What Does The Holy Father Know?

     Pope Francis has embarked on his adventure to the United States of America, and in so doing has received both accolades and admonitions from both the Left and Right. The Left does not like his talk of religious freedom and pro-life convictions, and the Right does not like his advocacy for global warming and wealth redistribution. It is hard to understand where this Pope stands on the issues, or maybe more to the point, he should not stand anywhere except keeping alive the message of Jesus Christ, of whom he is suppose to be the direct successor.
     It is easy for the Pontiff to criticize capitalism in America, remain silent on communism in Cuba, and preach wealth distribution as a means to solve poverty in the world. I say it is easy because it really does not affect the Holy Father one bit. He, like many in the clergy hierarchy of the Catholic church live cloistered lives, not so much participating in the world, but watching from a different planet and passing judgment. The Vicar of Christ has traded the simple robes and sandals of a savior for the opulence of Vatican City and the protection from the outside world it offers.
     So, for instance, it costs Pope Francis nothing to give stern warnings about America taking in refugees from around the world, because he knows that Vatican City will not be held to the same standard. It is quite effortless for Francis to advocate for distributing others wealth around the world when his lifestyle will not be impacted by such a redistribution. Somehow the Church, and most notably Vatican City, will escape the rigors of redistribution and receiving immigrants, legal or illegal.
     Pope Francis can play the compassionate man of God while having personal chefs and drivers. He can preach to others about "social justice" while not getting his hands dirty by speaking against the specific injustice of the atrocities being committed against his flock by members of a different faith. He can preach the false gospel of man-made climate change because it is easier than dealing forthrightly with abortion, and the murdering and organ harvesting done by those who support this barbaric practice. The Pontiff lives in his bubble of misperception spoon-fed to him by his handlers and  advisors.
     Growing up Catholic I was taught that the Pope was infallible on matters of faith. Of course back then the Pope's pointy hat did not tilt to the Left. Pope Francis has not only limited himself to matters of faith, but has made political pandering part of the faith. His virtual removal from the real world is necessarily a result of his position. He has no more concept of the world's problems, and apparently the difference between good systems of government from evil systems of government, as does a small child or an alien from another planet.

Texas Sharia Law And The Easily Escalated

     In the high charged, 24/7 information overloaded environment which technology and political evangelism have created in this country, sometimes those on both sides of the aisle cut the tethers of reason which keep human emotions in check. The latest of these tethers comes out of Texas where some on the unhinged Right have convinced their brethren across the country that Sharia Law is coming to every town and hamlet for the purpose of transforming the United States of America from a Christian nation into an Islamic one.
     Let me state for the record that I think radical Islam is a danger to peace, freedom, and the tenets of Liberty enshrined by the founders of this country in its originating documents. But is what is being suggested in Texas anathema to those values, or just a legitimate practice of them? The fact is that the Islamic Tribunal suggesting that Sharia Law be allowed in Texas only applies to willing Muslims in the course of practicing their religion. And they have said that civil U.S. law will take precedence.
     Now of course the solicitude for the American justice system by Mujahed Bakhach, a member of the Islamic Tribunal in Texas, could be just a subterfuge practiced in order to get Sharia Law's foot in the door of the United States justice system. After all, the tribunal's function sounds fairly innocuous; settling disputes among its members, including the practice of Khula, which is when a woman initiates a divorce against her husband.
     Many religious faiths in America have tribunals and courts to mete out the justice of their faith's religious tenets on their congregants. The Catholic church has its council of bishops and even requires votaries of the faith in other countries to follow the edicts of a Pope who is domiciled in Rome, Italy. But always the precepts of any faith's system of justice can not directly challenge the laws of the United States' constitution.
     Many of the easily escalated on the Right have recently been trying to convince others that if the Texas Islamic Tribunal is allowed to engage in the practice of their religion in the same manner other faiths have done in this country since its founding, they will somehow destroy our form of constitutional government and we will all end up slaves of radical Islam.
     We should approach with caution anything which threatens the natural laws which originate the rights of all human beings, and which were outlined in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, and the Federalist Papers. But in so doing we should not restrict those rights for any segment of the population, no matter their faith. The legitimate practice of one faith in limitation by civil law is a limitation on all faiths and therefore an affront to the very values and principles in which we believe and hold dear.    

