The Papists

Apologetics and Evengelization
  • September 2, 2013 3:25 pm
    Anonymous:  What can I do when I feel hopeless and desperate and separated from God? I have no idea what he wants from me.

    Immerse yourself in regular prayer, Mass, Adoration, Confession, and keep your family and friends close. That is what will carry you through your hopelessness. 

    Godspeed, Anon.

    Your friend,

    Olivier

  • August 8, 2013 4:12 pm

    The End of Denominations?

    varangoi:

    bannerofthecross:

    myadventuresinoddity:

    A wonderful article. 

    Schism (which is how many denominations came about) never fixes anything.  Disunity is a sin, a very real sin that Christians need to ponder.  This is one of the reasons I am wary of the continuing Anglican movement and have never seriously looked into it.  Though TEC has many problems, I don’t think abandonment is the solution.  

    I like this quote “Jesus didn’t give us many churches. He gave us one Church.”

    So if schism is bad, and Jesus gave us one Church…shouldn’t we try and figure out where that One Church went?

    I think they found it in Russia, Greece, Ukraine, Serbia, Georgia, Romania, and some other countries or something. Something about an Orthodox Church. Idk.

    Funny, you know I heard the same thing about a Church centered in Rome with rites all around the world…something about a Catholic Church? ;)

  • July 29, 2013 2:11 pm

    On Admitting Men with Same Sex Attraction to the Seminary

    bannerofthecross:

    Everyone outside of the Church seems to be celebrating Pope Francis’s “change in teaching” on homosexuality. This post is to show that what Pope Francis said is not anything new. 

    The Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly says, in paragraph 2358, that people with same sex attraction must be “accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity,” and that “every sign of unjust discrimination should be avoided.” So Pope Francis, in not judging, is doing what Jesus and the Church tells us to do.

    In 2005, the Vatican issued the document Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with Regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in View of Their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders which says:

    It is necessary to state clearly that the Church, while profoundly respecting the persons in question, cannot admit to the seminary or to holy orders those who practice homosexuality, present deep seated homosexual tendencies, or support the so-called “gay culture”. 

    Different however would be the case in which one were dealing with homosexual tendencies that were only expression of a transitory problem…Nevertheless, such tendencies must be clearly overcome at least three years before ordination to the diaconate.

    This means that men with very strong homosexual tendencies cannot be admitted to the Priesthood. In the same way, a man with very strong pornography tendencies will not be admitted to the Priesthood. As a requirement for Priesthood, all men must show a high degree of Sexual Integration where they have overcome their temptations of lust and have developed the freedom to authentically love.

    When the Church talks about the “gay culture”, She is referring to people who promote the idea of gay marriage, which is a direct violation of Church teaching. Pope Francis referred to these type of people as “being part of the lobby.” The Church will not ordain any man who is not in Communion with the Church on any issue. Priests are representatives of the Church and must adhere to all Her teachings; as should every Catholic.

    When Pope Francis says “the problem isn’t the orientation. The problem is making a lobby,” he is repeating that the real issue is when a man openly dissents from Church teaching. That’s when a man cannot be ordained. 

    Father Brett A. Brennan put it this way in his book To Save a Thousand Souls (which was published in 2010):

    The Vatican Instruction indicates that a practicing homosexual or a man with deep-seated homosexual tendencies ought never to be ordained a priest. The Church cannot allow ordination of men who are active homosexuals or who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies.

    But a man can be accepted for study if he has a significantly lesser degree of same-sex attraction which he has completely disclosed. He should completely and enthusiastically embrace the Church’s teaching on marriage and sexuality. He should be growing in affective maturity and must have clearly overcome the transitory same-sex attraction, living chastely for at least three years before his diaconate ordination.

    Pg 245

    So yes, a man with Same Sex Attraction can become a Priest, but it’s a case by case basis. There is no solid answer.

    What Pope Francis said is far from a “reversal” of Church Teaching, or a “new sign of openness”. The Church always has and always will welcome anyone, no matter race, gender, or sexuality, who is seeking Truth and seeking to do God’s will.

