(The Point) - I've been reading part of a lecture transcript of John Piper, in which he says that the term “Judeo-Christian ethic” is “flawed.” “If you say 'Judeo' and you mean Jews who do not believe in Jesus Christ but hold to the Ten Commandments, then you're introducing a flaw into worship which is utterly profound,” said Piper.
He goes on to say, “The New Testament is written to say that those who do not honor the Son do not honor the Father. So the concept of a Judeo-Christian ethic as the goal to which people ought to aim is profoundly mistaken, because ethics has to grow out of a true view of God. And to reject Jesus Christ is to have an absolutely flawed view of God. Therefore the ethic of morality that flows from this kind of flawed view of God is going to be flawed, even if some of the behavior is the same.”
I understand what he is saying, and I agree with his point about ethics requiring a proper view of God. But I think he is mistaken in saying that the term “Judeo-Christian ethic” is flawed. The way you define a Judeo-Christian ethic makes all the difference in the world.
I, for instance, believe that to believe in Judeo-Christian ethics does not mean that you are restricting the reality of Jesus. It merely reflects the reality that Jesus is the fulfillment of the Old Testament scriptures. If the term in use was “Judeo ethic” then Piper might have a strong point.
But a Judeo-Christian ethic properly demonstrates the fact that we come from a Jewish tradition in which the 10 Commandments and other ethical and moral commands were intently tied to the covenant God had with His people, and His desire to separate His nation from the others.
Since the coming of Jesus, we now have the fulfillment of those commands and know that we are saved by God’s grace, which comes as a result of faith, which, without works, would be dead. So obviously the works without the grounding of faith and understanding with the heart would be pointless from a salvific standpoint, but not necessarily from a moral standpoint.
“The point of ethics is not merely the shell of the behavior, but it is the inner convictions of the mind, the disposition of the heart, and the goal of what we're displaying. If Jesus Christ is omitted from that then I don't think we have Christian ethics or morality,” says Piper.
Is Piper restricting acts to being either being totally moral or totally immoral? I understand his point that if we were to have no religious faith at all, for instance, and only helped the elderly lady across the street because we thought she might tip us on the other side, then the act would not be a moral one, despite the good it did for the woman.
But if someone has no religious faith and does a good act out of this inner desire to be charitable, selflessly, then could we not also say that the act is moral? God did make us in His image a likeness, after all. Though dismayed and flawed, and regardless of whether or not we recognize Him, we are wonderfully made.
Similarly, when Piper says, “And to reject Jesus Christ is to have an absolutely flawed view of God. Therefore the ethic of morality that flows from this kind of flawed view of God is going to be flawed…” in the first quote, he takes another misstep.
Those who reject Jesus do not necessarily have an “absolutely” flawed view of God. Jews, for instance, have “an incomplete view due to the full revelation in Christ Jesus,” as a friend recently said. They have part of our salvation history, but lack the fulfillment in Jesus Christ. Whether their view of God is absolutely corrupted or just incomplete, would this person also have an absolutely flawed morality?
If God is love, then whenever we love we are participating in the source of love as well. Does that mean the loving unbeliever will be saved? Not necessarily. But the notion that an absolutely flawed view of God, or incomplete one, means an absolutely flawed moral act is unfounded.
While good, selfless and charitable acts are more holy, fulfilling and complete when done in union with a firm belief in Jesus Christ, can’t there be moral acts of varying degrees without that belief?
I say “yes!” What say you?
Friday, March 25, 2011
Thursday, March 24, 2011
NYC law to Crisis Pregnancy Centers: tell your patrons to go to Planned Parenthood
(Manhattan Declaration) - A new law in New York City requires pro-life pregnancy care centers to post a sign telling people if they have a medical professional on staff and that they would be better served going to another facility, like a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic.
The rationale for the law was that pregnant women are better served by medical professionals than those who believe in the sanctity of life and would not recommend abortion. Not surprisingly, Planned Parenthood supported this bill.