The Heresy Of The Non-Judgmental

     The Founders of this great nation, some of whom were not especially religious, created a system of government that respected and enshrined the free exercise of religion into the Constitution. They knew that a secular government could only succeed if it were populated with religious men. Since the time of the Founding, the pollution of Leftist thought has convinced many that expression of religious faith should be cloistered in private and not shared publicly for fear that it might violate someone's rights, and the non-existent constitutionality of separation of church and state.
     The Left has redefined deviancy as normal by essentially outlawing judgment of it. And the path of righteousness has, under the guise of being "enlightened," become a road less traveled by those afraid of being judged bigots by the very ones who have outlawed judgment by everyone else. The resulting debasement of virtue in our society has resulted in an out-of-wedlock birth rate of 43% in the United States, the spread of the impoverishment of the culture, over 50% of the populace dependent on government handouts in one way or another, and most importantly the rise of radical Islam and radical Leftism which are the twin barbarians to the coming age of darkness and oppression.
     Even the traditional arbiters of virtue and Godliness, the churches, have joined the fray of the non-judgmental. Choosing to be liked over spreading the laws of God, of leading their flocks down the path of damnation over doing the hard work of saving souls, and of being one with the world instead of making the world one with the laws of God. Many of these faiths have chosen the ephemeral nature of modernity over the eternal nature of God's righteousness. And in so doing, in not taking upon themselves the burden of judgment, they have fallen short of their promise to God.
     True judgment based on the laws of God is a burden, especially in a world that becomes ever reticent to the message of salvation. If we as a nation, and more importantly as God's representatives on earth, do not judge sin, then we are as guilty as the sinner of those sins. For of what use is preaching the forgiveness of God if there is no sin having been judged worthy of forgiveness? And what value is there in preaching the Good News if we are unwilling to acknowledge, i.e. judge, the opposite? For there can not be light without first judging the darkness, and there can not be good without judging what is evil.
     The heresy of the non-judgmental has cleared a path for the inequities of myriad sins. And in so doing has lead the people of God into darkness and hardship. There is no greater void than that of the Godless life, and without the cleansing power of judgment the chasm of sin swallows the rock of salvation and weakens the ground upon where humans stand.

Admonitions From A Former Altar Boy

     I was born into the Catholic faith and completed 12 years of Catholic education. I was an altar boy in grade school, helping the priests in my parish celebrate mass on the weekends and many times early in the morning before school began. I guess like many Catholic boys I thought about becoming a priest for period of time, but rejected the idea once my hormones really began to kick in. I always thought that my faith was a beautiful expression of God's law precisely because it was not of this world. I did not always keep that faith, but I always thought it was worth keeping.
     The ways in which the Catholic church has prostituted itself to modernity has sickened me over the last few decades. From the enabling and encouraging of gambling amongst their flock, to support by their priests and nuns of Democrats who support abortion, the church which Jesus built upon his Apostle Peter, the "Rock," has lately had a foundation of ever shifting sand. And the worst part is that instead of a Holy Father that is the Vicar of Christ, we have in Pope Francis an unholy alliance with the sins of the world for the sake of progressiveness.
     Pope Francis's recent welcoming of gays and of his blessing of co-habitation by unmarried couples is evidence of a Church that has lost its way in the darkness that is the human heart. The Church was not meant by Christ to be progressive, it did not need to progress, it was already at its destination from the moment Jesus bestowed upon Peter the task of shouldering His Church here on earth. Being His Church meant that its tenets were those of God in heaven, not of man on earth.
     The Catholic Church, through Pope Francis, is becoming transformed from the Church of Christ into the Church of Leftism. The Leftist faith has infected the Vatican with the destructive tenets of "social justice," homosexual tolerance, anti-capitalism, and extreme environmentalism. Instead of living by the credo that Christ left his followers of "If the world hates you, remember it hated me first," the current Church under the leadership of Pope Francis seems to be one of placating a sinful world.
     To Pope Francis, who has changed the mission of the church from being God's rock here on earth, to an ever malleable mudslide of moderation. And to all the Cardinals and Bishops who have allowed themselves and the Church to become one with the world. And to all the priests and nuns who have violated their sacred trust with God by supporting those who do not respect the sanctity of life. And finally to all those Catholics who have turned away from the word of God in favor of the words of fools and charlatans who practice the false faith of Leftism. Your Church is dying the death that all things of the world die.
     As for me, I continue to wander through this world witnessing the death of faith, and it only makes my faith stronger. I continue to see the false prophets in and out of the Church leading their flocks to the barren meadows of sin, and I am steeled in my determination to search for God's meadow of righteousness. I see the Church I once respected for their dedication to God's law becoming disciples of the whims of man, and I am saddened. But there is hope for all those who seek that Rock, and who eagerly hunger for the Word. But you must first abandon the sinking ship of your faith and find a new faith as you cling to the life preserver of your personal relationship with God.

