"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of
the morning? how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the
nations?" (Isaiah 14:12 )
“I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (Luke 10:18),
“…an enormous red dragon…His tail swept a third of the stars
out of the sky and flung them to the earth…the great
dragon was hurled
down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world
astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him”
(Revelation 12:3-9).
This is an image of Narcissus a character from greek mythology admiring his own image. In fact he was so fascinated and in love with his own beauty, that he could see nor give attention to nothing nor anyone else.
Contemplate it.
Is it a prophecy,
Is he a foreshadowing of Lucifer.
Remember time and space have no meaning in the spiritual realm.
Time and space have no meaning to God.
The story of narcius could quite conceivably be the image of Lucifer.
His fall and his story are told several places in the bible, including a description in the Gospel spoken by Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Contemplate it.
Is it a prophecy,
Is he a foreshadowing of Lucifer.
Remember time and space have no meaning in the spiritual realm.
Time and space have no meaning to God.
The story of narcius could quite conceivably be the image of Lucifer.
His fall and his story are told several places in the bible, including a description in the Gospel spoken by Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
As with Narcissus, if Lucifer could have married himself, he would have. His sin was pride anf fascination with himself his own image. It was so great that he would stop at nothing to fulfill his desire to behold himself. He could net believe he was a creature governed by his creator. He forgot that his image, his beauty, his light were gifts from his creator and not his own. A Godly person peering at his own image is moved to ask the question, I did not create this beauty myself, who then made me thus? To Him goes my fascination glory and worship.
To my Creator goes the glory.
Pride in and fascination with self is not the nature the sacraments and certainly not of Holy Matrimony. Holy Matrimony is a sacrament a gift from Our Lord, in which He presents men and woman one to another for the completion of his image of their flawed perfection as human beings.
As with all sacraments, although seemingly mundane in ceremony and ritual they are miracles of the supernatural. When contemplated against hollywood portrayal of the supernatural in the movies sacraments appear mundane rather than sensational. Although sensational and miracles in their metaphysical nature they are.
Sacraments are super natural events. They are a joining of heaven and earth they are time warps in which heaven opens a s a wormhole and joins the fleshy world with the spiritual realm and events take place and have significance in both realms. They are miracles. They are supernatural events. The events take place simultaneously in our souls and bodies. Our souls acting in the spiritual realm, while our bodies perform the ceremonies in the physical realm. This joining of bdoy and soul in events simultaneously taking place in the spiritual as well as physical realm create a serious and palpable bond with God. The sacraments are these gifts from God thaat doirectly join us to Him in heaven.
This truth is such that spiritual events outside of the sacraments given by Jesus to the Church are not from God but from darkness and must be avoided.
In the sacraments heaven and earth connect and touch each other in an intimate and very real way. This is intimacy is provided everyday in the miracle of the Mass. The Eucharist is the sacrament and as the priest finishes the consecration of the mundane -- the bread and wine -- the connection between heaven and earth opens up in a spectacular way, and the bread and wine become the body and blood of Jesus Christ. The event the ritual in the physical realm is the walking toward the body and blood of Our Lord, the prayerful ingesting of it, but this is not physical nourishment in the sense depicted by the physical ceremony, it is actually the soul of the person receiving communion that receives and is nourished by the Body and Blood of Our Lord. This is the spiritual action o the participant.
All the sacraments and there are seven. Seven only physical rituals which are actual events connecting heaven and earth with the appearance of the mundane. They are miracles. They are metaphysical events that transcend all others.
Holy Matrimony is one of these. Imagine if you will narcissus who gazing at his own image in a pool meets instead a woman of untold beauty, which his own words cannot describe adequately. She has not just the beauty of physical image of narcissism, with which he narcissus fell in love with his own, but the inner beauty. Imagine if you will that narcissus's intuition, his connection with the spiritual realm was used by God so that what was revealed to him was not just her exterior beauty her physical beauty her image, but the beauty of her soul and spirit as well -- a gift from God. This is preparation for the sacrament of Holy Matrimony. It is the initial step of a long journey that ends in not just life long commitment but spiritual union. The two, the man and the woman become one. What has been written before describes the sacrament of Holy Matrimony. It is a gift from our Creator. As with all His gifts it defies temporal description.
