Is the Catholic Church the one true Church?

Did the Catholic Church Keep the Bible out of the Hands of the Common People?

2008-01-12T17:42:00.000-05:00

Link to Original

It is not uncommon to hear "It was the Protestants reformers who made the Bible widely accessible to everyone and first brought the Bible to the people in their own language, so that it could be finely understood by everyone" of course this statement is not a true pretrial of history. Luther himself noted "it was an effect of God power, that the Papacy should have remained, in the first place, sacred baptism; secondly, the text of the Holy Gospels which it was custom to read from the pulpit in the vernacular tongue of every nation..." (De Missa privata, ed by Jensen, VI, Pg 92)

Latin and Greek manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments were diligently copied by medieval monks. Each monastery had its writing room or scriptorium, where the monks patiently and carefully copied the Scriptures by had. Manuscripts were produced on a large scale by having one monk read for many copyists. Some Bibles or required the work of many Monks such as "the worms Bible" was created by a team of 11 scribes and artists. to copy a Bible took years to complete, making them expensive, by the 13th century, portable, compactly written Bibles were made in great numbers.

This Latin Biblical leaf (circa 1260AD) has been written by hand, in black ink using miniature gothic texture on animal vellum. Rubricated initials and marginalia can be seen in red and blue. It was originally owned by William Foyle of Beeligh Abbey England.

There were many Latin manuscripts in the Middle Ages because anyone who could read could understand that language, but it is false to say that the Reformation, or its predecessors, first brought the Bible to the people in their own tongue. It is historically certain that between the seventh and fourteenth centuries, in all European countries, there were translation in sixteen vernacular languages. That these were no more widespread can be readily explained by the lack of demand for works so costly to produce. Indeed the Bible was "the most widely circulated book in the Middle Ages, and had a great influence on the life of the nations" (Michael, Geschichte der Deutschen Volkes, iii., 223). The priests used it in preparing their sermons, and knew it from their daily reading of the missal and the breviary. The monks copied the Scriptures in their scriptoria, and meditated upon them frequently as we learn from the pages of St. Bernard and Thomas a Kempis (The Imitation of Christ, iv., 11; Luddy, Life of St. Bernard). Every church had to have at least one Bible for the Mass readings, and most had an extra or two in the public space of the church, chained down the way we chain down directories at public telephones now, and for steal it. We must remember that a new Bible would cost a community about as much as a new church building, and the finished book was easily worth a manor. Books in the Middle Ages were done on parchment or on vellum (made from the skins of young sheep or cattle) and lettered, gilded, and illuminated by hand. A whole Bible took maybe four hundred animals and years of work by a score of scribes and artists. Then as now, there were plenty of unscrupulous collectors, so a stolen Bible could always be converted into an immense sum of cash. Plus there were the customary "garnitures", the covers and bindings that could run to twenty pounds of gold, decorated with jewels and enamels (when Henry VIII burned all of the Bibles in England, lie was careful to keep the bindings for himself). The miracle is that so many still survive.

The laity, before printing was invented and when Bible manuscripts were rare and costly, knew the Scriptures from listening to sermons, and from studying the sculpture, paintings, frescoes and mosaics that filled their churches. What a comprehensive view of both the Old Testament and the blew could be had by a parishioner of St. Mark's in Venice in the thirteenth century. As Ruskin says: "The walls of the Church became the poor man's Bible, and a picture was more easily read than a chapter" (The Stones of Venice, ii., 99).

Many non-Catholics have answered the above question in the negative. "It is no longer possible to hold," says Kropat. scheck, "as the old polemics did, that the Bible was a sealed book to both theologians and laity. The more we study the Middle Ages, the more does this fable tend to dissolve into thin air" (Das Schriftprincip der Luth. Kirche, 163). "We must admit," writes Dobschiitz, "that the Middle Ages possessed a quite surprising and extremely praiseworthy knowledge of the Bible, such as might in many respects put our own age to shame" (Deutsche Rundsckau, 1900, 61). "There is," writes Dr. Cutts, "a good deal of popular misapprehension about the way in which the Bible was regarded in the Middle Ages. Some people think that it was very little read, even by the clergy; whereas the fact is that the sermons of the medieval preachers are more full of Scriptural quotations and allusions than any sermons in these days; and the writers on other subjects are so full of Scriptural allusion, that it is evident their minds were saturated

The invention that revolutionized the distributions of sacred scriptures was the printing press invented by a Catholic named Gutenberg in 1454. Gutenberg caused great excitement when in the fall of that year he exhibited sample pages at the Frankfurt trade fair. Gutenberg quickly sold out all of the 180 copies of his Vulgate Bible even before the printing was finished. Italy soon rival Germany as the leading center of printing by the 1470's Venetian Latin Vulgate Bibles had glutted the book market. By the end of the 15th century Catholics were operating print shops in some 250 cities and towns across Europe. with the advance of the printing press these Bible became more common among the people. So brisk was the trade in Latin Bibles in literature that many printers in England gave up printing these books which they could import and concentrated instead on English literature.

These are incunabula leafs from a Pre-Luther Biblia Germanica or German Bible. Printed by the Catholic Anton Koberger printed it on February 17, 1483 in the city of Nuremberg.

When the invention of movable type made the printing of inexpensive Bibles possible, numerous editions were published. In the seventy years before Luther's Bible was published (Luther's Biblical translations, begun in 1522, when he issued his New Testament, and carried on to 1545, when he finished the Deuterocanonical books and the first complete edition of his Bible.) there were 626 editions of the whole or of part of the Bible. Of the 198 in the language of the common people, 104 were complete editions. There were 20 in the Italian, 26 in French, 19 Flemish, 2 in Spanish, 6 in Bohemian, 1 in Slavish, and 30 in German for example the German Strasbourg translation published in 1466. To these editions of the whole Bible, must be added 94 printings of single sections, in the dialects of Europe. Besides these editions in the vernacular, there were 62 editions in Hebrew such as the 1477 Bologna Hebrew translation., 22 in Greek, and 343 in Latin, a language known to all the educated classes. A fitting climax to this period of popularizing the Bible, was the completion of Cardinal Ximenes' Polyglot Edition in 1517.

A good example of the influence of these Catholic bibles is the Rheims (English version of the new testament) first printed in 1582,which historians tell us was a source for the King James version. It is interesting to note that while the Catholic Church promoted the wide spread publishing of its Bibles the Protestants did not. The crown of England claimed a copyright on the King James version and printing of that version was a privilege accorded exclusively to the King's printer at the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge. for this reason English Bibles in the colonies were scarce. the first complete Bibles published in 1743 in the English colonies were not in English language but rather these English speaking settlers had to publish a copy and use Luther's Germans translation. it was not until after the outbreak of the American revolution and the end of the English rule over America that the first colonial presses began to publish the King James version openly. The first King James Bible to be published in Americas was a new Testament versions printed in 1777 by Robert Aitken, it was not until 1782 that the first complete American edition of the King James Bible. Aitken's KJV Bible was the only Bible ever to be sanctioned by the American Congress. By 1790 a Catholic named Matthew Carey had already begun to publish the Douay-Rheims Bible in United States.

Check out Ron Paul's Blog - The Daily Dose

2008-01-12T07:44:00.000-05:00

January 11, 2008

Our campaign is growing every single day, with more and more volunteers and donors rallying to the cause of peace, freedom, and Constitutional government. And our staff is growing too! Our latest hire is Daniel McCarthy, who is coming on board as our Grassroots Communications Coordinator to keep the grassroots informed on the latest developments with the campaign.

You'll get the freshest and most exciting news from the campaign, straight from our War Room, from Daniel and other staffers at our blog, the Daily Dose. Instant reaction to breaking news, immediate mobilization of our supporters-the blog will keep you up to speed on everything happening with the Ron Paul movement.

And we're starting now: our first posts are up http://people.ronpaul2008.com/campaign-updates . Check back regularly!

Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign Committee

Salvation Sermon

2008-01-11T11:24:00.000-05:00

Salvation Sermon - #1

Salvation Sermon - #2

Salvation Sermon - #3

Salvation Sermon - #4

Do Catholics and Muslims worship the same God?

2008-01-11T07:42:00.000-05:00

By Father Raymond Taouk, SSPX

"The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her" - Pope Gregory XVI [1]

The false notion that all religions who give homage to a deity of any sort somehow worship the true "God" but simply "under another form" is one that is presently being propagated in order lead the Church down the smooth path of apostasy in the name of ecumenism.

The Catholic position on this is precisely opposed to this proposition, which is set forth by the modernist element in the Catholic hierarchy today.

Objectively:

From a purely objective point of view, regardless of the doctrinal teaching professed by Mohammedans and Catholics, it is evident that Almighty God is the God over both. God exists. His existence is not dependent on the acknowledgement of mankind that He exists. Nor is God's existence dependent upon any religion. He is the Creator and the Providence of the Universe: the whole of creation, the entire cosmos, of all existing things, whether they be angels, human beings, animals or plants, animate or inanimate. He is also the Savior and the Judge of the living and the dead, having redeemed mankind and must judge Catholics and Mohammedans, believers and atheists. Their god is but another strange god. On every essential point concerning the true God and the nature of the true God, the Mohammedan belief radically and seriously conflicts with the established and revealed Dogma of the Catholic Church.

Subjectively:

Again from a purely subjective thinking the Muslims might think and believe with a firm confidence that they are worshiping the true God, "Allah" yet the reality is quite the contrary as objectively speaking we can only affirm the contrary. This point is clear from Scripture "Whosoever does not continue in the doctrine of Christ does not have God". - II St. Jn 1:9

The teaching and the beliefs of Catholicism and Mohammedanism are different and contrary. Their concept of, and their approach to God, diverge and conflict. Catholics indeed accept as dogmatic truth the Holy Trinity, the Incarnation and the Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Moslems vehemently and vociferously deny the Blessed Trinity [2], the Incarnation [3], the Crucifixion of our Divine Lord and the Divinity of Christ [4]. The Mohammedans have such a carnal notion of heaven that St. Alphonsus did not hesitate to declare "The Mohammedan Paradise, is only fit for beasts; for filthy sensual pleasure is all the believer has to expect there." [5]

The Catholic and Christian God is 'The Trinity,' and our Lord Jesus Christ, the second Person of that Trinity, is the Creator and One true and merciful God. Despite monotheistic appearances, we do not have the same God; we do not have the same mediator. How then can it be that " together with us they (The Moslems) adore the one, merciful God." [6] This is incredible!

The Catholic Teaching: "Without faith it is impossible to please God." - Heb. 11:6

Mohammedans are infidels for "broadly speaking, infidels are those who do not possess the true faith; while in the strict sense infidels are the un-baptized"[7]. They are divided into monotheists (Jews and Moslems), polytheists (Hindus, Buddhists, etc.), and atheists.

From a Catholic perspective the Islamic worship is another form of false worship given to a "strange god" for as we read in scripture "All the gods of the Nations are Idols" - I Para 16:26

It would be blasphemous to declare that these false religions are the working of God. On the Contrary ''all faithful disciples of Jesus Christ well know that the false religions are only instruments of the devil to deceive souls and place them beyond Salvation" - [8a]

Pope Pius X long ago put forward that the modernist if they take logically there doctrine, would have no grounds for denying the Muslims there "experience" of " god" as being just as valid as that of another "believer" and hence he states:

"Here it is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with that of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true. What is to prevent such experiences from being found in any religion? In fact, that they are so is maintained by not a few. On what grounds can Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? [8b]

What a prophetic insight, Pope Pius X was so accurate that not even the Modernist came to deny what he stated, but only affirm the above with great audacity.

The Baltimore Catechism (No. 3) states as follows:

Q. 1148. How do we offer God false worship?

A. We offer God false worship by rejecting the religion He has instituted and following one pleasing to ourselves, with a form of worship He has never authorized, approved or sanctioned.

Islam clearly comes under the notion of false worship that (objectively speaking) is not render to God.

The psalmist tells us that "All the Gods of the Gentiles are Devils" (Psalm 96:5) and hence to whom do they render their worship? The Scriptures tell us clearly " They provoked him by strange gods, and stirred him up to anger, with their abominations. They sacrificed to devils and not to God: to gods whom they knew not: that were newly come up, whom their fathers worshipped not. " (Deut 32:16- 17 Cf. also Baruch 4:7)

They "sacrificed to devils and not to God" - regardless of whether or not they might have believed they were rendering homage to the True God, the reality is quite the contrary! It is an erroneous proposition to qualify a prayer addressed to the devil as authentic prayer.

Islam is a false Religion. A false religion is any non-Christian religion "in so far as it is not the religion that God revealed and wants to see practiced. Moreover, every non-Catholic Christian sect is false in so far as it neither accepts nor faithfully practices the entire content of Revelation." [9]

Christ tells us who the true worshipers shall be: "But the hour cometh and now is, when the true adorers shall adore the Father in spirit and in truth." (Jn. 4:23).

These words go directly against the terminology now used by the modernist hierarchy. They speak from a subjective position wishing to dogmatize and "opinion" which goes directly against the mind of the Church on this point.

This religious subjectivism, which she has always condemned under the names of indifferentism or latitudinarianism, and which "seeks to justify itself under the pretended claims of liberty, failing to recognize the rights of objective truth which are made manifest either by the lights of reason or by Revelation." [10]

This subjectivism only leads to that Religious indifferentism, which is "one of the most deleterious heresies" and which "places all religions on an equal footing," inevitably leads one to consider the truth of religious belief as merely a matter of utility for a well-regulated life.... "One ends by considering religion as an entirely individual thing which can be adapted to the dispositions of each one, letting everyone form his own personal religion, and by concluding that all the religions are good even though they contradict each other." [11]

The Church is not concerned with the subjective dispositions of men. This is for God to Judge. The Church is concerned with objective facts. Her judgments are objective. Pope St. Pius X, for this reason declared that "those who die as infidels are damned." [11a]

1907 In answer to a question as to whether Confucius could have been saved,wrote: "It is not allowed to affirm that Confucius was saved. Christians, when interrogated, must answer that those who die as infidels are damned."

Revelation is a reality, a fact, a truth accredited by God by sure signs. This revelation of God can in no way be placed on the same footing as those erroneous beliefs of infidels. We may say that the Mohammedans worship a false god, the god of their own making, which a deviation from the right worship of the true God.

Further we might rightly ask with St. Paul, "How then shall they call upon Him in whom they have not believed?" - Rom 10: 14

Although the modern terminology used might not seem to be "explicitly heretical" in nevertheless leads one down this path to apostasy. This vague terminology, which has been employed to put forward an erroneous notion of the faith so that we may be deceived along the path of syncretism. Yves Marsaudon, in his book Ecumenism as seen by a Traditional Freemason, commented favorably on the ecumenism that was nurtured at Vatican II. He said:

"Catholics and especially the conservatives must not forget that all roads lead to God. And they will have to accept that this courageous idea of free-thinking, which we can really call a revolution, pouring forth from our Masonic lodges has spread magnificently over the dome of Saint Peter's." [12]

This is precisely path of deception to which the enemies of the Church hope to direct her. For this reason St. Pius X, who could see where this disorientation in precise terminology was leading, required every would-be Catholic priest to recite the following words at the feet of his Ordinary:

"I condemn and reject premises from which it follows that dogmas are either false or doubtful". [13]

The Council of Florence, clearly sets down the four notes of heresy as follows:

1) a pertinacious adherence to teachings expressly contradictory to that which has been defined by the Church;

2) an opinion opposed to a doctrine not explicitly defined by the Church nor clearly proposed dogmatically as an article of Faith;

3) a proposition that, although not directly contradictory to the Faith, nonetheless necessarily entails logical consequences against it; and

4) a speculation which reaches a certain degree of probability of being against the Faith.

The Modernist's in using these subjective terms to formulate their erroneous notions that "We together with the Muslims worship the same God" go directly against the above statements of the Council of Florence. This formulation works directly against the Churches dogma "Outside the Church there is No Salvation" [14]

Pope Leo XIII, affirms in his encyclical "Satis Cognitum": "Nothing is more dangerous than the heretics who, while conserving almost all the remainder of the Church's teaching intact, corrupt with a single word, like a drop of poison, the purity and the simplicity of the faith which we have received through tradition from God and through the Apostles."

Although it is true to say that the reason that those outside the Church are not saved is not purely because they worship a false 'god' nevertheless there is still a clear connection. When Christ states, "No one comes to the Father but through me" (Jn. 14:6), this precisely means, if you don't posses Christ, you can't posses the Father (God) for Christ is that door to the Father. Hence without Christ there is no salvation from God. The relation is evident. Again this is confirmed by St. Irenaeus who wrote, "Thus, without the Holy Spirit, we cannot see the Word of God; and without the Son no one can go to the Father." [15a]

The only authentic prayer is true prayer addressed to the true God. Pope Leo XIII declares without hesitation that "the fitting and devout worship of God, which is to be found chiefly in the divine sacrifice and in the dispensation of the sacraments, as well as salutary laws and discipline . . . The (Catholic) Church alone offers to the human race that religion" [15b]

Pope Pius XI declares the same saying that "In her (the Catholic Church) alone is Christ believed with a faith whole and entire, worshiped with sincere homage of adoration, and loved with the constant flame of ardent Charity" [15c]

What happened to the 1st Commandment?

I am the Lord thy God...Thou shalt not have strange gods before me....Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them..." (Ex. 20:2-5).

If all religions worship the true God by simply claiming to be doing so, then one could not violate the 1st Commandment since all worship of any "god" would be tantamount to worshiping the true "God" according to the post the modernist element in the hierarchy, yet this would not only render the 1st Commandment obsolete but make it seem as though God had given us and absurd command. God does not command anything in vain.

The first commandment is not optional. A man cannot worship in any way that which he does not believe in, for the Law of Praying determines the law of believing, and vice-versa. If Mohammedans believe in a one-person deity, that is what they worship, and in no way can we logically argue that they worship with us the Holy Trinity.

We are not unfamiliar with the notion that claims that they implicitly worship the trinity, yet we cannot maintain this from an objective stand point for the simple reason that we can not hold that one worships implicitly what he explicitly rejects.

In our day and age it is often too easily forgotten that all non-Catholic worship is offensive to God and clearly violates the first commandment. This is because the "first commandment may be broken by giving to a creature the honor which belongs to God alone or by false worship." [16a]

The Church has always regarded the worship of Non Catholics as mere acts of superstitions since "there are four kinds of superstition, namely, illegitimate worship of the true God, idolatry, divination, and superstitious practices. The first consists in a false worship, though applied to the living God; for instance, if you worship Him (God) according to the Mosaic law, which is contrary to all the precepts of the Gospel; or if you adopt a new religion in opposition to the doctrine if the universal Church." [16b] Hence it is clear that "any public worship of the true God, outside the Catholic Church constitutes a superstitious worship of God as no other Church is authorized to give public worship to God. [16c]

Religion has an intellectual foundation, that is, it is based on knowledge. To be true religion its basis must be truth. The basis must be true both speculatively and practically. In other words, true religion must be based on a correct knowledge of God as existing and worthy of all honor, and of the manner and obligation of worshipping Him. On the other hand, religion is false if what is not God is considered to be God, and worshipped as God, or if there is error in the worship of the true God. Therefore, God is not truly worshipped when erroneous signs are used in His worship, as those of the Jews, or when superfluous ceremonies are employed, as by pagans and may heretics. [16d]

Although subjectively, it is the virtue of religion which prompts a man to render to God the worship and reverence that is His by right. [16e]

It is to be noted that an act based on a false religion cannot be really an act of virtue. For a virtue requires a morally good work. But in the cult (worship) of a false god, or in the false and superstitious worship of the true God, there can be no moral goodness, since such worship is opposed to right reason. [16f]

St. Pope Pius X, truly the Pope of our Age, could see where such absurd reason of the Modernists was leading the Church as he affirmed:

"... a great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, nor discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world the reign of legalized cunning and force, the oppression of the weak, and of those who toil and suffer." [17a]

True ecumenism with the Muslims

"Those who have learned theology well," says St. Basil, "will not allow even one iota of Catholic dogmas to be betrayed. They will, if necessary, willingly undergo any kind of death in their defense." [17b]

One of the greatest frauds presented to us by a great number of the current hierarchy is the false notion of ecumenism, which in reality is not ecumenism but simple "syncretism" going by the name of "ecumenism. True Ecumenism requires all those outside the Church to come to the Ark of Salvation so that they may not perish.

True ecumenism can be effectively defined as follows:

"The unity of Christians cannot otherwise be obtained than by securing the return of the separated to the one true Church of Christ from which they once unhappily withdrew. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, that stands forth before all and that by the will of its Founder will remain forever the same as when He Himself established it for the salvation of all mankind." [18]

This has been the constant teaching of the Church. Holy Mother Church has always taught that true unity cannot be effected, except by a unity in faith and government. [19]

Pope Pius IX condemned in his syllabus of errors the following false notions:

"Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true." (Proposition XV).

"Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation and arrive at eternal salvation." (Proposition XVI).

The real problem with this false ecumenism (which lead to indifferentism) is not only the fact that Catholics are being deceived but in the same process so are the infidels and non-believers and they sadly continue on the road to perdition without being told to recant their errors.

Catholics often forget that those faithful living on earth come under the title of "Church Militant". What is a Catholic who does not confess his faith or worse yet a Catholic who does not believe his faith?

St. Peter Canisius puts it this way: "Who is to be called a Christian? He who confesses the doctrine of Christ and His Church. Hence, he is truly a Christian thoroughly condemns and detests, the Jewish, Mohammedan, and the heretical cults and sects." [20]

What did St. Peter Mavimenus tell the Mohammedans? Did he say, "We worship the same God, all is well" No! He told them the truth, he put it this way to them "Whoever does not embrace the Catholic Christian religion will be damned, as was your false prophet Mohammed." [21]

Again we read that Blessed Nicholas Tavilich was just as stern as he openly states, "You Mohammedans are in a state of everlasting damnation. Your Koran is not God's law nor is it revealed by Him. Far from being a good thing, your law is utterly evil. It is founded neither in the Old Testament nor in the New. In it are lies, foolish things, buffooneries, contradictions, and much that leads not to virtue and goodness but to evil and to all manner of vice." [22]

St. Alphonsus attests to the fact how the Holy Monk St. Goerge of San Saba openly confessed to the Mohammedans: "But the holy monk (St. George of San Saba) having declared that Mahomet was a disciple of the devil, and that his followers were in a state of perdition, he also was condemned (to martyrdom) with his companions." [23]

The same we read in the testimony of the five disciples of St. Francis of Assisi, who when reproached by the followers of Koran for preaching against Mohammed, simply responded by saying "We have come to preach faith in Jesus Christ to you, that you will renounce Mohammad, that wicked slave of the devil, and obtain everlasting life like us" [23a]

Further we read in the life of St. John Vianney how he stated openly to a Protestant who believed that his worship rendered to God should do him just as well in his Protestant Sect as it would have in the Catholic faith, The Saint responded to him with the contrary advice saying "My friend, there are not two ways of serving Our Lord; there is only one good way, and it is to serve Him as He wishes to be served".[24]

This is the truth we must speak in charity and honesty to these lost souls who without the grace and redemption of Christ can't be saved for By nature, men are "children of wrath" (Eph. 2:3); by Him, we have been reconciled with the Father (Col. 1:20), and it is only by faith in Him that we can have the boldness to approach God with entire confidence (Eph. 3:12). To Him was given all power in heaven and on earth (Mt. 28:18), and at His name every knee must bend, in heaven, on earth, and under the earth (Phil. 2:10,11). No one goes to the Father save by Him (Jn. 14:6), and there is no other name under heaven given to man by which he must be saved (Acts 4:12). He is the Light that enlightens every man who comes into the world (Jn.1:9), and whoever does not follow Him wanders in darkness (Jn. 8:12). Who is not with Him is against Him (Mt. 13:30), and who does not honor Him also dishonors His Father who sent Him (as the Jews do) (Jn. 5:23).

Christ says, " Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No I tell you but division?" With the truth, division must come. This should not dishearten the man of God for "If God is for us, who is against us" - Rom 8:31

Salvation and Ignorance- "He that doth not believe is already judged." Jn, 3:18; Mk 16:16

Primarily it is important to we keep in mind that no one is save by ignorance, if anything we must boldly affirm the very opposite. Pope St. Pius X clearly affirms this saying: "We are forced to agree with those who hold that the chief cause of the present indifference and, as it were, infirmity of soul, and the serious evils that result from it, is to be found above all in ignorance of things divine. And so, Our Predecessor Benedict XIV had just cause to write: "We declare that a great number of those who are condemned to eternal punishment suffer that everlasting calamity because of ignorance of those mysteries of faith which must be known and believed in order to be numbered among the elect." [25]

St. Thomas Aquanis States " But through unbelief man is separated most from God: because he has no true knowledge of God. Nor can anyone in any way know God who holds a false opinion of Him" [26]

Although the Church makes a distinction between voluntary infidels in which one knowingly rejects the faith and involuntary infidels in which the offender is ignorant of the true faith.

Those who are not guilty of the sin of infidelity, but commit other grievous sins, are all those un-baptized persons who never had an opportunity of knowing the true religion, or of becoming aware of the obligation of seeking and embracing it, but who do not live up to the dictates of their conscience. This class of infidels will be lost, not on account of their infidelity, which was no sin for them, but on account of other grievous sins, which they committed against their conscience. "For whosoever have sinned without the law," says Saint Paul, "shall perish without the law." [27]

In fact, the infidels who are not lost because of the sin of incredulity, that is, by the sin of not having believed in Christ about whom they never knew anything, are lost by their other sins, the remission of which cannot be given to anyone without the true faith. Those infidels who are not guilty of the sin of infidelity and are faithful in obeying the voice of their conscience, Saint Thomas Aquinas says: "If anyone was brought up in the wilderness or among brute beasts, and if he followed the law of nature to desire what is good, and to avoid what is wicked, we should certainly believe that God, by an inward inspiration, would reveal to him what he should believe, or would send someone to preach the Faith to him, as He sent Peter to Cornelius."

Further Fr. Michael Mueller, C.SS.R in dealing with the issue states: "A Mohammedan is taught by his conscience that it would be a crime to believe in Jesus Christ, and not believe in Mahomet; will this impious conscience save him? The Scripture assures us that 'there is no other name given to men under heaven by which we can be saved,' but the name of Jesus only; and 'he that believeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remaineth on him." [28]

This should not surprise us since "what can be more contrary to reason than to be an infidel and not care to be under the sentence of eternal damnation" [29] Yes it is wholly against reason to place our faith in the testimony of a deceiver and murder as Mohammed manifested himself to have been. For this reason St. Thomas says "those who place faith in his (Mohammed's) words believe foolishly" [30]

Without the faith they can't be saved. Our Lord Jesus Christ is not optional.

Attendance at Islamic and Non-Catholic Worship

The abomination, which the Church has had from the very beginning for association of Catholics in the worship of Non Catholics [31], is evident from the words of St. John "If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into the house, or say to him Welcome" - II John 1:10

Suarez (one of the greatest amongst the Jesuits theologians) affirms that the reason the Apostle gives for this prohibition is verified in religious communication especially, because he, who unites himself with those outside the Church in religious worship, communicates in their wicked works. [32]

A Catholic who communicates formally in the worship of Non Catholics sins grievously against the virtue of Religion, as a false exercise of it. [33] For this reason "One is never allowed to cooperate formally in something which is intrinsically wrong objectively." [34]

St. Augustine, the great Champion of Catholic orthodoxy, reproves both actual and simulated communication in non-Catholic worship. In a letter to St. Jerome he states that one who observes the rites of Jews, or Gentiles, not only truly, but even fictitiously, has fallen into the abyss of the devil. [35]

The mind of the Church on this point was enshrined in old Code of Canon Law (1917), which stated that: " It is not permitted at all for the faithful to assist in any active manner at or to have any part in the worship of non-Catholics." [36]

All subsequent moral theology works have simply reiterated the same point. [37]

Pius XI in dealing with this issue that was so vehement in his own day had only the following to say "Certainly such movements as these cannot gain the approval of Catholics. They are founded upon the false opinions of those who say that, since all religions equally unfold and signify- though not in the same way - the native, inborn feeling in us all through which we are borne toward God and humbly recognize His rule, therefore, all religions are more or less good and praiseworthy. The followers of this theory are not only deceived and mistaken, but since they repudiate the true religion by attacking it in its very essence, they move step by step toward naturalism and atheism. Hence it clearly follows that anyone who gives assent to such theories and undertakings utterly abandons divinely revealed religion. " [38]

The Church can never lawfully grant to Catholics permission to participate formally in non-Catholic worship. In dealing those who claim they have been given ecclesiastical permission to participate in the ceremonial rites of non Catholics Fr. Michael Mueller in his well known work, "God the Teacher of Man Kind" aptly answers the question by stating "Neither any priest nor bishop, nay, not even the Pope, can give you permission to violate any of the commandments." [39]

It has been rashly stated the Mohammedans and other infidels adore the same God "together with us" [40] yet not only is this undoubtibly offensive to Catholic doctrine (as we have shown above) but it shows forth an ignorance of Islamic notion of God and their absurd doctrines. Mohammedans don't pray to their god, together with us, they pray to their false god against us! The Quran is explicit on this point as it openly states: "The Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before, may Allah destroy them, how they have turned away." [41]

Ultimately we can do no better than assume to ourselves the advice of the Apostle of the Gentiles (St. Paul) himself "Bear not the yoke with unbelievers. For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols?" - II Cor. 6: 14-18.

Foot Notes:

1Pope Gregory XVI - Summo Jugiter Studio, May 27, 1832

2. Sura iv. 171

3. Sura xxiii. 91

4. Sura iv, 157 and Sura v. 78.

5. St. Alphonsus de Liguori, History of Heresies, Vol. 1., ch. vii., art. 1.

6. Lumen Gentium, 16. Vatican Council II.,

7. - Roberti-Palazzini, Dizionario di teologia morale, p.813. Cf. Also A Compendium of St. Thomas's Theology, by Fr. E. O' Donnell, Vol. II, Dublin 1859, Pg. 21

8a.St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Philadelphians, VIII:2

8b. Pascendi, Sept. 8, 1907,

9. Roberti-Palazzini, Dizionario di teologia morale, p.813.

10. Dizionario de teologia morale, p.805.

11. Dizionario de teologia morale, p.805.

11a. The Sacred Congregation of the Propagation of the Faith, Pope St. Pius X, 1907 "In answer to a question as to whether Confucius could have been saved, wrote: ' It is not allowed to affirm that Confucius was saved. Christians, when interrogated, must answer that those who die as infidels are damned.' - The reason for this is as we previously mention. The Church judges the Objective facts and not the subjective dispositions of Men!

12. Lefebvre; Open Letter to Confused Catholics, Fowler Wright Books Ltd., Herefordshire, England, 1986, p. 106.

13. Oath Against Modernism

14. This dogma has been affirmed many times over by the Churches Magesterium. It has been affirmed by Pope Innocent III (DS423), The IV Lateran Council (DS 430), Pope Boniface VIII (DS 468), The Council of Florence (DS 714), Pius IX (DS1647), Pope Clement VI (DS 5706), The Council of Trent (DS 861).

15a. THE FAITH OF CATHOLICS, The Introduction, by Frs. Joseph Berington and John Kirk, rev. Fr. James Waterworth, San Marino, CA: Victory Publications, 1985.

15b. Satis Cognitum, June 19, 1896

15c. Lux et Veritas, December 25, 1931.

16a. Fr. D. I. Lanslot, Catholic Theology, St. Louise, M O, 1911, Pg. 486.

16b. Fr. E. O'Donnell, A Compendium of St. Thomas's Theology, Dublin 1859, Volume II, Pg. 113, Cf. Summa Theologica, II-II, QQ. 92-96.

16c. Fr. John R. Bancroft, C.SS. R, Communication in Religious worship with non Catholics, Washington, 1943, pg. 48.

16d. Fr. John R. Bancroft, C.SS. R, Communication in Religious worship with non Catholics, Washington, 1943, pg. 14.

