Monday, 29 June 2015

Prayers, please

I do not think my European brothers and sisters understand the difference between the passage of ssm here in America and the laws in Europe.

I suggest they read the comments of the bishops, archbishops, and cardinals, some of which are on my blog.

We are facing the beginning of the real loss of religious freedom here.

Prayers, please.

Wednesday, 24 June 2015

Gradualism, the Instrumentum Laboris and Synod 15

[I stated earlier in the blogpost on "What's at Stake at Synod? Everything!"
...that I would explain the heresy of Gradualism - apologies for the delay]

From The Instrumentum Laboris for 2015 Synod

122. (52) Have you considered the possibility that the divorced and remarried have access to the sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist. Several Synod Fathers have insisted in favor of the current rules in force of the fundamental relationship between participation in the Eucharist and communion with the Church and its teaching on marriage indissoluble. Others spoke to welcome not generalized to the Eucharistic table, in certain specific situations and under strict conditions, especially when dealing with cases related to irreversible and moral obligations to the children who would suffer unjust suffering. Any access to the sacraments should be preceded by a penitential journey under the responsibility of the diocesan bishop. It should also be in-depth the issue, bearing in mind the distinction between the objective situation of sin and extenuating circumstances, given that "the imputability or responsibility for an action can be diminished or nullified" by various "psychological or social factors" (CCC, 1735).

123. To address the above issue, there is a common agreement on the idea of ​​a journey of reconciliation or by penance, under the authority of the Bishop, to the faithful who are divorced and remarried civilly, who are in a situation of cohabitation. In reference to Familiaris Consortio 84, it suggests a process of becoming aware of the failure and the wounds produced by it, with repentance, verification of the nullity of marriage, commitment to spiritual communion and decision to live in continence. Others, by penitential mean a process of clarification and reorientation, after the failure experienced, accompanied by a priest appointed for this purpose. This process should lead the party concerned to a fair trial on their condition, in which even the same priest to mature its evaluation in order to make use of the power of binding and loosing adequately to the situation. In order to deepen about the objective situation of sin and the moral culpability, some suggest to consider the Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church concerning the Reception of Holy Communion by divorced and remarried faithful of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith ( September 14, 1994) and the Declaration on the admissibility of the divorced and remarried to Holy Communion of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts (24 June 2000)

There is absolutely nothing wrong with admitting that you don't know what the Church teaches on an issue
- and therefore proceed to research, discern the content and convey the discoveries
- but to pretend one does understand?
- and not bother with research?
- and to 'best guess/wing it' and arbitrarily impose one's tastes and opinions and portray it as Catholic teaching? Invokes scandal.
It's not merely incompetence, ineptitude and mediocrity....It's sloth and bearing false witness!
The worst recent example among virtually all Catholic commentators and journalists was during the Extraordinary Synod of 2014 where there were hundreds of thousands of words written on Gradualism. Even detailed self-professed expositions and step-by-step guides to it.
Yet NOT ONE had bothered to find out what Gradualism actually was!!??

Now before I begin please understand I am not referring to a gradualist growth in understanding of doctrine - eg Credal formulae after centuries of Christological infighting - Newman's essay on development of doctrine  - or the Ex Cathedra pronouncements on the Immaculate Conception & Most Glorious Assumption or the declarations of Vatican I on Fideism and ultra-Rationalism
Nor am I referring to the 'gradualism' of affinity between religions as expounded in Lumen Gentium or Unitatis Redintegratio or incrementalist oecumenical endeavours [eg Joint Catholic-Lutheran declaration on justification]
 
Instead I am referring to the proposed 'Gradualist' pastoral position on the quasi-compulsive sins of weakness [addictive sins] and the intrinsically morally disordered circumstances and consequences of mortal sin [eg how to deal with those living in adulterous/fornicating relationships and in ongoing states of mortal sin]

