Baby Faith: The Beauty, Value and Impact of a Single Life

Multiple, recent polls have shown that the heart of America is changing to the Pro-Life belief. There are many reasons I believe for this, but despite my personal list of reasons, the most predominant one is that the pro-life position is the position of absolute truth, unconditional love and recognizable beauty. Sooner or later, open hearts will find their way to this core belief; many times by the result of being exposed to a "witness of Faith".

Myah Walker, a 23 year-old, Canadian college student, received the news that the baby she was carrying had anencephaly, a condition where her baby had no brain. She followed and documented the beautiful story of this child, baby Faith - aptly named - with her blog:

"When I had my 19-week ultrasound, I remember the look on the radiologist's face (I can't describe that look) and when he asked me if this was my first child, I had a feeling that something was up. He said, "Something is wrong with the baby's head.This doesn't mean that you can't have healthy babies in the future." That is all he would tell me, that there was something wrong with the baby's head…

The doctor told me with tears in her eyes, "What they found is that the baby has no brain." She said that I could choose to continue the pregnancy with no risk to my health, but that my baby would die shortly after birth. Or, I could choose to induce early to terminate the pregnancy.

I was shocked. Just an hour earlier I was watching the ultrasound monitor and I could see her swimming around and sucking her thumb just like a normal baby. She looked perfect to me. I thought, no brain? How is that even possible? I said to the doctor,"Well... she must have some brain," but she just shook her head and said, "No." She assured me that her movements were "only reflexes."

When given the option to either carry her to term or terminate the pregnancy, I immediately told the doctor that I wanted to carry her to term. It was not a decision that I had to think about. For some reason I had to give the doctors my decision over and over again, which was frustrating. One doctor asked, "Can I ask why you want to continue this pregnancy?" I guess some people are baffled by unconditional love."

Myah obviously did carry the baby to term, and, as diagnosed, little Faith went home to God shortly after as Myah blogs:

"The best 93 days of my life were spent with my daughter. Faith went to Heaven today. We spent the entire morning and some of the afternoon snuggling together in my warm bed. I told her that I loved her many times. I was holding her in my arms when she passed away. It was around 4:40 in the afternoon. I had just finished changing her diaper and I decided to pick her up and wrap a blanket around her. She made a very sweet smiling face and held it for several seconds... I thought it was very cute. I waited for her to take her next breath, but she didn't. She looked up at me and opened her beautiful eyes, and I realized what was happening. I told her to go with Jesus. I told her that I loved her and that it was ok, that I would meet her in Heaven. I held her close and cried tears on her face. I felt her chest and there was no longer a heartbeat. But she still looked so beautiful. And even now, she is still so amazingly beautiful... as I hold her here she is looking like a porcelain doll. Her tube feed is gone. Her lips are still pink and her facial expression looks so happy and peaceful. God is good."

God is good, Myah, and so are Pro-life mothers. A priest once told me that while giving "last rights" to a very holy and frail person, their face lit up joyfully precisely at their moment of death. The priest was convinced that this person was seeing the Beatific Vision. Faith's smile at the moment of her passing reminds me of this story.

Any parents who have been through such an experience like this know the heartbreaking tragedy of receiving the sad neonatal news and having to return your baby to God so early in their life. But this tragedy could have been compounded tenfold if little Faith never had the opportunity to feel the embrace or soft kiss of her mother. Little Faith's soul went home to God from the warmth of her mother's arms and was released to Him with Myah's love. Myah did love unconditionally, as she made sure this baby was showered with human love before entering the kingdom of Divine love.

Myah has had 42,000 views of her blog profile since December. This could easily put the unique visitors to her blog in the millions. Multiple millions of people have read and been inspired by this beautiful story of little baby Faith. We must never underestimate the value and impact of an individual life. Even a little one, who was less than perfect and lived for only 93 days. To Myah, her many blog readers and her God, little Faith was definite perfection and her 93 days a more than ample amount of life to be vitally meaningful.

Ht to Creative Minority Report through Waltzing Matilda

Sonia Sotomayor: Operation Rescue Defender?

Here is another interesting tidbit. The news story hitting multiple web sites today is that Judge Sonya Sotomayor ruled in favor of pro-life protesters, from Operation Rescue, saying that the West Hartford, CT, Police used excessive force with the protesters. 261 protesters were injured at the event at the hands of the police.