16e. Summa Theologica II-II, q. 81, Art. 1

16f. Suarez, Opera Omnia, Tom XIII, pg. 7

17a. Our Apostolic Mandate

17b. Apud. Theod., lib. 4, Hist. Eccl., c. xvii.

18. Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos

19. Pope Leo XIII, Praeclara Gratulationis., June 20, 1894

20. St. Canisius Catholic Cate-chism, Dillingen, 1560, Question no. 1

21. St. Peter Mavimenus, The Roman Martyrology for February 21

22. "National Catholic Register," 1974

23. St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Victories of the Martyrs, ch. LIII.

23a. Saint Francis of Assisi, A biography, by Omer Englebert, 1979, Pg. 178-9

24. St. John Mary Vianney . John Mary: SPIRIT OF THE CURE D'ARS, Bowden, 1864

25. Acerbo Nimis, April 15, 1905

26. Summa Theologica II - II q. 10, Art. 3

27. Romans 2:12. Cf. Also Summa Theologica, II-II, Q. 11, Art. 1.

28. The Catholic Dogma, "Out of the Church there is positively no Salvation", BENZIGER BROTHERS, New York, 1888,

29. Fr. Michael Muller, Catholic Doctrine, preface, pg. 16

30. Summa Contra Gentiles, Book 1, Chapter 16, Art. 4.

31. Any documentation given in these regards are those which deal with only non Catholic worship in general, since there are volumes of condemnations both from antiquity and modern authorities on the communication of worship with heretics, who while retaining the name of Christian have departed from the faith of Christ. Since we are dealing with Non Catholics we limit ourselves to some of the authorities on this point.

32. Opera Omnia, Tom. XXIV, p. 708

33. Fr. John R. Bancroft, C.SS. R, Communication in Religious worship with non Catholics, Washington, 1943, pg. 48.

34. Fr. John R. Bancroft, C.SS. R, Communication in Religious worship with non Catholics, Washington, 1943, pg. 51

35. Epistola LXXXII, ad Hieronymum, Cap. II, n.18

36. Canon 1258

37. Moral Theology, A Complete Cource, by John A. Mchugh and Charles J. Callan, New York, 1929, Vol. I. n. 964, Pg. 376

38. Mortalium Animos

39. God the teacher of Mankind, New York, 1881, Pg. 331

40. Lumen Gentium, 16. Vatican Council II.

41. Quran, Book IX, par. 30, Cf. Sura 9:28, 5:17, 47:4, 5:62

Islamic Persecution of Christians

2008-01-11T07:28:00.000-05:00

A book that relates the untold story of the murder of 45 million Christians in the 20th century alone has caused controversy in Italy. The author of The New Persecuted: Inquiries into Anti-Christian Intolerance in the New Century of Martyrs, Antonio Socci, has been accused of "demonizing Islam" by raising the issue of Christian suffering in the Muslim world.

Socci provides evidence that in the past 2,000 years some 70 million Christians have been killed primarily or exclusively for the reason of their faith, two-thirds in the past 100 years alone, with Joseph Stalin as the chief culprit. He says that an average of 160,000 Christians have been killed every year since 1990, the vast majority by Muslims in the Third World. Chronicling attacks, pogroms and wars in East Timor, Indonesia, Sudan, Egypt, Pakistan, India, and the Balkans, Socci identifies Islamic extremism as the main danger. And yet, says he, "This global persecution of Christianity is still in progress but in most cases is ignored by the mass media and Christians in the west."

Western indifference to Christian suffering, documented by Antonio Socci, is well illustrated by the recent standoff at the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, one of the holiest Christian sites in the Holy Land, which was re-consecrated last month after being occupied by Arab gunmen and besieged by the Israeli army for 38 days. While extensively covered because of its photogenic value and its potential for further bloodshed, the stand-off has caused hardly a ripple in the Western world on what should be the obvious grounds for media scrutiny and public concern: the misuse and abuse of a Christian shrine by warring non-Christians in pursuit of their political objectives. The Bethlehem episode is thus illustrative of two parallel processes overlooked in the current Middle Eastern crisis: the apparently terminal decline of the Christian remnant in the Middle East after two millennia of precarious and mostly painful existence, and the remarkable indifference of the post-Christian Western world to its impending demise.

Already by their choice of the stage for what soon became a propaganda exercise the Muslim gunmen who occupied the church desecrated the basilica built on the site of the grotto where Jesus Christ is believed to have been born. They ate the food they found on the premises until it ran out, while more than 150 civilians went hungry. They consumed alcoholic drinks that they found in priests' quarters, undeterred by the Islamic ban on drinking alcohol. They tore up Bibles up for toilet paper. They turned one corner of the ancient church into an impromptu mosque. They even attempted to bury seven of their comrades, who were subsequently killed by Israeli snipers, inside the church or on its grounds -- obviously intending to turn one of the holiest Christian shrines into a place of Islamic pilgrimage to the fallen "martyrs."

Two weeks before the siege of the Church of the Nativity, as Israeli forces stormed into Bethlehem, an Israeli tank shell hit the facade of the nearby Holy Family Church, in a complex with an orphanage, hospital and hostel. The soldiers then fired, from fifty yards' distance, at the statue of the Virgin atop the Holy Family Church. The statue lost its left arm and its face was disfigured. The Israeli army expressed regret and promised investigation, but this did not look like an accidental shot: no terrorist could possibly hide behind the figure on the pinnacle of the hospital church. The story was reported by Reuters, and a picture taken by an AP photographer. It was available to the world media but ignored. These two incidents illustrate the predicament of the dwindling Christian remnant in the Middle East. Once thriving Christian communities are now minorities squeezed between the warring Jews and Muslims who may hate each other but all too often share their aversion to Christianity. Institutionalized or covert discrimination to which Christians are subjected in Syria, Israel, Egypt, and Lebanon, accompanied by occasional eruptions of anti-Christian violence by the Muslim majority in the last two countries, have contributed to an exodus that threatens to eradicate the believers in Christ in the lands of his birth and life.

(Excerpted from Chronicles Magazine)

Pope hails persecuted Christians as modern martyrs

2008-01-11T07:23:00.000-05:00

VATICAN CITY, Dec 26 (Reuters - Wed Dec 26, 2007 7:26am EST) - Pope Benedict said on Wednesday that Christians faced persecution, torture and death in some parts of the world and continued to be made martyrs for their faith.

In a message to pilgrims on the day after Christmas -- the feast day of St. Stephen, considered the first Christian martyr -- the Pope said Christians who die for their faith pray for forgiveness for their killers.

"We should always note that this is a distinctive characteristic of the Christian martyr -- it is exclusively an act of love, towards God and towards men, including the persecutors," he told crowds in a rainy St. Peter's Square.

"Christian martyrdom reminds us of the victory of love over hatred and death," he said.

St. Stephen was stoned to death by a mob in Jerusalem at a time when Christianity was first starting to spread. The Pope said such martyrdoms continued to this day.

"It is not rare even today that we receive news from various parts of the world of missionaries, priests, bishops, monks, nuns and lay people persecuted, imprisoned, tortured, deprived of their liberty or prevented from exercising it because they are disciples of Christ and apostles of the Gospel," he said.

The Pope did not give any examples, but it is less than two weeks since an Italian Catholic priest was stabbed in his church in Turkey, the latest in a spate of attacks on Christians in the predominantly Muslim country.

Another Italian priest in Turkey was shot dead in his church by a teenager in February, and in April three Christians had their throats cut at a Bible publishing house there.

On Wednesday, Hindu hardliners in India burned and damaged 12 churches, killing at least one person, in an outbreak of violence sparked by the reported injuring of a local Hindu leader by a Christian group. (Reporting by Robin Pomeroy, editing by Tim Pearce)

© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world.

Hindu Fundamentalists Beat 5 Nuns in Madhya Pradesh

2008-01-11T07:15:00.000-05:00

Mark Alessio
REMNANT COLUMNIST, New York

The accusation of “forced conversions to Christianity has once again been used as a pretext to justify Hindu fundamentalist violence against members of the Catholic community,” reports Asia News (Oct. 27, 2007):

Yesterday 5 sisters of the Poor Clare’s order were savagely beaten with sticks by a group of activists from Dharma Raksha Samiti (Committee for the protection of religion), a fundamentalist organisation in favour of sati (the ritual suicide of the widows). The incident took place yesterday afternoon in Raseli, Indore diocese, Madhya Pradesh. The police have refused the diocese’ attempts to report the incident.

The sisters, members of the Franciscan Clarist Congregation, are Sr. Jincy, 40, Sr. Sayujia, 27, Sr. Pavitra, 26, Sr. Sweta, 26 and Sr. Anna Maria, 27. The young sisters are recovering from the brutal assault in Bhandari Hospital, where their condition is described as “grave.”

“We had gone to attend the Rosary Prayer at Mr. Anil’s house. He is a Catholic by birth and the driver of our convent, when they attacked us with sticks”, says Sr. Jincy. Kamal Waghela of the Dharma Raksha Samiti group accused the nuns of trying to convert local Hindus to Catholicism. He claims that, after the prayer meeting, the sisters “picked a quarrel on this issue which lead to [sic] clash between the sisters and our workers”.

Christiansunite.com reports (Nov. 6, 2007) that twenty Hindu militants surrounded the home of Mr. Anil in the city of Indore at approximately 8:30 PM on the evening of October 25th. At the conclusion of the prayer gathering, the mob began accusing the nuns of forcibly converting local Hindus to Christianity. They then proceeded to attack the sisters, continuing to assault them until police arrived. The police escorted the nuns to safety, but not before Sr. Jincy suffered serious head injuries as a result of the attack. Sr. Sayujya suffered a broken leg in the assault.

A statement released after the attack by the Indore diocese stated: “It is nothing but finding an easy way to justify the brutality done to women religious, we will fight with tooth and nail.” Archbishop Leo Cornelio, Chairman, Catholic Bishops Council of Madhya Pradesh and Chattisgarh, said, “We have been suffering silently but it looks that the fundamental organizations take it as a weakness from our part, it is an attack on women and human freedom.”

Local police refused to launch an official investigation into the attack until Catholic authorities agreed to call off a hunger-strike planned in response to the brutal beating of the five sisters. Police felt that such a protest would have reflected poorly on a meeting of Madhya Pradesh Industries which was scheduled for October 27th. Msgr. Cornelio told AsiaNews:

What is alarming is that these fanatical outfits are so powerful politically, that the authorities cannot take care of Law and Order and fail in their duty to protect the citizens and hence these fanatics get encouraged to intensify their hate propaganda and anti-minority sentiments to carry out act [sic] of violence towards the monitory [sic] and get away scot-free. India is a democratic country and this cannot be tolerated, our religious freedom is non-negotiable.

There is a bizarre twist to the story. After beating the nuns and inflicting serious injury upon them, the Hindu zealots filed charges against the sisters at the local police station under the state's law restricting religious conversions.

Comment: Strangely enough, the first thing that entered my mind after reading about the five courageous nuns brutally beaten in Madhya Pradesh was the image of two “Womanpriest” harpies who recently made the headlines here in the States. According to a November 7, 2007 Associated Press report, Rose Marie Dunn Hudson, 67, and Elsie Hainz McGrath, 69, are going to be “ordained” as “priests.”

Naturally, the St. Louis Archdiocese has warned the “ladies” that they will be excommunicated should they proceed with their unholy little charade. The response from the women was, of course, the usual protestations of martyrdom. "It's a typically hierarchical form of intimidation, and we will not be intimidated," crowed Elsie McGrath. "What is he going to do, burn us at the stake, or what?" asked Rose Marie Hudson.

Compare, for a moment, McGrath and Hudson... and ask who has the greater claim to “victimhood.” The nuns of Madhya Pradesh risked attending a prayer gathering at the house of a fellow Catholic, knowing full well that they risked their lives to do so. McGrath and Hudson cluck because they desperately want to “take the stage” (which is all that the altar is for them) to play a clerical form of “dress-up.” With Catholics being persecuted daily in places like India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, China, etc., you would hope that, at the very least, these “womanpriest” types would feel some sense of shame in comparing themselves to truly courageous Catholic women.

As it is with Catholics everywhere these days, those living in India have an entire socio-political system against them. However, unlike Catholics living in America, who suffer “attacks” in the form of smarmy Hollywood blasphemies and persecution from idiotic celebrities and profiteering “civil-rights” groups, our brethren in India suffer direct assaults upon their persons. In fact, anyone who describes himself as a “Christian” is vulnerable to the most brutal assaults. The reports flow out of India in tidal waves. An 18-year-old Protestant boy from Madhya Pradesh, returning from a prayer meeting, dies after being thrown from a train by members of a militant Hindu youth group. The wife of a Protestant minister in Bihar state is raped by a man put up to the deed by Hindu militants. In Orissa, three daughters of a Protestant pastor are molested by Hindu militants and chased down by a tractor while on their way to school.

Meanwhile, Indian states pass “anti-conversion bills,” mandating jail-time and fines for anyone found "forcibly converting" another person. As can be seen from the case of the five nuns savagely beaten in Madhya Pradesh, “forcibly converting” is in the eye of the beholder. And, of course, the police turn a blind eye to violence directed against Catholics and Protestants. In fact, in the case of the boy thrown from the train, the police wanted to rule his death a “suicide!”

No, aspiring “womenpriests” Rose Marie Dunn Hudson and Elsie Hainz McGrath, you won’t be burned at the stake by an “intimidating” hierarchy. You’ll be able to play dress-up, and no one will bother you. And, pray God, someday, you may acquire a fraction of the love for Christ and the Catholic Faith that has motivated the true martyrs of history. In fact, may we all be so blessed.

The One True Church

2008-01-11T07:00:00.000-05:00

The Only Church That Christ Established Is The Catholic Church

By Arnold Damen S.J.

Imprimatur: Michael Augustine, Archbishop of New York

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be condemned." Mark xvi. 16.

I. MY DEARLY BELOVED CHRISTIANS: From these words of our Divine Savior it has already been proved to you, that faith is necessary for salvation and without faith there is no salvation; without faith there is eternal damnation. Read your own Protestant Bible, 16th verse of St. Mark, and you will find it stronger there than in the Catholic Bible.

Now, then, what kind of faith must a man have to be saved? Will any faith do? Why, if any faith will do, the devil himself will be saved, for the Bible says the devils believe and tremble.

It is, therefore, not a matter of indifference what religion a man professes; he must profess the right and true religion, and without that there is no hope of salvation, for it stands to reason, my dear people, that if God reveals a thing or teaches a thing, He wants to be believed. Not to believe is to insult God.

Doubting His word, or believing even with doubt and hesitating, is an insult to God, because it is doubting His Sacred Word. We must, therefore, believe without doubting, without hesitating.

I have said, out of the Catholic Church there is no divine faith-can be no divine faith out of that Church. Some of the Protestant friends will be shocked at this, to hear me say that out of the Catholic Church there is no divine faith, and that without faith there is no salvation, but damnation. I will prove all I have said.

I have said that out of the Catholic Church there can be no divine faith. What is divine faith? When we believe a thing upon the authority of God, and believe it without doubt, without hesitating. Now, all our separated brethren outside of the Catholic Church take the private interpretation of the Bible for their guide; but the private interpretation of the Bible can never give them divine faith.

Let me, for instance, suppose for a moment, here is a Presbyterian; he reads his Bible; from the reading of his Bible he comes to the conclusion that Jesus Christ is God. Now, you know this is the most essential of all Christian doctrines - the foundation of all Christianity. From the reading of his Bible he comes to the conclusion that Jesus Christ is God; and he is a sensible man, an intelligent man, and not a presumptuous man. And he says: "Here is my Unitarian neighbor, who is just as reasonable and intelligent as I am, as honest, as learned, and as prayerful as I am, and, from the reading of the Bible, he comes to the conclusion that Christ is not God at all. "Now," says he, "to the best of my opinion and judgment, I am right, and my Unitarian neighbor is wrong; but, after all," says he, "I may be mistaken! Perhaps I have not the right meaning of the text, and if I am wrong, perhaps he is right, after all; but, to the best of my opinion and judgment, I am right and he is wrong."

On what does he believe? On what authority? On his own opinion and judgment. And what is that? A human opinion - human testimony, and, therefore, a human faith. He cannot say positively, "I am sure, positively sure, as sure as there is a God in heaven, that this is the meaning of the text." Therefore, he has no other authority but his own opinion and judgment, and what his preacher tells him. But the preacher is a smart man. There are many smart Unitarian preachers also, but that proves nothing; it is only human authority, and nothing else, and, therefore, only human faith. What is human faith? Believing a thing upon the testimony of man. Divine faith is believing a thing on the testimony of God.

II. The Catholic has divine faith, and why? Because the Catholic says: "I believe in such and such a thing." Why? "Because the Church teaches me so." And why do you believe the Church? "Because God has commanded me to believe the teaching of the Church; and God has threatened me with damnation if I do not believe the Church, and we are taught by St. Peter, in his epistle, that there is no private prophecy or interpretation of the Scriptures, for the unlearned and unstable wrest the very Scriptures, the Bible, to their own damnation.''

That is strong language, my dear people, but that is the language of St. Peter, the head of the Apostles. The unlearned and unstable wrest the Bible to their own damnation! And yet, after all, the Bible is the book of God, the language of inspiration; at least, when we have a true Bible, as we Catholics have, and you Protestants have not.

But, my dearly beloved Protestant friends, do not be offended at me for saying that. Your own most learned preachers and bishops tell you that, and some have written whole volumes in order to prove that the English translation, which you have, is a very faulty and false translation.

Now, therefore, I say that the true Bible is as the Catholics have it, the Latin Vulgate; and the most learned among the Protestants themselves have agreed that the Latin Vulgate Bible, which the Catholic Church always makes use of, is the best in existence; and, therefore, it is, as you may have perceived, that when I preach I give the text in Latin, because the Latin text of the Vulgate is the best extant.

III. Now, they may say that Catholics acknowledge the Word of God; that it is the language of inspiration; and that, therefore, we are sure that we have the Word of God; but, my dear people, the very best thing may be abused, the very best thing; and, therefore, our Divine Savior has given us a living teacher, that is to give us the true meaning of the Bible.

And He has provided a teacher with infallibility; and this was absolutely necessary, for without this - without infallibility we could never be sure of our faith. There must be an infallibility; and we see that in every well-ordered government, in every government-in England, in the United States, and in every country, empire and republic, there is a Constitution and a supreme law.

But you are not at liberty to explain the Constitution and supreme law as you think proper, for then there would be no more law if every man were allowed to explain the law and Constitution as he should think proper.

Therefore, in all governments there is a supreme judge and supreme court, and to the supreme judge is referred all different understandings of the law and the Constitution. By the decisions of the supreme judge all have to abide, and if they did not abide by that decision why, my dear people, there would be no law any more, but anarchy, disorder and confusion.

Again, suppose for a moment that the Blessed Savior has been less wise than human governments, and that He had not provided for the understanding of His Constitution, and of His Law of the Church of God. If He had not, my dear people, it would never have stood as it has stood for the last eighteen hundred and fifty-four years. He has then established a Supreme Court, a Supreme Judge in the Church of the Living God.

IV. It is admitted on all sides, by Protestants and Catholics alike acknowledged, that Christ has established a Church; and, strange to say, all our Protestant friends acknowledge, too, that he has established but one Church - but one Church - for, whenever Christ speaks of His Church, it is always in the singular. Bible readers, remember that; my Protestant friends, pay attention. He says: "Hear the Church," - not hear the churche s- "I have built My Church upon a rock" - not My churches.

Whenever He speaks, whether in figures or parables of His Church, He always conveys to the mind a oneness, a union, a unity.

He speaks of His Church as a sheepfold, in which there is but one shepherd - that is the head of all, and the sheep are made to follow his voice; "other sheep I have who are not of this fold." One fold, you see. He speaks of His Church as of a kingdom, in which there is but one king to rule all; speaks of His Church as a family in which there is but one father at the head; speaks of His Church as a tree, and all the branches of that tree are connected with the trunk, and the trunk with the roots; and Christ is the root, and the trunk is Peter and the Popes, and the large branches are the bishops, and the smaller branches the priests, and the fruit upon that tree are the faithful throughout the world; and the branch, says He, that is cut off from that tree shall wither away, produce no fruit, and is only fit to be cast into the fire - that is, damnation.

This is plain speaking, my dear people; but there is no use in covering the truth. I want to speak the truth to you, as the Apostles preached it in their time - no salvation out of the Church of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

V. Now, which is that Church? There are now three hundred and fifty different Protestant churches in existence, and almost every year one or two more are added; and besides this number there is the Catholic Church.

Now, which of all these varied churches is the one Church of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? All claim to be the Church of Jesus.

But, my dear beloved people, it is evident no church can be the Church of Jesus except the one that was established by Jesus. And when did Jesus establish His Church? When? When He was here upon earth. And how long ago is it that Christ was upon earth? You know our Christian era dates from Him. He was born many centuries ago. That is an historical fact admitted by all. He lived on earth thirty-three years. That was about nineteen centuries before our time. That is the time Christ established His Church on earth. Any Church, then, that has not existed thus long, is not the Church of Jesus Christ, but is the institution or invention of some man or other; not of God, not of Christ, but of man.

Now, where is the Church, and which is the Church that has existed thus long? All history informs you that is the Catholic Church; she, and she only among all Christian denominations on the face of the earth, has existed so long. All history, I say, bears testimony to this; not only Catholic history, but Pagan history, Jewish history and Protestant history, indirectly.

The history, then, of all nations, of all people, bears testimony that the Catholic Church is the oldest, the first; is the one established by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

If there be any Protestant preacher who can prove that the Catholic Church has come into existence since that time, let him come to see me, and I will give him a thousand dollars. My dear preachers, here is a chance of making money - a thousand dollars for you.

Not only all history, but all the monuments of antiquity bear testimony to this, and all the nations of the earth proclaim it. Call on one of your preachers and ask him which was the first church - the first Christian Church. Was it the Presbyterian, the Episcopalian, the Church of England, the Methodist, the Universalist or the Unitarian? And they will answer you it was the Catholic Church.

But, my dear friend, if you admit that the Catholic Church is the first and the oldest-the Church established by Christ - why are you not a Catholic? To this they answer that the Catholic Church has become corrupted; has fallen into error, and that, therefore, it was necessary to establish a new church. A new church, a new religion.

And to this we answer: that if the Catholic Church had been once the true church, then she is true yet, and shall be the true Church of God to the end of time, or Jesus Christ has deceived us.
Hear me, Jesus, hear what I say! I say that if the Catholic Church now, in the nineteenth century, is not the true Church of God as she was 1854 years ago, then I say, Jesus, Thou hast deceived us, and Thou art an impostor! And if I do not speak the truth, Jesus, strike me dead in this pulpit - let me fall dead in this pulpit, for I do not want to be a preacher of a false religion!

VI. I will prove what I have said. If the Catholic Church has been once the true Church of God, as is admitted by all, then she is the true Church yet, and shall be the true Church of God until the end of time, for Christ has promised that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church. He says that He has built it upon a rock, and that the gates of hell shall never prevail against it.

Now, my dear people, if the Catholic Church has fallen into error, then the gates of hell have prevailed against her; and if the gates of hell have prevailed against her, then Christ has not kept his promise, then He has deceived us, and if He has deceived us, then He is an impostor! If He be an impostor, then He is not God, and if He be not God, then all Christianity is a cheat and an imposition.

Again, in St. Matthew, 28th chapter and verses XIX and XX., our Divine Savior says to His Apostles: ''Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe whatsoever I have commanded you." "Lo," says He, "I, Jesus. The Son of the Living God. I, the Infinite Wisdom, the Eternal Truth, am with you all days. Even until the end of the world."

Christ, then, solemnly swears that He shall be with His Church all days to the end of time, to the consummation of the world. But Christ cannot remain with the Church that teaches error, or falsehood, or corruption. If, therefore, the Catholic Church has fallen into error and corruption, as our Protestant friends say she has, then Christ must have abandoned her; if so, He has broken His oath; if He has broken His oath He is a perjurer, and there is no Christianity at all. Again, our Divine Savior (St. John, 14th chapter) has promised that He would send to His Church the Spirit of Truth, to abide with her forever. If, then, the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of Truth, teaches the Church all truth, and teaches her all truth forever, then there never has been, and never can be, one single error in the Church of God, for where there is all truth there is no error whatsoever.

Christ has solemnly promised that He will send to the Church the Spirit of Truth, who shall teach all truth forever; therefore, there has never been a single error in the Church of God, or Christ has failed in His promises if there has.

Again, Christ commands us to hear and believe the teachings of the Church in all things; at all times and in all places. He does not say hear the Church for a thousand years or for fifteen hundred years, but hear the Church, without any limitation, without any reservation, or any restriction of time whatever. That is, at all times; in all things until the end of time, and he that does not hear the Church let him be unto thee, says Christ, as a heathen and as a publican. Therefore, Christ says that those who refuse to hear the Church must be looked upon as heathens; and what is a heathen? One that does not worship the true God; and a publican is a public sinner. This is strong language. Could Christ command me to believe the Church if the Church could have led me astray - could lead me into error? If the teaching of the Church be corrupt, could He, the God of truth, command me without any restriction or limitation to hear and believe the teachings of the Church which He has established?

Again: Our Divine Savior commands me to hear and believe the teaching of the Church in the same manner as if He Himself were to speak to us. "He that heareth you,'' says He, in His charge to the Apostles, "heareth Me, and he th espiseth you despiseth Me." So then, when I believe what the Church teaches I believe what God teaches. If I refuse what the Church teaches I refuse what God teaches.

So that Christ has made the Church the organ by which He speaks to man, and tells us positively that we must believe the teaching of the Church as if He Himself were to speak to us.

Therefore, says St. Paul, in his Epistle to Timothy, "the Church is the ground" - that is, the strong foundation - "and the pillar of the truth." Take the ground or foundation of this edifice away, and it crumbles down; so with regard to these pillars upon which the roof rests; take them away and the roof will fall in; so St. Paul says, "the Church is the ground and the pillar of truth," and the moment you take away the authority of the Church of God you induce all kinds of errors and blasphemous doctrines. Do we not see it?

VII. In the sixteenth century Protestantism did away with the authority of the Church and constituted every man his own judge of the Bible, and what was the consequence? Religion upon religion, church upon church, sprang into existence, and has never stopped springing up new churches to this day. When I gave my Mission in Flint, Michigan, I invited, as I have done here, my Protestant friends to come and see me. A good and intelligent man came to me and said:

I will avail myself of this opportunity to converse with you."

"What Church do you belong to, my friend," said I.

"To the Church of the Twelve Apostles," said he.

"Ha! ha!" said I, "I belong to that Church too. But, tell me, my friend, where was your Church started?"

"In Terre Haute, Indiana," says he.

"Who started the Church, and who were the Twelve Apostles, my friend?" said I.

"They were twelve farmers," said he; "we all belonged to the same Church - the Presbyterian - but we quarreled with our preacher, separated from him, and started a Church of our own."

"And that," said I, "is the Twelve Apostles you belonged to - twelve farmers of Indiana! The Church came into existence about thirty years ago."

A few years ago, when I was in Terre Haute, I asked to be shown the Church of the Twelve Apostles. I was taken to a window and it was pointed out to me, "but it is not in existence any more," said my informant, "it is used as a wagonmaker's shop now."

Again, St. Paul, in his Epistles to the Galatians, says: "Though we Apostles, or even an angel from heaven were to come and preach to you a different Gospel from what we have preached, let him be anathema." That is the language of St. Paul, because, my dearly beloved people, religion must come from God, not from man. No man has a right to establish a religion; no man has a right to dictate to his fellow-man what he shall believe and what he shall do to save his soul. Religion must come from God, and any religion that is not established by God is a false religion, a human institution, and not an institution of God; and therefore did St. Paul say in his Epistles to the Galatians, "Though we Apostles or even an angel from heaven were to come and preach to you a new Gospel, a new religion, let them be anathema."

VIII. You see, then, my dearly beloved people, from the text of the Scripture I have quoted that, if the Catholic Church has been once the true Church, then she is yet the true Church.

You have also seen from what I have said that the Catholic Church is the institution of God, and not of man, and this is a fact - a fact of history, and no fact of history so well supported, so well proved, as that the Catholic Church is the first, the Church established by Jesus Christ.

So, in like manner, it is an historical fact that all the Protestant churches are the institutions of man - every one of them. And I will give you their dates, and the names of their founders or institutors.

In the year 1520 - 368 years ago - the first Protestant came into the world. Before that one there was not a Protestant in the world, not one on the face of the whole earth; and that one, as all history tells us, was Martin Luther, who was a Catholic priest, who fell away from the Church through pride, and married a nun. He was excommunicated from the Church, cut off, banished, and made a new religion of his own.

Before Martin Luther there was not a Protestant in the world; he was the first to raise the standard of rebellion and revolt against the Church of God. He said to his disciples that they should take the Bible for their guide, and they did so. But they soon quarreled with him, Zuinglius, and a number of others, and every one of them started a new religion of his own.

After the disciples of Martin Luther came John Calvin, who in Geneva established the Presbyterian religion, and hence, almost all of those religions go by the name of their founder.

I ask the Protestant, "Why are you a Lutheran, my friend ? "

"Well," says he, "because I believe in the doctrine of good Martin Luther."

Hence, not of Christ, but of man - Martin Luther. And what kind of a man was he? A man who had broken the solemn oath he had made at the altar of God, at his ordination, ever to lead a pure, single, and virginal life. He broke that solemn oath, and married a Sister Catherine, who had also taken the same oath of chastity and virtue. And this is the first founder of Protestantism in the world. The very name by which they are known tells you they came from Martin Luther.

So the Presbyterians are sometimes called Calvinists because they come from, or profess to believe in, John Calvin.

IX. After them came Henry VIII. He was a Catholic, and defended the Catholic religion; he wrote a book against Martin Luther in defense of the Catholic doctrine. That book I have myself seen in the library of the Vatican at Rome a few years ago. Henry VIII. defended the religion, and for doing so was titled by the Pope "Defender of the Faith." It came down with his successors, and Queen Victoria inherits it today. He was married to Catherine of Aragon; but there was at his court a maid of honor to the Queen, named Ann Boleyn, who was a beautiful woman, and captivating in appearance. Henry was determined to have her. But he was a married man. He put in a petition to the Pope to be allowed to marry her - and a foolish petition it was, for the Pope had no power to grant the prayer of it. The Pope and all the bishops in the world cannot go against the will of God. Christ says: "If a man putteth away his wife and marrieth another, he commiteth adultery, and he that marrieth her who is put away committeth adultery also."

As the Pope would not grant the prayer of Henry's petition he took Ann Boleyn anyhow, and was excommunicated from the Church.

After a while there was another maid of honor, prettier than the first, more beautiful and charming in the eyes of Henry, and he said he must have her, too. He took the third wife, and a fourth, fifth and sixth followed. Now this is the founder of the Anglican Church, the Church of England; and, therefore, it is that it goes by the name of the Church of England.

Our Episcopalian friends are making great efforts nowadays to call themselves Catholic, but they shall never come to it. They own that the name Catholic is a glorious one, and they would like to possess it. The Apostles said: "I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Holy Catholic Church'' - they never said, in the Anglican Church. The Anglicans deny their religion, for they say they believe in the Holy Ghost, the Holy Catholic Church. Ask them are they Catholics, and they say, "Yes, but not Roman Catholics; we are English Catholics." What is the meaning of the word Catholic? It comes from the Greek word Catholicus - universal - spread all over the earth, and everywhere the same. Now, first of all, the Anglican Church is not spread all over the earth; it only exists in a few countries, and chiefly only where the English language is spoken. Secondly, they are not the same all over the earth, for there are now four different Anglican churches: The Low Church, the High Church, the Ritualist Church and the Puseyite Church. Catholicus means more than this, not only spread all over the earth and everywhere the same, but it means, moreover, at all times the same, from Christ up to the present day. Now, then, they have not been in existence from the time of Christ. There never was an Episcopalian Church or an Anglican Church before Henry VIII. The Catholic Church had already existed fifteen hundred years before the Episcopal came into the world.

