Catholic

Why Does The Catholic Church Use Incense?

2011-02-07T21:13:00.002-05:00

"Incense is a symbolic sacramental. Its burning signifies zeal; its fragrance, virtue; and its rising smoke, prayer going up before the Throne of God." ~New Catholic Dictionary (A.D. 1910).

"Thou shalt make also an [altar to burn incense], of setim wood. It shall be a cubit in length, and another in breadth, that is, foursquare, and two in height. Horns shall go out of the same. And thou shalt overlay it with the purest gold, as well as the grate thereof, as the walls round about and the horns. And thou shalt make to it a crown of gold round about, And two golden rings under the crown on either side, that the bars may be put into them, and the altar be carried. And thou shalt make the bars also of setim wood, and shalt overlay them with gold.

[1] "An altar to burn incense"... This burning of incense was an emblem of prayer, ascending to God from an inflamed heart. See Ps. 140. 2; Apoc. 5. 8, and 8. 4.

And thou shalt set the altar over against the veil, that hangeth before the ark of the testimony before the propitiatory wherewith the testimony is covered, where I will speak to thee. And Aaron shall burn sweet smelling incense upon it in the morning. When he shall dress the lamps, he shall burn it: And when he shall place them in the evening, he shall burn an everlasting incense before the Lord throughout your generations. You shall not offer upon it incense of another composition nor oblation, and victim, neither shall you offer libations. And Aaron shall pray upon the horns thereof once a year, with the blood of that which was offered for sin, and shall make atonement upon it in your generations. It shall be most holy to the Lord." ~Exodus 30:1-10

"And taking the censer, which he [Aaron] hath filled with the burning coals of the altar, and taking up with his hand the compounded perfume for incense, he shall go in within the veil into the holy place: That when the perfumes are put upon the fire, the cloud and vapour thereof may cover the oracle, which is over the testimony, and he may not die." ~Leviticus 16:12-13

"And for the altar of incense, he gave the purest gold: and to make the likeness of the chariot of the cherubims spreading their wings, and covering the ark of the covenant of the Lord." ~1 Chronicles (or Paralipomenon) 28:18

"Let my prayer be directed as incense in thy sight; the lifting up of my hands, as evening sacrifice." ~Psalm 140(141):2

"For from the rising of the sun to its setting My name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to My name, and a pure offering; for My name is great among the nations, says the LORD of hosts." ~Malachi 1:11

"And entering into the house, they found the child with Mary His mother, and falling down they adored Him; and opening their treasures, they offered Him gifts; gold, frankincense, and myrrh." ~Matthew 2:11

"Once when he [Zechariah] was serving as priest in his division's turn before God, according to the practice of the priestly service, he was chosen by lot to enter the sanctuary of the Lord to burn incense. Then, when the whole assembly of the people was praying outside at the hour of the incense offering, the angel of the Lord appeared to him, standing at the right of the altar of incense...." ~Luke 1:8-11

"...the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints...." ... "And another angel came, and stood before the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given to him much incense, that he should offer of the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar, which is before the throne of God. And the smoke of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended up before God from the hand of the angel." ~Apocalypse (or Revelation) 5:8; 8:3-4

"The hierarch having ended a sacred prayer before the divine altar, begins by censing there and goes throughout the whole enclosure of the sacred edifice. And returned once more to the holy altar, he begins the sacred melody of the psalms, the whole well-ordered ecclesiastical array chanting along with him the holy psalmic song." ~Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, de Eccl. Hierarch., iii. 2.