Sotomayor wrote in her opinion:
"It is undisputed that the police were forced to employ some degree of physical coercion in order to arrest the protesters and remove them from the premises. Plaintiffs allege, however, that the police responded with far more force than was necessary, and inflicted severe pain on the demonstrators by dragging them out of the building by their elbows, using choke holds, and lifting them off the floor by their wrists. Moreover, one officer allegedly shoved and pinned a sitting protester's head to the floor with his foot, and some threatened those who were praying aloud that they would "get more" if they "kept crying out in praise of the Lord." The protesters who were subjected to this treatment "screamed" in pain, and the demonstrators assert that they could hear the continuous screams and protestations of their fellow arrestees."

Now this can be viewed as just an excessive force ruling, but boy are the militant Libs stricken with fear. They are in total meltdown mode. Our Supreme Court nominee allows people to cry out, "Praise the Lord!" in public? She is not throwing the book at these people trying to rob us of our rights?

Sleaze portal the Daily Kos is writing multi-volume dissertations on how Sotomayor is really a closet Conservative. They are self imploding with paranoia. The Daily Kos was the newspaper that reported the horrendous lie that Trig Palin was actually Sarah Palin's daughter's baby. It seems the first to unleash the dogs on a helpless teenager without any proof, is also the first to unleash the dogs on one of their own without any proof. Speaks volumes of their character and tolerance. Gestapo-like, isn't it?

God and Country reports:
"Nancy Keenan, president of Naral Pro-Choice America, urged supporters to press senators to demand that Judge Sotomayor reveal her views on privacy rights before any confirmation vote.
"Discussion about Roe v. Wade will—and must—be part of this nomination process," Ms. Keenan wrote. "As you know, choice hangs in the balance on the Supreme Court as the last two major choice-related cases were decided by a 5-to-4 margin."

The President of NARAL is now thinking NARAL may have gotten the shaft from Obama? Really, you can't trust this guy?

Wouldn't it be an unforeseen and unplanned course of events if the Liberals were the ones to torpedo this nomination?

Archbishop Charles Chaput takes on ND's Fr. John Jenkins

I was determined to let my last post on the Notre Dame scandal close this topic on my blog. Overall, I was happy with the message of this post and thought it was a good final comment. VCR hero, Archbishop Charles Chaput, has trumped my final comment. He issued a statement on the Diocese of Denver's Web site; once again not mincing words and preaching the unfiltered Gospel. He sets Fr. Jenkins straight and brings him back into a true reality while also exposing Time magazine's bias in the same piece. He is quickly becoming my favorite American prelate.

"...There was no excuse – none, except intellectual vanity – for the university to persist in its course. And Father Jenkins compounded a bad original decision with evasive and disingenuous explanations to subsequently justify it.

These are hard words, but they’re deserved precisely because of Father Jenkins’ own remarks on May 17: Until now, American Catholics have indeed had “a special expectation, a special hope for what Notre Dame can accomplish in the world.” For many faithful Catholics – and not just a “small but vocal group” described with such inexcusable disdain and ignorance in journals like Time magazine -- that changed Sunday.

The May 17 events do have some fitting irony, though. Almost exactly 25 years ago, Notre Dame provided the forum for Gov. Mario Cuomo to outline the “Catholic” case for “pro-choice” public service. At the time, Cuomo’s speech was hailed in the media as a masterpiece of American Catholic legal and moral reasoning. In retrospect, it’s clearly adroit. It’s also, just as clearly, an illogical and intellectually shabby exercise in the manufacture of excuses. Father Jenkins’ explanations, and President Obama’s honorary degree, are a fitting national bookend to a quarter century of softening Catholic witness in Catholic higher education. Together, they’ve given the next generation of Catholic leadership all the excuses they need to baptize their personal conveniences and ignore what it really demands to be “Catholic” in the public square...

...Notre Dame’s leadership has done a real disservice to the Church, and now seeks to ride out the criticism by treating it as an expression of fringe anger. But the damage remains, and Notre Dame’s critics are right. The most vital thing faithful Catholics can do now is to insist – by their words, actions and financial support – that institutions claiming to be "Catholic" actually live the faith with courage and consistency. If that happens, Notre Dame’s failure may yet do some unintended good."