Gradualism is also know as 'Theology of Compromise"
"... I have developed a theory of compromise theology precisely because of the inadequacy of Catholic ethics to come to grips with sin-filled situations. Sometimes the presence of sin in the world will force one to do something which, if there were no sin present, should not be done" [Charles Curran [silenced by CDF 25th July 1986]]

Now the 'Law of Graduality' to which St John Paul II refers in Familiaris Consortio 34 is the common-sense  perception of the gradual effects of a person's repentance and striving for holiness - how we gradually recover from sin and gradually move along the path to perfection.
Nobody can deny this is our Pastoral imperative - we are here to exact the seven corporal and seven spiritual works of mercy and the beatitudes among the faithful for subsidiarity, solidarity, justice and the common good...we are to Love our neighbour and help lift them out of sin and assist them on the road to perfection as we gradually mutually stumble along the long journey home.
BUT
Cardinals Erdo,Baldisseri,Marx,Nichols and many others  [and later the #Relatio & now the #Instrumentum laboris] misrepresent this Law of Graduality and instead make it appear as if the law of Graduality also refers to 'Gradiuality of the Law' - ie the Principle of Gradualism -  a Gradualist stategy [actually a heresy] - which is ironically exactly what Pope St JPII condemns in Familiaris Consortio 34 [ie 'gradualism of the law']
as well as in the beginning of Evangelium Vitae but most specifically in Veritatis Splendor 68
[remember this was a response to the Bishops of Synod 80 who wished active homosexuals, co-habiting couples and the divorced/civilly remarried to have access to the sacraments]

Gradualism refers to the formal/efficient causal 'Principle of Graduality which is a  pastoral strategy towards achieving perfection grounded upon two premises:
a] God has not provided enough readily available grace for a sinner to immediately stop sinning
b] The dignity of the human being is so diminished by sin that they cannot escape their sinfulness except by slowly diminishing the intensity and amount of their sins on a gradual incremental basis. [a sin-controlled diet - a pastoral personal sin-reduction fitness regime]

ie it's thinly disguised Jansenism - but viewed from the other end of the telescope - rather than the sinner being 'doomed' by their sin - it is instead 'unavoidable' that sinners will sin and continue to do so.

 "Once one holds that the sin condition of the world forces us to do something that should not be done, there are no genuine moral boundaries. If it is believed that the human person is incapable of avoiding certain sinful actions, there is a simultaneous readiness to look for assistance from forces external to the human person. Technology and medicine, for example, can then be used in ways that replace authentic human sexual expression" (Toward a Theology of the Body, p. 102-3) [Sr Mary Prokes]

Gradualism is a fatalistic pessimistic principle that a 'less than Loving' God has not provided us with enough available "Sufficient" grace to leave our sinful lives and not given us the capacity to not fall into sin
...therefore we should be advised to remain in a limited sinful way and attempt to gradually reduce our sins and neither aspire to perfection nor to never sin - merely to diminish the amount of sins or the intensity or gravity of our sins...
ie the sinner is to be treated more like a drug addict put on the methadone of lesser sins
rather than the alcoholic necessitating total abstinence or a gambler a total end to gambling....

In the 2000yrs of Church Moral Teaching the psychologically astute and empathic Church is fully aware just how disastrously counterproductive - calamitously futile - lethally aggravating and dangerous - this would be for the poor individual trying to repent of their sins and become holy...

Gradualism as a strategy or a principle for moral action, or pastoral intervention or counselling, is an heretical position:
Scripturally it is a proven falsehood and a grave calumny against a beneficent God bestowing a plenitude of Grace - and against human dignity.
"My Grace is sufficient for you" (2 Cor 12:9)
Those who are children of God love his Son; those who love him can keep his commandments (Jn 14.23).
God provides both the desire to do His will and the very free act by which one does it ( Phil 2.13).
& the Commands of Our Lord to "Be Ye Perfect" & "Go and sin more"
& the parables of Luke 10-15, - especially the rich fool - the parable of the pearl of great price etc...

