Obama, Jeremiah Wright/"You are known by the friends you keep"

"You are known by the friends you keep."

How many of us heard this from our parents as we were growing up? How many of us have said this to our own children, as they entered adolescence, when temptations abound and peer pressure can be so destructive to the impressionable?

The 20 year membership in Jeremiah Wright's Church, including a $26,000 donation in 2006, leaves absolutely NO doubt as to Obama's world view. No one gives that much money to a church, remains a member in good standing for 2 decades, exposes his most precious possession (his own children) to its liberation theology, and seals his marital covenant under its rafters, when he disagrees with its world view.

Sorry, Barack, we "red state" intellects are not that dull. No, the middle America, who provided thousands of truly courageous men, who lost their lives in WWII, so you could have the privilege and "audacity" you so blithely flout, were not that dull either, nor are we bitter or racist, nor are we addicted to the "opium of God."

What we are addicted to, is truth! You and your "ilk, ie., Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Resko, etc., are transparent to us. The irony is that it is the radical leftest and political opportunist who is, in fact, dull.

As "bombastic" as your friends are, they hold no captivation, neither intellectually nor morally; they are bankrupt spiritually...and it takes no more than the earthy purity in heart of a child to see it.

You will not be elected President of this great and "exceptional" country, because, in the end, it will be that very common sense humility and "eye for truth" which will defeat you.

The Public Square/The Case Against Google

Zachary Gappa has a good article on Townhall posted here.

He confronts the sinister and pervasive religious discrimination against Christians in the public square, all done in the name of "secularism."

A lawsuit against Google in the UK makes his point explicitly. Basically, Google refuses to run ads pertaining to religious views on abortion while it freely accepts pro choice, abortion clinic ads, etc. Rather than making the editorial decision not to run any ads dealing with abortion, it has only restricted the opportunity for pro-life ads to pop up, when "abortion" shows up in the search window.

Unfortunately, the media is hopelessly shallow and/or agenda driven, to acknowledge and dissect, what is going on here in the cultural debate; additionally, our public education system is hopelessly incapable, and for the most part unwilling, to teach the necessity of integrity in public discourse. Therefore, the entire colloquy continues, incessantly, devoid of the very foundational prerequisites of honest debate, ie., logic, veracity and authenticity. The entire exercise is based on a lie.

What is going on is blatent religious discrimination against one sector, Christians.

Many, in the religious community, fail to stand up against this discrimination because, in a sense, they have accepted the premise. Part of the blame must be attributed to the Church itself, in that, its own attempts at catechesis have been inexplicably narrow in terms of how it defines "faith." Faith, is not believing some set of ideas, for which there is no empirical evidence! Faith, is the actuating, underlying reality, which allows us to operate intellectually, psychologically, volitionally, even physically.

Perhaps every Christian should read the Christian existentialist, Paul Tillich's book, "The Dynamics of Faith." In a few pages it completely changes one's paradigm in regard to what "faith" is.

Tillich's explantion comes much closer to the true nature of "faith" than what is taught in most churches.

As Gappa describes it in his article, "faith" is simply the framework through which one views reality. An atheist makes certain presumptions upon which he bases all the rest of his opinions, including those made in the public arena. Notwithstanding the fact that individuals may never acknowledge or investigate their own existential presumptions, never the less, their lives are lived in obedience to them.

If one had no "framework" through which to view reality, he would be a completely disintegrated personality. We call degrees of that, mental illness; we call a complete lack of such a structure, insanity.

So, whether one believes there is no God, or whether he is operating on Pascal's wager, or, whether he is existentially committed to the, "Thou," his framework of "faith" will inevitably shape his opinions as he participates in the "public square."

The acknowledgement of this embarrassingly simple fact is almost entirely absent from our consciousness. In practice, what this amounts to, is barring the Christian point of view from the discussion. It is a lie and it is sinister. For public schools, the media, the judiciary and any other public institution to inculcate this view is unconscionable.

Christians must first take upon themselves the self-reflective task to examine the nature of "faith" itself, then, we must courageously engage the battle to restore our rightful place in the "public square."

It appears The Christian Institute in the UK has engaged the battle, against Google!

TRUTH-Benedict's words this week...a fragment from text of speech to youth at Yonkers, New York.

"The second area of darkness – that which affects the mind – often goes unnoticed, and for this reason is particularly sinister. The manipulation of truth distorts our perception of reality, and tarnishes our imagination and aspirations. I have already mentioned the many liberties which you are fortunate enough to enjoy. The fundamental importance of freedom must be rigorously safeguarded. It is no surprise then that numerous individuals and groups vociferously claim their freedom in the public forum. Yet freedom is a delicate value. It can be misunderstood or misused so as to lead not to the happiness which we all expect it to yield, but to a dark arena of manipulation in which our understanding of self and the world becomes confused, or even distorted by those who have an ulterior agenda.