After Episcopalianism, different other churches sprang up. Next came the Methodist, about one hundred and fifty years ago. It was started by John Wesley, who was at first a member of the Episcopalian Church; subsequently he joined the Moravian Brethren, but not liking them, he made a religion of his own - the Methodist Church.

After John Wesley several others sprang up; and finally came the Campbellites, about sixty years ago. This Church was established by Alexander Campbell, a Scotchman.

X. Well, now, my dear beloved people, you may think that the act of the twelve apostles of Indiana was a ridiculous one, but they had as much right to establish a church as had Henry VIII, or Martin Luther, or John Calvin. They had no right at all, and neither had Henry VIII, or the rest of them any right whatsoever.

Christ had established His Church and given His solemn oath that His Church should stand to the end of time; promised that He had built it upon rock, and that the gates of hell should never prevail against it - hence, my dear people, all those different denominations of religion are the invention of man; and I ask you can man save the soul of his fellow-man by any institution he can make? Must not religion come from God?

And, therefore, my dearly beloved separated brethren, think over it seriously. You have a soul to be saved, and that soul must be saved or damned; either one or the other, it will dwell with God in heaven or with the devil in hell; therefore, seriously meditate upon it.

When I gave my Mission in Brooklyn several Protestants became Catholics. Among them there was a very highly educated and intelligent Virginian. He was a Presbyterian. After he had listened to my lecture he went to see his minister, and he asked him to be kind enough to explain a text of the Bible. The minister gave him the meaning. "Well, now," said the gentleman, "are you positive and sure that is the meaning of the text, for several other Protestants explain it differently?" "Why, my dear young man," says the preacher, "we never can be certain of our faith." "Well, then," says the young man, "good-bye to you: If I cannot be sure of my faith in the Protestant Church, I will go where I can," and he became a Catholic.

We are sure of our faith in the Catholic Church, and if our faith is not true, Christ has deceived us. I would, therefore, beg you, my separated brethren, to procure yourselves Catholic books. You have read a great deal against the Catholic Church, now read something in favor of it. You can never pass an impartial sentence if you do not hear both sides of the question.

What would you think of a judge before whom a policeman would bring a poor offender, and who on the charge of the policeman, without hearing the prisoner, would order him to be hung? "Give me a hearing," says the poor man, "and I will prove my innocence. I am not guilty,'' says he. The policeman says he is guilty. "Well, hang him anyhow,'' says the judge. What would you say of that judge? Criminal judge! unfair man; you are guilty of the blood of the innocent! Would not you say that? Of course you would.

Well now, my dearly beloved Protestant friends, that is that is what you have been doing all along; you have been hearing one side of the question and condemning us Catholics as a superstitious lot of people, poor ignorant people, idolatrous people, non-sensical people, going and telling their sins to the priest; and what, after all, is the priest more than any other man? My dear friends, have you examined the other side of the question?

No, you do not think it worth your while; but this is the way the Jews dealt with Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ; and this is the way the Pagans and Jews dealt with the Apostles, the ministers of the Church, and with the primitive Christians.

Allow me to tell you, my friends, that you have been treating us precisely in the same way the Jews and Pagans treated Jesus Christ and His Apostles. I have said this evening hard things, but if St. Paul were here tonight, in this pulpit, he would have said harder things still. I have said them, however, not through a spirit of unkindness, but through a spirit of love, and a spirit of charity, in the hope of opening your eyes that your souls may be saved. It is love for your salvation, my dearly beloved Protestant brethren - for which I would gladly give my heart's blood - my love for your salvation that has made me preach to you as I have done.

XI. "Well," say my Protestant friends, "if a man thinks he is right would not he be right?" Let us suppose now a man in Ottawa, who wants to go to Chicago, but takes a car for New York; the conductor asks for his ticket; and he at once says: "You are in the wrong car; your ticket is for Chicago, but you are going to New York." "Well, what of that?" says the passenger. "I mean well." "Your meaning will not go well with you in the end," says the conductor, "for you will come out at New York instead of Chicago."

You say you mean well, my dear friends; your meaning will not take you to heaven; you must do well also. "He that doeth the will of My Father," says Jesus, "he alone shall be saved." There are millions in hell who meant well.

You must do well, and be sure you are doing well, to be saved. I thank my separated brethren for their kindness in coming to these controversial lectures. I hope I have said nothing to offend them. Of course, it would be nonsense for me not to preach Catholic doctrines.

Romans

2008-01-11T06:44:00.000-05:00

by Fr. Andre Lemieux

St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans is one of the greatest human documents of all time. In majestic style it expressed the radical concept of justification by Faith in Jesus Christ, rather than by the works of the old Mosaic Law.

This concept is now so clearly central to Christianity that nobody can reject it and still call himself Christian. However, when Paul wrote the Epistle on his third missionary journey about 25 years after Our Lord died on the cross, the concept was radical because for 1500 years previously the Jews had believed in justification by the Law. Even "completed" Jews (those who became the first Christians) would not accept the idea of replacing the Law of Moses with the Cross of Christ. They insisted that the Gentile converts had to be circumcised and to observe all the constrictive practices of the Old Law.

But this was a grave misunderstanding of the purpose of Our Lord's life and death, and it threatened to nullify the Incarnation of God altogether. Hence St. Paul's presentation in "Romans" of justification by faith is, as it were, interspersed with a series of objections on the part of an imaginary Jew to the new doctrine of salvation by Jesus Christ. In overcoming these objections which he must have been meeting with unceasingly as Doctor of the Gentiles, St. Paul lays out what might be called the Founding Charter of Christianity:_

The Gentiles are plunged in vice (I), but the law-breaking Jew are no better (II), and so all men alike are in absolute need of God's grace (III). Man attains this grace by believing in Jesus Christ (III) with a faith in God of which Abraham, Father of the Jews, provides the outstanding example (IV). Thus justification by faith, man is freed from sin to lead the life of the spirit in Christ Jesus (V-VIII). That Jews should be rejecting this Gospel of which they were the cradle, is a great mystery, but this rejection is for the benefit of the Gentiles, and the Jews will finally convert (IX-XI). Let then the Catholics of Rome, Jew or Gentile, faithfully practice their religion, leading lives of holiness and justice (XII, XIII), and putting up with their weaker brethren for Christ's sake (XIV, XV). Greetings finally to a long list of the Catholics in Rome (XVI), already famous for their obedience (v.19)

Does the Catholic Church Encourage us to Read Scripture?

a) Yes, b) upon certain conditions.

a) In 1968, many Indulgences were done away with, but this one remained: "A partial indulgence is granted to any Catholic who reads Scripture with due veneration for the word of God and in the manner of spiritual reading. The indulgence is plenary if he does this for at least half an hour." (Enchiridion Indulgentiarum, 1968, no. 50).

Scripture itself recommends we draw on its treasures: "For what things soever were written, were written for our learning: that through patience and the comfort of the scriptures, we might have hope" (Rom. XV,4). "The Holy Scriptures ... can instruct thee to salvation by the faith which is in Christ Jesus" (II Tim. III, 15).

b) But the Bible itself also indicates certain conditions for reading Scripture: St. Peter says that in the epistles of "his most dear brother" Paul, "are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction" (II Peter III, 15-16). For instance, numberless souls will have been drawn to destruction by Luther's having wrested "justification by Faith" to mean a subjective assurance of one's being saved regardless of the works that God requires to follow faith and to proceed from it (Gal. V6; James II, 20-26).

So the Catholic Church unconditionally encourages her children to study their catechism because here divine truth is humanly expressed to convey mysteries of God which m ay be neither simple nor clear, Mother Church encourages her children to read on certain conditions:- that they never use non-Catholic translations or non-Catholic editions (which would include all modernist editions), that they approach Scripture with humility and reverence as the Word of God that it is, and that they be willing to accept that the Catholic Church is the sole guardian of Scripture and sole interpreter of its true meaning.

The Challoner Douay-Rheims Bible, easily available in the U.S.A., provides a reliable text of Scripture, of which the Overview within provides an introduction to the Epistle to the Romans.

New Hampshire District Admits Ron Paul Votes Not Counted

2008-01-09T22:10:00.000-05:00

Sutton township reported Congressman had zero votes, actual number was 31

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Wednesday, January 9, 2008

The head clerk of the New Hampshire town of Sutton has been forced to admit that Ron Paul received 31 votes yet when the final amount was transferred to a summary sheet and sent out to the media, the total was listed as zero. The fiasco throws the entire primary into doubt and could lead to a re-count.

As we reported earlier today, an entire family voted for Ron Paul in Sutton, yet when the voting map on the Politico website was posted, the total votes for Ron Paul were zero.

Vote fraud expert Bev Harris contacted the head clerk in Sutton, Jennifer Call, who was forced to admit that the 31 votes Ron Paul received were completely omitted from the final report sheet, claiming "human error" was responsible for the mistake.

Two or three votes not counted could be a plausible mistake - but 31 votes for one candidate? "The classic method for rigging a hand count is to write the wrong number on the form," Harris told the Alex Jones Show.

"They are counting everything in public real nice, they fill out a form in public real nice and then they transfer it to another form and they call that a summary sheet and then that is the one they send in," explained Harris.

"What happened is she said they did not transfer the number correctly and put zero instead of 31 - that is unacceptable as an answer."

With 100% of precincts now reporting, the map originally listed zero votes for Ron Paul as you can see below. It has now been updated to reflect the 31 votes Paul actually received.

The remainder of the 31 people in Sutton who voted for Ron Paul need to go public immediately with the charge of vote fraud and make it known that they were cheated out of their right to vote.

Harris estimates that it could cost the Ron Paul campaign as much as $67,000 dollars for a recount, but such a move could throw the entire primary into doubt, especially in light of the fact that Barack Obama appears to have been cheated out of a win by Hillary Clinton .

C-SPAN: Possible Sutton County, NH vote fraud 1/8/0

New Hampshire Townships with more then 50 votes for “OTHER”

Hand Count Shows 15% For Ron Paul

Voter Fraud Against Paul Confirmed in Sutton, N.H.

Vote Fraud CONFIRMED - Paper vs. Electronic Ballots

Results: Precincts where Ron Paul had 0-3 votes total

Obama and Paul poll workers kicked out of some precincts

Ron Paul Votes Not Counted In New Hampshire District

New Hampshire's Polling Fiasco

Greenville Vote Discrepancy SAME as Sutton

Giuliani's Neocon Advisor Smears Ron Paul On Daily Show

Paul hopes cash gets him to Super Tuesday

Today's Modern Minstrels: Ron Paul Supporters

The Paul Campaign Speaks

Brave Sean, Coward Sean: Hannity Embellishes Confrontation with Paul Supporters

Fox News Used Planted Actor In Focus Groups

Six candidates to appear at GOP debate

The Persecution of Catholics in France by the Protestant Calvinists

2008-01-09T19:13:00.000-05:00

By William Thomas Walsh. EXCERPT FROM "PHILIP II" (Copyright © 1937)

Calvin: "Persons who persist in the superstitions of the Roman Antichrist . . . deserve to be repressed by the sword." (Harkness, Georgia, John Calvin: The Man and His Ethics, NY: Abingdon Press, NY, 1931)

In the fall of 1561 the Calvinists of France, well supplied with money, took arms under Conde' and Coligny and began marching through the country to mobilization points, often under the leadership of preachers armed to the teeth.

While these men thundered against the Scarlet Women of Babylon and preached slaughter with a fervor more becoming to Mohammedans than to men who called themselves Christians... they had begun to sack bishop's houses and churches, to destroy altars and images of Christ and of the saints, and to deprive Catholics of their arms.

The storm of hate, which had so long been gathering, burst in all its fury. Almost simultaneously, as if by a concerted signal, well-organized bands of Calvinists fell upon the Catholic churches, convents, schools and libraries. At Montpellier they sacked all the sixty churches and convents, and put one hundred-fifty priests and monks to the sword. At Nimes they made a great pile of statues and relics in front of the Cathedral, danced around it while the flames arose, yelled that they would have no more Mass or idolaters, and then wrecked and plundered the churches. At Montauban they dragged the Poor Clare from their convent, exposed them half-naked to the jibes of the paid mob, shouted insults at them and told them to get married. At Castres, in December, a Reformed Consistory or Sanhedrin, ordered the city officials to take every one found on the streets to Huguenot sermons. Priests were dragged from the altars, the Poor Clare were scourged at the whip's end, peasants were driven with blows to hear the preachers inveigh with their peculiar nasal intonation against the Mass, Confession, the Pope. The fields and vineyards around Catholic villages where the people refused to listen to the preaching were burned or cut down.

Within a year the Calvinists, according to one of their own estimates, "murdered 4,000 priests, monks and nuns, expelled or maltreated 12,000 nuns, sacked 20,000 churches, and destroyed 2,000 monasteries " (Novuvelle Collection de memoires relatif a l'histoire de France, Ch. XI, p. 512)with their priceless libraries and works of art. The rare manuscript collection of the ancient monastery of Cluny was irreparably lost, with many others. Sacred vessels from the churches were melted into money to pay German mercenaries, who were urged to be ruthless.

Coligny took an active part in many of the atrocities. He displayed such cold and vindictive cruelty, especially to priests and nuns, that Catholics came to call him Holofernes.(21) In some places the entrails of the victims were plucked forth, stuffed with straw, and given to the horse of the Huguenot troopers to eat. Hundreds of cities and villages were burned. Lyons and its prosperous commerce were ruined.

This ancient fury, deliberately cultivated, spared not even the dead. Not only was the tomb of William the Conqueror destroyed, but the venerated bodies of holy men and women who had spent their lives in the service of God and of the poor were dragged from their resting-places, trampled, burned, thrown into rivers. A mob cast down the statue of Saint Joan from the bridge at Orleans. Other fanatics threw the remains of Saint Irenaeus and Saint Martin of Tours into the Loire. In Poiters they destroyed the relics of Saint Hilary and precious books written by his hand. Breaking into the tomb of Saint Francis of Paula at Plessis-les-Tours, they found the body whole and incorrupt after more than half a century; instead of being awed by the phenomenon, they dragged it at the end of a rope thought the streets, and burned it. A few of the saint's bones were found afterward by Catholics and preserved in various church of the Order of Minims.

Not only those who had laid down their lives for Christ, but Christ Himself, seemed a special object of hatred to these men who called themselves Christians and taught the damnation of infants and the predestination of many souls to Hell. As in all anti-Christian revolutions, statues of the Savior were spat upon, knocked down and demolished. The Body of Christ was often injured and reviled in the Blessed Sacrament. At Nimes, in Paris and others places, the tabernacles were broken open, and the Host thrown out and trampled upon, both by men and by horses.

Although these atrocities were perpetrated by a small minority in an overwhelmingly Catholic country, all the forces of the national and local governments seemed paralyzed and impotent for the moment. The Calvinists had majority in the States-General and friends in the Parliament of Paris. There seemed to be men everywhere in important positions to protect them and to sidetrack any attempt to punish them.

Catherine, inspired by L' Hopital, issued and edict in January, 1562, giving the Calvinists the right to worship as they pleased outside the cities, provided the churches were restored and both sides abstained from violence. This was intended to mollify the Calvinists. It had no such effect. Taking if for the surrender it was, the Calvinists rejoiced over the first breach of the union of Church and State in France. They promptly destroyed the Cathedral in Beza's city, and drove away all the clergy. In part of Gascony no priest could be found within forty miles. More nuns were dragged form convents, more tabernacles opened and profaned. In February, just after the opening session of the Council of Trent (with French delegates present, thanks to the determination of their leader, the Cardinal of Lorraine) seventy Calvinist preachers met in solemn synod at Nimes and deliberately planned to destroy all the Catholic churches in the city and the diocese. They promptly proceeded to put the plan into execution, burned the Cathedral, and drove away all the priests. The reign of terror was not the impassioned unthinking work of an ignorant mob, but a carefully engineered program of spoliation, destruction and assassination.

Many Catholics who had at first supported the Coligny faction for some political reason, such as feud with Guises, now withdrew. The Constable Anne de Montmorency left the Politiques for the Catholic party. Anthony of Navarre returned to the Faith, joined Duke Francis de Guise, and proposed establishing the Inquisition to heal the wounds of France. But it was too late for such a peaceful measure.

Guise now started for Paris, at the invitation of Anthony of Navarre, taking along, with an armed escort, his children, and in a litter his sick wife, lonely daughter of Renee of France and Duke Hercule d' Este of Ferrara, of whom Ronsard had sung, Venus la sainte en sess graces habite....

At Vassy the cavalcade came upon a party of six or seven hundred Calvinist, most of them armed, holding a meeting in a barn. An altercation arose between some of Guise's men and the Calvinists. As the Duke rushed in to quell the disturbance, a Calvinist wounded him. Some of his men, infuriated, fell upon the heretics, killed twelve on the spots, and wounded forty others so badly that they afterward died.

Beza and the other vociferous propagandist of Calvinism seized upon this unfortunate but perhaps inevitable incident, inevitable considering the provocation given by the Calvinist Reign of Terror, to cry up the "Massacre of Vassy," until it was magnified into a cold-blooded slaughter of hundreds of noble and defenseless Calvinists. What is more remarkable is that so many modern historians have dated the Huguenot wars from this incident, instead of from the Tumult of Amboise. Beza preached a crusade against the Catholics. Conde' made another attempt to seize the young King, but failed. Guise meanwhile marched into Paris, and was received with delirious joy by the citizens. The merchants offered him 2,000,000 lives to defend the Faith and restore peace in the city. The Duke refused, saying he had come to place himself at the disposal of his King. Of all the principals in the first of the eight bloody Huguenot wars, this man clearly stands out, calm, courageous, loyal, patriotic and devout, a heroic character, one of the finest surely in French history.

The Homily that Caused an Outcry and the Priest to be Dismissed

2008-01-09T19:03:00.000-05:00

Homily on NFP provokes congregation member to stand up and shout at priest "When are you going to stop?"

By John Jalsevac
LifeSiteNews.com
Monday January 7, 2008
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2008/jan/08010703.html

ROCKFORD, Illinois, January 4, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - This past December 9, at St. James' parish in Rockford Illinois, a very normal Mass suddenly became a very unusual Mass when a parishioner stood up in the middle of the homily, interrupted the priest, shouting at him "When are you going to stop?", and then left, with her homosexual partner in tow. A few other parishioners also stood up and left the church. A few days later, the priest was dismissed from his duties at the parish by his bishop.

Catholics know that there are some things that you just don't hear preached from the pulpit any more. The most conspicuous of these unpreachables is sexual ethics, especially the idea that using contraception might be immoral, and contrary to a Culture of Life. Most priests know that these are unpopular subjects, and emphatically avoid them. But Fr. Tom Bartolomeo, who until several weeks ago was the associate pastor at St. James parish, is not your typical priest.

To begin with, Fr. Bartolomeo was ordained only just over a year ago. This, of course, is not exactly extraordinary in itself, except for the fact that he is now seventy years old. At an age when many other priests are retiring, therefore, he is only getting his feet wet.

Perhaps, says the elderly priest in an interview with LifeSiteNews.com, his newness to the ministry and late vocation explains his almost youth-like zeal for his priestly duties. "I'm going to die with my boots on," he says. "Who knows how many years I have left? That kind of puts pressure on me to preach the Gospel message. My days are numbered."

About a month ago, however, Fr. Bartolomeo's enthusiasm for the Gospel message brought an unexpected turn into his life, when he gave what he thought was a normal Advent homily. The homily was the second of a projected series of four homilies dealing with life and family issues, designed to coincide with the four Sundays of Advent - the season leading up to the birth of Jesus. This particular homily had to do with contraception and natural family planning.

The Catholic Church teaches that the use of contraception is intrinsically and gravely immoral. Church teaching does, however, allow married couples to use the natural rhythms of the female body to knowingly space children, if there is a sufficiently grave reason to do so. These fundamental moral teachings formed the basis of Fr. Bartolomeo's homily.

"New births, anniversaries and funerals, separations of any kind, a photograph from the past - give us pause and remind us whom we are bound to," he said in his homily, a copy of which he provided for LifeSiteNews. "Our human sexuality - father, mother, brother, sister - reveals our deepest relationships. We call God our father, and his Son our brother."

"Contraception, contra-conception, trivializes the sacred value of human sexuality - a danger humanity did not have to face a century ago before the advent of modern chemistry and technology, the pill (before or after) and a host of plastic devices."

"Contracept, take God's plan off the table, and you have mayhem," he said. "The most important thing in your lives, bearing children, is no longer discussed. It has been permanently removed from the conversation. Done deal. The pill, the IUD, the diaphragm, the sponge, the condom - who is making money here? - have shut down not only the body but the brain. And wives and husbands wonder why they grow apart? When a man and woman, a husband and wife, share daily this most wonderful mystery of their human sexuality they are bonding as nature and God intended."

In the middle of this homily however, say witnesses, one congregation member stood up and began to argue with the priest, yelling "When are you going to stop?" Gerald Weber, who has been a parishioner at St. James for 47 years, was at that Mass. "It was embarrassing, the noticeable argumentative tone with which she stopped him in his homily," he told LifeSiteNews. "Father treated her nicely for the way she was acting, but she continued yelling. She finally sat down, but then stood up again, and took her friend with her and made a show of leaving the church. With that there were some other people who objected to the subject matter."

While Weber suggests that the homily may have been somewhat "graphic" for a Sunday Mass, insofar as it touched on some of the science of NFP, he points out that nothing in the homily was contrary to Catholic teaching. The fact that Fr. Bartolomeo was dismissed from the parish Weber calls "drastic." "I think it's rather drastic, without knowing all the facts, to come down on a man in this way."

Another parishioner, Heidi Martinez, who was also at the Mass in question, disagrees that the homily was graphic, saying that she can't even recall what might have been considered objectionable in that way.

Martinez says she distinctly remembers the date and time of the homily, because she gave birth to her first-born child that same day, shortly after she left the church; she calls her new-born child her "miracle baby," since she had previously gone through three miscarriages. She also says that she has something of a different perspective on the homily, being as she is recently married. The message that Fr. Bartolmeo preached was extremely pertinent and necessary, she says. "The Catholic Church pushes all the time--don't use contraceptives, use NFP, and all that, but a lot of people don't know why. And if you don't hear it from the Church that pushes it, where are you going to get it from?"

"You're certainly not going to get it in the Catholic schools."

Weber also revealed to Fr. Bartolomeo, and LifeSiteNews, that the parishioner who had created the scene was a publicly practicing lesbian. She and her partner had recently been told that they could no longer lector or distribute Communion at the parish. "They [the lesbian couple] may have had an edge," says Weber, "because they have recently been kind of, not reprimanded, but not allowed to participate like they had been participating."

The priest, however, is quick to defend his bishop. "Bishop Doran's orthodox Catholic reputation is well established," he points out. "Our diocesan Respect Life Office under the leadership of Bishop Doran is continuously advancing the pro-life cause."

"I'm not being punished," Fr. Bartolomeo clarifies, pointing out that Bishop Doran agreed that his homily was perfectly in keeping with Catholic teaching. "I wasn't accused of doing anything wrong. I think the implication was that I was imprudent."

The Rockford Diocese's media relations official, Penny Wiegert, told LifeSiteNews that the diocese would not comment on Fr. Bartolomeo's dismissal, saying "The reasons for these moves are between the individual priest and his bishop and is considered a personnel issue that our diocese does not discuss in the press out of respect for both the individual priest and his bishop."
Wiegert also defended the Rockford Diocese's pro-NFP stance, saying "The Rockford Diocese is in the forefront of supporting Natural Family Planning and educating the faithful on its physical and spiritual benefits especially in its marriage preparation programs, seminars for married couples and in informational classes....The aforementioned forums are considered to be the most appropriate for educating and promoting the benefits and details of NFP. "

Fr. Bartolomeo, however, clearly does not agree that he was imprudent. "The Church is really under attack, and I think we flinch at the slight objections and I don't think that's the proper way to react to our enemies," he says. "Rather than dissuading me, all of this is drawing me more and more into that truth, into the Gospel. I have no idea where this is going to take me." He says that now he is beginning to read everything he can get on the life and family issues, and is looking into the possibility of pursuing advocacy in those areas.

He also disagrees that his homily was "graphic," observing that even the youngest children routinely encounter much more explicit material in their day-to-day encounters with television, the internet, and sex-ed at school.

The priest says that he was surprised at the adverse reactions to his homily, but is also learning that many of the Church's teachings on sexuality are not well-known, and are often considered optional by some Catholics. "The fact is, I suspect that most Catholics do not practice NFP," he says. "I think for many people there's a visceral reaction to that, particularly if they haven't heard it before. And tweaking of consciences can be painful."

But, he adds, "There's nothing more central to the malaise and disease in the church than contracepting Catholic couples, and not realizing the wonderful strengthening of faith that can be found in NFP. All you have to do is meet a family and their children to see that they have found the proper way to relate to each other. It's so demonstrably wonderful to see this natural, loving union of children. You don't ordinarily see that in families."

See Fr. Barolomeo's complete homily at http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2008/jan/080107a.html
*************

Fr. Tom Bartolomeo's Homily
Presented December 9, 2007 at St. James Parish, Rockford, Illinois

Every man innately prizes his own life above everything. No law of nature is as strong as the law of self-preservation and by extension the life of another united to his own. Most parents if needed would sacrifice their own lives for their childrens'. The same is often true in special relations such as the bond between soldiers in combat.

We speak of the family of man. Even in the worst of circumstances, violence and war, human life may be taken but it is never taken lightly. So, too, we extend our highest honors to firemen and soldiers who sacrifice their lives for others. Ask any parent of any new born child. New births, anniversaries and funerals, separations of any kind, a photograph from the past--give us pause and remind us whom we are bound to. Our human sexuality, father, mother, brother, sister reveals our deepest relationships. We call God, Our Father, and his son, our brother.

At a time, a century ago and earlier, when life was more organic, before baby formula, when babies were raised on mother's milk, a woman would not ovulate until she stopped suckling her child - nature's way of maintaining an intimate relationship of mother and child: children immunized from viral diseases, mothers immunized from breast cancer and children sufficiently spaced apart naturally. Imagine that! A woman's body would not release an egg for insemination as long as she suckled her child.

A woman's body has not changed. This remains God's plan for having children, not artificial contraception, chemical or mechanical, and all the health, emotional and spiritual dangers they present.

Sadly medical practice is not as holistic as it once was; now it is driven more by technology, chemistry and making money. Yet this same science can serve humanity by natural means- natural or organic family planning. It requires, however, some personal study and education, in place of supposedly other more convenient means (pills and plastic devises).

Sadly, too, so much of the medical profession is caught up in the trap of expanding internal medicine-prescription pads versus education. When I was recently hospitalized, I was handed by a doctor I did not know a prescription for additional medications I had not had before. I asked my own doctor, why? He explained that the government and the medical industry had decided from a large case study that additional medications may improve the average statistical results. I then sat down and consulted my own doctor, and we decided to maintain my current medication. What is a husband and wife, a man and a woman to do? Is a woman's primary recourse to a gynaecologist instead of her own and her husband's council in matters of sexuality and fertility?

Contraception, contra-conception, trivializes the sacred value of human sexuality - a danger humanity did not have to face a century ago before the advent of modern chemistry and technology, the pill, before or after, and a host of plastic devises.

God built the truth, our guidance, in our bodies - a wonderful process of fertility which, once understood, is the most effective, danger-free, means of growing a family. A woman's individual fertility cycle can be exactly determined by her and her husband's observations in as short as a three month period-for the purposes of bearing or deferring children. There are three indices determining a woman's fertility period: body temperature, the condition of cervical fluid and the cervix.

That's it. Set up your chart and you have the safest and most effective means of deciding when you choose to bear or defer having children. God's plan has always been there for husbands and wives.

The alternative is a wife whose primary relationship resides with a doctor whose appointments she must make and whose costly fees she and her husband must pay. And for what? For the woman to tell her doctor what she does not know about her body so he can make an uninformed decision? And where is her husband in all this? In some subservient position to another man...or woman doctor? A wallet in place of a conjugal mate?

Contracept, take God's plan off the table and you have mayhem. The most important thing in your lives, bearing children, is no longer discussed. It has been permanently removed from the conversation. Done deal. The pill, the IUD, the diaphragm, the sponge, the condom - who is making money here? - have shut down not only the body but the brain. And wives and husbands wonder why they grow apart?

When a man and woman, a husband and wife, share daily this most wonderful mystery of their human sexuality they are bonding as nature and God intended. Artificial contraception drives families apart. Has your wife taken the pill? How do you know? Or has she taken the pill and not told you, how do you know? If she has not taken the pill do you blame her? Has the husband had a vasectomy...in secret? How do you know? Who is responsible for the means of contraception? Do you resent your part or his part in the decision making? So sex is reduced to pleasure. What Christ had warned had happened in the days of Noah, "They were eating and drinking, marrying and remarrying" in the days before the flood.

Consider how the pleasure principle, "it feels good" or "it tastes good" has skewered our popular understanding of sexuality and nutrition - leaving in its wake an onslaught of sexual and eating disorders, an onslaught of sexual diseases, diabetes and obesity - including children's - which affect more than half our population. After coronary disease and cancer, eating and sexual disorders rank third and fourth as our most serious health issues today.

Their most pernicious effect corrupts the developing sensibility of children and their growing cynicism of sex and marriage. Can a man or boy see, speak or relate to a woman or girl without subconsciously evaluating her as an object of pleasure? The same can be said for women and girls' attitudes towards men and boys. I once heard a speaker who was a paraplegic from his neck down who explained how often women would open up to him and discuss matters with him which they would not ordinarily discuss with other men, because they sensed he was free of any predatorial sexuality.

Chastity, in marriage or in the single state, frees men to relate to woman as people first and women to relate to men as people first. Chastity relieves unhealthy tension and suspicion between the sexes. The liberation and honesty of a brother relating to a sister or a sister relating to a brother. There are no real personalities in promiscuous and pre-marital relations, only a sense of using and being used by the other which never lasts. Why sexuality at creation is a matter of permanency as Christ explained, "From the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother [and be joined to his wife], and the two shall be one flesh."

Good secular instruction books on natural family plan. Use of condoms or other artificial birth control means described in these books are not approved by the Catholic Church:

Nona Aquilar, The New NO-PILL NO-RISK Birth Control
Toni Weschler, MPH, Taking Charge of Your Fertility, revised edition.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(c) Copyright: LifeSiteNews.com. Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com).

How Many Heisman Winners Has Abortion Killed?

2008-01-09T18:56:00.000-05:00

Spirit & Life®
"The words I spoke to you are spirit and life." (Jn 6:63)
Human Life International e-Newsletter
Volume 01, Number 96 Friday, December 14, 2007

The sports world recently greeted the news that this year’s Heisman Trophy Winner, Tim Tebow from the University of Florida, was almost a casualty of abortion. Twenty-some years ago he was not the strapping 6’3”, 235 lb. beloved sports hero that he is today. At that time he was a one-inch-long unborn child whose existence, because of an amoebic infection, was defined as threat to his mother’s health. Pam Tebow, his mother, was told by a doctor that it would be in her best interests to abort this baby, and she refused. Her husband backed her up on that generous decision, and seven months later they gave birth to a perfectly healthy boy. Little did they know that twenty years later they would be standing on a national stage with a Heisman Trophy winner giving that magnificent witness to life. The world thanks you, Mr. and Mrs. Tebow! There cannot be a more touching Advent story than this.

I wonder if anyone has ever asked how many potential Heisman Trophy winners abortion has actually killed. The answer is, twelve. Reflect on that a bit as you read further because there is a larger lesson in the Tebows’ witness.

Dr. Brian Clowes, HLI researcher, has examined the data from the 2007 Statistical Abstract of the United States (most recent census data) and extrapolated the numbers of the various professions and categories of Americans who have been eliminated in the wake of nearly 49 million legalized abortions, one third of all Americans conceived since 1973. The following numbers are based on the actual government estimates of the professions represented in America. So then, who have we lost to abortion?

