Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Damaso, at the end of the day

Damaso, at the end of the day
By Antonio J. Montalvan II
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 04:52:00 10/11/2010

“AS CHINA’S population ages and the wages slowly rise, the government is becoming more concerned about who will take care of the elderly than about a destabilizing surge of young people unable to find jobs . . . . Experts worry that Beijing is unprepared for the sheer speed at which China will age. The United Nations predicts China’s working-age population will peak in 2015 and plunge by 23 percent by 2050.”

That was a Reuters report, datelined Beijing, in the Inquirer issue of Sept. 27, just about the same time that the Philippines went delirious over a Carlos Celdran in a bowler hat, he who could have demonstrated his wrath against the Chinese authorities for imposing a one-child policy. Except that Celdran was “demonstrating” against “overpopulation” in the Philippines which, if we heed his call, will very surely follow the path of China some years from now—remorseful for controlling population gone hopelessly geriatric.

Watching Celdran’s chutzpah acting on television screens and listening to the hosannas heaped upon him only convinced me that indeed, we have forgotten what Padre Damaso represented. Celdran was clever but his interpretation was, sadly, very literal. It is as if the world has not post-modernized after more than a hundred years of the “Noli.” Filipinos do not take their history too well.

Damaso was the quintessential schemer, a liar who was corrupt and adulterous, abusing his self-imposed, enlarged clerical power to exact vendetta. What he represented is very much real and existent in the flesh today, but not necessarily among the clerics. There are Damasos in media, and there truly are Damasos in government. The Damasos constitute a legion among our politicians. Celdran certainly missed the metaphor of Rizal’s parody.

One hardly finds the Damaso memory alive in Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales, the father of Pondong Pinoy, the low-key archbishop of Manila who is painfully aloof with the cameras. Celdran could have searched elsewhere. The script’s setting and dramatis personae were certainly skewed right from the start.

Post-Celdran theatrics, the debate has now shifted to the question of when life begins, as if this has not been answered by science yet. Of course, that is part of the script. And part of the script is the lie that many artificial contraceptives are not abortifacient. It is incredible that one does not know this in this wired age when a wealth of information can be accessed at the flick of a finger. May I invite readers to www.epm.org/articles/bcp3300.html.

Damaso’s expertise was deception. It should not be hard then to find where the Damasos are in this debate.

Surveys are part of the ruse. Majority of Filipinos are in favor of legislating the use of artificial contraception. Right. But the Church is not in this for popularity reasons. Little support or otherwise, it is the role of the Church to point out the moral moorings of public policy, no matter if that is not what the majority says. If the majority says we shall legalize jueteng, do we expect the Church to follow suit? We might as well ask the Church to support drug abuse and women trafficking if and when the majority says these are okay. Never has the Church been daunted by a rampaging mob in its 2,000 years of existence, or it could not have survived this long. And survive it will, with due respect to Amando Doronila.

The Church should not meddle in government? Damaso was hardly the yardstick for that. He lost his moral ascendancy as a perpetrator of colonial abuses, among which were deception and hypocrisy. As pro-life and anti-death advocate, the Church has the responsibility to safeguard the tenets of the faith, which politicians should not leave at the doorstep of their houses when they go to Congress or Malacañang. The Church as a domain of faith is not limited to territorial boundaries. Faith is a sea without shores. The bedroom is part of the Church. Which the hypocrite Damaso denied, hence his dalliances that brought forth the tragic Maria Clara.

Media was in a frenzy over the Celdran performance. “Strictly Politics” of Pia Hontiveros at ANC joined the “fray of friars”—unfortunate for an intelligently straightforward talk show that had once outwitted an unguarded Erap Estrada into admitting that he indeed had signed the bank transfer for Jose Velarde a foot away from Clarissa Ocampo. That was a feat for the probing Hontiveros. That was history at its best.

