CAJUN JOKES SENT BY AN OLD FRIEND

Boudreaux and his wife were asleep when the phone rang at 2 in the morning. Boudreaux picked up the phone, listened a moment. and said "How should I know, dat's 200 miles from here!" and hung up.

The wife said, "Who was that, my sweets?"

Boudreaux answered, "I don't know, some man wanting to know if the coast is clear."
----------------

Two Cajuns are walking down the street. One notices a compact on the sidewalk and leans down to pick it up. He opens it, looks in the mirror and says, "Hmm, dis person looks familiar."

The second Cajun says, "Here, let me see!!" So the first Cajun hands him the compact. The second one looks in the mirror and says, "You dummy, it's me!"
---------------

What did the Cajun girl ask her doctor when he told her she was pregnant?

"Is it mine?"
---------------

Boudreaux, a Cajun in his fourth year as a LSU Freshman, sat in his US Government class. The professor asked Boudreaux if he knew what Roe vs. Wade was about. Boudreaux pondered the question then finally said, "That was the decision George Washington had to make before he crossed the Delaware. "
---------------

Returning home from work, Boudreaux was shocked to find his house ransacked and burglarized. He telephoned the police at once and reported the crime. The police dispatcher broadcast the call on the radio, and a K-9 unit, patrolling nearby, was the first to respond. As the K-9 officer approached the house with his dog on a leash, Boudreaux ran out on the porch, shuddered at the sight of the cop and his dog, then sat down on the steps. Putting his face in his hands, Boudreaux moaned, "I come home to find all my possessions stolen. I call the police for help, and what do they do? They send me a BLIND policeman."

Enjoy.  My first LOL moment of the day is always greatly appreciated.

BLUEBERRY HILL - FATS DOMINO

Friday night with Fats Domino.

WHO WOULD EVER HAVE EXPECTED...?

A Facebook friend posted a link to an article in the Guardian on a possible reason for the pope's abrupt announcement of his retirement.

A potentially explosive report has linked the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI to the discovery of a network of gay prelates in the Vatican, some of whom – the report said – were being blackmailed by outsiders.

The pope's spokesman declined to confirm or deny the report, which was carried by the Italian daily newspaper La Repubblica.

The paper said the pope had taken the decision on 17 December that he was going to resign – the day he received a dossier compiled by three cardinals delegated to look into the so-called "Vatileaks" affair.

Last May Pope Benedict's butler, Paolo Gabriele, was arrested and charged with having stolen and leaked papal correspondence that depicted the Vatican as a seething hotbed of intrigue and infighting.

According to La Repubblica, the dossier comprising "two volumes of almost 300 pages – bound in red" had been consigned to a safe in the papal apartments and would be delivered to the pope's successor upon his election.

The newspaper said the cardinals described a number of factions, including one whose members were "united by sexual orientation".

A sufficient number of reports have surfaced to indicate a pattern in which those who protest the loudest against same-sexuality, whether the persons are politicians, government officials, leaders or spokespersons in religious institutions, or otherwise engaged are often enough caught in a web of deceit of their own making.  I don't know all the details of the story of what took place in the Vatican, but I would not be surprised if the existence of the factions "united by sexual orientation" proves to be true, thus the ironic title of the post.

La Repubblica said the cardinals' report identified a series of meeting places in and around Rome. They included a villa outside the Italian capital, a sauna in a Rome suburb, a beauty parlour in the centre, and a former university residence that was in use by a provincial Italian archbishop.

The men alleged to be involved don't seem to have exercised a great deal of discretion in their activities, but their actions were entirely predictable in an environment of mandatory celibacy.  I'm not interested in prying into the sexual activity of consenting adults, except when those same adults condemn the sexual activity of other adults, some of whom have been in faithful, committed relationships for years.  It's the hypocrisy...

UPDATE: The opinion piece by John L Allen, Jr in the National Catholic Reporter, may be more knowledgeable and balanced than the article in the Guardian and my commentary.  I've tried not to be a bitter ex-Roman Catholic, but I'll leave it to others to judge whether or not I've succeeded.

DISPLEASED SENATORS WRITE A LETTER

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC  20500

Dear President Obama:

Last Thursday, the Senate voted to continue its consideration of your nomination of former Senator Chuck Hagel to serve as our nation’s next Secretary of Defense.  While we respect Senator Hagel’s honorable military service, in the interest of national security, we respectfully request that you withdraw his nomination.

It would be unprecedented for a Secretary of Defense to take office without the broad base of bipartisan support and confidence needed to serve effectively in this critical position.  Over the last half-century, no Secretary of Defense has been confirmed and taken office with more than three Senators voting against him.  Further, in the history of this position, none has ever been confirmed with more than 11 opposing votes.  The occupant of this critical office should be someone whose candidacy is neither controversial nor divisive.

