On Hope in Death Part 1

I was not originally going to make this post. Why? Because, who in their right mind writes about death, especially when it is such a sensitive topic to everyone? But then again, why wouldn't a Catholic write about death? I've read countless other blogs that proclaim the message "carpe diem", seize the day, live for the moment... But what does that really mean? And so, thus begins my first trilogy--on death!

My question is this: Why have fear in death when you can have hope in death instead? This would be like opting for the treasure chest by itself instead of the treasure inside of it. You can truly live when you hope in death.


Society's view of death is a message of escape-- by living in the moment and never missing out on an "opportunity". There's this idea that there are constantly fleeting moments that you have to take advantage of by taking risks and embracing pleasure -- these magical moments that can be taken away from you. By death. But what do you actually lose when you die? When you're a Catholic the question becomes, 'What do I gain from death?'

The past few weeks I have been reading St. Paul, who writes about his hope in death:

"...We were utterly weighed down beyond our strength, so that we despaired even of life. 9 Indeed, we had accepted within ourselves the sentence of death, that we might trust not in ourselves but in God.  Why, we felt that we had received the sentence of death; but that was to make us rely not on ourselves but on God who raises the dead..." (2 Co 1:8–9)

St. Paul writes that death is not a bad thing, it is God's instrument of hope, and even trust. We have to trust in God's mercy when we die, and the promise of a life in heaven after we die can give us unimaginable hope when we actually embrace God's promise. Likewise, when our loved  ones die we have to hope they are in God's kingdom -- that they are happier than we had ever seen them during their lives on earth. 

St. Paul continues:"...Yet we are courageous, and we would rather leave the body and go home to the Lord. 9 Therefore, we aspire to please him, whether we are at home or away. 10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive recompense, according to what he did in the body, whether good or evil..." (2 Co 5:8–10). 

We cannot fear death as Catholics. God calls us throughout our lives to walk with him, and death actually puts us literally, by His side. Death brings us to our long awaited home and to our loving Father. This is what the Catholic Church has taught since its beginning during the time of the early Church fathers, and many of the saints write on the subject as well:

"...For God has called man and still calls him so that with his entire being he might be joined to Him in an endless sharing of a divine life beyond all corruption..." (Gaudium Et Spes)

St. Ignatius of Antioch writes in his letters while the Church is being persecuted: "For though I am alive while I write to you, I am eager to die." St. Dominic writes about how he will be more useful to others in death, "Do not weep, for I shall be more useful to you after my death and I shall help you then more effectively than during my life." Perhaps the reason for this is because often, we can do more in death than life. St. Teresa wrote,"I want to spend my heaven in doing good on earth."
Some, actually now that I think about it-- many considering how long I have talked about this, have called me fatalistic. I am not saying, go forth and die ye now because then ye will finally be with God. I am saying do not  fear death. If you do fear death, then fear death because it puts an end to your ability to love those around you by being physically present in the world. Even so, let me say this, this world is spiritual and physical. Scott Hahn said in his book, "Signs of life: 40 Catholic Customs and Their Biblical Roots" that our  salvation is very much so spiritual  and unseen. But the Catholic Church is the physical manifestation of that. I say this because I want all Catholic to believe that death is not the end for us. Eighty years out of  an eternity is still only eighty years. And although the spiritual reality of our salvation and those who have perished before us is hidden, it's still there. 

In conclusion, I don't have a problem with idea of living in the moment. I have a problem with this idea that we are constantly escaping a fleeting moment, and so we need to do as much as we can before we die with the hidden emphasis of to enrich our lives and those around us with positive memories. There is one question that we will ask ourselves on our death bed... It is not, did I live enough? Did I get to go wild in my youth? Did I get to see all the places I wanted to see? It is the same question God himself will ask us, "Did you love those around you the same way I have loved you?"  The question will be how much did you die to those around you. So I guess I would not have a beef with the motto,  "we should live for the moment" if there was a conjunction that said by dying and sacrificing for those around us. This is what we should be focusing on everyday, and everything else comes as a fruitful by product of living with that as your upmost priority. Love with all of your heart, give to the best of your ability as much as you can, die to yourself, because all other regrets will unquestionably be forgotten.  I will end with this quote by Saint Paul:


