Posts by Mrs. Don-o

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • The hard truth about marriage, mercy and Eastern “oikonomia”

    09/16/2014 3:18:54 PM PDT · 4 of 5
    Mrs. Don-o to NYer

    to read later

  • Federal Judge Envisions 'Rape License' for 'Right to Rape'

    09/16/2014 3:13:48 PM PDT · 23 of 24
    Mrs. Don-o to Scoutmaster
    I don't have much time to comment on this (I'm just about out the door) but selling babies is a bad idea. Those who have the money to do it, are are materialistic enough to actually become party to buying humans, wouldn't be buying the children of the poor, whom they would regard as off-brand, possibly coming from doper fathers and unhealthy mothers who probably have diabetes and haven't been taking their prenatal vitamins. They'd be buying babies from healthy white college students and willing to pay the premium price. Adoption only works to the good of the child if the child is adopted because of the child's personal dignity and human need, not because of the adult's wants or demands or yen for a lifestyle accessory.

    Further promoting the modern babies-are-property trend is a very, very bad idea.

  • Reigning and “Emeritus.” The Enigma of the Two Popes

    09/16/2014 8:51:00 AM PDT · 7 of 7
    Mrs. Don-o to wideawake; Cry if I Wanna
    Widewawake is speaking, I believe, of Antipope John XXIII (Baldassarre Cossa, 1370 – 1419).

    The fact that Angelo Roncalli (of the 20th century) took as his papal name "Pope John xxiii" indicated that he agreed ---- along with all church historians--- that the 15th century "John xxiii" was not legitimately elected.

  • Reigning and “Emeritus.” The Enigma of the Two Popes

    09/16/2014 8:47:50 AM PDT · 6 of 7
    Mrs. Don-o to Cry if I Wanna

    Not three legitimate popes. One pope: two false claimants.

  • Abortionist: “It’s Great” That 98% of the Babies He Aborted Were Hispanic

    09/16/2014 8:27:47 AM PDT · 19 of 41
    Mrs. Don-o to Ouchthatonehurt

    “Reproductive health” procedures - procedures that destroy reproduction and health.

  • Abortion ‘doula’: I was trained to ‘support’ women choosing gendercide

    09/16/2014 8:20:37 AM PDT · 14 of 16
    Mrs. Don-o to agere_contra

    I mean “pro-LIFE” counselor. Sheesh.

  • Federal Judge Envisions 'Rape License' for 'Right to Rape'

    09/16/2014 8:13:14 AM PDT · 18 of 24
    Mrs. Don-o to Kartographer

    And I suppose you’d have to throw out the soft little thigh bones and skulls and gristly stuff in hefty bags, at which point we’d have to object to the plastic.

  • Abortion ‘doula’: I was trained to ‘support’ women choosing gendercide

    09/16/2014 8:09:17 AM PDT · 11 of 16
    Mrs. Don-o to agere_contra; don-o
    "Ronan seems to be in for the long haul, as well. Abortion “strikes me as strangely similar to birth, only the opposite word and a different outcome.”"

    HOw about: "Ronan seems strikingly similar a loving, compassionate, caring pro-lie counselor on a Heavenly mission, only the opposite word and a different outcome."

    That's what always leaves me stunned: the depth of the human capacity for self-deception. It's frightening, appalling really. And since it's part of our fallen human nature, it's part of my nature, too. It reminds me of my (neglected) duty to really examine my conscience.

  • Obama urges Scotland not to ruin America's 'special relationship'..by voting for independence

    09/16/2014 7:58:35 AM PDT · 64 of 80
    Mrs. Don-o to C19fan

    "Gae Hame, ye Scoom!"

  • Obama urges Scotland not to ruin America's 'special relationship'..by voting for independence

    09/16/2014 7:56:39 AM PDT · 62 of 80
    Mrs. Don-o to Colonel_Flagg

    Everything Chairman Zero touches turns to Detroit.

  • Federal Judge Envisions 'Rape License' for 'Right to Rape'

    09/16/2014 7:50:04 AM PDT · 15 of 24
    Mrs. Don-o to Mrs. Don-o

    I guess I run he same risk as Samuel Johnson with his “Modest Proposal”.

  • Federal Judge Envisions 'Rape License' for 'Right to Rape'

    09/16/2014 7:47:59 AM PDT · 12 of 24
    Mrs. Don-o to Scoutmaster

    Or lawful to barbecue babies and sell juicy hunks of them from vending carts on the streets.