"...Burn yet the incense in the holy place...Give ye your incense to God." ~Testament of Saint Ephrem of Edessa (A.D. 306?-373)

Incense is mentioned throughout the Divine Liturgy of Saint Mark (5th century?): http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0718.htm and throughout the Divine Liturgy of Saint James (late fourth or early fifth century?): http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0717.htm

"In the liturgies of Ss. James and Mark, which in their present form originate in the fifth century, the use of incense is mentioned. A Roman Ritual of the seventh century marks it usage in the procession of a Bishop to the altar and on Good Friday. Moreover, in the Mass, an incensation at the Gospel appears very early; at the offertory, in the 11th century; and at the Introit, in the 12th century. Incense was also used at the Benedictus and Magnificat during Lauds and Vespers about the 13th century, and for the exposition and benediction of the Blessed Sacrament about the 14th century. Gradually, its usage was extended to the incensing of the celebrant and assisting clergy...The purpose of incensing and the symbolic value of the smoke is that of purification and sanctification... Incense also creates the ambiance of Heaven...The usage of incense adds a sense of solemnity and mystery to the Mass. The visual imagery of the smoke and the smell remind us of the transcendence of the Mass which links Heaven with earth, and allow us to enter into the presence of God." ~The Use of Incense by Father William Saunders

Important Links To Church Documents And Commentaries To Help Combat False Ecumenism, Religious Indifferentism and Religious Syncretism

2010-09-07T10:32:00.007-04:00

Mortalium animos - On Religious Unity, Against False Ecumenism (January 6, 1928)- Encyclical Letter of Pope Pius XI
LINK

Other Papal and Ecclesial documents and some commentaries worth reading......

1. CHURCH FATHERS: Treatise I - On the Unity of the Catholic Church (By Saint Cyprian of Carthage, Bishop and martyr)
LINK

A related address and document,

The Holy Father's 6 June 2007 Wednesday Audience Address (On Saint Cyprian)
LINK

The Catholicity of the Church By Saint Francis de Sales
LINK

2. Pope Pius IX's "Iam Vos Omnes"
LINK

3.What Catholics are to think of today's false ecumenism? - By Bishop George Hay - GENERAL LAWS OF GOD, FORBIDDING ALL COMMUNICATION IN RELIGION WITH THOSE OF A FALSE RELIGION
LINK

4. MIRARI VOS - ON LIBERALISM AND RELIGIOUS INDIFFERENTISM - ENCYCLICAL OF POPE GREGORY XVI (AUGUST 15, 1832)
LINK

5. QUI PLURIBUS - ON FAITH AND RELIGION - ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS IX (NOVEMBER 9, 1846)
LINK

6. PROBE NOSTIS (On the Propagation of the Faith) Pope Gregory XVI 18 September 1840
LINK

7. In Dominico Agro - ON INSTRUCTION IN THE FAITH - Encyclical of Pope Clement XIII promulgated on June 14, 1761
LINK

8. LAMENTABILI SANE - Pope Saint Pius X (July 3, 1907) - SYLLABUS CONDEMNING THE ERRORS OF THE MODERNISTS
LINK

Related documents,

PASCENDI DOMINICI GREGIS. ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS X ON THE DOCTRINES OF THE MODERNISTS
LINK

Sacrorum Antistitum: The Oath Against Modernism
LINK

9. QUANTO CONFICIAMUR MOERORE - ON PROMOTION OF FALSE DOCTRINES - ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS IX (AUGUST 10, 1863)
LINK

10. ON "FOSTERING TRUE RELIGIOUS UNITY" - POPE PIUS XI - 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
LINK

11. THE SYLLABUS OF ERRORS CONDEMNED BY POPE PIUS IX - Published on December 8, 1864, the Feast of the Immaculate Conception
LINK

12. The Duty to Evangelize by Saint Francis Xavier
LINK

*Reading these documents will help inspire you to counter the modern errors and heresies of religious indifferentism and religious syncretism with the Faith that has been passed on and defended and preserved by the Holy Spirit since the time of the Apostles. As the Catholic apologist Marco A. Fallon wrote,

"It's not enough to know Christ, we must bring Him to everyone!" -- (Pope John Paul II)...."As followers of Christ, it is not enough to have faith, but we also must proudly profess it and constantly bear witness to it. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1816) The Catechism explains that in response to the amazing revelation that God has given to us, 'Our duty toward God is to believe in Him and to bear witness to Him.' (CCC 2087) Bearing witness means that by our speech and our actions we must attest to the truth of the Gospel. We are called to be a light shining in the darkness. Bearing witness to our faith is a necessary part of having faith. In fact the Catechism goes so far as to say that 'Service of and witness to the faith are necessary for salvation.' (CCC 1816) This is because if we do not bear witness to our faith then by our very silence we are denying it. A very frightening statement that Jesus makes is that 'Everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven; but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.' (Matthew 10:32-33) This shows the importance of bearing witness to Christ and why it is necessary for salvation."