As reported by LifeSiteNews.com: “The law requires non-medical, pro-life ‘pregnancy services centers’ to inform women with notices posted in both English and Spanish whether they have a licensed medical provider on staff. The signs would also state that the city’s Health Department encourages women to seek help from a licensed medical provider if the center does not have one on staff. It also requires the pro-life centers to post on signs and ads whether they provide referrals for abortion, “emergency contraception,” and prenatal care. The notices are required both for the pregnancy centers’ facilities and on their advertizing – in a size and font to be determined by city authorities.”
Our friends over at the Alliance Defense Fund have reacted to this unjust bill by filing suit against New York City.
“Pregnancy centers, which offer real help and hope to women, shouldn’t be punished by political allies of the abortion industry,” said ADF Legal Counsel Matt Bowman. “Attacks on pregnancy centers are an ideologically motivated attempt to distract from the growing national scandals in the abortion industry. For years, abortionists have preyed on women and girls for profit. Now pro-abortion politicians are trying to give women fewer choices.”
Perhaps pro-abortion advocates cannot imagine women who actually want to keep her baby. Perhaps pro-abortion advocates care nothing for justice or fairness, which this law obviously violates. Perhaps pro-abortion advocates care nothing for real choice. Either way, this law should be overturned immediately so that women will not be subjected to manipulation or just one set of so-called options.
If you want to stay up-to-date with this case, go to ADFMedia.org or to their Facebook page.
The rationale for the law was that pregnant women are better served by medical professionals than those who believe in the sanctity of life and would not recommend abortion. Not surprisingly, Planned Parenthood supported this bill.
As reported by LifeSiteNews.com: “The law requires non-medical, pro-life ‘pregnancy services centers’ to inform women with notices posted in both English and Spanish whether they have a licensed medical provider on staff. The signs would also state that the city’s Health Department encourages women to seek help from a licensed medical provider if the center does not have one on staff. It also requires the pro-life centers to post on signs and ads whether they provide referrals for abortion, “emergency contraception,” and prenatal care. The notices are required both for the pregnancy centers’ facilities and on their advertizing – in a size and font to be determined by city authorities.”
Our friends over at the Alliance Defense Fund have reacted to this unjust bill by filing suit against New York City.
“Pregnancy centers, which offer real help and hope to women, shouldn’t be punished by political allies of the abortion industry,” said ADF Legal Counsel Matt Bowman. “Attacks on pregnancy centers are an ideologically motivated attempt to distract from the growing national scandals in the abortion industry. For years, abortionists have preyed on women and girls for profit. Now pro-abortion politicians are trying to give women fewer choices.”
Perhaps pro-abortion advocates cannot imagine women who actually want to keep her baby. Perhaps pro-abortion advocates care nothing for justice or fairness, which this law obviously violates. Perhaps pro-abortion advocates care nothing for real choice. Either way, this law should be overturned immediately so that women will not be subjected to manipulation or just one set of so-called options.
If you want to stay up-to-date with this case, go to ADFMedia.org or to their Facebook page.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Live Action offers Planned Parenthood ticker for your website or blog
(Manhattan Declaration) - Live Action is offering a “ticker” which will display on your website or blog facts as they relate to Planned Parenthood's federal funding and the amount of federal money they soak up.
CLICK HERE if you want to get this ticker (it’s free).
This ticker is being offered in the middle of some of the most contentious and hopeful legislative battles to defund Planned Parenthood under Title X. Many people do not realize this, but Planned Parenthood is not only the nation’s largest abortion provider, but receives more funding under Title X than any other organization in the country (over $1 billion since 2002).
Facts--like those provided by this Live Action ticker--give you the chance to remind everyone that Planned Parenthood is not only in violation of the federal law banning tax dollars from being used to fund abortions (despite their claims otherwise), but also that they are doing evil work and we are paying their bills.
It’s time for that to stop.
CLICK HERE if you want to get this ticker (it’s free).
This ticker is being offered in the middle of some of the most contentious and hopeful legislative battles to defund Planned Parenthood under Title X. Many people do not realize this, but Planned Parenthood is not only the nation’s largest abortion provider, but receives more funding under Title X than any other organization in the country (over $1 billion since 2002).