  • July 27, 2013 9:12 pm

    A Call for Reform in the Catholic Church by an Austrian priest

    existenceandidentity:

    thepapists:

    existenceandidentity:

    Fr. Schüller proposes the following:

    • allowing priests to marry
    • allowing women to become priests
    • allowing lay people to have communion services without a priest present
    • giving lay people much greater control of church policy and practice and local and higher levels
    • allowing remarried Catholics to receive the Eucharist
    • honoring loving committed gay relationships

    Just a warning, it’s late, I’m tired, I should probably gather my thoughts but I feel the need to respond to this article.

    Also, this is not directed explicitly towards existenceandidentity, this is directed towards this article. 

    The need for reform of Church teaching, doctrine, dogma, traditions, and the like is not a need at all. Vatican II already made its reforms, the council is over, the Church has spoken, let’s move on. 

    The crisis in the Church does not call for a reform of the Church; it calls for a reform of the hearts of Her members.

    The reforms of the Mass, from what I’ve understood, was an attempt to re-ignite the Faith of the 20th century. The Novus Ordo was supposed to help the laity become more involved, more active, and to better understand what the Mass is about. 

    What has happened in the last 50 years?

    A decline in Church attendance, poor catechesis, decline in Priestly and Religious vocations, and Catholics are living no different than the secular world. 

    Is this the fault of the Second Vatican Council?  No. It’s because the implementing of Vatican II exploded and people took it and ran with it.

    So what’s my point? Institutional reform without proper instruction results in crisis. Priests and Bishops at times, whether knowingly or unknowingly, veered away from what the Council taught. We have the reform already, now we need the proper instruction.

    Hence the New Evangelization and the Year of Faith; these help us rediscover what it means to be Catholic. 

    We can’t solve this crisis with more reforms. In my opinion, asking for more reforms is showing a lack of faith in Christ. “We are running out of Priests, we need the laity to be able to perform communion with no Priest present, we need Priests to be married, we need women priests”. Why don’t we just ask God to give us more Priests? 

    Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.

    Mt 7:7

    How much clearer can Christ be?

    By constantly seeking reform, we continue to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. We give into the temptation of the serpent to become like gods, and instead of trusting in God providence, we begin to play god by saying “No, God’s church is wrong about what God thinks.”

    Are the Church’s teachings hard? Yes! Of course they are! Why? Because the Church is our Mother and She challenges us to be more than what settle for. God gives us this challenge because He knows that we’re up for it. 

    All the reforms listed here are based on a misunderstood secular definition of love; that love is tolerance, acceptance, and warm fuzzies. Love is to will the good of the other and to act on it, which often includes being harsh. Denying someone communion who is not in communion with the Church is not meant to be a punishment; it’s meant to protect them from committing a sacrilege. 

    The Role of the Church is to bring Her people to the fullness of Truth and Salvation. Changing Her teachings would be an injustice to us. It’ll be uncomfortable, but as Pope Benedict said: “We are not made for comfort, we are made for Greatness.”

    I’ve written about the lay Catholic equivocation of the clergy with the Church before on this blog, so I won’t go into. Suffice to say that I think it’s a silly view to equate a very small percentage of men with the entirety of the Church. None of the reforms this priest is calling for are really out there. And allowing more lay involvement in church policy and practice is a necessity if the Catholic Church wants to remain relevant. It doesn’t affect teachings or dogma, and it decentralizes power away from the clergy. If the Church needs an example, they can always look at the Anglicans, Presbyterians, Lutherans, or any other Protestant denomination to see how it works.

    Priestly celibacy is a historically recent practice, there’s no reason to keep it for some nostalgic tradition. That level of sexual repression isn’t healthy, and quite honestly it’s probably why the sex abuse scandal is so big among Catholic clergy.

    The prohibition of women from the priesthood is based on a shaky interpretation (of faulty logic, no less) of the fact that Jesus only had men as apostles. The fact that he only had male apostles is not a command to never ordain women. If anything, a look at the Protestant churches that allow female ministers/priests shows that women are often better pastors than men. 