What of homosexual unions?
Tell me. Which of these
is bigotry? Which of these is hate?
I am not talking about what Christians might call sacrilege. Let us leave that out of this discussion. Which of the two groups below is exhibiting bigotry, hate?
"When up to a thousand conservative Christian parents in Germany were protesting against a new pro-homosexual “sexual diversity” curriculum in their schools, homosexuals charged at them and threw human excrement at the Christians. They also ripped pages of the Bible, wiped their anuses with the pages, crumpled them up and threw them at the Christians."
I am not talking about what Christians might call sacrilege. Let us leave that out of this discussion. Which of the two groups below is exhibiting bigotry, hate?
"When up to a thousand conservative Christian parents in Germany were protesting against a new pro-homosexual “sexual diversity” curriculum in their schools, homosexuals charged at them and threw human excrement at the Christians. They also ripped pages of the Bible, wiped their anuses with the pages, crumpled them up and threw them at the Christians."
Please refer to
The LGBT movement has often been equated with the racial bigotry that has plagued this country since its inception Racial prejudice has been with us since before independence and it continues even with our first African American President. It is a fact of American life.
What are the parallels between bigotry which is the judgement of another without basis in fact or personal knowledge; or the judgement of another based on an assumed stereotypical trait.
What are the parallels between racial prejudice, which is the judgement and treatment of another without knowing the facts, ie, the unfair treatment of another without taking account of the facts.
What are the parallels between racial bigotry and prejudice and homosexual bigotry and prejudice, and do parallels exist. Do parallels exist between racial prejudice and bigotry and homosexual prejudice and bigotry.
Show me the story of homosexuals
being hunted and trapped in their homelands, shackled and stacked in
unventilated ship holds like lumber, with no sanitation facilities, and little
care for nutrition. The story would have to continue with the stacked
"cargo" homosexuals in this case counted on the ships manifest, with
an accurate assessment of "breakage" ie, death during the passage so that
an accurate assessment as to the "cargo's" value at the end of the
journey could be added to the manifest.
Additionally each homosexual would have to be assessed upon loading having a market rate assigned based on their gender(s) and physical appearance.
This is not the story of the Aerican homosexxual. It is the history of the African American.
You are correct if say such stories regarding the shipment of homosexuals from their homelands and their treatment as cargo doesn't appear in standard American history texts. Perhaps it is an oversight, Perhaps these stories do exist and should be researched. But as of this point in history there is no record of homosexuals being reated ins cuch a manner -- as property. Thus there is no starting point for a comparison of racial prejudice and bigotry that can be compared to homosexual prejudice and bigotry. There is no evidence that homosexual prejudice and bigotry to base a comparison of such bigotry with the African American experience of racial prejudice.
The emotional outburst of the LGBT movement culminating in the recent supreme court decision granting homosexuals the right to enge in civil unions was based on these three studies the results of which are either inconclusive or valueless.
What makes the studies valueless are their hyp[otoheis in each of the studies the hypothesis is the same. Homosexuality is a natural congenital occurence in human beings and thus not a disorder and thus a civil right. The flaw in the hypotheisis is as follows. Just because a behavior is due to a congenital and antural occurence within a human being does not disprove it from being a disorder. There are many congenital naturally occring disorders observed in human beings, including down syndrome, cancer to name only two. Additinonally the experments do not even prove the flawed hypothosies.
The first two studies are similar in that they involved identical twins raised in separate environments. The hypothesis environment does not shape sexuality. The studies did not uncover conclusive evidence to support the hypothesis. In fact it was found with very little difference between the two studies that approximately 33% of twins separated and raised in different environments developed into homosexuals. On the surface this evidence negates the hypothesis and does not support it. However LGBT activists steadfastly ling to the idea that since only 33% of the twins raised in different environments became homosexuals this somehow proves the hypothesis that environment does not play a role in determining sexuality. This conclusion is an emotional response not supported by the evidence.