In contrast, in 2011, you nominated Leon Panetta, who was confirmed by the Senate with unanimous support.  His Pentagon tenure has been a huge success, due in part to the high degree of trust and confidence that Senators on both sides of the aisle have placed in him.  The next Secretary of Defense should have a similar level of broad-based bipartisan support and confidence in order to succeed at a time when the Department of Defense faces monumental challenges, including Iran’s relentless drive to obtain nuclear weapons, a heightened threat of nuclear attack from North Korea, potentially deep budget cuts, a strategic pivot to the Asia-Pacific region, military operations in Afghanistan, the ongoing Global War on Terror, the continued slaughter of Syrian civilians at the hands of their own government, and other aftermath of the Arab Spring.

Likewise, Senator Hagel’s performance at his confirmation hearing was deeply concerning, leading to serious doubts about his basic competence to meet the substantial demands of the office.  While Senator Hagel’s erratic record and myriad conversions on key national security issues are troubling enough, his statements regarding Iran were disconcerting.  More than once during the hearing, he proclaimed the legitimacy of the current regime in Tehran, which has violently repressed its own citizens, rigged recent elections, provided material support for terrorism, and denied the Holocaust.

Regarding U.S. policy on Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons, Senator Hagel displayed a seeming ambivalence about whether containment or prevention is the best approach, which gives us great concern.  Any sound strategy on Iran must be underpinned by the highly credible threat of U.S. military force, and there is broad bipartisan agreement on that point.  If Senator Hagel becomes Secretary of Defense, the military option will have near zero credibility.  This sends a dangerous message to the regime in Tehran, as it seeks to obtain the means necessary to harm both the United States and Israel.

We have concluded that Senator Hagel is not the right candidate to hold the office of Secretary of Defense, and we respectfully request that you withdraw his nomination.  Thank you for your consideration.

The letter is signed by Sens. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), David Vitter (R-La.), Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Dan Coats (R-Ind.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Jim Risch (R-Idaho), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.).

From the Washington post.

I see my senator, David Vitter (R-LA), signed the letter.  I'm disappointed but not surprised.  Would the senators who signed have been satisfied if Sen Hagel had said we should attack Iran forthwith?  The Obama administration ended our involvement in one war not so very long ago and is in the process of extricating our military from another war, but the grandstanding senators (you know who you are) and their followers seemingly can't allow the country a breather from military conflict.  No doubt Hagel's "erratic record and myriad conversions" include his public disapproval of George Bush's handling of the Iraq War, but he was hardly the lone supporter of the war who turned sour on the enterprise as the situation in Iraq went bad, and more people became convinced that there never were WMD in Iraq, nor was Saddam even close to having nuclear weapon capability.

Chuck Hagel would not have been my first choice as Secretary of Defense, but, if I were a member of the Senate, I'd vote to confirm him without hesitation.  Republicans eating their own for no good reason that I can fathom is a sorry spectacle.  Shame on you, senators. 

OUT OF ORDER

Catholic politicians who support abortion legislation should be refused Holy Communion, says Cardinal Raymond Burke, who heads the Apostolic Signatura, the Vatican's highest legal tribunal that rules on canon law.

"There can be no question that the practice of abortion is among the gravest of manifest sins,” The American cardinal told the Irish newspaper Catholic Voice in an interview published recently.

Cardinal Burke, an official of the Vatican, a foreign sovereign state, is out of order when he threatens Irish politicians if they cast votes of which he disapproves.  

Cardinal Burke said that Catholic politicians must support legislations that will "most reduce the evils which attack human life and the integrity of marriage."

The legislation, which allows for the termination of a pregnancy when the life of the woman is in danger is in response to the horror story of a pregnant woman who died of blood poisoning in an Irish hospital.

Savita Halappanavar, 31, a dentist who was 17 weeks pregnant, went to the hospital with back pain on October 21.

Her husband Praveen Halappanavar said she was told she was miscarrying, and after one day of severe pain she asked for a medical termination.
 
But her repeated requests were refused for three days, he said, because the foetal heartbeat was still present and they said they were legally unable to perform the abortion.

Mr Halappanavar said his wife was "in agony" the whole time.

Eventually the foetal heartbeat stopped and the foetus was removed. But Ms Halappanavar was by now seriously ill, and was taken to the high dependency unit and then the intensive care unit, where she died of septicaemia (blood poisoning triggered by infection) a week after she first arrived at the hospital.

How does allowing Ms Halappanavar to die "reduce the evils which attack human life". Where is compassion in the cardinal's judgement?  He says Ms Halappanavar's death was tragic, but, according to the Vatican rules, there was nothing to be done by the doctors but stand by and watch her die. I'm sick and tired of the Vatican's interference in the governance of countries around the world. I hope the politicians in Ireland vote their consciences and put a stop to such barbarous treatment in Irish hospitals.