    And affirming gay relationships is a matter of human dignity. On this the clergy/Church is unequivocally wrong.

    Why you see reform as a lack of faith is beyond me. Lack of faith in the clergy, perhaps, but not lack of faith in God, Jesus, or Christianity. Jesus was a reformer. Reform is the entire message of Jesus. In the Gospels, he is always saying, “repent, return to the basics, forgive your enemy, love God and love your neighbor.” In essence he says, “reform yourself”. 

    Of course, I’m not Catholic anymore, so I don’t really care what happens in the Church. But I think if it wants to continue being relevant in the world and retain members, it needs to change.

    But the thing is, some of these reforms are out there. I’ll admit I was a bit harsh on the Priestly celibacy and on Communion services with no Priest. As catholicninja pointed out to me, Celibacy is a discipline, not a dogma, so that can be changed, and Communion services already exist where it’s needed. Celibacy isn’t kept for nostalgic purposes. Practically speaking, a celibate Priest allows him to be more readily available to his parish, not to mention it is in imitation of Christ who was celibate. 

    As for the sex scandal:

    -Philip Jenkins, is a professor of history and religious studies at Penn State University, and has written a book on the topic. He estimates that 2% of priests sexually abuse youths and children.

    -Sylvia M. Demarest, a lawyer from Texas has been tracking accusations against priests since the the mid-1990s. By 1996, she had identified 1,100 priests who had been accused of molesting children. She predicts that when she updates the list, the total will exceed 1,500 names. This represents about 2.5% of the approximately 60,000 men who have been active priests in the U.S. since 1984.

    -Conservative columnist Ann Coulter claimed, without citing references, that there are only 55 “exposed abusers" in a population of 45,000 priests. This is an abuse rate of 0.12%.

    -Various news services reported that 200 Roman Catholic priests in the Philippines have been investigated for “sexual misconduct and abuses" over the past two decades. That would represent almost 3% of the total population of about 7,000 priests. However, it appears that misconduct includes many offenses, from child abuse to rape to keeping adult mistresses.

    And I found some sources, not nearly as authoritative that say less than 1%.

    -  Cynthia Stewart’s “The Catholic Church: A brief popular history.”

    -In England according to  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2011/may/16/catholic-church-vatican-letter-child-abuse , The percentage is less than half of one percent.

    Credit to nikosnature for the stats.

    Also this video.

    Most Priests are good holy men. I think what you said about lay Catholic equivocation of the clergy can be applied here: “it’s a silly view to equate a very small percentage of men with the entirety of the Church.”

    As for women priests, part of it is following the example of Jesus in only ordaining men, but it goes much deeper than that. As human beings we are incarnate spirits; our bodies reflect our souls. I am male both physically and spiritually. When a Priest is administering the Sacraments, he is in persona Christi; "in the place of Christ". In that moment he spiritually becomes Christ. Jesus is male, and only a male body can represent a male spirit. 

    The Catholic Church does acknowledge the dignity of people with same sex attraction.

    The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

    Catechism of the Catholic Church 2358

    (emphasis mine)

    Saying no to gay marriage does not mean saying no to the person.

    I agree with you, Jesus does say “reform yourself”. He desires for us to reform ourselves to His Truth, and how do we know what His Truth is? Through the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. The Church’s goal is not to stay relevant but to bring the world the Truth and to bring Her Children to Salvation.

    I’m sorry you decided to leave the Church, but know that we’re always ready to welcome you back. I’ll be praying for you

    In Christ,
    Javi

  • July 23, 2013 12:32 am

    A Call for Reform in the Catholic Church by an Austrian priest

    existenceandidentity:

    Fr. Schüller proposes the following:

    • allowing priests to marry
    • allowing women to become priests
    • allowing lay people to have communion services without a priest present
    • giving lay people much greater control of church policy and practice and local and higher levels
    • allowing remarried Catholics to receive the Eucharist
    • honoring loving committed gay relationships

    Just a warning, it’s late, I’m tired, I should probably gather my thoughts but I feel the need to respond to this article.

