Category Archives: religion

If It Looks Like Judgment, Sounds Like Judgment, Smells Like Judgment…

By Personhood Ohio

by Josh O Conner at National Geographic Environment

Millions without electrical power…
Drought across the Midwest…
U.S. Capitol blanketed in darkness for days…
Record-breaking heat waves with no A/C…
Violent, record-breaking storms in the east…
Record-breaking wildfires in the west…
Iran launches long-range missiles…
Unemployment continues to skyrocket…
The dollar’s future grows grim…
Chinese stinkbug destroys tens of millions of dollars of crops in 38 states…
Obamacare is the largest increase in the size of government in our nation’s history…
The Republican-dominated Supreme Court lurches to the left…
More taxpayer funding of abortion…

In the Bible, the shedding of innocent blood was often the last straw before God finally sent judgment. God promised and sent judgments to Israel such as economic disaster, defeat in battle, natural disasters, and “madness of heart.” Because they did not end the killing of other people’s children, God told them “your children will be dashed in pieces against a stone” (Hosea 10). Under God’s judgment, the Jews starved, were crucified, and cruelly enslaved because they refused to repent and do justice to protect the innocent. Many nations and empires greater than us have been annihilated because of their sin. If God did not exempt Israel – His chosen people, the apple of His eye – from judgment for her sin, why do we act like the U.S.A. is exempt?

Our nation shows no signs of even slowing the momentum into socialism and godlessness. With the passage of Obamacare, we’ve never had more taxpayer funding for abortion in our nation’s history. Large pro-life and pro-family groups in Ohio watch abortion-abolition movements like Personhood Ohio from the sidelines, preferring to regulate abortion than end it. Entrenched pro-life leaders believe that we are obligated to submit to judicial tyranny, and that we need to work to get pro-life presidents to appoint pro-life justices. You’d think that Robert Thompson’s vote for Obama’s communist, abortion-funding healthcare bill would help them re-think their failed pro-life strategy, but they don’t appear to be budging. Too many of them are far too comfortable with child-killing. They don’t see “the hand-writing on the wall” for America. Judgment is coming to our land, and Ohio’s opportunity to avert judgment is brief. We must protect the children, or we will lose our freedoms and our posterity will be enslaved.

All God’s looking for is a remnant “whose heart is perfect toward Him” in order to “show Himself strong” (II Chronicles 16:9). All God’s looking for is a remnant to avert judgment (Ezekiel 22:30-31). God prefers to resurrect leaders out of the grassroots than to prop up the status quo. He loves to do exploits through His underdogs. Just as Israel’s faith was tested in the wilderness before they could conquer their Promised Land, so our faith will be tested, for it is through faith we’ll cross the Jordan River into our Promised Land of “liberty and justice for all.” Ohio’s Personhood initiative draws a line in the sand between those who “sigh and cry” over the sins of the land that are bringing judgment upon us, and those who are comfortable to conserve the status quo (Ezekiel 9).

Will you sigh and cry with us? Will you mourn the 25,000 Ohioans who are slaughtered every year in our abortion clinics, and pray for their deliverance? Will you believe God with us, that every child will be protected under Ohio law?

Muslim Persecution of Christians: May 2012

By Raymond Ibrahim

Unlike those nations, such as Saudi Arabia, that have eliminated Christianity altogether, Muslim countries with significant Christian minorities saw much persecution during the month of May: in Egypt, Christians were openly discriminated against in law courts, even as some accused the nation’s new president of declaring that he will “achieve the Islamic conquest of Egypt for the second time, and make all Christians convert to Islam”; in Indonesia, Muslims threw bags of urine on Christians during worship; in Kashmir and Zanzibar, churches were set aflame; and in Mali Christianity “faces being eradicated.”

Elsewhere in sub-Saharan Africa—in Nigeria, Somalia, Kenya, Sudan, the Ivory Coast—wherever Islam and Christianity meet, Christians are being killed, slaughtered, beheaded and even crucified.

Categorized by theme, May’s assemblage of Muslim persecution of Christians around the world includes (but is not limited to) the following accounts, listed in alphabetical order by country, not severity. Note: Because Pakistan had the lion’s share of persecuted Christians last month, it has its own section below, covering the entire gamut of persecution—from apostasy and blasphemy to rape and forced conversions.

Church Attacks

Indonesia saw several church-related attacks:

A mob of 600 Muslims threw bags of urine, stones, and rotten eggs at the congregation of a Protestant church at the start of Ascension Day service, while shouting profanity and threatening to kill the pastor. No arrests were made. The church had applied for a permit to construct its house of worship five years ago. Pressured by local Muslims, the local administration ordered the church to shut down in December 2009, though the Supreme Court recently overruled its decision, saying the church is eligible for a permit. Regardless, local Muslims and officials demand that the church shut down.

Following protests “by hard-line groups including the Islamic Defenders Front,” nearly 20 Christian houses of worship were sealed off by authorities on the pretext of “not having permits.” Authorities added that only one church may be built in the district in question to accommodate the region’s 20,000 Christians.

The Muslim mayor who illegally sealed the beleaguered GKI Yasmin church, forcing congregants to worship in the streets, has agreed to reopen it—but only if a mosque is built next door, to ensure the church stay in line. As well as opposition from the mayor, “the church has faced hostility from local Muslims, who have rallied against them, blocked them from accessing the street where the church is situated and disrupted their outdoor services. It is unlikely that they will suddenly embrace the Christians.”

France: Prior to celebrating mass, “four youths, aged 14 to 18, broke into the Church of St. Joseph, before launching handfuls of pebbles at 150 faithful present at the service.” They were chased out, though “the parishioners, many of whom are elderly, were greatly shocked by the disrespectful act of the youths of North African origin.”