Have you noticed how often the call for freedom is made without ever referring to the truth of the human person? Some today argue that respect for freedom of the individual makes it wrong to seek truth, including the truth about what is good. In some circles to speak of truth is seen as controversial or divisive, and consequently best kept in the private sphere. And in truth’s place – or better said its absence – an idea has spread which, in giving value to everything indiscriminately, claims to assure freedom and to liberate conscience. This we call relativism. But what purpose has a “freedom” which, in disregarding truth, pursues what is false or wrong? How many young people have been offered a hand which in the name of freedom or experience has led them to addiction, to moral or intellectual confusion, to hurt, to a loss of self-respect, even to despair and so tragically and sadly to the taking of their own life? Dear friends, truth is not an imposition. Nor is it simply a set of rules. It is a discovery of the One who never fails us; the One whom we can always trust. In seeking truth we come to live by belief because ultimately truth is a person: Jesus Christ. That is why authentic freedom is not an opting out. It is an opting in; nothing less than letting go of self and allowing oneself to be drawn into Christ’s very being for others (cf. Spe Salvi, 28). "

"Bittergate", Secularism and Pope Benedict

The disdain and arrogance displayed by Barack Obama, by his patronizing remarks this weekend, reveal the fundamental "heresy" of secularism.

Pope Benedict, arriving shortly on American soil, has been passionately engaged in the intellectual argument against secularism and it's progeny, relativism, since his Papal "acceptance speech." Therefore, it is rather serundipitous that the two episodes overlap.

What is the fundamental heresy of secularism? The late Eastern Orthodox theologian, Alexander Schmemann, in my opinion, has the best definition of "secularism." He states the following in his essay, "Worship in a Secular Age:"


"If in theological terms, secularism is a heresy, it is primarily a heresy about man. Secularism has been analyzed, described and defined in these recent years in a
great variety of ways, but to the best of my knowledge none of these descriptions has
stressed a point which I consider to be essential and which reveals indeed better than
anything else the true nature of secularism, and thus can give our discussion its properorientation. Secularism, I submit, is above all a negation of worship."


Basically, his point is that, man's nature, (by design,) is predisposed to worship. Predisposed to worship for a reason; each human being is made in the "image of God;" therefore, man is created to find ultimate fulfillment only in loving communion with his Creator. Furthermore, all of creation is an "epiphany" of the Creator. Creation is a "means of God's relvelation, presence and power."

To put it another way, "man" is most himself, (true to his being, ) when he worships, "in spirit and in truth." He becomes what he truly is through this exercise in love, the bride with the Bridegroom, as the Church characterizes it. Schmemann says, "worship not only posits {man's} humanity, it fulfills it." If man is not a "worshipping being" he is not fully man.

Obama, and others, who declare that the only reason man turns to God is out of bitterness, or bigotry, is striking a dagger through the heart of the very essence of "being." He is making a statement about the nature of man, namely, he uses religion for a "crutch." Sound just like Marx?

Obama, who said himself that "words matter," who is Harvard educated, is a "secularist." He did not make a mistake, he said exactly what he thinks. As a secularist, he "views the world as containing within itself its meaning and the principles of knowledge and action. " (Schmemann, same essay) No need for worship here, unless narcissism can be defined as worship!

Pope Benedict's word's, implicitly or explicitly, will stress the inherent gift in man for worship, indeed, it is his true vocation. How timely is his message, which will serve as a response to the Obama's of the world.

No, Obama, "ordinary Americans," do not "cling" to God out of bitterness or bigotry, they worship God, out of love. It is the ultimate dignity of man, made in God's image. Obama, in his pseudo intellectualism, wants to strip this inherent dignity away.

If man's passion and thirst for God is eliminated, in favor of worldly values, what is left? What is left, is "relativism" and a race for power.

A fine example of secularism, in modern times, expresses it's consequences well:

"Everything I have said and done in these last years is relativism, by intuition. From the fact that all ideologies are of equal value, that all ideologies are mere fictions, the modern relativist infers that everybody has the right to create for himself his own ideology, and to attempt to enforce it with all the energy of which he is capable. If relativism signifies contempt for fixed categories, and men who claim to be the bearers of an objective immortal truth, then there is nothing more relativistic than fascism. " —Benito Mussolini

Obama denigrates the "ordinary" intellect of the small town redneck who "clings" to an objective immortal truth and has an innate calling toward "worship." Worship is fulfillment, it is joy, it is the pinnacle of intellectual integrity!

Give me the common sense of these "ordinary" "Americans, who humble themselves before their Creator, who love their neighbor and give up their lives for liberty, anyday, rather than the sterile intellectual snobbery of Barack Obama's secularism, where no God is needed!