*2 US Presidents
*7 Supreme Court Justices
*102 US Senators and 589 Congressmen
*8,123 Federal, district and local court judges
*31 Nobel Prize laureates
*328 Olympic medalists including 123 Gold medalists
*6,092 professional athletes
*134,841 physicians and surgeons
*392,500 registered nurses
*70,669 priests, ministers, rabbis and imams including
*6,852 priests and 11,010 nuns (vocations “shortage”?)
*1,102,443 teachers (K-12)
*553,821 truck drivers
*224,518 maids and housekeepers
*336,939 janitors
*134,028 farmers and ranchers
*109,984 police officers and sheriff’s deputies
*39,477 firefighters
*17,221 barbers, and
*24,450,000…women (the gender of roughly half of all children aborted).

These numbers of course are only the tip of the iceberg. Keep in mind that we get our statistics about abortion from the abortion industry itself which has a vested interest in under-reporting the numbers. Likewise, these categories are only a few of the professions that Americans actually work in and are by no means a full portrayal of the total American workforce. What they represent, however, is the immense human toll that abortion takes on a society. Abortion-promoters present abortion as an exclusively private choice, but thirty-five years of abortion exposes the perniciousness of that lie. There is a social toll that comes from abortion which cannot easily be corrected.

For three and a half decades the feminists have reveled in a misleading “freedom to choose,” and on the basis of that false “right” have eliminated their children and done immense damage to the family as the basic unit of society. Those who respect these sacred realities, on the other hand, have their wives and husbands to grow old with, their children to enjoy and their grandkids to play with and spoil. The love of life, marriage and family never leaves its adherents penniless, lonely or abandoned, and every now and then God throws in a Heisman Trophy just to show the rest of us that it’s all worth it.

Sincerely Yours in Christ,

Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer,
President, Human Life International

G.K. Chesterton in Sight & Sound

2008-01-08T13:49:00.000-05:00

The Witness of the Heretics

2008-01-08T12:22:00.000-05:00

by G.K. Chestrton

from the book, The Everlasting Man

Christ founded the Church with two great figures of speech; in the final words to the Apostles who received authority to found it. The first was the phrase about founding it on Peter as on a rock; the second was the symbol of the keys. About the meaning of the former there is naturally no doubt in my own case; but it does not directly affect the argument here save in two more secondary aspects. It is yet another example of a thing that could only fully expand and explain itself afterwards, and even long afterwards. And it is yet another example of something the very reverse of simple and self-evident even in the language, in so far as it described a man as a rock when he had much more the appearance of a reed.

But the other image of the keys has an exactitude that has hardly been exactly noticed. The keys have been conspicuous enough in the art and heraldry of Christendom; but not everyone has noted the peculiar aptness of the allegory. We have now reached the point in history where something must be said of the first appearance and activities of the Church in the Roman Empire; and for that brief description nothing could be more perfect than that ancient metaphor. The Early Christian was very precisely a person carrying about a key, or what be said was a key. The whole Christian movement consisted in claiming to possess that key. It was not merely a vague forward movement, which might be better represented by a battering-ram. It was not something that swept along with it similar or dissimilar things, as does a modern social movement. As we shall see in a moment it rather definitely refused to do so. It definitely asserted that there was a key and that it possessed that key and that no other key was like it; in that sense it was as narrow as you please. Only it happened to be the key that could unlock the prison of the whole world; and let in the white daylight of liberty.

The creed was like a key in three respects; which can be most conveniently summed up under this symbol. First, a key is above all things a thing with a shape. It is a thing that depends entirely upon keeping its shape. The Christian creed is above all things the philosophy of shapes and the enemy of shapelessness. That is where it differs from all that formless infinity, Manichean or Buddhist, which makes a sort of pool of night in the dark heart of Asia; the ideal of uncreating all the creatures. That is where it differs also from the analogous vagueness of mere evolutionism; the idea of creatures constantly losing their shape. A man told that his solitary latchkey had been melted down with a million others into a Buddhistic unity would be annoyed. But a man told that his key was gradually growing and sprouting in his pocket, and branching into new wards or complications, would not be more gratified.

Second, the shape of a key is in itself a rather fantastic shape. A savage who did not know it was a key would have the greatest difficulty in guessing what it could possibly be. And it is fantastic because it is in a sense arbitrary. A key is not a matter of abstractions; in that sense a key is not a matter of argument. It either fits the lock or it does not. It is useless for men to stand disputing over it, considered by itself; or reconstructing it on pure principles of geometry or decorative art. It is senseless for a man to say he would like a simpler key; it would be far more sensible to do his best with a crowbar. And thirdly, as the key is necessarily a thing with a pattern, so this was one having in some ways a rather elaborate pattern. When people complain of the religion being so early complicated with theology and things of the kind, they forget that the world had not only got into a hole, but had got into a whole maze of holes and comers. The problem itself was a complicated problem; it did not in the ordinary sense merely involve anything so simple as sin. It was also full of secrets, of unexplored and unfathomable fallacies, of unconscious mental diseases, of dangers in all directions. If the faith had faced the world only with the platitudes about peace and simplicity some moralists would confine it to, it would not have had the faintest effect on that luxurious and labyrinthine lunatic asylum. What it I did do we must now roughly describe; it is enough to say here that there was undoubtedly much about the key that seemed complex; indeed there was only one thing about it that was simple. It opened the door.

There are certain recognized and accepted statements in this matter which may for brevity and convenience be described as lies. We have all heard people say that Christianity arose in an age of barbarism. They might just as well say that Christian Science arose in an age of barbarism. They may think Christianity was a symptom of social decay, as I think Christian Science a symptom of mental decay. They may think Christianity a superstition that ultimately destroyed a civilization, as I think Christian Science a superstition capable (if taken seriously) of destroying any number of civilizations. But to say that a Christian of the fourth or fifth centuries was a barbarian living in a barbarous time is exactly like saying that Mrs. Eddy was a Red Indian. And if I allowed my constitutional impatience with Mrs. Eddy to impel me to call her a Red Indian, I should incidentally be telling a lie. We may like or dislike the imperial civilization of Rome in the fourth century; we may like or dislike the industrial civilization of America in the nineteenth century; but that they both were what we commonly mean by a civilization no person of common sense could deny if he wanted to. This is a very obvious fact but it is also a very fundamental one; and we must make it the foundation of any further description of constructive Christianity in the past. For good or evil, it was preeminently the product of a civilized age, perhaps of an over-civilized age. This is the first fact apart from all praise or blame; indeed I am so unfortunate as not to feel that I praise a thing when I compare it to Christian Science. But it is at least desirable to know something of the savour of a society in which we are condemning or praising anything; and the science that connects Mrs. Eddy with tomahawks or the Mater Dolorosa with totems may for our general convenience be eliminated. The dominant fact, not merely about the Christian religion, but about the whole pagan civilization, was that which has been more than once repeated in these pages. The Mediterranean was a lake in the real sense of a pool; in which a number of different cults or cultures were, as the phrase goes, pooled. Those cities facing each other round the circle of the lake became more and more one cosmopolitan culture. On its legal and military side it was the Roman Empire; but it was very many-sided. It might be called superstitious in the sense that it contained a great number of varied superstitions; but by no possibility can any part of it be called barbarous.

In this level of cosmopolitan culture arose the Christian religion and the Catholic Church; and everything in the story suggests that it was felt to be something new and strange. Those who have tried to suggest that it evolved out of something much milder or more ordinary have found that in this case their evolutionary method is very difficult to apply. They may suggest that Essenes or Ebionites or such things were the seed; but the seed is invisible; the tree appears very rapidly full-grown; and the tree is something totally different. It is certainly a Christmas tree in the sense that it keeps the kindliness and moral beauty of the story of Bethlehem. but it was as ritualistic as the seven branched candlestick, and the candles it carried were considerably more than were probably permitted by the first prayer-book of Edward the Sixth. It might well be asked, indeed, why anyone accepting the Bethlehem tradition should object to golden or gilded ornament since the Magi themselves brought gold, why he should dislike incense in the church since incense was brought even to the stable. But these are controversies that do not concern me here. I am concerned only with the historical fact, more and more admitted by historians, that very early in its history this thing became visible to the civilization of antiquity; and that already the Church appeared as a Church; with everything that is implied in a Church and much that is disliked in a Church. We will discuss in a moment how far it was like other ritualistic or magical or ascetical mysteries in its own time. It was certainly not in the least like merely ethical and idealistic movements in our time. It had a doctrine; it had a discipline; it had sacraments; it had degrees of initiation; it admitted people and expelled people; it affirmed one dogma with authority and repudiated another with anathemas. If all these things be the marks of Antichrist, the reign of Antichrist followed very rapidly upon Christ.

Those who maintain that Christianity was not a Church but a moral movement of idealists have been forced to push the period of its perversion or disappearance further and further back. A bishop of Rome writes claiming authority in the very lifetime of St. John the Evangelist; and it is described as the first papal aggression. A friend of the Apostles writes of them as men he knew and says they taught him the doctrine of the Sacrament; and Mr. Wells can only murmur that the reaction towards barbaric blood-rites may have happened rather earlier than might be expected. The date of the Fourth Gospel, which at one time was steadily growing later and later, is now steadily growing earlier and earlier; until critics are staggered at the dawning and dreadful possibility that it might be something like what it professes to be. The last limit of an early date for the extinction of true Christianity has probably been found by the latest German professor whose authority is invoked by Dean Inge. This learned scholar says that Pentecost was the occasion for the first founding of an ecclesiastical, dogmatic, and despotic Church utterly alien to the simple ideals of Jesus of Nazareth. This may be called, in a popular as well as a 'learned sense, the limit. What do professors of this kind imagine that men are made of? Suppose it were a matter of any merely human movement, let us say that of the conscientious objectors. Some say the early Christians were Pacifists; I do not believe it for a moment, but I am quite ready to accept the parallel for the sake of the argument. Tolstoy or some great preacher of peace among peasants has been shot as a mutineer for defying conscription; and a little while afterwards his few followers meet together in an upper room in remembrance of him. They never had any reason for coming together except that common memory; they are men of many kinds with nothing to bind them, except that the greatest event in all their lives was this tragedy of the teacher of universal peace. They are always repeating his words, revolving his problems, trying to imitate his character. The Pacifists meet at their Pentecost and are possessed of a sudden ecstasy of enthusiasm and wild rush of the whirlwind of inspiration, in a course of which they proceed to establish universal Conscription, to increase the Navy Estimates, to insist on everybody going about armed to the teeth and on all the frontiers bristling with artillery; the proceedings concluded with the singing of 'Boys of the Bulldog Breed' and 'Don't let them scrap the British Navy! That is something like a fair parallel to the theory of these critics; that the transition from their idea of Jesus to their idea of Catholicism could have been made in the little upper room at Pentecost. Surely anybody's common sense would tell him that enthusiasts, who only met through their common enthusiasm for a leader whom they loved, would not instantly rush away to establish everything that he hated. No, if the I ecclesiastical and dogmatic system' is as old as Pentecost it is as old as Christmas. If we trace it back to such very early Christians we must trace it back to Christ.

We may begin then with these two negations. It is nonsense to say that the Christian faith appeared in a simple age; in the sense of an unlettered and gullible age. It is equally nonsense to say that the Christian faith was a simple thing; in the sense of a vague or childish or merely instinctive thing. Perhaps the only point in which we could possibly say that the Church fitted into the pagan world, is the fact that they were both not only highly civilized but rather complicated. They were both emphatically many-sided; but antiquity was then a many-sided hole, like a hexagonal hole waiting for an equally hexagonal stopper. In that sense only the Church was many sided enough to fit the world. The six sides of the Mediterranean world faced each other across the sea and waited for something that should look all ways at once. The Church had to be both Roman and Greek and Jewish and African and Asiatic. In the very words of the Apostle of the Gentiles, it was indeed all things to all men. Christianity then was not merely crude and simple and was the very reverse of the growth of a barbaric time. But when we come to the contrary charge, we come to a much more plausible charge. It is very much more tenable that the Faith was but the final phase of the decay of civilization, in the sense of the excess of civilization; that this superstition was a sign that Rome was dying, and dying of being much too civilized. That is an argument much better worth considering; and we will proceed to consider it.

At the beginning of this book I ventured on a general summary of it, in a parallel between the rise of humanity out of nature and the rise of Christianity out of history. I pointed out that in both cases what had gone before might imply something coming after; but did not in the least imply what did come after. If a detached mind had seen certain apes it might have deduced more anthropoids; it would not have deduced man or anything within a thousand miles of what man has done. In short, it might have seen Pithecanthropus or the Missing Link looming in the future, if possible almost as dimly and doubtfully as we see him looming in the past. But if it foresaw him appearing it would also foresee him disappearing, and leaving a few faint traces just as he has left a few faint traces; if they are traces. To foresee that Missing Link would not be to foresee Man, or anything like Man. Now this earlier explanation must be kept in mind; because it is an exact parallel to the true view of the Church; and the suggestion of it having evolved naturally out of the Empire in decay.

The truth is that in one sense a man might very well have predicted that the imperial decadence would produce something like Christianity. That is, something a little like and gigantically different. A man might very well have said, for instance, 'Pleasure has been pursued so extravagantly that there will be a reaction into pessimism. Perhaps it will take the form of asceticism; men will mutilate themselves instead of merely hanging themselves.' Or a man might very reasonably have said, 'If we weary of our Greek and Latin gods we shall be hankering after some eastern mystery or other; there will be a fashion in Persians or Hindus.' Or a man of the world might well have been shrewd enough to say, 'Powerful people are picking up these fads; some day the court will adopt one of them and it may become official.' Or yet another and gloomier prophet might be pardoned for saying, 'The world is going down-hill; dark and barbarous superstitions will return, it does not matter much which. They will all be formless and fugitive like dreams of the night!

Now it is the intense interest of the case that all these prophecies were really fulfilled; but it was not the Church that fulfilled them. It was the Church that escaped from them, confounded them, and rose above them in triumph. In so far as it was probable that the mere nature of hedonism would produce a mere reaction of asceticism, it did produce a mere reaction of asceticism. It was the movement called Manichean and the Church was its mortal enemy. In so far as it would have naturally appeared at that point of history, it did appear; it did also disappear, which was equally natural. The mere pessimist reaction did come with the Manichees and did go with the Manichees. But the Church did not come with them or go with them; and she had much more to do with their going than with their coming. Or again, in so far as it was probable that even the growth of scepticism would bring in a fashion of eastern religion, it did bring it in; Mithras came from far beyond Palestine out of the heart of Persia, bringing strange mysteries of the blood of bulls. Certainly there was everything to show that some such fashion would have come in any case. But certainly there is nothing in the world to show that it would not have passed away in any case. Certainly an Oriental fad was something eminently fitted to the fourth or fifth century; but that hardly explains it having remained to the twentieth century, and still going strong. In short, in so far as things of the kind might have been expected then, things like Mithraism were experienced then; but it scarcely explains our more recent experiences. And if we were still Mithraists merely because Mithraic headdresses and other Persian apparatuses might be expected to be all the rage in the days of Domitian, it would almost seem by this time that we must be a little dowdy. It is the same, as will be suggested in a moment, with the idea of official favoritism. In so far as such favoritism shown towards a fad was something that might have been looked for during the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, it was something that did exist in that Empire and did decline and fall with it. It throws no sort of light on the thing that resolutely refused to decline and fall; that grew steadily while the other was declining and falling; and which even at this moment is going forward with fearless energy, when another eon has completed its cycle and another civilization seems almost ready to fall or to decline.

Now the curious fact is this; that the very heresies which the early Church is blamed for crushing testify to the unfairness for which she is blamed. In so far as something deserved the blame, it was precisely the things that she is blamed for blaming. In so far as something was merely a superstition she herself condemned that superstition. In so far as something was a mere reaction into barbarism, she herself resisted it because it was a reaction into barbarism. In so far as something was a fad of the fading empire, that died and deserved to die, it was the Church alone that killed it. The Church is reproached for being exactly what the heresy was repressed for being. The explanations of the evolutionary historians and higher critics do really explain why Arianism and Gnosticism and Nestorianism were born---and also why they died. They do not explain why the Church was born or why she has refused to die. Above all, they do not explain why she should have made war on the very evils she is supposed to share.

Let us take a few practical examples of the principle; the principle that if there was anything that was really a superstition of the dying empire, it did really die with the dying empire; and certainly was not the same as the very thing that destroyed it. For this purpose we will take in order two or three of the most ordinary explanations of Christian origins among the modem critics of Christianity. Nothing is more common, for instance, than to find such a modem critic writing something like this: 'Christianity was above all a movement of ascetics, a rush into the desert, a refuge in the cloister, a renunciation of all life and happiness; and this was a part of a gloomy and inhuman reaction against nature itself, a hatred of the body, a horror of the material universe, a sort of universal suicide of the senses and even of the self. It came from an eastern fanaticism like that of the fakirs and was ultimately founded on an eastern pessimism, which seems to feel existence itself as an evil.' Now the most extraordinary thing about this is that it is all quite true; it is true in every, detail except that it happens to be attributed entirely to the wrong person. It is not true of the Church; but it is true of the heretics condemned by the Church. It is as if one were to write a most detailed analysis of the mistakes and misgovernment of the ministers of George the Third, merely with the small inaccuracy that the whole story was told about George Washington; or as if somebody made a list of the crimes of the Bolshevists with no variation except that they were all attributed to the Czar. The early Church was indeed very ascetic, in connection with a totally different philosophy; but the philosophy of a war on life and nature as such really did exist in the world, if the critics only knew where to look for it.

I What really happened was this. When the Faith first emerged into the world, the very first thing that happened to it was that it was caught in a sort of swarm of mystical and metaphysical sects, mostly out of the East; like one lonely golden bee caught in a swarm of wasps. To the ordinary onlooker, there did not seem to be much difference, or anything beyond a general buzz; indeed in a sense there was not much difference, so far as stinging and being stung were concerned. The, difference was that only one golden dot in all that whirring gold dust had the power of going forth to make hives for all humanity, to give the world honey and wax or (as was so finely said in a context too easily forgotten) 'the two noblest things, which are sweetness and light!

The wasps all died that winter; and half the difficulty is that hardly anyone knows anything about them and most people do not know that they ever existed; so that the whole story of that first phase of our religion is lost. Or, to vary the metaphor, when this movement or some other movement pierced the dyke between the east, and west and brought more mystical ideas into Europe, it brought with it a whole flood of other mystical ideas besides its own, most of them ascetic and nearly all of them pessimistic. They very nearly flooded and overwhelmed the purely Christian element. They came mostly from that region that was a sort of dim borderland between the eastern philosophies and the eastern mythologies, and which shared with the wilder philosophers that curious craze for making fantastic patterns of the cosmos in the shape of maps and genealogical trees. Those that are supposed to derive from the mysterious Manes are called Manichean; kindred cults are more generally known as Gnostic; they are mostly of a labyrinthine complexity, but the point to insist on is the pessimism; the fact that nearly all in one form or another regarded the creation of the world as the work of an evil spirit. Some of them had that Asiatic atmosphere that surrounds Buddhism the suggestion that life is a corruption of the purity of being. Some of them suggested a purely spiritual order which had been betrayed by the coarse and clumsy trick of making such toys as the sun and moon and stars. Anyhow all this dark tide out of the metaphysical sea in the midst of Asia poured through the dykes simultaneously with the creed of Christ; but it is the whole point of the story that the two were not the same; that they flowed like oil and water. That creed remained in the shape of a miracle; a river still flowing through the sea. And the proof of the miracle was practical once more; it was merely that while all that sea was salt and bitter with the savor of death, of this one stream in the midst of it a man could drink.

Now that purity was preserved by dogmatic definitions and exclusions. It could not possibly have been preserved by anything else. If the Church had not renounced the Manicheans it might have become merely Manichean. If it had not renounced the Gnostics it might have become Gnostic. But by the very fact that it did renounce them it proved that it was not either Gnostic or Manichean. At any rate it proved that something was not either Gnostic or Manichean; and what could it be that condemned them, if it was not the original good news of the runners from Bethlehem and the trumpet of the Resurrection? The early Church was ascetic, but she proved that she was not pessimistic, simply by condemning the pessimists. The creed declared that man was sinful, but it did not declare that life was evil, and it proved it by damning those who did. The condemnation of the early heretics is itself condemned as something crabbed and narrow; but it was in truth the very proof that the Church meant to be brotherly and broad. It proved that the primitive Catholics were specially eager to explain that they did not think man utterly vile; that they did not think life incurably miserable; that they did not think marriage a sin or procreation a tragedy. They were ascetic because asceticism was the only possible purge of the sins of the world; but in the very thunder of their anathemas they affirmed forever that their asceticism was not to be anti-human or anti-natural; that they did wish to purge the world and not destroy it. And nothing else except those anathemas could possibly have made it clear, amid a confusion which still confuses them with their mortal enemies. Nothing else but dogma could have resisted the riot of imaginative invention with which the pessimists were waging their war against nature; with their Aeons and their Demiurge, their strange Logos and their sinister Sophia. If the Church had not insisted on theology, it would have melted into a mad mythology of the mystics, yet further removed from reason or even from rationalism; and, above all, yet further removed from life and from the love of life. Remember that it would have been an inverted mythology, one contradicting everything natural in paganism; a mythology in which Pluto would be above Jupiter and Hades bang higher than Olympus; in which Brahma and all that has the breath of life would be subject to Seeva, shining with the eye of death.

That the early Church was itself full of an ecstatic enthusiasm for renunciation and virginity makes this distinction much more striking and not less so. It makes all the more important the place where the dogma drew the line. A man might crawl about on all fours like a beast because he was an ascetic. He might stand night and day on the top of a pillar and be adored for being an ascetic. But be could not say that the world was a mistake or the marriage state a sin without being a heretic. What was it that thus deliberately disengaged itself from eastern asceticism by sharp definition and fierce refusal, if it was not something with an individuality of its own; and one that was quite different? If the Catholics are to be confused with the Gnostics, we can only say it was not their fault if they are. And it is rather hard that the Catholics should be blamed by the same critics for persecuting the heretics and also for sympathizing with the heresy.

The Church was not a Manichean movement, if only because it was not a movement at all. It was not even merely an ascetic movement, because it was not a movement at all. It would be nearer the truth to call it the tamer of asceticism than the mere leader or loosener of it. It was a thing having its own theory of asceticism, its own type of asceticism, but most conspicuous at the moment as the moderator of other theories and types. This is the only sense that can be made, for instance, of the story of St. Augustine. As long as he was a mere man of the world, a mere man drifting with his time, he actually was a Manichean. It really was quite modern and fashionable to be a Manichean. But when he became a Catholic, the people he instantly turned on and rent in pieces were the Manicheans. The Catholic way of putting it is that he left off being a pessimist to become an ascetic. But as the pessimists interpreted asceticism, it might be said that he left off being an ascetic to become a saint. The war upon life, the denial of nature were exactly the things he had already found in the heathen world outside the Church, and had to renounce when he entered the Church. The very fact that St. Augustine remains a somewhat sterner or sadder figure than St. Francis or St. Teresa only accentuates the dilemma. Face to face with the gravest or even grimmest of Catholics, we can still ask, 'Why did Catholicism make war on Manichees, if Catholicism was Manichean?

Take another rationalistic explanation of the rise of Christendom. It is common enough to find another critic saying, 'Christianity did not really rise at all; that is, it did not merely rise from below; it was imposed from above. It is an example of the power of the executive, especially in despotic states. The Empire was really an Empire; that is, it was really ruled by the Emperor. One of the Emperors happened to become a Christian. He might just as well have become a Mithraist or a Jew or a Fire-Worshipper; it was common in the decline of the Empire for eminent and educated people to adopt these eccentric eastern cults. But when he adopted it it became the official religion of the Roman Empire; and when it became the official religion of the Roman Empire, it became as strong, as universal and as invincible as the Roman Empire. It has only remained in the world as a relic of that Empire; or, as many have put it, it is but the ghost of Caesar still hovering over Rome.' This also is a very ordinary line taken in the criticism of orthodoxy, to say that it was only officialdoms that ever made it orthodoxy. And here again we can call on the .heretics to refute it.

The whole great history of the Arian heresy might have been invented to explode this idea. It is a very interesting history often repeated in this connection; and the upshot of it is in so far as there ever was a merely official religion, it actually died because it was merely an official religion; and what destroyed it was the real religion. Arius advanced a version of Christianity which moved, more or less vaguely, in the direction of what we should call Unitarianism; thought was not the same, for it gave to Christ a curious intermediary position between the divine and human. The point is that it seemed to many more reasonable and less fanatical; and among these were many of the educated class in a sort of reaction against the first romance of conversion. Arians were a sort of moderates and a sort of modernists. And it was felt that after the first squabbles this was the final form of rationalized, religion into which civilization might well settle down. It was accepted by Divus Caesar himself and became the official orthodoxy; the generals and military princes drawn from the new barbarian powers of the north, full of the future, supported it strongly. But the sequel is still more important. Exactly as a modern man might pass through Unitarianism to complete agnosticism, so the greatest of the Arian emperors ultimately shed the last and thinnest pretense of Christianity; he abandoned even Arius and returned to Apollo. He was a Caesar of the Caesars; a soldier, a scholar, a man of large ambitions and ideals; another of the philosopher kings. It seemed to him as if at his signal the sun rose again. The oracles began to speak like birds beginning to sing at. dawn; paganism was itself again; the gods returned. It seemed the end of that strange interlude of an alien superstition. And indeed it was the end of it, so far as there was a mere interlude of mere superstition. It was the end of it, in so far as it was the fad of an emperor or the fashion of a generation. If there really was something that began with Constantine, then it ended with Julian.

But there was something that did not end. There had arisen in that hour of history, defiant above the democratic tumult of the Councils of the Church, Athanasius against the world. We may pause upon the point at issue; because it is relevant to the whole of this religious history, and the modern world seems to miss the whole point of it. We might put it this way. If there is one question which the enlightened and liberal have the habit of deriding and holding up as a dreadful example of barren dogma and senseless sectarian strife, it is this Athanasian question of the co-Eternity of the Divine Son. On the other hand, if there is one thing that the same liberals always offer us as a piece of pure and simple Christianity, untroubled by doctrinal disputes, it is the single sentence, 'God is Love! Yet the two statements are almost identical; at least one is very nearly nonsense without the other. The barren dogma is only the logical way of stating the beautiful sentiment. For if there be a being without beginning, existing before all things, was He loving when there was nothing to be loved? If through that unthinkable eternity He is lonely, what is the meaning of saying He is love? The only justification of such a mystery is the mystical conception that in His own nature there was something analogous to self-expression; something of what begets and beholds what it has begotten. Without some such idea, it is really illogical to complicate the ultimate essence of deity with an idea like love. If the modems really want a simple religion of love, they must look for it in the Athanasian Creed. The truth is that the trumpet of true Christianity, the challenge of the charities and simplicities of Bethlehem or Christmas Day, never rang out more arrestingly and unmistakably than in the defiance of Athanasius to the cold compromise of the Arians. It was emphatically he who really was fighting for a God of Love against a God of colorless and remote cosmic control; the God of the stoics and the agnostics. It was emphatically he who was fighting for the Holy Child against the grey deity of the Pharisees and the Sadducees. He was fighting for that very balance of beautiful interdependence and intimacy, in the very Trinity of the Divine Nature, that draws our hearts to the Trinity of the Holy Family. His dogma, if the phrase be not misunderstood, turns even God into a Holy Family.

That this purely Christian dogma actually for a second time rebelled against the Empire, and actually for a second time re-founded the Church in spite of the Empire,, is itself a proof that there was something positive and personal working in the world, other than whatever official faith the Empire chose to adopt. This power utterly destroyed the official faith that the Empire did adopt. It went on its own way as it is going on its own way still. There are any number of other examples in which is repeated precisely the same process we have reviewed in the case of the Manichean and the Arian.

A few centuries afterwards, for instance, the Church had to maintain the same Trinity, which is simply the logical side of love, against another appearance of the isolated and simplified deity in the religion of Islam. Yet there are some who cannot see what the Crusaders were fighting for; and some ev en who talk as if Christianity had never been anything but a form of what they called Hebraism coming in with the decay of Hellenism. Those people must certainly be very much puzzled by the war between the Crescent and the Cross. If Christianity had never been anything but a simpler morality sweeping away polytheism, there is no reason why Christendom should not have been swept into Islam. The truth is that Islam itself was a barbaric reaction against that very humane complexity that is really a Christian character; that idea of balance in the deity, as of balance in the family, that makes that creed a sort of sanity, and that sanity the soul of civilization. And that is why the Church is from the first a thing holding its own position and point of view, quite apart from the accidents and anarchies of its age. That is why it deals blows impartially right and left, at the pessimism of the Manichean or the optimism of the Pelagian. It was not a Manichean movement because it was not a movement at all. It was not an official fashion because it was not a fashion at all. It was something that could coincide with movements and fashions, could control them and could survive them.

So might rise from their graves the great heresiarchs to confound their comrades of to-day. There is nothing that the critics now affirm that we cannot call on these great witnesses to deny. The modem critic will say lightly enough that Christianity was but a reaction into asceticism and anti-natural spirituality, a dance of fakirs furious against life and love. But Manes the great mystic will answer them from his secret throne and cry, 'These Christians have no right to be, called spiritual; these Christians have no title to be called ascetics; they who compromised with the curse of life and all the filth of the family. Through them the earth is still foul with fruit and harvest and polluted with population. Theirs was no movement against nature, or my children would have carried it to triumph; but these fools renewed the world when I would have ended it with a gesture! And another critic will write that the Church was but the shadow of the Empire, the fad of a chance Emperor, and that it remains in Europe only as the ghost of the power of Rome. And Arius the deacon will answer out of the darkness of oblivion: 'No, indeed, or the world would have followed my more reasonable religion. For mine went down before demagogues and men defying Caesar and around my champion was the purple cloak and mine was the glory of the eagles. It was not for lack of these things that I failed! And yet a third modem will maintain that the creed spread only as a sort of panic of hell-fire; men everywhere attempting impossible things in fleeing from incredible vengeance; a nightmare of imaginary remorse; and such an explanation will' satisfy many who, see something dreadful in the doctrine of orthodoxy. And then there will go up against it the terrible voice of Tertullian, saying, 'And why then was I cast out; and why did soft hearts and beads decide against me when I proclaimed the perdition of all sinners; and what was this power that thwarted me when I threatened all backsliders with hell? For none ever went up that hard road so far as I; and mine was the Credo Quia Impossible! Then there is the fourth suggestion that there was something of the Semitic secret society in the whole matter; that it was a new invasion of the nomad's spirit shaking a kindlier and more comfortable paganism, its cities and its household gods; whereby the jealous monotheistic races could after all establish their jealous God. And Mahomet shall answer out of the whirlwind, the red whirlwind of the desert, Who ever served the jealousy of God as I did or left him more lonely in the sky? Who ever paid more honor to Moses and Abraham or won more victories over idols and the images of paganism? And what was this thing that thrust me back with the energy of a thing alive; whose fanaticism could drive me from Sicily and tear up my deep roots out of the rock of Spain? What faith was theirs who thronged in thousands of every class and country crying out that my ruin was the will Of God; and what hurled great Godfrey as from a catapult over the wall of Jerusalem; and what brought great Sobieski like a thunderbolt to the gates of Vienna? I think there was more than you fancy in the religion that has so matched itself with mine!