Facts--like those provided by this Live Action ticker--give you the chance to remind everyone that Planned Parenthood is not only in violation of the federal law banning tax dollars from being used to fund abortions (despite their claims otherwise), but also that they are doing evil work and we are paying their bills.
It’s time for that to stop.
Another ADF victory: This time for Students for Life at Univ. of Michigan
(Manhattan Declaration) - Students for Life, a college pro-life group, at the University of Michigan hosted a lecture given by Dr. Alveda King, who is the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King. In her lecture she spoke about abortion and the sanctity of life, especially for the unborn. A group of pro-abortion students decided to protest the event.
Because the event might pose security concerns, school officials assigned several police officers to monitor the lecture.
The catch? Students for Life were charged over $800 by the university to cover the added security cost.
Unfortunately for University of Michigan officials, the Supreme Court previously ruled, “speech cannot be financially burdened, anymore than it can be punished or banned, simply because it might offend a hostile mob.”
The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) contacted the University of Michigan and educated them on the Supreme Court’s decision. Commendably, the University of Michigan complied with the court ruling and did not charge Students for Life the cost of extra security.
This ADF victory comes just a few weeks after another victory in which the University of California at Davis removed a school policy that defined religious discrimination as institutional oppression toward any religion except Christianity. Within 24 hours of an ADF letter, the school removed the policy.
ADF is on the front lines of defending religious liberty in the United States. We are indebted to their service. Please send this blog post to your friends via email, Facebook or Twitter to show the great work of the Alliance Defense Fund.
Because the event might pose security concerns, school officials assigned several police officers to monitor the lecture.
The catch? Students for Life were charged over $800 by the university to cover the added security cost.
Unfortunately for University of Michigan officials, the Supreme Court previously ruled, “speech cannot be financially burdened, anymore than it can be punished or banned, simply because it might offend a hostile mob.”
The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) contacted the University of Michigan and educated them on the Supreme Court’s decision. Commendably, the University of Michigan complied with the court ruling and did not charge Students for Life the cost of extra security.
This ADF victory comes just a few weeks after another victory in which the University of California at Davis removed a school policy that defined religious discrimination as institutional oppression toward any religion except Christianity. Within 24 hours of an ADF letter, the school removed the policy.
ADF is on the front lines of defending religious liberty in the United States. We are indebted to their service. Please send this blog post to your friends via email, Facebook or Twitter to show the great work of the Alliance Defense Fund.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Faux-Catholic Discussion on 'Sexual Diversity and the Catholic Church'
This is an effort by homosexual activists to confuse
(Catholic Online) - A group of "Catholic" universities and non-denominational divinity schools claim they are "collaborating to change the conversation about sexual diversity and the Catholic Church." They believe the current discussion regarding homosexuality is too much of a monologue.
Later this year there will be a series of four events held at Fordham University, Union Theological Seminary, Yale Divinity School and Fairfield University. According to the press release, "Each event has a unique focus and the series as a whole will lift up new voices that are rarely heard and raise awareness about the impact of church teachings and public stances on the lives of LGBT people."
From that statement alone you can see that this isn't going to be a "Catholic" discussion. The Catholic Church is informed by 2,000+ years of history and an ancestry of brilliant minds covering almost every topic under the sun. The Catholic Church doesn't need faux-Catholic voices or non-Catholics instructing us about our own faith or how we should approach the homosexual issue.
The series is funded by four organizations and the Arcus Foundation, which works for "LGBT equality" and to protect great apes.
It's not our actions, but our beliefs they are after
"Roman Catholic leaders have increasingly taken more public stances and hardened their language in support of the church's position against LGBT equality. This exemplifies the high-profile, one-dimensional discourse of institutional Roman Catholicism when it comes to issues of diverse sexual orientation and gender expression and LGBT equality," reads the press release.
From this statement alone we can see that this group has already made up their mind. Phrases like "LGBT equality" is used proliferously by gay activists. This series is not interested in addressing the way Catholics respond to repentant homosexuals- though that can always use improvement-but instead the Catholic belief that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered and unnatural.
If "LGBT equality" was to mean the equal treatment of people with same-sex desires, then this would be an entirely different discussion.