Kashmir: A Catholic church made entirely of wood was partially destroyed after unknown assailants set it on fire. “What happened is not an isolated case,” said the president of the Global Council of Indian Christians, and follows the “persecution” of a pastor who baptized Muslims. “With these gestures, the Muslim community is trying to intimidate the Christian minority.”

Kuwait: Two months after the Saudi Grand Mufti, in response to a question on whether churches may exist in Kuwait, decreed that all regional churches must be destroyed, villa-churches serving Western foreigners are being targeted. One congregation was evicted without explanation “from a private villa used for worship gatherings for the past seven years”; another villa-church was ordered to “pay an exorbitant fine each month to use a facility it had been renting… Church leaders reportedly decided not to argue and moved out.”

Zanzibar: Hundreds of Muslims set two churches on fire and clashed with police during protests against the arrest of senior members of an Islamist movement known as the Association for Islamic Mobilization and Propagation. Afterwards, the group issued a statement denying any involvement of wrong doing. Continue reading

Birthplace of Christ Used in Bid for Palestinian Statehood

By Christine Williams

The issue is not genuinely about a two-state solution – as many are fooled into believing. Lethal opposition to the State of Israel remains fierce. This tiny democracy, Israel, which lives by individual freedoms, equal justice under law and respect for universal human rights, is an affront to these autocratic regimes.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), will soon decide whether to honor the Palestinian application to award The Church of the Nativity the designation of a World Heritage Site—a title reserved for locations considered to have outstanding Universal Value.

The World Heritage Committee is now meeting in Saint Petersburg, Russia, presumably to decide to whom to award the Church of the Nativity, said to be the birthplace of Christ, as well as the Pilgrimage Route in Bethlehem.

Here is where it gets problematic: although only applicants recognized as having an independent state are eligible for consideration, the Palestinians are being considered even though they do not meet that qualification.

This ambitious move by the Palestinian Authority [PA] started in February 2011; Palestinian Tourism Minister Khulud Daibes was explicit about the motive: “The timing is crucial for us; it is part and parcel of our plan to end the (Israeli) occupation and build the institutions of the state of Palestine.”

The drive to have the Church of the Nativity recognized as a global heritage site is nothing short of offensive. Christians have been driven out of their ancestral lands; Palestinians have shown nothing but hostility to both Christians and Jews. Moreover, Christ himself was a Jew.

Upon the birth of the State of Israel in 1948, Bethlehem had a Christian population of over 80 percent. With the rise of the Muslim population, Christians dwindled in numbers. Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority took over the town in 1995, thanks to the Oslo Accords. Along with the PA, came a tribal political system which caused Bethlehem’s Christian population, already at 15%, to further sink to 2% today. Under this political system Christians are targeted, seen as inferiors, and subjected to threats, violence, discrimination and acts of terrorism.

Upon entering Bethlehem Yasser Arafat was strategic in overtaking the Christian populace. He first expanded municipal boundaries to include 30,000 Muslims living in refugee camps, as well as Muslim Bedouins who lived east of the town.

The first and second intifadas further drove Christians out of their ancestral town as they became trapped in the crossfire between the Palestinians and Israelis. The violent struggle predictably drew international attention, and created the ideal platform for Palestinian sympathizers to levy blame on the so-called Israeli “occupation.”

Israel’s so-called “occupation” and “aggression” were solely based on self defense: both the Palestinian and Hamas Charters call for Israel’s obliteration; Israel’s southern cities is still live under nearly daily attack by hostile Arab States and forces seeking its destruction.

The Muslim aggression on the other hand is based on a conditioned, generational hatred against the Jews (and Christians) evidently determined to see the Jews of the State of Israel, a country the size of Vancouver Island, pushed into the sea, while an Islamic Caliphate is formed to rule the Middle East.

This tiny democracy, Israel, which lives by individual freedoms. equal justice under law, and respect for universal human rights, is an affront to these autocratic regimes.

In mid-June, Palestinian Media Watch identified a program in which children are being indoctrinated to hate Jews and Christians.

Given the plight of beleaguered Christians in Bethlehem, the Palestinian delegation to UNESCO still brazenly included duplicitous high praises for the Christian heritage in its application, while Islamicizing the Christian tradition: “Jesus’ role as Issa,,” it stated,”the divinely inspired prophet in Islamic belief, is equally significant and underscores the sanctity of the place;” and further, that “there is no other site in the world that bears such an exceptional outstanding religious value for more than 2 billion Christians. There is only one site in the world that has the honor of being the birthplace of Jesus.”

As one step closer to the Arab vision of Palestinian statehood, the U.N. General Assembly voted to allow Palestine admission as a full member into UNESCO last October after President Mahmoud Abbas—whose PhD featured Holocaust denial– unilaterally made a case for Palestinian statehood and full U.N. membership.

Many Western nations condemned this unilateral maneuver, and protested that it would be best to allow negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians to continue — yet even to begin negotiations, Palestinians should first recognize the fundamental right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state, and change the contents of their charters to reflect this change. How can anyone negotiate anything with people who state that you have no right to exist?

The issue is not genuinely about a two-state solution — as many are fooled into believing. In 1947 the United Nations already came up with a two-state solution when it recommended partitioning Palestine into two states, one Jewish, one Arab; so there would have been a Palestinian state in 1948. But instead five Arab counties went to war against the new Jewish state to try to obliterate it at birth.

Today, sadly, nothing has changed. Lethal opposition to the existence of Israel remains fierce, including this current, more subtle provocation from a territory now using a Christian holy site — the Church of the Nativity — to try to advance a most un-Christian agenda.

Christine Williams is a federally appointed Director with the Canadian Race Relations Foundation. She is also a member of the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center Task Force Against Anti-semitism. She is a Journalist and nine time, international award-winning talk show Host and Producer at CTS TV in Burlington, Ontario. Her article was originally published by June 26, 2012
Gladestone Institute on June 26, 2012.