Those who would suggest that the faith was a fanaticism are doomed to an eternal perplexity. In their account it is bound to appear as fanatical for nothing, and fanatical against everything. It is ascetic and at war with ascetics, Roman and in revolt against Rome, monotheistic and fighting furiously against monotheism; harsh in its condemnation of harshness; a riddle not to be explained even as unreason. And what sort of unreason is it that seems reasonable to millions of educated Europeans through all the revolutions of some sixteen hundred years? People are not amused with a puzzle or a paradox or a mere muddle in the mind for all that time. I know of no explanation except that such a thing is not unreason but reason; that if it is fanatical it is fanatical for reason and fanatical against all the unreasonable things. That is the only explanation I can find of a thing from the first so detached and so confident condemning things that looked so like itself, refusing help from powers that seemed so essential to its existence, sharing on its human side all the passions of the age, yet always at the supreme moment suddenly rising superior to them, never saying exactly what it was expected to say and never needing to unsay what it had said; I can find no explanation except that, like Pallas from the brain of Jove, it had indeed come forth out of the mind of God, mature and mighty and armed for judgment and for war.

THE PERSECUTION OF CATHOLICS BY THE ANABAPTISTS

2008-01-08T10:53:00.000-05:00

The "New Jerusalem" (Münster), the founding of which was signalized by a reign of terror and indescribable orgies. Treasures of literature and art were destroyed; communism, polygamy, and community of women were introduced.

During February 1534, the power of the Anabaptists in Münster increased dramatically. On February 8, Jan Bockelszoon van Leiden and the guild leader Bernard Knipperdolling, whom Bockelszoon had befriended, ran wildly through the streets, screaming that everyone must repent of their sins. This ignited much emotional turbulence, especially among the women Anabaptists, who, as former nuns,had recently left the convents and fallen under the influence of Rothmann's preaching. Some began to see apocalyptic visions in the streets of such intensity that they would foam at the mouth and throw themselves upon the ground . In such a charged atmosphere, the Anabaptists made their first armed rising and took the Town Hall and market place. The Lutheran majority in the town offered little resistance, and soon the town council recognized the Anabaptists as legal citizens of Münster. Thereafter, many Lutherans fled the city and the Anabaptists grew in number and power. Messengers and manifestos were sent out urging Anabaptists in other towns to come with their families to Münster. The rest of the earth, it was announced, was to be destroyed, but Münster would be spared to become the New Jerusalem.Into this volatile situation Jan Matthys entered: a tall, gaunt figure with a long black beard. His imposing, physical presence allowed him to gain power quickly, but the attempt to realize the New Jerusalem was not without authoritarian measures. Unlike Hoffman, he did not hesitate to employ violence to accomplish his purposes. On February 25, 1534, he preached a sermon at the house of an Anabaptist near a fish market. Afterwards, he proclaimed to the crowd that God 's grace had allowed the city to have a favorable beginning, but in order to build the republic of Christ on earth, it was necessary to purify the city of all uncleanness (Unsauberkeit), whether the impure be papists or others who dissented from the prevailing Anabaptist teachings. To achieve this goal, Matthys advocated the execution of all remaining Roman Catholics. However, Knipperdolling, one of the town leaders, disagreed with Matthys, saying that the bloodshed would cause the outside world to be enraged against Münster. A compromise was reached and they decided to expel all the "godless" ((Gottlosen)) from the city and make those who chose to stay behind receive compulsory baptism.

This task of expulsion and compulsion took place several days later. On the morning of February 27, armed men, urged on by Matthys, ran through the streets yelling: "Get out you godless ones, and never come back you enemies of the Father." In bitter cold, in the midst of snow, rain and wind, droves of the "godless" including the old and invalids, small children, and pregnant women were chased from the town by Anabaptists who beat and laughed at them. They were forced to leave their belongings behind, their food was confiscated and they had no choice but to beg in the countryside for food and lodging. As for those who decided to remain in town, they received compulsory re-baptism in the marketplace. The entire process lasted three days. By eliminating the The Catholics from the city, Matthys and his cohorts not only heightened the sense of chiliastic expectation but they also came to realize that the outside world was growing intolerant of the developments within Münster, and that they were soon to be besieged. The Catholic Bishop of the city, Franz van Waldeck, had been at work some time in recruiting soldiers to confront the Anabaptist threat. The expulsion of the Catholics prompted him to accelerate his efforts. Soon thereafter, earthworks were erected around the town and the siege began. Many Anabaptists were surprised and confused to find themselves at war, but under the leadership of Knipperdolling they soon recovered confidence and began responding to the threat. Men, women, and children were assigned various duties. Small skirmishes took place outside the walls.

The war atmosphere led to a veritable social revolution. Matthys seized the opportunity to consolidate his power over the property and money of the townspeople. He preached that it was the Father's will that all the goods of the recent exiles be confiscated. Moreover, all the account books and contracts found in their homes were burned. Treasures of literature and art were destroyed. Their clothing, beds, furniture, tables, weapons, and food were placed in a central area and, after praying for three days, Matthys announced that God had given him a sign to appoint seven deacons to distribute the goods to the people.

This trend toward common ownership culminated in an institutionalized communism. Under the leadership of Matthys, the town preachers and council members decided that all goods should be shared in common. Matthys employed Rothmann to promulgate this new vision of society in his sermons. "Dear brothers and sisters," Rothmann proclaimed, "afterwards we shall be one people. Brothers and sisters, indeed it is completely God 's will that we bring our money, silver, and gold together. One person should have just as much as another." At first this order was met with considerable opposition. The people who had recently received compulsory baptism were assembled and told that unless they relinquished their money they would perish. They were then locked inside a church in a state of mortal fear for several hours. At length Matthys entered the church with a group of armed men. His victims implored him to intercede to God for them, which he did, saying that if they complied, God would allow them back in the community. Ultimately, they complied.

Yet not everyone acceded to Matthys's authority: some defied him unto death. A blacksmith, for instance, unconvinced by Matthys's prophecies, accused him of being possessed by the devil. Matthys had him arrested and thrown in the tower. Later he was brought to the market place where many of the citizens were also summoned. Matthys gave a speech in which he declared that God was outraged at this man's evil actions because he had defiled an otherwise pure town. He was sentenced to death, but before execution, was stabbed repeatedly with a halberd and thrown back into the tower. Later he was placed against the town wall and Matthys himself shot him in the stomach, causing his eventual death. The gathered crowd was told to profit from the example of the blacksmith and they dutifully sang a hymn before dispersing.

A final instance of the authoritarian control exercised by Matthys may be seen in his decision to regulate information. On March 15, 1534, Matthys proclaimed that all books except the Old and New Testaments (which were deemed solely sufficient for conducting a holy life) were to be brought to the cathedral-square where they were burned to ashes. This anti-intellectualist act represents a complete break with the past, and it allowed Matthys to gain a complete monopoly in the interpretation of Scripture.

On Easter Sunday of 1534, Matthys received what he believed to be a divine command to make a sortie against the besiegers of the city with only a few men to help him. The result was a miserable failure. He was pierced with a pike beheaded, and his body hacked to pieces. His head was later raised on a pole outside the city. Thus, the authoritarian reign of Jan Matthys came to an end Summing up the character of this prophet years later, Obbe Philips wrote:

He was so fierce and bloodthirsty that he brought various people to their deaths; yea he was so violent that even his enemies for their part were terrified of him, and finally in a tumult they became too powerful for him, they were so incensed that they did not just kill him . . . but hacked and chopped him into little pieces.

The death of Matthys allowed for his disciple Jan Bockelszoon van Leiden to assume leadership. Under Bockelszoon, the previously- established authoritarian measures of Matthys continued, reaching a crescendo in his decision to anoint himself king. The kingdom which he set up is legendary in German history, so here I will touch upon only its most salient features.

Bockelszoon began his messianic reign by running naked through the streets of Münster in a wild religious frenzy; he then fell into a silent ecstasy for three days. When his power of speech returned, he announced that God had told him to restructure the town government immediately, which he did by appointing twelve men whom he called the Elders or the Judges of the Tribes of Israel (Ältesten der Stämme Israels) who were placed in charge of all the public, private, spiritual, and worldly affairs of the citizens of Münster the "Israelites." The twelve published a new code of moral law which provided for strict military organization and a tighter communism of goods. Some workers, for instance, previously employed for money, were forced to continue in their trades without pay, simply as servants of the community. The code also had a very rigid stance on sins committed after (re-)baptism, and all citizens were subjected to demanding laws:

If we are God's sons and have been baptized in Christ then all evil must disappear from among us.... Every one is under the authorities, who have power over all. Because there is no authority outside of God.... If you do evil, fear the authorities. They wield the sword not in vain; they are God's servants, the avengers to punish the evildoer.Sins punishable by death included blasphemy, seditious language, scolding one's parents, adultery, lewd conduct, backbiting, spreading scandal, and even complaining! Bockleszoon's most controversial innovation was polygamy. It was introduced at least partly to emulate the Old Testament patriarchs and also (perhaps) to compensate for the rapid attrition of male citizens due to their military efforts. Bockelszoon established polygamy on his own authority by announcing that all who resisted it would be considered reprobates and therefore in danger of execution. Persons of marriageable age were ordered to marry; unmarried women had to accept the first man to ask them. This often led to disorder in the competition to see who could acquire the most wives, and thus this latter regulation was ultimately rescinded. Bockelszoon himself, beside remarrying Matthys's widow Divara,ultimately accumulated 15 wives. Bernard Rothmann received second place with nine.

It was not as an ordinary king that Bockelszoon established himself, but as the Messiah of the Last Days. One day a goldsmith declared that the Heavenly Father had revealed to him that Bockelszoon was to be king of the whole world, holding dominion over all kings, princes, and great ones of the earth. He was to inherit the scepter and throne of his forefather David and was to keep them until God should reclaim the kingdom from him. Bockelszoon accepted this man's prophecy and soon enlisted the town preachers to deliver one sermon after another, explaining that the Messiah foretold by the prophets in the Old Testament was indeed none other than Jan van Leiden Bockleszoon. Bockelszoon himself called a town meeting in which he gave a speech to proclaim his new identity, "Now God has chosen me to be king over the entire world. What I do, I must do, because God has ordained me. Dear brothers and sisters, let us now give thanks to God." After the sermon, Bockelszoon led the crowd in singing a psalm, and then everyone returned to their homes.

Bockelszoon did everything possible to represent tangibly the importance of his new position. While the siege continued outside the city, the streets and the gates within were given new names. Sundays and feast days were abolished and the days of the week were renamed on an alphabetical system. Even the names of infants were decided upon by the king according to a special system. Gold and silver coins were minted with inscriptions that emphasized Bockelszoon's unique role: "One King Over All."A special emblem was devised to symbolize Bockelszoon's absolute claim to spiritual and temporal dominion: a globe, representing the world, pierced by two swords and surmounted by a cross inscribed with the words: "One king of righteousness over all ." The king himself wore this emblem modeled in gold as a necklace, his attendants wore it as a badge on their sleeves, and it was accepted in Münster as the official emblem of the state.Bockelszoon set up a throne in the marketplace. Draped with cloth and gold, it towered above the surrounding benches which were allotted to other dignitaries and preachers. Often the king would come there to sit in judgment or to oversee the proclamation of new regulations. Heralded by fanfare, he would arrive on horseback wearing a crown and carrying a scepter. In front of him marched officers of the court, behind him came Knipperdolling, who was now chief minister; Rothmann, who was now the royal orator; and a long line of lesser servants. On either side of his throne stood a page, one holding a copy of the Old Testament, the other a sword. Both symbolized the absolute control which Bockelszoon exercised over the citizens.

Though the king indulged in a life of excess, he subjected his citizens to austerity. Harsh regulations of dress went into effect; for God, Bockelszoon had said, abhorred all superfluity in clothing. Every house was searched and anything that was considered surplus was confiscated. To justify the disparity between his lifestyle and that of the people, he explained that luxury was permitted him because he was completely dead to the world and the flesh.

Finally, though Bockelszoon maintained his grip on power through prophetic outbursts and appeals to Scripture, his primary means of controlling the populace was terror and brute force. Two instances suffice to demonstrate this. The first one came in the wake of Bockelszoon's decree of polygamy when a group of citizens, led by Henry Mollenhecke, attempted to stage a coup and depose him Their efforts failed, however, and Mollenhecke, with forty-eight of his followers was brutally tortured and ultimately beheaded in a macabre process that took four days. Afterwards, two mass graves were dug in the marketplace where all the dead bodies were placed a solemn reminder of Bockelszoon's authority. Another example of Bockelszoon's tactics of intimidation was his decision to execute several women for their sins. One was beheaded simply for denying her husband his marital rights, another for bigamy (the practice of polygamy was solely a male prerogative), and a third for insulting one of Bockelszoon's preachers. Indeed, the king would tolerate no transgressions. It was thus announced that all sinners in the future would be immediately brought before the king and sentenced to death. They would be extirpated from the Chosen People their very memory would be blotted out, and they would find no mercy beyond the grave.

WHILE Bockelszoon was busy with his power and prestige within the city outside the city walls, the siege of Münster, spearheaded by Bishop Franz von Waldeck, continued. By careful diplomatic action, the Bishop had managed to involve both Catholic and Protestant rulers, as well as imperial representatives in support of his cause. Even Philip of Hesse, one of the staunchest supporters of Protestantism, was a faithful supporter. Almost constantly out of funds, the Bishop wrote letters pleading for help to a host of potential patrons: King Ferdinand, elector of Mainz, Trier, Saxony, and Brandenburg; the dukes of Braunschweig, Luneburg, and Saxony; and the bishop of Liege. Although most declined, the bishop raised enough support to maintain the force which he had gathered and to continue the siege and the occasional skirmishes against the city. Despite political and financial support, the actual military enterprise proved largely unsuccessful throughout 1534 and for the first few months of 1535. Endeavors to blockade the city, to drain the moats, and even to take direct military action ultimately failed. In June, 1535, the defence became more and more hopeless, and John, as a last means of escape, determined upon setting fire to the city. His plan was frustrated by the unexpected capture of the town by the besiegers (24 June, 1535). The King, his lieutenant Knipperdollinck, and his chancellor Krechting were seized, and after six months' imprisonment and torture, executed. As a terrible warning, their bodies were suspended in iron cages from the tower of St. Lambert's church.

The Legend of the Orange Tree

2008-01-08T10:47:00.000-05:00

In the quadrangular enclosure at Santa Sabina on the Aventine Hill in Rome, there is an orange tree. According to a legend, St. Dominic planted the seed from which it grows. In the nineteenth century, when the tree sent off a new and healthy shoot, having many oranges, someone noted that it was when Pere Lacordaire was a novice. Some took that as a symbol of the new vigor of the Order which was soon restored in France and of its increase in other provinces. And so the legend grew that when the orange tree produced well, there would be a flowering of the Order.

Some years ago, on a trip to Rome, Fr. Zammit (Western Dominican) picked an orange from the Santa Sabina tree. He carefully preserved the seeds and took them to Corpus Christi Monastery where he asked the nuns to nurture the seeds in their enclosed garden.

When he became the chaplain at Mission San Jose, he took the little plant with him. It was planted near the house that then served as the chaplain's residence. There it slowly grew and developed into a little tree.

Returning to live at St. Albert's, Fr. Zammit was careful to be sure the little tree was not left behind. Its next home was in the garden behind the apartment I enjoyed on Harwood Avenue. The little tree grew into a sturdy small tree with long thorns but no fruit. When a branch was taken to a good local nursery, the horticulturist was amazed. He noted that it had to be originally from a very old, even ancient ungrafted tree. He assured me that, for years and years, orange trees had been grafted and cross-fertilized to develop trees that have no thorns and produce much fruit. I told him where the seed had come from which seemed to confirm his thoughts.

When I had to leave Harwood Avenue and my beloved garden, I made sure that the little tree was not left behind. It was carefully dug up and planted where it now flourishes by the sidewalk leading to the Priory Chapel.

So the little tree has lived among all branches of the Western Dominican Family and now, for the first time, it has produced some lovely bright oranges.

Do you suppose that for the Western Province the legend is being renewed? Well, let us pray!

Ellen Logue, OPL
February 1997

CDs for Traditional Latin Mass and Latin Rosary

2008-01-08T10:37:00.000-05:00

Here is a testimony from a Franciscan Tertiary:

I just wanted to bring to your attention an informative new CD we just discovered explaining the Mass - particularly the Extraordinary Traditional Rite - in a well presented and detailed manner. It's easy to listen to and is guaranteed to "drop your jaw" at least once or twice and give you a new appreciation for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass! Today ends a special promotion for bulk orders - but even at $9.95 a CD it's well worth the cost - especially if you keep passing the CD on to others after you listen to it.

http://promultismedia.com/default2.aspx

Finally! Now You Can Empower "Ordinary" Catholic Friends and Family to Truly Understand and Appreciate the Traditional Latin Mass.

What Every Catholic Needs to Know About the Traditional Mass

Pope Benedict XVI's Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum has made official what Traditional Catholics have maintained for decades-the Traditional Mass was never abrogated. And, despite forty years of confusion and contradiction, the Holy Father also declares, "What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred."

Now, you have an unprecedented opportunity to share the many riches of the Traditional Latin Mass with Novus Ordo family and friends. That's why we've produced our inspiring, exclusive new CD, What Every Catholic Needs to Know About the Traditional Mass.

This informative and non-confrontationsal presentation will introduce them to the traditional teaching on the Mass as a sacrifice, the Real Presence, why the Mass is in Latin, what to expect when assisting at the Traditional Mass, and so much more. This remarkable production also includes an overview of the vessels, vestments and the prayers of the Traditional Latin Mass, from the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar to the Last Gospel.

Experience shows that many who would never read a book on the Traditional Mass will listen to a CD. And so, for a limited time only, Pro Multis Media is offering this professionally produced and beautifully packaged presentation at a special discount price (see below). Catholics all over the world are talking about Summorum Pontifium. Now you can seize this historic teaching moment! Order now and empower everyone you know to discover What Every Catholic Needs to Know About the Traditional Mass!

All on One CD:

* The Mass as a true sacrifice

* The meaning of transubstantiation

* Why the Mass is said in Latin

* A prayer-by-prayer overview of the Traditional Latin Mass

* The significance of the vestments, vessels, altar, and liturgical colors

* How the 1962 Missal was never juridically abrogated and,
consequently, in principle, was always permitted

* The best method of assisting at Mass

* The graces from Holy Communion

* The Motu Proprio's presentation of the "continuity of Tradition"

* The Mass and Calvary

* The ends and fruits of the Mass

* Compiled from approved sources

Item #TM-CD, (1 CD), $9.95

Approximately 68 minutes

=====

The Most Holy Rosary - Recited in Latin

http://promultismedia.com/RIL2.aspx

In this inspiring and enlightening audio CD presentation, Fr. Patrick Perez recites the Traditional 15-decade Rosary in Latin, accompanied by inspirational music. As you listen to Father's impeccable pronunciation, you'll soon find praying the Rosary in Latin like second nature. Perfect for the home or car, now the whole family can "do as the Romans do" and pray the Rosary in the Traditional language of the Church.

a.. Traditional 15-decade Rosary in Latin
b.. Learn proper pronunciation
c.. May be used to pray all 15 decades or five-decade chaplet
d.. Includes virtues and fruits of the Mysteries in Latin
e.. Subtle musical accompaniment
f.. Perfect for your daily commute
g.. Teach the whole family to pray in Latin

Download the FREE Guide - The Mysteries and Prayers of the Most Holy Rosary in English and Latin

Item #RIL-CD, (1 CD), $12.95

Vatican offer rich online source of Bible commentary

2008-01-08T10:32:00.000-05:00

Link to original

Vatican, Dec. 12, 2007 (CWNews.com) - The Vatican Congregation for the Clergy has unveiled a powerful new web site, linking Bible texts with commentary from the Church fathers, doctors of the Church, councils, catechisms, and other magisterial documents.

The Biblia Clerus site links each passage of the Bible-- Old and New Testaments-- with commentary taken from a rich variety of sources. In an introductory note Cardinal Claudio Hummes, the prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy, explains that the site provides "Sacred Scripture, its interpretation in light of Sacred Tradition and the teachings of the Magisterium, with appropriate theological commentary and exegesis."

The sources of the commentary-- many of them provided in full on the site-- include the works of the apostolic fathers, saints, Popes, and councils. The site also provides links to the Code of Canon Law (and the Code for the Eastern Church), and to the catechisms of the Council of Trent, St. Pius X, and the 1997 edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Although designed for priests, the Biblia Clerus site is available to the general public. The entire contents of the site can be downloaded.

Link to Biblia Clerus

The Pope condemns the climate-change scaremongers

2008-01-08T10:27:00.000-05:00

Daily Mail December 11, 2007 Simon Caldwell

Posted on 12/11/2007 11:29:25 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum

Pope Benedict XVI has launched a surprise attack on climate-change prophets of doom, warning them that any solutions to global warming must be based on firm evidence and not on dubious ideology.

The leader of more than a billion Roman Catholics suggested that fears over man-made emissions melting the ice caps and causing a wave of unprecedented disasters were nothing more than scare-mongering.

The German-born Pontiff said that while some concerns may be valid it was vital that the international community based its policies on science rather than the dogma of the environmentalist movement.

His remarks will be made in his annual message for World Peace Day on January 1, but they were released as delegates from all over the world convened on the Indonesian holiday island of Bali for UN climate change talks.

The 80-year-old Pope said the world needed to care for the environment but not to the point where the welfare of animals and plants was given a greater priority than that of mankind.

"Humanity today is rightly concerned about the ecological balance of tomorrow," he said in the message entitled "The Human Family, A Community of Peace".

"It is important for assessments in this regard to be carried out prudently, in dialogue with experts and people of wisdom, uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions, and above all with the aim of reaching agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the well-being of all while respecting environmental balances.

"If the protection of the environment involves costs, they should be justly distributed, taking due account of the different levels of development of various countries and the need for solidarity with future generations.

"Prudence does not mean failing to accept responsibilities and postponing decisions; it means being committed to making joint decisions after pondering responsibly the road to be taken."

Efforts to protect the environment should seek "agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the well-being of all while respecting environmental balances", the Pope said.

He added that to further the cause of world peace it was sensible for nations to "choose the path of dialogue rather than the path of unilateral decisions" in how to cooperate responsibly on conserving the planet.

The Pope's message is traditionally sent to heads of government and international organisations.
His remarks reveal that while the Pope acknowledges that problems may be associated with unbridled development and climate change, he believes the case against global warming to be over-hyped.

A broad consensus is developing among the world's scientific community over the evils of climate change.

But there is also an intransigent body of scientific opinion which continues to insist that industrial emissions are not to blame for the phenomenon.

Such scientists point out that fluctuations in the earth's temperature are normal and can often be caused by waves of heat generated by the sun. Other critics of environmentalism have compared the movement to a burgeoning industry in its own right.

In the spring, the Vatican hosted a conference on climate change that was welcomed by environmentalists.

But senior cardinals close to the Vatican have since expressed doubts about a movement which has been likened by critics to be just as dogmatic in its assumptions as any religion.

In October, the Australian Cardinal George Pell, the Archbishop of Sydney, caused an outcry when he noted that the atmospheric temperature of Mars had risen by 0.5 degrees celsius.

"The industrial-military complex up on Mars can't be blamed for that," he said in a criticism of Australian scientists who had claimed that carbon emissions would force temperatures on earth to rise by almost five degrees by 2070 unless drastic solutions were enforced.

The Unlikeliest of Champions

2008-01-08T10:15:00.000-05:00

BY DAVE LAURIHA
STAFF WRITER

MOSCOW

Only at a school like St. Gregory’s Academy would the groundwork for a District 2 championship originate in a monastery in France.

The Highlanders, with the smallest enrollment of the schools that play soccer in the district, proudly trace their success to a trip to Europe last spring.

While the rest of the Lackawanna Soccer League, and Wyoming Valley Conference for that matter, begin official soccer practices in early- to mid-August, St. Gregory’s Academy is not even open to its students.

“We’re so small, and the boys don’t show up until Labor Day weekend, it’s an obstacle,’’ St. Gregory’s headmaster Howard Clark said. “When we played our first game, against Holy Cross, we looked terrible, and I wondered if it was going to be a long season. It didn’t look good.’’

Despite the auspicious start, the team’s leadership core truly believed the small school could achieve such a lofty goal.

French awakening

The success of the soccer team, and for that matter the senior class at the all-boys boarding school, arose from a spring trip to France.

“The boys went on a pilgrimage, with about 20,000 others (from around the world), from Paris to Chartres Cathedral, which dates back to the ninth century,” St. Gregory’s head dorm father Matthew Schultz said. “It houses the veil of the Blessed Mother.”

Highlander soccer players Alex Michel, Simon Dart, Joseph Long, Frank Pouliot, Brian Redmond and Zach Bateman were among those participating in the pilgrimage’s three-day, 75-mile walk.

Following that stop, the group went to an abbey, de Fontgombault, where they learned how monks lived.

It was during that peaceful time when the group decided to dedicate more than just a sports season to the Blessed Virgin.

“It was a real bonding experience,” Bateman said. “We spent a lot of time at the abbey, where we concentrated on our goal, which was to try to prepare for our senior year.”

On the soccer field, the seniors were out to atone for a 2006 team that some players believed had underachieved.

Second-year head coach Garret van Beek had decided to make junior Andrew McNeely his captain, and a large group of seniors could have been insulted by the slight.

However, Bateman reflected on his trip to France, and came up with the solution.

“It was our senior year, and we weren’t going to take anything for granted,” Bateman said. “Among the ideas we brought forth was that we weren’t going to complain, and that we had to make ourselves set a good example for the others.

“The coaches know what’s best for us, and that, as seniors, we had to set a good example.”

Van Beek correctly assessed how his team would react.

“Zach’s a talented player, but he didn’t have the title of captain,” van Beek said. “It was one of those things that can be heart-breaking, but he said, ‘My job is to follow without question. If I do what’s asked, they (the rest of the team) will follow’,”

Bateman shined without the mantle of leadership, playing so well that the senior was named the Lackawanna Soccer League Division 2 Player of the Year and garnered a berth on the state coaches association’s all-state team.

Instead of having a distraction, the Highlanders wound up with their first District 2 title, with McNeely scoring in the 1-0 victory over Wyoming Seminary in the Class A final.

With that title brings added attention to the school which has just one sport in the Lackawanna League.

Off the beaten path

What makes St. Gregory’s unique is that the 15-year-old school draws students from across the country in search of a liberal arts education. An easy-to-miss three-story brick building sits off Griffin Road, not far from where Route 590 juts out from Route 435. The L-shaped building itself is obstructed from view, some 100 yards off Griffin Road, hidden by a house and trees.

The landscape makes for a fine jigsaw puzzle, particularly when trees on the 190-acre spread are covered with the bright reds, yellows and oranges leaves of fall. Van Beek created a “property run” of 2½ miles, giving the school a self-contained cross country course.

An old brick water tower stands sentry over the back of the property, much like a lighthouse watches over the ocean, overlooking the property’s rolling hills.

A sculpture of the head of the poet Homer, and seemingly there forever, with its variety of shades of green is actually a recent addition to the campus, by St. Gregory’s graduate, and now, artist-in-residence, Andrew Smith.

It does not sound special enough to draw students from across the country, yet boys from Alaska, New Mexico, California and Canada mix in with those from Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey.

It does add up to a unique school.

“It’s a special place, with a jovial atmosphere,” van Beek said.

Melting pot

St. Gregory’s Academy seems to be a hybrid of college and high school.

The going away part, with students from across the country, and the cost ($11,000 for tuition, room and board) gives the school a university feel.

The ages of the students, and their willingness to try anything gives St. Gregory’s its high school feel.

“The parents want their kids to have a liberal-arts education, and they don’t like their local parochial schools,” Clark said. “We really don’t advertise, we get our kids by word of mouth, through brothers and cousins.”

The soccer team is no exception. Junior John Bascom, McNeely, Michel and Redmond are among those who had relatives graduate from St. Gregory’s. None regret coming to Northeastern Pennsylvania..

“It’s weird that you have all these guys who are Catholic, and are so cool,” said Long Island-born Michel. “This has been a great experience.”

Added McNeely, of Lincoln, Neb.: “It’s a different life. There are a lot more rules.”

Despite a regimented schedule and some job duties, the boys seem to enjoy being away from home.

“It turned out to be more than I expected,” said Highlanders sweeper Nathan Blain of Albuquerque, N.M. “I’m so glad I did this.”

Family also plays a big role in the school’s success.

“Most of the kids come from stable, two-parent homes,” Turner said. “There is a religious background for most of them.”

The combination of religion and its liberal arts education usually continues through college.

Clark believes upward of 90 percent of graduates attend college, with others choose the military. Among the popular colleges St. Gregory’s graduates attend include the University of Dallas, in Texas; Christendom College, in Front Royal, Va.; and St. Thomas Aquinas College, in Santa Paula, Calif.

Academics

On the school’s web site, saintgregorysacademy.com, St. Gregory’s boasts that its remote setting takes away distractions for the students, allowing them to focus on the eternal things: the true, the good, and the beautiful. It also promotes its liberal arts education, and wants to play a part in building character and not just to pass on information.

Bonum, Verum, Pulchrum — the true, the good and the beautiful — appears with the school crest, a banner on the second floor of the building, and the teachers take that motto seriously.

Among the classes offered include rhetoric, religion, Latin, humanities, logic, four years of music and more. Having classes like that, it’s easy to understand why the students seem so well-spoken and worldly.

“I think it’s real important to study the greats, like Homer and Virgil,” Bateman said.

“What draws the kids is our emphasis on education with a Western tradition, poetry, studying the great writers, through Christianity,’’ Turner said. “We offer a great education with a good Catholic environment.”

Academics include three hours of classes in the morning, two more in the afternoon, and a mandatory physical education period of an hour and 45 minutes, where practice time for soccer and rugby take place during their respective seasons.

But there is also time for a juggling club, where students throw bowling-pin type objects and fire batons, or learning how to ride a variety of unicycles, all to balance the rigorous academic schedule.

Some enjoy their time at St. Gregory’s so much they come back. Among the list of 17 faculty members are seven graduates of the school.

“A lot of that happens here,” said van Beek, a St. Gregory’s alum. “The students get a lot out of this place, and they want to give back.”

Sense of community

Because St. Gregory’s is so small, the relationships built seem to be stronger, like one can find in small towns. A soccer player does not play for just himself, but for his teammates, classmates and the rest of the school.

“If I didn’t have the opportunity, I wouldn’t have had the opportunity to get to know these people,’’ Blain said. “I’m part of a community here, and we care about each other.”

They may care for each other more than at public schools, where every one can go their own way when they leave school.

Here, the kids don’t leave; instead they retreat to their six-to-a-room, barracks-type living quarters. With only 10 rooms, 60 is the largest number of students the school can have at one time.

Work details, like cleaning the stairways, doing dishes and cleaning the cafeteria, keep the students humble and they get a sense about hard work.

The common bond is friendship among classmates.

“I think one of the great selling points is that you get to be with your friends 24/7,” van Beek said. “You go to school with them, eat with them.

“You’re always with your friends.”

Instead of waking up and meeting friends at the bus stop or even school, students begin a highly regimented day at 7 a.m. with morning prayer in the quaint chapel that sits on the third floor of the academy. The day ends at 9:30 p.m. with night prayer, followed by lights out at 10.

“The days are full,” van Beek said. “If you want to instill discipline, you want to fill your days with as much as possible.

“You definitely don’t want to let your days of youth go by.’’

Highlander pride

The athletics program at the school very often feels hidden, simply because the Highlanders do not participate in many sports in the Lackawanna League.

Soccer is the lone sport St. Gregory’s is a league member, winning two division titles in its history.

Many of those soccer players become rugby players in the spring, but that rugged sport is not among those offered by the local league.

The soccer program never tasted victory in a District 2 Class A playoff game, until this year.

Until this magical season, when more people got to hear about St. Gregory’s, hear being the operative word.

“It’s a fun atmosphere,” Valley View coach Bob Berg said of making the trip to play its fellow LSL 2 member. “Our kids get excited going up there. We enjoy the bagpipers.’’

Currently, St. Gregory’s boasts of two bagpipers, who fit in with the unicyclists and the jugglers to create a festive, Renaissance-era atmosphere.