    Also, this is not directed explicitly towards existenceandidentity, this is directed towards this article. 

    The need for reform of Church teaching, doctrine, dogma, traditions, and the like is not a need at all. Vatican II already made its reforms, the council is over, the Church has spoken, let’s move on. 

    The crisis in the Church does not call for a reform of the Church; it calls for a reform of the hearts of Her members.

    The reforms of the Mass, from what I’ve understood, was an attempt to re-ignite the Faith of the 20th century. The Novus Ordo was supposed to help the laity become more involved, more active, and to better understand what the Mass is about. 

    What has happened in the last 50 years?

    A decline in Church attendance, poor catechesis, decline in Priestly and Religious vocations, and Catholics are living no different than the secular world. 

    Is this the fault of the Second Vatican Council?  No. It’s because the implementing of Vatican II exploded and people took it and ran with it.

    So what’s my point? Institutional reform without proper instruction results in crisis. Priests and Bishops at times, whether knowingly or unknowingly, veered away from what the Council taught. We have the reform already, now we need the proper instruction.

    Hence the New Evangelization and the Year of Faith; these help us rediscover what it means to be Catholic. 

    We can’t solve this crisis with more reforms. In my opinion, asking for more reforms is showing a lack of faith in Christ. “We are running out of Priests, we need the laity to be able to perform communion with no Priest present, we need Priests to be married, we need women priests”. Why don’t we just ask God to give us more Priests? 

    Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.

    Mt 7:7

    How much clearer can Christ be?

    By constantly seeking reform, we continue to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. We give into the temptation of the serpent to become like gods, and instead of trusting in God providence, we begin to play god by saying “No, God’s church is wrong about what God thinks.”

    Are the Church’s teachings hard? Yes! Of course they are! Why? Because the Church is our Mother and She challenges us to be more than what settle for. God gives us this challenge because He knows that we’re up for it. 

    All the reforms listed here are based on a misunderstood secular definition of love; that love is tolerance, acceptance, and warm fuzzies. Love is to will the good of the other and to act on it, which often includes being harsh. Denying someone communion who is not in communion with the Church is not meant to be a punishment; it’s meant to protect them from committing a sacrilege. 

    The Role of the Church is to bring Her people to the fullness of Truth and Salvation. Changing Her teachings would be an injustice to us. It’ll be uncomfortable, but as Pope Benedict said: “We are not made for comfort, we are made for Greatness.”

  • July 16, 2013 11:43 pm

    Quotes From Abortion Doctors

    the-last-crusade:

    They [the women] are never allowed to look at the ultrasound because we knew that if they so much as heard the heart beat, they wouldn’t want to have an abortion.

    – Dr. Randall, former abortionist

    Even now I feel a little peculiar about it, because as a physician I was trained to conserve life, and here I am destroying it.

    – Dr. Benjamin Kalish, abortionist

    You have to become a bit schizophrenic. In one room, you encourage the patient that the slight irregularity in the fetal heart is not important, that she is going to have a fine, healthy baby. Then, in the next room you assure another woman, on whom you just did a saline abortion, that it is a good thing that the heartbeat is already irregular… she has nothing to worry about, she will NOT have a live baby… All of a sudden one noticed that at the time of the saline infusion there was a lot of activity in the uterus. That’s not fluid currents. That’s obviously the fetus being distressed by swallowing the concentrated salt solution and kicking violently and that’s to all intents and purposes, the death trauma… somebody has to do it, and unfortunately we are the executioners in this instance[.]

    – Dr. Szenes, abortionist

    Telling those women their fetuses feel pain is heaping torment upon torment. These women have real pain. They did not come to this decision easily. Creating another barrier for them to get the medical care they need is really unfair.

    – Abortionist Dave Turok

    This is why I hate overuse of forceps – things tear. There are only two kinds of doctors who have never perforated a uterus, those that lie and those who don’t do abortions.