Sermon on the Mount: The New Currency

By Daniel Downs

In the last post on Jesus’ Sermon given from Mount Gerezim, the discussion about its relevance for today was continued. The topic was spiritual food. For those on the journey to the heavenly city, spiritual food is more important than the natural kind. You know the saying: you are what you eat! Those on the journey know they will not get there without still being alive unto God.

For the spiritually poor, consuming and living God’s word is a matter of utter survival. More crucial than society’s socialist welfare program is God’s welfare plan for our lives. It too is a cradle to beyond the grave plan encompassing our material and spiritual needs and rights. The really good part is that God promises to coach us through the challenges and celebrate our successes. Because God is a good provider, the poor do not remain needy.

Maybe that is why Jesus directed his sermon to those who would be blessed of God. (See the links below to the previous four posts.)

In his next sermon point, Jesus’ focus on the divine economy turns to currency. Currency is something of specified value used in the trade of goods and services. In a barter economy, people trade their stuff for other people’s stuff. As in our modern economy, the ancients used money for buying and selling desired goods and services. As you can see, giving and receiving is part of the divine design for humans in this world. What we often overlook is the other type of currency we are expected to use in God’s economy, which is summarized in the following verse:

“Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.”(Matthew 5:7)

All previous parts of Jesus’ sermon focused on a state of being as it relates to God and to a lesser degree to others. Here the emphasis is on a dynamic of giving and receiving.

In the previous four posts, Jesus taught that acknowledging one’s spiritual poverty leads to acquiring personal property in God’s kingdom. This was followed with the assurance that when in the state of mourning for one’s failures God would be there to comfort and to restore. The benefit of sorrow and repentance is the development of a right attitude about oneself. The name for the realization of one’s log-size flaws is called humility. Gentleness towards others is the desired outcome. It is realizing that others deserve as much understanding and compassion as oneself. The practice of this divine virtue is equivalent to a mortgage for earthly property, which property God promises to give. Of course, sowing righteousness or justice produces a harvest of satisfaction. The motivation to do so comes in the state of being hungry for it. This kind of hunger is a combined result of the poverty and guilt, a poverty of right relationships because of sin, pride, arrogance, self-righteousness, and the like.

What is amazing about knowing God is the fact that it is a relationship based on God’s demonstrated mercy, compassion, and loving-kindness. The evidence of our experienced relationship with God is a character formed in the His likeness, that is God being merciful, compassionate, and kind. This also we find in Luke’s version of Jesus sermon:

“Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.” (Luke 6:36)

Here the adjective “merciful” describes more than a “state of being” it is a way of acting towards others. To be merciful is to show mercy as God has demonstrated it to oneself.

According to the perspective of Matthew’s gospel, the degree to which our lives exemplify God’s mercy is the degree to which we are perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5:48).

The Bible is full of examples of mercy. The model of God’s mercy is the Exodus, which was the eventful emancipation of the Jews from poverty and misery of slavery in Pharaoh’s Egypt, and its capstone is the redemption of the Gentiles from bondage to the evils of sin. The dessert of divine justice for human crime (sin) against the law of God was completely satisfied by the sacrificed life of Jesus. This is the supreme example of God’s mercy mediated through one sinless man, Jesus.

Yet, Jesus demonstrated the kind of mercy God expects the blessed citizens of His kingdom to give. The gospels show Jesus healing the sick, comforting the bereaved, and even feeding the hungry. He was kind towards lepers, prostitutes, and IRS agents of his day. He sought to bring them into the righteousness of God’s kingdom through compassion rather than condemnation. Like the good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-36), Jesus went out of his way to bind up the wounded and to facilitate their restoration to physical and spiritual health. The Spirit by which he accomplished it then is the same God who is accomplishing it today.

When Jesus was instructing his audience about the currency of mercy, he may have had in mind more than the biblical canon. He may have had in view some popular extra-canonical texts as well. Consider the following teaching in the Testament of Zebulun:

“And now, my children, I bid you to keep the commands of the Lord, and to show mercy to your neighbors, and to have compassion towards all, not towards men only, but also towards beasts. For all this thing’s sake the Lord blessed me, and when all my brethren were sick, I escaped without sickness, for the Lord knows the purposes of each. Have, therefore, compassion in your hearts, my children, because even as a man doeth to his neighbor, even so also will the Lord do to him. For the sons of my brethren were sickening and were dying on account of Joseph, because they showed no mercy in their hearts; but my sons were preserved without sickness, as ye know. And when I was in the land of Canaan, by the sea-coast, I made a catch of fish for Jacob my father. (5:1-5).

“I was the first to make a boat to sail upon the sea, for the Lord gave me understanding and wisdom therein. And I let down a rudder behind it, and I stretched a sail upon another upright piece of wood in the midst. And I sailed therein along the shores, catching fish for the house of my father until we came to Egypt. And through compassion I shared my catch with every stranger. And if a man were a stranger, or sick, or aged, I boiled the fish, and dressed them well, and offered them to all men, as every man had need, grieving with and having compassion upon them. Wherefore also the Lord satisfied me with abundance of fish when catching fish; for he that shares with his neighbor receives manifold more from the Lord. For five years I caught fish and gave thereof to every man whom I saw, and sufficed for all the house of my father. And in the summer I caught fish, and in the winter I kept sheep with my brethren. (6:1-8)

“I saw a man in distress through nakedness in winter-time, and had compassion upon him, and stole away a garment secretly from my father’s house, and gave it to him who was in distress. Do [the same], my children; from that which God bestows upon you, show compassion and mercy without hesitation to all men, and give to every man with a good heart. And if ye have not the wherewithal to give to him that needs, have compassion for him in bowels of mercy…. Because also in the last days God will send His compassion on the earth, and wherever He finds bowels of mercy He dwells in him. For in the degree in which a man hath compassion upon his neighbors, in the same degree hath the Lord also upon him.” (7:1-4; 8:13).