"But if Christ is preached as raised form the dead, how can some among you say there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is not resurrection of the dead, then neither has Christ been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, the empty too is our preaching; empty, to, your faith. Then we are also false witnesses to God, because we testified against God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, neither has Christ been raised, and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is vain; you are still in your sings. Then those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are the most pitiable people of all. But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead came also through a human being. For just as in Adam all die, so too in Christ shall all be brought to life,but each one in proper order: Christ the first fruits; then, at his coming, those who belong to Christ; then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to his God and Father, when he has destroyed every sovereignty and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.  The last enemy to be destroyed is death,  for “he subjected everything under his feet...” (1 Corinthians 12-27)

The Catholic Church and Oppression of Women II

A few days ago, during a political debate of sorts, an acquaintance suggested that the constitution should not be used to determine what is and is not a right.  This person was specifically reffering to the current patient and affordable act which he said was "irrelevant" to whether or not women's "rights" were under oppression by the Catholic Church. I had to pause for a second in order to process the accusation. Let me bring in a metaphor to illustrate my thoughts on this subject. Suppose someone decided to drop you off a cliff. As the culprit holds you 10,000 feet above the ground, you beg him to reconsider because you are afraid and want to live. In return he looks at you blankly and without comprehension. He says to you that it is irrelevant that you are afraid... after all, he is standing safely on the ground (which is arguably a very safe place for him to stand). He continues to try and calm you by informing you that he bought blue suede shoes last week for only $20! You continue waving your hands in the air telling them to stop this madness because honestly, shoes are the last thing on your mind. Finally, he gets irritated and begins to accuse you of ignoring him. So he loosens his grip entirely. The last thing you hear as you plummet 1000 km per hour towards the ground is the voice of the man still yelling, "Don't worry so much; I'll be fine!" The point that I'm trying to make with this metaphor is this: if you are the guy standing on solid ground, it's easy to stay calm. You aren't the one dangling over the cliff or having your rights violated.

Only in a day and age where religious persecution and tyranny are rampant would we not pause and ask whether or not a law that requires the entire population to purchase a product should be examined by the constitution at the law's birth. From a political stand point, the first question that must be asked in order to determine whether or not the Catholic Church can stand by Her principles is whether or not the constitution lets Her. So with this question in mind I am going to dive into this debate by first offering some context.

Catholic Institutions are self insured. When forced to "compromise" Obama promised that religious institutions no longer had to provide contraceptives, but that their insurers will. The problem with this "compromise" is that most Catholic institutions are insured by Catholic insurance agencies. This means that Catholic insurance companies will have to pay for contraceptives. 

With that having been said, I currently work for a company who will have to provide contraceptive services at the expense of my dollar. Yes, Obama's "new" plan essentially did nothing. It's like instead of taking candy from a baby... you pay a bully to do it for you. That way, you aren't actually taking the candy from the baby, someone else is. Clever, clever.

The government knows that the contraceptives (which will promote the act of sex and thus spread of STD's) and abortive pills (which usually increase the likelihood of cancer and hormonal inbalances) can currently be attained from almost anywhere. For an example, the halls of my old university. You want a condom? Go to the bathroom and you can buy one for a quarter. We are not arguing whether or not people should have contraceptives available to them. We are arguing whether it is an essential right guaranteed by the constitution which is why the government wants so desperately for Catholics to be forced to purchase the product. (Despite the direct violation of the constitution)

Obama's new plan allows for religious exemptions. For example, some Muslims and Amish are exempt because they view insurance as a form of gambling, which is forbidden by their religious laws. This further demonstrates the law's personal bias against Catholicism. Furthermore states are allowed to disallow Aids and Cancer treatments in their plans as they see fit. These sound like essential health services to me. Here are more ways that this is unconstitutional as cited by:

http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/upload/02-28-12-Lori-Testimony-for-House-Judiciary-long-form.pdf:

"Gender equality—because the mandate only pertains to preventive services for women, it requires coverage of tubal ligations, but not vasectomies.

Service to all in need—religious organizations lose their exemption under the 4- part test if they primarily serve those outside their faith, giving the organizations a strong incentive to curtail their work for the neediest in society.

Freedom of choice—people and groups that are still forced by government to fund and facilitate sterilization and contraception over their religious objections have  no choice.

Separation of church and state—the mandate has the government both interfering with the internal affairs of religious organizations, and favoring some religious  organizations over others by means of the restrictive 4-part test.

...

Thus, although HHS will brook no dissent regarding whether sterilization and contraception, including abortifacients, must be covered as “preventive services,” HHS is essentially indifferent regarding what is—or is not—mandated as an “essential health benefit.”  As a result, genuinely indispensable items under the important rubrics listed above may well be omitted from coverage, depending on the policy preferences of each state.  By contrast, states have no such discretion with respect to sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients—these must be covered, even over religious objections in many cases.