It has been condemned by Church Fathers such as Chrysostom, Ambrose, Jerome [especially St Augustine in 'de peccatorum 2,6,7 "A man, helped by God, can, if he will, be without sin" &
“God, therefore, does not command what is impossible, but in commanding he also admonishes you to do what you are able, and to ask his help for what you are unable to do” (FEF 1795). Even the most hardened sinner is offered help enough to repent, if only the grace is accepted (see FEF 2097, 2232).

Continue through the history of the Church and Thomism calls it a grave heresy against both God and the human person - Suarez goes so far as to call in the great heresy against the Love of God - that He does not give us enough grace to escape from sin is a diabolical lie....
It is anathematised in Session VI of the Council of Trent

"But no one, however much justified, should consider himself exempt from the observance of the commandments; no one should use that rash statement, once forbidden by the Fathers under anathema, that the observance of the commandments of God is impossible for one that is justified.
For God does not command impossibilities, but by commanding admonishes thee to do what thou canst and to pray for what thou canst not, and aids thee that thou mayest be able." [DS 1536/804]

 “If anyone says that the commandments of God are impossible to observe even for a man who is justified and in the state of grace: let him be anathema” [DS 1568/828]

In other words: "God does not command the impossible"
...and to suggest, as Gradualism does, that we cannot cease from continuing in our state of mortal sin, nor continue to commit mortal sins, nor can be in the present condition to repent from mortal sin..is a lie!

It is condemned by St John Paul II in Veritatis Splendor 68
..."In point of fact, man does not suffer perdition only by being unfaithful to that fundamental option whereby he has made "a free self-commitment to God".113 With every freely committed mortal sin, he offends God as the giver of the law and as a result becomes guilty with regard to the entire law (cf. Jas 2:8-11); even if he perseveres in faith, he loses "sanctifying grace", "charity" and "eternal happiness".114 As the Council of Trent teaches, "the grace of justification once received is lost not only by apostasy, by which faith itself is lost, but also by any other mortal sin".115 "
- a refutation of Gradualism is also inherent within the first 20 sections of Evangelium Vitae.

To pretend that the Synod is only 'positively reframing' an age-old common sense understanding that throughout our lives we 'gradually' mature and become less sinful and more understanding and holy?
...is a lie!!
...is a nightmare!!!

That is NOT what is being proposed - this Gradualist principle strategy has poisoned every single part of the Mid-term Relatio's and the Instrumentum Laboris arguments
- and yet nobody seems to see that we have an heretical ideology invading Catholic Moral teaching and its applied ethics in pastoral activity

Everyone seems to be saying
'Oh gradualism means X'
...while they can see the real gradualist strategy Y in front of their eyes inherent in the Relatio's approach to every neuralgic moral issue.
To such an extent one feels like running through the streets shaking every Catholic to "Wake up!!"

Gradualism is here and it must be prevented at all costs from being given backdoor access into Catholic moral teaching or any doctrinal anthropological position or given any deference in the consideration of how God bestows grace upon Creation and how we should pastorally engage with those in states of mortal sin.

Gradualism is a lie about the human condition and a lie about the God who loves us.
Gradualism - ie we are poor sinners and must be left to keep on sinning just a little less and a little less badly every day - is an inherent underlying premise within the Relatio & Instrumentum Laboris...
- the MTR even blatantly states "according to the principle of Gradualism"
 - a condemned heresy actually being advocated in a Church document!!
- and thus it poisons every aspect of it
i.e. it doesn't matter how tolerant, charitable, merciful or compassionate the Relatio's conclusions may appear - they are all grounded on a falsehood about God and human dignity and thus the whole principle and proposals for pastoral implementations are false too...