It also needs to be pointed out that at least one standard practice in scientific research was not adhered to in the two studies summarized above. That is the researchers were homosexual men. This in itself does not negate the hypothesis, but indicates the possible existence of a subjective bias on the part of the researchers that would need to be considered and controlled for in a valid scientific experiment.
The above experiments on twins rasied in different envuronments from a sceintific perspective
A- do not prove the hypothesis and
B- Contain uncontrolled for subjective bias that may have influenced the research.
The third study that supplies emotional fuel for the LGBT propaganda is one in which the hypothalami.of cadaverous was measured. What prompted this study as well as a clearly defined hypothesis for the study is unclear to this writer. What the researcher found was that in a limited number of cadavers those who were supposedly homosexual men had smaller hypothalami than those of supposed heterosexual men.
The issues with the above study should be obvious. First, the size of the hypothalamus has not been conclusively linked to sexuality. and second there are certain obvious improprieties in the reliance on the testimony of cadavers as witnesses to their own sexuality. In other words how does a scientist conclusively establish the sexuality of a cadaver.
All three of these studies are clinged to by the LGBT rights movment with an emotional ferver that can only be described as rabid in the face of the actual eveidence.
None of these studies prove conclusively that homosexuality is a congenital natural occurrrence.
The inconclusivness of the studies not withsstanding there is also the fact that has not been adequatly addressed or controlled for in any study that is that just because a behavior has been porved to be, and homosexuality has not been so proved, just because a behavior is due to a congential natural occucrence does not prove it is not a disorder. There are many congenital natural occcurences that occcur acrosss species that are conclusively disorders.
Additionally each homosexual would have to be assessed upon loading having a market rate assigned based on their gender(s) and physical appearance.
This is not the story of the Aerican homosexxual. It is the history of the African American.
You are correct if say such stories regarding the shipment of homosexuals from their homelands and their treatment as cargo doesn't appear in standard American history texts. Perhaps it is an oversight, Perhaps these stories do exist and should be researched. But as of this point in history there is no record of homosexuals being reated ins cuch a manner -- as property. Thus there is no starting point for a comparison of racial prejudice and bigotry that can be compared to homosexual prejudice and bigotry. There is no evidence that homosexual prejudice and bigotry to base a comparison of such bigotry with the African American experience of racial prejudice.
The emotional outburst of the LGBT movement culminating in the recent supreme court decision granting homosexuals the right to enge in civil unions was based on these three studies the results of which are either inconclusive or valueless.
What makes the studies valueless are their hyp[otoheis in each of the studies the hypothesis is the same. Homosexuality is a natural congenital occurence in human beings and thus not a disorder and thus a civil right. The flaw in the hypotheisis is as follows. Just because a behavior is due to a congenital and antural occurence within a human being does not disprove it from being a disorder. There are many congenital naturally occring disorders observed in human beings, including down syndrome, cancer to name only two. Additinonally the experments do not even prove the flawed hypothosies.
The first two studies are similar in that they involved identical twins raised in separate environments. The hypothesis environment does not shape sexuality. The studies did not uncover conclusive evidence to support the hypothesis. In fact it was found with very little difference between the two studies that approximately 33% of twins separated and raised in different environments developed into homosexuals. On the surface this evidence negates the hypothesis and does not support it. However LGBT activists steadfastly ling to the idea that since only 33% of the twins raised in different environments became homosexuals this somehow proves the hypothesis that environment does not play a role in determining sexuality. This conclusion is an emotional response not supported by the evidence.
It also needs to be pointed out that at least one standard practice in scientific research was not adhered to in the two studies summarized above. That is the researchers were homosexual men. This in itself does not negate the hypothesis, but indicates the possible existence of a subjective bias on the part of the researchers that would need to be considered and controlled for in a valid scientific experiment.