While cheerleaders may cheer at other schools, how many student sections sing songs and chants designed to bolster their team’s resolve?

Only at St. Gregory’s.

“When we played Meyers (in the district semifinals), there was a group of kids who wanted to try to do the same thing,” Schultz said. “I don’t think they were able to come up with a song they all knew.”

Unlike most schools, singing is a big part of the way of life at St. Gregory’s.

“It’s the spirit blossoming and growing,” Schultz said. “There’s no way to force them to sing those songs.’’

Game atmosphere

The school’s web site has a section about the importance of music and performing arts at the academy. Music is given its due as a way to form character and delight the soul, highlighting both folk music, with its rich story-telling songs, and Gregorian chant, an ancient expression of worship in the Catholic faith.

Soccer games involving St. Gregory’s are unlike any other in the area. The bleachers filled by the small St. Gregory’s student body back their fellow students with loud songs and chants throughout the game.

Unlike the hooligans that disrupt games around the world with derogatory or even racist taunts, these cheers are all positive and designed to help the Highlanders.

“When you’re a little down after messing up, (the crowd) gets you back into it,’’ Redmond said. “They’ve never given up on us, why should we give up on ourselves? It’s very inspiring.”

Berg appreciates what an advantage the Highlanders have.

“They make you lose your voice as a coach,” Berg said. “Trying to yell instructions to your players, maybe you can yell to midfield. It’s impossible to be heard by the guys on the far side of the field.”

More impressive than that is the fact that all of the cheering, singing and chanting is all positive. No disparaging remarks about the opposition.

“I’ve never heard a negative comment,” Berg said. “It’s always a song or a chant, and it’s all very respectful.”

In fact, the school received a letter from a soccer referee who had never done a St. Gregory’s game before he officiated one of the District 2 playoff games.

“St. Gregory’s Academy renewed my own enjoyment of officiating soccer at the high school level when I witnessed the school representatives, coaches, players, scorekeeper, ball boys, bagpipers, flag-wavers and students demonstrating a rare school spirit which was both refreshing and spiritually uplifting to me,” the referee wrote. “The skill level and sportsmanship displayed by the Highlanders was outstanding which was certainly a reflection of their coach and school.

“The camaraderie among the players was great. I heard only positive reinforcement from coaches and players: no negative sarcasm when a player missed an opportunity or misplayed a ball.”

The team did its part to keep its fans going for 80 minutes. In its 11-4 season, all three regular-season losses were by one goal, meaning the Highlanders always had a chance no matter how little time was left in the game.

The exception was the 4-0 state playoff loss to Catasauqua, which scored all of its goals in the second half.

“When we play a game, they don’t let up,” Blain said. “If you don’t play hard, you feel like you are letting down your teammates and fans.”

Athletes are supposed to be so focused on the task at hand that they aren’t supposed to hear the crowd. But just knowing the hum they hear in the background can be enough to carry them.

“I know, before the game, you hear the bag pipes during the warm-up, and you hear these resounding voices, and it makes you want to play harder for them,’’ van Beek said. “It’s funny, it seems like the other schools watch (soccer) like it’s a golf match.”

Not at St. Gregory’s, where cheering is one of the things that sets the academy apart from the other schools.

It’s part of their tradition, along with the blazers, ties and dress shirts.

It all adds up to a unique experience.

Mary and the Moslems

2008-01-07T19:26:00.000-05:00

Archbshp Sheen's Prophetic warning of 50 years ago: Mary and the Moslems; The Significance of Fatima

The Mindzenty Report, published by the Cardinal Mindzenty Foundation (11/1/01)

Mary and the Moslems:

Moslemism is the only great post-Christian religion of the world. Because it had its origin in the seventh century under Mohammed, it was possible to unite, within it, some elements of Christianity and of Judaism, along with particular customs of Arabia. Moslemism takes the doctrine of the unity of God, His Majesty and His creative power, and uses it, in part, as a basis for the repudiation of Christ, the Son of God.

(The following was written in 1952 and reprinted in the October 2001 Mindszenty Report.)

The Power of Islam
by Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen

Misunderstanding the notion of the Trinity, Mohammed made Christ a prophet, announcing Him just as to Christians Isaiah and John the Baptist are prophets announcing Christ.

The Christian European West barely escaped destruction at the hands of the Moslems. At one point they were stopped near Tours and at another point, later on in time, outside the gates of Vienna. The Church throughout northern Africa ws practically destroyed by Moslem power, and at the present hour, the Moslems are beginning to rise again. If Moslemism is a heresy, as Hilaire Belloc believes it to be, it is the only heresy that has never declined. Others have had a moment of vigor, then gone into doctrinal decay at the death of the leader, and finally evaporated in a vague social movement. Moslemism, on the contrary, has only had its first phase. There was never a time in which it declined, either in numbers, or in the devotion of its followers.

The missionary effort of the Church toward this group has been at least on the surface, a failure, for the Moslems are so far almost unconvertible. The reason is that for a follower of Mohammed to become a Christian is much like a Christian becoming a Jew. The Moslems believe that they have the final and definitive revelation of God to the world and that Christ was only a prophet announcing Mohammed, the last of Gods real prophets.

At the present time, the hatred of the Moslem countries against the West is becoming a hatred against Christianity itself. Although the statesmen have not yet taken it into account, there is still grave danger that the temporal power of Islam may return and, with it, the menace that it may shake off a West which has ceased to be Christian, and affirm itself as a great anti-Christian world power. Moslem writers say, When the locust swarms darken countries, they bear on their wings these Arabic words: We are Gods host, each of us has ninety-nine eggs, and if we had a hundred, we should lay waste the world, with all that is in it.

The problem is, how shall we prevent the hatching of the hundredth egg? It is our firm belief that the fears some entertain concerning the Moslems are not to be realized, but that Moslemism, instead, will eventually be converted to Christianity - and in a way that even some of our missionaries never suspect. It is our belief that this will happen not through the direct teachings of Christianity, but through a summoning of the Moslems to a veneration of the Mother of God. This is the line of argument:

Mary, Mother of God

The Koran, which is the Bible of the Moslems, has many passages concerning the Blessed Virgin. First of all, the Koran believes in her Immaculate Conception, and also, in her Virgin Birth. The third chapter of the Koran places the history of Marys family in a genealogy which goes back through Abraham, Noah, and Adam. When one compares the Korans description of the birth of Mary with the aprocryphal Gospel of the birth of Mary, one is tempted to believe tht Mohammed very much depended upon the latter. Both books describe the old age and the definite sterility of the mother of Mary. When, however, she conceives, the mother of Mary is made to say in the Koran: O Lord, I vow and I consecrate to you what is already within me. Accept it from me.

When Mary is born, the mother says: And I consecrate her with all of her posterity under thy protection, O Lord, against Satan! The Koran passes over Joseph in the life of Mary, but the Moslem tradition knows his name and has some familiarity with him. In this tradition, Joseph is made to speak to Mary, who is a virgin. As he inquired how she conceived Jesus without a father, Mary answered: Do you not know that God, when He created the wheat had no need of seed, and that God by His power made the trees grow without the help of rain? All that God had to do was to say, So be it, and it was done. The Koran has also verses on the Annunciation, Visitation, and Nativity. Angels are pictured as accompanying the Blessed Mother and saying: Oh Mary, God has chosen you and purified you, and elected you above all the women of the earth.

In the nineteenth chapter of the Koran there are 41 verses on Jesus and Mary. There is such a strong defense of the virginity of Mary here that the Koran, in the fourth book, attributed the condemnation of the Jews to their monstrous calumny against the Virgin Mary.

The Significance of Fatima

Mary, then, is for the Moslems the true Sayyida, or Lady. The only possible serious rival to her in their creed would be Fatima, the daughter of Mohammed himself. But after the death of Fatima, Mohammed wrote: Thou shalt be the most blessed of all the women in Paradise, after Mary. In a variant of the text, Fatima is made to say, I surpass all the women, except Mary.

This brings us to our second point: namely, why the Blessed Mother, in the 20th century, should have revealed herself in the significant little village of Fatima, so that to all future generations she would be known as Our Lady of Fatima. Since nothing ever happens out of Heaven except with a finesse of all details, I believe that the Blessed Virgin chose to be known as Our Lady of Fatima as a pledge and a sign of hope to the Moslem people, and as an assurance that they, who show her so much respect, will one day accept her divine Son too. Evidence to suport these views is found in the historical fact that the Moslems occupied Portugal for centuries. At the time when they were finally driven out, the last Moslem chief had a beautiful daughter by the name of Fatima. A Catholic boy fell in love with her, and for him she not only stayed behind when the Moslems left, but even embraced the Faith. The young husband was so much in love with her that he changed the name of the town where he live to Fatima. Thus, the very place where our Lady apeared in 1917 bears a historical connection to Fatima, the daughter of Mohammed.

The final evidence of the relationship of Fatima to the Moslems is the enthusiastic reception which the Moslems in Africa and India and elsewhere gave to the Pilgrim statue of Our Lady of Fatima, as mentioned earlier. Moslems attended the church services in honor of our Lady, they allowed religious processions and even prayers before their mosques; and in Mozambique the Moslems who were unconverted, began to be Christian as soon as the statue of Our Lady of Fatima was erected.

A Missionary Strategy

Missionaries in the future will, more and more, see that their apostolate among the Moslems will be successful in the measure that they preach Our Lady of Fatima. Mary is the advent of Christ, bringing Christ to the people before Christ Himself is born. In an apologetic endeavor, it is always best to start with that which people already accept. Because the Moslems have a devotion to Mary, our missionaries should be satisfied merely to expand and to develop that devotion, with the full realization that Our Blessed Lady will carry the Moslems the rest of the way to her divine Son. She is forever a traitor, in the sense that she will not accept any devotion for herself, but will always bring anyone who is devoted to her to her divine Son. As those who lose devotion to her lose belief in the divinity of Christ, so those who intensify devotion to her gradually acquire that belief.

Many of our great missionaries in Africa have already broken down the bitter hatred and prejudices of the Moslems against the Christians through their acts of charity, their schools and hospitals. It now remains to use another approach, namely, that of taking the 41st chapter of the Koran and showing them that it was taken out of the Gospel of Luke, that Mary could not be, even in their own eyes, the most blessed of all the women of Heaven if she had not also borne the Savior of the world. If Judith and Esther of the Old Testament were pre-figures of Mary, then it may very well be that Fatima herself was a post-figure of Mary! The Moslems should be prepared to acknowledge that, if Fatima must give way in honor to the Blessed Mother, it is because she is different from all the other mothers of the world and that without Christ she would be nothing.

(This article courtesy of The Mindzenty Report, published by the Cardinal Mindzenty Foundation.)

Conversion Story

2008-01-07T19:05:00.000-05:00

by Katherine, author of No Fighting, No Biting! blog

I grew up an Episcopalian, it seemed more of a social experience than spiritual. My husband and I met at church so that is where we were married and our first child was baptized. Our priest was a good, holy man and taught us how to study Scripture and pray.

Then the new Catechism of the Catholic Church came out- must have been late 1997 or early 1998. Tim had been doing one of those read the Bible in a year studies (Scripture Union) and had found several glaring inconsistancies in the Protestant religion. Why were some Scripture passages taught literally and others had to be twisted into knots to understand? We had many dinner and late night discussions about this and the lack of moral courage in the Anglican/Episcopal church.

So Tim asked me to buy him a copy of the Catechism. He read it front to back- an amazing feat and discovered the Truth in its pages. Many more discussions and arguments ensued. He was convinced that the Roman Catholic Church contained the fullness of Truth. I was skeptical, not intellectually (because I trust Tim and because 99% of the time he is the smartest person in the room), but from a purely superficial view. I had attended a few Masses as a child, mostly after sleep-overs and what I saw didn't thrill me: people in shorts, lots of hand-holding, ugly, modern churches. But over time I came to appreciate the Church's stance on abortion, divorce, contraception, and other moral issues and agreed to go into RCIA.

We already had orders to go to Naples, Italy so it was decided to wait until we got there to start RCIA. We had a wonderful priest come over for dinner weekly and answer questions and were confirmed at the Easter Vigil 1999.

Here is the link to part of an article Tim wrote at that time: New Catholic

Since then we have settled in a Traditional Latin Mass parish and enjoy sensational homilies from our FSSP-trained priest, a beautiful Gregorian chant High Mass, and the support of other families that are open to life, homeschool, and have become our extended family.

Thank you God for all you have given us, especially the gift of your Church.

Keep The Faith is pleased to announce the release of a new Streaming Video series

2008-01-06T17:53:00.000-05:00

Keep The Faith is pleased to announce the release of a new Streaming Video series entitled CATHOLIC INSIGHT, available FREE - 24/7 at www.KeepTheFaith.org .

Keep The Faith's Catholic Insight is a popular streaming video series on various topics pertaining to the Catholic Faith and apologetics.

After a brief interlude, Catholic Insight is now back again hosted by Father John Perricone. Father Perricone is a gifted speaker, a learned scholar and an experienced teacher. Presently a Professor of Philosophy at St. Francis College in New York, Father Perricone begins this series with a highly informative and fascinating overview of "The Five Ways" of St. Thomas Aquinas on the Proofs of the Existence of God.

Over the next several weeks, Father will present 6 different talks on the proofs of the existence of God.

Following a series of talks on Natural Theology, Father Perricone will also cover other points of Catholic doctrine and morality.

Now more than ever, Catholics need to strengthen their faith and nourish their intellects on the revealed truths of God and the teachings of such great saints as St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Anselm and others.

Great talks for the "devout and doubtful" alike, homeschooling families, recent converts and cradle Catholics, this series will help you understand and appreciate more deeply than ever the wonderful truths of our Catholic Faith.

Click here to join us for this excellent primer on "The Five Ways" at Keep The Faith!!

Spread the word!

PLUS! Here's some companion talks on this same topic by the late, great Dr. William Marra of Fordham University.

The Existence of God - Part 1 of 3 - As Known by Faith and Reason

The Existence of God - Part 2 of 3 - St. Anselm's Proof

The Existence of God - Part 3 of 3 - The Proofs of St. Thomas Aquinas

CLICK HERE TO VIEW VIDEO NOW!

Keep The Faith Catholic Audio, The Most Powerful Catholic Audio on the Web!Visit us at: www.KeepTheFaith.org .

Lecture on the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum

2008-01-06T17:46:00.000-05:00

Lecture on the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum

Given to the priests of the Diocese of Little Rock, Arkansas

October 16th 2007

Book Review: Sacred Then and Sacred Now

2008-01-06T17:38:00.000-05:00

by Shawn Tribe

Recently a new book was mentioned, Sacred Then and Sacred Now: The Return of the Old Latin Mass, by Thomas E. Woods, Jr., published by Roman Catholic Books. ($15.95 USD)

I was pleased to be sent a review copy and wanted to quickly share some thoughts about the book. The book is very brief, coming in at around 120 pages, and seems especially suited to those uninitiated in the ancient Roman rite and the liturgical issues which surround it. Such is, of course, quite necessary. Short enough to be undaunting to the neophyte in such matters and thus more likely to find a readership while also providing a comfortable venue for those exploring the issues.

The book essentially does a few things. On the one hand, it presents the actual Explanatory Letter and Motu Proprio of the Pope; an evidently good inclusion which allows people to read the plain-speaking texts of the Pope directly. Beyond this however, Thomas Woods includes two chapters which present the background of the matter, "Why Benedict Restored the Classical Liturgy" and "Benedict's Revolution", essentially providing a history of the liturgical debate (and Cardinal Ratzinger's stated positions in this regard -- many quotations are included) as well as a commentary upon the motu proprio itself, demonstrating what Benedict's intentions are and are not -- this is particularly relevant considering how much effort there has been to skew the intent of the Pope and the scope of the motu proprio itself.

Woods also includes "A Brief Guide to the Extraordinary Form" which takes one through the various prayers and postures of the older form of the Roman Mass, while another chapter explains some of the differences one can expect to see in the usus antiquior from the modern Roman liturgy. Many people are naturally uncomfortable at the prospect of attending something in which they may not know "what to do" and these chapters will no doubt be particularly beneficial to those unfamiliar with the older form of the rites and can thus help them be less intimidated and better prepared. The latter chapter also higlights some of the points of debate to be found within the modern liturgy today: altar girls, the overuse of EMHC's and so on.

Similarly, the chapter on "Common Misconceptions" presents a concise question and answer format to issues such as the use of Latin in the liturgy, the priest "having his back to the people", what the Council mandated and so on. This provides Woods the opportunity to introduce conciliar teachings and to introduce some of the fundamental questions proposed by the reform of the reform. Such will not only be useful to the beginner, but are also pertinent summations for parish priests and those already familiar with these liturgical debates.

Finally, the book includes the excellent sermon delivered by Fr. Calvin Goodwin, FSSP, for the occasion of the Sept 14th Mass held at the Shrine of the Blessed Sacrament in Alabama, and a listing of "Useful Resources" which includes a short-list of particular book titles and websites that those aspiring to learn more about these issues might consider -- one of which is the NLM, to which we are appreciative to receive such a recommendation.

Overall, this a good and concise resource for introducing friends, family, even clergy, to the motu proprio, to the Pope's liturgical thought and to the ancient Roman liturgy itself.

Catholic Bishop Makes Anniversary of Roe v. Wade "Day of Fast and Abstinence"

2008-01-06T17:35:00.000-05:00

By Peter J. Smith

AMARILLO, Texas, January 3, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A Catholic bishop has declared his diocese will observe the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision legalizing abortion in the United States, as a day of penance for Catholics.

Bishop John W. Yanta of the diocese of Amarillo said that Tuesday January 22 will be observed in his diocese as a "Day of Fast and Abstinence." The bishop said that day is a particular day of penance in the United States for violations to the dignity of the human person committed through acts of abortion, and of prayer for the full restoration of the legal guarantee of the right to life.

"I encourage all the people of God to attend Mass that day, pray before the Blessed Sacrament, pray the rosary and witness to life," Bishop Yanta wrote.

Catholic priests in the diocese will celebrate in violet vestments, a symbol of penance in the Catholic Church.

The day coincides with the annual National March for Life in Washington, D.C., whose 2008 theme is "Build Unity on the Life Principles throughout America. No Exception! No Compromise!"

Bishop Yanta will also celebrate the annual Diocesan Respect Life Mass for Peace and Justice January 19, 9:30AM at St. Mary's in Amarillo. Afterwards the first leg of the annual Respect Life Ministries' March for Life will proceed from St. Mary's to the Planned Parenthood facility at 15th and Taylor to pray for an end to abortion.

On January 22, Amarillo Right to Life will hold a commemorative service at the Amarillo Civic Center to remember the victims of abortion with Rev. John Keane, S.A. speaking about the importance of Christian unity in bringing about abortion.

Planned Parenthood Watchdog Releases New List of Corporate Supporters

2008-01-06T17:32:00.000-05:00

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
January 3, 2008

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A leading pro-life group that monitors Planned Parenthood and companies that support the nation's largest abortion business has released a new list of corporate supporters. Life Decisions International says 160 companies have stopped backing the pro-abortion group since its boycotts began.

See who's on the list at:
http://www.lifenews.com/nat3581.html

Hillary Clinton Tells Iowa Campaign Rally "I Am in Favor of Abortion"

2008-01-06T17:21:00.000-05:00

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
January 2, 2008

Des Moines, IA (LifeNews.com) -- At a campaign stop in Iowa, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton told an audience that she favors abortion. Clinton meant her comments to come across in the same moderate tone former President Bill Clinton, but the way she phrased her position could come back to haunt her.

Abortion advocates frequently insist they don't support abortions but want to keep them legal as an option for women.

Clinton, like other pro-abortion politicians, has used the "safe, legal and rare" mantra as a way to tone down their stridently pro-abortion views and voting records against bans on partial-birth abortions or tax-funded abortions.

Normally politicians say "abortions should be safe, legal and rare" but don't talk about their own position supporting or opposing them. Clinton changed and went a different direction.

“I am in favor of abortion being safe, legal and rare,” she said.

As if noticing that she told the audience she favored abortion, she quickly added, “I would do everything to make it as rare as possible.”

But, MSNBC's Tucker Carlson in November questioned whether that was really the case.

"Has she ever suggested placing any restriction of any kind on abortion, limiting for instance abortion for sex selection? Or any restriction, of any kind. Ever? I must have missed it. Has she?" Tucker asked.

Last month, Clinton largely avoided a question of how abortion is hurting social security. A woman in the audience said abortion is going to make it harder to keep the system afloat.

She simply said she has worked to keep abortion "safe, legal, rare."

The Mitt Romney Report

2008-01-06T16:57:00.000-05:00

Taken from the Mass Resistence website ( http://massresistance.org/romney/ )

As former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney runs for President of the United States, his powerful (and well-funded) campaign machine uses revised history and misleading statements to portray him as a solid social and fiscal conservative with a track record of successes as governor. Much of this is exacerbated by fawning (and lazy) conservative media.

However, the truth is different. We present the following documentation of Romney's actual record in Massachusetts. We think that the facts will speak for themselves.

[Note: We still have a great deal of material we haven't yet posted, which we're still preparing! We will thus be updating this page regularly.]

The Mitt Romney Deception Report - Our 28-page comprehensive report released last November describing how Gov. Romney ran for office and governed as a liberal, despite his claims to the contrary. This covers a wide range or topics and is an essential read. [NOTE: We plan an updated and expanded version of this soon.]

Report on the true pro-life views of Gov. Romney - Written this past spring in reaction the controversy over Romney's various pro-life stands.

How Mitt Romney brought "gay marriage" to Massachusetts - Complete report with comprehensive legal analysis. The Supreme Judicial Court made a ruling and ordered the Legislature to act. The Legislature did nothing, so Romney stepped in and ordered same-sex "marriages" to begin -- essentially violating his oath of office.

Letter from 44 conservative leaders across the country to Gov. Mitt Romney - Hand-delivered in December 2006; urged Romney to act to undo his mistakes on "gay" marriage before leaving office. Letter was ignored. Reported nationally in WorldNetDaily article.

Romney's universal health care includes taxpayer-funded abortions - Legislation also names Planned Parenthood on advisory board.

Romney's Department of Social Services (DSS) honored two "married" men as their "Adoptive Parents of the Year". Agency aggressively placed children with homosexuals.

While he was Governor, Romney donated $10,000 to radical homosexual "health" group. - A very destructive group, publisher of notorious "Little Black Book - Queer in the 21st Century." Did Mitt Romney donate $10,000 to an organization without knowing what it does? This was four times the amount he gave to an organization promoting abstinence among teen girls, "Best Friends Foundation," in 2003.

ALSO:

Letter from Mitt Romney to Massachusetts Log Cabin Republicans - While running for US Senate against Ted Kennedy Mitt made big promises to the homosexual lobby.

The Mitt Romney 20-question flip-flop quiz - How much do YOU know? Test yourself on Gov. Romney's principled stands and positions.

Mitt Romney's Massachusetts marriage license - Party A and Party B

VIDEO of Romney debating Ted Kennedy in 1994 - Romney arguing that he's more liberal than Ted Kennedy!

VIDEO of Romney passionately defending his pro-choice position - during 2002 campaign for Governor.

VIDEO of Romney disavowing any connection to pro-life movement - dursing 2002 campaign for Governor.

VIDEO of Romney with wife Ann assuring voters he'll be solidly pro-choice - during 2002 campaign for Governor.

Romney popular with know-nothing conservatives - From MassResistance Blog.

Example of Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth activities - Your tax dollars at work, under Romney's control.

Mitt Romney loses temper at campaign stop in Chicago when questioned about his role in same-sex "marriage" in Mass. - Talk show host at meeting asked embarrassing question -- why did he order the Mass. marriage certificates to be changed from "Husband and Wife" to "Parther A and Partner B", as reported in the Associated Press and elsewhere?

Mass. pro-life movement sells its soul - Mass. Citizens for Live gives Gov. Romney "political leadership award" after receiving $15,000 donation from him.

Romney timeline on "gay" marriage - Here's what happened and when.

Romney campaign sends out press release personally attacking Brian Camenker of MassResistance - Hard to believe they would actually do this. Undignified & unpresidential reaction to MassResistance report on Romney's record.

COLUMNS & ARTICLES:

"Mitt Happens" - by Don Feder 2/21/2007

On Romney's "buying off" conservative politicians & organizations:

"Straw poll and the straw man" - by Janet Folger 3/14/2007. How the pro-life movement in Massachusetts sold out to Romney.

"In Romney’s Bid, His Wallet Opens to the Right" - New York Times, 3/11/2007. Front page Sunday NY Times article exposes Mass. "pro-family" groups taking $$$ from Romney, then endorsing him. MassResistance quoted in article.

"Romney Wallet Opens to Buy Prolifers" - Carol McKinley blog 3/11//07. Refers to New York Times article, also brings up other sources.

Watch the Ron Paul Town Hall, live from New Hampshire at 5 PM

2008-01-06T16:38:00.000-05:00

January 6, 2008

Tonight on local New Hampshire television and simulcast on our website at http://www.ronpaul2008.com/snippets/127/manchester-townhall/, Ron Paul will take questions from an audience of undecided voters in the Granite State.

With the New Hampshire primary just two days away, Dr. Paul will bring his message of liberty and constitutional government directly to the people-real questions, real answers, as fair and balanced as politics gets.

Sunday, January 6
5:00 - 6:00 PM ET
Manchester, New Hampshire

LIVE at http://www.ronpaul2008.com/snippets/127/manchester-townhall/

Kate Rick
NH Communications Coordinator
Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign Committee
*************************

Ron Paul Town Hall, pt. 1

Ron Paul Town Hall, pt. 2

Snubbed by Fox, Paul holds own N.H. forum

*************************

Ron Paul at ABC Republican Debate, Part I

Ron Paul at ABC Republican Debate, Part II

ALL of RON PAUL’s replies @ ABC/N.H. debate on 1-05-08

Paul, Romney spar on terrorism @ ABC NH Debate

Ron Paul A Man Among Boys at ABC Debate

How Dare Charlie Gibson Allow Ron Paul To Speak

*************************

Ron Paul - Town Hall Forum - Part 1 of 6

Ron Paul - Town Hall Forum - Part 2 of 6

Ron Paul - Town Hall Forum - Part 3 of 6

Ron Paul - Town Hall Forum - Part 4 of 6

Ron Paul - Town Hall Forum - Part 5 of 6

Ron Paul - Town Hall Forum - Part 6 of 6

*************************

Barry Goldwater, Jr. to Campaign for Ron Paul in NH

Ron Paul's Supporters Hit the Highway

Michigan Resident Flies from Germany to Cast Ballot '0001' for Ron Paul

Ron Paul launches eight-state ad blitz

The Ron Paul Backlash Hits Fox

***************************

For more on Ron Paul see:

RON PAUL 2008 DOT COM

RON PAUL NATION

RON PAUL WAR ROOM

RON PAUL AIR CORPS

MORTALIUM ANIMOS: On "FOSTERING TRUE RELIGIOUS UNITY"

2008-01-05T12:51:00.000-05:00

POPE PIUS XI
TO HIS VENERABLE BRETHREN
GIVES GREETING AND APOSTOLIC BENEDICTION

Never perhaps in the past have the minds of men been so engrossed as they are today with the desire to strengthen and extend for the common good of man kind that tie of brotherhood--the result of our common origin and nature--which binds us all so closely together. The world does not yet fully enjoy the fruits of peace; on the contrary, dissensions old and new in various lands still issue in rebellions and conflict. Such disputes, affecting the tranquil prosperity of nations, can never be settled without the combined and active goodwill of those who are responsible for their government, and hence it is easy to understand--especially now that the unity of mankind is no longer called into question--the widespread desire that all nations, in view of this universal kinship, should daily find closer union with one another.

It is with a similar motive that efforts are being made by some, in connection with the New Law promulgated by Christ our Lord. Assured that there exist few men who are entirely devoid of the religious sense, they seem to ground on this belief a hope that all nations, while differing indeed in religious matters, may yet without great difficulty be brought to fraternal agreement on certain points of doctrine which will form a common basis of the spiritual life. With this object congresses, meetings, and addresses are arranged, attended by a large concourse of hearers, where all without distinction, unbelievers of every kind as well as Christians, even those who unhappily have rejected Christ and denied His divine nature or mission, are invited to join in the discussion. Now, such efforts can meet with no kind of approval among Catholics. They presuppose the erroneous view that all religions are more or less good and praiseworthy, inasmuch as all give expression, under various forms, to that innate sense which leads men to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. Those who hold such a view are not only in error; they distort the true idea of religion, and thus reject it, falling gradually into naturalism and atheism. To favor this opinion, therefore, and to encourage such undertakings is tantamount to abandoning the religion revealed by God.

Nevertheless, when there is a question of fostering unity among Christians, it is easy for many to be misled by the apparent excellence of the object to be achieved. Is it not right, they ask, is it not the obvious duty of all who invoke the name of Christ to refrain from mutual reproaches and at last to be united in charity? Dare anyone say that he loves Christ, and yet not strive with all his might to accomplish the desire of Him who asked His Father that His disciples might be "one" (John xvii. 21)? Did not Christ will that mutual charity should be the distinguishing characteristic of His disciples? "By this shall all men know that you are My disciples, if you have love one .for another" (John xiii. 35). If only all Christians were "one," it is contended. then they might do so much more to drive out the pest of irreligion which with its insidious and far-reaching advance is threatening to sap the strength of the Gospel. These and similar arguments, with amplifications, are constantly on the lips of the "pan-Christians" who, so far from being a few isolated individuals, have formed an entire class and grouped themselves into societies of extensive membership, usually under the direction of non-Catholics, who also disagree in matters of faith. The energy with which this scheme is being promoted has won for it many adherents, and even many Catholics are attracted by it, since it holds out the hope of a union apparently consonant with the wishes of Holy Mother Church, whose chief desire it is to recall her erring children and to bring them back to her bosom. In reality, however, these fair and alluring words cloak a most grave error, subversive of the foundations of the Catholic faith.

Conscious, therefore, of Our Apostolic office, which warns Us not to allow the flock of Christ to be led astray by harmful fallacies, We invoke your zeal, Venerable Brethren, to avert this evil. We feel confident that each of you, by written and spoken word, will explain clearly to the people the principles and arguments that We are about to set forth, so that Catholics may know what view and what course of action they should adopt regarding schemes for the promiscuous union into one body of all who call themselves Christians.

God, the Creator of all things, made us that we might know Him and serve Him; to our service, therefore, He has a full right. He might indeed have been contented to prescribe for man's government the natural law alone, that is, the law which in creation He has written upon man's heart, and have regulated the progress of that law by His ordinary Providence. He willed, however, to make positive laws which we should obey, and progressively, from the beginnings of the human race until the coming and preaching of Jesus Christ, He Himself taught mankind the duties which a rational creature owes to His Creator. "God, Who at sundry times and in diverse manners spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all in these days hath spoken to us by His Son" (Heb. i. 1, seq.). Evidently, therefore, no religion can be true save that which rests upon the revelation of God, a revelation begun from the very first, continued under the Old Law, and brought to completion by Jesus Christ Himself under the New. Now, if God has spoken--and it is historically certain that He has in fact spoken--then it is clearly man's duty implicitly to believe His revelation and to obey His commands. That we might rightly do both, for the glory of God and for our own salvation, the only-begotten Son of God founded His Church on earth. None, we think, of those who claim to be Christians will deny that a Church, and one sole Church, was founded by Christ.