Missing the point
The topic of homosexuality too often misses the point by referring only to the desires of people with same-sex attraction, and sidesteps the philosophical, biological, sociological and theological dimension of what it means to be a man and woman. What were we designed for? Did God simply make us? Or did He actually inscribe his very nature into our bodies.
The topics covered in this four-part series merely address the surface issue of same-sex attraction and the Catholic Church's position on that. But it seems to totally miss the deeper points of what it means to be man and woman, and what the purpose of marriage really is.
Their problem is with the laity
"The conversation on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues in the Roman Catholic Church has for too long been only a monologue - the sole voice being heard is that of the institutional Catholic Church," said Paul Lakeland, Aloysius P. Kelley, S.J., Professor of Catholic Studies, Director of the Center for Catholic Studies at Fairfield University, and an organizer of the series.
This point insinuates that the institution of the Church has no place for the laity. The laity is the driving force of pro-traditional marriage efforts throughout the country. Dr. Robert George, for instance, is the founder and Chairman Emeritus of the National Organization for Marriage, one of the premiere pro-traditional marriage organizations in the country, and co-architect of the Manhattan Declaration, which takes a strong pro-traditional marriage stance.
It is the laity that boldly and proudly teaches the truth behind John Paul II's Love and Responsibility and Theology of the Body. One of the most popular speakers and writers on Theology of the Body is Christopher West, a married man with five children. In fact, most Theology of the Body speakers are not clergy.
The clergy, College of Cardinals and Pope Benedict XVI aren't snuffing out the small voices of the Catholic Church. In contrast, the true voice of authority in the Church--the Magisterium--is at times hard to hear amongst the vigorous excitement of the Catholic laity on the issue of true masculinity, true femininity and the Theology of the Body.
If the homosexual community has a problem with any specific group of Catholics, it is not the "monologue" of the Catholic hierarchy they should be concerned with. Instead, they should be worried about the powerful, diverse and informed voices of the laity that believes in, and carries the banner for, the Magisterium.
The Catholic Church is not a democracy
"When the Connecticut Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in the fall of 2008, the Connecticut Bishops responded first with a public statement offered on behalf of all the Catholic faithful in the state (without their deliberation or consent) condemning the decision and arguing that marriage was not a civil right to be exercised by gay and lesbian people," said Dianna M. Swancutt, Associate Professor of New Testament at Yale Divinity School.
Without the Catholic faithful's deliberation and consent? Since when do bishops go to the Catholic faithful for a democratic vote on moral and ethical issues? Perhaps this series should begin with a basic introduction to what the Catholic Church is and how it operates.
This series of talks is based upon the notion that if only the Catholic hierarchy of Bishops, Cardinals and the Pope would listen to the little voices in the pews, they might change their stance on fundamental, foundational issues of theology and Natural Law.
I pray that this day never comes. Catholics should be thankful that the Holy Spirit speaks through the Catholic Church, not in spite of it. If Bishops needed to consult with the opinion of the Catholic faithful on issues that the Church has studied, both philosophically and theologically, since Saint Paul first put pen to paper, Catholics might as well become Protestant. This notion that the Catholic Church is a democracy is fallacious and ignorant.
What they should have done
If this series of talks had been about how the Catholic Church could better respond to homosexuals, while respectfully recognizing the long standing beliefs about sexuality and our view of marriage as a conjugal, permanent union of one man and one woman, it could perhaps be a profitable venture. Our methods and disciplines can always use refinement-but the principles and foundational truths need no reconsideration.
It is terribly sad when people, whether Catholic or anything else, object to homosexuality by dismissing the person and casting homosexuals aside as unworthy of our time and effort. We are called to love these people and treat them with charity and equal dignity. Christ didn't die on a cross for the righteous. He died for us all, whether gay or straight.
But to go from addressing the Catholic response to homosexuals, to the very foundational belief behind marriage and the sexual act, is dangerous and pointless.
(Catholic Online) - A group of "Catholic" universities and non-denominational divinity schools claim they are "collaborating to change the conversation about sexual diversity and the Catholic Church." They believe the current discussion regarding homosexuality is too much of a monologue.