Taking just one example of “essential health benefits”—prescription drugs—the  state may define this category to require coverage of cancer drugs, AIDS drugs, and other life-saving treatments.  But HHS has no quarrel with a state that decides not to require coverage of drugs like these.  By contrast, HHS requires that state to cover drugs that, according to respected medical studies and the drugs’ manufacturers, may increase women’s risk of suffering from breast cancer, stroke and AIDS."

Here are some articles that address the effectiveness of Obama's plan for ruling the world, (and indeed that is what he is attempting... I am confused at how willingly people followed that ploy):

Philpott, A., Knerr, W., & Maher, D. (2006, December 2). Promoting protection and pleasure: amplifying the effectiveness of barriers against sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy. Lancet. pp. 2028-2031. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69810-3.

This study shows that contraceptives vary in effectiveness. Anywhere from 60%-95% effectiveness for preventing STD's, where 95% is not the mean but instead an outlier... In addition to this the number abortions have doubled in Spain as a result of easy access of contraceptives in their society.

http://www.lifenews.com/2011/01/03/study-abortions-double-in-spain-despite-increased-contrapcetion/

Now someone is bound to say, and indeed they have, that "the study was flawed because our societies are different", to which I say the following: the way a study works is simple. You introduce a variable that is not typically there and you watch the effects after adding that variable. This has been the method for science for quiet some time now, we cannot continually play the "science is not fool proof" card only now that the Catholic Church has entered the boxing ring. It would be like giving all boxers boxing gloves and the Catholic Church a pillow. I think it is time that we call out the contradictions of the media and its stance that science is fool proof when it is convenient, but also fallible when it is also convenient. What happened in Spain is discredited because science is fallible, but contraception is trusted completely because the science is infallible. 

In the situation with Spain, contraceptives were introduced and the abortion rate rose. We need to learn from the mistakes of other nations. The reason I posted this is because a massive wave of liberals have begun attacking the Catholic Church and accusing her of oppressing women. I find the view Ironic because no other institution promotes the dignity of women more than the Catholic Church. Indeed, it is ironic because society oppresses women, not the One, Holy, and Apostolic Catholic Church. 

When Society says that sex should be something that people do freely, the Catholic Church says, "Wait... please, for the dignity of women." We do not want men walking the street talking about how badly they want to go and "bang" another girls. When society says that pornography is a means of entertainment and a right that needs to be provided to the public, it is the Catholic Church that says that society is degrading the value of women and that it needs to stop. When society releases article upon article on the damaging affects of sexualization of women in society to the point where women are discriminated in the work force, are performing worse in school, aren't taken seriously in society, and are payed less in the work force, the Catholic Church is the only one that even suggests that we take a stand. Saying that the Catholic Church causes any of these problems is like saying slim fast causes obesity because people don't like to drink things that make them healthy.  =/

I will end this with a quote by G.K. Chesterton. "Society is becoming a secret society. The modern tyrant is evil because of his elusiveness. He is more nameless than his slave. He is not more of a bully than the tyrants of the past; but he is more of a coward."

The Catholic Church and Oppression Against Women Part I

So I know, it has been awhile since I posted last. I guess. But, I read a blog today that accused the Catholic Church of being patriarchal and that woman were only to be used as children bearing machines. He accused the Catholic Church of oppression against women. I kind of blinked… a lot. There are just so many ways to analyze this, here is one of many blogs on the Catholic Church and Oppression against women.

My first angle comes from the family life. What should happen in a family dynamic if said family has a child?

1.     Have a stay at home dad. (Wow, I literarily shuttered at the thought of that.)

2.     Have a stay at home mom.

3.     Day Care

4.     Leave the child at a zoo with nothing but a lazer gun and hope that wolves truly can raise children. (see Day care)

As a developmental psychology major we talk a lot about what works and what doesn’t in parenting. Let me just say that who ever is going to stay home with the child, in order for it to help the Childs confidence and promote the optimum psychological state of health, the provider must stay at home with the child for at least the first 4 years of its life. This is an undisputed psychological fact. I won’t bore you with the countless reasons why, but lets just say they will be severely emotionally challenged if they don’t. Justifiably so, many highly acclaimed psychologists and teach for America even, believe that the time period where the child develops much of who they are happens before the age of 7.

So we know the early stages of childhood are crucial to a child’s understanding of the world. How do we apply that? Many liberalist will say that women should give birth to children, and then, have the fathers stay at home, or put them in day care, or even more laughable, go to work and just forget about it. Lets explore each of those.