Another interesting statement is found in an ancient Hebrew work by the title Sirach. There are some significant variations in a number of translations, but the following is one version of the statement:

“He that practices kindness offers fine flour, and he that doeth mercy sacrifices a thank-offering.” (35:2)

This statement seems reminiscent of biblical texts like “I desired mercy and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings” (Hosea 6:6) or possibly “To do righteousness and justice is desired by the LORD more than sacrifice.” (Proverbs 21:3)

What is certain is that any one person in Jesus’ audience would have recalled one of those statements when Jesus later utters the following quote, “Go learn what this means: ‘I desire compassion and not sacrifice’.” (Matthew. 9:13 & 12:7)

The second part of Jesus’ sermon point under consideration may be put this way: Blessed are those who gain in what they trade. Because they give mercy they also receive mercy. They also receive many other benefits. According to Zebulun, God threw in a health plan and a food distributorship.

More important, God regards giving mercy as an act of spiritual sacrifice, a sacrifice of loyalty and thanksgiving.

It is God himself first gives humanity the currency of mercy, compassion, and loving-kindness. God invests mercy in us so that we can trade it with others. Being a good Father and capitalist, He expects a return on His investment. He also expects us to go and do likewise (Luke 10:37).

Previous Sermon on the Mount posts:

Sermon on the Mount: Any Relevance Today,
From Weeping to Laughing,
Property Rights.
Sermon on the Mount: Spiritual Food

Catholic Church’s Internal Legal System Charged with Unfairness and Partisanship

By Bai Macfarlane

A Catholic News Agency (CNA) story from June 4, says Pope Benedict challenges US bishops to revive Christian culture: “The Holy Father spoke of the challenges in marriage, in family life.” Gregory Lynne, a practicing Catholic residing in Virginia, observes that, “in regards to marriage and family, the U.S. Catholic Bishops act schizophrenically in the practices and teachings of their diocesan staff including their tribunals.”

In a recent article, Monsignor Cormac Burke – a canon lawyer who served on the appellate court for internal matters for the Catholic Church (Apostolic Tribunal of the Roman Rota) – said there is a widespread problem in the English-speaking world. Specifically, judges in the tribunal courts in the Catholic Church who rule on canon law affecting Catholic marriages commonly have a mistaken bias toward giving annulment decisions and they treat defendant-respondents unfairly.

An annulment, which in canon law is called a declaration of invalidity, is a decree from the Church tribunal system saying that two people were never really married. Cases start when one party alleges that their marriage is invalid. The other party, the defendant-respondent, has the right to argue that their marriage is valid. The law requires that all marriages shall be presumed valid until proven otherwise.

Schizophrenia, in general use, is a mentality or approach characterized by inconsistent or contradictory elements. Mr. Lynne’s concern centers on the Catholic Church’s complacency and/or complicity when her own members force upon their spouses and children no-fault divorce. The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that divorce is immoral and a grave offense against nature.

Lynne sees further inconsistency when the local Church tribunals easily issue annulment decrees alleging that spouses were never married in the first place. In Lynne’s experience, his wife forced a no-fault divorce on him and his children

Lynne says, “The priest that married us, Fr. Charles Irvin (Lansing, MI Diocese) (himself a canon lawyer) told me the vows he witnessed between us were disposable.”

Lynne vehemently disagrees, citing the marital commandment (1 Cor. 7:10-11), which “tolerates ONLY legal separation and which also enjoins spouses to seek to reconcile. Meanwhile, lax Church clergy concession toward civil divorce (vs. legal separation) has enticed my wife into bigamy, further alienating our mutilated family with a step-father while the validity of our marriage is still putatively, canonically-intact.”

If the U.S. bishops undermine their own Church’s official doctrine and law on marriage, separation, divorce, and annulment, it unlikely that they will have any effect strengthening marriage and family amongst the culture at-large. The Pope is asking them to revive Christian culture, particularly regarding marriage and family.

“Angelicum Review,” the prestigious journal from the Dominical Pontifical University in Rome, published Msgr. Cormac Burke’s article, “Justice and Transparency in Matrimonial Decisions.” Burke has an extensive website where anyone can read case law from the Roman Rota and he corresponds with readers:

“Among other e-mails that my website brings in, a number come from respondents in marriage cases. They inquire about procedural matters, and particularly about how to proceed if, after a first instance Affirmative decision, they wish to appeal to the Roman Rota. Case after case has served to confirm the impression I formed during my years at the Rota (an impression which was common among the judges there) that, especially in the English-speaking countries, quite a number of local tribunals show a lack of due respect for the rights of the respondent, a reluctance to inform him or her of the ways open to them if they oppose a first instance decision and at times, it must be added, even a certain misrepresentation of the difficulties (especially in relation to costs) which may arise from an appeal to the Rota.

“One senses a trace of partisanship here, as if the Judicial Vicar or the judges involved, yielding to a pro-nullity pastoral stance, had lost the impartiality that is a necessary quality of the just judge.”

Msgr. Burke shares excerpts from a current annulment case being tried by a U.S. tribunal court, in which the defendant-respondent was treated unfairly. The identity and diocese of the defendant-respondent are kept secret, but Burke publishes and criticizes direct quotes from the US tribunal judge’s letters to the defendant-respondent.

The U.S. tribunal judge gave the defendant-respondent disinformation about his right to appeal the first ruling that his marriage was invalid. The defendant was erroneously told that in order to appeal to the Vatican, the defendant had to prove to the local judge that the reasons for appeal were serious enough, plus the appeal to Rome was going to cost the defendant-respondent a lot of money. Former Roman Rota Judge, Burke clarified that the local tribunal does not have any discretionary power to stop someone from appealing to Rome to defend the validly of their marriage.