Later this year there will be a series of four events held at Fordham University, Union Theological Seminary, Yale Divinity School and Fairfield University. According to the press release, "Each event has a unique focus and the series as a whole will lift up new voices that are rarely heard and raise awareness about the impact of church teachings and public stances on the lives of LGBT people."
From that statement alone you can see that this isn't going to be a "Catholic" discussion. The Catholic Church is informed by 2,000+ years of history and an ancestry of brilliant minds covering almost every topic under the sun. The Catholic Church doesn't need faux-Catholic voices or non-Catholics instructing us about our own faith or how we should approach the homosexual issue.
The series is funded by four organizations and the Arcus Foundation, which works for "LGBT equality" and to protect great apes.
It's not our actions, but our beliefs they are after
"Roman Catholic leaders have increasingly taken more public stances and hardened their language in support of the church's position against LGBT equality. This exemplifies the high-profile, one-dimensional discourse of institutional Roman Catholicism when it comes to issues of diverse sexual orientation and gender expression and LGBT equality," reads the press release.
From this statement alone we can see that this group has already made up their mind. Phrases like "LGBT equality" is used proliferously by gay activists. This series is not interested in addressing the way Catholics respond to repentant homosexuals- though that can always use improvement-but instead the Catholic belief that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered and unnatural.
If "LGBT equality" was to mean the equal treatment of people with same-sex desires, then this would be an entirely different discussion.
Missing the point
The topic of homosexuality too often misses the point by referring only to the desires of people with same-sex attraction, and sidesteps the philosophical, biological, sociological and theological dimension of what it means to be a man and woman. What were we designed for? Did God simply make us? Or did He actually inscribe his very nature into our bodies.
The topics covered in this four-part series merely address the surface issue of same-sex attraction and the Catholic Church's position on that. But it seems to totally miss the deeper points of what it means to be man and woman, and what the purpose of marriage really is.
Their problem is with the laity
"The conversation on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues in the Roman Catholic Church has for too long been only a monologue - the sole voice being heard is that of the institutional Catholic Church," said Paul Lakeland, Aloysius P. Kelley, S.J., Professor of Catholic Studies, Director of the Center for Catholic Studies at Fairfield University, and an organizer of the series.
This point insinuates that the institution of the Church has no place for the laity. The laity is the driving force of pro-traditional marriage efforts throughout the country. Dr. Robert George, for instance, is the founder and Chairman Emeritus of the National Organization for Marriage, one of the premiere pro-traditional marriage organizations in the country, and co-architect of the Manhattan Declaration, which takes a strong pro-traditional marriage stance.
It is the laity that boldly and proudly teaches the truth behind John Paul II's Love and Responsibility and Theology of the Body. One of the most popular speakers and writers on Theology of the Body is Christopher West, a married man with five children. In fact, most Theology of the Body speakers are not clergy.
The clergy, College of Cardinals and Pope Benedict XVI aren't snuffing out the small voices of the Catholic Church. In contrast, the true voice of authority in the Church--the Magisterium--is at times hard to hear amongst the vigorous excitement of the Catholic laity on the issue of true masculinity, true femininity and the Theology of the Body.
If the homosexual community has a problem with any specific group of Catholics, it is not the "monologue" of the Catholic hierarchy they should be concerned with. Instead, they should be worried about the powerful, diverse and informed voices of the laity that believes in, and carries the banner for, the Magisterium.
The Catholic Church is not a democracy
"When the Connecticut Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in the fall of 2008, the Connecticut Bishops responded first with a public statement offered on behalf of all the Catholic faithful in the state (without their deliberation or consent) condemning the decision and arguing that marriage was not a civil right to be exercised by gay and lesbian people," said Dianna M. Swancutt, Associate Professor of New Testament at Yale Divinity School.
Without the Catholic faithful's deliberation and consent? Since when do bishops go to the Catholic faithful for a democratic vote on moral and ethical issues? Perhaps this series should begin with a basic introduction to what the Catholic Church is and how it operates.
This series of talks is based upon the notion that if only the Catholic hierarchy of Bishops, Cardinals and the Pope would listen to the little voices in the pews, they might change their stance on fundamental, foundational issues of theology and Natural Law.