"Woe to me (i.e., how terrible it would be) for me if I did not preach the Gospel!" (1 Corinthians 9:16).

"Faith come by hearing; how will they hear if there is no one to preach?" (Roman 10:14-17).

"Proclaim the good news to all!" (Mark 16:15).

"How beautiful are the feet of those who bring the good news!" (Romans 10:15).

"We have been given the grace to preach" (Ephesians 3:8).

"You are the salt of the earth, you are the light of the world, no one lights a lamp and puts it under a basket, they put it high for everyone to see!" (Matthew 5:13-16).

"God wills everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:4).

"We are called and empowered to share and to defend our faith by virtue of our Baptism and Confirmation!" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1313).

Spiritual Warfare

2010-06-16T07:52:00.002-04:00

The head of Human Life International, Father Tom Euteneuer, discusses the subject of Exorcism and Spiritual Warfare in a new book called "Exorcism and the Church Militant": Click Here

Question: why does God permit us to experience Spiritual Warfare?

God permits us to experience spiritual warfare not only to allow us to win souls for Him but to make us into saints. We do so by spiritually training hard like athletes so we may be spiritually fit and deserving of the imperishable crown won at the end of the race, the imperishable crown being Eternal Life in Heaven where we will enjoy the Beatific Vision if we gain Final Perseverance at the end of life and die in a state of Sanctifying Grace (the spiritual warfare/athlete/imperishable crown theme is also the teaching of Saint Paul). Saint Paul says,

"Do you not know that the runners in the stadium all run in the race, but only one wins the prize? Run so as to win. Every athlete exercises discipline in every way. They do it to win a perishable crown, but we an imperishable one. Thus I do not run aimlessly; I do not fight as if I were shadowboxing. No, I drive my body and train it, for fear that, after having preached to others, I myself should be disqualified." (1 Corinthians 9:24-27)

If we never fought the battle as the Church Militant (the Church Militant is engaged in spiritual war against the world, the flesh and Satan) then we would not be properly prepared and deserving of Heaven. It takes a real commitment to Jesus and His Church, a love for TRUTH, to overcome obstacles in the spiritual life so we may reach the end of the race victoriously even though we may be beaten up and fall very often along the way. Keeping our eyes on the prize even though Satan forces us to lose focus by causing us to be distracted along the way of the spiritual life is something that can be achieved only through prayer and through frequent reception of the Sacraments and through daily acts of Mortification. We have to achieve this in obedience to Our Lord and Savior Jesus who commands us to "be perfect" (holy) as our Heavenly Father is perfect" (Matthew 5:48).

This is also why we must consistently support and pray for each other out of charity and love for the TRUTH as members of the Church Militant (by practicing the Spiritual Works of Mercy (which concerns the soul: http://www.secondexodus.com/html/catholicdefinitions/spiritualworksofmercy.htm) and the Corporal Works of Mercy (which concerns the body: http://www.secondexodus.com/html/catholicdefinitions/corporalworksofmercy.htm).

John 6:54-55, and the Meaning of the Verb “to Eat” Flesh By Robert Sungenis

2010-06-05T01:43:00.005-04:00

The word used in John 6:54, 56-58, when Jesus says to eat his flesh and drink his blood is an important matter to consider when doing exegesis of the passage. The word to eat, trogo, means to gnaw, crunch, so showing the physical reality, and showing the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. This is too obvious for some, and even Protestant dictionaries have to try to explain away the meaning of this. Here Robert Sungenis responds to an email from someone who asks him a question on the meaning of the word to “eat flesh” (trogo.) The Protestant’s Vine’s Dictionary attempts to give a figurative meaning to the expression of eating flesh (p. 192), and Bob Sungenis responds to this attempt. In Green is the email from the person asking the question, and later, quotes from Vine’s dictionary. In Blue is Sungenis’ analysis.