The Left Sees No Separation Of Mosque And State

     Some of Barack Obama's opponents accuse him of being Muslim, his supporters vehemently defend his Christianity. Me, I think he is a practicing narcissist. That being said, I do believe he sympathizes more with Islam than Christendom, in fact there are dozens of examples of his fondness for the Muslim faith that are part of the public record on the subject. The one that I feel is most damning is when he stated, "The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam."
     This statement by Barack Obama as President of the United States is telling in so much as it is not something that any other president has said, or would say. It is also interesting that he chose the expression must not instead of should not, as the former denotes action to prevent, and the latter is just a statement of wishful thinking. President Obama, as president, is stating that action must be taken to prevent the future from belonging to those who slander the prophet of Islam.
     Another truth about Mr. Obama's statement is what it does not say. He did not say that the future must not belong to those who slander any faith, only Islam. So apparently in the world of Barack Obama, slanderers of Jesus Christ, Buddha, or any other religious icon can own as much of the future as they wish as long as they leave Mohammed alone. This is probably because the practitioners of these other faiths have thicker skins and do not go around beheading those who do not believe as they do.
     Barack Obama's statement is also interesting as it relates to the Lefts preaching the gospel of separation of church and state, which does not exist anywhere in the U.S. Constitution. One could argue that what President Obama did in the officiousness of his position was directly in violation of the constitution's establishment clause of the First Amendment. He singled out Islam, not only for special mention, but since he denoted action with the phrase must not, he singled out the faith for special protection from those practicing their First Amendment right to free speech. There is no bigger violation of the concept of separation of church and state, and the First Amendment, than for the President of the United States to single out a particular faith for special protection.
     The Left does not give special attention to Islam out of fear as much as it does so out of a kinship of ideology. It is no coincidence that the largest Leftist organization in the world, i.e., the United Nations, is also the most anti-Semitic. And anti-Semitism is not the only sacrament that the Left shares with Islam. The Left hates Western culture almost as much Islam does, and in so doing works to reduce its power and influence in the world at large. The Left also aims to keep women subservient as does Islam. The former accomplishes this goal through dependence on government, the latter through obedience to a male-dominated ideology.
     Mr. Obama's aforementioned statement about the prophet of Islam also shows a defense of a brutal and intolerant enemy of Western values and culture. There is no more intolerant statement than to say, in no uncertain terms, that free speech against religious doctrine and icons must not be allowed. And in this way, President Obama's statement is analogous to if President Roosevelt would have said, "The future must not belong to those who slander Adolf Hitler." What Barack Obama does not seem to understand is that the First Amendment of the constitution that he took an oath to defend and protect, not only acknowledges the right of free people to advocate for a particular faith, but it equally protects the right of those people to advocate against any faith by practicing their right of free speech.
      

