Showing posts with label CNN. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CNN. Show all posts
Thursday, June 08, 2017
The fake news campaign against President Donald Trump is coming apart...
"Speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into Him who is the head, into Christ....Therefore, putting away falsehood, let everyone speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members of another." (Ephesians 4: 15, 25).
The fake news campaign which the liberal mainstream media has been waging against President Donald Trump is coming apart. See here and here for example. And also here.
When communicating with others, we all have certain responsibilities. For example, we all have a responsibility to submit ourselves to truth when communicating. Dr. Germain Grisez explains that, “As creatures, human persons are utterly dependent on God. Their freedom and action presuppose realities whose meaning and value cannot be changed. Therefore, human fulfillment requires knowing and conforming to the truth, and especially to the truth about what is good. But since genuine community is cooperation in seeking common fulfillment, it depends on submission to truth. Consequently, since all parties to communication should be open to genuine community, they should submit themselves to truth. The alternative is pursuing what they want regardless of truth, caring about no common good beyond themselves, and so, while using means of communication, failing to promote genuine community.”
The Eighth Commandment does not say, "You shall not bear false witness unless you have a really good reason." Rather, the Commandment calls on us to be honest because, as God's children, we are called to imitate our Father who can neither deceive nor be deceived (Job 12: 16). The Lord hates lying lips (Proverbs 12: 22); He hates a lying tongue (Proverbs 6: 17); He destroys those who speak falsehood (Psalm 5: 6).
The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains that, "The eighth commandment forbids misrepresenting the truth in our relations with others. This moral prescription flows from the vocation of the holy people to bear witness to their God who is the truth and wills the truth. Offenses against the truth express by word or deed a refusal to commit oneself to moral uprightness: they are fundamental infidelities to God and, in this sense, they undermine the foundations of the covenant." (2464). And again: "Christ's disciples have "put on the new man, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness." By "putting away falsehood," they are to "put away all malice and all guile and insincerity and envy and all slander." (2475)
In 2477 the Catechism explains that: "Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. He becomes guilty....of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them."
Calumny is a lie told about someone, accusing him of something of which he is not guilty. It is a sin against charity and justice. It is more or less serious depending on the importance of the object of the slanderous lie and also on the evils caused to the victim.
News outlets which continue to promote the fake news campaign alleging that the Trump campaign is guilty of "collusion with the Russians" are betraying the ethics of responsible journalism while betraying the common good.
No collusion. See here.
Sunday, February 15, 2015
CNN: Papal revolution calls for female Deacons in accord with the early Church
CNN is touting a papal revolution while arguing that there is a theological framework for ordaining women to the diaconate. In an article which may be found here, Jay Parini writes,"...the early church had female deacons, and St. Paul put great trust in female leaders, such as Lydia and Phoebe (a deacon with whom he entrusted his famous Letter to the Romans)."
Wrong Jay. Gerhard Ludwig Muller, Professor of Dogmatic Theology in Munich, explains in his scholarly work entitled "Priesthood and Diaconate" (Ignatius Press) that the consecration of deaconesses in the early Church was not an ordination of women to the diaconate. He writes:
"The institutionalization of charitable services performed by widows in the Christian community, of the assistance rendered by women during baptismal ceremonies, and of liturgical functions in a convent of consecrated virgins is apparent from the beginning of the third century in the ecclesiastical neologism: diaconissa/diacona. For Koine Greek, unlike Latin, could not construct the female form of 'servant' by a change of ending, but could only indicate it with the feminine article (cf. Rom 16:1). Aside from that, we also encounter the title diaconissa (and, similarly, presbyterissa and episcopissa) as a designation for the wives of deacons - for example, in papal instructions or conciliar canons that admonish higher clerics to practice celibacy, in the sense of continence.
Although there are records of the liturgical installation of deaconesses dating back to the fourth century, one must not overlook the fact that the selfsame authors who testify to this practice also make clear that the consecration of deaconesses was not the ordination of women to the diaconal ministry; on the contrary, it was a question of a different ecclesiastical office.
To the early Church it was clear that, without prejudice to the various degrees of bishop, presbyter, and deacon, which assumed a definitive form in the transition to the postapostolic age, these ministries owe their existence to the historical initiative of the apostles and to the special presence of the Holy Spirit in the foundational phase of the Church; whereas the latter, so-called nonsacramental consecrations were introduced by ecclesiastical authorities and thus are not matters of divine law but only of Church law." (pp. 48-49).
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches clearly that: "Deacons share in Christ's mission and grace in a special way. The sacrament of Holy Orders marks them with an imprint ('character') which cannot be removed and which configures them to Christ, who made himself the 'deacon' or servant of all. Among other tasks, it is the task of deacons to assist the bishop and priests in the celebration of the divine mysteries, above all the Eucharist, in the distribution of Holy Communion, in assisting at and blessing marriages, in the proclamation of the Gospel and preaching, in presiding over funerals, and in dedicating themselves to the various ministries of charity." (CCC, 1570).
