Michael Voris Discredits Himself

Michael Voris recently did a Vortex entitled, "How Is This Happening" in which he issued a challenge:

This is a direct shout out to the Church of Nice Catholic Establishment and its media lapdogs – both official on traditional media outlets AND their wannabe allies in the internet world –

Listen to sound bites from this interview we conducted with a young homosexual who goes to daily Mass in the archdiocese of New York and frequently attends Mass at St. Francis of Assisi parish on 31st in midtown.

At the end of the clips – be prepared to answer how this young man, this soul that God loves infinitely, is capable of giving responses like he gives.

So I am taking Voris up on his challenge, and I will use his own video to show just how deceptive and manipulative he is.

After Voris issues the above challenge, he then goes to a clip of his interview with Jason, a young, gay Catholic man, in front of St. Francis of Assisi Church in NYC.

In the first part of this clip, Jason gives his own explanation of the meaning of I Corinthian 13. Jason gives us the worn out explanation that God created him as a gay man and God doesn't make mistakes.

He then makes a very interesting statement:

. . .so that is how I understand it so I mean honestly the Church is wrong in that the Church has gotten things wrong before.

Voris follows up Jason's statement with this:

Now Church of Nice, US Hierarchy, support staff, Catholic Establishment Media – explain this.

This is your doing. You have spent so much time avoiding telling the truth of the entire catastrophe of Catholic catechesis in this nation for the past 50 years that you have ignored young men like this.

You have sacrificed his spiritual well being for the sake of your own comfort. From bishops to priests to the Catholic Establishment Media, so much time has been spent been protecting the status quo – meaning their own rear ends and reputations, that they have allowed young souls like this to drift into a world of delusion.

Why? How is it possible that a man who goes to Mass everyday can have such an incorrect understanding of Catholic truth? We’re waiting for an answer.

Explain this? Michael Voris, didn't you hear what Jason said? Jason made it very clear that he knows exactly what the church teaches, and he is willingly and voluntarily rejecting this teaching.

Look at his words:

"The Church is wrong in that the Church has gotten things wrong before."

This means that, contrary to Voris's repeated statements that no one is teaching Catholics the truth, Jason has been taught the truth of the Church and he has chosen to reject it.  This being the case, how can "bishops to priests to the Catholic Establishment Media" be responsible for a man who knows church teaching and chooses, on his own, to reject it?

In fact, Voris confirms this fact with his own words:

He is no dummy. He shared with us that he went to Notre Dame and actually submitted an extensive paper SUPPORTING the Church’s teaching .. you heard right, he once understood and agreed with the Church’s teaching on homosexuality

It seems that Jason was taught the dogma of the Church so well that, as Voris reports, Jason wrote "an extensive paper SUPPORTING the Church's teaching."  And there is no other place Jason could have learned this other than IN the Catholic Church. But Voris just glides right over this fact and says:

But somewhere, some how over the intervening years, he threw in the towel, he listened to the prevailing gay-friendly propaganda coming from pulpits and priests and bishops affirming doubts he may have had .. and now he is transformed into a Church teaching denying Daily Communicant.

Jason seems to be a very young man, most likely still in his 20's. So he learned Catholic dogma, which he once wholeheartedly embraced, during the 90's into the first part of the 21st Century. This was most definitely during what Voris would call the reign of the "Church of Nice."

Yet Voris blames the Catholic Church, who had taught Jason very well, for the fact that Jason now rejects this truth? Voris doesn't think for a moment that the influence of our corrupt society, a society that endorses and promotes homosexuality, had any part in the fact that Jason now rejects Church teaching? Really? And just what would Voris have the Church do to Jason for rejecting her teachings? Go back to the methods of the Inquisition and put him on the rack?

Jason has fully admitted that his beliefs are in direct contradiction to church teaching. He is under no delusion about what the Church teaches. How much plainer can that be that it is not the fault of the Church that he has come to reject her teachings?

Voris then goes on a familiar rant about how corrupt the "Church of Nice" is:

How pathetic is it that all the Church of Nice and church leaders can muster up for a young man like this and all the rest who have to carry the cross of same-sex attraction is to quietly condone their acts.

They provide a false safety net, the APPEARANCE or pretense of charity when all the while the real truth is they are just cowards and even worse – selfish cowards who care more about themselves than this young man.

That say much much more about the state of their souls an their own lack of faith than it does about the souls of same-sex attracted Catholics.

And again, you will never ever hear stories like this – reports like this on EWTN or other mainstream Catholic Media outlets.

Blah, blah blah.  The same old same old from Michael Voris.

I have one question for Michael Voris.  Did he, Michael Voris, do anything to try to bring the "real truth" to Jason which Voris says was not given to Jason by the "selfish cowards who care more about themselves than this young man"?

Voris tells us this:

It’s the very last exchange we had with him – he said, lets pray for each other. And so we shall.

No, it seems that Mike just let Jason go on his merry way without saying anything to him.  Why didn't Voris do what he blames "the Church of Nice" for not doing? Why didn't you educate this young man as to the truth of the Church? Could it possibly be because you knew he wouldn't accept it and that your words would be falling on deaf ears? Or were you more interested in just using Jason to attack the Church and not really interested in his spiritual well being at all? You say the "Church of Nice", the Church which actually taught him very well, doesn't care about Jason. Do you? Only you, Mike, can answer that question.

Voris wants us to "answer how this young man, this soul that God loves infinitely, is capable of giving responses like he gives." The answer is right in your video, Mike. But you are so driven in your efforts to tear down Church hierarchy that you can't even see how you discredit yourself.

Michael Voris was at the "Pre Pride Mass" at St. Francis of Assisi Church along with Jason.  I am assuming he listened to the sermon, which is the same sermon that Jason heard. As I have reported, the celebrant gave a sermon in which he urged young men like Jason to let go of his "preconception, hardheartedness, and prejudice."

Jason was warned in the sermon that day at St. Francis of Assisi Church, just minutes before the interview with Voris, that not to be in communion with the Church was to put his soul in peril.  I was there and I heard these words preached.  But Voris gave only a very edited version of this sermon (basically the last two sentences) to make it seem that the priest was condoning homosexuality.  Then Voris goes on a rant accusing the Church of not caring about men like Jason.

Who is really providing "a false safety net, the APPEARANCE or pretense of charity when all the while the real truth is they are just cowards and even worse – selfish cowards who care more about themselves than this young man"?  Is it the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, or is it Michael Voris?

Before you get all upset with me for using these words on Michael Voris, please understand that I am using his own words which he uses to described the ordained hierarchy of the Catholic Church. Maybe you could get just a little upset over that.

Yes, we most definitely need to pray for young men like Jason. We also need to pray for the soul of Michael Voris. He is surely in need of it.

The Message of Pope Francis According to The New York Times

Without question, the most misunderstood person in the entire history of mankind is Jesus Christ. He was misunderstood at the time he lived when the religious leaders of the day called him a devil. Down through history both saints and sinners used his words and teachings to justify their actions, good or bad. Warmongers use the words of the Lord who preached love and mercy to justify war. His words of truth and justice have been used to browbeat people into submission. Rarely is our Lord presented as He truly was - our Creator who came to pour out His Blood for the salvation of mankind. The same has been true of the Church founded by Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church. As the late great Venerable Fulton Sheen once said, “There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”

I would submit that the most misunderstood person in the world today is Christ's representative and the head of the Catholic Church, our Holy Father, Pope Francis. This papacy could easily be labeled, "The Litmus Papacy". Listening to people talk about Pope Francis doesn't really give one as much insight into Pope Francis as it does into the person speaking about Pope Francis.

THE INTERVIEW (and if you don't know what I'm referring to, it can only be because you were either in a coma for the last couple of weeks or on another planet) is a prime example of how the world sees Pope Francis through their own individual ideas and prejudices.  The Pope covered many topics in this interview, but the one that almost everyone picked up on was the following statement:

We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible.

NARAL got so excited over this remark that they posted the following on their Facebook page:

Chris Rock, hardly a conservative Christian, tweeted, "I might be crazy but I got this weird feeling that the new pope might be the greatest man alive."  On the opposite end of the spectrum, many conservative Catholics felt the Holy Father was going off the rails, just another example of the destruction wrought by Vatican II.

The truth is that Pope Francis was not saying anything new in this interview but merely echoing the words of Our Lord from 2000 years ago.  Pope Francis said we should not be concentrating on people's individual sins but more on their spiritual healing and bringing them to Christ.   In making this statement, he was merely following the lead of his Boss, Jesus Christ.

Our Lord with the woman caught in adultery

Our Lord rarely pointed out people's sins. We see this in the story of the woman taken in adultery, as told in John 8, when the Jews were demanding she be stoned. This is what the law demanded, but how does our Lord treat her? Jesus writes on the floor and one by one, the woman's accusers leave. Only then does Jesus address the woman:

Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”“No one, sir,” she said.“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

While certainly acknowledging that the woman taken in adultery was a sinner, Jesus did not condemn her but instead showed compassion and mercy. His only acknowledgement of her sin was to tell her to sin no more. Our Lord did not see a sinner when he looked at this woman. He saw a human being in need of healing. There was no obvious sign of repentance from the woman, no indication that she intended to change her life, but that did not prevent Him from extending His Love and Forgiveness. Pope Francis echoes our Lord's words and actions with these words:

A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person. Here we enter into the mystery of the human being. In life, God accompanies persons, and we must accompany them, starting from their situation. It is necessary to accompany them with mercy. When that happens, the Holy Spirit inspires the priest to say the right thing.

Matthew 9 relates the story of our Lord having dinner at the apostle Matthew's house, which was attended by many tax collectors and sinners.  Not only was he having dinner and socializing with these known sinners, I can assure you he was also not telling them that they were sinners and headed to hell. He was a charming and entertaining guest who made them feel very comfortable and accepted.

Credit:  newdaychurch.info

Think of our Lord having dinner with likes of the heads of Planned Parenthood, the leaders of the homosexual movement, etc. You think he would never do such a thing? From Matthew 9:11-13:

When the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?”

On hearing this, Jesus said, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’ For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

Our Holy Father, Pope Francis, summed up this sentiment exactly with these words:

“I see clearly that the thing the church needs most today is the ability to heal wounds and to warm the hearts of the faithful; it needs nearness, proximity. I see the church as a field hospital after battle. It is useless to ask a seriously injured person if he has high cholesterol and about the level of his blood sugars! You have to heal his wounds. Then we can talk about everything else. Heal the wounds, heal the wounds.... And you have to start from the ground up.”

Credit:  www.tillhecomes.org

One of the best interpretations of the Pope's remarks that I have read comes from what many call the Secular Bible, The New York Times. This is an opinion piece, entitled "The Pope’s Radical Whisper", written by Frank Bruni, a very traditional liberal. It can be found here, although I am reprinting the entire editorial below:

IT’S about time. The leader of the Roman Catholic Church has surveyed the haughty scolds in its ranks, noted their fixation on matters of sexual morality above all others and said enough is enough. I’m not being cheeky with this one-word response. Hallelujah.

But it wasn’t the particulars of Pope Francis’ groundbreaking message in an interview published last week that stopped me in my tracks, gave fresh hope to many embittered Catholics and caused hardened commentators to perk up.

It was the sweetness in his timbre, the meekness of his posture. It was the revelation that a man can wear the loftiest of miters without having his head swell to fit it, and can hold an office to which the term “infallible” is often attached without forgetting his failings. In the interview, Francis called himself naïve, worried that he’d been rash in the past and made clear that the flock harbored as much wisdom as the shepherds. Instead of commanding people to follow him, he invited them to join him. And did so gently, in what felt like a whisper.

What a surprising portrait of modesty in a church that had lost touch with it.

This is exactly what Pope Francis is talking about.  As I stated in a previous post, we live in a world in which people have completely lost their way.  Like the people of Nineveh in the Book of Jonah, the world today does not know their left hand from their right.   They are the walking wounded, lost in darkness and not even aware of it.  They feel something is not right, and in their moments of solitude and silence - which they try to avoid as much as possible - they keenly feel this sense of loss. They are not in need of our condemnation but like the woman taken in adultery, they need compassion and love to bring them to the only One who can heal them.

Mr. Bruni notes how different is the tone of Pope Francis compared with the rest of the world:

And what a refreshing example of humility in a world with too little of it.

That’s what stayed with me, not the olive branch he extended to gay people or the way he brushed aside the contraception wars but his personification of a virtue whose deficit in American life hit me full force when I spotted it here, in his disarming words. Reading and then rereading the interview, I felt like a bird-watcher who had just stumbled upon a dodo.

I’m hardly the first to flag this pope’s apparent humility or the fact that it extends beyond his preference for simple dress over regal costumes, for a Ford Focus over a papal chariot, for modest quarters over a monarch’s suite. Less than two months ago, when he answered a question about gay priests with a question of his own — “Who am I to judge?”— the self-effacement in that phrase was widely and rightly celebrated. Was a pope really acting and talking like this?  

But Francis’ tone so far is interesting not just as a departure for the church but as a counterpoint to the prevailing sensibility in our country, where humility is endangered if not quite extinct. It’s out of sync with all the relentless self-promotion, which has been deemed the very oxygen of success. It sits oddly with the cult of self-esteem.

Mr. Bruni continues to contrast Pope Francis with the ways of our contemporary world, and how deeply impressed he is with the humility and sincerity of the Holy Father.  Mr. Bruni doesn't realize it, but what he is really seeing is the difference between the ways of the world and the ways of Jesus Christ:

Humility has little place in the realm of social media, which is governed by a look-at-me ethos, by listen-to-me come-ons, by me, me, me. And humility is quaintly irrelevant to the defining entertainment genre of our time, reality television, which insists that every life is mesmerizing, if only in the manner of a train wreck, and that anyone is a latent star: the housewife, the hoarder, the teen mom, the tuna fisher. Just preen enough to catch an audience’s eye. Just beckon the cameras close.

Politics is most depressing of all. It rewards braggarts and bullies, who muscle their way onto center stage with the crazy certainty that they and only they are right, while we in the electorate and the news media lack the fortitude to shut them up or shoo them away. They disgust but divert us, or at a minimum wear us down. Maybe we get the showboats we deserve.

FOR a textbook case of humility gone missing, consider right-wing Republicans’ efforts to derail Obamacare by whatever crude and disruptive means necessary. The health care law has its flaws, some of them profound, but it was legitimately passed, in accordance with the rules, and to stray outside them in order to make it go away is to believe that they don’t apply to you, that your viewpoint trumps the process itself. It’s the summit of arrogance.

Humility doesn’t work in the cross-fire of our political combat. Certainty and single-mindedness are better fuels.

This is exactly what Pope Francis talked about in his interview when he told us we must always leave room for self doubt:  "Yes, in this quest to seek and find God in all things there is still an area of uncertainty. There must be. If a person says that he met God with total certainty and is not touched by a margin of uncertainty, then this is not good. For me, this is an important key. If one has the answers to all the questions—that is the proof that God is not with him. It means that he is a false prophet using religion for himself."

Mr. Bruni then contrasts Pope Francis with the liberal icon of our age, Barack Obama:

How exactly does President Obama fit in? While his Syria reversals may well have diminished him, they had a sort of humility to them, reflected a willingness to yield to the strong feelings of others and deserve some acknowledgment along those lines. Leadership, more art than science, should be a mix of rallying people to your cause and recognizing when you stand too far away from them.

But in Obama there’s a recurrent deflection of criticism and a refusal to abide certain political customs and efficiencies — the stroking, the rewarding, the mantra-style repetition of a simplified argument for a distracted populace — that work against his success and smack of excessive pride. He could take a page from this pope.

Credit:  www.driftwoodandcherry.com

Mr. Bruni next shows how the genuineness of Pope Francis has even helped to heal the wounds so recently inflicted upon the Church, at least in the eyes of the writer:

I never expected to write that. For too many years I watched the chieftains of the church wrap themselves in lavish pageantry and prioritize the protection of fellow clergy members over the welfare of parishioners. They allowed priests who sexually abused children to evade accountability and, in many cases, to abuse again. That cover-up was the very antithesis of humility, driven by the belief that shielding the church from public scandal mattered more than anything else.

For too many years I also watched and listened to imperious men around the pope hurl thunderbolts of judgment from the Olympus of Vatican City. But in his recent interview, Francis made a plea for quieter, calmer weather, suggesting that church leaders in Rome spend less energy on denunciations and censorship.

He cast himself as a struggling pastor determined to work in a collaborative fashion. He characterized himself as a sinner. “It is not a figure of speech, a literary genre,” he clarified. “I am a sinner.”

In his final paragraphs, Mr. Bruni makes it clear that he is not ready to convert, but he is ready to listen, and that is a huge step. Mr. Bruni, unlike too many Catholics, understands that the Pope is not going to change the teachings of the Church. However, he does see Pope Francis as someone who has something to give to the world, and he is open to this message:

He didn’t right past wrongs. Let’s be clear about that. Didn’t call for substantive change to church teachings and traditions that indeed demand re-examination, including the belief that homosexual acts themselves are sinful. Didn’t challenge the all-male, celibate priesthood. Didn’t speak as progressively — and fairly — about women’s roles in the church as he should.

But he also didn’t present himself as someone with all the answers. No, he stepped forward — shuffled forward, really — as someone willing to guide fellow questioners. In doing so he recognized that authority can come from a mix of sincerity and humility as much as from any blazing, blinding conviction, and that stature is a respect you earn, not a pedestal you grab. That’s a useful lesson in this grabby age of ours.

The message of Jesus Christ has mercy and forgiveness at its core, as shown above in the quote from Matthew 9.  Our job is not to condemn the world but to bring to it the healing message of Jesus Christ. That is exactly what Pope Francis has done, and Frank Bruni of The New York Times got this message loud and clear.   My prayer is that those who call themselves followers of Jesus Christ will hear this message as well.

Credit:  fr-fr.facebook.com

Pope Benedict XVI: We Are Restless Until We Rest In God

“The desire for God is written in the human heart, because man is created by God and for God; and God never ceases to draw man to himself. Only in God will he find the truth and happiness he never stops searching for” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 27).

We have seen many stories of celebrities and other well known people who seem to have it all - talent, beauty, fame, money, the adulation of millions.  Yet so often they have terrible tragic endings, and we find out they were deeply addicted to drugs or alcohol, going from one failed relationship to another with little or no happiness or contentment in their lives.  We think of people like Elvis Presley, Marilyn Monroe, Michael Jackson and Whitney Houston.  All great talents, "loved" by millions, at the very top of their game and yet, desperately lonely and unhappy people who died as total failures in their personal lives.

Blessed Mother Teresa and Princess Diana

We were given a prime example of this in 1997 when we witnessed the untimely and tragic death of Princess Diana, a terribly frustrated and unhappy individual who knew little peace or happiness in her short life.  Less than one week later Blessed Mother Teresa died, having lived a life of love and service to others and completely at peace.  Mother Angelica described this event perfectly:

One who had everything died with nothing; one who had nothing died with everything.

What was Blessed Mother Teresa's secret?  No secret at all - she loved Our Lord above everything else.  She found what she was looking for:

“To me - Jesus is my God. Jesus is my Spouse. Jesus is my Life. Jesus is my only Love. Jesus is my All in all. Jesus is my everything. Jesus, I love with my whole heart, with my whole being. I have given Him all, even my sins, and He has espoused me to Himself in all tenderness and love. Now and for life I am the Spouse of my crucified Spouse.”

Our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, has continued his talks in regard to the Year of Faith.  On November 7, he gave a talk in St. Peter's Square about man's innate desire for God, that desire which was completely fulfilled in Blessed Mother Teresa's life.  I have copied a translation of our Holy Father's talk from the Vatican website and given my understanding of the Holy Father's talk:

Pope Benedict starts his talk by reminding us that we all have an innate desire for God.  

The journey of reflection that we are making together during this Year of Faith leads us to meditate today on a fascinating aspect of the human and the Christian experience: man carries within himself a mysterious desire for God. In a very significant way, the Catechism of the Catholic Church opens precisely with the following consideration: “The desire for God is written in the human heart, because man is created by God and for God; and God never ceases to draw man to himself. Only in God will he find the truth and happiness he never stops searching for” (n. 27).

A statement like this, that even today in many cultural contexts seems quite acceptable, even obvious, might, however, be taken as a provocation in the West’s secularized culture. 

Our secular world is trying very hard to push God out, telling us that He is a figment of our imagination and that belief and obedience to Him will only enslave us and make us unhappy.  But that doesn't lessen our need for God in any way.  We often try to fill this desire for God by using the things of this world, especially all the distractions we have in our contemporary world such as movies, TV, video games, etc.  Some people use their work, some people use food.  Some people try to use other people in their lives - a spouse, children, etc.  And of course millions get involved in false pagan religions in which the real God is nowhere to be found  All of these are substitutes.  Pope Benedict XVI explains that try as we might, nothing will satisfy our desire for God but God Himself.

The Holy Father then states that despite our natural desire for God, many in our world today deny this vehemently.  They dismiss belief and faith in God almost as some sort of neurosis:

Many of our contemporaries might actually object that they have no such desire for God. For large sectors of society he is no longer the one longed for or desired but rather a reality that leaves them indifferent, one on which there is no need even to comment. In reality, what we have defined as “the desire for God” has not entirely disappeared and it still appears today, in many ways, in the heart of man. Human desire always tends to certain concrete goods, often anything but spiritual, and yet it has to face the question of what is truly “the” good, and thus is confronted with something other than itself, something man cannot build but he is called to recognize. What can really satisfy man’s desire?

Many of us think the answer to our desires is "romantic" love.  If we can just find our soul mate, that person who can complete us, we will have everything we need.  Pope Benedict directs us to his  first encyclical, Deus Caritas Est ("God Is Love") in which he discussed the meaning and significance of romantic love:

In my first Encyclical Deus Caritas Est, I sought to analyze how such dynamism can be found in the experience of human love, an experience that in our age is more easily perceived as a moment of ecstasy, of leaving oneself, like a place in which man feels overcome by a desire that surpasses him. Through love, a man and a woman experience in a new way, thanks to each other, the greatness and beauty of life and of what is real. If what is experienced is not a mere illusion, if I truly want the good of the other as a means for my own good, then I must be willing not to be self-centred, to place myself at the other’s service, even to the point of self-denial. The answer to the question on the meaning of the experience of love then passes through the purification and healing of the will, required in loving the other. We must cultivate, encourage, and also correct ourselves, so that this good can truly be loved.

The Holy Father, quoting from his own encyclical, tells us that truly loving another takes us out of ourselves and can actually start us on the journey "towards authentic self-discovery and indeed discovery of God."  The more authentic the love, "the more it reveals the question of its origin [that origin being God, who is Love Personified] and its destiny [the destiny of love is union with God], of the possibility that it may endure for ever."  Notice that Pope Benedict says that this reveals the question of love's origin and destiny.  Loving another opens us up to go beyond ourselves, but that is only the beginning.

Thus the initial ecstasy becomes a pilgrimage, “an ongoing exodus out of the closed inward-looking self towards its liberation through self-giving, and thus towards authentic self-discovery and indeed the discovery of God” (Encyclical Deus Caritas Est, n. 6). Through this journey one will be able to deepen gradually one’s knowledge of that love, initially experienced. And the mystery that it represents will become more and more defined: in fact, not even the beloved is capable of satisfying the desire that dwells in the human heart. In fact, the more authentic one’s love for the other is, the more it reveals the question of its origin and its destiny, of the possibility that it may endure for ever. Therefore, the human experience of love has in itself a dynamism that refers beyond the self, it is the experience of a good that leads to being drawn out and finding oneself before the mystery that encompasses the whole of existence.

The Holy Father explains that the more we experience true, genuine love in our lives, the more restless we become because "every good experienced by man projects him toward the mystery that surrounds the human being; every desire that springs up in the human heart echoes a fundamental desire that is never fully satisfied."   To truly love projects us towards God, making us realize that there is something bigger than we are  But these desires cannot be fulfilled solely by human effort, and thus the act of loving another make us even more restless in looking for the answers.  As Pope Benedict explains, "Undoubtedly by such a deep desire, hidden, even enigmatic, one cannot arrive directly at faith".  The Pope tells us we know what does not satisfy us, but apart from God, we are unable to put a name on exactly what it is that we do desire and need.  "One cannot know God based on human desire alone."  As St. Augustine said, we are still restless. "Man is, deep down, a religious being, a beggar of God":  Experiencing true love and true beauty creates in us "a desire to know the light itself, what makes the things of the world shine and with them ignites the sense of beauty."

One could make similar observation about other human experiences as well, such as friendship, encountering beauty, loving knowledge: every good experienced by man projects him toward the mystery that surrounds the human being; every desire that springs up in the human heart echoes a fundamental desire that is never fully satisfied. Undoubtedly by such a deep desire, hidden, even enigmatic, one cannot arrive directly at faith. Men and women, after all, know well what does not satisfy them, but they cannot imagine or define what the happiness they long for in their hearts would be like. One cannot know God based on human desire alone. From this point of view he remains a mystery: man is the seeker of the Absolute, seeking with small and hesitant steps. And yet, already the experience of desire, of a “restless heart” as St Augustine called it, is very meaningful. It tells us that man is, deep down, a religious being (cf. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 28), a “beggar of God”. We can say with the words of Pascal: “Man infinitely surpasses man” (Pensées, ed. Chevalier 438; ed. Brunschvicg 434). Eyes recognize things when they are illuminated. From this comes a desire to know the light itself, what makes the things of the world shine and with them ignites the sense of beauty.

The Holy Father next gives us hope that despite the fact that everything in our contemporary world is so completely focused on the material, at blocking out what he calls the "transcendent dimension", we can still find the "true religious meaning of life, that shows how the gift of faith is not senseless, is not irrational."  The Holy Father tells us that in order to find this "transcendent dimension,"  we need to  "to discover or rediscover the taste of the authentic joy of life."  He defines the taste for true joy as "family, friendship, solidarity with those who suffer, self-renunciation for the sake of the other, love of knowledge, art, the beauty of nature."  He says this needs to be instilled in children from a young age. Developing a taste for the true joys of life produces "antibodies that can fight the trivialization and the dulling widespread today."  He does not exclude adults, who "need to rediscover this joy, to desire authenticity, to purify themselves of the mediocrity that might infest them."

Pope Benedict XVI tell us that it is only these authentic joys that will "bring out the desire for God." This is very important to note for us who live in such immoral times in which everything around us seems designed to take us as far away from God as possible.  We must be very careful of the entertainment we allow ourselves and our family to watch, the books we read, the places we frequent, even the people with whom we socialize.  We have a mighty adversary who is doing everything he can to snatch away the spark of God that is in each person.

We must therefore maintain that it is possible also in this age, seemingly so blocked to the transcendent dimension, to begin a journey toward the true religious meaning of life, that shows how the gift of faith is not senseless, is not irrational. It would be very useful, to that end, to foster a kind of pedagogy of desire, both for the journey of one who does not yet believe and for the one who has already received the gift of faith. It should be a pedagogy that covers at least two aspects. In the first place, to discover or rediscover the taste of the authentic joy of life. Not all satisfactions have the same effect on us: some leave a positive after-taste, able to calm the soul and make us more active and generous. Others, however, after the initial delight, seem to disappoint the expectations that they had awakened and sometimes leave behind them a sense of bitterness, dissatisfaction or emptiness. Instilling in someone from a young age the taste for true joy, in every area of life – family, friendship, solidarity with those who suffer, self-renunciation for the sake of the other, love of knowledge, art, the beauty of nature — all this means exercising the inner taste and producing antibodies that can fight the trivialization and the dulling widespread today. Adults too need to rediscover this joy, to desire authenticity, to purify themselves of the mediocrity that might infest them. It will then become easier to drop or reject everything that although attractive proves to be, in fact, insipid, a source of indifference and not of freedom. And this will bring out that desire for God of which we are speaking.

Pope Benedict also warns us never to be content with our status in life, with what we have achieved.  We must be constantly moving forward, or we will begin to go backward in the wrong direction.  That is our only choice.  He calls this discontent a "healthy restlessness that leads us to be more demanding — to want a higher good, a deeper good — and at the same time to perceive ever more clearly that no finite thing can fill our heart."

A second aspect that goes hand in hand with the preceding one is never to be content with what you have achieved. It is precisely the truest joy that unleashes in us the healthy restlessness that leads us to be more demanding — to want a higher good, a deeper good — and at the same time to perceive ever more clearly that no finite thing can fill our heart. In this way we will learn to strive, unarmed, for the good that we cannot build or attain by our own power; and we will learn to not be discouraged by the difficulty or the obstacles that come from our sin.

Pope Benedict tell us that even when our desire become disordered and "follows artificial paradises and seems to lose the capacity of yearning for the true good", we can still be redeemed by God.  "Even in the abyss of sin, that ember [the yearning for the true good] is never fully extinguished in man. . . .God, by the gift of his grace, never denies man his help."  The Holy Father tell us "When in desire one opens the window to God, this is already a sign of the presence of faith in the soul, faith that is a grace of God."  This is what Divine Mercy is all about, this is what faith is all about - God reaching out to man:

In this regard, we must not forget that the dynamism of desire is always open to redemption. Even when it strays from the path, when it follows artificial paradises and seems to lose the capacity of yearning for the true good. Even in the abyss of sin, that ember is never fully extinguished in man. It allows him to recognize the true good, to savour it, and thus to start out again on a path of ascent; God, by the gift of his grace, never denies man his help. We all, moreover, need to set out on the path of purification and healing of desire. We are pilgrims, heading for the heavenly homeland, toward that full and eternal good that nothing will be able to take away from us. This is not, then, about suffocating the longing that dwells in the heart of man, but about freeing it, so that it can reach its true height. When in desire one opens the window to God, this is already a sign of the presence of faith in the soul, faith that is a grace of God. St Augustine always says: “so God, by deferring our hope, stretched our desire; by the desiring, stretches the mind; by stretching, makes it more capacious” (Commentary on the First Letter of John, 4,6: PL 35, 2009).

Because of God's great mercy and love for us and His desire to reach down to us even in the midst of great sin, we can feel like brothers and sisters to all men, even of those who do not believe.  As the Catechism tells us "God never ceases to draw man to Himself."  This is the reason why we must be praying for all who are truly seeking God:

On this pilgrimage, let us feel like brothers and sisters of all men, travelling companions even of those who do not believe, of those who are seeking, of those who are sincerely wondering about the dynamism of their own aspiration for the true and the good. Let us pray, in this Year of Faith, that God may show his face to all those who seek him with a sincere heart. Thank you.

Assisted Suicide: Just Another Way to Say "I Love You"

Mankind has lived in a fallen world since the time our first parents said yes to the serpent and no to God and as a result were thrust out of the Garden of Eden.  Adam and Eve had to deal with fratricide when one of their sons, Cain, killed another, Abel.  There is no evil in the world today that has not existed since the beginning of time. 

But there is one big difference in the era in which we live.  Much of what was once deemed totally unacceptable and evil is now being accepted and even embraced as normal, e.g., homosexuality, living together without marriage, having babies outside of marriage, drug use, etc. etc.  And now the New York Times tells us that even suicide is acceptable and further, helping someone to commit this evil act is now considered an act of love.  The Bee Gees sang back in the 70's:

You know it's all right, it's ok
I'll live to see another day
We can try to understand
The New York Times' effect on man

Assisted suicide?  Why, you just might be up for a
humanitarian award from The New York Times!

Well, in 2012, the New York Times' "effect on man" may be that we will not live to see another day.  A week of so ago in the New York Times Magazine section, there was a question to The Ethicist that just made my mind go tilt, and the answer given was directly from Satan himself.  A woman wrote in very concerned because her mother has asked her to give her books on suicide.  The answer from The Ethicist says everything about how secular and anti-God and anti-life our society has become.   Read on.

SUICIDE WATCH

I am one of five children of two aging parents. My father, 88, is in the early stages of dementia. My mother is 83 and has macular degeneration. I’ve always enjoyed a close relationship with both parents, especially my mother. She is the most practical, intelligent person I have ever known. She is my best friend. I go to her for advice on everything, but I need help with the one thing she has turned to me for: My mother asked me to get her books on how to commit suicide, so that she can read up on it before her vision deteriorates to a point where she can no longer read at all. When pressed, she told me she does not want to commit suicide now — but that when the time comes, knowing how to end her life will give her great comfort. I love her, and I understand how she feels. Do I get her books on suicide? [How low have we fallen as a culture where this question can even be asked?  This woman obviously loves her mother, but she cannot see that helping her mother kill herself is not an act of love!] I also have four siblings — do I have to clear it with them? [She wants to know if giving books on suicide to her mother is something she should clear with her siblings.  We as a society have no idea what love even means anymore.] R.C., Westchester, N.Y.

And here is the understanding, compassionate answer from "The Ethicist":

This is a heavy problem. The request, however, is straightforward and reasonable [!!!!!!!!]. Your mother is not asking you to help her commit suicide; she is asking you for books that explain how such an act could be done without pain or error. [Yes, you're reading it right. This is the answer given in America's "paper of record."  The only thing wrong with suicide is if it is painful or you make a mistake, not like suicide itself is a mistake!] You describe her as “practical and intelligent,” so it’s not as if she’s making this request from a position of confusion or naïveté. She may never act on this urge, and it’s possible that reading about the reality of suicide might make her less willing to consider it. But the fact that she’s asking you to acquire these books is meaningful. She could undoubtedly find them on her own, but she specifically asked you to do it for her. What this suggests is that she’s indirectly asking for your permission to consider this option and potentially helping you prepare for the inevitable end of her life. [I guess it didn't occur to "The Ethicist" that possibly the woman's mother is reaching out to her daughter and saying  "help me." ]  It’s doubtful that simply withholding these books will stop her from making a decision this profound [Note, suicide is a "profound" decision, not a morally wrong decision], so I would get her what she requests. But keep in mind that this is more than a favor. This is an attempt to communicate much deeper information to a child she trusts. As for your siblings, you don’t need their permission [!!!!!], but you should absolutely tell them that your mother has made this request (and that you elected to fulfill her wish) [isn't this thoughtful of The Ethicist]. If they find this upsetting or shocking [I can't imagine why they would be shocked by the news that their mother wants to kill herself and their sister is going to give her books on how to do it], explain your reasoning and tell them that they need to talk to your mother about why this is important to her.

Ah, so now we have been told by The New York Times that telling someone you want to kill yourself is just another way of saying I love you and trust you.  And if we love the person who confides so in us, we will respond in the most compassionate way possible and help him or her do it, but do it in the right way, with no errors or pain.  After all, life with any kind of discomfort or suffering just isn't worth living, and so if someone does not have a perfect life, the most loving thing we can do is help them end it if that is what they wish. 

Back in the 70's there was a very funny movie made called "The End" with Burt Reynolds and Dom DeLuise.  Burt Reynolds played a man who has just been told he has a fatal disease, and he decided the only way to deal with it was to kill himself.  After he attempts suicide, he meets Dom DeLuise's character in a psychiatric hospital.  When Burt tells Dom he wants to kill himself, Dom feels the best way to be his friend is to help him in his morbid goal.  Each time Burt would come close to it, he would chicken out.  Here is the trailer:


The truth is, Burt's character didn't really want to die. He just wanted to find a way out of the pain he was in. We laughed at Dom DeLuise's character because we knew that his "assistance" to Burt wasn't really the right thing.  By the end of the movie both Burt and the audience know that life is always the best choice.  But the New York Times would treat this story as a serious drama, and Dom DeLuise would be the hero of the movie. 


Where does thinking like this come from?  It may sound strange, but it all comes from the use of artificial birth control.  When we use birth control we are cutting ourselves off from life, and to cut ourselves off from life is to separate from God.  When you are separate from God, your only other choice is the devil, whose only goal is to destroy you.  So you have now made a partnership with your worst enemy.  We have now separated ourselves from the author of Life and from the One who gave his Life for us so that we may spend eternity in complete bliss and happiness with him.  Instead, we are now in league and controlled by the very one who is the author of death and who wishes to destroy us.  What else can we expect?  Of course suicide is going to be glorified in our society.  We celebrate the "right" of women to kill their babies.  We run from pain and suffering, and by doing so, we run right into the arms of the devil.  Instead of taking the Cross from Christ that will lead us to life, we take up the cross from the devil upon which he will kill us.  As Blessed John Paul II said, we are a culture of death.

And we honestly think there is still hope for a society that thinks assisted suicide is a form of love?  America, America, how I mourn for you!

American Military Preparing to Fight Americans

On December 31, 2011, while the US was partying on New Year's Eve and no one was watching, President Barack Obama quietly signed the National Defense Authorization Act, which allows the president to instruct the military to arrest any American at any time with no charge and place them in an undisclosed place for an indefinite period of time with no trial.  You can go here and here to read about this.  As I posted on March 20, President Obama further signed an executive order as follows:

In a stunning move, on March 16, 2012, Barack Obama signed an Executive Order stating that the President and his specifically designated Secretaries now have the authority to commandeer all domestic U.S. resources including food and water. The EO also states that the President and his Secretaries have the authority to seize all transportation, energy, and infrastructure inside the United States as well as forcibly induct/draft American citizens into the military. The EO also contains a vague reference in regards to harnessing American citizens to fulfill “labor requirements” for the purposes of national defense. 

Now the latest news is that the military is putting a plan in place to fight Americans.  Oh yes, you read that correctly.  The American military is making plans to go to war against American citizens. Here is the editorial from The Washington Times, lamenting that this is going too far:

EDITORIAL: The Civil War of 2016

U.S. military officers are told to plan to fight Americans

Imagine Tea Party extremists seizing control of a South Carolina town and the Army being sent in to crush the rebellion. This farcical vision is now part of the discussion in professional military circles.

At issue is an article in the respected Small Wars Journal titled “Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A ‘Vision’ of the Future.” It was written by retired Army Col. Kevin Benson of the Army's University of Foreign Military and Cultural Studies at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., and Jennifer Weber, a Civil War expert at the University of Kansas. It posits an “extremist militia motivated by the goals of the ‘tea party’ movement” seizing control of Darlington, S.C., in 2016, “occupying City Hall, disbanding the city council and placing the mayor under house arrest.” The rebels set up checkpoints on Interstate 95 and Interstate 20 looking for illegal aliens. It’s a cartoonish and needlessly provocative scenario.

The article is a choppy patchwork of doctrinal jargon and liberal nightmare. The authors make a quasi-legal case for military action and then apply the Army’s Operating Concept 2016-2028 to the situation. They write bloodlessly that “once it is put into play, Americans will expect the military to execute without pause and as professionally as if it were acting overseas.” They claim that “the Army cannot disappoint the American people, especially in such a moment,” not pausing to consider that using such efficient, deadly force against U.S. citizens would create a monumental political backlash and severely erode government legitimacy.

The vision is hard to take seriously [no, unfortunately, it is not hard to take seriously at all]. As retired Army Brig. Gen. Russell D. Howard, a former professor at West Point, observed earlier in his career, “I am a colonel, colonels write a lot of crazy stuff, but no one listens to colonels, so I don’t see the problem.” [They are trying very hard to deflect attention from this.]  Twenty years ago, then-Air Force Lt. Col. Charles J. Dunlap Jr. created a stir with an article in Parameters titled “The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012.” It carried a disclaimer that the coup scenario was “purely a literary device intended to dramatize my concern over certain contemporary developments affecting the armed forces, and is emphatically not a prediction.”

The scenario presented in Small Wars Journal isn’t a literary device but an operational lay-down intended to present the rationale and mechanisms for Americans to fight Americans. Col. Benson and Ms. Weber contend, “Army officers are professionally obligated to consider the conduct of operations on U.S. soil.” This is a dark, pessimistic and wrongheaded view of what military leaders should spend their time studying.

 A professor at the Joint Forces Staff College was relieved of duty in June for uttering the heresy that the United States is at war with Islam. The Obama administration contended the professor had to be relieved because what he was teaching was not U.S. policy. Because there is no disclaimer attached to the Small Wars piece, it is fair to ask, at least in Col. Benson’s case, whether his views reflect official policy regarding the use of U.S. military force against American citizens.

Visions of Sister Lucy

I wish I was making this up. Interestingly, it is planned for 2016. That is very close to coinciding with the 100th anniversary of the apparitions of our Lady of Fatima, which occurred in 1917. What does this have to do with anything? Read the following from fatima.org:

At Rianjo, Spain in August 1931, Our Lord communicated to Sister Lucy His dissatisfaction with the Pope’s and the Catholic bishops’ failure to obey His command to consecrate Russia [Sister Lucy was one of the visionaries of Fatima and the only one to survive past childhood, as predicted by our Lady]. He said:

Make it known to My ministers, given that they follow the example of the King of France in delaying the execution of My requests, they will follow him into misfortune. It is never too late to have recourse to Jesus and Mary.

In another text Lucy wrote that Our Lord complained to her:

They did not wish to heed My request! Like the King of France they will repent of it, and they will do it, but it will be late. Russia will have already spread its errors in the world, provoking wars and persecutions against the Church. The Holy Father will have much to suffer.

The reference by Jesus to the King of France’s disobedience and punishment is as follows:

On June 17, 1689 the Sacred Heart of Jesus manifested to Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque His command to the King of France that the King was to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart. For 100 years to the day the Kings of France delayed, and did not obey.

So on June 17, 1789 [100 years to the day from St. Margaret Mary Alacoque's warning] the King of France was stripped of his legislative authority by the upstart Third Estate, and four years later the soldiers of the French Revolution executed the King of France as if he were a criminal.

In 1793 France sent its King, Louis XVI, to the guillotine. He and his predecessors had failed to obey Our Lord’s request that France be consecrated to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and thus misfortune had befallen both the King and his country.

Execution of King Louis XVI

Now, after more than seventy-five years, another consecration requested by God Himself, the solemn public Consecration of Russia, has still not been performed. In the meantime, we see that the prophecies predicted by Our Lady of Fatima are being fulfilled, and the Pope and bishops will be punished if they continue delaying the execution of God’s requests.

In the vision of the Third Secret of Fatima, released by the Vatican on June 26, 2000 the Pope and bishops were shown the results of ignoring Our Lord’s requests. The vision depicts a bishop dressed in white, who is shot and killed by a band of soldiers while he is kneeling at the foot of a large wooden cross atop a hill, after having traversed a half-ruined city filled with corpses. The execution of the bishop dressed in white is followed by the execution of many bishops, priests and laity. This prophetic vision of death and destruction should serve as a warning to those who persist in delaying the requests of God, for Our Lord warned Sister Lucy that if the bishops continue to do this, "they will follow him (the murdered King Louis XVI of France) into misfortune."

We are seeing our government turn against the Catholic Church before our eyes. The handwriting is on the wall. We know that the government views anyone who speaks out as a potential terrorist. Even those who pray in front of abortion clinics are suspects.  As I have stated and shown on this blog, soon anyone who "discriminates" against homosexuals will be prosecuted for hate crimes.  This will allow the government to close churches.  Just as the Catholic Church in China has been forced underground, so it will happen here in the United States. 

There is no more time to bury our heads in the sand.  We are headed for times of great persecution and martyrdom.  We must start preparing now and asking our Lord and our Lady for the grace and strength to stand up for what is right as the United States government more and more becomes the force of evil.  And it will not matter who is president or controlling the Congress, Republican or Democrat.  Voting for the "right" person will not make a difference.  Prayer is our only weapon.

Storm Clouds of Christian Persecution Are Gathering

I have been warning on this blog that there is major persecution coming against the Catholic Church right here in the United States, and that it will come strongest from militant homosexuals.  A major story in the last few weeks is, unfortunately, bearing out the truth of my statements  The owner of a fast food restaurant had the temerity to stand up for his religious beliefs and announce that he supports traditional marriage between a man and a woman.  Dan Cathy, the owner of Chick-fil-A has now become the symbol of hate speech and is basically being put on the same level as Adolph Hitler.  From a pro-homosexual website, the author of an article condemned the following words of Dan Cathy:

I think we are inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at Him and say 'we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage' and I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we have the audacity to define what marriage is about"

The author of the article stated:  "Dan Cathy's comments are obviously disturbing, regardless of broader context. But when one considers the context in which they were delivered, these comments really do show us, without any shred of doubt, where a major American fast food chain places LGBT people, our lives, and our loves within the societal realm."

It is amazing that society, which not that long ago condemned sodomy as perverted and sinful, is now supporting militant homosexuals against Christians who are merely stating their religious beliefs.  Yet there is no double standard seen.  It is perfectly acceptable to persecute Christians. 

We have seen this patterns before, e.g., Nazi Germany with the Jews.  Now is not the time to stick our heads in the sand and say, no that could never happen in America. In fact, it's already happening. 

Here is the timeline of this story: 

 July 16, 2012

Company President Dan Cathy gives an interview to the Biblical Recorder newspaper, which is re-posted in the Baptist Press, saying, "Well, guilty as charged," when asked about the company's support of the traditional family. "We are very much supportive of the family — the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that."

July 18, 2012

Controversy spreads nationally on social media networks like Twitter and Facebook. The Office star Ed Helms announced on Twitter he's boycotting the company over the stance. Helms' tweet: "Chick-fil-A doesn't like gay people? So lame. Hate to think what they do to the gay chickens! Lost a loyal fan."  [What would they do to our Lord if he was on earth today and took this stance?  It's the same thing they will do to his followers]

July 19, 2012

On the Chick-fil-A Facebook page, the company posts a statement saying it's staying away from further discussion of the gay marriage debate. "Going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena," the posting said. Company spokesmen sent the same statement to NPR when we requested an interview.  [This is what you will see when groups are persecuted for standing up for their beliefs.  Will the Catholic Church stand strong?]

July 20, 2012

The Jim Henson Co., which controls the popular Muppets characters, announces on its Facebook page that it's cutting off its collaboration with Chick-fil-A in response to Cathy's comments. Coincidentally, the Jim Henson Creature Puppets that were to be distributed in Chick-fil-A kids' meals through August were pulled due to "product safety" reasons a few days later.

Boston Mayor Thomas Menino writes a letter to Chick-fil-A vowing to block the fast-food chain from opening a franchise in Beantown. "There is no place for discrimination on Boston's Freedom Trail and no place for your company alongside it," the letter reads. Since the move by Menino, a Chicago alderman and the San Francisco mayor have followed suit, saying the company should stay out of their cities.  [No one seems to be bothered by the discrimination against Christians]

July 23, 2012

In response to the firestorm, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee calls on Christian customers to show support for the company and stick up for Cathy's values. "The goal is simple," he announced, calling on Americans to help those who honor "the godly values we espouse by simply showing up and eating at Chick-fil-A on Wednesday, Aug. 1." As of 11:30 a.m. Friday, Huckabee's Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day already had more than 279,000 RSVPs.

Meanwhile, gay and lesbian groups have called for same-sex couples to kiss at Chick-fil-A stores on "National Same Sex Kiss Day" Aug. 3.

The following article shows the widespread support in labeling Dan Cathy a homophobic bigot and his speech defending traditional marriage as hate speech.

Chick-Fil-A Gay Flap A 'Wakeup Call' For Companies  

Atlanta-based Chick-fil-A has long stood by its Bible-based roots, keeping stores closed on Sundays and donating millions to Christian causes. But when its president, Dan Cathy, went public to defend his company's stance against gay marriage, he set off a considerable controversy that has everyone from politicians to puppets weighing in.

First telling the Baptist Press his company supported the "biblical definition of the family unit," Cathy then told the radio program The Ken Coleman Show, "I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we would have the audacity to try to redefine what marriage is all about."

The backlash spread swiftly. [Does anyone wonder how a "Christian" nation such as the USA has claimed to be, can have a backlash against someone upholding Christian principles?] Boston's mayor pledged to block the chicken sandwich stores from opening in Beantown, a Chicago alderman said he'll try to stop a franchise from opening in his ward and the Jim Henson Co. cutoff its Chick-fil-A collaboration. Because it's a private company, it will be difficult to measure the bottom-line impact of all the attention.

Social Media Spread
Americus Reed, a marketing professor at University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School who studies brand loyalty, says Cathy underestimated what might happen once his comments to a niche religious publication and a syndicated radio show spread to a wider audience.

"I think this is part of the wake-up call for companies to understand that social media makes these decisions very, very risky," Reed said, "because it's much easier now for these messages to get out to consumers and consumers to virtually organize."  [This is why persecution of Christians can happen so quickly now, especially when all of the elite of society, including and especially the MSM, are anti-Christian. ]

What does a famous chicken sandwich have to do with a polarizing political issue? The connection has long been clear to gay rights groups, which have tried to call attention to the millions of dollars Chick-fil-A, through its charitable arm, has donated to opponents of same-sex marriage. But never before has the Atlanta-based chain been thrust into such a swirling controversy over its faith-based positions.

Support For Gay Rights
But other companies see the risks of going public on controversial issues differently. This year, a handful of big brands have made headlines for taking the opposite side — supporting same-sex rights and benefits.

Starbucks coffee cup quote

"From time to time we are going to make a decision that we think is consistent with the heritage and the tradition of the company that perhaps may be inconsistent with one group's view of the world," Howard Schultz, Starbucks CEO, said at a shareholder meeting in March.

He explained the coffee giant's pro-gay positions were about making its employees proud — and aligning with its corporate values.

"Since we made that decision there has not been any dilution whatsoever in our business, and as you can see, shareholder value has increased significantly," Schultz said, citing revenue growth in the face of efforts like DumpStarbucks.com, led by pro-family organizations.

The lure of dollars from a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender market is another likely motivator for taking certain social stands. Marketing firm Witeck-Combs estimated the LGBT market's buying power at $800 billion last year.  [Money, not values, will always be the bottom line for corporate America.  And the money is on the side of the militant homosexuals.] 

"I think it's a sign of the times to try and speak to other groups that potentially one has not had a connection with, and that's just part and parcel with trying to grow your market," Reed said.

But beyond the big bucks, corporate reputation specialist Sekou Bermiss says companies may be motivated to contribute to community good.  [Supporting militant homosexuals is now seen as "community good."]

"More and more, you see firms that are trying to or feel obliged to certain issues in society, [to] do some greater good in society," Bermiss said.

Boycotts And Bottom Lines

Target Ad promoting
same sex marriage

Starbucks, Target and General Mills all stepped into the same-sex marriage issue by supporting gay marriage legislation in their home states. [Why is corporate America becoming involved in anti-family legislation?  What is the real agenda and who is really behind it?]  Each face ongoing boycotts led by the American Family Association and the National Organization for Marriage for doing so. The National Organization for Marriage said it's uncertain whether its boycotts are having an impact on businesses.

And after JC Penney hired Ellen DeGeneres as its spokesperson, the socially conservative group One Million Moms called for her firing.

"They wanted to get me fired and I'm proud and happy to say that JC Penney stuck by their decision to make me their spokesperson," DeGeneres said on her show. The retailer also started running Mother's Day and Father's Day ads featuring same-sex couples.

JC Penney ad featuring lesbian couple with child

But Reed says companies that make a social argument for business gain should be prepared to change course if an outcry leads to longer term losses.

"Most brands are keeping their heads down because these are very controversial sorts of strategies. And it probably makes sense — good business sense — to not weigh in on these issues," Reed said.

That's a lesson Chick-fil-A seems to be learning quickly.

It declined requests for an interview, but in a statement said, "Going forward, our intent is to leave the policy debate to the political arena."

There should be no doubt in anyone's mind that the lines are being drawn very sharply between Christians and non Christians, and that the government, mainstream media, the entertainment industry and corporate America are all siding with the non-Christians.  As we can see with Chi-fil-A, when the heat is turned up, these organizations that support Christian belief will back down and bow to the pressure.  We know that the Catholic church - the true Catholic Church - will never bow to the pressure and will suffer the persecution that will come from standing strong.  We must each individually ask ourselves, how will we stand in the face of the storm?