I pray that this day never comes. Catholics should be thankful that the Holy Spirit speaks through the Catholic Church, not in spite of it. If Bishops needed to consult with the opinion of the Catholic faithful on issues that the Church has studied, both philosophically and theologically, since Saint Paul first put pen to paper, Catholics might as well become Protestant. This notion that the Catholic Church is a democracy is fallacious and ignorant.
What they should have done
If this series of talks had been about how the Catholic Church could better respond to homosexuals, while respectfully recognizing the long standing beliefs about sexuality and our view of marriage as a conjugal, permanent union of one man and one woman, it could perhaps be a profitable venture. Our methods and disciplines can always use refinement-but the principles and foundational truths need no reconsideration.
It is terribly sad when people, whether Catholic or anything else, object to homosexuality by dismissing the person and casting homosexuals aside as unworthy of our time and effort. We are called to love these people and treat them with charity and equal dignity. Christ didn't die on a cross for the righteous. He died for us all, whether gay or straight.
But to go from addressing the Catholic response to homosexuals, to the very foundational belief behind marriage and the sexual act, is dangerous and pointless.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
CatholicVote.org debunks 3 Planned Parenthood myths (VIDEO)
(Manhattan Declaration) - CatholicVote.org, a website dedicated to infusing Catholic teaching within online media and to educate Catholic voters, has created a pro-life video exposing Planned Parenthood activists for what they really believe.
Pro-choice/pro-abortion advocates claim three things about abortion and Planned Parenthood that this video categorically debunks:
1. “Safe, legal, and rare”
While this video does not reveal alleged illegal Planned Parenthood activity (that’s been done here, here, here, here, here, here, and here), it does reveal that pro-choicers care nothing for the rarity of abortion.
They hold up signs insisting on having abortion on demand. Others talk about how abortion should be available on demand because they wanted a better paying job, because they aren’t responsible enough, or because society doesn’t want to adopt them all. One woman says, “A baby is going to get in the way of the job that I need to get to pay off those loans."
Doesn’t sound like they’re fighting for rarity of abortion, does it?
2. Abortion isn’t a religious issue.
Not appeal sociopathic, utilitarian, or at war with the largest moral voice in the world (the Body of Christ), abortion activists often claim that abortion is a medical issue that each person should make for themselves.
In the video, you see people chanting, “Not the Church, not the State, women must decide their fate.” One girl interviewed says, “I want them to stop making decision about my body with their Bibles. Keep your rosaries off my ovaries.”
If abortion isn’t a religious issue, then why are they at war with people of religion? Christians uphold the dignity of every human being, so it's a natural fight for abortion activists to come after those with a reasonable argument threatening their empire.
(Sidenote: Some atheists are pro-life too. Christopher Hitchens revealed his pro-life belief in a debate with Jay Richards.)
3. Planned Parenthood isn’t an abortion business
As the video shows, since 2002 Planned Parenthood has received over $1 billion in taxpayer funding. Likewise, “according to the Planned Parenthood 2009 annual report, abortion accounted for 98% of its [Planned Parenthood] services to pregnant women.”
Watch the video and share it with everyone you know!
Pro-choice/pro-abortion advocates claim three things about abortion and Planned Parenthood that this video categorically debunks:
1. “Safe, legal, and rare”
While this video does not reveal alleged illegal Planned Parenthood activity (that’s been done here, here, here, here, here, here, and here), it does reveal that pro-choicers care nothing for the rarity of abortion.
They hold up signs insisting on having abortion on demand. Others talk about how abortion should be available on demand because they wanted a better paying job, because they aren’t responsible enough, or because society doesn’t want to adopt them all. One woman says, “A baby is going to get in the way of the job that I need to get to pay off those loans."
Doesn’t sound like they’re fighting for rarity of abortion, does it?
2. Abortion isn’t a religious issue.
Not appeal sociopathic, utilitarian, or at war with the largest moral voice in the world (the Body of Christ), abortion activists often claim that abortion is a medical issue that each person should make for themselves.
In the video, you see people chanting, “Not the Church, not the State, women must decide their fate.” One girl interviewed says, “I want them to stop making decision about my body with their Bibles. Keep your rosaries off my ovaries.”