Women are more capable of soothing their children with Oxytocin that is released during breast feeding, breast feeding also reduces the chance of breast cancer by roughy 90%, and children recognize and are naturally comforted from their mothers voice more than any other voice. Scientists think this is because it is the first voice they heard since the mothers voice would have been all they could hear during the 9 months in the mother’s womb. What does that mean for guys? I’ll tell you. It means that you have literarily no means of calming a baby that is crying and soon you will be all too able to identitfy with Arnold Schwartzenager in Kindergarten Cop.

Children who are simply put into day care without a consistent provider to turn to for the first 3 years, come to resent their parents and develop emotionally short of those who had a consistent provider (Consistently at home for 3 years... which is why developmental psychologists say, make maternity leave longer, or there is no point in giving it.)

This is where liberalist say, But but—women will be independent and they… will have super powers and… they will be happier! If by super powers you mean they will report  feeling that they did not understand their roles and had a greater incidence of depression.  Then yes, they will have that. Most women who worked and were mothers for their children reported as not having enough time and not having enough time to be a wife and mother, and this identity conflict caused them to feel depressed.

Now, I am not saying that women should never work in their lives. I think that they should and If a family is struggling and they need the income they should go for it. I have also read that women who worked after their children are in school reported having the highest satisfaction, had children that developed properly, and reported having a 100% likelihood of having superflying skills, X-Ray vision, and super strength. Let's go super moms!

Let me just end with a quote by John Paul II in Mulieribus Dignitatem, "It is commonly thought that women are more capable than men of paying attention to another person, and that motherhood develops this predisposition even more. The man - even with all his sharing in parenthood - always remains "outside" the process of pregnancy and the baby's birth; in many ways he has to learn his own"fatherhood" from the mother." There is so much more that men have to learn from women, including how to love. As Catholics we embrace an egalitarian society, we acknowledge that women are the forefront of civilization and are the archetype of humanity. We acknolwedge that there are some things that women can definitely do better than men vise versa. What you do with that information is up to you.

A Catholic Perspective on Love

Today I have decided to write A Catholic Perpective on Love. You see, Lizzie was having a bad day so I texted her to cheer her up. I told her to feel lucky that we have each other: not only because we have each other’s remarkable presences to enjoy, but also because we have physical proof of God always acting in our lives. For me, that proof is her. For her, that proof is (I hope at least, and if not then I have horribly misread my girlfriend) me. Then I thought for a second… hey… wait… isn’t that—Yep. That’s right—that could be part of the reason that Marriage is a sacrament. Now I’m not saying that we’re married... Not yet anyways... But just bare with me for a second while I sort out this analogy. (p.s. I’m really good with analogies. But actually not really. So that’s why you have to bare with me.)

Firstly we should define what a Sacrament is. Many people wonder why Catholics have to confess their sins to a priest when they can confess to God Himself. Or why do Catholics need to go to church in order to receive Christ in the form of the Eucharist. A very good general response, without diving too deeply into any one of the seven sacraments is this: The reason is not that God requires us to do it in this way for some random arbitrary reason, but because we ourselves require some kind of physical sign of God grace due to our humanity. I’ve never heard anyone say, “Boy, I really wish I had less proof that God existed! That would really help my belief in Him.” Truth is, we are all a bunch of doubting Thomases. We look at the Bible and say, “Hah! I can’t believe Thomas needed proof that Jesus was Jesus. I mean, it was totally obvious. What a horrible Apostle… Can’t even recognize his Savior Jesus Christ after three consecutive years of constant companionship!” But then we don’t believe that the Eucharist is Jesus Christ (even some Catholic doubt this fundamental truth). The truth is, we need a physical sign that God has forgiven us. We need a physical sign that God is with us, and we need a physical sign that the Holy Spirit will be with us always. This is what a sacrament accomplishes.

A sacrament is merely a physical sign of a spiritual reality, namely that God loves us and is with us. Marriage then falls quiet nicely into the definition of a sacrament then because we see in so many ways that God is acting in our lives. God shows us what love is by giving us another part of ourselves to love. There is something quiet profound about the (mostly) un-conditional love from another human being that we try to emulate when we are in a relationship. This unconditional love that we give to our partner is meant to be given to the entire world. Perhaps this is what it is so necessary that some fall in love, perhaps this is why God Himself placed you in each others’ lives. God said, “Yeah those two would totally work together!” God actually said this through Holy Scripture:

“Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” (

Mark 10:9)          

Ok lets repeat that, God himself not only approves of the person you are going to marry, but He finds it so necessary for the two of you to be together, that he himself placed the two of you in each others’ lives. Think of children who ask their dad’s permission for marriage, or children when they ask if they can go to the movies with their friends for the first time. What is the first thing they do? That’s right, a jump and a fist pump!