In the merriment anti-life advocates went into to celebrate Celdran, a hapless John Carlos de los Reyes, the pro-life presidential contender in the May 2010 elections, was ganged up on by a cabal of known pro-death advocates—Beth Angsioco, Krip Yuson, Ricky Carandang and a revealing pro-contraceptive Pia Hontiveros—who only revealed their ignorance of “Humanae Vitae.” Balanced media reporting? Ricky Carandang, now a Cabinet secretary, has been a known anti-life advocate from way, way back. Now a public servant, Carandang remains anti-Church and anti-life. Call that democracy. Damaso would have relished that.

At the end of the show, Hontiveros unfolds a Damaso T-shirt. Everybody giggles and finds it cute, never mind if Delos Reyes is flabbergasted. At the end of the day, who is the real Damaso?

* * *

Comments to montalvan_antonio@g.cu.edu.ph


source: 

http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20101011-297078/Damaso-at-the-end-of-the-day

Friday, October 8, 2010

Fw: Greetings in the Divine Mercy!- feedback from Sibu Malaysia


-----Original Message-----
From: Maryleflyna Dau William
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 14:42:46
To:
Subject: Greetings in the Divine Mercy!

Dear Bro Stanley,
Thank you so much for taking time to conduct the conference in in Sibu,
Sarawak, Malaysia on 16-18 September 2010. I was one of those who
attended your conference in Sibu recently. Friends shared with me that
they saw and felt something on the Miraculous Image of Divine Mercy
Lord you brought. Some felt Lord Jesus' heart pumping when they put
their hands on his heart, others saw white rays circling on his chest,
others saw the red and white rays alive, others saw water ripples on the
Image, a gent saw Jesus sat on a chair with a crown, a friend was able
to bend down after after 1 and half year of back ache, some felt so
loved and peace when venerating the Image of Our Lord, etc. As for me I
felt so much joy tremendous love in my heart that I forgot to ask you
what The Lord's message for me. I am the one (at the counselling) who
passed the list of petition for you to give to the Lord. I also asked
if the Lord was present and you said "He is always around. He is
listening to you." Any message from the Lord for me?

At my parish St Joseph we pray the Chaplet every Sunday. At another
parish St Peter we pray everyday at 3pm. I have put in your name in the
petition box so that you will be protected and that the Lord will use
you powerfully to win more souls.

Once again I would like to say thank you to you and I praise and thank
God for you. Enclosed is an image that my friend's friend took during
the veneration in Sibu on 17th September, 2010.

When are you free to come to Kuching (we are half an hour's journey by
fight from Sibu, Sarawak, Malaysia?

Thanks & God Bless.
Mary

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

RH law not needed, if Noy would do his job POSTSCRIPT By Federico D. Pascual Jr.

This article presents another side of the RH bill that is already quite overridden by the media hype. The writer, in fact, to quote is "for reproductive health". Just the same, from this stand, he enumerates and highlights why the law is not needed.  Lets take it from the other side of the discussion.

RH law not needed, if Noy would do his job

POSTSCRIPT By Federico D. Pascual Jr. (The Philippine Star) Updated October 07, 2010

NOT NEEDED: For the record, I am for personal and public health in general, for Reproductive Health in particular.

But I am alarmed by the over-reaching scope of the proposed RH bill(s), and by the attempt to use the RH debate to cover up the mismanagement of our rich human and natural resources.

The RH bill I have seen aims to pluck the poor and ignorant masses from the muck of overpopulation by imposing a law cutting down the number of their children without due regard for their private sentiments and religious beliefs.

Actually, despite our being dominantly Catholic, we routinely ignore Church teachings on contraception and abortion and slyly resort to the birth control method of our choice.

We are already doing this without an intrusive and coercive RH law hanging over our heads.

*      *      *

OVERLAPPING LAW: What do proponents of the RH bill(s) really want?

Stripped of their generalized slogans proclaiming family planning, responsible parenthood, informed choice, gender equality, infant and child care, and fighting violence against women, what do they specifically want?