God Bless this Great Shepherd!

Sonia Sotomayor: Maybe Not the Worst Appointment

Well, I could not have been more wrong with my Supreme Court prediction. And believe me, it kills an Irishman to admit that. That being said, am I somewhat crazy to think this may not be the worse outcome?

Granted, Sonia Sotomayor is a make-it-up-as-you-go liberal judge, more decisions on whims than case histories. She may be one of the worst ever in this regard. She has been overturned more times than an undercooked pancake. CNN.com had a thorough listing of her rulings today and how many were overturned by the US Supreme Court. Here is the abridged version:

• Riverkeeper, Inc. vs. EPA, 475 F.3d 83 (2007) -- reversed 6-3 (Dissenting: Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg)
• Knight vs. Commissioner, 467 F.3d 149 (2006) -- upheld, but reasoning was unanimously faulted
• Dabit vs. Merrill Lynch, 395 F.3d 25 (2005) -- reversed 8-0
• Empire Healthchoice Assurance, Inc. vs. McVeigh, 396 F.3d 136 (2005) -- reversed 5-4 (Dissenting: Breyer, Kennedy, Souter, Alito)
• Malesko v. Correctional Services Corp., 299 F.3d 374 (2000) -- reversed 5-4 (Dissenting: Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer)
• Tasini vs. New York Times, et al, 972 F. Supp. 804 (1997) -- reversed 7-2 (Dissenting: Stevens, Breyer)
• Environment (Protection of fish at power plants): The Supreme Court reversed Sotomayor's ruling in a 6-3 decision, saying that Sotomayor's interpretation of the "best technology" rule was too narrow. Riverkeeper, Inc. vs. EPA, 475 F.3d 83 (2007)
• Taxes (Deductability of trust fees): The Supreme Court upheld Sotomayor's decision but unanimously rejected the reasoning she adopted, saying that her approach "flies in the face of the statutory language." Knight vs. Commissioner, 467 F.3d 149 (2006)
• Finance (Rights of investors to sue firms in state court): The Supreme Court unanimously overturned Sotomayor's ruling in an 8-0 decision. Dabit vs. Merrill Lynch, 395 F.3d 25 (2005)

There are many more cases listed, but you get the picture. Not exactly artisan of air-tight legal opinions, which brings me to my first point.

Her nomination is not that bad because she will be no match for Scalia, Roberts, Alito and Thomas thus having limited influence on the Court.

Jeffrey Rosen came out with a extremely critical look at Sotomayor, which is currently being denounced by some as politically motivated:

"Over the past few weeks, I've been talking to a range of people who have worked with her, nearly all of them former law clerks for other judges on the Second Circuit or former federal prosecutors in New York. Most are Democrats and all of them want President Obama to appoint a judicial star of the highest intellectual caliber who has the potential to change the direction of the court. Nearly all of them acknowledged that Sotomayor is a presumptive front-runner, but nearly none of them raved about her. They expressed questions about her temperament, her judicial craftsmanship, and most of all, her ability to provide an intellectual counterweight to the conservative justices, as well as a clear liberal alternative.

The most consistent concern was that Sotomayor, although an able lawyer, was "not that smart and kind of a bully on the bench," as one former Second Circuit clerk for another judge put it. "She has an inflated opinion of herself, and is domineering during oral arguments, but her questions aren't penetrating and don't get to the heart of the issue." (During one argument, an elderly judicial colleague is said to have leaned over and said, "Will you please stop talking and let them talk?")

Now, I do not know personally how bright she is. The confirmation process will be an interesting window into that answer. John Roberts set the bench mark in history how to respond in a confirmation hearing. This bench mark is out there and she will be judged by it, as Alito was.

I do know, however, that her mentioning that judges "make policies" when you know you are being tape recorded tells me you are not are not the sharpest nail in, or on, the bench. Honest? Yes. Intelligent? Very questionable.

She is going to be in for a very rude awakening if she thinks that her ideas will have free range and not be intensely challenged every step of the way behind the jurist doors.