Just like all sacraments, Marriage is supposed to reflect God and ultimately leads towards our unity with Him which includes necessary unity with others. What does that mean for the married? What God has given, namely love, is meant to be given away. I said it earlier and I will say it again: the unconditional love that we give to our partner is meant to be an example of how to treat the entire world.
I remember talking with a good friend of mine who shall remain nameless merely to protect her humility—about the countless couples getting married within our friendship circle. I do mean countless, like how many times Jar Jar Binks appeared in Star Wars despite the fact that he was a universally despised character—yeah, that countless. We were talking about how to tell if relationships are going to work and we decided that you could tell by how much they unite those around them. One reason for the great mystery of marriage is this awesome verse, which you wouldn’t at first think is about marriage at all, but totally is!:

“Where two or more are gathered in my name, there am I.” (Matthew 18:20)

Marriage does not only unite you with your spouse, but it is also intended to unite those around you because Christ is working through you both. God knows the most direct path to your salvation involves caring for another and making a new life through said union. Isn’t that awesome??!

Some may find it satisfactory to say that anything in our life is given to us by God, but at times these and other statements become cliché and we feel as though they do not apply to us. When those times come, it becomes more and more necessary for us to follow Bing Crosby’s advice and count our blessings instead of sheep.

And so-- Ready your sheep!  St Ignatius said that anything God gives us is meant to lead us closer to Him. Any married person was given his/her other half as a gift or grace, they were meant in a special way to lead them closer to God. (

This is a strange thought… does that mean the person you marry is himself or herself a grace? But those are thoughts for another day.)  Marriage necessarily brings you closer to God in many ways, like, through knowing that God is acting through your lives simply from the fact you found each other.  I am emphasizing this concept in this way because no one really focuses on it, but there are many other ways that you can tell that God has a working hand in HOLY MARRIAGES: the children which you are given by God, the way that your trust increases as you turn to Him and trust in Him to lead you and your family, the way you will necessarily have to forgive your partner an infinite amount of times just like Jesus forgives us an infinite amount of times, the way the two of you watch each others’ backs for sin through vigilant prayer and reliance on God.

There is a reason why most people, when talking about their partner they say, “They make me want to become a better person” or something along those lines. The origin of this feeling does not come from the innate virtue radiating around the imperfect partner (thank goodness), but from the fact that Christ is present in that relationship. Jesus says to us in our broken nature,

"Behold, I make all things new!" (Revalation 21:5)." 

Jesus gives us a simple way to follow him, if used appropriately the sacrament of marriage provides one of the most powerful means to getting closer to God and humanity. 

" And a highway shall be there, and it shall be called the Way of Holiness; the unclean shall not pass over it. It shall belong to those who walk on the way; even if they are fools, they shall not go astray. " (Isaiah 35:8)

Granted the last quote is mainly about the Catholic Church and the giving of the Holy Spirit-- I believe it can be applied to the Sacrament of marriage. Even if you are completely unaware of God's love, you can still participate in the type of love that God had planned for all of humanity since the beginning through the Sacrament of Marriage... And in many ways see God and ultimately grow closer to Him. Ahhh its soo awesomme!! We need to make a feast day!! A feast to all of the married who have seen God work in their lives so that they never ever, ever, forget God's active hand in their lives!..

…Nevermind, they already have that. It’s called an anniversary.Whatever I totally thought up the concept of an anniversary before anyone else.

Mission Statement!

Hey everyone!


I have recently decided to start a Catholic blog. The main purpose of this is to explore the beauties of Catholicism, and in doing so, hopefully take an active role in the new evangelization? I dunno maybe abit of a stretch maybe not. I will try to write in a way that respects other's beliefs while pointing out all the really awesome beliefs of the Catholic Church... And I would expect the same of people of other beliefs. Show the beauty of what you believe rather than the negative aspects of another train of thought. There are after all, a thousand ways to not make a light bulb.  

I think we can all benefit from helping each other from writing on our experience with God, especially in a society that persecutes religion.

Oh, and by the way... I am not a great writer... So... any good writing can probably be blamed on my loving girlfriend for correcting me with her perfect english! 


First post I hope to have by the end of the week! =D