What's worse is we already have the chaos of the heresy of incrementalism leaving the Pro-Life movement in ruins where human lives are considered negotiable and exceptions and compromises are justified in order to rescue some lives by selling out other lives - the Caiaphas principle

What happens IF a gradualist premise is permitted as a pastoral response to any moral or doctrinal neuralgic issue or crisis?
If gradualism is justified once?
It - being like a virus - will be given free-rein to attack every other moral issue
Look how gradualism has distorted and perverted Natural Family Planning from being a critical recourse for a grave reason in the time of emergency and potential prevention of a moral evil - into a normative practice which may be engaged in by a couple for ANY reason whatsoever - it is backdoor contraception by omission!
If Gradualism is permitted for instance in regard to the divorced and civilly remarried?
It would not be the promoters of Same-Sex marriage who destroyed the nature of marriage - but the rebellious ignorant hierarchy within the Catholic Church!!

If Gradualism is given a precedent?
Then Humanae Vitae lies is the gravest of danger
For it was the pre-Humanae Vitae Vatican commission which endorsed the use of artificial contraception on gradualist grounds
..and if Humanae Vitae falls?
So does every other aspect of Catholic moral teaching on life, love, sexuality and the family...
Gradualism has declared war upon us - and we need to fight back and realise what a toxic pernicious evil it is...
A lie which destroys everything around it....

To quote Germain Grisez
"This solution to the problem of quasi-compulsive sins of weakness is rendered a Practical Impossibility by Pastoral counselling which tells people "Nobody expects you to just stop. All that's required is that you work at it: as long as you're trying, you can be sure what you're doing is a venial sin at most" "

...meanwhile Synod [as revealed in the Instrumentum Laboris] intends to give exactly this type of pastoral counselling!!???

If you now have even a basic understanding of Gradualism - perhaps it might be a little more easy to understand what I describe in "What's at Stake at Synod? Everything!"


Now you may also notice that #122 appeals to mitigating and diminishing [and even nullifying] conditions for reduction in culpability...that's another issue for another post

Monday, 22 June 2015

Why A Promised Land?

Growing up in a world haunted by the Cold War, aware of nations which had no religious freedom, where Catholics in certain eastern European countries were fired from university positions for being Catholic, and bishops lingered in prisons, I understood why the Hebrews of old needed a "Promised Land".

Daily, in the Benedictus, we read these lines pertaining to God and His People:  

....to remember his holy covenant
and the oath he swore to Abraham our father,
that he would give himself to us,
that we could serve him without fear
– freed from the hands of our enemies –
in uprightness and holiness before him,
for all of our days.


The words of Moses to Pharaoh come to mind as well:

Exodus 7:16 Douay-Rheims

16 And thou shalt say to him: The Lord God of the Hebrews sent me to thee saying: Let my people go to sacrifice to me in the desert: and hitherto thou wouldst not hear.


The reasons for the promise of land, a special place, for God's People could be summed up in two phrases: safety and purity of worship.

The Hebrews, like all religious groups, needed space to be safe from the many enemy tribes, whose cultures were, simple, "cultures of death".

The "culture of life" came from the covenant, the relationship with God the Father, who visited His People regularly through the patriarchs, prophets, and holy women of old. But, in order to live out the life of this relationship, the people needed a place of safety.


Religious freedom means the ability to worship and believe freely without fear of persecution or hindrance. Religious freedom was made possible by the taking of the Promised Land. God, in His Divine Providence, made a place for His People, and a place of preparation for the Incarnation. His Son came "in the fullness of time" to a particular people, a particular place, 

As Catholics, we are now facing an almost global uprising of rejection of both Christ and His Church. Like the Hebrews of old and even the Jews of today, we need a place in order to feel safe and worship freely as Christians.

Is there such a place? Many people have asked me, "Is there a safe haven?" 

We long for this place of safety and religious freedom in order to live out our relationship with God and His Church.  Like the great saints whose feast day we celebrate today, St. Thomas More and St. John Fisher, we face the same restrictions but in more subtle forms.

Let us pray for a promised land, a place of safety, a place of religious freedom, where the Laws of God and the natural law may be followed in the market place.

This dream of the ancients, and even of More and Fisher, seems to be slipping away into the past,

Yes, heaven is our true home, but as humans who live, work, play, rest on this earth, we need that place of safety and the freedom to praise God as we see fit.