There was a case a year or so back where the Court was ruling on whether lethal injection was cruel and unusual punishment. A lawyer arguing before the Court tried to make the case that it was painful and therefore cruel. Antonin Scalia caught the lawyer completely off-guard asking where in the law does it mention that the death penalty has to be painless. The point to be made here does not have anything to do with the validity of capital punishment, or whether or not it should be painless. The point being made here is that Scialia did not accept the first premise of a presented argument without making the lawyer prove it. He went down to the component level when most anyone else would have considered the statement reasonable.

Tonight could have been much worse if another judge with superior intellectual horsepower and powers to persuade the Court and America was named today.

Finally, my second point:

She was apparently the only judge named in the list of possibilities to give the Pro-Life cause any sliver of hope.

Life News wrote this about her:

"The only potential Supreme Court justice who may provide hope for pro-life advocates is Sonia Sotomayor, a member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit...

Sotomayor participated in a decision concerning the Mexico City Policy, which President Obama recently overturned and which prohibits sending taxpayer dollars to groups that promote and perform abortions in other nations.

Writing for the Second Circuit, Judge Sotomayor upheld the Mexico City Policy, but [Americans United for Life] says the significance of the decision "may be minimal because the issue was largely controlled by the Second Circuit’s earlier opinion in a similar challenge to the policy."

AUL notes that Judge Sotomayor also upheld the pro-life policy by rejecting claims from a pro-abortion legal group that it violated the Equal Protection Clause."

There must be a recognition that Obama was the one who was nominating and a moderate liberal appointment is a victory. As mentioned previously, Diane Wood supported partial-birth abortion and could have easily gotten the nod. Obama was never in a better position, with the House and Senate, to nominate an militant judge and get her through. He will not be in this good of position even a year from now. Yes, it could have been a lot worse.

The President of Planned Parenthood checked in on the nomination:

"What our nation needs from our Supreme Court justices is a deep understanding of the law, an appreciation of the impact of the court's decisions on everyday Americans, and a commitment to the protection of our individual liberties. Judge Sotomayor will bring this dedication and commitment with her to the bench."

They seem to be happy, but there is also a cautious tone to the statement. PP is telling what the court needs first and foremost, and not praising the pick. If it was Diane Wood, the praise would have come first. They probably don't know any more than anyone else about how Sotomayor would rule. There is a growing need for a larger filing system for all the Liberals who have been burnt by Obama recently. I am hoping PP joins this catalog with this appointment.

As we all know, lifetime appointments have a way of dropping pretenses and ideologies that were necessary to reach the appointment. Ask David Souter or Sandra Day O’Connor if allegiances change. Hopefully, Sotomayor's Catholic upbringing has left an impression on her heart. Time will tell.

Memorial Day Remembrance

Executive Mansion,Washington,

Nov. 21, 1864.

Dear [Mrs. Bixby],--

I have been shown in the files of the War Department a statement of the Adjutant General of Massachusetts that you are the mother of five sons who have died gloriously on the field of battle.

I feel how weak and fruitless must be any word of mine which should attempt to beguile you from the grief of a loss so overwhelming. But I cannot refrain from tendering you the consolation that may be found in the thanks of the Republic they died to save.

I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom.

Yours, very sincerely and respectfully,

Notre Dame: Who are the Crazy Ones?

About one year ago, I was corralling my kids and trying to push them through the front door of my Church for 9:30AM Sunday Mass. Suddenly, over my shoulder I saw a very unkempt man with a long beard and equally long hair. He was completely disheveled and on first appearance you would think something was wrong with him. He could have easily passed for someone who may not have been all there, or maybe even homeless. I remember positioning my small children within my reach, as my paternal instinct told me to do as this man walked into the Church ahead of us.

Upon entering the church, he slowly genuflected down on one knee in the center aisle at the back of the Church. He did not stop there, however. He, in sequence, went down on the other knee, then put his palms on the floor, finally laying his cheek to the ground in a sign of absolute reverence of being in the presence of the Eucharist in the tabernacle. After seeing this overwhelming sign of respect and affection, I thought to myself maybe everyone else in their well-kept appearances waiting for Mass to start (the chatting school mothers, the joking ushers, the bulletin readers (personally, guilty as charged)) were the "crazy" ones and this vagabond-appearing man was the normal one who actually understood the situation. It was a very contrarian thought and a very eye-opening one.