And if the cardinal thinks so highly of the integrity of marriage, why isn't he married? 

DOCTOR VISIT

A man visits his doctor with celery stalks stuck in each ear and a carrot stick up each nostril.

He mumbles, "Doc, I'm just not feeling well."

The doctor replies, "Maybe you're not eating right."


Cheers,

Paul (A.)

I know.  It's awful.  Still, the joke gave me my first laugh of the day, so what could I do? 

SUPPORT FOR GAY MARRIAGE GROWS

The video ad shows a surprising combination of supporters of gay marriage.  Throughout the country, support for same-sex marriage is increasingly seen as a matter of equality.

UPDATE: From ABC on Laura Bush:

The former first lady’s office told the Dallas Morning News that Bush had not given her consent to be part of the ad, and had asked that she be removed from it.

WHAT IS AMIE UP TO?

Note: Unless you're an Anglican/Episcopal wonk, this post is probably not for you.

In Sheffield, South Yorkshire, statistics show that only 3% of the population regularly attend church. Back in 2002 the leadership team at Christ Church Fulwood were invited by senior diocesan staff to investigate the possibility of church planting, with the aim of sharing the Gospel with people who had moved into the new residential developments in the city centre. Despite extensive discussions, diocesan support for this initiative was withdrawn, but with mission our priority Christ Church Central was “born” in October 2003 as “a church for people who don’t go to church” outside the formal structures of the Church of England.

So.  Without the approval of the diocesan leadership, a Church of England parish planted a church outside the jurisdiction of the diocese.  Then the communities of the two churches, one Church of England, the other not, discerned that another church plant was in order, thus a second church outside the diocesan jurisdiction was established.  Did the leaders of the Diocese of Sheffield note the odd arrangement?

Nearly 10 years later both parent and daughter churches have continued to grow numerically and partnered one another in mission to the city. An expression of this partnership was the planting of Christ Church Walkley last year, with the initial members drawn from both congregations living in the area. Pete Jackson, who has been one of the associate ministers at Christ Church Central, is the founding minister.  

But wait.  Pete Jackson is not ordained.

Concern that his ministry and that of the new church should be appropriately recognised led us to consult the leadership of the Anglican Mission in England (AMiE), who subsequently wrote to the GAFCON Primates’ Council with a request that they should facilitate Pete’s ordination.

Appropriately recognized by whom?  Anyway, Pete went to Kenya and was ordained deacon in the Anglican Church of Kenya by Bishop Josephat Mule of Kitui.  Are you still with me?  Apparently, the ordination in Kenya caught the attention of the officials in the Diocese of Sheffield, as is shown by the following statement from the diocese.

ORDINATION IN KENYA

Reports are now circulating in the public domain of an ordination in Kenya in recent days. The Communications Office was inundated with calls wanting clarification and comment.

+Peter (Bishop of Doncaster)has issued the following statement today:

“The Diocese of Sheffield was made aware last week that Pete Jackson from Christ Church Walkley had been ordained in Kenya on Saturday 9 February 2013. This came as a total surprise as we had no prior knowledge or communication regarding this. We continue to seek further clarification and dialogue with those involved in the ordination at various levels and are taking advice so that we have a comprehensive picture of what took place. This will enable us to reflect further on the developments and their implications.”

AMiE (Anglican Mission in England) and AMiA (Anglican Mission in the Americas) see England and the Americas as mission territory in dire need of evangelization by the right sort of Anglicans, but the groups wish to remain part of the Anglican Communion.  I suspect their secret (or not so secret) wish is to take control of the communion and disseminate what they consider proper Anglicanism.

H/T to Simon Sarmiento at Thinking Anglicans for the links.

Adrian Worsfold, in his post titled "Entryism in the Church of England" says:

So, here we go, and outside London: entryism inside the Church of England.

Entryism is where a small body that keeps a tight control of itself invades and uses a host of a more mdoerate (sic) body because that body has a wider outreach than the small group could ever hope to acquire, despite the fact that the small body can attract to a limited extent larger numbers of its own fanatical types and some newer marginal people under its wing. The small group also takes opportunities to go out into the larger body and take over, bit by bit, as the opportunities present, units of the larger body's operation. The usual channels of decision making become subverted under the entryists' often informal and preplanned means of control. The model is trotskyite, and was shown with the actions of the Militant Tendency inside the Labour Party.

The larger body is usually undergoing weaknesses and transition, and is ripe for actions taken against it: and the small body seeks to weaken the host further as it takes to itself the hosts' shell institutions and acquire them to itself.