The above experiments on twins rasied in different envuronments from a sceintific perspective
A- do not prove the hypothesis and
B- Contain uncontrolled for subjective bias that may have influenced the research.
The third study that supplies emotional fuel for the LGBT propaganda is one in which the hypothalami.of cadaverous was measured. What prompted this study as well as a clearly defined hypothesis for the study is unclear to this writer. What the researcher found was that in a limited number of cadavers those who were supposedly homosexual men had smaller hypothalami than those of supposed heterosexual men.
The issues with the above study should be obvious. First, the size of the hypothalamus has not been conclusively linked to sexuality. and second there are certain obvious improprieties in the reliance on the testimony of cadavers as witnesses to their own sexuality. In other words how does a scientist conclusively establish the sexuality of a cadaver.
All three of these studies are clinged to by the LGBT rights movment with an emotional ferver that can only be described as rabid in the face of the actual eveidence.
None of these studies prove conclusively that homosexuality is a congenital natural occurrrence.
The inconclusivness of the studies not withsstanding there is also the fact that has not been adequatly addressed or controlled for in any study that is that just because a behavior has been porved to be, and homosexuality has not been so proved, just because a behavior is due to a congential natural occucrence does not prove it is not a disorder. There are many congenital natural occcurences that occcur acrosss species that are conclusively disorders.
Lest I be labeled a
hater by the bigots that make up the LGBT lobby, I believe that all people
should be treated with dignity and respect. And quite frankly who you have sex
with is none of my business and does not enter into how I choose my friends.
The emotional fever of the LGBT movement has influenced the "science", and politics through our elected officials who need the money and support of a very powerful LGBT lobby (and don't get me wrong I m not one of those who consider lobbyists to be bad they are an important part of pout political process) but in this case this LGBT lobby gaining in power, money and status by their acceptance of candidates who need their votes to get elected the emotional power of the lobby won out and science lost.
I am not a President Obama hater, in fact I support much of what he stands for and what he has tried to achieve for the country, health care for all is a good thing, helping those in need is a good thing and a part of the Gospel of life. We cannot as Catholics continue to support candidates who say they are pro-choice but vote against welfare or lowering benefits for the poor who need to feed clothe, and educate the babies we do not want them to abort.
Although I am not an obama hater, I have never voted fo him. I could not. He is pro-choice. As a Catholic my duty and my directive from our bishops is clear. I am free to support and speak in favor of campaign for anyone I want, except and until I am faced with a choice between a pro-choice candidate and a pro-life candidate. In that case I must support, speak in favor of and campaign for the pro-life candidate, even if I disagree with that candidate on every other issue I must at the potential of losing my soul support and vote for the pro-life candidate. This is the only time and only circumstance in which the bishops tell us Catholics how to vote. One cannot be both pro-choice and Catholic, and I am Catholic.
There is and important limitation to this directive and that is up until the time that the final nominations are made and I am faced with the choice between a pro-life and a pro-choice candidate, that is, up until the finalists are chosen I am free to support a pro-choice candidate and I do. Once the nominations are made I immediately make the switch and start supporting and voiting for the pro-life candidate. This I must do to remain true to my CAtholic faith.
Othere areas as with homosexual activity are not so clear. I do not know the sexual prefecnes of my friends. It is non of my businesss unless and until they come to me for council, This rarely happens. I do know that when the government sasy that homosexuals can amrry each other that they are sanctiong disordered behavior, I will noto call it sin. I am not Jesus. It is not my job to judge sin.
I will call homsexual behavior what sceince calls it a disorder, an anomaly. It may be an anomaly that occurs in nature ie with other species, but their are lots of disorders that occur across species including cancer, down syndrome etc. Science says homosexual activity is disordered behavior, particularly if the person engaging in such activity finds in bothersome.