Christianity Faces Two Front War

     Recently the Holy Father, Pope Francis, stated that Christians around the world face persecution not seen since the Roman Empire. In fact, the Pontiff said, that there are more Christian martyrs now than there were in the heyday of Romans' favorite pastime, slaying Christians by whatever means was available. The Vicar of Christ's statements need no more proof of their validity than for one to pay even a modicum of attention to world events.
     The persecution of Christians in the modern world comes almost entirely at the hands of radical Islam. But the flocks of Jesus must not only face physical persecution, but the political persecution of their right to freely practice their religion. Not only in places like North Korea and China, where one might expect restrictions on faith, but in the United States of America, which was founded on freedom of religious conscience.
     The imposition of Sharia Law and the imposition of Leftist ideology have in common the desire to forbid any public expression of any other faith but theirs. The narrowing of religious rights by the Obama administration is no less disturbing than the same goal of Sharia Law in the Middle East and elsewhere. But while radical Islamists use violence and the threats of violence to impose their religious will upon those of other faiths, the Obama administration has used the power of an over-bloated central government with extra-constitutional instruments like federal bureaucracies and legislation like ObamaCare.
      The actions of the Left and radical Islam are not symbiotic, but the ideology that drives both are. The Left in America and throughout the world are as single-mindedly radically dedicated to the tenets of their faith as radical Islamists are to Sharia Law. There is no more rabid a creature than a Leftist who aims to impose his doctrine on the whole of society. One might make the same argument about Conservatives, but with conservative ideology the aim is to limit the role of government in the lives of average citizens, which leads to more personal liberty, just the opposite of the Leftist's goal.
     Islamists throughout the world have tried to silence the Christian faith by beating, imprisoning, and even slaughtering those who practice it. In the United States, Leftists like Barack Obama have fought to remove public symbols of the Christian faith upon which this country was founded and built, and they have even gone as far as to force Christians to violate the very conscience of their faith. By forcing Christian businesses to participate in homosexual weddings, and to provide aborta fascias to their employees as part of their health care plan, Leftists have practiced a religious tyranny on par with Sharia Law.
      When the Holy Father made his statement about the persecution of Christians being at its worst in history, he was not simply engaging in religious hyperbole. The onslaught against the freedom of religious conscience from radical Islam and the far Left has ramifications not only for the faithful, but for all those who seek liberty in any form. If the natural right of man to be free in expressing his relationship with his creator by practicing the tenets of his faith can be mitigated or disposed by government or the practitioners of a faith not his own, then no liberty is safe from dispossession.

Arizona Legislation Was Anti-Discriminatory

     The new religious freedom bill in Arizona unfortunately is not going to become the law of the land in that state. Governor Jan Brewer vetoed the legislation under duress from radical homosexual groups. The legislation, and the concepts of religious freedom contained within, offended "gay rights" activists so much that they had to lie about the bill by characterizing it as discriminatory. As per usual, the Left is 180 degrees out of phase with reality.
      The legislation would have actually ensured that the religious beliefs of business owners would not be violated by the forced participation in activities that offend their moral and religious sensitivities. Sound familiar? It should, it is the very same moral correctness used to write the first amendment to the United States constitution. Of course, for the Left, there is no religious freedom, unless the religion is Leftism. And there is no freedom of speech unless it is in support of their religion.
     The vetoed legislation in Arizona, that would have protected citizens religious freedom, was   heralded by the Left as "anti-gay." But the Arizona legislation did not even mention homosexuals, let alone any restrictions placed upon them. But the Left sees any permission for persons to practice their faith, when it does not condone and celebrate their agenda, as discriminatory. The Left can not tolerate any moral conscience or individual thought, all must march to the beat of the group think drummer.
     If a baker has long-held religious beliefs that prevent him from making a wedding cake for a same sex couple, and the right to practice those beliefs are upheld by law, what is the detriment to any same sex couple? They are not being prevented from having their cake made by a baker who does not have such beliefs. By forcing the baker to make the cake, the radical homosexual community and others on the Left, have placed their rights above those of the baker. This is antithetical to the live-and-let-live spirit of the constitution.
      The Arizona situation has once again illustrated the Lefts unwillingness to practice constitutional principles, and its live-and-let-live tenet. It is not enough for those on the Left to engage in the sacraments of their corrupt faith, they aim to impose those sacraments on the whole of American society. They will bully, intimidate, lie, and cheat to bring to fruition their twisted vision of Utopia. A Utopia where thoughts no longer belong to the individual but to the State. A Utopia where religious faith is no longer in competition with Leftist secularism for the heart and soul of a nation. A Utopia that replaces virtue with vice and freedom with the chains of conformity.