They want planning of family size and spacing of pregnancies? Many couples are already doing that — even without an intrusive RH law.

They want the Pill, injectible contraceptives, condoms, and other devices preventing or terminating unwanted pregnancy? All these physical and chemical interventions are already available without an RH law. Ask around.

They want gender equality? That is already promoted by existing laws. And you can be sure the women rights crusaders are never asleep.

They want more food, dwellings, better education for their children? They should pressure government officials, from Malacañang down, to do their sworn duties and not foist the lack of an RH law as an excuse.

They want emancipation from poverty? They should tell Malacañang to carry out measures to reduce poverty — such as improved revenue collection, wise use of resources, and no-nonsense prosecution of grafters. This can be done without an RH law.

They want to tell parents to limit to two the number of their children? There are better ways — without having to coerce parents through an RH law — of convincing and helping couples limit the size of their brood.

They want abortion on demand? Sorry, but they will have to contend with the Constitutional mandate for the protection of the unborn, not to mention the penal laws on the taking of human life. An RH law cannot overturn the basic Charter.

*      *      *

MISMANAGEMENT: The absence of an RH law (superimposed on laws already covering the subtopics of reproductive health) is being used to explain away the failure of government to address decades-old problems identified with poverty.

Our problem in the Philippines is not so much population growth as it is the mismanagement of our God-given human and natural resources. President Aquino has pinpointed one area — corruption that saps resources and the will to excel.

Overpopulation is not the cause of corruption. Rather, it is corruption that creates myriad problems that impact on the growing population.

The quality of the population is a decisive factor in building a strong and progressive nation. Properly managed, the population is an asset. Mismanaged, it is a heavy burden.

A number of developed countries whose population’s median age has become alarmingly high are now easing the brakes on population control and encouraging couples to produce more babies.

Some countries that cannot wait for these babies to grow into productive members of the community woo selected foreigners who are professionals or skilled workers. Many qualified Filipinos take advantage of this situation.

*      *      *

HATE-OBJECTS: It is sad that the strategy stable of President Aquino is again using politics of hate not only to gain acceptance of the RH idea but also to display the President as a hero battling opponents of the bill, especially the Catholic Church.

In the same manner that they put up Gloria Arroyo as a hate-object to win the last elections, they seem to be again drawing the same divisive line of promoting a battle royale with the Church on the issue of birth control.

They probably figured that they could win this big fight also. The President should instruct his boys to discuss the issues purely on the merits instead of again fomenting rifts that may not easily heal.

*      *      *

ABORTIFACIENT: Reader Noel Manalo called our attention to the fact that all contraceptives are abortifacient (causing abortion). He explained in an email:

“The early contraceptives, such as Enovid back in 1957, did prevent ovulation, and therefore conception — majority of the time. But such “hormonal” contraceptives — so called because they used hormones such as estrogen and synthetic hormones like progestin — had a difficult problem.

“They caused internal bleeding and cancer of the uterus. This is the main reason why manufacturers and doctors turned to outright abortifacients (“pampalaglag”).

“The use of abortifacients looks ‘clean.’ The one they abort is the fertilized egg — a human being initially one cell in size, too tiny to see, but a human person nonetheless. Abortifacients murder a helpless, unborn person with the same human worth and dignity as all of us.

There are still hormonal contraceptives being produced, but they retain the same problems of hormonal contraceptives — intra-uterine bleeding and cancer of the uterus.

“If you take hormonal contraceptives once or a few times, maybe you won’t bleed or get cancer. But for these things to work, you have to take them constantly, day after day, month after month, year after year — until menopause.

“Otherwise, if you miss a dose, you could get pregnant, and all your plans are ruined. This is how people become slaves to contraceptives and abortifacients.”

