Once, For All

⁸ Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him,

⁹ Knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him.

¹⁰ For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God.

¹¹ Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Oh won’t you come with me
To a hill called Calvary
See the face of a bruised and denied man
Can anyone explain
The mystery beyond the pain of this place
Where love is born again

Once and for all
He gave His life
He bled and died
The sacrifice for all
Who will take His name
Once and for all

Oh won’t you come and see
The tide of all humanity
They come on bended knee
We cannot close the door
That isn’t why He fought
the war of this place
Everyone can be free

Once and for all
He gave His life
He bled and died
The sacrifice for all
Who will take His name

Once and for all
Open wide the doors
There’s room for more
Tell all the world
that a heart can soar
when you call upon His Holy name

Once and for all
There is freedom
Once and for all
There is healing
Love sealed it all
Once and for all

It goes on and on
Out to everyone
Who will call upon His Holy name
On the tide will turn
For all those who yearn
For a heart that burns
With His flame
Once and for all

Cross posted at Spirit Driven.

More Easter Posts:

Oh, Mighty Cross

Jesus Conquered the Grave

The Bizarre World Of Chris Matthews

In Chris Matthews’ world, it’s apparently urbane and hip and sophisticated and oh-so-cool to text raunchy, unsolicited photos of yourself to women half your age with whom you’ve have a previously casual, virtual relationship. As opposed to doing your best to live up to Christian ideals of behavior like being faithful to your wife which is, apparently, backward.

Why does anyone continue to lend credence to anything this man says?

Update 1:  The Other McCain weighs in.

Sometimes It’s Not “Only Words”

I am pro-life. I oppose abortion under any circumstances, no matter how psychologically painful or even physically dangerous carrying a pregnancy to term might be for the mother. I am pro-life because I believe that an unborn child is a human being from the moment of conception and that it’s always wrong to take an innocent human life. Did I not believe the first point to be true, my position would be different. When an unborn child is denied its humanity, there is no reason to protect it in the womb.

Let me repeat: I am pro-life because I believe that an unborn child is a human being from the moment of conception. These are not “only words” to me; in terms of their need to be loved, cherished and protected, I see no difference between an embryo, a fetus, a newborn and a toddler.

Recent conversations with both people who describe themselves as pro-choice and people who describe themselves as “pro-life,” have brought me to the conclusions that to many people, these are only words.

People who are pro-choice hear what I’m saying but have only a superficial understanding of my meaning; they still can’t understand why I want to deny women their “right to choose.” For these people, my words are only words. That’s to be expected; there’s no reason they should understand the depth of my belief and in not understanding, it’s no wonder that my position angers them.

More disturbing are self-described pro-lifers who agree that an unborn child is a human being, but would still grant a woman the right to terminate a pregnancy for so-called compassionate reasons – in cases of rape, incest or danger to her own life. For these people, their own words – their own beliefs, apparently – are only words. In the cases of rape and incest, people who would be horrified to see a ten-year-old jailed for the crimes of his father feel its acceptable for a ten-week-old fetus to be given the death penalty for the same, as if the circumstances surrounding an unborn child’s conception have a bearing on the value of its life. They would be shocked to see a mother put her five-year-old child between herself and an attacking dog, but also accept that same mother’s right to abort her five-month-old fetus for reasons of her own health.

To hold a pro-life position based on the humanity of the unborn child, while still wanting to allow  for abortion in certain circumstances is a position that cannot be supported through logic or reason.  Furthermore it’s my opinion that this position is less moral than that of the pro-choice individual who holds a sincere belief that the unborn child is lacking humanity.

In fact, I find it to be morally abhorrent; when I say I object to abortion as the unjustified taking of an innocent human life, it’s not “only words” to me.

Free Love: Still Not Free

It appears that the generation that brought us free love and “if it feels good, do it” is paying the price in the form of rising STD rates.

I know it’s a popular misconception among cultural Christians – the non-religious as opposed to people who have made a conscious decision to follow Christ – that God placed strictures on promiscuous sex simply to spoil their fun rather than as a protection against disease but maybe it’s time for them to give the thought some consideration.

Or at least practice safe sex. At their ages, they should know better.

Police Prepare For Christians To Riot In Protest

An arsonist has set fire to a backyard statue of Jesus in St. Paul, Minnesota.  St. Paul Police are preparing for the backlash of violence that inevitably follows destruction of Christian religious symbols. Oh, wait….

Read more.

What Do You Think Nature’s Greatest Gift Is?

A new video from CatholicVote.org

Thoughts?

For Unto Us A Child Is Born, Unto Us A Son Is Given

The prophecy…

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Isaiah 7:14

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Isaiah 9:6

Fulfilled…

And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)

And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:) to be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.

And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.

A very merry Christmas to you. May all the joys and blessings of the season and the peace of our Lord and Savior be with you now and throughout the new year.