  • Premarital Sex is a Mortal Sin – Of this we must be clear and insist on repentance as the...

    09/16/2014 7:40:29 AM PDT · 12 of 17
    Mrs. Don-o to GeronL
    "Pope Francis doesn’t seem to agree."

    I believe that is loose talk that discourages the just and damages the church --- and it is unfounded in fact.

    Pope Francis does everything he canto encourage fornicators to turn away from fornication and get married.

    Here is Pope Francis' homily to the couples and congregation (remember that it is based on this Sunday's readings for the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross. The first reading was about Moses' making a bronze seraph serpent and putting it on a pole to cure people of their snakebite; after they'd been bitten as a punishment for their sins, and the Gospel reading relates this to the Cross):

    "Today’s first reading speaks to us of the people’s journey through the desert. We can imagine them as they walked, led by Moses; they were families: fathers, mothers, sons and daughters, grandparents, men and women of all ages, accompanied by many children and the elderly who struggled to make the journey. This people reminds us of the Church as she makes her way across the desert of the contemporary world, reminds us of the People of God composed, for the most part, of families.

    " This makes us think of families, our families, walking along the paths of life with all their day to day experiences. It is impossible to quantify the strength and depth of humanity contained in a family: mutual help, educational support, relationships developing as family members mature, the sharing of joys and difficulties. Families are the first place in which we are formed as persons and, at the same time, the "bricks" for the building up of society.

    " Let us return to the biblical story. At a certain point, "the people became impatient on the way" (Num 21:4). They are tired, water supplies are low and all they have for food is manna, which, although plentiful and sent by God, seems far too meagre in a time of crisis. And so they complain and protest against God and against Moses: "Why did you make us leave?..." (cf. Num. 21:5). They are tempted to turn back and abandon the journey.

    " Here our thoughts turn to married couples who "become impatient on the way", the way of conjugal and family life. The hardship of the journey causes them to experience interior weariness; they lose the flavor of matrimony and they cease to draw water from the well of the Sacrament. Daily life becomes burdensome, and often, even "nauseating".

    " During such moments of disorientation – the Bible says – poisonous serpents come and bite the people, and many die. This causes the people to repent and to turn to Moses for forgiveness, asking him to beseech the Lord so that he will cast out the snakes. Moses prays to the Lord, and the Lord offers a remedy: a bronze serpent set on a pole; whoever looks at it will be saved from the deadly poison of the vipers.

    " What is the meaning of this symbol? God does not destroy the serpents, but rather offers an "antidote": by means of the bronze serpent fashioned by Moses, God transmits his healing strength, namely his mercy, which is more potent than the Tempter’s poison.

    "As we have heard in the Gospel, Jesus identifies himself with this symbol: out of love the Father "has given" his only begotten Son so that men and women might have eternal life (cf. Jn 3:13-17). Such immense love of the Father spurs the Son to become man, to become a servant and to die for us upon a cross. Out of such love, the Father raises up his son, giving him dominion over the entire universe. This is expressed by Saint Paul in his hymn in the Letter to the Philippians (cf. 2:6-11). Whoever entrusts himself to Jesus crucified receives the mercy of God and finds healing from the deadly poison of sin.

    "The cure which God offers the people applies also, in a particular way, to spouses who "have become impatient on the way" and who succumb to the dangerous temptation of discouragement, infidelity, weakness, abandonment… To them too, God the Father gives his Son Jesus, not to condemn them, but to save them: if they entrust themselves to him, he will bring them healing by the merciful love which pours forth from the Cross, with the strength of his grace that renews and sets married couples and families once again on the right path.

    " The love of Christ, which has blessed and sanctified the union of husband and wife, is able to sustain their love and to renew it when, humanly speaking, it becomes lost, wounded or worn out. The love of Christ can restore to spouses the joy of journeying together. This is what marriage is all about: man and woman walking together, wherein the husband helps his wife to become ever more a woman, and wherein the woman has the task of helping her husband to become ever more a man.[My note: this theology of male-female reciprocity is the exact and definitive refutation of the ideology of "gay" "marriage".}

    " This is the task that you both share. "I love you, and for this love I help you to become ever more a woman"; "I love you, and for this love I help you to become ever more a man". Here we see the reciprocity of differences.[Heterosexual reciprocity again.] The path is not always a smooth one, free of disagreements, otherwise it would not be human. It is a demanding journey, at times difficult, and at times turbulent, but such is life! Within this theology which the word of God offers us concerning the people on a journey, spouses on a journey, I would like to give you some advice. It is normal for husband and wife to argue: it’s normal. It always happens. But my advice is this: never let the day end without having first made peace. Never! A small gesture is sufficient. Thus the journey may continue. Marriage is a symbol of life, real life: it is not "fiction"! It is the Sacrament of the love of Christ and the Church, a love which finds its proof and guarantee in the Cross. My desire for you is that you have a good journey, a fruitful one, growing in love. I wish you happiness. There will be crosses! But the Lord is always there to help us move forward. May the Lord bless you!"