In Burke’s article, he says, “It is quite common for tribunals to suggest to a party thinking of an appeal to Rome, that this is a very expensive practice. This is not true.” In the early 1990’s there was an agreement between Rome and any U.S. diocese. Burke explains:

“If the Tribunal accepts the petition (cf. c. 1505, §1), it is logical that the Petitioner makes a payment towards the expenses of the case. But if the Respondent is opposed to the claim, there would be no logic whatsoever in requiring him or her to share in the expenses of a case initiated by the Petitioner. Taking this a step farther, if after a first instance Affirmative decision, the Respondent pursues his or her right of defense by appealing to the Roman Rota, justice requires that the local Tribunal facilitates this appeal and does not seek to make it more difficult – e.g. by suggesting that the Respondent must pay something in the order of $500 or $850. This would be totally contrary to the terms and spirit of the agreement mentioned above.”

Burke also exposes the unjust practice of withholding from the defendant-respondent a full copy of the final decision. If the petitioner/plaintiff gets a pro-annulment decision from the lower tribunal, the decision or “Sentence” is supposed to describe the law-based rationale that the judges used to conclude that the marriage was invalid. The defendant-respondent is supposed to get a full copy of the Sentence – which they would need as they correspond with an appellate court to describe their objections and observations. The defendant-respondent in Burke’s article was not allowed to get his own copy of the Sentence.

Lynne said that the Tribunal of the Diocese of Richmond Virginia, in 2003, would not provide him his own full copy of their Sentence declaring his marriage was invalid, even though he made multiple requests. Only after Lynne had appealed Richmond’s decision to the Roman Rota did the Richmond court provide him a full copy of their decision.

Deborah Nuzzo, a defendant-respondent in the Tribunal of the Diocese of Brooklyn, New York, says that in 2010, the tribunal would not let her have her own full copy of their decision.

In and e-mail interview, Nuzzo said “The director of Brooklyn’s tribunal told me that they never give copies of the Sentence to the parties. He went on to say that there is not a Church tribunal in any of the adjoining states who do. When I pressed him to explain, he glibly answered, ‘someone might put this on their refrigerator.’ This was the second time I received the same answer to my question. It is against canon law to withhold this, plus it treats a serious matter as a joke.”

Nuzzo advises respondent-defendants to learn about their rights and inform the bishop every step along the way if rights are being denied, and to save all written correspondence for future defense to the Tribunal of the Roman Rota.

Bai Macfarland is founder of Mary’s Advocates, a advocacy work for the advancement of traditional Catholic marriage and family law.

Sermon on the Mount: Spiritual Food

By Daniel Downs

In my previous three posts, the relevance of the Sermon given by Jesus on Mount Gerezim was discussed. It is still important today because of God’s concern for both those who are spiritually and materially poor. The blessed are those who discover God and His welfare plan, which includes gaining a challenging yet comforting coach and divine rights to property. (See Sermon on the Mount: Any Relevance Today, From Weeping to Laughing, and Property Rights).

Jesus also taught that spiritual food would produce a high quality of life. In this part of the sermon, Jesus focuses on the quality of life the blessed are expected to live. As recorded in the gospel of Matthew, he said:

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied. (Mt. 5:6 NASB)

Here Jesus uses metaphorical language. Just as natural it is to feel hunger pains. It is natural for the blessed of God to strongly desire the presence of God. In a world filled every kind of immorality and injustice as well as arguments to justify them, it is impossible for God’s people to be unaffected. Because of this reality, thirsting for God’s righteousness is as natural as thirsting for cold water amidst a scorching summer day. Within our daily struggle with unrighteousness and our seeking first His righteousness, we find the presence of God the enabling power to live the way of Christ.

It is in this interactive relationship with God that His righteousness develops in us.

Notice, however, Jesus did not say blessed are those who hunger and thirst for God’s presence. It is in seeking the righteousness of God that His presence is experienced. That is what Paul meant when he wrote:

Therefore, being always of good courage, and knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord— for we walk by faith, not by sight. (2 Cor. 5:6-7 NASB)

Yet, one of the rewards of our faith is knowing God. A real relationship is not based on belief or faith alone but experiencing the presence of the other person. How can we have a relationship with another (i.e., parent, child, spouse, friend) without being with, communicating with, and doing things with the other person? It is no different with our heavenly Father. The obvious difference is physically seeing God, but waning of feelings is normal in all relationships.

The calling of the prophets provides us with the best example. For many of the Hebrew prophets had visions and dreams in which saw and heard God is a tangible way. They saw, heard, and felt God in a physiological manner. Overtime their descriptions of received revelation were limited to hearing the voice or word of the Lord. The reason is the prophets like us live a spiritual life through the flesh in a physical world where God is not physically visible. Being satiated with the materiality of nature is the human norm. In order for God to acclimatize them to His presence and will, they had to become familiar with Him in a physical way. Once familiar with God, they only needed to perceive the words of His voice. They otherwise lived according by a commitment to God by faith.

One important caveat is the fact that Jesus is God’s physical revelation of His nature and will for our life and future. There is no excuse for immorality, injustice, deception, or unbelief in God.

Nevertheless, the promise to those who do belief and follow Jesus’ way of righteousness is fulfillment. God does keep His word. When we keep our part of the covenant, God will be able to fulfill His part. Because He does, our hunger and thirst for His righteous is satisfied. This is the same spiritual food Jesus ate (Jo. 4:24).

Come, everyone who thirsts, come to the waters;
and he who has no money, come, buy and eat!
Come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.
Why do you spend your money for that which is not bread,
and your labor for that which does not satisfy?

