R. J. Grigaitis

You can now take a virtual tour of the Vatican:

• St. Peter’s
• Sistine Chapel
• St. John Lateran
• St. Paul’s Outside the Walls

Fr. Thomas J. Loya devoted the Daughters of St. Paul’s USTREAM.TV Theology of the Body class this month to the Clergy Sex Abuse Scandal. He put the whole thing in the correct context. It’s well worth watching:

The rest of the classes are also very interesting.

Fr. Loya also talked about this on his radio show, A Body of Truth:

In my last blog entry, I suggested people to “Seek out reliable news sources that are not intent on slandering Christ’s Church.” Some wonder where to find these “reliable news sources.” Well it seems that yesterday Catholic San Francisco published a letter by Cardinal William J. Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. I doubt the New York Times would publish such a letter.

This is the headline: “Cardinal Levada to NY Times: Reconsider ‘attack mode’ against Pope Benedict.” The subtitle is: “The New York Times and Pope Benedict XVI:
how it looks to an American in the Vatican.” The caption under the photo reads, “The New York Times lacks fairness in its coverage of Pope Benedict, Cardinal William J. Levada writes in a lengthy letter from Rome.”

The online edition of the letter can be read here:
http://www.catholic-sf.org/news_select.php?newsid=&id=57030

If the world hates you, realize that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, the world would love its own; but because you do not belong to the world, and I have chosen you out of the world, the world hates you. (John 15:18-19)

The sex abuse scandal the pope has found himself in does not surprise me; in fact, I’ve come to expect things like this. This is a satanic attack, but not against the pope. It is an attack against at least 70% of Catholics, and more likely, more than 80% of Catholics, not to mention the many people that knowingly or unknowingly wish to be Catholic.

Very few people get their news from reliable sources. Most put their trust in the mass media, which is unapologetically  anti-Catholic. Even the majority of people in the mass media that claim to be Catholic give an anti-Catholic slant to the news. An example of this is the use of the terms Anti-Choice, or Anti-Abortion, or the new one, Abortion Rights Opponent for the correct term Pro-Life. Another example is who they choose to quote as authentic Catholic experts, who usually turn out to be major Catholic dissenters like Fr. Richard McBrien. Since this is where most people get their news, including the vast majority of Catholics, they’re quite likely to believe this anti-Catholic propaganda.

It’s also no coincidence  that the mass media is bringing this story out at this particular time of year. It’s that time of year when some, among the 70% of Catholic that do not regularly attend Mass, are deciding if they’re going to go to Mass for Easter. With the recent reports in the news about the pope, maybe they won’t go to Mass this year, maybe never again.

What about the 30% that do regularly attend Mass? Well, it seems that less than 20% of Catholics practice the Faith in its entirety, most notably on the major issue of contraception (Remember the term intrinsically evil?). This means that at least a third of Catholics that regularly attend Mass don’t actually believe everything the Church teaches. With the recent reports in the news about the pope, maybe they’ll stop believing more of what the Church teaches.

The Catholic Church is the voice of God in the world. The only way to God is through the Catholic Church. Hence, everyone knowingly or unknowingly wants to be Catholic. The majority of people are not Catholic. With the recent reports in the news about the pope, maybe they’ll never become Catholic. (Note: you don’t have to be Catholic to go to heaven, but once you’re in heaven, you’ll be Catholic.)

What about the pope? He’s probably not the least bit concerned about his good reputation, which is extremely good. His biggest concern is likely the three groups of people mentioned above.

What about the mass media? They’ve succeeded! When the truth becomes too obvious, they’ll simply quit reporting on this issue. They will offer no apology, and they will not run stories that contradict what they are now reporting. They will leave the general public to continue to doubt the pope’s character, and since the majority of the general public only gets its news from the mass media, the truth will likely never reach the majority of the general public.

What am I going to do? I’m going to go back to only reading reliable news sources. A while ago, I started reading news from the mass media, but I’m too disgusted with it now. When a major event happens that I need to pray about, the pope will publicly pray about it. When he does, reliable new sources will report on it, and when they do, I’ll hear about it.

What do I suggest you do? Seek out reliable news sources that are not intent on slandering Christ’s Church. I also recommend going to Mass this Easter whether you’re Catholic or not.

“I never lose an argument; even when I’m wrong.”