There were four Notre Dame protesters (the liberal media calls them hecklers to minimize their impact) who could not contain themselves on Sunday when an institution dedicated to Our Blessed Mother honored the most militant pro-abortion leader in our land for his record on civil rights and humanitarian achievements. The overwhelming hypocrisy was apparently too much to ask these people to remain silent or to be controlled. They would implode if they watched anymore of this intense outrage. An individual - who voted for withholding any type of life-saving help for a defenseless baby who survived a botched abortion and was now breathing on his/her own - was making his own, personal beachhead in the jewel of Roman Catholic higher education.

A master of rhetoric was using his deceptive tools on a Catholic stage to fool even more multitudes of less discerning people all orchestrated by a co-conspirator who was priest of the Holy Cross. A priest who smiled mesmerized in pictures with him as a little leaguer would do in a picture with Alex Rodriguez.

As they escorted these four individuals out - each of whom truly deserved the name of the school's heritage, “the Fighting Irish”- most in the crowd showed their disapproval of their actions with "boos" and "hisses".

To parallel the above story, I believe these four were the normal ones who completely understood what the situation was at hand, and the other 10,000 people were the ones who didn’t understand, or care to understand, what was happening or the intensity of the moment. If they did, their numbers would have been in direct reciprocal of Sunday's result. Obama would not have been able to speak one word at the podium because he would have been drowned out by 10,000 voices attenuating the Hail Mary.

As these protesters are made in His Image, even our God fiercely capsized the money-changing tables at the Temple when the level of outrage, sacrilege and hypocrisy became too much for even Divinity to cope with. The scene of the scorn was not a Temple, but it was a House of God - - our beloved Notre Dame -- and a sacred place to many where these four honorably tried to overturn the tables.

Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. (Ephesians 5:11)

Barack Obama's Notre Dame Speech: Post Game

A couple of thoughts on the Obama Notre Dame speech:

The event really lived up to its promise of being a large-scale dog and pony show. It was assured of this being run by its two fantasy show promoters, Obama and Jenkins, that had to try their best to defend an indefensible position with their only chance being to fool everyone.

No one told Jenkins that he was not the commencement speaker. My goodness, ad nauseum. He saw his remarks as the only place where he could explain his ridiculous, no touch-points-to-reality position of honoring a man who voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act while all the time trying to save his own tail. By the time he was done, I thought Obama stormed the beaches at Normandy by himself and discovered the cure to polio simultaneously while in the trenches. In regard to Jenkins actions and persona today, "We have met the enemy and he is us". He was very smug today; he will not be long for the ND world.

Also, Jenkins used no less than three Papal quotes to justify his invitation to Obama. This drew strong parallels to Nancy Pelosi using a quote from St. Augustine to justify her unconscionable view on abortion. There is a line in the movie A Man for All Seasons where St. Thomas More talks about "the tangles of the mind," and how people can twist and justify anything in their head.

Give the devil his due. As usual, Obama was great in his oratory skills. So great that by the end of his teleprompter speech the average person would think that Obama is a middle-of-the-road, reasonable guy. That is the greatness, and the danger, of Obama. Maybe someone should ask him how he plans to work to make fewer abortions when in his first few days he signed a bill opening tax dollars to finance them, and how this will happen when he will nominated a extremist to the Supreme Court within the next two weeks? Do you see what I mean, all rhetoric… by their fruits you shall know them.

VCR hero, Fr. Frank Pavone told the 30 or so students who sacrificed their special day and a large-scale, Pomp and Circumstance celebration for a quiet prayer at the grotto that they have inspired Pro-Life people across America. No truth could be more spoken and these students must be very special young people. You are the pride of the Pro-Life cause tonight.

In addition, those who were arrested also inspired me. I half-joked with a relative yesterday, "Alan Keyes was arrested at Notre Dame, I am so jealous."

The Valedictorian of ND, Brenna Bollman, gave an interview to Fox News this AM. She stated that "Catholic" means universal so we should be accepting of other people's views, regardless if they are based in morality. Catholic does mean universal, but it is in regard to the Church's teaching, not in regard to a big tent theory. This comment was a little unnerving considering she was number one in her class and may point to a more wide spread problem with the professors at the University.

