Lent: Catechumens, Candidates, and joy in the desert

Fast times a'comin'!

I love Lent. This God-given season does my soul good, as long as I let it.

There are so many blessings to enjoy in this season, but let me share one of my favorites: praying for — and with! — the catechumens and candidates as they come down the home stretch, so to speak, to the goal of complete Communion.

The trouble with being a "cradle-Catholic"...

...for me, anyway, has often been taking for granted the glories offered by the True Church. In my wacky mindset, Lent generally shook me up.

Lent was a "sad" time. Gee. No "Gloria." No "Alleluia" verses. And, depending on where my life was, at the time, "giving up" of things: candy, TV, trash novels, whatever.

One day I met a catechumen — and everything changed.

Lent became a time of joyful preparation!

And not just for my friends' baptism, or anticipating my Protestant friends' coming into full Communion with the Church. It became a time for my own renewal...a time to contemplate just what it means to be Baptized in Christ...to die with Christ in order to, please God, share in the glories of His Resurrection.

The Rite of Election...

...generally coinciding with the First Sunday of Lent, is an amazing celebration. In the presence, usually, of the bishop, those who will become Roman Catholics affirm their intention of joining the Church, inscribing their names in the "Book of the Elect" as a pledge of their fidelity. It's an almost overpowering ceremony and I never, if possible, miss it.

And so I ask you, as we enter into Lent...

...to enter into the desert with those who will, come Easter, become what God our Father wants all of His children to be: joyful brothers and sisters of Jesus Christ, ready to follow Him wherever He leads us. To be reborn in Christ, filled with the grace to endure anything and everything the world throws at us, for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven.

To you who are intensely preparing for full Communion:

Know that I'm cheering you on, praying as hard as I can, and am completely confident that you will make it to victory. How can you miss with Christ at your side?

And please accept my humble and loving gratitude...you are as needed as you are welcomed.

Life before BIRTH (was "Life before conception")

Ahem.

Everything I wrote yesterday in the post directly beneath this one is completely accurate...

...except the stuff I got wrong.

Alarmed at impending heresy charges, I skedaddled back to the chapel from whence the Italian priest's words were heard, anxious to save my sorry skin from the rack or worse.

(Okay, okay, I was on my way out to Mass anyway.)

After Mass, I got to talk to the priest. Guess what?

I got the quote wrong. (Mama Mia!)

From what I can remember (and no, I wasn't going to make a further fool out of myself by writing down what the priest said this time but I think I've got it right...it was only about a half an hour ago), Padre was referring to the baby's dreaming about the angel friends he remembered from the womb...not when he was in Heaven.

So that "rather wonderful something" I heard yesterday? I didn't hear it right, after all.

Which is odd, since I'm usually such a good eavesdropper!

Still, it's pretty cool, I think...the notion that unborn babies can sense the angels watching over them, being their friends.

Thanks to Catholic Mom, Barb, and JenB for their kindness in the comment boxes below.

In this case, the good Padre wasn't wrong...the lady in the pew was.

It happens. (I hate when it does, but it does happen.)

Life before conception

Right on the heels of posting a link to Melanie Bettinelli's Pregnancy Reflection, I heard something rather wonderful after Mass this morning at a wonderful chapel I love to frequent.

An young-although-elderly Italian priest was speaking to a young couple. A baby was sleeping in his mother's arms.

(I, cheapskate that I am, was waiting to get my parking validated.)

The priest said something like:

"I wonder...is he dreaming of his angel friends?"

The parents — and I — looked at him. The priest continued his theory:

"You see, it hasn't been long since he, or his soul, was in Heaven. Of course, I don't know this from books, but it is possible, no? I think your souls and my souls were in Heaven before God gave us our bodies and placed us in our mothers' wombs. Children remember...but, ah, as we grow older, we forget. I think maybe he is dreaming of his angel friends."

Makes sense to me.

And under the heading "Catholic Identify Theft"...

Another kind of Catholic: Breakaway groups reject Vatican teachings on issues such as priestly celibacy and divorce

I guess my question is this: are Roman Catholics facilitating "identity theft?"

Paul Veliyathil, a former Roman Catholic priest who leads weekly prayer and discussion for lapsed Roman Catholics in his Coral Springs home, spent 13 years as a priest in India, Canada and the United States before breaking with Roman Catholicism over a host of issues, ranging from the prohibition on birth control to the infallibility of the pope.