Thursday, 18 June 2015

John Rao Launches Sacred Heart League to Un-Locke the Church and the World


Dr. John Rao, Associate Professor of History at St. John's University in New York City, and Director of the Roman Forum, has launched a new initiative to awaken Catholics to the full meaning of the doctrine of the Sacred Heart for the Kingship of Christ over individuals and society at large and the way in which John Locke and his teachings, so prevalent in the post-Vatican II Church, prevents this goal from ever being achieved.  Dr. Rao hopes to build on the work of William Blake (1757-1827) who attempted long ago in Britain: "To cast off Bacon, Locke & Newton from Albion's covering; To take off his filthy garments, & clothe him with Imagination."  Read about this new and important initiative here.

Most Sacred Heart of Jesus,
have mercy on us.

Wednesday, 10 June 2015

The Divine Office


As a member of the laity who took Blessed Pope Paul VI seriously, I have tried to pray daily some part of the Breviary. If I am on my monastic schedule, the exercise is much easier.

Blessed Pope Paul VI promulgated by Apostolic Constitution “The Divine Office Revised by Decree of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council" on November 1, 1970. In the "General Instruction of the Liturgy of the Hours", the call for the public saying of the office, as well as the private saying of it as mental prayer, was reiterated.  

Many people use Universalis, found here, http://www.universalis.com/

and some use this site,

http://divineoffice.org/liturgy-of-the-hours/how-to-pray-the-liturgy-of-the-hours/#sthash.IlHndOPv.iyNFnfZP.dpbs

I also recommend the Monastic Diurnal.




May all the laity turn in these times to the discipline of the Divine Office. This prayer of the Church makes the entire day holy.



Wednesday, 3 June 2015

Sadness at A Parting


When one is in love and the beloved decides to end the relationship, the rejected party must face a life without the love and security which the significant other brought into one's life.

Love creates a sense of well-being, acceptance, security, comfort. Even if the relationship is totally Christian and moral, the break-up can be extremely painful. One wants to be in love forever.

We all desire never-ending love.

My love affair with my own country has come to an end. I cannot find the essence of beauty which caused the love in the first place. I have lost that "first love".  As flags were waving in the breeze, and still do in some neighborhoods for Memorial Day last week, I walked down a leafy street sick at heart at the decay of a once great nation.

Yes, there still are brave hearts and great people here, but the turning of this nation from secular humanism, if not Christianity, from liberal, in the true sense of the word, ideals, to ideologies and paganism, has caused me to fall into a sadness. I cannot find but a remnant, very, very small indeed, of those Catholics who understand what is about to happen to our once great country.

The acceptance of the slaughter of the babes in the womb could be seen by some as the turning point from civilization to barbarism. Historically, a people who sacrifice their young for prosperity, like the Canaanites, the Carthaginians, and others, have been labelled "barbaric". No longer does it seem we are allowed to use this term for any activity.

Now, we are facing a decision which will contradict natural law, common sense, centuries of shared civilization, and the long teaching of Christ as promulgated by the Catholic Church.

What can we expect but chaos and the final decay of this great nation?

This nation will not be able to be called as one "under God". I would not be able to say this as it would amount to blasphemy, as well as hypocrisy. Perhaps, I say this for the last time, perhaps. Babes in the womb have been denied liberty and justice for all for decades, and now we are facing a nation which will pass judgement against God's law regarding same-sex relations. The Catechism of the Catholic Church reminds us of the four sins which cry out to God for vengeance.

1867 The catechetical tradition also recalls that there are "sins that cry to heaven": the blood of Abel,139 the sin of the Sodomites,140 the cry of the people oppressed in Egypt,141 the cry of the foreigner, the widow, and the orphan,142 injustice to the wage earner.143

One weeps at the parting of loves. I feel like a person without a country, but then, I must remember my true home is not here, but with God, and with His People. My real home is the Catholic Church.

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

There is, truly, only one place where these words are true, and that is in God.