Reprehensible A LAW EACH DAY (Keeps Trouble Away) By Jose C. Sison

Reprehensible
A LAW EACH DAY (Keeps Trouble Away) By Jose C. Sison (The Philippine Star) Updated

People who believe in God whether Christians, Muslims, Buddhists or any other faith would certainly feel offended if somebody disrupts the very rite or liturgy that is the center of their faith, the celebration of God’s presence in their midst. These rituals are the most sacred to them. This is the reason behind the provision of our Revised Penal Code (RPC, Article 133) penalizing with imprisonment from 6 months to 2 years and 4 months “anyone who shall perform acts in a place devoted to religious worship or during the celebration of any religious ceremony” which are “notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful”.

For Catholics “the Mass is the center of the Church. Nothing can compare to the Mass because it is the renewal of the Sacrifice on the Cross where Christ offers Himself up for all humanity. It is the moment when heaven and earth unite”. Disrupting the Mass is therefore the most offensive act against the feelings of Catholic faithful. Anyone who disrupts the mass like that Intramuros tourist guide (his name is not worth mentioning) certainly deserves to be imprisoned. His act can never be justified by his deep resentment against the prelates who oppose the RH bill. It is willfully, willingly and feloniously done during a rite most sacred to Catholics and therefore punishable under the RPC. Muslims and Buddhists would also feel offended if such disruption was committed against them. There is no reason why disruption of a Catholic ritual should be treated differently.

Article 133 of the RPC does not penalize the proponents and supporters of the RH bill or those who want to impose a family planning program and the promotion of women’s reproductive health. It only penalizes the act of disrupting religious worships and rites. Definitely this is not a medieval law. It is relevant and appropriate for as long as faith in the almighty God exists. Those who are therefore advocating the repeal of the law on the premise that it is being enforced by the “Padre Damasos” allegedly still in our midst or by “people whose thinking is stuck in the dark ages”, are grossly mistaken and miserably misinformed.

It is really reprehensible for the advocates and supporters of the RH bill to vent their ire and viciously attack the Catholic prelates and the faithful simply because the latter believe that the RH bill is wrong and contrary to their own belief. They may have the freedom to express their own views but they must also respect the customs, practices and the rights of others to express contrary views. They have no right to denigrate, defile and blaspheme those who do not agree with them.

Actually there is an abuse of freedom in our society today. People now think that they have the absolute right to act and speak freely even to the extent of trampling upon the rights of others or of imposing their individual rights over and above the rights promoting the common good. This observation is confirmed not only by recent criminal act of that tourist guide at the Manila Cathedral. The more dangerous example is the alleged right to informed choice guaranteed by the RH bill which is now being openly supported by P-Noy after accepting that Millennium Challenge Corporation grant.

The RH bill and P-Noy would grant couples the right to choose between the natural and artificial method of birth control with the use of contraceptives in spacing the births of their children and planning the size of their family provided they are properly informed. According to the bill, the entire range of contraceptives will be made available to them if they choose the artificial method. But medical science has already established that some of these contraceptives do not actually prevent conception. Instead they prevent the live fetus from implanting in the wall of the uterus which is terminating pregnancy or simply abortion. Considering that couples have the right to choose these contraceptives pursuant to the RH bill, then couples are virtually given the right to choose abortion.

Pro choice is really a popular catchword. It is bound to attract backers of the RH bill like that Intramuros guide fanatic. But “whenever we hear the term pro choice, we must also ask the all important question, ‘what choice are we talking about’. “Given the facts about abortion, the question really becomes, do you think people should have the right to choose to kill” innocent defenseless and helpless children in the mothers’ womb “if that is what they want to do”? (Pro life Answers to Pro Choice Arguments, p. 83).

Indeed, the main authors of this bill, Representatives Lagman and Guarin do not deny that some of these contraceptives prevent the live fetus from implanting in the walls of the uterus. But they stubbornly insist on the passage of the bill by claiming that life begins only upon the implantation of the fetus on the uterus contrary to the scientifically established findings that life begins from the moment the egg is fertilized by the sperm or at conception. Raising the issue of when life begins just leads us to the following question: “If you are driving at night and you think the dark figure ahead on the road may be a child but may just be a dark figure of a tree, do you drive into it or do you put on the brakes. Shouldn’t we give the benefit of the doubt to life”? ( idem, p. 39).