When politics, when the government says that homosexuals are free to engage in civil unions which the government calls marriage, they are sanctioning a disordered behavior. What they are saying to the person who may be troubled by their engaging in such activity, don't worry it's pok it is perfectly normal there is no need for you to explore your concerns any further. Science does not support this view. Government has over stepped its bounds.
One of the first rules of engagement, argument, dispute, discussion is to know your enemey. The LGBT movement has no idea who we Cattholics are. We invite you to learn juts who you are dealing with. We are the Church that Jesus Christ personally founded, we wrote the new testment (it didn't just fall into Luther's lap one day we wrote it). We have what is callled apostolic succession. As a Catholic who has received the sacrament of confirmation I have had hands laid on me, by someone who has had ahnds laid on them etc etc etc all the way back in an unbroken chain to Our God Jesus Christ, only our Eastern Othodox brothers and sisterss share this suyccesion with us, Billy Grahm does not, Joel Osteen does not. They are borhters in baptism but they do not have the fullness of the faith.
Tell me the stories of how the LGBT community was officially persecuted by the longest lasting most fearsome empire that ever existed. Tell me the story of how the LGBT community endured their God being crucified, and their martyrs literally feed to lions as entertainment for secularists.
Yes, tell me as a Catholic which I am, that persecution of the LGBT community compares even slightly with the persecution of not just african americans but also of Catholics.
I will tell you the story of the Catholic Church as we existed in secret underground literally and figuratively over 300 years until Our God rose us up to convert the emperor Constantine and his wife.
There is no greater story of persecution then that of the Catholic Church.
Catholics hve been persecuted in the USA as well.
It is the 4th of July, Indpendence Day A good time for me to tell you the story of Charles Carroll the only Catholic signer of the declaration of Independence. Then I will tell you about how Charles Carroll had to go back to his native state of Maryland, and after putting his life on the line, for signing the declaration was and act of treason, and all who signed would have been hanged by the king had the colonies lost the revolutionary war. I will tell you the story of how this Catholic and patriot had to go back to his home state of Maryland and fight for the right for Catholics to vote and hold political office. And then I will tell you the story of John Carroll, Charles's cousin who became the first Archbishop of the United States.
It is the 4th of July, Indpendence Day A good time for me to tell you the story of Charles Carroll the only Catholic signer of the declaration of Independence. Then I will tell you about how Charles Carroll had to go back to his native state of Maryland, and after putting his life on the line, for signing the declaration was and act of treason, and all who signed would have been hanged by the king had the colonies lost the revolutionary war. I will tell you the story of how this Catholic and patriot had to go back to his home state of Maryland and fight for the right for Catholics to vote and hold political office. And then I will tell you the story of John Carroll, Charles's cousin who became the first Archbishop of the United States.
Charles Carroll
The only Catholic signer of the
Declaration of Independence
Declaration of Independence
So just as the LGBT community has nothing to do with the suffering and persecution of African Americans, they have nothing to do with the suffering and persecution of Catholics. In fact the LGBT community does not have the slightest idea of what suffering and persecution are. They are in fact emotionally extereme about their right to engage in a life style that has not been conclusivley proved to be natural, moral, or right. In your emotinal bigotry you cast human feces on our houses of worship. Who are the bigots here?
As Catholics we fear nothing but our God. Do not mistake our kindness for fear.
As Catholics we need to start referring to marriage not as a civil union, not as anything that the government has a say about, but as the sacrament that it is, Holy Matrimony. Doing this is standing up for our faith against those who would attempt to control it and us. WE defeated the 2000 year old Roman Empire, after they crucified our God, and feed us to the lions, what do we have to fear from the blatherings of a Supreme Court that has stepped outside it's jurisdiction to define a sacrament, ignoring the scientific evidence.
What on earth do we have to fear from an emotionally rabid mob bent on enacting their right to engage in disordered sexual activity into the law of the land. Emperors executed us because we refusedd to bow down to them. Do you really think we fear your Supreme Court or you excrement?
What on earth do we have to fear from an emotionally rabid mob bent on enacting their right to engage in disordered sexual activity into the law of the land. Emperors executed us because we refusedd to bow down to them. Do you really think we fear your Supreme Court or you excrement?