    * * *

    He is encouraging them to repent and seek healing as did the Hebrew people in the desert. He is directing them to the Cross of Christ for this healing.

    I can't fault him for that.

  • If ISIS Is Not Islamic, then the Inquisition Was Not Catholic

    09/15/2014 10:02:27 AM PDT · 30 of 83
    Mrs. Don-o to ryan71

    I’m not disagreeing with you.

  • If ISIS Is Not Islamic, then the Inquisition Was Not Catholic

    09/15/2014 9:24:10 AM PDT · 19 of 83
    Mrs. Don-o to ryan71
    Not all the Germans were Nazis.

    And not all the Nazis were Germans.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/15/2014 7:47:17 AM PDT · 103 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to NonValueAdded
    OK.

    I give you evidence (google "cost of a Catholic annulment" and see what you find: $400 - $1,00 average, sliding scale down to zero in cases of financial distress, cheap compared to civil divorce,and it's a money-losing proposition for most dioceses);

    And you give:

    Two words.

    "The Kennedies."

    The. Kennedies.

    And not even any facts about "The" "Kennedies". How much DID Congressman Joe P. Kennedy II pay for his annulment? And then Joan Rauch Kennedy, his ex, had it overturned on appeal to the Vatican. How much did SHE pay? More than he did?

    Any what were the grounds?

    Give me the financial facts, the case-law facts, and do the same for Ted and Joan Bennett Kennedy, and for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Mary Richardson Kennedy.

    Otherwise, you're just arguing from tabloids, and generalizing from worst-case scenarios, when you should be arguing from evidence.

    And by the way,at least in the case of Ted, the marriage was arguably null because Ted's vows were knowingly fraudulent: he did not intend, from the git-go, for the marriage to be either unbreakable until death, or sexually exclusive/faithful. That what Joan told Adam Clymer, author of Edward M. Kennedy: A Biography. In this case, what would be your argument? You have, logically, 2 choices:

    Either a consciously fraudulent vow, involving deception of the marriage partner, is a lawful and valid Sacramental act, or

    Marriage is still binding on both partners for life, whether one partner deliberately lied or not, whether there was a real sacrament or not, whether it was --- as the Church sees it -- a marriage or not!

    Which would be your position?

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/15/2014 5:11:09 AM PDT · 100 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to ravenwolf

    “All the hubbub” is about journalists who don’t know jack chick about Canon Law.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/15/2014 5:10:20 AM PDT · 99 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to ravenwolf
    THis is unfair generalization. You started off saying, "No the mother does not have to marry the father of her child, she can be a bitch." (Generalizing that this is the action of a bitch.)

    Then after I objected, you crafted a particular case in which the woman's behavior was for multiple ways reprehensible. ("...for a woman to deliberately get pregnant and then refuse the man who would do the right thing just because she wants to be independent and live off of the taxpayers.")

    In other words, you offered the truly foul situation AFTER you had made an unfair generalization to all cases.

    I still object to the generalization.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/15/2014 5:05:04 AM PDT · 98 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to Kansas58
    I can imagine being "very put off by the Tribunals' actions in more than one case in my area."

    That, however, does not generalize to "The formal annulment process is often corrupt and unfair."

    That you were bothered by it does not mean that it was unjust and unfair. Did you have access to all the depositions, all the testimony? (You ought not to have, in any case, since there's that would be a violation of confidentiality unless you were either the petitioner or the respondent.)

    And even if the Tribunal were "corrupt and unfair" in the cases you are thinking of, that does not mean that the process across the board is "often" corrupt and unfair.

    It is more likely, I think, that the process is usually exacting, conscientiously applied, and realistically designed to be fair to all parties; sometimes mistaken (not infrequently because of perjured testimony); very, very rarely corrupt.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/15/2014 4:53:20 AM PDT · 97 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to Gamecock
    Then I offer you this #96 for your consideration.