Actually however there is no more doubt on this matter anymore. Our Constitution itself says that the state shall protect the life of the mother equally with the life of the unborn from the moment of conception. So the RH bill should be junked not because the Church is opposing it but because it is unconstitutional. There is no reason at all to pounce on the Church and her prelates for opposing the bill.

E mail us at jcson@pldtdsl.net.

Another sharing

Personal MessagePraises to Jesus the Divine Mercy & Mama Mary!Oct 4, '10 5:29 PM
by revelita for users ourdivinemercy and rmc1979
I want to share to others how Jesus gave me my job when I lost my Solidbank job effective September 1, 2000. Jesus gave me Metrobank as my next employer effective Sept. 1, 2000. I did not lose hope when I was told I was not among the list of retained employees. I prayed the chaplet unceasingly and sought the intercession of Mama Mary and Saint Faustina who became a saint on April 30, 2000. My job at Metrobank lasted till April 15, 2009. I still wanted to work and effective April 16, 2009 I reported to the LGU Office to work as Administrative Officer IV at the City Budget Office of Ozamiz City effective June 01, 2009. Nine (9) months after I was promoted to Accountant III at the Economic Enterprise Office up to the present. That's how generous the Lord Jesus! Then our daughter passed the Physicians' Licensure exam in August 2010 and she is now a resident doctor at Vicente Sotto Memorial Medical Center in Cebu City. Glory to God in the highest!

Sunday, October 3, 2010

Before taking a stand, know what you are taking a stand for. Read the fine print. Before its too late.

Id like to share this appeal for life.

THIS IS AN APPEAL.

THIS MORNING, I RECEIVED THIS EMAIL FROM A CO-PARENT AT WOODROSE THROUGH OUR MOM'S YAHOO GROUPS AND I HAVE DECIDED TO SHARE IT HERE. I THINK FOR MOST PART MANY HAVE BEEN SILENT FOR FEAR OF THE POSSIBLE REACTIONS THAT WILL BE ELICITED FROM TAKING A PRO-LIFE STAND ESPECIALLY WITH THE RECENT EVENTS THAT HAVE INVOLVED THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND PRO-CHOICE PROPONENTS. THEN AGAIN THIS MORNING, I WAS COMPELLED BY THIS EMAIL TO TRY AND TAKE A FEW STEPS FURTHER TO SUPPORT LIFE AND TO RALLY FOR LIFE.


SOMETIMES, SILENCE IS GOOD AND GOLDEN BUT WHEN IT DISABLES US FROM TAKING A STAND, FROM BEING THE THE BETTER VERSION CHRISTIANS WE ALL ASPIRE TO BE AND NATURAL STEWARDS OF LIFE, THEN CHOOSING TO BE SILENT DOES MORE DAMAGE THAN WHAT WE WANTED TO AVOID ANYWAY. THERE IS A LINE BETWEEN TOLERANCE AND PERMISSIVENESS. I REMEMBER THIS ALWAYS FROM FR. CORAPI'S TALKS.  WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR LIFE. WE ARE CARETAKERS OF LIFE,  FOREMOST AS PARENTS AND AS HUMAN BEINGS. GOD HELP US WITH COURAGE TO SPEAK UP IN FAVOR OF LIFE, NOT SO MUCH TO BE CONFRONTATIONAL OR ARGUMENTATIVE OR SENSATIONAL TO SAY THE LEAST- BUT JUST TAKE A STAND FOR IT REGARDLESS OF RELIGION. AFTER ALL, LIFE AND CHOICE- THESE BLESSINGS ARE NOT EXCLUSIVE TO CATHOLICS. THESE BLESSINGS ARE ALL INCLUSIVE.