My question is:

In checking Vine's Dictionary for "trogo" it says that it is used "metaphorically of the habit of spiritually feeding upon Christ", which is clearly the Protestant definition. It goes on to say "The use of 'trogo' in Mat.24:38 and John13:18 is a witness against pressing into the meaning of the word the sense of munching or gnawing; it had largely lost this sense in its common usage." How do I answer this above statement?

**Here are some excerpts from an article I am writing titled: "The ‘trogo' Experience of Contemplative Munching

First, Vines' Expository Dictionary is a Protestant work that is biased against Catholic doctrine. Even the three volume Dictionary of New Testament Theology (editor Colin Brown) is a biased work, especially in regards to the words used in John 6. A better resource is a Greek lexicon, like Walter Bauer, Liddell and Scott, Moulton-Milligan, or Reinecher.

Here is what Vine says of "trogo": (I will make comments intermittently)**

"Primarily, to gnaw, to chew, stresses the slow process; it is used metaphorically of the habit of spiritually feeding upon Christ, John 6:54,56,57,58 (the aorists here do not indicate a definite act, but view a series of acts seen in perspective);

Comment: First of all, the "trogo" verbs in John 6:54-58 (pronounced "troogoon;" the double o signifying the long-sounding Greek omega), are all in the present participle form, not aorist, so Vine's comment here is irrelevant. The only aorist is "phagete" in John 6:53, but that is a subjunctive in a conditional clause, which would not support Vine's point. Second, notice how Vine first admits to the very literal usage of "trogo" as "to chew," even stressing the "slow process" of chewing, but then, out of nowhere, injects the conclusion that "trogo" is used "metaphorically" of "spiritual feeding" in John 6. He does not give any grammatical or historical rationale for his abrupt shift in meaning, rather, he is forced to this conclusion by his Protestant bias.

He continues: "of the constant custom of eating in certain company, John 13:18; of a practice unduly engrossing the world, Matt. 24:38."

Comment: Vine is picking out one dimension of the use of "trogo" in these verses, but ignoring the other dimensions. It is the combination of these two dimensions which gives "trogo" its special meaning. I will elaborate on this in my latter paragraphs.

**"In John 6, the change in the Lord's use from the verb esthio (phago) to the stronger verb trogo is noticeable.”

Comment: At least he does recognize that the switch from phago to trogo is "noticeable." We'll have to thank him for taking "notice," reluctant he may be in doing so.**

"The more persistent the unbelief of His hearers, the more difficult His language and statements became. In vv. 49 to 53 the verb phago is used; in 54, 58 trogo (in ver. 58 it is put into immediate contrast with phago)."

Comment: Of course, Vine's reason for Jesus making his language "more difficult" is that "trogo" is used spiritually while "phago," as noted in his previous explanation above and in his description of "phago" in his dictionary, is used physically. But what he misses is that "phago" is used quite often in the spiritual sense in the New Testament (see below), and is even used on par with "trogo" in John 6:53-54. So if Vine's argument is that "trogo" is "more difficult" than "phago" because "trogo" is spiritual and "phago" is physical (e.g., as "phago" is used physically to recount the giving of manna to the OT Jews in John 6:49), this cannot be possible, since "phago" must also, due its presence in John 6:53 as a lead in to "trogo" in John 6:54, be used in Vine's "spiritual" sense. Vine cannot object to our critique of his view because he has already committed to viewing John 6:54-58 as metaphorical and spiritual, which also commits him to seeing "phago" in John 6:53 as metaphorical and spiritual.

But if Vine were to claim that both "phago" and "trogo" are being used spiritually in John 6:53- 54, then he would have no basis for saying, as he earlier did, that the use of "trogo" is "more difficult" than "phago," since both words would then be on an equal spiritual plane and point to the same spiritual idea — that the bread is not Jesus but merely a symbol of Jesus. Spiritually speaking, "trogo" could not be "more difficult" than "phago." "Chewing spiritually" cannot be any more difficult than "eating spiritually," since both point to the same spiritual reality. The "more difficult" nature of "trogo" in contrast to "phago" can only be in the PHYSICAL realm of meaning, that is, "phago" refers to "physical eating" but "trogo" refers to "intense physical eating." This is confirmed by the fact that the Jews, according to John 6:52, understood "phago" as referring to physical eating, not spiritual eating. Mr. Vine is trapped, but he doesn't realize it.

