Abp. Ganswein says “No Proof” God Exists
[Interviewer:] If someone were to ask you: Your Excellency, prove to me that God exists. What would you answer him?
[Ganswein:] There is neither proof that God exists, nor is there proof that God does not exist. Faith does not operate based on [rational] proof. Faith lives by witnesses and witnessing. If I am convinced by a witness and by what he says, then this sets [faith] ablaze. Everything else does not lead to faith but remains outside of faith. This is true also, and especially, in our times.
When I read this article, I was dumbfounded. Granted, his answer may seem “acceptable” to some people, but the truth is, it is a slap in the face when it comes to Catholic Faith.
The First Vatican Council in the late 1800’s made it clear in the document Dei Filius that the existence of God is supported through reason. The council also admonishes those who disregard their roll in the church and her teachings.
Therefore We, fulfilling the duty of our supreme pastoral office, entreat, by the mercies of Jesus Christ, and, by the authority of the same our God and Savior, We command, all the faithful of Christ, and especially those who are set over others or are charged with the office of instruction, that they earnestly and diligently apply themselves to ward off and eliminate these errors from the Holy Church, and to spread the light of pure faith.
And since it is not sufficient to shun heretical depravity, unless those errors also be diligently avoided which more or less nearly approach it, We admonish all men of the further duty of observing those constitutions and decrees by which such erroneous opinions as are not here specifically enumerated, have been proscribed and condemned by this Holy See.
It seems Archbishop Ganswein may need a refresher course on the dogmatic constitution of the Catholic faith.
Here are some interesting articles for your reading enjoyment…
How I Changed My Mind About Pope Francis by Matthew Schmitz
Then Amoris Laetitia came out. In it, Francis sought to muddy the Church’s clear teaching that the divorced and remarried must live as brother and sister. “I have felt the Church’s teaching on marriage land like a blow, yet I take no encouragement from this shift,” I wrote. It was clear by then that my initial rosy assessments were wrong. Francis meant to lead the Church in a direction that I could not approve or abide. He believes that “the great majority of our sacramental marriages are null.” This renders him unable to resist the lie that says a man may abandon one wife and take up another. Instead, he reassures us that we can blithely go from one partner to the other without also abandoning Christ. This is the throwaway culture baptized and blessed, given a Christian name and a whiff of incense.
Church Teaching on Communion cannot be changed, says Cardinal Burke
Cardinal Burke, a canon lawyer and former head of the Vatican’s supreme court, told Arroyo: “Exactly what Pope St John Paul II is what the Church has always taught and practised, and my concern is that Amoris Laetitia seems in some way to permit an interpretation which leads to a practice which contradicts the constant practice of the Church. And that simply is a source of the gravest concern for me.
Praying the Jesus Prayer: Mercy With Every Breath
Growing up Catholic, I had never heard of the Jesus Prayer, at least not in the form in which it has been cherished and prayed by Orthodox Christians for centuries. The simplest formula of this brief repetitive petition – “Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner” – was of course vaguely familiar from the Gospel stories it echoes: the cure of the blind man (Mark 10:46-52), the publican’s humble confession in the parable (Luke 18:9-14)
With the beginning of the new year, I thought it would be a good time to get back to the routine of daily, or at the very least near-daily, blog entries…
I have been posting daily photos on Instagram (michael.t.barrett and renegade.abstracts), which also posts those photos on Facebook, Twitter, and Tumbler, but I have been remiss in remembering to send those posts here to my blog.
I am not sure what I will post each day, but I am hoping to get back into a routine.
Happy New Year!
At dawn on December 7, 1941, Japanese planes attacked the United States Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor In Hawaii.
Anxious to maintain their military and economic power in the region the Japanese planned to cripple the U.S. fleet which would then allow them to attack the Philippines and Indo-China without opposition and acquire the raw materials they needed to maintain their position.
Several ships were sunk or damaged, the U.S.S. Oklahoma capsized, and the U.S.S. Arizona was completely destroyed. More than 2,300 Americans died in the attack.
The next day President Franklin D. Roosevelt addressed a joint session of Congress, which declared war against Japan, and the United States officially entered World War II. The Japanese had no idea they were awakening a sleeping giant. December 7th, 1941 truly was a date which would live in infamy.
James Bradley, whose father was one of those who raised the flag on Iwo Jima, has studied the war and the reason Japan attacked us in the first place.
In a secret presidential cable to Tokyo, in July 1905, Roosevelt approved the Japanese annexation of Korea and agreed to an “understanding or alliance” among Japan, the United States and Britain “as if the United States were under treaty obligations.” The “as if” was key: Congress was much less interested in North Asia than Roosevelt was, so he came to his agreement with Japan in secret, an unconstitutional act.
Bradley’s op-ed in the New York Times is an excellent read for anyone who wants to know the real reason that Japan decided to attack us the way they did.
Take a moment today to remember all of those who died on that December morning in 1941.
I stopped paying attention to The Weather Channel several years ago. Why? Because of notifications like the one showed in this image.
According to the National Weather Service, rainfall in the Atlanta area is 17 inches below normal (National Weather Service, 2016) and local forecasters are predicting anywhere from 1.5 inches to 3 inches or more over the next 48 hours (Hill, 2016).
Three inches of rain does not end a severe drought, especially when we are looking at 17 inches or more. In fact, short term rain may postpone worse conditions, but unless there is a significant change to the weather pattern (Mellish, 2016) our drought is likely to continue for a considerable amount of time.
I understand the need for short messages in mobile notifications, but the Weather Channel began “soundbite forecasting” a long time ago. They do a great disservice when they hype events like this, because they are gravely mistaken if they think the drought is over simply because we will finally see two days of rain after little to no measurable rainfall for the past 42 days…
Hill, Jeff. (2016). Rainfall Totals Forecast. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/jeffhillfox5/status/803287709624242178/photo/1
Mellish, Kirk. (2016). Drought in much of Georgia. Retrieved from http://www.wsbradio.com/weblogs/kirk-mellishs-weather-commentary/2016/jun/09/drought-much-georgia/
National Weather Service. (2016). Rainfall Scorecard, Retrieved from http://www.weather.gov/ffc/rainfall_scorecard