Fox anchor Greg Jarrett was so bias in the coverage he should consider a career at MSNBC.

Notre Dame: John Paul the Great's Advice

In 1979, when the Soviet empire was teetering of verge of imploding, the government’s attention was unavoidably diverted to a visitor in Poland. A conquering hero had come home. One of their own had unbelievably risen to the office of the Papacy.

With all the fear and the tension that a Papal visit behind the iron curtain must had created for the Soviets, Pope John Paul II did not take this prime opportunity to unleash fiery rhetoric and deliver the final death nail into the Soviet’s coffin. He did something much more damning.

His most powerful, chosen words to his people on this visit were as soft spoken as they were subtle. In fact, those opposing and monitoring the Holy Father's trip would had most likely not have noticed them nor understood their impact. It was a direct appeal to Poland's heart, hope and heritage.

He simply said to his beloved Poles, “ Do not forgot who you are!” He was ensuring that his oppressed countrymen never forgot that they were not the nameless faces of a Communist regime but were still the children of, and belonging to, the One, True and Universal God. Their government was finite, their God was not. Their human and spiritual value as a people was forever secured in this statement regardless of the totalitarianism of their state. Their victory was a matter of certainty, not question because they knew their true identity as created in God's own, eternal image.

I can not help but think of the Holy Father's words repeatedly in my head as I read the daily headlines of Obama’s upcoming speech at Notre Dame. The management of the University has sadly let the secular world erase its Roman Catholic identity without a whimper. The people of Poland never let this happen even under fierce Communist persecution.

Notre Dame, you are not secular bastion of moral relativism. You are not a placater of earthly values and political expediency. You are a custodian of the Eternal Truth that has been revealed to you to safeguard, defend and promote. All the while, dedicated to the veneration and the honor of Our Blessed Mother. Notre Dame, "Do not forgot who you are!"

"...what Notre Dame is saying with this invitation is that Obama’s 100 percent support for policies and programs that bring death to more than a million unborn children every year is no disqualification to being honored by a university dedicated to Our Lady who carried to term the Son of God." - Pat Buchanan

Best of VCR: Pius XII Maligned

Today the Holy Father visited the Holocaust Museum in Israel. A section of the museum states Pius XII was silent during the Holocast:

"In the museum, a caption under a photo of Pius XII – the pope during World War II – says that his papacy was silent as Nazis rounded up Jews across Europe and sent them to their deaths."

I would suggest this museum chisel the following quotes in their walls in a Pius XII wing:

Pinchas Lapide (Israeli consul in Milan and Holocaust survivor) declared in 1967 that Pius XII "was instrumental in saving at least 700,000, but probably as many as 860,000 Jews from certain death at Nazi hands."

Albert Einstein quoted in Time magazine (12/23/1940): "Only the Church stood squarely across the path of Hitler’s campaign for suppressing truth. …The Church alone has had the courage and persistence to stand for intellectual truth and moral freedom. . . . I never had any special interest in the Church before, but now I feel great affection and admiration …and am forced thus to confess that what I once despised, I now praise unreservedly."

The New York Times editorial (12/25/1942) stated: "The voice of Pius XII is a lonely voice in the silence and darkness enveloping Europe this Christmas... He is about the only ruler left on the Continent of Europe who dares to raise his voice at all."

In 1958, Golda Meir sent her condolences on Pius XII’s death: "We share in the grief of humanity. …When fearful martyrdom came to our people, the voice of the Pope was raised for its victims. The life of our times was enriched by a voice speaking out about great moral truths above the tumult of daily conflict. We mourn a great servant of peace."

The Chief Rabbi of Rome, Emilio Zolli, stated: "Volumes could be written on the multiform works of Pius XII, and the countless priests, religious and laity who stood with him throughout the world during the war." "No hero," he said, "in all of history was more militant, more fought against, none more heroic, than Pius XII in pursuing the works of true charity . . . and thus on behalf of all the suffering children of God." Zolli converted to Catholicism afterwards and took Pius XII’s name in reverence to him.

Rabbi Isaac Herzog, the Chief Rabbi of Israel, wrote in a letter (1945) to the future John XXIII: "The people of Israel…will never forget what His Holiness and his illustrious delegates, inspired by the eternal principles of religion, which form the foundation of true civilization, are doing for our unfortunate brothers and sisters in the most tragic hour of our history, which is living proof of Divine Providence in this world."