    – Anonymous Abortionist

    I got to where I couldn’t stand to look at the little bodies anymore.

    – Dr. Beverly McMillan, former abortionist

    Sorrow, quite apart from the sense of shame, is exhibited in some way by virtually every woman for whom I performed an abortion, and that’s 20,000 as of 1995. The sorrow is revealed by the fact that most women cry at some point during the experience… The grieving process may last from several days to several years… Grief is sometimes delayed… The grief may lie sublimated and dormant for years.

    – Dr. Susan Poppema, abortionist

    If I see a case…after twenty weeks, where it frankly is a child to me, I really agonize over it because the potential is so imminently there…On the other hand, I have another position, which I think is superior in the hierarchy of questions, and that is “who owns this child?” It’s got to be the mother. 

    – Dr. James MacMahon, abortionist

    We know that it’s killing, but the state permits killing under certain circumstances. 

    – Dr. Neville Sender, abortionist

    Read More

  • July 16, 2013 4:40 pm
    Anonymous:  Is watching movies on YouTube a mortal sin? I don't think it's illegal, since YouTube itself is legal, but if the person uploading the movie (or TV show, or song) is breaking copyright laws, would a viewer be considered approving or acting as an accomplice to that sin?

    Hey Anon,

    This is a very difficult question to answer. You have a good point in that YouTube would take down something that is illegal. I’d invite you to to check out what Father Shane said on a similar question about music.

    If you’re still not sure, maybe you can check out what the FBI warnings say before movies start and pray about it.  

    In my opinion, I don’t really see the use in watching movies on YouTube considering things like RedBox exist where you can rent movies for a dollar.

    -Javi

  • June 24, 2013 6:34 pm
    badwolfcomplex:

hxccatholic:




emilye:




iniquitousmiscreant:




Science? Really? Show me which biologists state that this process constitutes an instand human….
By this logic, a cake exists the moment the eggs, flour and butter hit a bowl…. If that’s how you take your cakes then that’s fine, I just prefer mine, ykno, baked, finished, completed.
FTR I - like I imagine most people - am not “pro abortion”, I am against them completely if they can be avoided…. I am however pro choice and I believe that under certain circumstances - rape for example - it should be a choice a woman is allowed to make without fear of persecution or judgment.
Peace.




If you consult any of the standard human-embryology texts, you will find that human embryos are exactly what the embryology textbooks say they are: human organisms — living individuals of the human species — at the earliest developmental stage.  Scientists distinguish embryos from other cells or clusters of cells precisely by their self-directed, integral functioning — their organismal behavior.  The entire basis for life beginning at conception stems from well documented, universally recognized scientific fact.  Science has quite clearly and decidedly proven that human life begins at conception.




“Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”
“A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).”




— Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.
 




“Development begins with fertilization, the process by which the male gamete, the sperm, and the femal gamete, the oocyte, unite to give rise to a zygote.”




—T.W. Sadler, Langman’s Medical Embryology, 10th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2006. p. 11.




“[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginning of a new human being.”




—Keith L. Moore, Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2.




“Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a ‘moment’) is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.”




—Ronan O’Rahilly and Fabiola Müller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.




“Human embryos begin development following the fusion of definitive male and female gametes during fertilization… This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development.”




—William J. Larsen, Essentials of Human Embryology. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1998. pp. 1, 14.
 




“Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition.”




—E.L. Potter and J.M. Craig, Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, 3rd edition. Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975. p. vii.




“It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.”




—Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School




“I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception.”




—Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni, Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania
 




“After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. [It] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion…it is plain experimental evidence. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”




—Dr. Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics, University of Descartes




“By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”




—Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic




“The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter – the beginning is conception.”




—Dr. Watson A. Bowes, University of Colorado Medical School




THIS. THANK YOU. SHARE THIS!!