On the further question, however, as to what in the intention of its Founder was to be the precise nature of that Church, there is not the same agreement. Many of them, for example, deny that the Church of Christ was intended to be visible and manifest, at any rate in the sense that it was to be visibly the one body of the faithful, agreeing in one and the same doctrine under one teaching and governing authority. They conceive the visible Church as nothing more than a federation of the various Christian communities, even though these may hold different and mutually exclusive doctrines. The truth is that Christ founded His Church as a perfect society, of its nature external and perceptible to the senses, which in the future should carry on the work of the salvation of mankind under one head, with a living teaching authority, administering the sacraments which are the sources of heavenly grace (John iii. 5, vi 48-59, xx. 22 seq.; cf. Matt. xviii. 18, etc.). Wherefore He compared His Church to a kingdom (Matt. xiii), to a house (cf. Matt. xvi. 18), to a sheepfold (John x. 16), and to a flock (John xxi. 15-1 7). The Church thus wondrously instituted could not cease to exist with the death of its Founder and of the Apostles, the pioneers of its propagation; for its mission was to lead all men to salvation, without distinction of time or place: "Going therefore, teach ye all nations" (Matt. xxviii. 19). Nor could the Church ever lack the effective strength necessary for the continued accomplishment of its task, since Christ Himself is perpetually present with it, according to His promise: "Behold, I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world" (Matt. xxviii. 20). Hence not only does the Church still exist today and continue always to exist, but it must ever be exactly the same as it was in the days of the Apostles. Otherwise we must say--which God forbid--that Christ has failed in His purpose, or that He erred when He asserted of His Church that the gates of hell should never prevail against it (Matt. xvi. l8).

And here it will be opportune to expound and to reject a certain false opinion which lies at the root of this question and of that complex movement by which non-Catholics seek to bring about the union of Christian Churches. Those who favor this view constantly quote the words of Christ, "That they may be one ... And there shall be one fold and one shepherd" (John xvii. 21, x. 16), in the sense that Christ thereby merely expressed a desire or a prayer which as yet has not been granted. For they hold that the unity of faith and government which is a note of the one true Church of Christ has up to the present time hardly ever existed, and does not exist today. They consider that this unity is indeed to be desired and may even, by cooperation and good will, be actually attained, but that meanwhile it must be regarded as a mere ideal. The Church, they say, is of its nature divided into sections, composed of several churches or distinct communities which still remain separate, and although holding in common some articles of doctrine, nevertheless differ concerning the remainder; that all these enjoy the same rights; and that the Church remained one and undivided at the most only from the Apostolic age until the first Ecumenical Councils. Hence, they say, controversies and long-standing differences, which today still keep asunder the members of the Christian family, must be entirely set aside, and from the residue of doctrines a common form of faith drawn up and proposed for belief, in the profession of which all may not only know but also feel themselves to be brethren. If the various Churches or communities were united in some kind of universal federation, they would then be in a position to oppose resolutely and successfully the progress of irreligion.

Such, Venerable Brethren, is the common contention. There are indeed some who recognize and affirm that Protestantism has with inconsiderate zeal rejected certain articles of faith and external ceremonies which are in fact useful and attractive, and which the Roman Church still retains. But they immediately go on to say that the Roman Church, too, has erred, and corrupted the primitive religion by adding to it and proposing for belief doctrines not only alien to the Gospel but contrary to its spirit. Chief among these they count that of the primacy of jurisdiction granted to Peter and to his successors in the See of Rome. There are actually some, though few, who grant to the Roman Pontiff a primacy of honor and even a certain power or jurisdiction; this, however, they consider to arise not from the divine law but merely from the consent of the faithful. Others, again, even go so far as to desire the Pontiff himself to preside over their mixed assemblies. For the rest, while you may hear many non-Catholics loudly preaching brotherly communion in Jesus Christ, yet not one will you find to whom it even occurs with devout submission to obey the Vicar of Jesus Christ in his capacity of teacher or ruler. Meanwhile they assert their readiness to treat with the Church of Rome, but on equal terms, as equals with an equal. But even if they could so treat, there seems little doubt that they would do so only on condition that no pact into which they might enter should compel them to retract those opinions which still keep them outside the one fold of Christ.

This being so, it is clear that the Apostolic See can by no means take part in these assemblies. nor is it in any way lawful for Catholics to give to such enterprises their encouragement or support. If they did so, they would be giving countenance to a false Christianity quite alien to the one Church of Christ. Shall we commit the iniquity of suffering the truth, the truth revealed by God, to be made a subject for compromise? For it is indeed a question of defending revealed truth. Jesus Christ sent His Apostles into the whole world to declare the faith of the Gospel to every nation, and, to save them from error, He willed that the Holy Ghost should first teach them all truth. Has this doctrine, then, disappeared, or at any time been obscured, in the Church of which God Himself is the ruler and guardian? Our Redeemer plainly said that His Gospel was intended not only for the apostolic age but for all time. Can the object of faith, then, have become in the process of time so dim and uncertain that today we must tolerate contradictory opinions? If this were so, then we should have to admit that the coming of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles, the perpetual indwelling of the same Spirit in the Church, nay, the very preaching of Jesus Christ, have centuries ago lost their efficacy and value. To affirm this would be blasphemy. The only-begotten Son of God not only bade His representatives to teach all nations; He also obliged all men to give credence to whatever was taught them by "witnesses preordained by God" (Acts x. 41). Moreover, He enforced His command with this sanction: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; he that believeth not shall be condemned" (Mark xvi. 16). These two commands, the one to teach, the other to believe for salvation, must be obeyed. But they cannot even be understood unless the Church proposes an inviolate and clear teaching, and in proposing it is immune from all danger of error. It is also false to say that. although the deposit of truth does indeed exist, yet it is to be found only with such laborious effort and after such lengthy study and discussion, that a man's life is hardly long enough for its discovery and attainment. This would be equivalent to saying that the most merciful God spoke through the prophets and through His only-begotten Son merely in order that some few men, and those advanced in years, might learn what He had revealed, and not in order to inculcate a doctrine of faith and morals by which man should be guided throughout the whole of his life. These pan- Christians who strive for the union of the Churches would appear to pursue the noblest of ideals in promoting charity among all Christians. But how should charity tend to the detriment of faith? Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems in his Gospel to have revealed the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress upon the memory of his disciples the new commandment "to love one another," nevertheless strictly forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt form of Christ's teaching: "If any man come to you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house, nor say to him, God speed you" (2 John 10). Therefore, since the foundation of charity is faith pure and inviolate, it is chiefly by the bond of one faith that the disciples of Christ are to be united. A federation of Christians, then, is inconceivable in which each member retains his own opinions and private judgment in matters of faith, even though they differ from the opinions of all the rest. How can men with opposite convictions belong to one and the same Federation of the faithful: those who accept sacred Tradition as a source of revelation and those who reject it; those who recognize as divinely constituted the hierarchy of bishops, priests, and ministers in the Church, and those who regard it as gradually introduced to suit the conditions of the time; those who adore Christ really present in the Most Holy Eucharist through that wonderful conversion of the bread and wine, transubstantiation, and those who assert that the body of Christ is there only by faith or by the signification and virtue of the sacrament; those who in the Eucharist recognize both sacrament and sacrifice, and those who say that it is nothing more than the memorial of the Lord's supper; those who think it right and useful to pray to the Saints reigning with Christ, especially to Mary the Mother of God, and to venerate their images, and those who refuse such veneration as derogatory to the honor due Jesus Christ, "the one mediator of God and men" (cf. I Tim. ii.5)?

How so great a variety of opinions can clear the way for the unity of the Church, We know not. That unity can arise only from one teaching authority, one law of belief, and one faith of Christians. But we do know that from such a state of affairs it is but an easy step to the neglect of religion or "indifferentism," and to the error of the modernists, who hold that dogmatic truth is not absolute but relative, that is, that it changes according to the varying necessities of time and place and the varying tendencies of the mind; that it is not contained in an immutable tradition, but can be altered to suit the needs of human life.

Furthermore, it is never lawful to employ in connection with articles of faith the distinction invented by some between "fundamental" and "non-fundamental" articles, the former to be accepted by all, the latter being left to the free acceptance of the faithful. The supernatural virtue of faith has as its formal motive the authority of God revealing. and this allows of no such distinction. All true followers of Christ, therefore, will believe the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God with the same faith as they believe the mystery of the august Trinity, the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff in the sense defined by the Ecumenical Vatican Council with the same faith as they believe the Incarnation of our Lord. That these truths have been solemnly sanctioned and defined by the Church at various times, some of them even quite recently, makes no difference to their certainty, nor to our obligation of believing them. Has not God revealed them all?

The teaching authority of the Church in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that the revealed doctrines might remain for ever intact and might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men. This authority is indeed daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him; but it has the further office of defining some truth with solemn decree whenever it is opportune, and whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or again to impress the minds of the faithful with a clearer and more detailed explanation of the articles of sacred doctrine. But in the use of this extraordinary teaching authority no fresh invention is introduced, nothing new is ever added to the number of those truths which are at least implicitly contained within the deposit of Revelation divinely committed to the Church; but truths which to some perhaps may still seem obscure are rendered clear, or a truth which some may have called into question is declared to be of faith.

Thus, Venerable Brethren. it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics. There is but one way in which the unity of Christians may be fostered, and that is by furthering the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it; for from that one true Church they have in the past fallen away. The one Church of Christ is visible to all, and will remain, according to the will of its Author, exactly the same as He instituted it. The mystical Spouse of Christ has never in the course of centuries been contaminated, nor in the future can she ever be, as Cyprian bears witness: "The Bride of Christ cannot become false to her Spouse; she is inviolate and pure. She knows but one dwelling and chastely and modestly she guards the sanctity of the nuptial chamber" (De Cath. Ecclesiae unitate. 6). The same holy martyr marveled that anyone could believe that "this unity of the Church built upon a divine foundation, knit together by heavenly sacraments, could ever be rent asunder by the conflict of wills" (ibid.). For since the mystical body of Christ, like His physical body, is one (I Cor. xii.12), compactly and fitly joined together (Eph. iv. 15), it were foolish to say that the mystical body is composed of disjointed and scattered members. Whosoever therefore is not united with the body is no member thereof, neither is he in communion with Christ its head.

Furthermore, in this one Church of Christ no man can be or remain who does not accept, recognize, and obey the authority and supremacy of Peter and his legitimate successors. Did not the ancestors of those who are now entangled in the errors of Photius and of the Reformers obey the Bishop of Rome, the chief shepherd of souls? Their children, alas! have left the home of their fathers; but that house did not therefore fall to the ground and perish for ever, for it was supported by God. Let them. then, return to their Father, who, forgetting the insults in the past heaped upon the Apostolic See, will accord them a most loving welcome. If, as they constantly say, they long to be united with Us and Ours, why do they not hasten to enter the Church, "the mother and mistress of all Christ's faithful."? (Conc. Lateran. iv. c. 5). Let them heed the words of Lactantius: "The Catholic Church is alone in keeping the true worship. This is the fount of truth, this the house of faith, this the temple of God; if any man enter not here, or if any man go forth from it, he is a stranger to the hope of life and salvation. Let none delude himself with obstinate wrangling. For life and salvation are here concerned, and these will be lost forever unless their interests be carefully and assiduously kept in mind" (Divin. Inst. lv. 30, 11-12).

Let our separated children. therefore, draw nigh to the Apostolic See, set up in the City which Peter and Paul, Princes of the Apostles, consecrated by their blood; to the See which is "the root and womb whence issues the Church of God" (Cypr. Ep. 48 ad Cornelium, 3); and let them come, not with any intention or hope that "the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth" (l Tim. iii. 15), will cast aside the integrity of the faith and tolerate their errors, but to submit themselves to its teaching and government. Would that the happy lot, denied to so many of Our Predecessors, might at last be Ours, to embrace with fatherly affection those children whose unhappy separation from Us We now deplore. Would that God our Saviour, "Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (Tim. ii. 4), might hear our humble prayer and vouchsafe to recall to the unity of the Church all that are gone astray. To this all-important end We implore, and We desire that others should implore, the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of divine grace, Help of Christians, victorious over all heresies, that she may entreat for Us the speedy coming of that longed-for day, when all men shall hear the voice of her divine Son, and shall be "careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Eph. iv. 3).

You, Venerable Brethren, know how dear to Our heart is this desire, and We wish that Our children also should know, not only those belonging to the Catholic fold, but also those separated from Us. If these will humbly beg light from heaven. there is no doubt but that they will recognize the one true Church of Jesus Christ, and entering therein, will at last be united with Us in perfect charity. In the hope of this fulfillment, and as a pledge of Our fatherly goodwill, We impart most lovingly to you, Venerable Brethren, and to your clergy and people, the Apostolic Benediction.

Given at S. Peter's, Rome, on the 6th day of January, the Feast of the Epiphany of our Lord Jesus Christ in the year 1928, the sixth of Our Pontificate.

Traditional Propers for the Feast of the Holy Family

2008-01-05T12:41:00.000-05:00

Vestments: White

INTROIT
Proverbs 23-25
The father of the Just rejoiceth greatly, let Thy father and Thy mother be joyful, and let her rejoice who bore Thee. -- (Ps.88. 2, 3). How lovely are Thy tabernacles, O Lord of Hosts! my soul longeth and fainteth for the courts of the Lord. V.: Glory be to the Father . . . -- The father of the Just . .

COLLECT - O Lord Jesus Christ, who, being subject to Mary and Joseph, didst sanctify home life with unspeakable virtues: grant, that, by the aid of both, we may be taught by the example of Thy Holy Family, and attain to eternal fellowship with it: Who livest and reignest, with God the Father, in the unity of the Holy Ghost, God . . .

EPISTLE
Colossians 3: 12-17
Brethren, Put ye on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, the bowels of mercy, benignity, humility, modesty, patience: bearing with one another and forgiving one another: even as the Lord hath forgiven you, so do you also. But above all these things have charity, which is the bond of perfection: and let the peace of Christ rejoice in your hearts, wherein also you are called in one body: and be ye thankful. Let the word of Christ dwell in you abundantly, in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms, hymns and spiritual canticles, singing in grace in your hearts to God. All whatsoever you do in word or in work, do all in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, giving thanks to God and the Father by Jesus Christ our Lord.

GRADUAL
Psalms 26: 4
One thing I have asked of the Lord, this will I seek after: that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life. V. (Ps. 88. 5). Blessed are they that dwell in Thy house, O Lord, they shall praise Thee for ever and ever.

LESSER ALLELUIA - Alleluia, alleluia. V. (Isaias 45. 15). Verily Thou art a hidden King, the God of Israel, the Savior. Alleluia.

TRACT
Hebrews 10:5
SACRIFICE and oblation Thou wouldst not, but a body Thou has fitted unto me. V. Burnt-offering and sin-offering Thou didst not require: then said I: Behold I come. V. In the head of the book it is written of Me that I should do Thy will.

GREATER ALLELUIA - ALLELUIA, alleluia. V. Blessed is the man that heareth Me and that watcheth daily at My gates, and waiteth at the post of My doors. Alleluia. V. Our life is hidden with Christ in God. Alleluia.

GOSPEL
Luke 2: 42-52
When Jesus was twelve years old, they going up into Jerusalem according to the custom of the feast, and having fulfilled the days, when they returned, the Child Jesus remained in Jerusalem, and His parents knew it not. And thinking that He was in the company, they came a day's journey, and sought Him among their kinsfolk and acquaintences. And not finding Him, they returned into Jerusalem, seeking Him. And it came to pass that after three days they found Him in the Temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, hearing them and asking them questions. And all that heard Him were astonished at His wisdom and His answers. And seeing Him they wondered. And His Mother said to Him: Son, why hast Thou done so to us? Behold Thy father and I have sought Thee sorrowing. And He said to them: how is it that you sought Me Did you not know that I must be about My Father's business? And they understood not the word that He spoke unto them. And he went down with them and come to Nazareth, and was subject to them. And His Mother kept all these words in her heart. And Jesus advanced in wisdom and age and grace with God and men.

OFFERTORY
Luke 2:22
The parents of Jesus carried Him to Jerusalem, to present Him to the Lord.

SECRET - We offer unto Thee, O Lord, this propitiatory Sacrifice, humbly entreating Thee: that the intercession of the Virgin Mother of God, with blessed Joseph, Thou wouldst firmly establish our families in Thy peace and grace. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, Thy Son, who liveth and reigneth with Thee in the unity of the Holy Ghost God, world without end. Amen.

PREFACE (Preface of the Epiphany) - It is truly meet and just, right and for our salvation, that we should at all times, and in all places, give thanks unto Thee, O holy Lord, Father almighty, everlasting God; for when Thine only-begotten Son was manifested in the substance of our mortal flesh, with the new light of His own Immortality He restored us. And therefore with Angels and Archangels, with Throne and Dominations, and with all the hosts of the heavenly army, we sing the hymn of Thy glory, evermore saying: Holy, Holy, Holy...

COMMUNION
Luke 2:51
Jesus went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was subject to them.

POST COMMUNION - Make us, O Lord Jesus, whom Thou dost refresh with heavenly sacraments, ever to follow the example of Thy Holy Family: that in the hour of our death, the glorious Virgin Thy Mother with blessed Joseph may come to our aid, and we may be found worthy to be received by Thee into everlasting tabernacles. Who livest and reignest, with God the Father, in the unity of the Holy Ghost . . .

Feast of the Holy Family

2008-01-05T12:28:00.000-05:00

Jesus, Mary, and Joseph

First Sunday after the Epiphany

From "Divine Intimacy" by Fr. Gabriel of St. Mary Magdalen, O.C.D.

Presence of God - I beg the Blessed Virgin Mary to allow me to enter in spirit the humble home at Nazareth, to contemplate Jesus' most admirable life there.

Meditation

1. On this day for the last time in the cycle of the liturgical year, the Church invites us to contemplate the mystery of Jesus' humble, hidden life. A feeling of close intimacy and tenderness characterizes this Feast and is expressed in the liturgy of the day: " . . . it is good for us to recall the little home at Nazareth and the humble life of those who lived there . . . . In it, Jesus learned Joseph's humble trade, and grew in age, and was happy sharing the work of a carpenter: 'Let the sweat,' He seemed to say, 'trickle over My limbs before they are drenched with the torrent of My Blood, and the pain of this labor shall go to atone for the sins of men!'" (RB). Let us enter the little house; in the presence of such humility, which conceals Jesus' infinite Majesty, let us repeat the words of the sacred text: "Thou art indeed a hidden King, O God the Savior, King of Israel" (ibid.).

Today's liturgy particularly emphasizes one typical aspect of the humble life of this hidden God: obedience. "Although He was the Son of God . . . He learned to obey; He humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death" (ibid.). From Bethlehem to Calvary obedience was His companion. The Gospel (Lk 2, 42-52) stresses this obedience of Jesus at Nazareth in words which carry for all time the strength of their first utterance, "He was subject to them." Let us ask ourselves with St. Bernard, "Who obeyed? Whom did He obey?" The Saint replies, "God obeyed man! Yes, the God to whom the angels are subject . . . was subject to Mary, and not only to Mary, but also to Joseph. For God to obey a woman is humility without parallel . . . . Learn then, man, to obey; learn, O earth, to be submissive. God subjected Himself to men; and do you, desiring to rule others, place yourself above your Creator?"

2. "Did you not know that I must be about My Father's business?" Jesus, who was so humble and submissive, did not hesitate to make this reply to Mary when she gently questioned Him about having remained behind in the Temple without her or Joseph's knowledge, while they in anguish had been seeking Him for three days.

These are the first words of Jesus which we find recorded in the Gospel. He spoke them in order to declare his mission and to affirm the primacy of the rights of God. When hardly an adolescent, Jesus taught us that God and the things of God must always come first. He must hold the first place in our lives, and we must obey Him regardless of all other considerations, even if it means sacrificing the rights of nature and of blood. Yielding to relatives and friends is no longer a virtue-and may even be sinful-if it leads us away from the will of God or hinders its fulfillment.

Giving precedence to the rights of God does not imply that we neglect our duties toward our neighbor. Today's Feast calls our attention to these obligations, and especially to those concerning our family, natural or religious, inviting us to follow the example of the Holy Family of Nazareth. To this end, the Epistle (Col 3 ,12-17) shows us the virtues we should practice: "Clothe yourself . . . with mercy, benignity, humility, modesty, and patience, bearing with one another, and forgiving one another."

--
Sincerely in Christ,
Our Lady of the Rosary Library
"Pray and work for souls"
http://olrl.org/

Prayer to be said on New Years Day

2008-01-01T21:00:00.000-05:00

O God, Heavenly Father of Mercy, God of all Consolation! we thank thee that from our birth to this day, Thou hast so well preserved us, and hast protected us in so many dangers; we beseech Thee, through the merits of Thy beloved Son, and by His sacred blood which He shed for us on this day in His circumcision, to forgive all the sins which, during the past year, we have committed against Thy commandments by which we have aroused Thy indignation and wrath against ourselves. Preserve us in the coming year from all sins, and misfortunes of body and soul. Grant that from this day to the end of our lives, all our senses, thoughts, words. and works, which we here dedicate to Thee for all time, may be directed in accordance with Thy will, and that we may finally die in the true Catholic faith, and enjoy with Thee in Thy kingdom a joyful new year that shall know no end. Amen

Catechism frames life

2007-12-30T19:02:00.000-05:00

Ruth Gledhill Analysis

(December 24, 2007 ) In his Introduction to Christianity, Professor Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, gave warning against the “secularisation of love” as preached by Luther, the founder of the Protestant Reformation.

This text is almost certainly among the documents that Tony Blair will have been given to read as part of his “instruction” before becoming a Catholic.

The former Prime Minister will have received an intense programme of spiritual and doctrinal instruction from Father Mark O’Toole, secretary to the Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor. For doctrinal instruction, he will also have been asked to read the Church’s Catechism, which contains all contemporary doctrine as well as other introductions to Christianity.

Chris Gillibrand, a former Anglican who now blogs on Catholic Church conservation from Brussels, said: “However formal or informal the instruction, the Catechism frames the spiritual life of every convert. The existence of the Catechism means there is not a doctrinal continuum between the Catholic Church and other churches, not least the Anglican.”

Speaking of his own conversion, Mr Gillibrand said: “I said goodbye to the Church of England on the steps of Westminster Abbey, went for several beers and a curry in Soho with a good agnostic friend, returning to Oxford that evening by coach which passed by Littlemore, where John Henry, later Cardinal, Newman was received into the Church.

“I was received on the Sunday morning in a frankly ugly church, but I knew, with the hands of the two sponsors on my shoulders, I would be for the rest of my life home.”

Have your say

The Holy Family with a Lamb

2007-12-29T09:15:00.000-05:00

Raphael. The Holy Family with a Lamb. 1507. Oil on panel. Museo del Prado, Madrid, Spain.

Feast of the Holy Family

2007-12-29T08:55:00.000-05:00

Feast of the Holy Family

Why is this Feast celebrated today (December 30), instead of closer to Christmas? Because in Old Testament Law, a child wasn't a son of Abraham or a true part of the family until his circumcision at 8 days of age, an event of Christ's life that we celebrated on 1 January (from 25 December to 1 January are 8 days).

There are few private devotions associated with this day, though the blessing of children by their parents, the renewal of marriage vows (even if just privately), and consecration of the family to the Holy Family are a few:

Consecration to the Holy Family

O Jesus, our most loving Redeemer, who having come to enlighten the world with Thy teaching and example, didst will to pass the greater part of Thy life in humility and subjection to Mary and Joseph in the poor home of Nazareth, thus sanctifying the Family that was to be an example for all Christian families, graciously receive our family as it dedicates and consecrates itself to Thee this day. Do Thou protect us, guard us and establish amongst us Thy holy fear, true peace and concord in Christian love: in order that by living according to the divine pattern of Thy family we may be able, all of us without exception, to attain to eternal happiness.

Mary, dear Mother of Jesus and Mother of us, by the kindly intercession make this our humble offering acceptable in the sight of Jesus, and obtain for us His graces and blessings.

O Saint Joseph, most holy Guardian of Jesus and Mary, help us by thy prayers in all our spiritual and temporal needs; that so we may be enabled to praise our divine Savior Jesus, together with Mary and thee, for all eternity. Amen.

Say an Our Father, Hail Mary and Glory be three times.

A reading for the day, written by St.Bernard of Clairvaux (A.D. 1090-1153):

Reading

The Feast of the Holy Family

By St. Bernard of Clairvaux

In Mary we praise that which places her above all others, that is, fruitfulness of offspring together with virginity. For never has it been known in this world that anyone was at the same time mother and virgin. And see of Whom she is mother. Where does your astonishment at this so wondrous dignity lead you? Is it not to this, that you may gaze in wonder yet never sufficiently revere? Is she not in your veneration, nay, in the esteem of Truth itself, raised above choirs of angels? Does not Mary address the Lord and God of all the angels as Son, saying: Son, why hast thou done so to us?

Who among the angels may thus presume? It is enough for them, and for them their greatest honour, that while they are spirits by nature they have become and are called angels, as David testifies: Who makest thy angels spirits. Mary, knowing herself mother, with confidence calls that Majesty Son Whom the angels in reverence serve. Nor does God disdain to be called that which He disdained not to be. For the Evangelist adds a little later: He was subject to them.

Who was subject to whom? A God to men. God, I repeat, to Whom the angels are subject: Whom principalities and powers obey: was subject to Mary; and not alone to Mary, but to Joseph also, because of Mary. Admire and revere both the one and the other, and choose which you admire the more: the most sweet condescension of the Son, or the sublime dignity of the Mother. For either am I at a loss for words: for both are wondrous. For that God should obey a woman is humility without compare; and that a woman should have rule over God dignity without equal. In praise of virgins is it joyfully proclaimed: that they follow the lamb withersoever he goeth. Of what praise shall you esteem her worthy who also goeth before Him?

Learn, O Man, to obey. Learn, O Earth, to be subject. Learn, O Dust, to submit. The Evangelist in speaking of thy Maker says: He was subject to them; that is, without doubt, to Mary and to Joseph. Be you ashamed, vain ashes that you are. God humbles Himself, and do you exalt yourself? God becomes subject to men, and will you, eager to lord it over men, place yourself above your Maker? O would that God might deign to make me, thinking such thoughts at times in my own mind, such answer as He made, reproving him, to His apostle: Go behind Me, Satan: because thou savorest not the things that are of God.

For as often as I desire to be foremost among men, so often do I seek to take precedence of God; and so do I not truly savour the things that are of God. For of Him was it said: And he was subject to them. If you disdain, O Man, to follow the example of a Man, at least it will not lower thee to imitate thy Maker. If perhaps you cannot follow Him wheresoever He goeth, at least follow in that wherein He has come down to you.

If you are unable to follow Him on the sublime way of virginity, then follow God by that most sure way of humility; from whose straitness should some even from among the virgins go aside, then must I say what is true, that neither do they follow the Lamb withersoever he goeth. He that is humble, even though he be stained, he follows the Lamb; so too does the proud virgin; but neither of the two whithersoever He goeth: because the one cannot ascend to the purity of the Lamb that is without stain, nor will the other deign to come down to the meekness of the Lamb, Who stood silent, not merely before the shearer, but before the one that put Him to death. Yet the sinner who makes after Him in humility, has chosen a wholesomer part than the one that is proud in his virtue; since the humble repentance of the one washes away uncleanness, but the pride of the other contaminates his own virtue.

Truly blessed was Mary who possessed both humility and virginity. And truly wondrous the virginity whose fruitfulness stained not, but adorned her; and truly singular the humility, which this fruitful virginity has not troubled, but rather exalted; and wholly incomparable the fruitfulness which goes hand in hand with her humility and her virginity. Which of these things is not wondrous? Which is not beyond all comparison? Which that is not wholly singular? It would be strange if you did not hesitate to decide which you regard as most worthy of praise: whether the wonder of fruitfulness of offspring in virginity, or of virginal integrity in a mother: sublimity of Offspring, or humility joined to such dignity: unless it be that we place both together above each one singly: and it is truly beyond any doubt more excellent and more joyful to have beheld these perfections united in her, than to see but one part of them.

And can we wonder that God, of Whom it is written that He is wonderful in his saints, shows Himself in His own Mother yet more wondrous still. Venerate then, Ye spouses, this integrity of flesh in our corruptible flesh. Revere likewise, Ye virgins, fruitfulness in virginity. Let all men imitate the humility of God's Mother. Honour, Ye angels, the Mother of your King, you who adore the Offspring of our Virgin; Who is your King and our King, the Healer of our race, the Restorer of our fatherland: Who among you is so sublime, yet among us was so lowly: to Whose Majesty as well from you as from us let there be adoration and reverence: to whose Perfection be there honour and glory and empire for ever and ever. Amen.

Prayer to the Holy Family Domine Iesu Christe, qui Mariae et Ioseph subditus, domesticam vitam ineffabilibus virtutibus consecrasti: fac nos, utriusque auxilio, Familiae sanctae tuae exemplis instrui et consortium consequi sempiternum: Qui vivis et regnas in saecula saeculorum. Amen.

Lord Jesus Christ, Who, being made subject to Mary and Joseph, didst consecrate domestic life by Thine ineffable virtues; grant that we, with the assistance of both, may be taught by the example of Thy Holy Family and may attain to its everlasting fellowship. Who livest and reignest forever. Amen.

Devotion to the Holy Family

Since the three holiest persons the world has ever beheld, Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son of God, His immaculate mother, Mary, and His foster-father, Saint Joseph, dwelt together for many years in the humble home of Nazareth, it is natural that Catholics should venerate them not only as individuals but also as a family. The cult of the Holy Family, however, did not manifest itself to any extent in the Church until the 17th century. At that time this devotion became popular throughout Europe, and was introduced into Canada through the zeal of F. de M. Laval, first Bishop of Quebec. This period witnessed the establishment in France of a religious congregation of women known as Daughters of the Holy Family. At the present day there are several religious congregations both of brothers and of sisters under the patronage of the Holy Family. In 1861, Father Francoz, a Jesuit, founded at Lyons an association of Christian families consecrated to the Holy Family. Pope Leo XIII, in his Apostolic letter "Neminem fugit" (14 June 1892) and in his brief "Quum nuper" (2 July 1892), affiliated to this society all the similar organizations throughout the world and enriched it with many privileges and indulgences. The Cardinal-Vicar of Rome is the protector of this association. The Archconfraternity of the Holy Family differs from the preceding association in that it is composed, not of families as such, but of individuals. It owes its origin to the zeal of a Belgian military officer of the 19th century, Henri Belletable. Perceiving the havoc that was being wrought among the working classes by socialism, Belletable established at Liege, 1844, a confraternity of working-men under the patronage of the Holy Family. Its first spiritual director was the Redemptorist, Father Victor Dechamps, later cardinal and Archbishop of Malines. In 1847 the organization was approved by Pope Pius IX, who elevated the confraternity of Liege to the dignity of an archconfraternity, with the right to affiliate to itself other confraternities throughout the world and to communicate to them its spiritual privileges. The confraternity is now extensively spread through Europe and America and has a membership of several hundred thousand. It is no longer limited to working-men; any Catholic, man or woman, child or adult, may join this association. It is, to a great extent, under the direction of the Redemptorist Fathers, the rector of the Redemptorist community at Liege being its chief director. One of the most celebrated confraternities is that in the Redemptorist Church at Limerick, Ireland, which counts more than 6,000 men as practical members. By decree of the Congregation of Rites, 26 October 1921, a feast of the Holy Family was instituted for the universal Church, to be celebrated on the Sunday within the octave of the Epiphany. Among the many masters who have represented the Holy Family in art are: Alberti, Baroccio, Batoni, Bartolommeo, Burckmair, Annibale Carracci, Agostino Carracci, Cignani, L. Cranach the Elder, Credi, Da Vinci, EI Greco, Fra Bartolommeo, Franeia, Imola, Lanzano, Luini, Mantegna, Mengs, Michelangelo, Murillo, Perugino, Pinturicchio, Piombo, N. Poussin, Raphael, Rembrandt, Reni, Ribera, Romano, Rottenhammer, Rubens, Sarto, Schongauet, Signorelli, Titian, Trevisani, Van der Werden, Van Dyck, Van Orley, Vasari, Veronese, Zaleski.

New Catholic Dictionary

Cardinal O'Connor's Homily: Holy Family Feast

Cardinal cites teaching on 'mercy, kindness, humility, meekness, patience'

This is the text of Cardinal O'Connor's homily delivered in St. Patrick's Cathedral on Sunday, Dec. 26, the feast of the Holy Family.