Pope Francis Ends Church Support For Liberty

     Pope Francis, in the latest published pontiff pontification has signaled a change for the Catholic church from defender of freedom to purveyor of Marxist ideals. It is hard to believe that it was scarcely thirty years ago that Pope Francis' predecessor, Pope John Paul II, joined forces with Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher to oppose, and finally defeat the communist Soviet Union. But here we are thirty years later, and today's Pope not only refuses to oppose the practice of communist ideology, he has suggested the augmentation of such ideas as some sort of panacea to solve all the world's problems.
     The current Vicar of Christ wrote that much of the world's pain and suffering has been caused by "unfettered capitalism." I wonder in which part of the world His Holiness sees "unfettered capitalism?" The failings of capitalism have existed to the extent that government interferes with it, which allows crony capitalism to supplant free market capitalism. We have seen this corruption  practiced in this country for several decades, but it has been greatly accelerated under the Obama administration. Companies and businesses that have an "in" with the administration receive favorable treatment through legislation i.e., Dodd/Frank, or blatant political payoffs with taxpayer money, i.e., Solendra and the rest of the "green energy" sector.
     Pope Francis also wrote that more government is needed in the world, and that government needs to provide its people with health care and other essentials of life. I must have missed the Holy Father's appointment to the Obama administration, but it sounds as though he has fallen right in line with its talking points, "If you like your Catholicism, you can keep your Catholicism." Pope Francis may know matters of faith, but he is woefully under served by his knowledge of world history. The most tyranny and oppression throughout history has been practiced by unlimited governments, not limited ones.
     Of course no left-leaning treatise would be complete without its reference to "equality," and so it is with Pope Francis'. But what Leftists like the Pope fail to recognize is that all men are equal in the eyes of God, but God has also placed inequalities in men and nature in order for the proper functioning of a balanced world. Civilized and free societies can not function when its members have equality forced upon them. And throughout history these types of systems have always failed because there is no equality in nature, and the abrogation of the laws of nature is the reason Leftist public policy fails wherever and whenever it is implemented. The world is defined by inequality; one mountain is higher than another, one location is warmer than another, and so on. So it is with men; one man is more intelligent than another, one man is more athletic, and so on.
     It is very disheartening to see the faith of my upbringing utterly dismantled by that which corrupts and sullies everything it touches; Leftism. Christ told Peter, the man considered the first Pope, that he was the rock upon which he would build his church. Unfortunately the current successor to Peter has traded that rock for the fleeting, feel-good feather bed of Leftism.

Pope Francis Joins The Left

     Sometimes the influence of Leftism on our culture is sublime and sometimes it is explicitly axiomatic, as was the case with a recent statement from the Pope of the Catholic church. Pope Francis recently bemoaned the fact that the church has placed moral doctrine over serving the poor, a more politically correct statement can not be imagined or expressed in or out of religious life. The founder of the Catholic church, Jesus of Nazareth, was explicit in reminding his followers that service to their heavenly father via living a moral life, was the only path to salvation. Helping the poor and disadvantaged is just one brick in the edifice of morality, not its foundation.
     But in this politically correct world driven by Leftist ideology, even the Pope of the church that Jesus built has succumbed to the notion that helping the poor is the primary function of faith-based and non faith-based organizations such as governments. If, as the Pope suggests, one only needs to serve the poor to gain entrance to heaven, and all that morality stuff is just fluff, then Adolf Hitler is a resident of paradise because he gave health care to millions of poor Germans who did not previously have it. Additionally, serving the physical needs of the poor without the slightest moral judgment of how their choices and behavior may have lead them to their current predicament, is not the basis of Christianity. High expectations for improving one's life through living a moral doctrine is the cornerstone of not only the Christian faith, but many others as well.
     I would recommend that Pope Francis needs a refresher course at Divinity School to remind him that the basis of the Catholic Church, as well as most other faiths, is the teaching and safekeeping of moral doctrine. If the main function of any faith-based organization is simply to serve the poor, it makes them no better than politicians in government who use serving the poor to increase their own power, influence and wealth. And if the Church does not have the preservation of God's morality as their core mission, then modern mores (if there are any) replace morality. Modern mores would have the Church softening their moral doctrine in favor of approval by the secular world. They forget that Jesus said, "If the world hates you, remember that they hated me first." Church leaders like Pope Francis are so afraid of that hate that they have all but abandon strict adherence to the moral doctrine that built the Church.  
     Of course, the goal of Leftism is to eliminate all absolutes, morality is an absolute and contemporary mores are fluid and change with the times. This is why one will hear Leftists in and out of the Church complain that it must "change with the times." Jesus did not preach his message, die on the cross for it and resurrect to give it and us eternal life, only to have that message changed and corrupted by modern values, whatever those modern values represent. Certitude of moral doctrine is the basis of the Church given birth by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and Pope Francis would do well to reconnect himself to that moral doctrine, for the sake of the Catholic Church and the world that needs it more than ever.
    