And again: "Since the Second Vatican Council the Latin Church has restored the diaconate 'as a proper and permanent rank of the hierarchy,' while the Churches of the East had always maintained it. This permanent diaconate, which can be conferred on married men, constitutes an important enrichment for the Church's mission. Indeed it is appropriate and useful that men who carry out a truly diaconal ministry in the Church, whether in its liturgical and pastoral life or whether in its social and charitable works, should 'be strengthened by the imposition of hands which has come down from the apostles. They would be more closely bound to the altar and their ministry would be made more fruitful through the sacramental grace of the diaconate.'" (CCC, 1571).
Women cannot receive Holy Orders. Period. End of story. The Sacrament of Holy Orders is conferred in the degrees of Bishop, Presbyter, and Deacon (See Lumen Gentium Nos. 18-29). Tradition in its entirety has always firmly held that all degrees of ordination are essentially rooted in one sacrament, as being a repraesentatio Christi capitis [a representation of Christ the Head].
Once again, CNN has published a piece of drivel from a "journalist" who hasn't researched his subject. This is what we've come to expect from the mainstream media: sheer nonsense.
And they do not fail to deliver.
Wrong Jay. Gerhard Ludwig Muller, Professor of Dogmatic Theology in Munich, explains in his scholarly work entitled "Priesthood and Diaconate" (Ignatius Press) that the consecration of deaconesses in the early Church was not an ordination of women to the diaconate. He writes:
"The institutionalization of charitable services performed by widows in the Christian community, of the assistance rendered by women during baptismal ceremonies, and of liturgical functions in a convent of consecrated virgins is apparent from the beginning of the third century in the ecclesiastical neologism: diaconissa/diacona. For Koine Greek, unlike Latin, could not construct the female form of 'servant' by a change of ending, but could only indicate it with the feminine article (cf. Rom 16:1). Aside from that, we also encounter the title diaconissa (and, similarly, presbyterissa and episcopissa) as a designation for the wives of deacons - for example, in papal instructions or conciliar canons that admonish higher clerics to practice celibacy, in the sense of continence.
Although there are records of the liturgical installation of deaconesses dating back to the fourth century, one must not overlook the fact that the selfsame authors who testify to this practice also make clear that the consecration of deaconesses was not the ordination of women to the diaconal ministry; on the contrary, it was a question of a different ecclesiastical office.
To the early Church it was clear that, without prejudice to the various degrees of bishop, presbyter, and deacon, which assumed a definitive form in the transition to the postapostolic age, these ministries owe their existence to the historical initiative of the apostles and to the special presence of the Holy Spirit in the foundational phase of the Church; whereas the latter, so-called nonsacramental consecrations were introduced by ecclesiastical authorities and thus are not matters of divine law but only of Church law." (pp. 48-49).
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches clearly that: "Deacons share in Christ's mission and grace in a special way. The sacrament of Holy Orders marks them with an imprint ('character') which cannot be removed and which configures them to Christ, who made himself the 'deacon' or servant of all. Among other tasks, it is the task of deacons to assist the bishop and priests in the celebration of the divine mysteries, above all the Eucharist, in the distribution of Holy Communion, in assisting at and blessing marriages, in the proclamation of the Gospel and preaching, in presiding over funerals, and in dedicating themselves to the various ministries of charity." (CCC, 1570).
And again: "Since the Second Vatican Council the Latin Church has restored the diaconate 'as a proper and permanent rank of the hierarchy,' while the Churches of the East had always maintained it. This permanent diaconate, which can be conferred on married men, constitutes an important enrichment for the Church's mission. Indeed it is appropriate and useful that men who carry out a truly diaconal ministry in the Church, whether in its liturgical and pastoral life or whether in its social and charitable works, should 'be strengthened by the imposition of hands which has come down from the apostles. They would be more closely bound to the altar and their ministry would be made more fruitful through the sacramental grace of the diaconate.'" (CCC, 1571).
Women cannot receive Holy Orders. Period. End of story. The Sacrament of Holy Orders is conferred in the degrees of Bishop, Presbyter, and Deacon (See Lumen Gentium Nos. 18-29). Tradition in its entirety has always firmly held that all degrees of ordination are essentially rooted in one sacrament, as being a repraesentatio Christi capitis [a representation of Christ the Head].
Once again, CNN has published a piece of drivel from a "journalist" who hasn't researched his subject. This is what we've come to expect from the mainstream media: sheer nonsense.
And they do not fail to deliver.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Philosopher Sam Harris advances the "Heaven is escapist" argument...
No one can accuse philosopher Sam Harris of being original. During a recent interview with CNN, which may be seen here, Mr. Harris asserted that, "Religion causes people to fixate on issues of less moral importance....Religion has convinced us that there's something else entirely other than concerns about suffering. There's concerns about what God wants, there's concerns about what's going to happen in the afterlife..." In other words, concerns about supernatural realities such as God's Holy Will and Heaven are "escapist" because these "distract us" from the concerns of this world.