The London Times (10/1/1942), explicitly praises Pius XII for his condemnation of the Nazis. "A study of the words which Pope Pius XII has addressed since his accession…leaves no room for doubt. He condemns the worship of force and its concrete manifestations in the suppression of national liberties and in the persecution of the Jewish race."

Moshe Sharett, Israel's second Prime Minister, spoke at a personal meeting with Pius XII: "I told [Pius XII] that my first duty was to thank him, and through him the Catholic Church, on behalf of the Jewish public for all they had done in the various countries to rescue Jews…We are deeply grateful to the Catholic Church."

Dr. Raffael Cantoni, future President of the Union of Italian Jewish Communities, stated: "…six million of my co-religionists have been murdered by the Nazis, but there could have been many more victims had it not been for the efficacious intervention of Pius XII."

From the Catholic League’s Web site:
"In Rome, 155 convents and monasteries sheltered some 5,000 Jews throughout the German occupation. No less than 3,000 Jews found refuge at one time at the Pope's summer residence at Castel Gandolfo, and thus, through Pius' personal intervention, escaped deportation to German death camps. Sixty Jews lived for nine months at the Jesuit Gregorian University, and many were sheltered in the cellar of the Pontifical Bible Institute. Pope Pius himself granted sanctuary within the walls of the Vatican in Rome to hundreds of homeless Jews."

Pius XII is currently under consideration for sainthood. I will leave that final decision to Rome, where it should stay. When I hear Pius XII detractors trying to prevent the progress of his Cause because of the complete lies that he turned a blind eye to the Jewish people’s suffering during the war, my blood boils and the truth must be told and defended.

For more information on these quotes, the Catholic League has two great articles by Sister Margherita Marchione and Rabbi David Dalin.

Supreme Court's Short List and Long Odds

Here is an online casino's odds for the next Supreme Court Justice nomination:

Sonia Sotomayor 13/8 (Favorite, less than 2 to 1)
Diane Pamela Wood 9/4
Elena Kagan 4/1
Kim McLane Wardlaw 9/2
Kathleen Sullivan 8/1

Another comment to add on Wood, other than my comments below, is that she is an elitist from Chicago and probably runs in the same circles that Obama did/does.

Interestingly, Wardlaw has been getting a few mentions. She is the best possibility from the list, meaning the most moderate. She ruled in favor of displaying the 10 Commandments on public property, ruled against habeus corpus for detainees, and gave the EPA a broader scope in one ruling. She is hispanic on her mother's side and was the first female hispanic named to the court of appeals. She worked in the Bill Clinton presidential campaign which might hurt her even more than her moderate rulings.

Post Note 5/10: Here is a site that claims Obama and Wood have a personal relationship when they both taught at the University of Chicago law school.

Obama's Supreme Court Appointment: Diane Wood?

On June 5, 2005, The Supreme Court of the United States ruled by a 5 to 4 margin that the city government of New London, CT, could legally take their private citizen’s homes away and deliver the land to real estate developers for the sole purpose of building a shopping mall.

The ruling interpreted, er…. legislated, that the 5th Amendment’s Eminent Domain Clause could mean that our government could take private property away from one private citizen and award it to another. It is worth emphasizing that this was not an eminent domain case of the government acquiring land because a much-needed highway could not be established by any other route through a city. This was a case of the government confiscating land from evicted citizens and delivering it to developers so that the developers could get rich and the state could increase their kitty benefiting from an increase in sales’ taxes.

This ruling was so absurd, that consistently liberal judge Sandra Day O’Connor broke with her left-wing cohorts on the court and actually wrote the dissenting opinion:

"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party…"

Thankfully, three months later, Chief Justice John Roberts would be appointed to lead the bench, followed by Samuel Alito a few months later making ridiculous rulings such as this less probably.

So why am I reviewing this case’s history? To show you how much our Supreme Court has run-a-muck in the last fifty years. This case easily illustrates this belief to almost anyone because it is not dealing with a polarizing, emotional issue that is super-charged. Everyone can relate to the government knocking on their door and serving them with an eviction notice for a shopping mall.