MANY YEARS INTO THE FUTURE, IT WILL BE OUR CHILDREN WHO WILL HARVEST THE CONSEQUENCES OF OUR DECISIONS, ACTIONS AND INACTIONS.

MAY OUR CHOICES, REGARDLESS WHO IS RIGHT OR WRONG, BE ALWAYS LIFE-GIVING.

GOD BLESS!



From: SHARON FERNANDEZ <sybf2005@yahoo.com>
Subject: A CALL FOR ACTION
Date: Sunday, October 3, 2010, 9:48 AM

Dear Family and Friends,

This past week saw a very sad incident and a tragic turn of events take place in our midst - a misguided individual took it upon himself to disrespect and desecrate the holy sacrifice of the mass, the most central and revered practice of our faith, under the excuse of "freedom of expression". He also disrespected the leaders of our Church, who were present in the celebration. If this had happened in a mosque and it was the muslim religion that was disrespected, muslims everywhere (not only in the Phils) would be up in arms and calling for a fatwah.

But how did we react as Catholics? 

In light of all the attacks being waged against the Church these past weeks (and which we can expect will continue as those who are pushing for the RH bill will certainly make the most out of the recent incidents to put the Church in a bad light and force Filipinos to take sides), let's take some time to pause and reflect on where we stand in all of this. As Catholics, are we going to side with those who say that we should be "flexible" (see Carmen Pedrosa's column in Phil. Star today, Oct 3) and just choose to follow those teachings of the Church that don't agree with our views? Or are we, like true Catholics, going to practice humility and recognize that our Mother the Church is just doing her job of looking out for our welfare by reminding us of what is good for us, because God said so and He knows what's best? Since when did being a Catholic mean we can pick and choose what we want to believe and practice based on what is convenient and "makes sense" to us? For isn't that the essence of FAITH - the belief in something to be true based on the authority of someone else? In this case, we believe in the truths taught to us by the Church because the authority behind the Church is God Himself. I don't know about you but I'm not about to go against what God says because I happen to "think" that using contraceptives will be a much better (read: easier, more convenient) solution to preventing unwarranted births than say, abstinence. But that's what all these biased columnists and people in media would have us think and do.  Just think about it for a while: why is it that we don't read any articles/columns that talk about the merits of ABSTINENCE? Condoms and other contraceptives have already been scientifically proven to be less than 100% effective (condoms between 85-95% effective), which is why there are still so many incidences of unwanted pregnancies despite their use, which then motivates the person to seek abortion as her next and last resort. But if people practice ABSTINENCE, that will be 100% effective 100% of the time. The problem with ABSTINENCE is that there's no money to be made by anyone out of it AND it will require discipline and self-sacrifice (virtues  many of our so-called leaders and politicians could definitely benefit from learning).  With abstinence, both the rich AND poor alike will benefit (not only physically but spiritually), whereas promoting contraceptives supports a billion $ industry. 

So going back, where do we, as true CATHOLICS, stand in all of this? Are we going to allow the views of the few but very vocal, misguided individuals speak for the millions of Catholics in this country? As the article below says, if we don't speak up now when our very beliefs are being challenged, when else will we speak? What kind of society will we bequeath to our children and grandchildren? A society that values comfort and self-seeking over self-sacrifice and whole families (father, mother, children) loving one another? A society where children don't need to tell their parents that they're using contraceptives because they're having pre-marital sex at 15? A society where a wife doesn't need to discuss with her husband her decision to have a ligation, even if he still wants to have children? A society that doesn't value children because they represent hard work, sacrifice, expense? For that will be the result of passing the RH Bill currently being touted as the ultimate solution to our problems with poverty.