Leftism: A Higher Calling For Some In Religious Life

     Yesterday, Pope Francis I gave his inaugural mass in Vatican City, Rome. He spoke to thousands of attendees, including some world leaders who oddly enough don't support the church's mission, and who only saw the event as a photo-op. One of those leaders was our very own "Slow" Joe Biden.    
    Vice President Joe Biden attending the Pope's inaugural mass is an insult to Catholicism specifically and all of Christendom in General. The Vice President's support of a pro-abortion agenda is in conflict with the very core of the Catholic faith and Christian beliefs. Joe Biden says he is a Catholic, but how does one reconcile the core teachings of their faith with the radically anti-life position of their political affiliation if that person is a Democrat?
     During the vice presidential debate in the last election cycle, Joe Biden said that he believes abortion is wrong and he believes in the sanctity of life, but he doesn't wish to impose his beliefs on others. The hypocritical VP had moments before used his faith as a basis for defending an expanding government to fund social programs that he says, "support the least among us." The call of religious faith to help the poor through public policy was even alluded to by Pope Francis. It is disheartening that even a theologian like the Pope has accepted as truth the propaganda that the Left has encouraged over the last few decades. That propaganda uses the message of the Bible and other religious texts for individuals to help those less fortunate, as an endorsement of big government.
     Recently I have become evermore disgusted with clergy and others in religious life who have taken vows and then vote for politicians like Barack Obama. I fail to understand how they justify their politics in light of what they say are their deeply held religious beliefs. Either these people have taken a higher vow to Leftism or they are completely ignorant of the positions that are supported by those to whom they carelessly give their vote. If the former is true, they have broken their vow to God and will suffer His wrath for doing so. If, however, the latter condition applies, they have failed at the very basic responsibility of citizenship, i.e., to be part of an informed electorate. Unfortunately their ignorance not only affects their singular relationship with the big "G", God, but condemns us all to a life of servitude to the little "g", government.
    

Barack Obama's Silent Support Of Iranian Religious Oppression

     There are many things about the way in which Barack Obama has conducted the office of President of the United States of America that can serve to embarrass, anger, irritate and demoralize   the average freedom-loving American. His handling of myriad issues ranging from the economy to Benghazi and Fast and Furious are exemplary of this President's combination of incompetence and willful destruction of the American value system and the rule of law. But his silent support of the Iranian government's imprisonment of an American Christian pastor goes beyond the pale, even for this President.
     Saeed Abedini is a Christian pastor, who is also an American citizen, and was imprisoned last September in his homeland of Iran, simply for preaching the gospel. His wife, Naghmeh Abedini, along with their two U.S.-based attorneys from the American Center for Law and Justice, Jay and Jordan Sekulov, have recently testified before Congressman Tom Lantos' Commission on Human Rights in the U.S. House of Representatives. Mrs. Abedini, in part, expressed a deep sorrow for the lack of courage and defense of religious freedom by her government in general and by the President specifically. I am in solidarity with Naghmeh Abedini's disgust and disappointment with the Obama administration's lack of support for American values, however, I can not say that I am all that surprised.
     Anyone who has not been in a coma for the last four years is painfully aware of the reckless disregard that Mr. Obama and his gang have for all things decent and traditionally American. Mrs. Abedini expects defense of her husband's first amendment religious freedoms from a man who many times has expressed his contempt for the very document that insures those and other liberties. From his characterization of the Constitution as a "charter of negative rights" to his signature health care legislation, which is a Constitutional abomination, this President has illustrated that he has no more respect or reverence for the American founding principles than he does for truth and probity in general.
     So while President Obama and the rest of his political party try to figure out how they can continue to bankrupt the greatest nation on earth, one of its citizens sits imprisoned simply for practicing his Christian faith. Sadly, for Saeed Abedini and his family, he chose to express his faith during a time when the beacon of religious freedom, the United States of America, has a caretaker that has allowed its light to dim and fade into the black sky of religious oppression and tyranny.   