Tuesday, 26 May 2015

Lessons from Tornado Country

Yesterday, I spent a few minutes in the basement as a tornado warning was in effect in my area of residence. Another friend, in a nearby Midwest state, spent time in his storm shelter, caught between two tornado warnings.

Now, there are two ways people in these parts respond to tornado warnings, which mean either that tornados have actually touched ground nearby (the real definition of a tornado) or have been spotted in the air.

Some people, like me, obedient the to guidelines of NOAA, get ready and go into the basement, or, like my friend, go into a shelter.

Some people, like two other friends of mine, who grew up, as I did, in "tornado alley", go and sit on the swing on their front porch and watch the sky.

My two bold swinging friends do not believe they will be carried away by winds or beaten by large hail storms. Perhaps they do not care if they die and go to h, h, or p at this time. I want to live a bit longer.

What came to my mind were the attitudes of so many Catholics who, instead of obeying rules, or learning why rules are important, watch the skies rather laconically, and hope for the best.

Prudence, which is practical wisdom, demands certain responses to serious situations. As the CCC quotes, "a prudent man looks where he is going".  This phrase always reminds me of the Victorian children's book, Der Struwwelpeter.  In the book, there is a character which reminds me of my two fearless friends.


The Story of Johnny Head-in-Air
As he trudged along to school,
It was always Johnny's rule
To be looking at the sky
And the clouds that floated by;
But what just before him lay,
In his way,
Johnny never thought about;
So that every one cried out
"Look at little Johnny there,
Little Johnny Head-In-Air!"

Running just in Johnny's way
Came a little dog one day;
Johnny's eyes were still astray
Up on high,
In the sky;
And he never heard them cry
"Johnny, mind, the dog is nigh!"
Bump!
Dump!
Down they fell, with such a thump,
Dog and Johnny in a lump!
Dog and Johnny in a lump!

Once, with head as high as ever,
Johnny walked beside the river.
Johnny watched the swallows trying
Which was cleverest at flying.
Oh! what fun!
Johnny watched the bright round sun
Going in and coming out;
This was all he thought about.
So he strode on, only think!
To the river's very brink,
Where the bank was high and steep,
And the water very deep;
And the fishes, in a row,
Stared to see him coming so.








One step more! oh! sad to tell!
Headlong in poor Johnny fell.
And the fishes, in dismay,
Wagged their tails and swam away.
There lay Johnny on his face

There lay Johnny on his face,
With his nice red writing-case;
But, as they were passing by,
Two strong men had heard him cry;
And, with sticks, these two strong men
Hooked poor Johnny out again.
Oh! you should have seen him shiver

Oh! you should have seen him shiver
When they pulled him from the river.
He was in a sorry plight!
Dripping wet, and such a fright!
Wet all over, everywhere,
Clothes, and arms, and face, and hair:
Johnny never will forget
What it is to be so wet.


And the fishes, one, two, three,
Are come back again, you see;
Up they came the moment after,
To enjoy the fun and laughter.
Each popped out his little head,
And, to tease poor Johnny, said
"Silly little Johnny, look,
You have lost your writing-book!"
Silly little Johnny, look



Now, it is fair to say that growing up in tornado country makes one a bit blasé.

However, I am not indifferent to storm warning, or tornado warnings, when the siren blares and the NOAA radio shouts out "get to shelter".

Perhaps the lesson today is that we should not let ourselves become too complacent about our surroundings, our culture, even our civilization. Two dear friends of mine lost everything in Katrina. One told me it was the best thing that ever happened to his family, as it gave them all a perspective that the only thing which really mattered were Mom, Dad, and the kids.

The other one got up and started her business immediately, not letting the loss overcome her energy and talents. But, both went and left the coming eye of the storm in plenty of time to avoid being killed.

1,833 people died in Katrina, including the uncle of a friend of mine who refused to leave, having made it through Camille, when only about 300 people perished. He stayed in the second floor of his house but was drowned by the thirty-nine foot wave  coming off the Gulf.