If this is the kind of society that you would want generations of Filipinos to inherit, then do NOTHING after reading this. But if you want to have a hand in our country's future, TALK, WRITE, DEBATE, DISCUSS with others what you believe. If you belong to a group who are active in Church activities, ministries, etc., generate talk and discuss these with them and get others to make a stand with you. Write to your congressmen or if you know/have connections to any politician, talk/write letters to them and let them know what you think. Because unless we make the effort to speak out, the highly vocal minority will speak out for us, and then where would we be?


Sharon Fernandez
(If you are unsure of the fact and would like to be further enlightened on the arguments against contraception, abortion, population control, the RH Bill, etc. I would be more than happy to share information with you. Feel free to e-mail/text me.)

----- Forwarded Message ----

Sent: Sun, October 3, 2010 7:42:31 AM
Subject: [alfi] Elizabeth, Generations for LIfe: An Obligation to the Truth

 

An Obligation to the Truth

— Posted by Elizabeth (September 15, 2010 at 7:48 pm)

Have you ever been in a situation when a friend shares with you the fact that they performed a less-than-honorable action? And instead of pointing out that what they did was wrong, and that they have an obligation to get right with God, you laugh it off?

Yes, that happened to me. Recently, in fact. I was merely trying to be non-judgmental, but I ended up condoning that action. I didn’t speak the truth, instead I remained silent.

In our society, silence implies consent. By saying nothing, we indicate that we have no objections. We affirm the speaker as correct, and give them permission to proceed.

Meanwhile, our culture is constantly throwing objectionable beliefs in our face. We read biased articles from the media; there are numerous social settings where we run into people who hold immoral viewpoints. Our friends get caught up in the lies. As Christians – especially as Catholics who have been confirmed – we have an obligation, like it or not, to speak the truth instead of remaining silent.

We don’t have to be confrontational. We might not be especially persuasive. Maybe we’ll feel embarrassed because the truth is unpopular. But when the truth is disrespected in our presence, we can’t let the insult pass without raising even a small objection.

When you think about it, wouldn’t we speak up in any other situation? If I was speaking to someone who dissed my family, favorite sports team, or even my favorite movie, I would most certainly challenge their statement. Very few of us would merely shrug it off.

In the big picture, the Church, morality, and our pro-life beliefs are important enough to be defended – although it should be done with compassion and respect. And while oftentimes, we will be tuned out and ignored, we have the assurance that we have done the right thing.




Generations for Life

http://generationsforlife.org/
Lets continue taking a stand for life. The future generations are banking on us.

An Obligation to the Truth

An Obligation to the Truth

— Posted by Elizabeth (September 15, 2010 at 7:48 pm)
Have you ever been in a situation when a friend shares with you the fact that they performed a less-than-honorable action? And instead of pointing out that what they did was wrong, and that they have an obligation to get right with God, you laugh it off?

Yes, that happened to me. Recently, in fact. I was merely trying to be non-judgmental, but I ended up condoning that action. I didn’t speak the truth, instead I remained silent.

In our society, silence implies consent. By saying nothing, we indicate that we have no objections. We affirm the speaker as correct, and give them permission to proceed.

Meanwhile, our culture is constantly throwing objectionable beliefs in our face. We read biased articles from the media; there are numerous social settings where we run into people who hold immoral viewpoints. Our friends get caught up in the lies. As Christians – especially as Catholics who have been confirmed – we have an obligation, like it or not, to speak the truth instead of remaining silent.

We don’t have to be confrontational. We might not be especially persuasive. Maybe we’ll feel embarrassed because the truth is unpopular. But when the truth is disrespected in our presence, we can’t let the insult pass without raising even a small objection.

When you think about it, wouldn’t we speak up in any other situation? If I was speaking to someone who dissed my family, favorite sports team, or even my favorite movie, I would most certainly challenge their statement. Very few of us would merely shrug it off.

In the big picture, the Church, morality, and our pro-life beliefs are important enough to be defended – although it should be done with compassion and respect. And while oftentimes, we will be tuned out and ignored, we have the assurance that we have done the right thing.


http://generationsforlife.org/2010/0915/speaktruth/