It was C.S. Lewis who so eloquently answered this charge of "escapism" with the simple question "Who talks the most against 'escapism'? Jailers." No doubt this point would be lost on Mr. Harris.
Heaven is not escapist because it is real. An idea is only "escapist" if it is a lie. By asserting that the afterlife is somehow "escapist," Mr. Harris is presupposing atheism. But if Heaven is real (and it is), it is escapism not to think about it and realistic to do so. One can almost hear Mr. Harris responding, "There is no scientific evidence to show that Heaven (or the "afterlife") exists." But this argument also falls flat. Where is the scientific evidence proving the notion that nothing exists except what may be proved by scientific evidence? There is no scientific evidence for such an assumption. In fact, such an assumption represents merely a desire to narrow the bounds of reality to that which may be demonstrated by the scientific method.
If Heaven is real and it is our ultimate destination, then it is really our primary task. Which is why we are commanded to "strive first for the kingdom of God" (Matthew 6: 33) because "our citizenship is in heaven." (Phil 3: 19-20). And what of Mr. Harris' assertion that "Religion causes people to fixate on issues of less moral importance"? What could be more important than saving one's soul and attaining eternal life in Heaven with God? How is such an issue of "less moral importance"?
Does concern for the afterlife necessarily distract one from "concerns about suffering"? Did it serve to distract Moses, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Avicenna, Augustine, Aquinas and, of course, Jesus the Christ from such concerns?
God preserve us from such nonsense!
It was C.S. Lewis who so eloquently answered this charge of "escapism" with the simple question "Who talks the most against 'escapism'? Jailers." No doubt this point would be lost on Mr. Harris.
Heaven is not escapist because it is real. An idea is only "escapist" if it is a lie. By asserting that the afterlife is somehow "escapist," Mr. Harris is presupposing atheism. But if Heaven is real (and it is), it is escapism not to think about it and realistic to do so. One can almost hear Mr. Harris responding, "There is no scientific evidence to show that Heaven (or the "afterlife") exists." But this argument also falls flat. Where is the scientific evidence proving the notion that nothing exists except what may be proved by scientific evidence? There is no scientific evidence for such an assumption. In fact, such an assumption represents merely a desire to narrow the bounds of reality to that which may be demonstrated by the scientific method.
If Heaven is real and it is our ultimate destination, then it is really our primary task. Which is why we are commanded to "strive first for the kingdom of God" (Matthew 6: 33) because "our citizenship is in heaven." (Phil 3: 19-20). And what of Mr. Harris' assertion that "Religion causes people to fixate on issues of less moral importance"? What could be more important than saving one's soul and attaining eternal life in Heaven with God? How is such an issue of "less moral importance"?
Does concern for the afterlife necessarily distract one from "concerns about suffering"? Did it serve to distract Moses, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Avicenna, Augustine, Aquinas and, of course, Jesus the Christ from such concerns?
God preserve us from such nonsense!
Sunday, August 09, 2009
The controversy continues...
From WorldNetDaily, July 28, 2009:
After being attacked by groups ranging from the Southern Poverty Law Center to Media Matters for relentlessly calling on Barack Obama to prove his eligibility for the office of the presidency, CNN's Lou Dobbs wasn't backing off on either his syndicated radio or his television program today.
Once again, he renewed his calls for Obama to produce his long-form birth certificate that would settle doubts about where he was born and offered that the president's actions could actually be "illegal."
Dobbs took on the special-interest groups demanding that CNN shut him up.
"The left is trying to silence their opponents and their competitors in the public marketplace of ideas," he said on his radio show. "One issue in which the ethnocentric issue groups have been trying to silence me is on the issue of illegal immigration. Many of those, if you will, have migrated to me here recently because I, even though I said I believe the president is a citizen of the United States, I don't understand why he shouldn't produce a birth certificate. My God, you're talking about the third rail of American journalism, baby! That's it. I'm not going to back off."
After being attacked by groups ranging from the Southern Poverty Law Center to Media Matters for relentlessly calling on Barack Obama to prove his eligibility for the office of the presidency, CNN's Lou Dobbs wasn't backing off on either his syndicated radio or his television program today.
Once again, he renewed his calls for Obama to produce his long-form birth certificate that would settle doubts about where he was born and offered that the president's actions could actually be "illegal."
Dobbs took on the special-interest groups demanding that CNN shut him up.
"The left is trying to silence their opponents and their competitors in the public marketplace of ideas," he said on his radio show. "One issue in which the ethnocentric issue groups have been trying to silence me is on the issue of illegal immigration. Many of those, if you will, have migrated to me here recently because I, even though I said I believe the president is a citizen of the United States, I don't understand why he shouldn't produce a birth certificate. My God, you're talking about the third rail of American journalism, baby! That's it. I'm not going to back off."
Read the WND article here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)