The storm of anti-Catholicism has been growing off the shores of Britain in a new manner. Anti-Catholicism in England is still muted under a sort of indifference, and like the two friends stated, sitting on the front porch, the sky does not seem "that bad". But, the vote in Ireland has changed the atmospheric pressure. Those who are paying attention need to plan how to meet the winds of evil which have been gathering and which will try to destroy the Catholic Church. Do not kid yourselves, we are in for a tornado.


Saturday, 2 May 2015

The SSM Debate

Caravaggio's Beheading of St. John the Baptist-in St. John's Co-Cathedral, Valletta, Malta

Over on the Catholic Herald website, is an engaging debate on the ramifications of ssm. Now, what is missing in most of the comments being made seems to be a misunderstanding of three principles-one, the question of civil rights; two, the agenda of those pushing for ssm; the larger movement of culture away from Christian morals.

I refuse to use the word "values" as morals are not values. Morals for the Catholic are God's standards, given to each human being as natural law, by the fact that one is human, and, also, enshrined in Revealed law, the Ten Commandments. We also have the clarification of both in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and the long teaching of the Church in the past 2,000 plus years. If one is confused as to the moral teaching of the Church on one of the four sins which cries out to God for vengeance, one only has to look at the many sources from the Teaching Magisterium of the Church.

The first point: Civil rights are given to men and woman as part of the dignity of being human. A "right" is given in the name of justice. Positive, or Divine Law set the rules for what is a right and what is not. The right to fair wages, fair trials, property and so on, are given because of the dignity of human beings, as creatures of God.

Sin, which is beneath the dignity of all men and women, has no rights. Therefore, such things as child molestation, rape, graft, embezzlement murder and so on have no right, and a state has a duty to protect civilians from criminal activity.

The problem is modern times has been the movement to give sin rights. Adultery now has a right, as most Protestant denominations follow civil law in recognizing marriage after divorce, without an annulment. For the Catholic, this situation does not require justice, but repentance. Abortion is legal, but unjust, an intrinsically evil sin, as is sodomy. Those wanting ssm want to change society and make it God-less.

Sadly, the secular society accepts serious sins, which merit damnation for some people, as rights. The thinking of some judges is that law is what a government decides, not God.

We live in post-Christian societies, with laws even the ancient pagan societies did not accept.

Second point: few on the CH site recognize the huge agenda of those pushing for ssm. This agenda goes back to Gramsci and his efforts to undermine Christian morality in order to promote the communist nation-state system. One can read the numerous posts I have on Gramsci on my blog.

How interesting it is that in the published letters of Gramsci from prison, and I have all the volumes, that his first note reminds his readers that the Catholic Church, even at that early date, was the only group of people who understood what was the real agenda of the Communist Manifesto. Gramsci saw clearly that the popes in his era "got it"--the awareness of the agenda to create a God-less, Church-less society. This is the current agenda of those pushing for ssm. Make no mistake about it. There is an agenda.

Third point: those who hate Christ and His Church have been pushing for societies which are against the Church since the persecutions in Jerusalem, which cause St. John to take Our Lady to Ephesus and which witnessed the martyrdom of St. James, and others. The Church has always had enemies, as those in darkness, who choose darkness, hate the light. They hate Christ, they hate us.

Many of those making comments on the CH website do not or do not want to see the big picture-which is the demise of Western Civilization, which was created by the Catholic Church, and the beginning of chaos and persecution for Catholics.

St. John the Baptist was beheaded for reminding Herod that he was living in adultery. 'Nuff said.

Friday, 24 April 2015

From Today's Divine Office


Death, where is your victory? Death, where is your sting? Now the sting of death is sin, but let us thank God for giving us victory over sin through our Lord Jesus Christ, alleluia.