Welcome, Pope Benedict!

The Death of "Personhood"/Abortion

“I survived Roe v Wade,” so read many of the t-shirts, worn by youth, at this year’s Right to Life March in Washington D.C.

I was startled and immensely heartened to see how the Pro-Life Movement is evolving into a movement of the young. At the same time, it broke my heart that any generation of Americans should have to suffer such sorrow for their peers, while thinking of themselves as, “survivors” of the post Roe v Wade era.

This is the issue of our time. All other issues, at their core, come down to the dignity of the individual, or, to put it another way, “personhood.”

“Personhood” is at the core of the abortion debate, but, it is also the core of Christian theology itself. It is western civilization’s view of “personhood” which has built our culture, philosophy, our pursuit of science, law, tradition, and every other value which has contributed to the most enlightened society in the history of the world.

Abortion threatens the entire edifice.

The modern mind takes the concept of “personhood” for granted. We are no longer taught in schools that it was not always so. In fact, the notion that each individual human being embodies a unique, valuable, non-repeatable personhood, worthy of protection and dignity, was a totally foreign concept in the ancient world.

In his remarkable book, “The Gifts of the Jews, How a Tribe of Desert Nomads Changed the Way Everyone Thinks and Feels,” Thomas Cahill traces Jewish history, beginning from about 3200 B.C.; he uncovers the emerging spiritual consciousness among the Jewish people, (immeasurably ahead of their contemporaries,) which evolved into a revolutionary change in mindset.

As Christians, we owe to our Jewish forebears, the concept of linear time, monotheism, and the idea of “personhood.” The thought that time had a beginning, that it was not an endless meaningless wheel of life and death, with no purpose, offering man nothing more than a fixed fate, was a Jewish innovation. And, what an innovation it was!

What followed as a result of this astonishing change of paradigm is nothing short of miraculous in the history of the human species!

If “time” is linear, not simply an ever turning wheel of suffering, (like the Eastern Religions still see it,) then man can make a difference, it gives us the theological foundation for “free will,” for a concept of history, for human dignity, for purpose and meaning to existence, for moral law, for the pursuit of scientific discovery. If God is ONE, not a myriad of selfish deities mocking and manipulating the cosmos on jealous whims, and, if this ONE God, is “Being (in) Communion,” thus, perfect “Personhood,” then “love” becomes possible and, if love, than human will.

Therefore, the corner stone of western civilization is directly traceable to Jewish spiritual foresight. We are theologically, their spiritual descendents.

Abortion strikes a death knell to “personhood,” hence, at the foundation of western civilization.

How so? Professor Robert J. Spitzer, President of Gonzaga University, makes a scholarly, yet understandable, presentation of how “personhood” is the ultimate victim within every beating heart so ruthlessly snuffed out in abortion. The 7-part series can be downloaded here,

Briefly, he argues the following in his series, “Healing the Culture:”

1) A moral abyss awaits those who do not define “personhood,” (with all the constituent protections that embodies,) as human existence itself, ie., conception.
2) The definition of humanness, biologically testable, is a “living, metabolizing entity with a full human genetic code, all of which exists at conception.
3) When the Supreme Court destroyed the “objective criterion of personhood, it substituted, by necessity, a subjective criterion.”
4) Hence, the argument began, “when does life begin, is it at viability, respiration, “clarity, ie., when it looks like a human being?”
5) Once a subjective criterion is implemented, anything that does not fit that criterion can be destroyed. “No better definition of tyranny exists.”
6) The Roe v Wade decision, in one death blow, undercut the fundamental critical assumption of civilization, that every being of human origin has all the powers in potencia …worthy of dignity and protection, endowed with a sense for love, fairness, beauty, truth etc.

Parenthetically, I used to think, along with most secularists, including Karl Marx, that the Christian idea of a “personal God,” who actually took an interest in each person, down to the last hair on his head, was a ridiculous anthropomorphic crutch. I too spent a few of my earlier years enamored with eastern religions, which seemed, much more esoteric. Blending into some universal harmony, whether it was Nirvana or Taoism’s “Way,” was initially appealing.

However, what I failed to calculate, until my own “encounter,” was something Professor Spitzer articulates, philosophically, in a different set of lectures; (it may be his lectures on proofs of God’s existence, not sure,) namely, if God, who by definition is perfect, were incapable of “personable-ness,” then God would suffer a restriction, therefore, God is perfect Personhood, ie., “trinity,” ie., “personable-ness.

St Paul, who was a member of the Roman intellectual elitist class, probably thought the early Christians had a pathetically provincial outlook also, at least until he was literally knocked off his horse, in a most “personal encounter,” on his way to Damascus!

As Spitzer says, (I think I’m accurately quoting him,) “we need to impale our humanity on the spears of {these} outrageous fortunes.” Is this Hamlet?