    As far as I can see it, I would argue this is the only canonically acceptable answer.

    And as for those who reflexively impute bad motivations to the Pope, I think that is wrong to do to anyone --- anyone whasoever. That is precisely the kind of thing we cannot judge justly --- a person's interior disposition --- unless they tell us themselves.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/15/2014 4:42:01 AM PDT · 96 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to Wyrd bið ful aræd
    "If she had a child and the child's natural father wasn't married to her, isn't married to her, was married to her but isn't any more, and/or won't marry her..."
    I'll let you play a little guessing game with yourself and decide which of these allow for the person in question to marry and which don't.
    "

    OK, thanks, but it won't involve guessing.

    In all of the above scenarios, if the woman now wishes to marry a man who is eligible (he is of the male sex, he is not castrated or permanently impotent, he is not already married to someone else, he has not taken a vow not to marry, he has the appropriate intentions for the Sacrament of Matrimony, he is mentally competent, he is not within prohibited degrees of kinship, and he is willing) --- there being no canonical impediments on either side--- , and they are in a state of grace, having confessed and repented their past sins, then they are good to go, marriage-wise, and they have a right to marry because they have a right to the sacraments for which they are eligible.

    One thing that sadly prevents a lot of people from marrying as they ought, is that they had a messed-up period in their lives (typically late teens and early 20's) in which they made bad choices,committed serious sins, and now feel they are shut out from God and the Church for the rest of their lives.

    The Pope is saying,"No, you're not ruined forever. In Christ there is merciful forgiveness of sins, and you can have a new and redeemed life --- even a good married life --- because of Him."

    "Its the message he wants to send."
    It is prudence and justice, as well as charity, to impute the best motives. It's the sin of Rash Judgment --- and/or its allied sins Slander and Detraction --- to impute the worst motives. There's way too much of that around here.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 6:37:00 PM PDT · 85 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to Wyrd bið ful aræd
    Here is Pope Francis' homily to the couples and congregation (remember that it is based on this Sunday's readings for the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross. The first reading was about Moses' making a bronze seraph serpent and putting it on a pole to cure people of their snakebite; after they'd been bitten as a punishment for their sins):

    "Today’s first reading speaks to us of the people’s journey through the desert. We can imagine them as they walked, led by Moses; they were families: fathers, mothers, sons and daughters, grandparents, men and women of all ages, accompanied by many children and the elderly who struggled to make the journey. This people reminds us of the Church as she makes her way across the desert of the contemporary world, reminds us of the People of God composed, for the most part, of families.

    " This makes us think of families, our families, walking along the paths of life with all their day to day experiences. It is impossible to quantify the strength and depth of humanity contained in a family: mutual help, educational support, relationships developing as family members mature, the sharing of joys and difficulties. Families are the first place in which we are formed as persons and, at the same time, the "bricks" for the building up of society.

    " Let us return to the biblical story. At a certain point, "the people became impatient on the way" (Num 21:4). They are tired, water supplies are low and all they have for food is manna, which, although plentiful and sent by God, seems far too meagre in a time of crisis. And so they complain and protest against God and against Moses: "Why did you make us leave?..." (cf. Num. 21:5). They are tempted to turn back and abandon the journey.

    " Here our thoughts turn to married couples who "become impatient on the way", the way of conjugal and family life. The hardship of the journey causes them to experience interior weariness; they lose the flavor of matrimony and they cease to draw water from the well of the Sacrament. Daily life becomes burdensome, and often, even "nauseating".

    " During such moments of disorientation – the Bible says – poisonous serpents come and bite the people, and many die. This causes the people to repent and to turn to Moses for forgiveness, asking him to beseech the Lord so that he will cast out the snakes. Moses prays to the Lord, and the Lord offers a remedy: a bronze serpent set on a pole; whoever looks at it will be saved from the deadly poison of the vipers.

    " What is the meaning of this symbol? God does not destroy the serpents, but rather offers an "antidote": by means of the bronze serpent fashioned by Moses, God transmits his healing strength, namely his mercy, which is more potent than the Tempter’s poison.

    "As we have heard in the Gospel, Jesus identifies himself with this symbol: out of love the Father "has given" his only begotten Son so that men and women might have eternal life (cf. Jn 3:13-17). Such immense love of the Father spurs the Son to become man, to become a servant and to die for us upon a cross. Out of such love, the Father raises up his son, giving him dominion over the entire universe. This is expressed by Saint Paul in his hymn in the Letter to the Philippians (cf. 2:6-11). Whoever entrusts himself to Jesus crucified receives the mercy of God and finds healing from the deadly poison of sin.