Lessons Learnt from Commemorating the Centennial of the Armenian Genocide



A hundred years ago, a genocide began which eliminated 1.5 million Armenian Christians through forced migration, torture and massacre.  The world was fixated on the Great War in Europe and the many lives lost to were practically ignored Armenia was far away as well as the vigorous denials by the Turks,

One man at the time who did not turn a blind eye to the atrocity was Mehmet Celal Bey, a Turkish official who is known in some circles as the Ottoman Oskar Schindler.




The Armenian Supreme Patriarch Kerekin II canonized the 1.5 million victims of the Armenian Genocide as martyrs.  Even today, the topic of the Armenian Genocide inspires tumult and vigorous denials from Turks.  Pope Francis stated: The first genocide of the 20th century was that of the Armenians."   The Turkish Foreign Ministry immediately shot back that Pope Francis' remarks were one-sided. When that demarche proved insufficient, Ankara summoned the Vatican ambassador for an explanation and later recalled Turkey's Ambassador to Rome.   The Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu noted: "Religious authorities are not the places to incite resentment and hatred with baseless allegations."  Turkey's position is that the 1.5 million victim figure is disputable and that any deaths were due to World War I.

Even after 100 years, denial is not just a river in Egypt.

The Centennary of the Armenian Genocide is instructive as the world currently is seeing a massacre of Christians by Muslim extremists, like ISIS, Boko Haraam and Al Shabaab, and much of the so called civilized world is non-plussed by the atrocity and believes that it does not affect them. Or our feckless leaders acknowledge the horrific event but never name the perpetrators (radical Islamism) or do not acknowledge the identity of the victims (Christians or Jews).






 

Thursday, 23 April 2015

A Bit on Justifying Georgemas


British Great War Recruiting Poster 

According to the Gregorian calendar, April 23rd is the Feast of St. George (or Georgemas).  The Orthodox also admire the attributes of St. George but follow the Julian calendar which marks the feast on May 6th.  St. George born in Syria Palestrinia in the late Third Century who served as an officer in the Roman army that guarded the Emporer Diocletian, but who was martyred for not renouncing his Christian faith.  The emperor tried to bribe George to renounce his faith and tortured him, but to no avail. Before he was decapitated, St. George gave all of his wealth to the poor.

St. George is one of the most venerated saints in the Catholic Church, among Anglicans, Orthodox, East Syrian churches. Even Muslims revere this honorable military man. In the Twelfth Century a legend was attached to St. George about slaying a dragon.  The standard Orthodox icon of St. George depicts him slaying a dragon with a woman in the background.





The dragon is generally understood as being both Satan and the monster from his own life (Diocletian). The woman in the background is Alexandra, the wife of Emperor Diocletian. Crusaders credit an appearance of St. George. This was probably legend which traveled back with the Crusaders from the Holy Land and was embellished in courtly Romance retellings.

***
St. George is the patron saint of England yet it is not a public holiday in England. The reasons why celebration of Georgemas is muted are cultural, historical and now tinged with political correctness.



St. George was neither English nor roundly associated with England, even though King Edward III formed the Order of the Garder under the patronage of St. George in 1348.  The Reformation played a part as Protestants did not care much for saints' days. In addition, celebration of St. George's day has been in decline since the Act of Union between England in Scotland completed in 1707.  In today's world,  the Daily Telegraph reports that many English people are concerned that national symbols like St. George can be considered racists,


Aside from the fact that many pubs in England are named after George and the dragon, it makes one wonder why this legend matters. Modern man is quick to dismiss myths (unless it is anthropogenic global warming), but this is short sighted. Myths convey essential truths although the romantic story elements may not be exact.

***

The reason that St. George matters so much to the English is that the legend reinforces characteristics which the English admire and seek to emulate.  St. George is a knight who exemplified chivalry. St. George and the dragon also champions the little guy as well as the triumph of good over evil.  The versions which depict him making the sign of the cross depict deep dedication to principles (if we dare not declare faith).  These romanticized virtues along with the more verifiable versions of his hagiography make St. George a man worthy (bank holiday or not) for Englishmen to emulate.



SEE MORE at DC-LausDeo.US 
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...