Monday, December 07, 2009

An Argument for Home Schooling...

cut straight from today's headlines....

THIS POSTING IS NOT FOR MINORS
 NOR FOR THE SQUEEMISH!

You have been warned.

Let me preface this by urging us all to recall the Prayer of St Ephraim the Syrian: "O Lord and Master of my life, a spirit of idleness, despondency, ambition, and idle talking give me not. But rather a spirit of chastity, humble-mindedness, patience, and love bestow upon me Thy servant. Yea, O Lord King, grant me to see my failings and not condemn my brother; for blessed art Thou unto the ages of ages. Amen."

If it weren't for the reliability of the source, I wouldn't believe this. Read this story, and be aware that there is extremely graphic material involved. It is entitled: Breaking: Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” Is Promoting Child Porn in the Classroom– Kevin Jennings and the GLSEN Reading List

Very seldom will you find me urging you to make a "political" call. But the main number for the White House is (202) 456-1111, and the "Contact Us" page is here.

But before you "make that call" pray the following Psalm, as we are all sinners and in some way must have contributed to this situation.

Psalm 50

Have mercy on me, O God, according to Thy great mercy; and according to the multitude of Thy compassions blot out my transgression. Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. For I know mine iniquity, and my sin is ever before me. Against Thee only have I sinned and done this evil before Thee, that Thou mightest be justified in Thy words, and prevail when Thou art judged. For behold, I was conceived in iniquities, and in sins did my mother bear me. For behold, Thou hast loved truth; the hidden and secret things of Thy wisdom hast Thou made manifest unto me. Thou shalt sprinkle me with hyssop, and I shall be made clean; Thou shalt wash me, and I shall be made whiter than snow. Thou shalt make me to hear joy and gladness; the bones that be humbled, they shall rejoice. Turn Thy face away from my sins, and blot out all mine iniquities. Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me. Cast me not away from Thy presence, and take not Thy Holy Spirit from me. Restore unto me the joy of Thy salvation and with Thy governing Spirit establish me. I shall teach transgressors Thy ways, and the ungodly shall turn back unto Thee. Deliver me from blood-guiltiness, O God, Thou God of my salvation; my tongue shall rejoice in Thy righteousness. O Lord, Thou shalt open my lips, and my mouth shall declare Thy praise. For if Thou hadst desired sacrifice, I had given it; with whole-burnt offerings Thou shalt not be pleased. A sacrifice unto God is a broken spirit; a heart that is broken and humbled God will not despise. Do good, O Lord, in Thy good pleasure unto Sion, and let the walls of Jerusalem be builded. Then shalt Thou be pleased with a sacrifice of righteousness, with oblation and whole-burnt offerings. Then shall they offer bullocks upon Thine altar.

3 comments:

Dymphna said...

Thank you SO much for this post, Father. I just posted about this yesterday. Your post is very God centered and helpful. I am grateful for your ministry.

Paul of Thebes said...

Oh please, you have fallen for hate-mongering. This is a link to a supposed story that is actually a total fiction. This feeds hatred - not love.

We all need to go to real primary sources instead of accepting the very biased “opinions slants.” Aside from extreme right-wing blogs, there is no evidence that anything like this story is true. If there was an ounce of truth to this story, would it not be on NPR, ABC, CBS, BBC - or any of the major newspapers? It is reported only on the most distorted of blogs . . . and now you have given it credence.

When we direct others to materials that are “being false witness,” we also bear some responsibility.

The Byzantine Rambler said...

Dear Paul of Thebes:

"Hate-mongering" is a stong term. I suggest that you confuse righteous concern with hatred. To suggest that this posting feeds "hatred-not love" is to presume motives both for the original posting and for my publicizing it.

Perhaps you should come out of the desert more often. Firstly, I would not post this even on the basis of "the reliability of the source" unless I had also checked other sources, including the specific website cited, for corroboration.

You charge that real primary sources need to be accessed versus "biased 'opinions slants'".

What constitutes your categorization of "extreme right-wing blogs"? What does the labeling of a blog, or any other source of opinion, as dismissible due to such a characterization simply on that basis alone invalidate the content of a particular article? Further, on what basis do you justify that solely on the basis of truth or falsity (I expect you mean, “fact” or lack thereof) would any other news medium omit to report the matter? Consider, if something is not unacceptable to me in general, I may not consider charges against it as news-worthy and thus be disinclined to investigate a particular instance, even if such investigation might result in my discovering information that would disturb me and lead me to make substantiated charges.

The fact remains that by following the links on the original story one may go to the specific organization’s website and find all of the books quoted in the article. Further, the recommendations for the books to be added to reading curricula of the article’s noted suggested age-groups is also validated. In addition, from the very site in question, links are provided to Amazon, wherein one may “Look inside” to read a few pages of the books’ actual contents. This, too, corroborates the article’s charge of inappropriate content for the age-groups suggested.

But perhaps this brings to the heart of matter the tendency to cast about charges of “hate-mongering”. If one has no problem with the content of the material and the suggestion of its appropriateness for the particular age-groups, one might easily be led to conclude that the only reason one might object is “hate”, and thus that any protest or argument against the material could only be “hate-mongering”.

If you can show that the material in question does not contain the content the article claims, or that the individual given the position of “School Safety Czar” was not associated with the organization in question, and further has never renounced the specific inclusion of the questioned material as inappropriate, I retort that your charge of “being false witness” (“bearing false witness”?) is ungrounded. Further, I ponder your own motives for choosing to write such a provocative comment on this entry of my blog.

And lest anyone be prepared to make the charge, let me assert strongly that there is a definite difference between hating the sin and loving the sinner. Let no one dare to charge the false dichotomy that hating the sin requires one to hate the sinner as well or else one must love both. Irrational ravings have no place in civil discourse.

 
.......