''I couldn't honestly teach some of the teachings of the church,'' said Veliyathil, who started holding meetings at a Lutheran church five years ago. ``Every time you put on the collar, you are a representative of the church, and it's a very difficult cognitive dissonance.''

I guess what confuses and saddens me the most is also what tears me apart — and, presumably, people who subscribe to the above —and that is, people really want to be Catholic.

The tragedy, in my opinion, is that they want to be "Catholic" on their own terms...not on those of Christ.

Bishop Villaire, who was raised Roman Catholic in Bay City, Mich., said he felt called to the priesthood at a young age. But shortly after being ordained in 1965, he started to feel uncomfortable with church teachings condemning divorce and birth control, he said.

His father, a grocer, and his mother, a beautician, had raised him to believe ''the customer is always right,'' he said. Denying communion to divorced Catholics made him uncomfortable, he said.

See, the thing is, we're not "customers." We're sheep. And sheep — as any shepherd will tell you — need leadership, guidance, direction.

(Otherwise, God wouldn't have invented sheep dogs!)

Here's where I think Roman Catholicism might want to shoulder some responsibility...and become a part of the solution.

At a recent Mass, [sic] Villaire led the congregation in a revised version of the Mass, administering [sic] communion and offering healing through a laying on of hands. Aside from subtle differences -- no one knelt during the service, and no references were made to the pope -- Villaire conducted a traditional Catholic liturgy.

I've been to Masses like this, or darn close to it.

And again:

The Rev. Ricardo Rivera, a former Roman Catholic seminarian who was ordained as a priest in the National Catholic Church last November, said he did not realize he was joining an independent Catholic movement when he first attended Mass at an independent Catholic church in Fort Lauderdale.

''The liturgy is the same, everything is the same,'' said Rivera, who joined the National Catholic church after moving to South Florida from Puerto Rico two years ago.

Rivera now serves as a priest at Santa Barbara Catholic Church, a Spanish-speaking independent Catholic parish in Little Havana with about 400 parishioners, many from Cuba and Central America. The simple, white church is adorned with large statues of the Virgin Mary and other saints. A wall of votive candles flickers in the back corner.

''It's confusing for some people,'' Rivera said. ``Most of the people that come to the church visiting, they are under the impression that we're Roman Catholics.''

Indeed.

There was a time when one could walk into a Roman Catholic Church and identify it unmistakably by the Mass offered. That is evidently not true today.

I wish you'd read the whole article and tell me what you think. And, please, pray for the Church.

Thanks.

Pregnancy Meditation

Little babes in the womb, bless the Lord.
Praise and exult him above all forever.

Melanie Bettinelli shares a sublime reflection with us as she awaits the birth of her child...it's amazing and prayer-inspiring.

Bishop Richard G. Lennon: You bet he works here!

The trouble with Brian...and the Globe.

First, a word about Lennon: trouble. It seems like whenever anything goes awry in the archdiocese, Lennon's hand can usually be felt, whether in the removal of a popular parish priest in Newton for reasons that are dubious at best or the lockout of kids at a parochial school in Brighton for no apparent reason at all.

— Brian McGrory, Boston Globe

First two words about Bishop Richard G. Lennon: holiness and testosterone. (Okay, he can't sing...but he once organized a choir!)

— Kelly Clark, nobody lady in the pew

You can read the tripe that the Boston Globe published on Friday, February 24...and let your heart strings get tugged. You can read, with a bit more clarity, Dom's take on the latest attempt to demonize Bishop Lennon.

You can also read what I've got to say. I'll be brief.

Bishop Richard G. Lennon is a servant of God.

On Friday, December 13, 2002, Bernard Cardinal Law left the Archdiocese. Some downed champagne. Others cried. Two men came to grips.

John Paul II and the newly ordained bishop, Richard G. Lennon.

On Sunday, December 15, 2002, Archbishop Richard G. Lennon took over a bleeding diocese...and the tourniquet he strongly, lovingly, and manfully applied worked.

The Apostolic Administrator (what a title!) did his job ably and well.

And he's still a shepherd, waiting in the wings, ready to fight for the right of every bleeping sheep here to claim and cultivate holiness.

I said I'd be brief, and I will be. There's no need for me to enumerate the Bishop's unselfish gifts to this Archdiocese (although there's nothing to stop you from doing so.)

Thank God for giving us Bishop Richard G. Lennon.

We needed him then.

We need him now.

You know why? Because, dammit, he works here!

Test (you don't have to read this)

I tried to upload an edited version of an earlier post, only to get the message that the "blog was not found." Wonder if this new post will make it.

Duped! By kids! In sneakers! (Sheesh!)

Okay, I'll admit it. I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer and, yes, I probably have been remiss and then some in Following Fads. But still!

Here's the thing. I tromp around alot in the city.

So sneakers are important to me. Walking is important to me. When I walk — and I tend to walk so fast that even the most casual stroll with a companion turns into an argument...

He: Would you slow the bleep down???
Me: (oblivious) So anyway, as I was saying...hey, where'd ya go? ...and so I tend to walk alone.

But I like watching other walkers.

Especially kids. And for the past year now, I've been mesmerized by kids, tiny kids, middle- sized kids, even big kids, doing something remarkable as they walk.

They...glide!

Yes! I've seen them, I've complimented them, I've tried to emulate them. Yes, I've tried to push my toe (right toe, left toe, it doesn't matter) in the way they do, attempting in vain to achieve that absolutely magnificent glide these young walkers — and at such a young age! — have mastered.

To no avail.

No matter how hard I tried (and believe me, I've even tried the maneuver in my own room) I've failed abysmally. And even though I attempted to brush off my failure with a casual "who gives a bleep"...still, it hurt.

I swallowed my pride, time and time again.

Everytime I saw some kid doing his or her masterful glide on sneakers, I'd watch first...furtively, naturally. (After all, I'm An Adult and Therefore Above Such Antics.) Ultimately, though, I'd succumb.

"How do you do that???"

My reward for asking varied.

"It's not hard."
"You just need to practice."
"My mom taught me."

and...

"I think the shoes have something to do with it...they gotta be the right shoes."

The right shoes? Me, a connoisseur of walking sneakers? Like I'm not the queen of discernment among the Nike, Reebok, and Adidas lines? Hogwash.

I started to practice on my very large tiled floored kitchen.

And got pretty good at it, if I do say so myself. But...alas...whenever I took my hard-won skills to the pavement? Well, but for the grace of God I didn't end up in the emergency room with a broken leg. I gave it up. Grudgingly.

Until today.

Today, while walking — briskly and gracefully, thank-you-very-much — three little girls zoomed past me...gliding! I tried, honest I did, to ignore them, but then they started to swirl — actually swirl — around me! It was too much. Noticing they were accompanied by what seemed to be their parents, I swallowed what was left of my pride and appealed to them.

"Excuse me, please...but how do they do that?"

Fully expecting to be either rebuffed or mocked, or perhaps (worse) politely ignored, I got, instead, a surprise. The mom and dad smiled. And beckoned one of the little girls over to say hello to me.

She: "Hi."
Me: "Hiya."
She: "How are you?" (Polite little minx!)
Me: "Fine, although can I ask you something?"
She: (please keep in mind this girl was about 6) "Sure!"
Me: "How do you glide like that?"
She: "Really good."
Me: (checking exasperation admirably) "Yes, I know...but how? I mean, what's the trick?"
She: (giggling) "Oh! My shoes!"

I'd heard that one before but I never quite got it.

This time, I got it.

The little girl patiently took off one shoe and handed it to me. The shoe had a wheel on the heel. Sheesh. Okay. For my birthday, I'm asking for Roller Sneakers.

(And for the grace to 'fess up when anybody — if there's anybody in the world left who doesn't know about these sneakers — asks me how I glide!)

Chair of Saint Peter (and another giggle from the Curt Jester)

A great feast today...and how apt to announce the new Cardinal delegates, but even more important, to keep the Holy Father and his intentions in our daily prayers.

From Vatican I:

"(Canon) Therefore, if anyone says that it is not according to the
institution of Christ our Lord himself, that is, by divine law, that St
Peter has perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole Church;
or if anyone says that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of St
Peter in the same primacy: let him be condemned.

And:

"We think it extremely necessary to assert solemnly the prerogative
which the only-begotten Son of God deigned to join to the highest
pastoral office. "And so, faithfully keeping to the tradition received
from the beginning of the Christian faith, for the glory of God our
Savior, for the exaltation of the Catholic religion, and for the
salvation of Christian peoples, We, with the approval of the sacred
council, teach and define that it is a divinely revealed dogma: that
the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks "ex cathedra", that is, when, acting
in the office of shepherd and teacher of all Christians, he defines, by
virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, doctrine concerning faith or
morals to be held by the universal Church, possesses through the divine
assistance promised to him in the person of St. Peter, the
infallibility with which the divine Redeemer willed His Church to be
endowed in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals; and that such
definitions of the Roman Pontiff are therefore irreformable because of
their nature, but not because of the agreement of the Church.

"(Canon) But if anyone presumes to contradict this our definition (God
forbid him to do so): let him be condemned"

Allow me to echo the "God forbid" part!

And now (to quote Rocky, the Flying Squirrel), here's something you' ll really like!

Archbishop O'Malley, Cardinal-Designate

Quodcumque dixerit facite.

When +Sean Patrick O'Malley, O.F.M./Cap., became Archbishop of Boston, he chose these beautiful words of Our Lady as his motto.

Please pray that these words — the last words of Mary in the Gospel — remain the guiding force, not only of the Pastor of this Archdiocese, but of his flock.

Thank you for your prayers...I pray for you all the time!

Information about the Cardinal-designate can be found here.

Is this a "tricky pro-life issue?"

From Lifesite:

Michelle McCusker was hired to teach pre-kindergartners at the St. Rose of Lima School in Queens. She loved her job and was hired on a teaching contract set to last for one year.

However, a month after school began, McCusker told school officials she was pregnant but would keep the baby rather than have an abortion. She was fired.

This reads as if Miss McCusker was fired because she wouldn't have an abortion. But is this the case?

McCusker has filed an employment discrimination lawsuit against the school, which is run by the Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn. But the school defends its decision.

"The school requires its teachers to convey the faith, to convey the gospel values and Christian traditions of the Catholic faith," Frank DeRosa, a spokesman for the Diocese of Brooklyn, told ABC News.

Feminists for Life steps in:

Serrin Foster, president of Feminists for Life, says the firing sends the message to women and employees that they should have abortions if they become pregnant.

"When an employer fires a woman for carrying a child to term, they send an unintended message: An abortion will cover up the sex," she says.

"How would the employer feel if they later learned that their actions contributed to pressuring Ms. McCusker into having an abortion," she asked.

"The compassionate response to a woman who is carrying a child should be to ask if she needs help," Foster explained. She added that firing a pregnant woman is to "cause a crisis for her by taking her career, her income, and the obstetric/prenatal care that is critical to the health and well being of both mother and unborn child."

What's the answer? Abortion is — and this should go without saying — is not an option.

My prayers are certainly with Miss McCusker, her child, and the Diocese of Brooklyn, and I know you're joining in these prayers.

Here's the question: is the Diocese of Brooklyn wrong in its stance?

I'm asking you because I really don't know.

Here's the whole article.

Great new Catholic blog resource!

In a hurry but want to check on any particular issue from a Catholic blogger's perspective? Check out "CatholicBlogs.com."

Thanks to Dom for the tip.

Parishioners say "no thanks" to VOTF

Earlier this month, VOTF sent out a frantic call to action; i.e., to disrupt a Sunday Mass at Saint Joseph's Parish in Mendham, NJ, on the grounds that the parish's new pastor was "not in keeping with a parish formed in Vatican II spirituality."

At first the protest was scheduled for February 12; hours later it was rescheduled for February 26.

Now, it's un-scheduled...at the parishioners' request.

From an e-mail forwarded to me today:

The call to join St. Joseph parishioners in Mendham on February 26th for the celebration of the liturgy, and a potential demonstration, in conjunction with the bishop’s visit, has been called off. The decision to do so was made last week by St. Joseph parishioners.

VOTF issued an Action Alert on February 8th in support of St. Joseph parishioners. The plan was to join them in the celebration of the 10:30 AM liturgy, and if the issue of parish finances arose, to leave the pews and proceed outside to demonstrate with them in support of the concerns they have attempted to address with their pastor, and subsequently with the bishop.

Some sleight o' hand going on here.

The initial letter made it clear that this protest was initiated by ex-parishioners, not "parishioners." This, of course, might be a bit of face-saving on VOTF's part, but that doesn't make it true. In fact, it makes it false.

Still, they try.

VOTF initiated the Action Alert at the invitation of St. Joseph parishioners, as a support to their objectives, and as an activity consistent with VOTF’s goals. Due to their current assessment of their situation, we have recalled it. VOTF does not wish to force any action on anyone or to interfere with any parish and its self-definition.

No, "the invitation" came from ex-parishioners. And the irony of the claim that the organization "does not wish to...interfere with any parish" is priceless. It's my guess that the rebuff has set VOTF noses painfully out of joint.

One final bit o' bluster:

Canon 212 recognizes the duty of the faithful “to manifest to their sacred pastors their opinions on matters which pertain to the good of the Church.” To the bishops, Lumen Gentium 27 warns: “Let him not refuse to listen to his subjects.” (Come to think of it “subjects” does sound a bit dated. Perhaps it is time for the laity to call another council.)

Perhaps it's time for VOTF to face the music and dance...right off the floor and out of the picture.

And don't tell me Jesus was a "nice guy," sheesh

If you're like me...then quick, for Heaven's sake, light a candle and pray!!!!!

Ahem. Sorry. Reflex reaction.

Anyway, if you've had the same experiences that I've had, then you've heard non-Christians — atheists, agnostics, wiccans (whatever they are), nation of Islam folk (I never know whether "Muslim" or "Moslem" is P.C. so I use that phrase), and Jews, tell you, in one form or another:

"Jesus of Nazareth was an important figure in history. He did much good. He is to be admired as a proponent of peace and justice. He was a nice guy."

They generally fall short of suggesting a stamp be issued in Jesus' name, but you can tell they're itching to do so.

Such remarks are balderdash. Tomorrow's Gospel (Mark 2:1-12) proves their folly.

"Child, your sins are forgiven."

That's what he said, folks. "Your sins are forgiven."

Now you know and I know that only God can forgive sins. (So did the scribes in the Gospel reading. So — if you're an honest and learned atheist — know this, if only in theory.)

So. Given this, Jesus was:

1.) Stark raving mad, or...
2.) A blasphemer and/or a first-class con artist, or...
3.) God

Forget the miracles that preceded or followed His self-proclaimed ability to forgive sins. Just concentrate on what He said. "Your sins are forgiven."

So please. Either Jesus was a nut, a jerk, a creep, a liar...or was and is and always will be God.

If, as a man on earth, he happened to do "nice" things...that's nice.

But hardly the point.

Millions more Catholics...I think...

Okay all you math expert: step up to the plate, here!

What does this mean? I can't make it add up.

'Course I struggle to add 2 + 2, so that's no surprise.

Questions about Purgatory, life after death

A reader writes:

I just read from your website and was wondering if I
could ask you about purgatory?

Where does the Bible discuss purgatory? Jesus speaks
more about hell than heaven and I don't remember if
purgatory is mentioned?

PS-Would you say you know for certain where you are
going when you die? Is there a way to know? If so,
where do you believe you're going and why?

My response:

Thank you for your note.

The word "purgatory" is not mentioned in the Bible.

Nor are the words "Trinity" and "incarnation" and "Bible."

But the notion of "purification" after life on earth certainly does appear in Sacred Scripture. Jesus speaks of sins to be forgiven "in the life to come." (Matthew 12:23)

Saint Paul writes of those saved in the next life "through fire." (1:Corinthians 3:15)

In 2 Maccabees 12:44-46, Scripture explicitly tells us to "pray for the dead." If there was only Heaven and Hell, what would be the point of praying for the dead?

As to your second question:

No, I do not know for certain where my soul — which I assume is what you mean — will be upon the end of my life here on earth. Jesus has given me every chance to make that destination Heaven. But God created me with a free will, to either embrace or reject Him. I pray I will never reject Him and will one day be with Him forever in Heaven.

I hope this is helpful. I do urge you to read an article by Mark Shea on Purgatory, which can be found here:

Purgatory? Where Is That in the Bible?

If anybody wants to add, correct, question, or otherwise clarify, feel free to jump in. Thanks!

Mass bishops opt to give Catholic teaching a try

Vatican teaching states that adopting children to homosexual couples is "gravely immoral."

How unambigious is that? I get it. Do you get it?

Well, after the four Massachusetts bishops spent three months of studying the "theological and practical impact" of adhering to Church teaching, it looks like they get it, too.

Now all they have to do is convince the state. And a bunch of lay people who evidently call the shots.

This decision to seek an exemption from state anti-discrimination rules pits the bishops against the 42-member board of Catholic Charities of Boston, which is made up of some of Boston's most prominent lay Catholics. The board voted unanimously in December in support of continuing to allow gay couples to adopt children.

Prominent Catholic[TM] Peter Meade is in a predictable snit.

''This is an unnecessary, unmitigated disaster for children, Catholic Charities, and the Archdiocese of Boston," said Peter Meade, who remains a board member.

Let the legal games begin.

Reportedly, the bishops have hired the Boston law firm Ropes & Gray to help them figure out what to do. (Ropes & Gray does not come cheap.)

The Massachusetts Catholic Conference weighs in...if anybody can translate it.

In a prepared statement yesterday, he [Ed Saunders, director] said that while the bishops want to maintain the ''good work" that Catholic Charities does in the area of adoption, they must also deal with ''substantial first amendment issues that arise from any government regulations which force Catholic social service agencies to provide services that conflict with church doctrine."

Call me simple-minded — (hey, that's just a saying!) — but the solution seems simple to me. In fact, I don't even see a problem.

Vatican teaching states that adopting children to homosexual couples is "gravely immoral."

We're not supposed to do "gravely immoral" things.

So what's the problem?

Source: The Boston Globe

O, Canada! (Sheesh!)

From LifeSite:

Canada's Largest Catholic Paper Lauds Gay Propoganda Film

To be fair, please read, if you have the chance, both Michael Swan's (rather gushing) review as well as that of John Bentley Mays (both links are at the end of the LifeSite article.) I'm wondering if LifeSite is being a tad rough on Mays.

Then we have:

Canadian Bishops' Twelfth-Grade Moral Textbook "Fails Dismally" to Present Moral Teaching

Dr. [John] Shea, retired doctor and medical consultant for the pro-life group Campaign Life Coalition, reviewed the book In Search of the Good: A Catholic Understanding of Moral Living, written and produced by the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB), for the February 2006 issue of Catholic Insight.

“I cannot and would not recommend this book for Grade Twelve students,” Dr. Shea writes. “A significant flaw in this work is its failure adequately to present the moral teaching of the Church (his emphasis) to its intended readers…In particular it is deficient in its instruction about chastity and sexual morality, areas which are so important in this hedonistic age.”

Dr. Shea raises a series of questions about the authors’ use of vague and confusing language in reference to the Church’s moral authority, such as “a church in dialogue” and the Church as a “community of moral deliberation.” He suggests that for a Catholic text, authored by the CCCB, the book presents an alarmingly relativistic approach to moral understanding and the exercise of conscience.

Again, a link for the review is provided at the end of the LifeSite article. On this one, I'd definitely recommend reading the complete review.

(And lest any of my friends in the Northern country think this a "misery loves company" post...au contraire mon frere! This stuff happened to come to me from an orthodox Catholic list moderator...who happens to be a Canadian.)

"Plan B": apparently Wal-Mart has no choice

BOSTON, Feb 14 (Reuters) - A Massachusetts regulatory board voted on Tuesday to require Wal-Mart stores to stock morning-after contraceptives, two weeks after three women in the state sued Wal-Mart for refusing to fill orders for the pills.

When, I wonder, did certain "boards" get the power to tell businesses what they must offer for sale?

I'm a co-owner of an advertising/design studio. Were a potential client to ask us to create an advertising campaign, for, oh let's say for the sake of argument, a local abortion clinic, we would decline. For two reasons. One, it would be morally repugnant. And two, it would be bad for business.

Could some "board of registration in advertising" make us do it? Not yet, seeing that such a board doesn't exist. Yet.

Why should Wal-Mart of any retailer stock something it would prefer not to?

The company has stated repeatedly that there's no real demand for what some health professionals call an abortifacient. But that's not a good enough reason, evidently, for the folks who brought the suit in the first place. In fact, it's, from their point of view, a terrible reason.

There should be a demand, apparently!

Time after time I've seen dramatized the pathetic case of a woman raped. What can she do? Nothing, one is told, unless access to "Plan B" is readily available.

But even the drug's makers don't use that ploy.

Some snippets from the manufacturer's website:

Things do not always go as planned. You might have forgotten to take your pill, or another birth control method you used might have failed, like your condom broke. Now you have a second chance to prevent pregnancy with Plan B.

Plan B is an emergency contraceptive that can still prevent a pregnancy after contraceptive failure or unprotected sex.

Ask your healthcare professional for a prescription in advance, so that it will be there for you — in time — if you ever need it.

Does this sound like words from a knight in shining armor rescuing a maiden in distress?

Come on...this is just another way the government is pushing the "pro-choice" agenda.

It's bad business. In more ways than one.

Happy Saints Cyril & Methodius Day!

Not to make light of you romantic types, but I'm celebrating the saints remembered in today's Church calendar...and why not? They remind me of the church of my baptism!