This is why Supreme Court appointments are so essential to all of our rights. It is the most significant and lasting imprint that a Presidency can leave on history.

I am extremely thankful to President Bush for keeping us safe from terrorist attacks for the 7 years that followed 9-11. But I am equally thankful, if not more, for his appointments of Justices Roberts and Alito whom will keep our liberties safe for the next 30 years. As Uncle Billy said in It’s a Wonderful Life, "Not every heel is [overseas…]"

President Obama now has the luxury of leaving his mark on history.

Some specific thoughts I have on this appointment:

I don't think it will come before his Notre Dame commencement speech. (It still hurts me to say that sentence.) Obama is not going to stoke the fires and create photo-op's of protesters for this event by nominating a militant pro-abortion judge just prior to the event.

Secondly, with many of his recent cabinet appointments going up in flames, I think he will be looking for someone with absolutely no baggage. His administration can't afford to have another public embarrassment and the pick will be completely vetted on everything from personal taxes to wild college nights.

I think the name that everyone is floating, Sonia Sotomayor, will not be the pick. She has a very controversial caught-on-tape statement that judges actually "make policy from the bench" that would cause Obama great grief during a confirmation hearing. She prefaces this damning statement with, "I know I shouldn’t say this on tape…"

A final thought is that there is very little chance that the judge will not be a liberal activist. A pro-abortion, gay rights; a make-up-the-Constitution-as-you-go type.

So with my rationale, I am basically expecting that Obama will nominate the most militant liberal judge with the most squeaking clean life.

My guess is that it will be Diane Wood.

Justice Diane Wood is the Armageddon scenario for this appointment. She has been a disaster for the pro-life cause with rulings for partial birth abortion and using RICO laws to prevent peaceful abortion protests. My prediction is that she will get the nod. I hope I am wrong.

Best of VCR: The Temperments of God

In realizing we are in the month honoring our Blessed Mother, I think it is proper to lead off with a past post dedicated to her. Originally posted on June 5, 2008:

I often noted, and very much over the years tried to reconcile, the difference in temperaments between the God in the Old Testament (Yaweh), and the same God in the New Testament (God the Father).

Yaweh was a very stern God who would strike down your enemies down and let you wander 40 years in the desert if you made a mistake. The kind God in the New Testament - - who was the same exact God -- was a loving Father, and through his Son told us to love our enemies. He was a God who allowed what was most dear to Him to be sacraficed for our mistakes.

I once had a college professor try to offer an explanation. He said that in the Old Testament we were in our infancy stage with God and he treated us as such, like toddlers. Don’t touch the outlet, don’t go in the street, you will be severely punished and have to sit on the couch if you do what you are thinking. He said by the time the New Testament came along, we had grown up and our relationship with God advanced lovingly to where our parent became more of a trusted friend and confidant.

This made somewhat sense to me, but once again the words of St. Jean Vianney brought me closer to what was the true answer. He directed me to the exact beginning of the New Testament for the time when God’s temperament changed.

He said God’s anger was "hanging over our heads like a sword ready to strike us down, [but] as soon as the Holy Virgin appeared upon this earth, his anger was appeased." He saw the level of perfection that his creation could achieve, a creature than would never disobey, betray or disappoint Him; there the Blessed Mother stood in front of Him. Once again, His anger was "appeased." His temperament was changed.

Vianney tells of the special relationship that the Trinity has with this perfect human creation:

God views the Blessed Mother as the masterpiece of his creation that He made with his own hands. He takes great pride in her because it is His work done to absolute perfection.

The Son takes pleasure in the heart of Mary, from which He drew his mortal blood (the Blessed Mother provided the mortal makeup to Christ). He used this blood He received from her to "ransom" it for us so that we might be reconciled to the Father.

And The Holy Spirit considers the Blessed Mother His temple, a place of His dwelling, because He conceived with in her.

These beautiful insights from St. Jean Vianney really reinforces why we venerate the Blessed Mother, and why she will never be refuse any request she makes on our behalf in the presence of God.

So the next time you are watching The Ten Commandments with Charlton Heston and see Yaweh striking down Israel’s enemies in the Red Sea, venerate Our Blessed Mother. Because of her we were not next.