Archbishop John Carroll Cousin of Charles Carroll only Catholic to sign the Declaration of Independence, first bishop of Maryland, first Archbishop in the United States of America
As a Catholic civil marriage even in a protestant church has never meant anything to me. These civil unions whether recognized by protestants or not have always been questionable unions, questionable activities. Not that I bothered myself with these much. Being Catholic I am focused on Holy Matrimony -- true marriage -- a man and woman brought together by God who have gone through the rigorous standards of the Church and they are many and rigours, after all a couple doesn't just show up to a priest one day say we want to get married here's the license and $100.00 could you marry us now. Nobody seems to be using the altar let's get it on Father.
No, there is a very rigorous procedure prior to even planning the ceremony and many meetings with the priest who is going to marry the couple so that he can get to know them to see if they are compatible capable of the responsibilities of marriage and of understanding those responsibilities. Holy Marimony is much more than going to a justice of the peace. Holy Matrimony is a sacrament and the priest plays a very important role in determining of this sacrament will take place.
We must encourage Catholic Church to officially declare ex cathedra that our Holy Matrimony is a sacrament between a man and a woman that resides above the natural order of government and that it is ratified and regulated by the Catholic Church alone.
ex cathedra -- for those
of you who do not understand the term ex-cathedra these are the times in which
the Pope speaks with spiritual and temporal infallibility. "you are Peter
and upon this rock I shall build my Church the gates of hell shall not prevail
against it, I give you the keys to the kingdom, whatsoever you bind on earth,
shall be bound in heaven, whatsoever you loose on earth shall be loosed in
heaven. (Protestants often miss the entire series of verses when they try to
explain away the papacy and papa; infallibility ex-cathedra aka from the
chair). Of course the Pope's every random utterance as miss-quoted by the media
is not ex-cathedra.
Start using the term “Holy Matrimony” and always use that term. Yes, you don’t need
permission. That’s capital H and capital M. Go there. The word “holy” is important and
“matrimony” has its etymology in the Latin mater meaning “mother.” Matrimony brings about
the procreation of babies and makes women into “mothers.” Holy Matrimony. Got it?
Thus Holy matrimony is something very different than what the supreme court recently ruled on, holding in favor of homosexuals getting married and their decsion really has nohing to do with Holy Matrimony and the Catholic Church. In other words the Church and the sacrament of Holy Matrimony transcends same sex unions, supreme court decions and in fact the Government of the United States of America. The recent supreme Court decesion has nothing to do with we Catholics.
Just as protestant marriages, civil ceremonies by justices of the peace, same sex or homosexual marriages have nothing to do with us.
We as Catholics do not perform marriages, we administer the sacrament of Holy Matrimony.
Sometimes I think we Catholics get too caught up in secular politics that have nothing to do with us. If the secularists and the protestants want to marry homosexulas, well it's wrong we should point that out we should fight it at every turn, but ultimately as Catholics it has nothing to do with us. We don't perform marriages, we administer that sacrament of Holy Matrimony -- that is part of what makes us Catholics. And the government is not going to force us to perform marraiges, that is not what we do. We have nothing to fear from this puny 200 year old nation state, governments crucified our God and feed us to the lions and we defeated them. What is this infant of a nation, a nation that cannot even determine the very defeinte line between justice and tolerance, what could they possibly do to us.
We are Catholics. The Church the kingdom of God/Heaven that God Jesus Christ came to earth to found. That is the story of the Gospels the founding of our Church and the training of our first bishops in outline form.
What do we have to fear from the United States of America an antion in obvious decline.
Happy independence day.
The Madonna of the Host
Oh Mary Conceived without sin pry for us who have recourse to thee.
Pax Christi,
Vivat Jesus,
Ave Maria,
Fred Celio
Please Donate and Join St. Michael God's Knight On Facebook
Please Donate and Join St. Michael God's Knight On Facebook
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment