Waiting for Godot to Leave

Deacon Jim Russell is trolling the internet claiming that G. K. Chesterton supported lying for a good cause. He bases this on a Chesterton quotation taken entirely out of context which I addressed three years ago, and the points I made then Deacon Russell continues to ignore now. In brief ... The entire point of Chesterton’s quote and of the English tradition since the execution of the Jesuit martyrs is that equivocation is wrong because it is lying about lying; it is a double lie. Equivocation is not wrong because lying is right; equivocation is wrong because lying is wrong, and to play games with words is to lie twice. Read what Chesterton actually said about lying here. And please pray for people who get sucked in to the irrationality that rules most of the internet. Personally, I need a break. *** And, by the way, something else that Deacon Russell and the "We Like Lying" crowd have ignored for years is the mass of evidence that the Ordinary Magisterium ...

"Professional Catholic" Mark Shea rightly condemns Professional Demagogue Michael Voris for promoting the work of antisemites and geocentrists . Let me explain what this is all about.  I'll use shorter words. Michael Voris.  The bad hair doesn't bother me; what bothers me is what's underneath. Michael Voris is not content (as Shea points out) with denouncing the errors and gutless cowardice of such menaces as Fr. Father Robert Barron and such dangerous men as Karl Keating, Jimmy Akin, Al Kresta and similar wolves in sheep’s clothing ... he now gives exposure to folks who believe that modern science is all wrong and who believe that the Jews are a menace to society. *** Let us learn a few things here. As I point out in Mark's comment box ... The fact is that Voris has been fueling the fires of schism, fanning the flames of the irrational, and feeding the furnace of wrath for years now. His engine keeps chugging along, but the track leads ...

Now while he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Festival, many people saw the signs he was performing and believed  (ἐπίστευσαν) in his name. But Jesus did not trust (ἐπίστευεν)   himself unto them because he knew all men  ( John 2:23-24 ) The same root word in Greek is used to signify both the faith professed by the people in Jerusalem who are impressed by the signs performed by Jesus, and the thing Jesus will not offer in return. They offer some sort of faith in His name, but He has no faith in this faith, as it were. John explains why in the next verse ... and [Jesus] didn't need anyone to tell him about human nature. He knew what people were really like. ( John 2:25 ) Knowing their hearts  - even without being told - Jesus knows that their faith is not such that He could entrust Himself to them.  Indeed, neither could Jesus count on the faith of His closest disciples, who all abandoned Him in His hour of need. So He keeps a wise reserve. Jes...

Let's call him "Chad Withers", the Sensitive Actor I once hired an actor.  Let's call him Chad Withers.  That's not his real name. He did a fairly decent job for Upstage Productions , but one Christmas season, he got very angry at us for not giving him the number of shows to perform that he thought he was entitled to.  So he quit.  He quit after he had already agreed to perform some gigs - leaving me to clean up his mess, re-cast the shows he had agreed to do, and cover for him. About a year later, he called and apologized. This was a first for me.  I mean, who calls and apologizes for something they once did?  When is the last time that's happened to you?  People just aren't sorry for the bad things they've done, and if they are, they're embarrassed about them, so they keep their mouths shut. Of course, Chad wanted something from me.  The apology had a point to it.  He wanted me to hire him back. *** Now here's where it gets...

Fellow Sinner, are you struggling with sins that you just can't give up?  Force of habit is a strong thing, but you yourself know that habit is not the whole story, that you enjoy sinning.  Of course you do.  We all do.  Why else would we sin if it weren't somehow fun or rewarding to us?  You may realize intellectually that your sin harms you in the long run, but you calculate that the immediate pay off is better than the long term pay out.  That sounds a bit harsh, but it's really true.  There is a kind of calculation going on here. Alice Boyes writes ... Change Happens When You're Ready? We often hear "Change will happen when you're ready". In my more than 20 years of experience [as a psychologist], I've come to understand that "ready"--or the tipping point of change--often means 'when the consequences of our behavior outweigh the value of that behavior to us'. In other words, when the pay out (consequence) becomes greater tha...

Kevin Tierney at Catholic Exchange has written his best post yet on the Theology of the Body , correcting the sex-saturated pop-Catholic misinterpretations of it. Kevin's article is about shame. The Westians want us all to be "naked without shame" - as if that were a good thing. It is a shame that Tierney has to instruct us on shame.  It is a shame that shame is presented as a thing that is entirely negative by Catholics who should know better.  It is a shame that these same Catholics are so ignorant not only of human nature but also of holy Scripture that they don't recognize how shameful we fallen men actually are. Tierney alludes to Sirach 4:21 There is a sense of shame laden with guilt, and a shame that merits honor and respect. or, in another translation for there is a shame that leads to sin and a shame that is honourable and gracious.  ... which reminds me of 2 Cor. 7:10 For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation and brin...