass slaughter of millions of the poor?  Isn’t that basically the story we’re told?  We’ve recently had the story of a de-frocked priest and Marquette University professor lambasting Archbishop Dolan for having the temerity to support a Republican Congressional initiative (the ‘Ryan plan’) to stave off pending fiscal disaster in this country, calling Dolan’s support a ‘criminal act’, and something totally in defiance of what Jesus taught.  I could name a host of other examples, but you get the point – this is what we’re told constantly. 

But there is something, apparently, that the saintly democrats love more than the poor, and that is abortion.  Recently, the state of Indiana passed a law completely defunding Planned Parenthood.  Planned Parenthood can no longer receive state Medicaid payouts.  Many other states are considering similar measures.  And so how does the Obama Administration respond to this threat to their number one constituency?  They threaten the poor of Indiana – by claiming that the federal government will shut off ALL Medicaid funding for Indiana if Planned Barrenhood funding is not reinstated:

The Obama administration is raising serious objections to a new Indiana law that cuts off state and federal money for Planned Parenthood clinics providing health care to low-income women on Medicaid….

Federal officials have 90 days to act but may feel pressure to act sooner because IN is already enforcing its law, which took effect on May 10, and because legislators in other states are working on similar measures

If a state Medicaid program is not in compliance with federal law and regulations, federal officials can take corrective action, including “the total or partial withholding” of federal Medicaid money. The mere threat of such a penalty is often enough to get states to comply. Actually imposing the penalty would, in many cases, hurt the very people whom Medicaid is intended to help.

Administration officials said the IN law imposed impermissible restrictions on the freedom of Medicaid recipients to choose health care providers.

So, the Obama Administration is basically using terrorist tactics, blackmailing the State of Indiana over Planned Barrenhood funding, and revealing yet again that when the chips are down, when push comes to shove, there is nothing more central, more essential to the democrat party than continued support for abortion.  After all, money wins elections, and the poor don’t have much.  But abortionists do.  So the Obama Administration is prepared to cut off ALL Medicaid funding for ALL who need it in Indiana, in order to preserve funding for the critical, party sustaining sacrifices to the dark god Moloch, who completely controls the destinies of all demonrats and must be appeased at all costs!! Planned Parenthood.  And yet, conservatives hate the poor.  Indeed.

 Check out this stinging editorial from the Fort Wayne News Sentinel:

According to a statement approved by the White House, IN’s law is not needed because federal law already prohibits federal dollars from being spent on abortion. Furthermore, Medicaid does not allow “states to stop beneficiaries from getting care they need – like cancer screenings and preventive care – because their provider provides certain other services.”

“Certain other services” are abortions, in case the language is too subtle for you. The WH’s stance shows the big lie in the claim that government money won’t be used for them. Money is fungible – that is, one dollar is the same as any other. If the government gives money for things such as screenings and preventive care, that frees up PP to use its other dollars for abortions. [Yep, anyone with a brain can see that]

And forgive us the metaphor, but surrounding abortions with all those other “needed services” is a little like terrorists putting their hideouts in neighborhoods full of innocent civilians: Take us out if you dare, but be prepared for collateral damage. Why must those needed services be provided by PP? State officials have said they will make sure to provide them elsewhere.

One of the premier lies told by Planned Barrenhood and its supporters over and over and over is that PB performs essential medical services to the community that simply aren’t available elsewhere.  Jill Stanek points out that there are 92 counties in Indiana, and  yet PB only has 28 “clinics.”  ” Meanwhile there are a combined hundreds if not thousands of doctors offices, immediate care clinics, county health departments, and Federally Qualified Health Clinics in IN that provide all the same services to Medicaid patients – and much more – than PP. As Gov. Mitch Daniels said when signing the bill, “We will take any actions necessary to ensure that vital medical care is, if anything, more widely available than before.”

Everything Planned Barrenhood says is a lie.  And nothing is more sacrosanct to the democrat party than abortion on demand. 

Notre Dame trustee gave $30k to pro-abort Emily’s List May 27, 2011

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Basics, Dallas Diocese, disaster, foolishness, General Catholic, religious, sadness, scandals, sickness.
comments closed

The only thing – the ONLY thing – that Emily’s List advocates for is abortion.  They are one of the most strident pro-abort organizations in the country.  Their sole purpose, according to their website, is function as “a community of progressive Americans dedicated to electing pro-choice Democratic women to every level of office.”  That’s it.  And so, when news broke about Roxanne Martino being named to the Notre Dame Board of Trustees and her numerous donations to Emily’s List, did Notre Dame issue a mea culpa?  Did they try the tired, discredited ‘seamless garment’ argument?  No……..they pretended Ms. Martino had no clue what Emily’s List is, and does:

Ms. Martino (along with her husband, Rocco) is a Notre Dame graduate, and she is fully supportive of Church teaching on the sanctity of life.

She has through the years contributed to organizations that provide a wide range of important services and support to women. She did not realize, however, that several of these organizations also take a pro-choice position.