I’ve heard the above saying many times. I even had the same attitude myself; although, I was never so bold to  state it out load. Over many years of reflection, I now have a different attitude, which I sum up with the following words:

“I always lose an argument; even when I’m right. I never lose a discussion, unless it turns into an argument.”

I should clarify. I’m not using the word argument in the philosophical sense, but in the worldly sense of a confrontation. Disagreements and corrections can be discussed, and a solution where there are no losers can be reached, but when a discussion turns into an argument (confrontation), even the party that is right loses because of bad feelings.

I don’t mind being wrong in a discussion because I can become a better person once I am corrected. In an argument, however, the confrontation makes me feel ill, and I feel like the loser regarudless of if I am right or wrong. I find no consolation in being right when an issue cannot be calmly discussed.

Sometimes one has to engage in confrontation. I dread the very thought. Nevertheless, when it’s necessary, I pray that any arguments turn in to discussions. An argument that turns into a discussion really isn’t an argument anymore.

When I first heard about the movie No Greater Love, I thought, “Great, another good movie teaching Christian values.”

When I saw the trailer, I thought, “Oh No! They know nothing about Christian marriage and make Christians look like a bunch of nuts.”

I was planning on watching No Greater Love as soon as it came out so I could write a review to warn everyone to stay away from this movie, but I couldn’t find the time. Fortunately, Sr. Helena Burns, who is an actual movie critic, has written a really good review of the movie, which, unfortunately, confirms my concerns raised by the trailer. I’m not going to waist my money on this movie now that Sr. Helena has taken the time to warn us of its major problems.

If you’re considering watching No Greater Love, read Sr. Helena’s review first:
http://hellburns.blogspot.com/2010/02/movies-no-greater-love-dvd.html

How can a person be taken seriously on an issue when he is too afraid to say what he is actually taking a stand for or against? Compare these two ads:

If I was is favour of something evil, I wouldn’t want to tell anyone what that actual evil was either.

In case you didn’t understand the first ad, Olympic Gold Medalist Al Joyner and former NFL football player Sean James are responding (can you call it responding when they haven’t see what they’re “responding” to?) to the Pam and Tim Tebow ad that ran during the Super Bowl. If you followed the FocusOnTheFamily.com link at the end of the ad, you’d see all the information that couldn’t be put in a 30 second ad. The ad with Al Joyner and Sean James does not give a link, just the name “Planned Parenthood.” The name “Planned Parenthood” sounds nice, but they are the largest abortion provider in the U.S., and their parent organization, International Planned Parenthood Federation, is the largest abortion provider in the world.

Since the ad was too afraid to give any links, here they are:
http://www.plannedparenthood.org
http://www.ippf.org

BTW: So you don’t get confused, “reproduction health” is the code word for “abortion.”  And, if you don’t know what abortion is, it’s when a baby is murdered in his mother’s womb before he’s born.

The story about the Planned Parenthood ad can be found here:
http://www.lifenews.com/nat5961.html

The term pro-choice is misleading and inaccurate. Those that say they are pro-choice are not really pro-choice. It may sound good, but being totally pro-choice is absurd. There are some choices that should not be allowed. No one should be given the choice of driving 200 km/h or 30 km/h (remember, I’m Canadian) in a school zone, especially when kindergarten is letting out. No one should be given the choice of stealing a $40,000 car or paying for it. No one should be given the choice of killing a person, whether that person is an abortion practitioner  or a fetus (the word fetus, by the way, is Latin for “young one”).

Even more misleading is the use of the term anti-choice instead of pro-life. Those that say they are pro-life are not anti-choice. There are many choices that should be allowed. Everyone should have the choice of fair-trade chocolate, strawberry, or vanilla (even if you’re allergic, wouldn’t it be nice to have the choice?). Parents should have a choice of names for their children. Everyone should have a choice of religion.

Even when it comes to abortion, many of those that say they are pro-choice are not really pro-choice. It seems those in the abortion business are doing everything they can so women who have an unplanned pregnancy do not have an informed choice. They lie about the relationship between abortion and breast cancer. They lie about the pain that a fetus feels during an abortion. And, they lie about the psychological damage abortion does to the woman. As well, Canadians do not have a choice in financially supporting abortion with their tax money.

No one is pro-choice, so stop using the term. If you’re pro-abortion, call yourself “pro-abortion.” If you’re afraid to, it only goes to prove that there is something wrong with abortion.