If abortion isn’t a religious issue, then why are they at war with people of religion? Christians uphold the dignity of every human being, so it's a natural fight for abortion activists to come after those with a reasonable argument threatening their empire.
(Sidenote: Some atheists are pro-life too. Christopher Hitchens revealed his pro-life belief in a debate with Jay Richards.)
3. Planned Parenthood isn’t an abortion business
As the video shows, since 2002 Planned Parenthood has received over $1 billion in taxpayer funding. Likewise, “according to the Planned Parenthood 2009 annual report, abortion accounted for 98% of its [Planned Parenthood] services to pregnant women.”
Watch the video and share it with everyone you know!
Saturday, March 12, 2011
New Online Catholic Campaigns Leverage Social Media
Catholic Media Promotion Day and JPII 'thank you' campaign exemplify purpose of social media
(Catholic Online) - Whenever people give advice about how to do something, whether that be fix a car, loose weight, or clean a house, doesn't it help when the person giving the advice actually lives what they preach?
Well the Catholic Church is learning to leverage the power of social medias in exciting ways, while maintaining their true purpose. With the endorsement of Pope Benedict XVI, we are learning how to use social media while also being weary of its lacking. One of the most important elements of social media and blogging is to remember that on the other end of every Facebook status, Tweet, or blog comment is an actual person that needs personal interactions that aren't available on a computer or smart phone.
Headline Bistro has been commended for its use of social media to give young people an opportunity to say "thank you" to John Paul II. Headline Bistro is collecting 500-word or less notes written to John Paul II thanking him for all his work in leading the Catholic faithful. This is where the typical social media campaign would end. But to add a personal, tangible element to it, this Knights of Columbus new service, will be taking these notes to Rome for Pope John Paul II's beatification.
Taking the actual messages of each person who submits one to the actual beatification provides a feeling of actually participating in the event. That feeling might inspire people in their faith and encourage them in their daily walk.
Another effort that leverages social media to an even greater extent is the organic movement of Catholic Media Promotion Day. This movement of new media Catholics hopes to accomplish 4 goals:
1. On March 15, 2011, everyone with a blog, podcast, or Facebook page is encouraged to list their favorite three blogs, three podcasts, three other Catholic medias, three random Catholic things online, and their own projects.
2. Participants will then post the link of their list to the Catholic Media Promotion Day's Facebook page on March 15th.
3. Press are encouraged to write articles and press releases about this digital event.
4. On March 15th, participants will be going to iTunes and leaving at least three positive written reviews for various Catholic podcasts and three positive written reviews for Catholic mobile applications.
Using social media and other new medias to help increase the exposure of solid, Catholic content on the internet is vital for the Church.
Pope Benedict said at the Pontifical Council for Social Communications, "The contribution made by believers can.be useful to the world of the mass media, opening horizons of meaning and value which digital culture alone is incapable of seeing or representing."
Similarly, Bishop Ron Herzog wrote about the consequences of ignoring social media: "Social media is proving itself to be a force with which to be reckoned. If not, the church may be facing as great a challenge as that of the Protestant Reformation."
These kinds of efforts, which not only use social media, but also encourage the spread of strong, Biblical, Catechetical and Magisterial content, will be one way in which the Church continues to be viewed as a beacon of hope for many, and the source of truth for all.
(Catholic Online) - Whenever people give advice about how to do something, whether that be fix a car, loose weight, or clean a house, doesn't it help when the person giving the advice actually lives what they preach?
Well the Catholic Church is learning to leverage the power of social medias in exciting ways, while maintaining their true purpose. With the endorsement of Pope Benedict XVI, we are learning how to use social media while also being weary of its lacking. One of the most important elements of social media and blogging is to remember that on the other end of every Facebook status, Tweet, or blog comment is an actual person that needs personal interactions that aren't available on a computer or smart phone.
Headline Bistro has been commended for its use of social media to give young people an opportunity to say "thank you" to John Paul II. Headline Bistro is collecting 500-word or less notes written to John Paul II thanking him for all his work in leading the Catholic faithful. This is where the typical social media campaign would end. But to add a personal, tangible element to it, this Knights of Columbus new service, will be taking these notes to Rome for Pope John Paul II's beatification.