    "The cure which God offers the people applies also, in a particular way, to spouses who "have become impatient on the way" and who succumb to the dangerous temptation of discouragement, infidelity, weakness, abandonment… To them too, God the Father gives his Son Jesus, not to condemn them, but to save them: if they entrust themselves to him, he will bring them healing by the merciful love which pours forth from the Cross, with the strength of his grace that renews and sets married couples and families once again on the right path.

    " The love of Christ, which has blessed and sanctified the union of husband and wife, is able to sustain their love and to renew it when, humanly speaking, it becomes lost, wounded or worn out. The love of Christ can restore to spouses the joy of journeying together. This is what marriage is all about: man and woman walking together, wherein the husband helps his wife to become ever more a woman, and wherein the woman has the task of helping her husband to become ever more a man.

    " This is the task that you both share. "I love you, and for this love I help you to become ever more a woman"; "I love you, and for this love I help you to become ever more a man". Here we see the reciprocity of differences. The path is not always a smooth one, free of disagreements, otherwise it would not be human. It is a demanding journey, at times difficult, and at times turbulent, but such is life! Within this theology which the word of God offers us concerning the people on a journey, spouses on a journey, I would like to give you some advice. It is normal for husband and wife to argue: it’s normal. It always happens. But my advice is this: never let the day end without having first made peace. Never! A small gesture is sufficient. Thus the journey may continue. Marriage is a symbol of life, real life: it is not "fiction"! It is the Sacrament of the love of Christ and the Church, a love which finds its proof and guarantee in the Cross. My desire for you is that you have a good journey, a fruitful one, growing in love. I wish you happiness. There will be crosses! But the Lord is always there to help us move forward. May the Lord bless you!" * * * He is encouraging them to repent and seek healing as did the Hebrew people in the desert. He is directing them to the Cross of Christ for this healing.

    I can't fault him for that.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 6:27:22 PM PDT · 84 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to Kansas58

    This doesn’t answer, or even address, my question. How can you make a generalization about many annulments being corrupt or unfair, without offering any facts that would support your accusation? You are making a judgment about the operations of an institution that affects tens of thousands of couples per year in the US alone, a judgment which involves imputing moral culpability (”corrupt, unfair” entails moral fault) and you “refuse” to give facts or reasonable inferences from facts??

    Are we supposed to accept sweeping insinuations of immoral, corrupt and unjust behavior without evidence? Is this just? Or are we just supposed to be credulous?

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 6:06:18 PM PDT · 74 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to Ransomed

    “Any stick...”

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 6:05:32 PM PDT · 73 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to metmom
    I mean "Ecclesia semper reformanda."

    I don't know if that was a typo or a grammar-o.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 6:02:17 PM PDT · 71 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to metmom

    The Church is constantly to be reformed. Ecclesia semper reformandi.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 5:59:53 PM PDT · 69 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to ravenwolf
    "No the mother does not have to marry the father of her child, she can be a bitch."

    That's an exceptionally foul and malicious thing to say.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 5:58:14 PM PDT · 67 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to GeronL

    Which sins do you think he thinks are OK, based on this article?

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 5:57:12 PM PDT · 66 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to ravenwolf; Arthur McGowan

    As Fr. Arthur McGowan commented in a previous response, there is no “taboo” here. These situation occur in every parish and are handled the same way. As long as the to-be-marrieds are eligible to marry each other, there’s no canonical impediment, and they are in a state of grace (having repented previous sins with a firm desire of amendment) they really can’t be denied marriage. None of these situations are, on the face of them, in violation of Canon Law.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 5:51:47 PM PDT · 61 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to Wyrd bið ful aræd

    Your judgment reflects prejudice.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 5:51:14 PM PDT · 60 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to RetiredTexasVet

    Bet you $5,000 he doesn’t.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 5:49:39 PM PDT · 59 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to NonValueAdded; Gamecock
    Dear Non Value, Annulment are not sold.

    In cases of financial distress, there is no charge for an annulment.

    If you are really poor, it costs nothing. If you have limited means, you pay as much of the fee as you can. If you have means, you pay the full tribunal fee which ranges from $500 to $1,000 depending on the complexity of the case. E.g. if they have to collect documents or depositions from people in another country or have them translated from a different language that costs more.