Science And Religion Are, Well, Different

But that simple truth has escaped Newsweek’s Eleanor Clift.

From Newsbusters:

On the Nov. 29 edition of “The McLaughlin Group,” host John McLaughlin asked about the prospects of a Copenhagen climate change treaty and its possible impact on the U.S. economy. MSNBC and “The McLaughlin Group” regular Pat Buchanan gave some spot-on analysis on global warming alarmist about former Vice President Al Gore and how it pertains to the climate change issue.

“Well, I don’t think it’s going to have any impact, John, because I don’t think it’s going to get through the United States Senate,” Buchanan said. “And there’s a reason for that John, and that’s Al Gore’s moment has come and gone. The truth is they’re changing the name to climate change rather than global warming for a reason.”

snip…

“It was warming, John,” Buchanan said. “It’s not been warming since ’98. Secondly, there’s no known proof it’s because of man and there’s no known proof it’s a great danger.”

However, Clift felt inclined to responded, rather emphatically. She said she believes U.S. policy should be proactive toward the issue. Her view is arguably indicative of the mainstream media’s sentiment on the debate, and she equated it to blind faith when she told Buchanan there’s no proof there’s a God either, which didn’t mean global warming wasn’t a danger.

“It’s no known proof there’s God, either. How much proof do you need, Pat?” Clift replied. “Oh, it is a danger. It’s a danger in many places.”

I believe there’s a God. I can’t prove that; my belief is faith-based. I’m comfortable with that. That’s how religion works.

Science, on the other hand, should never be faith-based. It should be rooted in things like data and observation and testing your hypothesis and other science-y stuff. That what makes it different from religion.

Clift makes a serious logical error by arguing that belief in global warming can somehow be equated with belief in God.

Unless global warming is your religion.

Holiday Madness

Is it really asking so much to expect that CDs filled with songs such as “Christmas Canon,” “Tennessee Christmas,” “Blue Christmas” or “The Christmas Song” be assigned to the genre “Christmas” rather than “Holiday” music? Honestly, is anyone who would buy these CDs going to be put off by them being called Christmas music?

A case in point is “The Best of Bing Crosby: The Christmas Collection.” Of the 18 songs, seven have the word “Christmas” in the title; six are based on the religious aspects of Christmas, yet the genre, as assigned by Ebenezer Scrooge, apparently, is “Holiday.”

Is the entertainment industry really so far removed from reality that they can’t understand that people who buy Christmas music aren’t offended by the word “Christmas?” If that’s the case, I pity those poor people who can’t understand the perfect love summed up here:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
John 3:16 KJV

Of Bishops and Congressmen

You may have seen news stories over the weekend about the controversy surrounding Catholic Bishop Thomas Tobin, Representative Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) and the Bishop’s request that Kennedy refrain from taking communion because of his publicly stated pro-choice stance.

As a result of the controversy, Bishop Tobin appeared on “Hardball with Chris Matthews.” For those of you who can’t bear to watch Chris Matthews, I sympathize – I couldn’t watch the entire thing myself. Fortunately, the part I found really interesting was right at the beginning. The segment started with a clip of John F. Kennedy speaking to Ministerial Association of Greater Houston on September 12, 1960.

I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish — where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches, or any other ecclesiastical source — where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials.

Matthews assertion, of course, was that the Bishop’s request that Kennedy not take communion was tantamount to imposing the will of the Catholic Church “upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials.”

From my perspective, Bishop Tobin isn’t seeking to influence Kennedy on public policy so much as he is defining what it means to be Catholic. Isn’t that the right of the Catholic Church or any church for that matter? Of what use is a church that’s uncommitted to its own doctrine? Jesus had something to say about it in the Sermon on the Mount.

Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? It is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.  ~Matthew 5:13 KJV

That makes it rather clear that a church is obligated to teach and apply doctrine to the best of its understanding. Having been raised in the Catholic Church, Kennedy must have known what he was risking when he chose to support the pro-choice position. My Catholic friends tell me that any Catholic who publicly challenged church doctrine on the abortion issue could face the same restriction; Kennedy’s not been singled out for special treatment.

For someone who apparently has so little regard for church teaching, one has to wonder why he’s chosen to make a public issue out of what should have been a private matter, especially now, at least two years after the fact. The Boston Herald provides some insight.

“I thought they were pro-life. If the Church is pro-life, then they ought to be for health-care reform because it’s going to provide health care that (is) going to keep people alive,” Kennedy told the Catholic News Service in October, less than two months after the death of his father, the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy.

It appears as though Chris Matthews may have it exactly backwards. Rather than Bishop Tobin trying to influence Kennedy, perhaps Kennedy is using Tobin’s genuine pastoral concern to try turn public opinion against those Bishops who are opposing the Democrats health care reform plans. Advice for the Congressman: Tread carefully; God will not be used.