An AmP reader who took action and called Rep. Kildee’s office because of our CatholicVoteAction alert yesterday, tells us what Kildee’s office is saying today:

I just called Rep. Kildee’s DC office and spoke with a … young woman who said, “At this time, I understand that Rep. Kildee plans to vote for this health reform bill [as it stands], but he is carefully reviewing the language to make sure there are adequate protections [against abortion].”

As the US Bishops and many others have argued time and time again, the abortion “protections” in the current language are simply inadequate!

This is the radio ad we will have going up on the air in six radio stations servicing Flint and Saginaw, Michigan, starting at 6 am tomorrow morning:

Knowing the combined might of the CatholicVoteAction family, I know we can make sure this video gets tens of thousands of views!

Please do whatever you can to spread the word: for instance, embed the video on your Facebook page and blog – especially if you hail from this area of Michigan! And of course, continue calling Kildee’s office at (810) 239-1437.

And please, donate $15 dollars so we can continue keeping this ad on the air as long as we need to!

For more information on this situation, see my post today on the APP blog which shows how the Democrat leadership intends to push through Obamacare through the house – without even taking a real vote! Also: see this post by APP-contributor James Bell which introduces us to some of the faces behind the Stupak coalition.

 In the previous post, I talked about how a realization in one area can lead to developments in very different areas. I also mentioned that we're going to do a series of posts that embody this concept.

So let's lay the foundation stone for future posts.

It's a particularly heavy stone.

So heavy, in fact, that God can't lift it.

Or that is what is claimed.

But could there really be a stone so heavy that God couldn't lift it?

Once, back in philosophy grad school, I was in a class where the question was raised of whether God could make a stone so heavy he couldn't lift it (this being a classic challenge to the idea of divine omnipotence) and I jokingly responded, "No, because any stone that heavy would collapse and become degenerate matter and thus no longer a stone."

The professor replied, "Welcome to academic philosophy! You have answered the question without engaging the issue!"

The issue, of course, has nothing to do with stones. You could ask, "Could God make a mass of degenerate matter so heavy he can't move it?" or "Can God make an object so massive he can't move it?" or any number of other things to get around tongue-in-cheek answers like mine.

But the challenge remains: If God could make something too heavy for him to lift then it seems that there is something he can't do (i.e., lift it). On the other hand, if he can't make something to heavy for him to lift then it again seems there is something he can't do (i.e., make it). Either way it seems that there is something God can't do and thus something contradictory with the idea of omnipotence.

The standard answer to this challenge is to say that it involves a mistaken idea of what omnipotence is.

Omnipotence doesn't mean the ability to do anything you can say.

It means the ability to do anything that is possible--anything that can be done.

In philosophy, this is usually refined to "the ability to do anything that is logically possible."

"Logical possibility" is a term of art in philosophy. What it refers to is anything that does not involve a logical contradiction. That is, the terms used to describe something do not contradict each other, creating an inherent impossibility.

A classic example of a logical impossibility is a square circle. This is something that can't exist because no two-dimensional shape can have a perimeter that is both square and circular at the same time. 

You can imagine a two-dimensional shape with a perimeter that is sometimes square and sometimes circular. You can imagine a three-dimensional shape that looks circular if you look at it from above but square if you look at it from the side (that would be a cylinder). You can imagine a circle inscribed inside a square or a square inscribed inside a circle. But these are just dodges.

No two-dimensional figure can have a perimeter that is both square and circular at the same time.

Thus such an object violates the law of non-contradiction, which holds that nothing can have the property A and the property Not-A at the same time in the same respect. (In this case, A would be either "circularity" or "squareness"--your choice--and Not-A would be the opposite.)

So the idea of a square circle entails a logical contradiction from the very terms involved, making it a logical impossibility.

God thus cannot create square circles, but that doesn't contradict his omnipotence because, while "square circle" is something you can say, it's not something that is logically possible and thus not something that falls under the scope of omnipotence.