    I read that Catholic marriage tribunals in the U.S. ended up $14,000,000 in the red last year. It is not now and never was a money-making proposition. Tribunal fees are minimal compared to civil divorce fees.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 5:41:46 PM PDT · 55 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to Wyrd bið ful aræd
    "As it is presented, it appears she had a child with one guy and then went and married a different guy."

    I'll admit I don't quite get it. If she had a child and the child's natural father wasn't married to her, isn't married to her, was married to her but isn't any more, and/or won't marry her, is she supposed to stay unmarried for the rest of her life?

    Maybe you'll object that this isn't your point. But --- honest question -- what IS your point? Was she wrong to get married?

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 5:35:02 PM PDT · 52 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to Gamecock

    Do you have an objection to any of these cases? I’m interested.

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 5:33:26 PM PDT · 50 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to onedoug
    "He did this with no instruction with regard to Catholic marriage, at all?.... And how many of these were non-Catholics?"

    Maybe I read it too fast. Sometimes I miss relevant facts. Did the article say either of these two things?

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 5:31:53 PM PDT · 49 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to Wyrd bið ful aræd

    Is this a sin?

  • Pope Breaks Taboo By Marrying Couples Who Lived 'In Sin'

    09/14/2014 5:30:46 PM PDT · 47 of 105
    Mrs. Don-o to Kansas58
    "The formal annulment process is often corrupt and unfair."

    That kind of generalization doesn't sit well with me. It's the kind of careless jibe that would come easily to mouth if you thought annulments are too easy to get, or too hard; that there are too many, or too few; that most people know to scam the system, or that it's so arcane nobody knows how to navigate it.

    In other words, it's a charge than can be "proven" in some people's eyes by any one-off impression or anecdote, no matter how casual, and cannot be DIS-proven by any actual fact or collection of facts, no matter how weighty.

    I could accept "the annulment process can be frustrating," or "baffling" or "emotionally difficult". The dozen or so I've seen up close as an RCIA leader trying to prepare divorced/remarried people for reception of the Sacraments, have been all that.

    --- but I can't accept "corrupt and unfair." Unless you can adduce sufficient evidence. I do listen to evidence.

  • Ross Shouldn’t Do That (Ref: Ross Douthat’s New York Times hit piece on Ted Cruz)

    09/14/2014 4:57:10 PM PDT · 11 of 12
    Mrs. Don-o to stanne; elcid1970
    The late George Habash was a Lebanese Orthodox Christian Secretary General of the PFLP (GC): Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command.

    He was reportedly the political mentor for some of the people at the IDC conference, who wish to mold the middle-east Christians as a constituency or political movement distinct from both the Jews (Israel) and the Muslims (Islamic nationalism.)

    I don't know much about it. That's all I can contribute.

  • Nothing Between My Soul and the Savior! Really? Help us, Lord!

    09/14/2014 6:57:09 AM PDT · 51 of 52
    Mrs. Don-o to Tax-chick

    Chupacabra? I’m green and mottled with envy!

  • College: Students must agree ‘why’ they had sex to avoid sexual assault charges

    09/14/2014 6:54:11 AM PDT · 51 of 52
    Mrs. Don-o to bigdaddy45; MichaelCorleone
    "There has never been a time when few had any sex prior to marriage. At least within the last 1000 years."

    There's no way you could know that.

  • College: Students must agree ‘why’ they had sex to avoid sexual assault charges

    09/13/2014 6:21:45 PM PDT · 27 of 52
    Mrs. Don-o to SeekAndFind

    Why don’t they get married? Seems less complicated.

  • In Defense of Christians Says Ted Cruz Was Not Booed; Critics Wanted Focus on Christians, not Israel

    09/13/2014 6:12:27 PM PDT · 9 of 42
    Mrs. Don-o to Rome2000
    Google "In Defense of Christians" (IDF) Hezbollah

    At LiveLeak. Take it for what it's worth.

    The Clinton/Terrorist Connection: Ted Cruz Booed

    Questions surround a Washington, D.C. conference whose stated purpose was to gather lawmakers, Eastern and Western churches, community leaders and a variety of Christian groups to confront the problem of genocide being perpetrated against Christians by ISIS.

    by Dr. Susan Berry

    According to Alana Goodman, writing at the Washington Free Beacon, In Defense of Christians (IDC) was funded by a controversial Clinton donor that featured pro-Hezbollah and pro-Assad speakers.