Pope Francis I And The Politically Incorrect Church

     The election of Cardinal Bergoglio as the new leader of over a billion Catholics as Pope Francis I was historic. Not only because he was the first non-European elected to that position since Pope Gregory in 700, but because of the historic level of ignorance the news media exhibited for all things faith-based. The report I saw was on CNBC, but I'm sure a similar lack of religious decorum and knowledge was exhibited on other networks as well.
     The proudly uninformed and woefully inadequate anchor on CNBC actually made the comment that Jorge Bergoglio was a compromise choice for the conclave of cardinals. I could understand if he had made this comment about a Cardinal from the hated and evil United States. But isn't it in these people's contracts to promote countries like Argentina because, like the rest of the world, they have been robbed and abused by the U.S.? Does this "I have to remind myself to breath because I'm too stupid to stay alive otherwise" anchor know anything about the process used by the cardinals to elect a new Pope? It is not a political process but a spiritual one.
     But then I wouldn't expect anyone from the main stream media specifically, and from the Left in general, to understand spiritual matters. The cardinals believe, sincerely from their perspective, that they are inspired by the Holy Spirit to select a new leader of God's church on earth. Whether the media or anyone on the Left doesn't believe that, it is only important that that is the basis from which the cardinals elect one of their members to be the new Pope. But the Left doesn't understand anyone operating under anything but purely political motives, so being moved by the Holy Spirit is as foreign to them as truth is to our current President.
     The other troublesome comments made by anchors all over the media is the incessant focus on whether Pope Francis will reform the church on issues ranging from contraception to gay rights, as if the Pope is some sort of community agitator, like you know who. The Left is incapable of understanding any person or organization having values that form the very core of their existence. The principles under which the church was established two thousand years ago are the same scriptural-based principles then, now and forever. They are based on God's word and he doesn't change to suit the latest flavor-of-the-day, politically correct positions. God, and by extension His church here on earth, are proudly and un-apologetically politically incorrect. If Pope Francis I is to be a successful leader of the Catholic church, he will reaffirm the principles which established it and re-dedicate it to the timeless values of God's word.

Obama Steps In Deuteronomy

     It is not surprising that President Obama would show his ignorance in public on a whole host of issues. What is surprising is his recent ridiculing of the Bible, at a prayer breakfast. The President misrepresented several Bible passages, either on purpose or through ignorance, most notably Deuteronomy.  He characterized Deuteronomy 21:18-21 as condoning the stoning of children, which it most certainly does not. I have excerpted the passage below:

          If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his
          father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not
          hearken unto them:

          Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders
          of his city, and unto the gate of his place;

          And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious,
          he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

           And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil
           away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

 

    The President misstated the passage as condoning the stoning of children for simply wandering from the faith. Anyone who actually reads the passage would understand that it says nothing at all about a child wandering from the faith. The passage talks about a child who is rebellious, stubborn, gluttonous and a drunkard. One must also have the context of history when trying to understand this and many other Bible passages. Clearly Barack Obama thinks history began with his rise to power and anything that came before is just not important. Prior to the writing of Deuteronomy 21:18-21, the killing of a child by the parents without any outside involvement was a commonly accepted practice. For the first time, this passage from Deuteronomy, required that the father and the mother bring the child to the town elders, who acted as the first legal system in civilized society. This is important because for the first time it elevated due process over even the rights of parents. President Obama most likely missed this point because due process and the rule of law are not concepts that he values. This passage also completely removed capital punishment from the realm of the parents, where it had existed prior, and placed it in the hands of the town elders.

     Deuteronomy 21:18-21 also elevated women to the same status as men when it makes clear that the rebellious child not listening to the voice of his mother is a sin on the same level as not listening to the voice of his father. Secondly, the passage clearly makes it a requirement that the child be brought to the town elders by both his father and his mother, making the mother's role as essential as the father's.

     And finally the passage makes the execution of the son the responsibility of all the men of the town, giving this law of Moses transparency and broad-based support in the community at large.

One could make the case that the President's recent policy of using drones to kill American citizens that he decides are collaborating with terrorists, is based on pre-Deuteronomy practices.

     President Obama's recent Bible misquotes are not the first time he has shown scriptural ignorance. He and others on the Left have continually justified their big government programs by using the Bible's promotion of being your brother's keeper. The problem is that the only place in the Bible where it mentions the term, "brother's keeper" is in Cain's response to God when asked about the whereabouts of his bother Abel. He asks God, "Am I my brother's keeper?" It's part of the Lefts hypocrisy, ridiculing the Bible on one hand, while misusing it to sell their big government expansion on the other. But it is our ignorance as the governed that allows President Obama to step in Deuteronomy and end up smelling like a rose.