Taking the actual messages of each person who submits one to the actual beatification provides a feeling of actually participating in the event. That feeling might inspire people in their faith and encourage them in their daily walk.
Another effort that leverages social media to an even greater extent is the organic movement of Catholic Media Promotion Day. This movement of new media Catholics hopes to accomplish 4 goals:
1. On March 15, 2011, everyone with a blog, podcast, or Facebook page is encouraged to list their favorite three blogs, three podcasts, three other Catholic medias, three random Catholic things online, and their own projects.
2. Participants will then post the link of their list to the Catholic Media Promotion Day's Facebook page on March 15th.
3. Press are encouraged to write articles and press releases about this digital event.
4. On March 15th, participants will be going to iTunes and leaving at least three positive written reviews for various Catholic podcasts and three positive written reviews for Catholic mobile applications.
Using social media and other new medias to help increase the exposure of solid, Catholic content on the internet is vital for the Church.
Pope Benedict said at the Pontifical Council for Social Communications, "The contribution made by believers can.be useful to the world of the mass media, opening horizons of meaning and value which digital culture alone is incapable of seeing or representing."
Similarly, Bishop Ron Herzog wrote about the consequences of ignoring social media: "Social media is proving itself to be a force with which to be reckoned. If not, the church may be facing as great a challenge as that of the Protestant Reformation."
These kinds of efforts, which not only use social media, but also encourage the spread of strong, Biblical, Catechetical and Magisterial content, will be one way in which the Church continues to be viewed as a beacon of hope for many, and the source of truth for all.
Friday, March 11, 2011
Apple again in the crosshairs of gay activists. Will they fold?
(Manhattan Declaration) - Change.org, the same organization that successfully appealed to Apple to have the Manhattan Declaration app removed from the iTunes Store is now setting its sites on a new target: Exodus International. This comes just one day after Exodus International President Alan Chambers was seen on Our America with Lisa Ling in her special "Pray the Gay Away?."
Exodus International is, according to their website, “the world’s largest ministry to individuals and families impacted by homosexuality” and “a community of people who are choosing to honor God with their sexuality and looking for real answers to their questions.”
Exodux International is decidedly Christian, and stands on the principle that marriage should be the union of one man and one woman in a permanent bond. Similarly, they believe homosexual activity is not in the best interest of the person or the common good and work with people who want to leave that lifestyle and return to the Lord.
But Change.org cannot stand the thought that traditional marriage proponents have the opportunity to voice their opinion in the public square. Civil discourse and debate is of no interest to them.
Interestingly enough, just like the Manhattan Declaration app before it was pulled, Apple gave the Exodus International app a 4+ rating, which indicates that Apple found “no objectionable material.”
Either Apple has no internal consistency for how they rate their apps, or they are throwing a bone to all of the thousands of Manhattan Declaration signers they upset by saying that our app might cause harm to others.
It will be interesting to see in the coming days and weeks if Apple caves to the gay activists, or if they will allow civil discourse to carry on.
Exodus International is, according to their website, “the world’s largest ministry to individuals and families impacted by homosexuality” and “a community of people who are choosing to honor God with their sexuality and looking for real answers to their questions.”
Exodux International is decidedly Christian, and stands on the principle that marriage should be the union of one man and one woman in a permanent bond. Similarly, they believe homosexual activity is not in the best interest of the person or the common good and work with people who want to leave that lifestyle and return to the Lord.
But Change.org cannot stand the thought that traditional marriage proponents have the opportunity to voice their opinion in the public square. Civil discourse and debate is of no interest to them.
Interestingly enough, just like the Manhattan Declaration app before it was pulled, Apple gave the Exodus International app a 4+ rating, which indicates that Apple found “no objectionable material.”
Either Apple has no internal consistency for how they rate their apps, or they are throwing a bone to all of the thousands of Manhattan Declaration signers they upset by saying that our app might cause harm to others.
It will be interesting to see in the coming days and weeks if Apple caves to the gay activists, or if they will allow civil discourse to carry on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)