    Clinton donor and Lebanese-Nigerian billionaire Gilbert Chagoury, who pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative in 2009, reportedly provided funding for the IDC summit.

    Chagoury, says the Free Beacon, also has backed Lebanese politician Michel Aoun, Hezbollah’s main Christian ally in the country, according to United States diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks.

    Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8e3_1410507598&comments=1#ZezYBbMkuvhVTIXs.99

  • Nothing Between My Soul and the Savior! Really? Help us, Lord!

    09/13/2014 5:57:29 PM PDT · 46 of 52
    Mrs. Don-o to Tax-chick

    No Frigga'n paganism!!
  • Santa Rosa Diocese: Teacher Contract Update Affirming Catholic Teaching Will Happen

    09/13/2014 6:21:30 AM PDT · 8 of 11
    Mrs. Don-o to DoodleDawg
    That's generally the way it is, isn't it, in this world of human freedom and human failings?

    The only alternatives would be universal hostile surveillance, and/or brain implants to make you think and do as ordered.

    Neither of which the Church is interested in.

  • Santa Rosa Diocese: Teacher Contract Update Affirming Catholic Teaching Will Happen

    09/13/2014 4:54:36 AM PDT · 4 of 11
    Mrs. Don-o to DoodleDawg
    1) Anyone who doesn't sign it doesn't get hired.

    2) Anyone who does sign it and publicly violates the contract, gets fired.

    3) No penalty for "secret" violation, since the Church doesn't do surveillance.

  • Nun says misery of Iraqis ‘pierced my heart like a knife’

    09/12/2014 6:16:27 PM PDT · 6 of 9
    Mrs. Don-o to NYer
    God save the Christian people of Iraq and Syria. God save all the people of good will. God save these good Sisters and peple of any faith who are doing everything they can to help them.

    God will be merciful to the merciful. Guaranteed.

  • Ted Cruz Takes Tough Stands For Religious Liberty

    09/12/2014 6:11:25 PM PDT · 16 of 54
    Mrs. Don-o to jazusamo

    Cruz is one of the VERY few men in Washington I respect. Like, maybe only two: him and Trey Gowdy. Is there a third?

  • Woman of 24 found to have no cerebellum in her brain

    09/12/2014 4:26:07 PM PDT · 67 of 71
    Mrs. Don-o to don-o; Red Badger; St_Thomas_Aquinas; NorthMountain
    Some of you guys may be interested in this:

    #65

  • Nothing Between My Soul and the Savior! Really? Help us, Lord!

    09/12/2014 3:29:36 PM PDT · 33 of 52
    Mrs. Don-o to cloudmountain
    Yeah. COFFEEcoffeecoffee....

    :o)

  • Woman of 24 found to have no cerebellum in her brain

    09/12/2014 3:00:04 PM PDT · 65 of 71
    Mrs. Don-o to don-o
    It's a little disappointing that almost all the comments were jokes. I actually love the science in this kind of story. There was a time--- quite recently, actually--- when neuroscientists thought that the brain lacked the capacity to heal itself. Now we're hearing of people's brains spontaneously rewiring to regain function despite the most terrible injuries.

    My favorite story was from one of the early homeschooling pioneers --- was it Ray Moore? -- who told of a little baby girl born missing most of her brain. Docs said she wouldn't live, so the parents might as well leave her in the hospital and say goodbye, but the parents, homeschoolers, decided to take her home.

    Their older children had small, regular care-giving tasks to do with the baby, feeding, stimulation, giving her baths, just carrying her around a lot. She survived but for several years never seemed to respond. Her facial expression never showed comprehension or attention or interest, and her muscle tone was terrible: at about 3 or 4 all they could do was to prop her up in a sitting position. But they always talked to her, sang for her, read to her.

    One day at the usual reading time, she was propped sitting on the floor, with her back to the couch, but the sister who was supposed to be reading to her was delayed half an hour. When the sister came back, she found the "unresponsive" brain-damaged little girl had crawled over to the bookcase, pulled the correct book off the shelf, and actually had managed to open it to the correct page.

    Later medical investigation revealed that she never spoke or even appeared to comprehend anything because she had almost no control over the muscles of her face.

    The family started on a program of exercising her face muscles and general strength-building routines---

    I don't know, last thing I heard (this was years ago) she was reading, writing, laughing, and ice-skating.