Listen diligently to me, and eat what is good,
and delight yourselves in rich food.
Incline your ear, and come to me;
hear, that your soul may live….
Isa. 55:1-3a (ESV)

More on the Slaughtered Convert to Christianity

By Raymond Ibrahim
Jihad Watch
June 5, 2012

I just received an email from the editor of a large website, who posted my story from yesterday about the slaughtered apostate. He writes:

The story generated a huge number of commentaries from readers, some of them originating from Muslim Countries. They harshly dispute and deny the veracity of the facts you mention in your paper. Some argue that this abomination did not take place in Tunisia—and I do believe so—but somewhere in Iraq, that the young man is not a Christian but a Shiite, that he was not slaughtered for apostasy but for being a spy of the Americans, and so on… It’s true that the facts are not properly documented : we don’t know even the date of this event, the place, the name of this unfortunate young man… Do you have any additional details and data to help answering ? Many thanks for your kind and urgent attention.

I responded with a quick list of facts, which I repost here, enlarged and augmented, for anyone else interested:

Fact 1: The Egyptian TV host, who recently aired this video—which went viral on the Arabic blogosphere on Sunday, when I wrote my report—said this occurred in Tunisia. Yes, others have subsequently said that this was in Iraq, others in Syria; but, from what people have sent me, the only “evidence” is the same video—but with a title that indicates Iraq or Syria. Personally, I am inclined to believe a formal Arabic current events program devoted to the topic than an anonymous Internet posting with no further details. Either way, the issue is less which country, and more why the man was slaughtered. Read on.

Fact 2: The Muslim narrator who speaks while the man is being slaughtered specifically names and continually condemns “apostasy”—the crime of leaving Islam—and even calls the executed man an apostate, i.e., the man is being slaughtered for apostasy, a capital offence in Islam. If the world is not surprised that the actual “government” of a Muslim nation, Iran, is preparing to execute a man simply for converting to Christianity, are we supposed to be surprised when roaming bands of jihadis take it upon themselves to execute apostates to Christianity in their midst?

Fact 3: The Muslim narrator specifically names and condemns al-mushrikin, and calls the executed man a mushrik—i.e., a “polytheist”; in fact, he calls him a mushrik murtadd, an “apostate to polytheism”: this is the standard appellation for Christians, who are regularly called polytheists for “associating” Jesus with God. Yes, there are other religions deemed polytheistic in Islam, such as Hinduism, but one rarely if ever hears of Muslims in the Middle East converting to, and dying for, Hinduism, whereas conversion to Christianity—with all the attendant consequences—is a regular occurrence. Moreover, the overwhelming majority of apostasy cases, from one end of the Muslim world to the other, cases of attacks, imprisonments, etc., deal with Muslim converts to Christianity (see my monthly Muslim Persecution of Christians reports for an idea).

Fact 4: My contacts in the Middle East, many well-connected with the doings of the region, regularly see and hear of such things, and are confident that he was beheaded for converting to Christianity. The reader is free to hold their opinions as biased or subjective; but if so, why hold the protests of Muslim apologists, equally biased and subjective, as more authoritative, especially in light of history, doctrine, and ongoing current events, which support the former opinion?

Fact 5: Muslim apologists always deny anything and everything that makes Islam look bad and will, naturally, try to put the best spin on this video—turning the victim into the aggressor, portraying him as a “traitor,” a “spy,” etc.—just like the Iranian regime, after unequivocally stating that Pastor Nadarkhani is to be executed for converting to Christianity, began backtracking by saying he is to be executed for being a “Zionist spy,” an “extortionist,” etc.

At day’s end—and here is the most indisputable fact all apologists and detractors need contend with—we are left with a man having his head sliced off while his murderers scream Islamic slogans and accuse him of apostasy.

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shilliman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum.

“The Reason is Religion, Mom”

Army Pvt. Naser Jason Abdo faced his mother during a visit in a Texas jail last July.

Abdo had been arrested for plotting an attack on a restaurant in Killeen popular with soldiers from nearby Fort Hood. He would set off a bomb inside the restaurant, then shoot and kill as many survivors as possible as they scrambled out to safety.

His mother asked the obvious question. Why?

Jurors convicted Abdo for attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction and attempted murder after hearing and seeing the answer on video.

“The reason is religion, Mom.”

He had to act in response to American military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq. As a Muslim, he considered those affected by such actions to be family. “When bad things are happening,” he said, “you have to do something about it.”

His mother couldn’t comprehend her son’s logic, to which he explained, “it may seem crazy from the outside, but it’s not.”

Abdo’s reasoning echoes the justification offered by a series of attempted homegrown jihadists. If America is killing Muslims, the logic goes, Muslims must do whatever they can to stop it.

Abdo chose Fort Hood as a target because that’s where Army psychologist Nidal Malik Hasan opened fire a year earlier, killing 13 people. Hasan reportedly shouted “Allahu Akhbar” as he opened fire, and had built a disturbing record of justifying suicide bombings and endorsing other radical ideas during his time in the service.

Hasan had been in direct contact with American-born al-Qaida cleric Anwar al-Awlaki before the attack. Abdo carried copies of al-Qaida’s English-language magazine, Inspire, which included articles from Awlaki invoking theology in urging Muslims in America to wage attacks at home.

“We as Muslims should seek the wealth of the disbelievers as a form of jihad in the path of Allah,” Awlaki wrote in one issue. “That would necessitate that we spend the money on the cause of jihad and not on ourselves.”

Despite the self-professed motives, Islamist advocates argue that radical religious interpretations should not be discussed in assessing terrorist plots by Muslims. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) even conspired with a political scientist in 2010 to gin up sales of the professor’s book, which claimed that religious extremism was a minimal factor in suicide bombings.

The group tries to pressure people out of discussing Islamic radicalism in general.

In the wake of Hasan’s Fort Hood shooting spree, CAIR national spokesman Ibrahim Hooper told a radio interviewer that Hasan’s religious beliefs shouldn’t be considered as a factor. “He could have just snapped from some kind of stress. The thing is when these things happen and the guy’s name is John Smith nobody says well what about his religious beliefs? But when it is a Muslim sounding name that automatically comes into it.”