Excellent source list.
Not to mention the cake analogy fails because putting ingredients together in a bowl is not similar at all to what happens at fertilization. At fertilization, the sperm and egg are no longer separate things; they’re not even separate things that have been mushed together, the way flour and butter are in a bowl. When sperm and egg fuse, they cease to be sperm and egg, and instead there is a new organism with its own DNA and growth pattern, not recognizable as or separable into the sperm and egg that created it. 

    badwolfcomplex:

    hxccatholic:

    emilye:

    iniquitousmiscreant:

    Science? Really? Show me which biologists state that this process constitutes an instand human….

    By this logic, a cake exists the moment the eggs, flour and butter hit a bowl…. If that’s how you take your cakes then that’s fine, I just prefer mine, ykno, baked, finished, completed.

    FTR I - like I imagine most people - am not “pro abortion”, I am against them completely if they can be avoided…. I am however pro choice and I believe that under certain circumstances - rape for example - it should be a choice a woman is allowed to make without fear of persecution or judgment.

    Peace.

    If you consult any of the standard human-embryology texts, you will find that human embryos are exactly what the embryology textbooks say they are: human organisms — living individuals of the human species — at the earliest developmental stage.  Scientists distinguish embryos from other cells or clusters of cells precisely by their self-directed, integral functioning — their organismal behavior.  The entire basis for life beginning at conception stems from well documented, universally recognized scientific fact.  Science has quite clearly and decidedly proven that human life begins at conception.

    “Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”

    “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).”

    — Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.

     

    “Development begins with fertilization, the process by which the male gamete, the sperm, and the femal gamete, the oocyte, unite to give rise to a zygote.”

    —T.W. Sadler, Langman’s Medical Embryology, 10th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2006. p. 11.

    “[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginning of a new human being.”

    —Keith L. Moore, Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2.

    “Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a ‘moment’) is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.”

    —Ronan O’Rahilly and Fabiola Müller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.

    “Human embryos begin development following the fusion of definitive male and female gametes during fertilization… This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development.”

    —William J. Larsen, Essentials of Human Embryology. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1998. pp. 1, 14.

     

    “Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition.”

    —E.L. Potter and J.M. Craig, Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, 3rd edition. Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975. p. vii.

    “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.”

    —Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School

    “I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception.”

    —Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni, Professor of Pediatrics and Obstetrics, University of Pennsylvania

     

    “After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being. [It] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion…it is plain experimental evidence. Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”

    —Dr. Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics, University of Descartes

    “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

    —Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic

    “The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter – the beginning is conception.”

    —Dr. Watson A. Bowes, University of Colorado Medical School

    THIS. THANK YOU. SHARE THIS!!

    Excellent source list.

    Not to mention the cake analogy fails because putting ingredients together in a bowl is not similar at all to what happens at fertilization. At fertilization, the sperm and egg are no longer separate things; they’re not even separate things that have been mushed together, the way flour and butter are in a bowl. When sperm and egg fuse, they cease to be sperm and egg, and instead there is a new organism with its own DNA and growth pattern, not recognizable as or separable into the sperm and egg that created it. 

  • April 7, 2013 12:24 am

    "

    [tw: abortion, violence]

    He “induced labor, forced the live birth of viable babies in the sixth, seventh, eighth month of pregnancy and then killed those babies by cutting into the back of the neck with scissors and severing their spinal cord,” District Attorney Seth Williams said.

    […]

    “A doctor who with scissors cuts into the necks, severing the spinal cords of living, breathing babies who would survive with proper medical attention commits murder under the law,” he said. “Regardless of one’s feelings about abortion, whatever one’s beliefs, that is the law.”

    "

    [source]

    I know this hasn’t been getting media attention, but-

    If you are pro-choice, you should be paying attention to this case.
    If you are pro-life, you should be paying attention to this case.

    (via boldaswellas-strong)

  • March 31, 2013 7:42 pm
    Anonymous:  Why do Catholics believe Mary was born without original sin?

    Check out this video, it’s a little long but very interesting. The video goes into much of what Catholics believe about Mary.

    Peace and Happy Easter :)

    -Javi