This is not her personal position, and she will now review all of her contributions to ensure that she does not again inadvertently support these kinds of activities in the future. [That $30,000 given over 12 years – she had no idea where it was going.  She maxed out her individual contributions for the past 4 years!  She was supporting Emily’s List to the utmost of her ability!] 

Oh, so not only has she given money to Emily’s List, she apparently has also given money to other pro-abort groups, as Notre Dame’s own statement above indicates.  But the ostensibly brilliant Ms. Martino somehow did not know that Emily’s List is solely dedicated to electing pro-abort women.  Thomas Peters is having none of it:

But the idea that EMILY’s List provides “a wide range of important services and support to women” is, to be blunt, baloney (and I don’t mean “baloney”).

Furthermore, the idea that Mrs. Martino has been donating to Emily’s List for twelve years – right up until last year – normally to the tune of $5,000 (the legal max amount, coincidentally, for designated donations to candidate campaigns – and Emily’s List ONLY endorses pro-abortion candidates) for a total of almost $30,000, without EVER realizing what Emily’s List PROUDLY does … that idea also beggars serious doubt.

Finally – and this is my real point – when committed, Catholic, pro-life people come to a Catholic university and, knowing all these facts in the public record, ask for an explanation, they deserve a forthright answer and an apology – not a snow job.

Notre Dame never seems to miss an opportunity to strain its already tenuous relationship with Catholics of principle and passion. My patience with their current leadership has about snapped.

‘About snapped.’  Ha……sorry, Thomas, I think I can speak for many faithful Catholics whose patience for ‘Notre Shame’ expired years ago.  I wouldn’t spend $50k a year to send my kids there.

Vatican calls for worldwide Adoration….. May 27, 2011

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, Interior Life, North Deanery, Papa.
comments closed

……in support of the 60th anniversary of Pope Benedict’s ordination to the priesthood.  The 60 hours are to be centered around Wednesday, June 29. 

I think this is an effort that deserves great support!  Many local parishes offer some periods of Adoration, some more generous than others, but perhaps a kind and charitable request to a pastor may help encourage various parishes to support this additional Adoration!  That would be a very great thing for the Church – being in the Real Presence of the Lord brings so many tangible benefits in terms of Grace and strengthens both our Catholic identity and our collective Faith!  Would you, in your charity, consider sending your pastor a brief, kindly worded message, asking him to assist in this worldwide celebration of Pope Benedict’s ordination? 

This could be a source of great blessings for the whole Church!

That is how to do Adoration!

Anybody ever been to….. May 27, 2011

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Art and Architecture, awesomeness, Basics, General Catholic.
comments closed

……St. Stanislaus parish in Bandera, TX?  We were planning on going down to Pipe Creek and then Medina lake this weekend, but the kids are sick and we may not make it.  BUT……if we do, I definitely want to check out this Polish-Catholic parish in Bandera – St. Stanislaus.  See the pic below – I know some Polish Catholic parishes are pretty traditional – from this pic it looks like they still use the wall-type altar and not a ‘table’ type?  Versus Deum, perhaps?  Anybody ever been there?

The family we’re staying with usually goes to church in Helotes, but I may try to check this place out if we make it down this weekend.  There are alot of very nice Catholic parishes in the Hill Country.

Malthusian idiot takes on the Church May 26, 2011

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, Dallas Diocese, foolishness, General Catholic, Good St. Joseph, North Deanery, scandals, sickness, silliness, Society.
comments closed

Via Pewsitter, a PhD Unitarian ‘minister’ (alarm bells should be going off immediately) strives to use Rerum Novarum, Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical on labor and wages, etc.,  as a justification for abortion.  This op-ed is steeped in Malthusian rhetoric and operates from the fundamental claim that “The world doesn’t need more people; it’s already overcrowded.”  As such, he claims that because Rerum Novarum argues for reasonable wages for workers, and for (under ideal conditions) all people to have nice living conditions, time for recreation, etc, that being pro-life is hypocritical since we all know that all babies that aren’t aborted wind up growing up in completely sqaulid poverty.

There are so  many obvious holes in this ‘logic’ that its stupefying it would published.  First of all, the Malthusian rhetoric has been completely discredited repeatedly.  There is no “maximum ceiling” for the number of people who can live on this planet.  Repeatedly in the past, leftist fantasists like Paul Erlich have proclaimed that mass starvation and horrid living conditions are just around the corner, once the world hits a population of 4 billion, 5 billion, or whatever made up figure.  In fact, it is unfortunate that the fantasists have been as successful as they have – as I reported yesterday, the world birth rate is about to fall below the replacement rate for the first time in recorded history.  We don’t face an overpopulation crisis, the world is facing an underpopulation crisis.  Look at countries like Japan and much of Europe, where the Malthusian impulse is far more deeply ingrained than in the US -their socialist economies are nearing implosion, as the benefits promised to various groups are unsustainable with a shrinking working age population.  In fact, without unconstrained immigration, which has brought massive social problems to these countries, the social welfare states would not have lasted as long as they have.  In the history of the world, economic good times have always been associated with growing populations, whereas decreasing population has always signalled economic collapse.  As with so much on the left, they get it exactly wrong – their prescription to improve economic conditions will actually make things much, much worse.