A week after the massacre, when Hasan’s beliefs and contacts with Awlaki were well established, CAIR issued a press release arguing that those who did discuss religion were exploiting the tragedy to “promote hatred and intolerance.”

And military leaders have shied away from the issue, omitting any reference to it in a report on Hasan’s Fort Hood attack. That drew a strong rebuke last year in a report by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

“We are concerned that [Defense Department’s] failure to address violent Islamist extremism by its name signals to the bureaucracy as a whole that the subject is taboo,” the report said, “and raises the potential that DoD’s actions to confront radicalization to violent Islamist extremism will be inefficient and ineffective.”

It is just as odd to see the Obama administration take pains to avoid even uttering the phrase “radical Islam,” opting instead for a generic “violent extremism.” Continue reading

Parish Threatened, Harassed Over Sign Opposing ‘Gay Marriage’

A Massachusetts Catholic parish has received threats of arson and other harassing messages after posting a sign with the Church’s position on same-sex “marriage.”

“It went viral,” said Steven Guillotte, Director of Pastoral Services at Saint Francis Xavier Parish in Acushnet, recalling an “explosion” of responses to the message displayed on the sign in front of the church earlier this week. It read: “Two men are friends, not spouses.”

Guillotte posted the message on the morning of May 15, and responded within hours to an e-mail “saying that it was hateful.” Later that day, Guillotte’s e-mail response ended up being posted to Facebook.

“Next thing you know, the nasty telephone calls started to come, and they were coming every few minutes,” said the pastoral director in a May 17 interview with CNA.

After local media took an interest, there were “some horrible e-mails overnight,” and a phone call from a woman “saying the church should be burned down.”

“We had a group of three young men and a woman who were upset. They were actually planning on going into the church,” he recounted. Guillotte steered them away, while trying to field an inquiry from a reporter.

“She witnessed one of the guys scream across the parking lot that he was going to burn the church down. We hear that, here and there.”

Guillotte said the sign was intended to clarify Catholic beliefs after President Obama’s recent support for redefining marriage. After the president’s announcement, he recalled, “there were a lot of Catholics out there misrepresenting, or even maligning, the Church’s position on gay marriage.”

“So I came in on this past Tuesday morning and just decided to put up a sign expressing the Church’s teaching in a very concise way … saying that the proper relationship between two men – or for that matter, two women – is friendship, and not marriage.”

Opponents of the message starting posting their own signs on or near the parish property. One of them contained an invitation to “spread LOVE, not hate,” while another used a sexual insult to describe the Virgin Mary. Others read “Jesus Freaks, come to your senses,” and “Pray for death.”

Many of the phone calls “were just f-words and people hanging up,” along with others “saying they were disgusted with the sign” and asking “how could we do it, because it was so ‘hateful.’”

But Guillotte said the expressions of “hate” or “intolerance” seemed to be coming from the Church’s critics in this case.

“If the Methodist church down the street put a sign up that said they were in favor of gay marriage,” he observed, “you wouldn’t see me down their with a hammer and nails on their property.”

Another phone call came from a concerned Catholic, who worried that the sign would drive people away from the Church. Guillotte disagrees.

“We have a pastor who’s taken a firm, orthodox stand on Church teaching, and our staff is the same way,” he said. “Unlike some parishes in the area, our census has actually gone up this last year.”

Although the Church sign has since been changed, Guillotte continues to stand by Tuesday’s message as one that should be brought into the public square. He said Catholics should show patience and love in the debate over marriage, but also be “firm in our presentation of what the truth is.”

Otherwise, he warned, “next thing you know, you’re agreeing with the other side, which is exactly what they’re really striving for.”

He believes advocates for sexual radicalism “don’t really want tolerance, in my opinion; they want us to agree with them.”

“When we do that,” he said, “we give up our Catholic faith, and I think we turn our back on Christ.”

Mexican Jihad

By Raymond Ibrahim

As the United States considers the Islamic jihadi threats confronting it from all sides, it would do well to focus on its southern neighbor, Mexico, which has been targeted by Islamists and jihadists, who, through a number of tactics—from engaging in da’wa, converting Mexicans to Islam, to smuggling and the drug cartel, simple extortion, kidnappings and enslavement—have been subverting Mexico in order to empower Islam and sabotage the U.S.

According to a 2010 report, “Close to home: Hezbollah terrorists are plotting right on the U.S. border,” which appeared in the NY Daily News:

Mexican authorities have rolled up a Hezbollah network being built in Tijuana … closer to American homes than the terrorist hideouts in the Bekaa Valley are to Israel. Its goal, according to a Kuwaiti newspaper that reported on the investigation: to strike targets in Israel and the West. Over the years, Hezbollah—rich with Iranian oil money and narcocash—has generated revenue by cozying up with Mexican cartels to smuggle drugs and people into the U.S. In this, it has shadowed the terrorist-sponsoring regime in Tehran, which has been forging close ties with Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, who in turn supports the narcoterrorist organization FARC, which wreaks all kinds of havoc throughout the region.

Another 2010 article appearing in the Washington Times asserts that, “with fresh evidence of Hezbollah activity just south of the border [in Mexico], and numerous reports of Muslims from various countries posing as Mexicans and crossing into the United States from Mexico, our porous southern border is a national security nightmare waiting to happen.” This is in keeping with a recent study done by Georgetown University, which revealed that the number of immigrants from Lebanon and Syria living in Mexico exceeds 200,000. Syria, along with Iran, is one of Hezbollah’s strongest financial and political supporters, and Lebanon is the immigrants’ country of origin. Just like only 19 jihadists were necessary to cause the devastation of September 11, 2001, only a handful of these 200,000 are necessary to wreak havoc north of the border.