Adrian's take is interesting.  He sees the entryism "located at Christ Church Fulwood, which is C of E and the centre of the franchise."

BUT WILL SHE WEAR HER MITRE?

Katharine Jefferts Schori

The Episcopal Church
Office of Public Affairs
Tuesday, February 19, 2013

At the invitation of Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, Episcopal Church Presiding Bishop and Primate Katharine Jefferts Schori will attend the enthronement celebration on March 21 at Canterbury Cathedral.

“I look forward to joining with other primates of the Anglican Communion for the investiture of the next Archbishop of Canterbury,” Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori said. “It is a particular delight to welcome Justin Welby in this role, as we have come to know him over the last several years, both in The Episcopal Church and among the primates.  He enters this role at a time of opportunity and challenge, when many people hope for continued growth and maturation within the Communion.”

During the trip, Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori will attend the Anglican Communion Primates Standing Committee, of which she is an elected member.

Archbishop Welby is the former bishop of Durham.

The Archbishop of Canterbury is considered one of the four instruments of Communion of the Anglican Communion; the others are the Lambeth Conferences, the Primates Meetings and the Anglican Consultative Council.

Inquiring Episcopalian minds want to know...about the mitre, that is.

UPDATE: My question in the headline is moot.  The Primates who attend the enthronement ceremony wear the rochet and chimere.

Rowan Williams' enthronement

Thanks to Lapin at Facebook for the photo, which is from the ACNS.

TELL HIM, NURSE

A 65-year-old former nurse has delivered a withering telling off to the Archbishop of Westminster – England’s most senior Catholic – for his stance on gay marriage.

The woman, who now works with animals and lives in northern England, says she has been married for 30 years but gay marriage doesn’t threaten the status of her relationship whatsoever.

And she says Archbishop Vincent Nichols and his church have become obsessed with gay sex, ignoring the real problems of society – the economy, schools, hospitals and our children’s future.

The woman has requested to remain anonymous.  Excerpts from her splendid letter follow.

I am 65 years of age and have been married for almost 30 years. I would so have appreciated an explanation from you or any of the hierarchy exactly how my long and happy marriage will be threatened by the union of gay couples. When I meet people in my day to day existence they talk about the economic climate (bad), lack of employment (bad), uncertain future for their children (bad), state of schools, hospitals (bad) – never ever has anybody expressed concern about a threat to their marriage by the proposed legalizing of same-sex marriage. You, the church, claim that marriage is the bedrock of society and indeed it is but you also seem to consider it so fragile that allowing a few gay people access to it will endanger it forever. Here the implicit homophobia cannot be ignored.

Sadly you still think your pronouncements will be accepted without question by a meek credulous herd. You have spent far too much time telling us just how sinful we are while drawing veils of respectability over your own grievous wrongdoings.

I sometimes despair of this church, this institution. It seems to me in my reading of the Gospels that Jesus had no problem whatsoever with those who were considered outsiders or exceptions. He appears to have happily shared meals with prostitutes, drunkards, lepers, Gentiles and I do not doubt with people of same-sex orientation since such an orientation has existed since time began. The church seems much happier with its version of order over compassion and love towards the so-called exceptions. It has an appalling history of excluding and torturing those who do not think or subscribe to its definition of ‘right’.
....

To me, you (particularly but not exclusively the hierarchy) appear to be a frightened group of men preoccupied with titles, clothing and other religious externals. You seem, with some wonderful and brave exceptions, to pay only lip service to ecumenism and matters of social justice. I would love to see the so-called ‘Princes of the Church’ (Where did all these triumphant, utterly anti-Gospel titles you award yourselves come from?) get rid of the silk, the gold, the Gucci shoes, the ridiculous tall hats, croziers, fancy soutanes etc etc and substitute bare heads and a simple pilgrim’s staff on all liturgical occasions and that might be taken as a small outward sign of your inner acceptance of fundamental Gospel values.

Bulls-eye!  What an excellent and eloquent letter.  Along with the Roman Catholic "princes" of the church, I'd hope the "princes" of the Church of England, and especially the chief "prince", Archbishop Justin Welby, who will be enthroned next month, read the retired nurse's letter.  The  matters with which the archbishops and bishops in the two churches occupy their time and speak of, so often seem to have very little to do with the Gospel.

And for all hierarchical churches, if those in authority would keep in mind that they are called to be the servants of all, the Gospel of Jesus Christ would be far better served.  I've often wondered what silks, and lace, and mitres have to do with the Gospel and thought that simpler vestments might be an aid to remind those in authority of their servant role.  Mitres are the silliest, and my suggestion would be to ditch them.

But I digress.  Though I have quoted generously from the letter, I urge you to read it all.

Photo from Wikipedia.