Same thing for four-sided triangles, married bachelors, and other things of this sort.

But it doesn't apply to things that could exist but don't--like classically-conceived unicorns, pegasi, centaurs, and prequels to Star Wars that are actually good.

So what about "stones too heavy for God to lift"?

They fall in the same category as square circles. A being with omnipotence has unlimited (i.e., infinite) lifting power. That means, no matter how much mass you give an object, God can produce an equal amount of lifting power and thus can move it. 

Since God's lifting power is infinite, the only way to have a stone too massive to be moved would be for it to have more than infinite mass.

While there are varying kinds of infinity that mathematicians have described, nothing is "more than infinite." Even infinite things will fall somewhere within the taxonomy of infinities. Nothing is beyond that.

So "a stone too heavy for God to lift," like "square circle" and "four-sided triangle," is something you can say, but not something that can actually exist because it contains an internal logical contradiction. It is an intrinsically impossible thing.

And thus not something that God can make.

Yet it doesn't deny God's omnipotence because it doesn't fall within the range of possible objects.

"And what does this have to do with the idea of prophecy?" you say.

Glad you asked!

NEXT: WHAT DOES GOD KNOW AND WHEN DOES HE KNOW IT?

He's just done the right thing by backing up a school in his Archdiocese that declined to allow two children of lesbian "parents" to re-enroll.

GET THE STORY.

It's interesting how the more things change, the more they stay the same.

One of the arguments being used by his critics is that if children with homosexual "parents" shouldn't be in the school then what other children shouldn't be there based on their parents' misbehavior?

Witness:

Concerned Coloradans demand a follow-up column from Chaput, providing much clearer detail on who among us are welcome to send our children to Catholic school– to send them, that is, and not have them later expelled through no fault of their own.

Funny . . . that argument sounds awfully, awfully, familiar.

(NOTE: Theological Connections continues tomorrow.)

Yesterday I read the surprising news reported by Roll Call that Catholic Congressman Dale Kildee had told them he “will probably vote” for the pro-abortion Senate language being proposed in the House of Representatives soon.

Here at CatholicVoteAction.org we were deeply disturbed that one of the Bart Stupak coalition of pro-life Democrats – and a Catholic – might be tempted to change his mind at this critical time. 

We put a plan into action to purchase radio advertisements in Kildee’s district, to make Catholics and other pro-lifers aware of Kildee’s change of heart, so they could let him know how strongly they oppose sending money to abortion providers with this legislation.

As a courtesy, we called Kildee’s office and told them about our intentions, and about our dismay at his changed position.

Linsey Beck, Kildee’s legislative staffer, told us that the media reports were inaccurate, and that the representative has not decided to vote for the Senate language bill. 

But it’s still important for him to hear from you, and especially from fellow Catholics.

So please, if you are pro-life and support the strong pro-life position he is willing to take, call his district offices and encourage him to continue standing strong with Bart Stupak and his fellow pro-life Democrats:

    –> Flint Office // Phone: (810) 239-1437 // Fax: (810) 239-1439
    –> Saginaw Office // Phone: (989) 755-8904 // Fax: (989) 755-8908
    –> Bay City Office // Phone: (989) 891-0990 // Fax: (989) 891-0994
    –> DC Office // Phone: (202) 225-3611 // Fax: (202) 225-6393

The phone calls you have already made are flooding his office, I am told. Let’s melt the phone lines!

Together, we can encourage our Catholic representatives to continue fighting for the most vulnerable of our country!

CatholicVoteAction.org (CVA) is the legislative arm of CatholicVote.org, with over 500,000 members. Our goal is to build, organize, and mobilize the largest movement of Catholic laity in American politics. We believe in life, family, and the power of human freedom to renew America.

Bishop Salvatore (not Joseph) Cordileone gives a crystal clear presentation of the reasons why the bishops are supporting Stupak and his pro-life Democrat group:

Hopefully what the Bishop said in this interview bears a strong resemblance to what I’ve been writing on this issue for many months now.

 Watch the latest news video at video.foxnews.com

And without getting into the cable news war debate, it’s nice to see a bishop asked some other question besides “what do you think the punishment for women should be if Roe v. Wade is overturned?” by an interviewer. 

As if that’s what they spend their evenings thinking about.

The Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest is offering a Gregorian Chant CD. The album includes tracks recorded by their Seminarians to help fund their ongoing restoration campaign of St. Francis de Sales Oratory in South St. Louis.

I blogged about this effort back in July 2009.

The CD is $15 on Amazon and you can download a free track here!

What a great way to support their work!

I have some simple questions to ask Doug Kmiec, Catholics United, Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, Catholic Democrats, the editors of The National Catholic Reporter (most particularly Michael Sean Winters, a prominent liberal writer for them), and any high-visibility Catholic professor, pundit or blogger who claimed, time and time again last year, that Barack Obama would actively work to reduce the number of abortions.

They said he was the “pro-life” candidate. They said where republicans only paid lip service, Obama would deliver results. They said we, who did not believe his token promises, were guilty of undermining our best chance to “find common ground” on this issue since Roe v. Wade.

414 day in office and counting, and Obama hasn’t done squat to reduce the number of abortions in this country.

In fact, under his watch, the faith-based council has just punted – again – on this issue:

President Obama’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships presented policy recommendations to him today – notably missing: Any mention of the life issue.

Pro-life groups had hoped to hear the council’s plan to reduce abortions. CBN White House Correspondent David Brody said that did not happen.

“This council, in essence, basically punted the abortion question down the road,” he said.

Brody said the council has attempted to take a pass on the hot-button issue. 

Frank Page, a member of this council, tells it like it is:

The Southern Baptist leader was also unhappy that the council did not spend more time addressing how to reduce abortion. Page recalled that when the office launched, President Obama said abortion reduction was among the priority issues the council would tackle. But Page said the contentious issue was “quickly taken off the table.”

Instead, Obama has been busying himself with pushing a health care plan that includes money for abortions, and will siphon billions of dollars into organizations like Planned Parenthood which run the abortion mills in this country.

I’ve written before that one of the most important virtues to have in politics is memory. We must remember what others have said, what arguments they have made, and then evaluate their long-term consequences. Through this process, we can come to an accurate evaluation about the trustworthiness of individuals and the arguments they make.

So my simple questions to the individuals and organizations mentioned above is: why were you wrong? Why has Obama done exactly what I (and others) predicted (nothing) and why has he not even tried to do what you promised he would do if we voted him into office?

Were you the ones duped, or was it the ones who believed and followed your guidance when they entered the polling booth?

Please, refresh my memory.

update - just to highlight the relevance and urgency of my questions, we should keep in mind that these same groups I have named above are now actively pushing Catholics to support the current pro-abortion health-care legislation, arguing that it is the pro-life thing to do.

Well, if I had an investing agent who kept steering me to buy stocks whose value plummets as soon as I purchase them, I’d want some more proof before I let myself get sold on his next hot idea. 

I hope other Catholics are sick of being sold this bogus bill of goods.

This is a tangled one:

The former chief operating officer of Catholic Charities has called on the organization to reverse its recent decision to change health benefits for employees’ spouses, a move designed to avoid legitimizing same-sex marriage. 

Tim Sawina, who was until last year one of the group’s highest-ranking executives, called the elimination of spousal health benefits “devastating” and “wrong” in a letter Wednesday to the governing boards of the social service organization. 

The move to change benefits is the most recent fallout from a struggle between the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington and District officials, who passed legislation last year to legalize same-sex marriage. (WaPo)

The Washington Post  has had it out for the Catholic Church in DC since this most-recent drama surrounding the legalization of homosexual “marriages” in the District began. The “WaPo” didn’t see fit to mention that Sawina is a “former priest” until the fifth paragraph. Still more strangely, both Sawina and Catholic Charities chose to keep the circumstances of Sawina’s July departure from the organization “confidential.”

Fr. Robert Araujo, SJ at the Mirror Justice blog does a masterful job of demolishing Sawina’s arguments. But this whole situation prompts some related questions:

How did Sawina work for Catholic Charities for 12 years? Who is hiring personnel over there? How do we employ, for twelve years, people who are willing to publicly excoriate the Church and challenge her even in the most difficult of circumstances? The Catholic Church in DC could use some friends right now, and Sawina’s efforts to draw blood from within the Church’s camp is an unwelcome blow. The WaPo is only too happy, after all, for any opportunity to make the Church appear divided.

Maybe this came out of nowhere, but I’d suspect that someone doesn’t work for Catholic Charities for twelve years without making it clear to his or her co-workers that they don’t see eye-to-eye with the Church. Well, I know plenty of bright, talented young kids who would love an executive-level job at Catholic Charities. And they’ll defend the Church’s teachings even after their term of employment ends.

update – my father Ed Peters disagrees with the prudence of Abp. Wuerl’s decision, but for reasons far more consistent with principles of Catholic Social Teaching.

I’ve been blogging long enough and have witnessed enough scandals that it’s pretty hard to take my breath away anymore.

Well, “Sex Positive Week” at (Jesuit-founded, Catholic) Georgetown University did. 

Folks, looking at what activities this week included, it’s pretty clear we’re not even on planet earth anymore. I can’t write about what they talked about, because I don’t want Google to blacklist my blog as pornographic.

Last year (yes, they’ve done it before) coincided with the first week of Lent. One of the organizers speaks:

Taormino, an [deviant-]sex adviser and the director of award-winning lesbian erotica, [said]. “I think we need to stop pitting religion and sex against each other, and I think Catholics do this the best of anyone,” Taormino said. “We’ve seen how this has failed people on several levels.” 

More windows into the twisted, deeply anti-human world-view of the organizers:

“… the leading figures of Sex Positive Week didn’t shy away from pushing the boundaries of what they see as a largely sex-negative campus community. The events not sponsored by the university—Guerilla Sex Theatre in Red Square, guerilla queer bar at the Tombs, [I had to delete this activity], [I had to delete this activity too]—are meant to challenge what they see as static and limited conceptions of sex at Georgetown.”

Other organizers run the gambit of serious sexual depravity.

Looking through the notes of the meeting where the Student Activities Group approved (by large majorities) these organizers’ requests for university funds, after some objection was raised, it was dismissed with the following argument: “…keep in mind that the Access to Benefits policy exists specifically for this purpose: that not everything is in keeping with the Catholic identity, and they are empowered to voice their ideas.”

As you can see, the institutional guidelines that govern the university provide all the cover these other individuals need to have their agendas funded by the administration.

Catholic News Agency notes that similar events are taking place at (Jesuit) Loyala University of Chicago and (Jesuit) Seattle University.

I think it’s almost pointless to call these institutions “Catholic”. It’s a grossly misleading adjective when applied here. They are, I would say, schools originally founded by Catholic religious orders, in which you can find (often) a disproportionate number of Catholics, and which may still have some trappings (mascots, Mass on campus or a stray chapel) that comport with Catholic identity. 

But when an institution cannot summon the conviction or courage to stop these sorts of events, the game is up. Free speech is one thing, but endorsing “seminars” which promote things that gravely wound the physical, intellectual, emotional, psychological and spiritual state of students (in other words, things which hurt the human person), you’ve sunk beneath what even the School of Athens aspired to impart.

Ph/t: Crunchy Con.

Good training for the next young crop of Rutgers lawyers:

Clinic Escort Training … Representatives from the Philadelphia Womens Center will conduct a training in clinic escorting; providing women in need of abortion an escort through anti-abortion protests and observing protesters to ensure they follow the law. Participants in the training will have an opportunity to join the NLG’s Clinic Defense Project. (Rutgers School of Law, Camden)

Nothing like helping women get past those violent, unruly, obnoxious, in-your-face pro-life protestors:

Maybe the students at the Rutgers Catholic Center could stage a pro-life prayer vigil at the Rutgers abortion clinic escort training. Just a thought.

Ph/t: The Eponymous Flower

Photo source: Te Deum Laudamus (that’s Archbishop Vigneron praying the rosary and leading the vigil, by the way).

It should come as no surprise that traditional Anglican groups take a more “traditional” approach to one of the most hotly-contested Catholic debates:

Archbishop John Hepworth, Primate of the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC), told LifeSiteNews (LSN) on Friday that the TAC is very clear on refusing Communion to pro-abortion politicians or anyone advocating an anti-life view.

“Anybody publicly espousing an anti-life stand against the clear teaching of the Church and the commandments would be immediately removed from any office, and certainly would be told they can’t receive Communion,” he explained. (LSN)

The primate’s comments are especially interesting considering the strong possibility that these Anglican communities may be united to the Catholic Church soon:

Hepworth made these comments in an interview with LSN while he visited Halifax, Nova Scotia as part of a worldwide tour encouraging TAC communities to accept the Vatican’s recent offer for reunion with the Catholic Church.

As I reported last week, the Anglican Traditional Communion in America (which comprises over 100 parishes) has already asked for entry into the Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church in America, in other words, can expect an influx of traditional Anglicans into the fold. 

Over in Britain, where this process is far more advanced, there have been not-so-veiled complaints made by the more liberal Catholic bishops of that country that the influx of these new traditionally-minded people will tilt the balance of power in the Church to the orthodox side.

In America the dynamics are far different, and while I of course recognize that Anglican ministers and their “archbishops” do not enjoy the grace of full priestly or episcopal orders, they also are drawing on the tradition of the Christian church when it comes to prudential matters of what to do about the public scandal caused by pro-abortion Catholic politicians continuing to receive communion.

I write all this not to predict what will happen, but merely to highlight the possibilities of what could happen as these traditional Anglicans enter the Church and begin contributing their gifts to the conversation in the Church on this critical question.

Regular readers know that one of my commitments for Lent is to blog something every day (except Sundays). Well, last week I wasn't able to do that because . . . I forgot.

I had company over, and by the time the evening ended it was getting late, and I realized the next morning that blogging had slipped my mind.

Since Lenten resolutions of this sort are free-will commitments and don't bind under pain of sin, I could just say, "Oh, well," and move on.

But I thought I'd make it up anyway by doing a double-post today.

Herewith are some videos that you might find amusing. I like the lighthearted way that Dave Carroll treats the issue. The lightheartedness is even more on display in Songs 2 and 3. 

The whole affair also gave his career a nice boost--a way of taking lemons and making lemonade.

Basically, here's what happened: United Airlines baggage handlers recklessly damaged his $3,500 Taylor guitar and then the company refused to pay for repairs. After exhausting his options with United, he told them he would write three songs and put them on YouTube. Reportedly, he was told, "Good luck with that one, pal."

The first has eight million views, one million of which happened in the first week of release. He was quickly contacted by United with an offer of compensation in hopes of his pulling the video. Reportedly, he replied, "Good luck with that one, pal."

He did say that he wasn't interested in compensation any longer and suggested that they donate the money to the charity of their choosing. They did. It went to the Thelonious Monk Jazz School.

So what's the Catholic Answers connection to this?

It turns out that Catholic Answers is housed in the same business complex in El Cajon, California as Taylor Guitars. Some of the guys from work play basketball at lunch with the guys from Taylor, so we're neighbors, and neighborly.

That made the videos a topic of discussion at work when Song 3 was released recently.

I'm not sure what stereotypical Mariachi singers, stereotypical Germans, and stereotypical hillbillies have to do with anything, but . . . enjoy!

SONG 2 

SONG 3 

A WORD FROM TAYLOR GUITARS (video)

AN INTERVIEW WITH DAVE CARROLL (text)

Recently at my Friday night square dance club, a couple of the guys were talking about the huge amounts of snow that much of the country has been receiving, and I commented that I'd seen folks describing it online as "Snowmageddon" and "the Snowpocalypse."

That put me in mind of another year with an unusually high proportion of cold weather, and at the beginning of the next tip (i.e., pair of dances), I mentioned this year to the dancers.

It was 1816--the year after Mt. Tambora in Indonesia blew in a big way and caused the volcanic equivalent of a nuclear winter.

As a result, it rained, sleeted, and snowed much more than normal, and 1816 came to be referred to by a number of names--19th century equivalents of "Snowmageddon" and "Snowpocalypse."

These names included "The Year without a Summer," "Poverty Year," and my favorite . . .

EIGHTEEN HUNDRED AND FROZE TO DEATH.

This year had a number of very interesting consequences. Among them:

• Westward migration in the early United States.
• Food riots in England and France.
• A typhus epidemic in Ireland.
• Brown and red snow falling in Europe.
• Famine in China.
• Later development of the bicycle.
• Joseph Smith's family moves, leading to the writing of the Book of Mormon and the creation of Mormonism.
• Lord Byron writes his poem Darkness.
• The creation of chemical fertilizers.

And others.

But what I mentioned to my Friday square dancers was the fact that the constant rain during 1816 led a group of upper-class English vacationers to take refuge indoors while they were at Lake Geneva in Switzerland.

While cooped up by the "beastly" weather (no doubt they described it that way), they entertained themselves by making up stories, some of which became famous.

Among the vacationers was John William Polidori, who wrote The Vampyre--the first vampire story in English.

But that is by no means the most famous monster story to come out of this ill-weathered setting.

That would be Mary Shelly's

FRANKENSTEIN: OR THE MODERN PROMETHEUS.

Yes! That's right!

We owe Frankenstein to the creative juices that got flowing because of the Mt. Tambora explosion that caused Eighteen Hundred and Froze to Death.

Afterward, I was thinking about how our own recent snow problem led me down the convoluted path to the door of Frankenstein.

That made me think of a program (or "programme," as the British say) that was on the air back in the late 1970s.

Do you remember the show Connections, hosted by British historian of science James Burke?

I do. I loved that show as a boy. And I recently got it on DVD.

It was a fascinating, and fast-moving, documentary series in which Burke (pictured) argued that scientific change is not a linear process, as it is commonly depicted.

The big developments in science don't tend to be a slow accumulation of small changes across a predictable spectrum of improvements and refinements. Instead, they are the product of unpredictable cross-pollinations between widely different fields.

A discovery in one area will lead to major changes in a totally different field.

For example, did you know that the fact the Normans wore stirrups on their horses at the Battle of Hastings helped lead to the development of deep space telecommunications?

That's episode 3: "Distant Voices."

The show is a lot like a real-world, science fact version of The Simpsons, where the place you start at the the episode is the beginning of a wild ride that has very little to do with where you end up.

So why am I extending this chain of reasoning even further, from my Friday square dance club, to this year's current snowstorm, to 1816, to Frankenstein, to James Burke and his TV show, to The Simpsons and how it's plotted?

Because with this post I'm starting to blog a series that will take us very far afield from where we are presently starting.

Get ready for logic, science, science fiction, and truly inter-cosmic journeys--all brought home to theology in a Lenten journey of "theological Connections."

NEXT: THE FOUNDATION STONE.

If you’re wondering why the rate of new posts to AmP has been a little less frequent recently, you can blame one thing: the health care debate is sucking all the air out of the room.

Things are a complete mess right now, and amidst this swirling confusion only one thing appears stable: Rep. Bart Stupak and his band of 12 pro-life democrats refuse to sign the pro-abortion Senate health care bill into law.

As a reminder, the US Bishops have stated publicly that “The Senate health reform bill should not move forward in its current form” and nothing about the bill has changed since they wrote that.

Not only does the Senate bill not include strict Hyde-ammendment language, which prevents public funds from going to pay for abortions (which has been shown by independent studies to always increase the rate of abortions wherever federal funds are provided) but the Senate bill also gives $11 billion dollars to “community health centers” which could begin providing abortions. 

For that reason, Brian Burch, the President of CatholicVoteAction.org is calling on Catholics and other pro-life Americans to place at least two phone calls to any of the representatives, starting with the ones on this short list.

Remember: it is always best to call your own representative – they have been elected to represent your interests – and the vast majority of Americans don’t want tax dollars going to pay for abortions eventually.

Over at the American Principles Project blog, my co-worker James Bell has been working tirelessly to keep us up to date on the latest health care developments (his latest post today is available here). James has done the math and thinks right now the health care debate is a tie game.

That’s why it’s so urgent for you to take action and call your representatives. Support the Stupak 12 – help ensure that the unborn don’t get sacrificed in the name of health care reform!

You can also take action through the American Principles In Action contact page. I’ve also created a Facebook group in support of the Stupak coalition.

Thank you for your continued efforts on behalf of the most vulnerable. God bless you.

While little Francesco (L) had no problem holding the microphone, Guiseppe (R) found himself still struggling to conquer his crippling shyness.

Photo: AP Photo

One of the movies notably absent from this year’s Academy Awards was a very important film released this year: The Stoning of Soraya M. I’m hardly surprised the academy showed such poor artistic taste.

I was sent an early copy of this film, it is available for pre-order now on Amazon, and will ship on March 9th.

What I most respect about this film is that it brings awareness to the plight of women who live under Sharia law in Islamic countries such as Iran (where this movie is set).

The plot, based closely on a true story, tells the story of a woman falsely condemned for adultery in a small village. Shohreh Aghdashloo does a stunning job in her difficult role (you may recognize her from several of her other roles, including Elizabeth in The Nativity Story). Jim Caviezel plays a small but important part as well.

The subject matter is appropriate for older teenagers and up, but be warned that the end of the movie contains some very violent imagery. I would recommend it to anyone looking for a powerful, heart-wrenching movie about terrible things which are still justified by some in the name of religion.

From multiple sources:

Pewsitter summarizes the Italian press reports:

The Italian media [on March 5 reported] that Pope Benedict has decided to establish a commission of inquiry, under the jurisdiction of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, to discuss the alleged apparitions that have been taking place in Medjugorje for three decades. This commission will reportedly be headed by Cardinal Camillo Ruini.

God the Son wouldn’t be showing up, of course, until the consecration.

Photo: AP Photo

APP is where the action is today:

1. Quote of the Day: America’s Welfare State
2. Vulnerable Senate Seat Report: Harry Reid
3. Video: Sen. Reid says “Only 36,000 people lost their jobs today, which is really good”
4. Michael Fragoso writes on the double-standard when it comes to gun rights vs. abortion “rights”
5. Krauthammer on free health care … and free ice cream

If you have a Facebook account, did you know you can friend AmP? {link fixed!}

3,500+ papists already have!

Here are the top 5 countries AmP’s Facebook fans hail from:

1. United States
2. Canada
3. Philippines
4. United Kingdom
5. Italy

Top 5 American cities:

1. Washington
2. Houston
3. Chicago
4. New York
5. Atlanta/Dallas (tied)

Joining the fanpage is a wonderful way to keep up on AmP news through your Facebook friend feed, and interact more with the AmP community. I hope to see you over there soon!

And needless to say, if you have a Twitter account, you can also keep up AmP-worthy news and commentary as it happens!