A jihadist cell in Mexico was recently found to have a weapons cache of 100 M-16 assault rifles, 100 AR-15 rifles, 2,500 hand grenades, C4 explosives and antitank munitions. The weapons, it turned out, had been smuggled by Muslims from Iraq. According to this report, “obvious concerns have arisen concerning Hezbollah’s presence in Mexico and possible ties to Mexican drug trafficking organizations (DTO’s) operating along the U.S.-Mexico border.”

As far back as 2005, an article entitled “Islam is gaining a Foothold in Chiapas” showcased the inroads of Islam in Mexico:

Long a bastion of Catholicism, southern Mexico is quickly turning into a battleground for soul-savers. Islam, too, is gaining a foothold and the indigenous Mayans are converting by the hundreds. The Mexican government is worried about a culture clash in their own backyard… Muslim women in headscarves have become a common sight….

To appreciate the significance of the fact that Muslim headscarves “have become a common sight” in Mexico, consider the words of former jihadist Tawfik Hamid, who personally knew al-Qaeda leader Ayman Zawahiri. In his book, Inside Jihad, he writes: “The proliferation of the hijab [Muslim headscarves] is strongly correlated with increased terrorism…. Terrorism became much more frequent in such societies as Indonesia, Egypt, Algeria, and the U.K. after the hijab became prevalent among Muslim women living in those communities.”

After discussing an increase in converts to Islam, the article continues by saying: “It’s a development that is beginning to worry the Mexican government. Indeed, the government even suspects the new converts of subversive activity and has already set the secret service onto the track of the Mayan Muslims. Mexican President Vincente Fox has even gone so far as to say he fears the influence of the radical fundamentalists of al-Qaida” [emphasis added].

Kidnappings, as part of a drug cartel or as part of a jihadist operation, which legitimizes crimes such as kidnapping and child slavery, have become increasingly common. To convert non-Muslims to their cause, Islamists also whip up—and then exploit—a sense of “grievance” against the “white man.”

In addition, according to counterterrorism experts in this report, Islamic terrorists blend in better with Mexicans than with Europeans, thereby enabling them to sneak into the U.S. across the southwest border. This Muslim cleric, for example, discusses how easy it is to smuggle a briefcase containing anthrax from Mexico into America, thereby killing at least some 330,000 Americans in a single hour.

Similarly, Michael Braun, formerly assistant administrator and chief of operations at the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), said that the Iran-backed Lebanese group has long been involved in narcotics and human trafficking in South America; however, it is relying on Mexican narcotics syndicates that control access to transit routes into the U.S. Hezbollah relies on “the same criminal weapons smugglers, document traffickers and transportation experts as the drug cartels.”

Only a few months ago, Washington announced that FBI and DEA agents disrupted a plot to commit a “significant terrorist act in the United States,” tied to Iran with roots in Mexico. The increased violence—including beheadings, Islam’s signature trademark—is even more indicative that Islamists are well ensconced in Mexico’s drug cartel.

The threat is not limited to Hezbollah; back in 2006, according to ISN, “Mexican authorities investigated the activities of the Murabitun [a da’wa, or missionary-outreach, organization named after historic jihadists along Spain’s borders] due to reports of alleged immigration and visa abuses involving the group’s European members and possible radicals, including al-Qaeda.”

Even innocuous reports, such as this Muslim article, are cause for concern: “Today, most Mexican Islamic organizations focus on grassroots da’wa. These small organizations are most effective at the community level, going from village to village and speaking directly to the people.” Although this may not sound problematic, the strain of Islam being spread by many of these da’wa organizations is the radical, “Salafist,” anti-American variety. Here, for instance, is a popular Egyptian TV cleric saying that while Muslims must never smile to non-Muslims—who, as “infidels,” are by nature the enemy—they are free to do so if the Muslim is engaged in da’wa, trying to win over the infidel into the fold of Islam, especially if the potential convert can help empower Islam in any way.

These are but a few of the many reports on Islam in Mexico. The evidence that many Islamists in Mexico are plotting against the U.S., using all means—such as drug trafficking, which is not forbidden in Sharia law if it serves to empower Islam—is overwhelming.

Under various methods—from the violent to the subversive to the exploitative—Islam allows Muslims to lie and commit other duplicitous acts in the furtherance of Islam. Taqiyya [dissimulation] permits Hezbollah and other Islamists to engage in Mexico’s drug cartel, just as “pious” members of the Taliban in Afghanistan pursued the heroin trade. Aside from sheer violence, justified as “jihad,” or holy war, tactics pursued by Mexico’s Islamists include:

Kidnappings and enslavement, for which Mexico is already notorious. Sharia permits kidnapping, and even enslaving the infidel, in this situation, any non-Muslim in Mexico. The Quran not only approves of this, but allows male jihadists to have sex with female captives of war (Sura 4, verse 3). Here, for example, is a Muslim politician trying to legalize the institution of “sex-slavery.”

Extortion and blackmail, features of the Mexican landscape, are also permissible in Islam. According to Sharia, during jihad, Muslims are permitted to hold for ransom infidels to be sold back for large amounts of money. Here, for instance, is a popular Egyptian sheikh saying that the Islamic world’s problem is that it has stopped plundering and enslaving its infidel neighbors. He even boasts that under true Sharia, he could go to the local market and “buy” a female “sex-slave.”

In using subversive elements for da’wa, Muslims might comfortably use false arguments to turn Mexicans against their northern neighbors. For instance, they often argue that Islam is a religion of “racial equality,” whereas Christianity is the “white man’s” religion, imposed on their ancestors by racist whites who sought to keep them “impoverished” beyond the border. Islamist strategies in Mexico amount to trying to win the unbelievers over to their side, whether through conversion or just cooperation. For those who refuse to cooperate, they are infidels to be used in any way that seems appropriate.

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum. His article was first published by the Gatestone Institute on May 11, 2012