Permit me to begin by thanking the members of the press corps for everything they have done during this holy season. I do not say this in any way to curry favor with the press, but the press has done so much during this particular period of time to convey what is going on in the cathedral that I think it would be inappropriate of me if I did not thank them. They have been very gracious, and I am personally appreciative. (I hope that improves what they say about me in the future!)

Might I make note of something exceedingly important to me and to many. On Dec. 28 at 10 o'clock in the morning we will be having a Mass for the Holy Innocents. This would not mean perhaps a great deal to everyone, but liturgically it means a great deal to the Church. This Mass is in memory of all of those innocents put to death at the direction of Herod, as well as the untold numbers slaughtered today by way of the horror of abortion. We are well aware that a great number of people do not appreciate this horror nor do we charge it to them. We know that many do not appreciate what is happening, but we try to compensate on this particular feast of the Holy Innocents. We hope many of you will be able to participate on the 28th.

Permit me to formally begin this homily with a reflection on the very gentle first reading. [Sir. 3: 2-6, 12-14] We do not have the massive crowds, and there is a kind of quiet, it seems to me, that lends itself to what was not necessarily the case during the beautiful ceremonies of Christmas night. I read portions of those readings that have already been presented so beautifully.

"The Lord sets a father in honor over his children;

A mother's authority he confirms over her sons.

He who honors his father atones for sins;

He stores up riches who reveres his mother."

These do not sound like profound truths, do they? Yet they are truths so easily lost in this often chaotic day, when so many are pressed so hard to try to make a living, to try to take care of young children, to contribute to older children. Many find this a very, very difficult and very complex society to live in. I think those simple Scripture readings can be very helpful.

"He who honors his father is gladdened by children,

And when he prays he is heard.

He who reveres his father will live a long life;

He obeys the Lord who brings comfort to his mother."

Let us turn now, if we may, to the letter of St. Paul to the Colossians. [Col. 3:12-21] Once again, the words are so very simple.

"Because you are God's chosen ones, holy and beloved, clothe yourselves with heartfelt mercy, with kindness, humility, meekness, and patience."

It seems to me that during this Christmas season those words are so very fitting. Unlike concerns about fashion during this special season, we are reminded about how important it is to clothe ourselves in virtue. God's chosen ones, "clothe yourselves with heartfelt mercy, with kindness, humility, meekness and patience." I know I must repeatedly remind myself of this.

"Bear with one another; forgive whatever grievances you have against one another. Forgive as the Lord has forgiven you. Over all these virtues put on love, which binds the rest together and makes them perfect."

It is fascinating, isn't it, that we can read and listen to these beautiful words in the Scriptures and yet perhaps find that we do not seem to turn to them. We must try, in every thought and word and action, to help one another, to help ourselves live as our Divine Lord wishes.

Then, finally. this very beautiful Gospel [Lk. 2: 22-40] which, of course, is at the heart of this Christmas season.

"When the day came to purify them according to the law of Moses, Mary and Joseph brought Jesus up to Jerusalem so that he could be presented to the Lord, for it is written in the law of the Lord, 'Every first-born male shall be consecrated to the Lord.' They came to offer in sacrifice 'a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons,' in accord with the dictate in the law of the Lord.

"There lived in Jerusalem at the time a certain man named Simeon: He was just and pious, and awaited the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. It was revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not experience death until he had seen the Anointed of the Lord. He came to the temple now, inspired by the Spirit; and when the parents brought in the child Jesus to perform for him the customary ritual of the law, he took him in his arms and blessed God in these words:

" 'Now, Master, you can dismiss your servant in peace; you have fulfilled your word. For my eyes have witnessed your saving deed displayed for all the peoples to see: A revealing light to the Gentiles, the glory of your people Israel.' "

Imagine what this meant to Mary and Joseph? We read:

"The child's father and mother were marveling at what was being said about him. Simeon blessed them and said to Mary his mother, 'This child is destined to be the downfall and the rise of many in Israel, a sign that will be opposed--and you yourself shall be pierced with a sword--so that the thoughts of many hearts may be laid bare.' "

Perhaps of the entire Christmas season of readings one might say these words constitute what appear to be the cruelest, that "your heart will be pierced with a sword." It is very difficult for us perhaps to recognize the meaning of Mary's gift, but to give herself unconditionally, to give up Joseph, to live alone suffering with the Christ Child, this is what has made it possible for us to be here today, this tremendous gift of Mary. May it be a gift that we never forget.

SUNDAY WITHIN THE OCTAVE OF THE EPIPHANY [January 6]
FEAST OF THE HOLY FAMILY
December 30 [New Calendar]

THIS Sunday has been chosen by the Church for the celebration of the Feast of the Holy Family; the liturgy of the day, as expressed in the Gospel, harmonizes well with the mystery of the new Feast, for it already carries us forward to the childhood of our Emmanuel and gives us those wonderful words which, after the example of his Blessed Mother, we must ever ponder within our hearts: 'And he went down with them' and came to Nazareth and was subject to them.'

The Feast of the Holy Family is of recent origin. In 1663 Barbara d'Hillehoust founded at Montreal the Association of the Holy Family; this devotion soon spread and in 1893 Leo XIII expressed his approval of a feast under this title and himself composed part of the Office. The Feast was welcomed by succeeding Pontiffs as an efficacious means for bringing home to the Christian people the example of the Holy Family at Nazareth, and by the restoration of the true spirit of family life, stemming, in some measure, the evils of present-day society. These motives led Benedict XV to insert the Feast in the universal Calendar, and from 1921 it has been fixed for this present Sunday [meaning the Traditional Rite since the New Order of Mass did not exist in Dom Gueranger's day-----in the Novus Ordo, is December 30].

We will read the Gospel passage for this Feast and the author's short prayer of praise, followed by the Offertory, the Secret, the Commemoration of the Epiphany, The Communion and the Hymn at Vespers:

Sequel of the holy Gospel according to Luke.
Ch. 2.

When Jesus was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem, according to the custom of the feast; and having fulfilled the days, when they returned, the Child Jesus remained in Jerusalem, and His parents knew it not. And thinking that He was in the company, they came a day's journey, and sought Him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance. And not finding Him, they returned into Jerusalem, seeking Him. And it came to pass, that after three days they found Him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, hearing them, and asking them questions. And all that heard Him were astonished at His wisdom and His answers. And seeing Him, they wondered. And His Mother said to Him: Son, why hast Thou done so to us? Behold Thy father and I have sought Thee sorrowing. And He said to them: How is it that you sought Me? Did you not know that I must be about My Father's business? And they understood not the word that He spoke unto them. And He went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject to them. And His Mother kept all these words in her heart. And Jesus advanced in wisdom, and age, and grace with God and men.

Thus, O Jesus!-----didst Thou come down from Heaven to teach us. The tender age of Childhood, which Thou didst take upon Thyself, is no hindrance to the ardour of Thy desire that we should know the one only God, Who made all things, and Thee, His Son, Whom He sent to us. When laid in the Crib, Thou didst instruct the Shepherds by a mere look; when swathed in Thy humble swaddling-clothes, and subjected to the voluntary silence thou hadst imposed on Thyself, Thou didst reveal to the Magi the light they sought in following the star. When twelve years old, Thou explainest to the Doctors of Israel the Scriptures which bear testimony to Thee. Thou gradually dispellest the shadows of the Law by Thy presence and Thy words. In order to fulfill the commands of Thy heavenly Father, Thou dost not hesitate to occasion sorrow to the heart of Thy Mother, by thus going in quest of souls that need enlightening. Thy love of man will pierce that tender Heart of Mary with a still sharper sword, when she shall behold Thee hanging on the Cross, and expiring in the midst of cruelest pain. Blessed be Thou, sweet Jesus, in these first Mysteries of Thine Infancy, wherein Thou already showest Thyself devoted to us, and leavest the company of Thy Blessed Mother for that of sinful men, who will one day conspire thy Death.

The Offertory takes us in thought to the Feast of the Purification; let us again offer ourselves to the Lord.

OFFERTORY
(Luke 2.)

The parents of Jesus carried Him to Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord.

In the Secret the Church again prays that she may be strengthened in peace and grace; these gifts have been purchased for us by our Lord Himself; it is through the Holy Mass that we can be more strongly established in them.

SECRET

We offer to thee, O Lord, an atoning Victim, humbly entreating that through the intercession of the Virgin Mother of God and blessed Joseph, Thou wouldst strongly establish our families in Thy peace and grace. Through the same Lord.

Commemoration of the Sunday

May the sacrifice we have offered to thee, O Lord, always enlighten and defend us. Through, etc.

Commemoration of the Epiphany

Mercifully look down, O Lord, we beseech Thee, on the offerings of Thy Church; among which, gold, frankincense, and myrrh, are no longer offered; but what was signified by those offerings is sacrificed, and received, Jesus Christ, Thy Son, our Lord. Who liveth, etc.

COMMUNION
(Luke 2.)

And He went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject to them.

If we have kept before our eyes the example of the Holy Family, we may humbly trust that at the hour of our death we shall be helped and consoled and be found worthy to have fellowship with Christ in the eternal dwellings. Such is the last prayer of the Church, and may it be one we love to repeat and dwell on.

VESPERS

HYMN

Blest light of all the heavenly hosts,
Sole hope of them that dwell on earth,
The purest love that ever graced
A home, did smile upon Thy birth.
Mary, dear Mother, who but thee
Was ever yet so rich in grace?
Didst nourish Christ upon thy knee
And fold Him in a sweet embrace?
And Joseph, chosen out to guard
The Virgin with thy gentle might,
The Infant Jesus smiled on thee
And called thee father as by right.
You, Who to save a guilty race
Were born of David's noble line,
O hear the humble prayers of all
Today, who gather round Your shrine.
The sun now wends his way to rest
And earth is veiled in shadows gray;
Yet hearts a-fire with joy and love
Still bid us linger on to pray.
O may the grace of that sweet home
Which held the earthly Trinity,
Be shed abroad upon the world
And bless the Christian family.
O Jesu, born of Virgin bright,
Immortal glory be to Thee;
Praise to the Father infinite
And Holy Ghost eternally. Amen.

V. I will make all thy children to be taught of the Lord.
R. And great the peace of thy children.

(Taken From THE LITURGICAL YEAR, Dom GuÃ©ranger OSB, Book III. LORETO PUBLISHING)

The Epiphany Blessing (20+Gaspar+Melchior+Balthazar+08)

2007-12-29T08:39:00.000-05:00

20+G+M+B+08

(20+Gaspar+Melchior+Balthazar+08)

The Ceremony of the Blessing

Epiphany Chalk is used to write the inscription over all the doors of one’s house. Soft classroom chalk of any color is best for writing on varnished or painted surfaces. A priest should bless the chalk on Epiphany Day, before the celebration of the main Mass of the day, using the following Blessing, which is taken from the Roman Ritual:

V. Our help is in the Name of the Lord.

R. Who made heaven and earth.

V. The Lord be with you.

R. And with thy spirit.

Let Us Pray:

O Lord God, bless + this chalk which Thou hast created, that it may be helpful to mankind; and grant that through the invocation of Thy most holy Name all those who use this chalk or with it write over the doors of their houses the names of Thy Saints, Gasper, Melchior, and Balthazar, may by their merits and intercession receive health of body and protection of soul. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen. (Priest now sprinkles chalk with Holy Water.)

Later that day – or any day within the Octave of the Feast of the Epiphany – at home, the ceremony is completed by a priest, or the father, or senior member, of the family. The following prayer is said once and at the main entrance of the house. All the family as he or she goes from door to door – everyone keeping a respectful silence, or better yet, reciting the Joyful Mysteries of the Rosary.

Let Us Pray:

Hear us, O Holy Lord, Father Almighty, Eternal God, and send Thy Holy Angel from Heaven to watch over, cherish, protect, be with, and defend all who live in my house. I call upon Your Saints, Gasper, Melchior, and Balthazar, to protect my family and my home from every harm and danger, and I place the marks of their holy names over the doors of my home to remain there as a constant reminder to us and to all who enter here that my house is truly a house of the Lord.

O God, make the door of my house wide enough to receive all who need human love and companionship; narrow enough to shut out all envy, pride, and strife. Make its threshold smooth enough to be no stumbling clock to children, nor to straying feet, but rugged and strong enough to turn back the temper’s power.

O God, make the door of my house the gateway to Thy eternal Kingdom. I ask these things in the Name of Jesus Christ Thy Son. Amen.

Padre Pio's Christmas Meditation

2007-12-29T08:25:00.000-05:00

Appearing in volume four of the Italian-language edition of Padre Pio's letters, this essay was taken from Padre Pio's hand-written notebooks. To the best of my knowledge, it is presented here for the first time in English.

Translated by Frank M. Rega, December 2005.

"Padre Pio da Pietrelcina: Epistolario IV," Edizioni Padre Pio, San Giovanni Rotondo, 2002, pages 1007-1009.

Far into the night, at the coldest time of the year, in a chilly grotto, more suitable for a flock of beasts than for humans, the promised Messiah – Jesus – the savior of mankind, comes into the world in the fullness of time.

There are none who clamor around him: only an ox and an ass lending their warmth to the newborn infant; with a humble woman, and a poor and tired man, in adoration beside him.

Nothing can be heard except the sobs and whimpers of the infant God. And by means of his crying and weeping he offers to the Divine justice the first ransom for our redemption.

He had been expected for forty centuries; with longing sighs the ancient Fathers had implored his arrival. The sacred scriptures clearly prophesy the time and the place of his birth, and yet the world is silent and no one seems aware of the great event. Only some shepherds, who had been busy watching over their sheep in the meadows, come to visit him. Heavenly visitors had alerted them to the wondrous event, inviting them to approach his cave.

So plentiful, O Christians, are the lessons that shine forth from the grotto of Bethlehem! Oh how our hearts should be on fire with love for the one who with such tenderness was made flesh for our sakes! Oh how we should burn with desire to lead the whole world to this lowly cave, refuge of the King of kings, greater than any worldly palace, because it is the throne and dwelling place of God! Let us ask this Divine child to clothe us with humility, because only by means of this virtue can we taste the fullness of this mystery of Divine tenderness.

Glittering were the palaces of the proud Hebrews. Yet, the light of the world did not appear in one of them. Ostentatious with worldly grandeur, swimming in gold and in delights, were the great ones of the Hebrew nation; filled with vain knowledge and pride were the priests of the sanctuary. In opposition to the true meaning of Divine revelation, they awaited an officious savoir, who would come into the world with human renown and power.

But God, always ready to confound the wisdom of the world, shatters their plans. Contrary to the expectations of those lacking in Divine wisdom, he appears among us in the greatest abjection, renouncing even birth in St. Joseph’s humble home, denying himself a modest abode among relatives and friends in a city of Palestine. Refused lodging among men, he seeks refuge and comfort among mere animals, choosing their habitation as the place of his birth, allowing their breath to give warmth to his tender body. He permits simple and rustic shepherds to be the first to pay their respects to him, after he himself informed them, by means of his angels, of the wonderful mystery.

Oh wisdom and power of God, we are constrained to exclaim – enraptured along with your Apostle – how incomprehensible are your judgments and unsearchable your ways! Poverty, humility, abjection, contempt, all surround the Word made flesh. But we, out of the darkness that envelops the incarnate Word, understand one thing, hear one voice, perceive one sublime truth: you have done everything out of love, you invite us to nothing else but love, speak of nothing except love, give us naught except proofs of love.

The heavenly babe suffers and cries in the crib so that for us suffering would be sweet, meritorious and accepted. He deprives himself of everything, in order that we may learn from him the renunciation of worldly goods and comforts. He is satisfied with humble and poor adorers, to encourage us to love poverty, and to prefer the company of the little and simple rather than the great ones of the world.

This celestial child, all meekness and sweetness, wishes to impress in our hearts by his example these sublime virtues, so that from a world that is torn and devastated an era of peace and love may spring forth. Even from the moment of his birth he reveals to us our mission, which is to scorn that which the world loves and seeks.

Oh let us prostrate ourselves before the manger, and along with the great St. Jerome, who was enflamed with the love of the infant Jesus, let us offer him all our hearts without reserve. Let us promise to follow the precepts which come to us from the grotto of Bethlehem, which teach us that everything here below is vanity of vanities, nothing but vanity.

COMMENTS WELCOME

Translation Disclaimer:
All translations in any of my Web pages made from various Italian language sources are intended as an informal, good faith sharing from my own personal notes, and are not otherwise authorized, official, or presented as completely accurate.

Frank M. Rega's Homeplate

Back to St. Padre Pio of Pietrelcina

This page was last updated on 12/23/05
Copyright 2005 Frank M. Rega.

Blair Converts to Catholicism

2007-12-29T08:14:00.000-05:00

THOMAS WAGNER Associated Press Writer

LONDON - (December 22, 2007) Tony Blair, who often kept his religious views private while serving as Britain's prime minister, has converted to Catholicism , officials said Saturday.

Blair, who had long been a member of the Church of England, converted to the Catholic faith during a Mass held on Friday night at a chapel in London, the Catholic Church said.

"It can be confirmed that Tony Blair has been received into full communion with the Catholic church by Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor," the head of the church in England and Wales, the church said in a statement.

"I'm very glad to welcome Tony Blair into the Catholic Church," the statement quoted Murphy-O'Connor as saying.

"For a long time he's been a regular worshipper at Mass with his family and in recent months he's been following a program of formation for his reception into full communion. Our prayers are with him, his family and his wife at this joyful moment in their journey of faith together," Murphy-O'Connor said.

There had long been speculation that Blair planned to convert to Catholicism. His wife, Cherie, is Roman Catholic, the couple's children have attended Catholic schools, and Blair had regularly attended Catholic, rather than Anglican, services.

Blair, who is now a Middle East peace envoy, met Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican in June.

The former prime minister told the BBC this year that he had avoided talking about his religious views while in office for about 10 years for fear of being labeled "a nutter."

In England's last census, 72 percent of people identified themselves as Christian. Many are Anglicans affiliated with the Church of England, which was created by royal proclamation during the 16th century after King Henry VIII -- who married six times -- broke ties with the Roman Catholic Church in a dispute over divorce.

The Church of England has said that less than 10 percent of its members are regular churchgoers.

Britons often are surprised by people who openly and fervently discuss their religious views, and the degree to which faiths such as evangelicalism can influence U.S. politics.

Criticism For Blair Over Conversion
Updated:19:21, Saturday December 22, 2007

Tony Blair's conversion to Catholicism has been criticised by commentators who argue his views as PM were at odds with church teachings.

Mr Blair was welcomed into the Roman Catholic church by the Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor - leader of the Roman Catholics in England and Wales.

Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor welcomed the politician's personal decision, which culminated in the ceremony at the chapel of the Archbishop's House in Westminster.

He said: "For a long time he has been a regular worshipper at Mass with his family and in recent months he has been following a programme of formation to prepare for his reception into full communion."

The move comes after years of speculation that Mr Blair, whose wife Cherie and four children are Catholic, would convert from Anglicanism after he resigned from Number 10 in June.

Converting while in office would have caused him problems in connection with issues such as abortion, contraception, homosexuality and faith schools.

The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) reacted with surprise to the news.
John Smeaton, SPUC's national director, said: "During his premiership Tony Blair became one of the world's most significant architects of the culture of death, promoting abortion, experimentation on unborn embryos, including cloned embryos, and euthanasia by neglect.
"SPUC is writing to Tony Blair to ask him whether he has repented of the anti-life positions he has so openly advocated throughout his political career."

Tory MP Ann Widdecombe, who converted to Catholicism in 1993, told Sky News it was possible in her opinion to be a practising Catholic and prime minister.

She said: "I think the crucial thing to remember is at the point you are received (into the Catholic church) you have to say individually and out loud 'I believe everything the church teaches to be revealed truth'.

"And that means if you previously had any problems with church teaching, as Tony Blair obviously did over abortion, as he did again over Sunday trading...you would have to say you changed your mind.

"And I think people will want to know that he did go through that process, because otherwise it will seem as if the church did make an exception for somebody just because of who he is."

Britain has become a 'Catholic country'

By Jonathan Wynne-Jones
Last Updated: 2:30am GMT 23/12/2007

Roman Catholics have overtaken Anglicans as the country's dominant religious group. More people attend Mass every Sunday than worship with the Church of England, figures seen by The Sunday Telegraph show.

This means that the established Church has lost its place as the nation's most popular Christian denomination after more than four centuries of unrivalled influence following the Reformation.

Last night, leading figures gave warning that the Church of England could become a minority faith and that the findings should act as a wake-up call.

The statistics show that attendance at Anglican Sunday services has dropped by 20 per cent since 2000. A survey of 37,000 churches, to be published in the new year, shows the number of people going to Sunday Mass in England last year averaged 861,000, compared with 852,000 Anglicans worshipping.

The rise of Catholicism has been bolstered by an influx of immigrants from eastern Europe and Africa, who have packed the pews of Catholic parishes that had previously been dwindling.

It is part of the changing face of churchgoing across Britain in the 21st century which has also seen a boom in the growth of Pentecostal churches, which have surpassed the Methodist Church as the country's third largest Christian denomination.

Worshipping habits have changed dramatically with a significant rise in attendance at mid-week services and at special occasions - the Church of England expects three million people to go to a parish church over Christmas Eve and Christmas Day.

In an attempt to combat the declining interest in traditional religion, the Anglican Church has launched radical new forms of evangelism that include nightclub chaplains, a floating church on a barge and internet congregations.

The Rev Alister McGrath, professor of historical theology at Oxford University, said that the church attendance findings from the organisation Christian Research should act as a wake-up call to the Church of England.

"While it can rightly point to the weight of history, the importance of cultural memory, the largest number of church buildings and nominal church members in defence of its continued status as the established church, there is clearly a problem emerging," said Prof McGrath, one of Anglicanism's most respected figures.

"What happens if the established church becomes a minority church?"

The Catholic Church has also suffered a serious fall in the size of its congregations, but the expansion of the European Union in 2004 resulted in its numbers being bolstered by the arrival of hundreds of thousands of Poles and Lithuanians.

Attendance at Mass in 1991 was recorded as 1.3 million, a drop of 40 per cent since 1963. But over the past six years it has fallen by only 13 per cent, with the rate of decline slowed by immigrants from Catholic countries.

The Rt Rev Crispian Hollis, the Bishop of Portsmouth, said that the Roman Church had been active in trying to win back lapsed worshippers, but conceded that mass immigration had been a significant factor in swelling its numbers.

"The number of Catholics attending church has been catching the Anglicans over a number of years," he said.

"We don't want to be seen to be scoring points over the Anglican Church as we are in no way jealous of its position as the national church, but of course these figures are encouraging. It shows that the Church is no longer seen as on the fringes of society, but in fact is now at the heart of British life."

Danny Sriskandarajah, the head of migration, equalities and citizenship for the Institute for Public Policy Research, said that its research indicated that pews would not stay packed for long.

"We are already seeing numbers from eastern Europe dropping and many of them have already returned home," he said. "It is an important phenomenon, but it is likely to be temporary. I doubt we'll be seeing this level of attendance in another 10 years."

Churchgoing in Anglican and Catholic parishes had stood at about a million each for the past 10 years, though the relative equality in their numbers over recent years is surprising considering that there are 25 million people who regard themselves as Anglicans, and only 4.2 million Catholics.

"It isn't a competition. I'm delighted to see all Christian denominations flourishing," said the Rt Rev Graham Cray, the chairman of the Church of England's report on evangelism.

"Large numbers of eastern Europeans have come in to the country, which has certainly strengthened them as has happened with non-whites in central London churches."

Vatican hails Blair Church switch

Published: 2007/12/23
BBC NEWS

The Vatican has welcomed Tony Blair's decision to become a Roman Catholic.

A spokesman said such an "authoritative personality" choosing to join the Catholic Church "could only give rise to joy and respect".

The ex-PM was received into the Church by the Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor.

It comes as research shows Catholic churchgoers now outnumber Anglicans for the first time since the Reformation in the UK.

Ex-Tory minister Ann Widdecombe - herself a Catholic convert - said Mr Blair's voting record as an MP had often "gone against Church teaching".

Mr Blair's wife and children are already Catholic and there had been speculation he would convert after leaving office.

Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor, who led the service to welcome Mr Blair, said he was "very glad" to do so.

'Joyful moment'

Last year, Mr Blair, who is now a Middle East peace envoy, said he had prayed to God when deciding whether or not to send UK troops into Iraq.

And one of Mr Blair's final official trips while prime minister was a visit to the Vatican in June where he met Pope Benedict XVI.

Mr Blair was received into full communion with the Catholic Church during Mass at Archbishop's House, Westminster, on Friday.

Cardinal Murphy O'Connor, who is the head of Catholics in England and Wales, said he was "very glad" to welcome Mr Blair into the church.

"My prayers are with him, his wife and family at this joyful moment in their journey of faith together," he said.

Chief Vatican spokesman Federico Lombardi said the Catholic church in Rome shared Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor's "satisfaction".

"The choice of joining the Catholic church made by such an authoritative personality can only arouse joy and respect," Fr Lombardi added.

'Private matter'

BBC correspondent David Willey said it had been no secret in Rome that Mr Blair had been taking instruction from a Catholic priest as a prelude to conversion.

He added that the Pope was informed of Mr Blair's intentions prior to his visit to the Vatican in June 2007, shortly before he left office.

The Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams, leader of the Anglican church, wished the former prime minister well in his spiritual journey.

He said: "Tony Blair has my prayers and good wishes as he takes this step in his Christian pilgrimage."

Downing Street confirmed the former prime minister had converted but said it was a private matter and it would not comment further.

But Miss Widdecombe, who became a Catholic in 1993, told the BBC Mr Blair's move raised some questions.

"If you look at Tony Blair's voting record in the House of Commons, he's gone against Church teaching on more than one occasion. On things, for example, like abortion," she said.

"My question would be, 'has he changed his mind on that?'"

Eastern Europeans

There has never been a Roman Catholic prime minister of Britain, although there is no constitutional barrier to such a move.

However, it had in the past been suggested that Mr Blair would wait until after leaving office, to avoid possible clashes such as over his role in appointing Church of England bishops.

A study by the organisation Christian Research has found Church of England services are no longer Britain's most popular form of worship and have been overtaken by Catholic mass.

The numbers have swelled due to the large number of EU nationals from Eastern Europe who have immigrated to the UK in recent years, it says.

Estimates for church attendances in 2006, based on previous years' figures, reveal 861,800 Catholics attended services every Sunday compared with 852,500 Anglican worshippers.

Also: http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7150000/newsid_7157400/7157441.stm?bw=bb&mp=wm&asb=1&news=1&bbcws=1

And: http://inhocsigno.blogspot.com/2007/12/rocky-horror-rite-of-reception-of.html

Former CEC Archbishop and Wife Become Catholic

2007-12-29T08:08:00.000-05:00

By Deacon Keith Fournier
Catholic Online

"Sandy and I had found ourselves moving deeper into Catholic Christianity during our tenure in the CEC. More recently, the draw toward full communion in the Roman Catholic Church had grown greater and became a very strong call in the six months prior to our conversion. We are delighted to continue our service to Jesus Christ and His Church as Catholics.” Randy Sly

RICHMOND, VIRGINIA (Catholic Online) - Randolph W. Sly, former Archbishop of the Charismatic Episcopal Church and one of the early founders of the CEC in 1992, was received into full communion with the Roman Catholic Church, along with his wife, Sandra, on November 12, 2006 at St. Benedict Catholic Church in Richmond, Virginia.

Sly indicated this decision came from an extended time of discernment for the two of them. “We were at a point last summer personally and ecclesiastically in the CEC where I felt a change was coming. Sandy and I had found ourselves moving deeper into catholic Christianity during our tenure in the CEC. More recently, the draw toward full communion in the Roman Catholic Church had grown greater and became a very strong call in the six months prior to our conversion. We are delighted to continue our service to Jesus Christ and His Church as Catholics.”

Fr. James Kauffmann, Pastor of St. Benedict Catholic Church issued the following statement: “It was my great joy to receive Randy and Sandy Sly into the full communion of the Roman Catholic Church at the Divine Liturgy at Saint Benedict Catholic Parish on November 12, 2006. What a glorious day it was! It was also a wonderful gift to, along with Deacon Keith Fournier, work with the Sly's during their period of catechesis leading up to their reception. Their love for the Lord and the ancient yet ever fresh Catholic Faith is an inspiration. Their prior years of service to the Lord have only prepared them for what lies ahead as they respond to God's continuing invitation to serve Him in the New Evangelization called for by the late Servant of God John Paul II. We welcome them home and eagerly anticipate all that lies ahead for them in the fullness of Catholic faith.”

Even prior to his involvement in the CEC Sly had been known for several years as a major voice of the “Convergence Movement” where the evangelical, charismatic, and liturgical/sacramental streams of the church were coming together as “one mighty river of God.” He has been in active pastoral ministry for over 30 years, first with the Wesleyan (Methodist) Church and then with the Charismatic Episcopal Church, where he last served as Archbishop of the Eastern Province and Supervising Archbishop of the Office of Communications.

Currently, Sly is President of Common Good, a way, a work, and a movement dedicated to the four pillars of the Church’s social teaching: life, family, freedom, and solidarity with the poor. A published author and communications specialist, he is also at work on several book projects as well as other commercial writing and media projects.

The Sly’s reside in the Northern Virginia community of Potomac Falls, where they are active members of Our Lady of Hope Parish. They have three grown children, all of whom are married and live nearby.

Vatican Newspaper Slams "Golden Compass" as "The Most Anti-Christmas Film Possible"

2007-12-29T08:02:00.000-05:00

By John-Henry Westen
LifeSiteNews

VATICAN CITY, December 19, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano added its voice yesterday to the condemnation of the newly released film 'The Golden Compass" and the book series on which the film was based. In a lengthy editorial on December 18, the paper said Golden Compass was "the most anti-Christmas film possible."

This latest confirmation of Catholic opposition to the film, puts into sharp relief once again the positive review which the film received from the film office of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). After several Catholic leaders and many lay faithful contacted the USCCB with their concerns the review was officially withdrawn. Since then a growing number of Catholic bishops and archbishops have publicly condemned the film.

The Vatican paper's editorial explained, "It's a film that leaves one cold, because it brings with it the coldness and the desperation of rebellion, solitude and individualism."

L'Osservatore Romano also observed that Phillip Pullman, the author of 'His Dark Materials' novels on which the film was based, advocates "a totally atheist ideology, the enemy of all religions, traditional and institutional, and of Christianity and Catholicism in particular."

"In the world of Pullman, hope simply doesn't exist, in part because there is no salvation but only personal, individualistic capacity to control the situation and dominate events," it said.

Honest viewers of the film gifted with a discerning spirit, "will feel no particular emotion, except for a great chill -- which is not only due to the polar scenes," said the paper.

It goes to show, said the Vatican paper, "when man tries to eliminate God from his horizon, everything is reduced, made sad, cold and inhuman."

The editorial suggested that the film's lackluster performance at the box office compared to blockbusters such as 'Chronicles of Narnia', could deter films based on the other two books in the series. "If that should happen, it wouldn't be a big loss," it said.

The man responsible for the USCCB's now-pulled positive review of 'Golden Compass' is the USCCB film office director Harry Forbes, who embarrassed the USCCB two years ago with a glowing review for the homosexual propaganda film Brokeback Mountain. That review was altered substantially after Catholics were alerted to it by a LifeSiteNews.com report.

Human Life International Leader Fr. Tom Euteneuer has called on the USCCB to fire Forbes for the scandal he has caused.

LifeSiteNews.com reported yesterday on another positive review Forbes made in the name of the USCCB for a film celebrating homosexual immorality. (see: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/dec/07121804.html )

To express concerns contact:

USCCB President
Francis Cardinal George, O.M.I.
Archdiocese of Chicago
155 E. Superior Street Chicago, IL
60611 312-751- 8200
mfox@archchicago.org