Secondly, this Unitarian PhD takes the repeated Biblical imperatives to be open to life, to allow God to determine when and how children will come, and stands it on its head: “Reproduction is not a high calling: anything that lives can breed.   The higher calling is asking whether we can be proper stewards of the life we already have.   If we can’t, it is wrong to let our higher possibilities be smothered by the fertile effects of forceful, sometimes forcible, mating calls.   We are meant for more than that, and are urged – commanded – not to settle for less.”  According to this man, not only are humans apparently incapable of resisting the effects of concupiscence, but only sub-human brutes “breed” without constraint.  In fact, he has mixed the two concepts up – humans are called to lead chaste lives, something I’m certain this author would not agree with, but we are also called to be open to the life God sends within the confines of sacramental marriage.  Notice the arrogant disdain for life?  He reduces the miracle of raising up new Saints for God to animal husbandry.  There is no comparison.  There is also an incredibly smug sense of his own superiority, and that of his class, while sneering derisively through his fained compassion:

It is perhaps the first time in history that those who want to defend their position as religious must begin to recognize that both birth control and abortion are not only an economic necessity today, but also a religious one. People cannot live like human beings in the squalor of the slums and shantytowns in which they will forever be defined, like brutes, by the basic animal instincts of self-preservation and breeding – and, of course, sexual and economic exploitation.

Are you kidding?  Only those who obtain a certain measure of economic success and physical comfort are “true” human beings?  Those who live in slums are not quite human, they are in fact rather sub-human, and should not be allowed to breed.  That is exactly what he’s saying!  This is precisely the eugenicist argument that Margaret Sanger and others used to kick start Planned Parenthood and in developing the birth control pill!  That’s exactly what the very compassionate Davidson Loehr, “musician, combat photographer, and Unitarian minister with PhD” is saying – only those with American Express cards and who can vacation in Tuscany are fully human.  Forgive me, but what a pig.

I should find it ironic and hypocritical that the liberal would reduce human life down to a materialistic concept, but it makes perfect sense, for that is the core of leftism.  Marxism, and I’m certain that Davidson Loehr, Unitarian PhD is quiet marxist, reduces mankind to the achievement of material ends. “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.”  That marxist material concept seeps through his entire piece, and I find it hilarious that the ostensible “defenders of the proletariat” would make such an upper class series of arguments.  In fact, he sounds like a bad parody of a revolutionary, like a snobbish British aristocrat who talks about helping the “little people.”  But what is most offensive is his complete rejection of both the miracle of life and the unique nature of the human soul.  Animals don’t have souls, but humans do.  I don’t think Davidson Loehr Unitarian PhD quite gets that.  In fact, I’m not sure he has much faith in God at all – he certainly doesn’t trust that God will provide for his people (and proving the Malthusians wrong again and again), and I don’t think he believes that each human being is a Saint that should be raised up to God.

You should go read the entire, offensive, badly thought out piece, if only to understand the depths of the smugly superior narcissistic depravity that inhabits the pro-abort side.   The author’s entire conception of life places Ikea before Isaac, and Chryslers before Christ.

Oh, by the way – the Unitarian PhD was fired from his Church (in Austin, naturally) in 2008.  Apparently, he was lazy and divisive, being too leftist even for the Unitarians (and that is saying something).

For a nice corrective to the Malthusian fantasy of Davidson Loehr Unitarian PhD, the following video from PRI is nice:

God hates murder.

UPDATE: [Reminder to self: Don’t write late at night!  Good grief, this ‘update’ was a disaster!  I need the humiliation!]  Forgive me, Lord, for calling this very misguided man an idiot. I pray he converts.  He absolutely stood Rerum Novarum and Pope Leo XIIIs beliefs on their head.  Rerum Novarum is predicated on acceptance and cherishing all life.  If we declare that some people can be killed due to inconvenience, or overpopulation, or lack of sufficient wealth, or whatever reason, then all the other sage wisdom from Rerum Novarum is meaningless – without a right to life, what matters good wages or recreation time?  Pope Leo would never have suborned human life to material pursuits.  I can’t believe how distant this Unitarian is from Catholic – no,Christian – views on this vanishing world and the unimportance of it.   This man makes this life the be all of existence.  And this materialistic view of the world is precisely the vision that has fired numerous atrocities and near genocides around the world, all for some purported good – be it Mao Tse Dung’s ‘Great Leap Forward’ or Stalin’s collectivization of the Ukraine or the Nazi’s ‘General Government – Poland’ – all were driven by some utopian vision, and all lead to massive death and slaughter.  This man’s vision gives me cold chills.