**"The use of trogo in Matt. 24:38 and John 13:18 is a witness against pressing into meaning of the word the sense of munching or gnawing; it had largely lost this sense in its common usage."**

Comment: The assertion that "it had largely lost this sense in its common usage" is mere conjecture based on his wish to dispense with the Catholic usage of "trogo" in John 6. There is absolutely no evidence for Vine's claim in either koine or classical literature. What Vine misses is that "trogo" connoted more than "munching" or "chewing," but a special kind of munching or chewing, which I will explain below.

Here is some additional information:

**Contrary to Vine, "trogo" is never used metaphorically in either koine or classical Greek. "trogo" (= "I eat," present indicative) is used six times in various verb forms in the New Testament:**

Matt. 24:38
John 6:54, 56, 57, 58
John 13:18

As a preliminary matter, the main issue is not whether "trogo" can refer to something other than munching or chewing, but whether "trogo" is ever used in a non-physical sense. The meaning in the above passages concerns only the physical act of eating, which distinguishes the meaning from being merely symbolic, as is true of its counterpart "phago" which is sometimes used symbolically (cf., John 4:32; 1 Cor. 10:3).
In fact, there is no symbolic usage of "trogo" in the New Testament or in classical literature, and "trogo" is not used in the LXX. In classical literature, according to Liddell and Scott, "trogo" referred mainly to biting into a piece of fruit or vegetable and eating it. Of the two, "phago" is the more general, since it can refer to physical or spiritual eating, but there are other reasons I will state below. Vine tries to turn "trogo" in Matt 24:38 and John 13:18 into metaphors by claiming that the physical eating is merely representative of the social scene, but this is illegitimate, since that is not how a true metaphor is defined. The ante-deluvian people were literally "eating and drinking, and marrying and giving in marriage" right up until Noah entered the ark, since the ark door was shut on the very day it started raining; and Judas did share an intimate meal with Jesus right before he betrayed him. In fact, as I will show below, the social context of Matt. 24:38 and John 13:18 is only made possible by the fact that "trogo" is taken in its literal sense.

"Phago" and "trogo," when used in the physical sense, can be used interchangeably. For example, in John 6:53-54 Jesus says, "Except you eat ("phagete" - aorist, subjunctive) the flesh of the Son of Man....He that eats ("trogon" - present, participle) my flesh." Likewise, Jesus uses "phago" in Matt. 26:26; Mark 14:22; when he says, "Take, eat, This is my body."

Another interchange is in John 6:58: "Not as your fathers ate ("ephagon" - aorist, indicative) the manna and died. He that eats (" trogon " - present, participle) this bread shall live forever." Notice that "phago" in John 6:58 is understood in the physical sense, which would also point to its being used physically in John 6:53. This is so because "phago," used in both John 6:49 and 6:58 when Jesus is speaking of the Jews eating manna in the desert, is sandwiching John 6:53 which uses "phago" in reference to eating Jesus. It would be grammatically incongruous for Jesus to switch from a physical meaning in verse 49, to a spiritual meaning in verse 53, and back to a physical meaning in verse 58.

Notice also that "trogon" in John 6:54 and 6:58 is a present participle, which refers to an ongoing eating, whereas the aorist indicative of "phago" in 6:58, which describes the eating of the manna, refers to a past, discontinued event. In fact, all the uses of "trogo" in John 6 are present participles, which means that the eating of Jesus must be continual.

All in all, "trogo" carries the meaning not just of "chewing" or "munching" but also of "intimate, sustained, eating and total consumation," as opposed to "phago" which is usually only a general reference to eating without further description. One way to distinguish the two, using our everyday language, is to say "phago" refers to "eating for essential nourishment," while "trogo" refers more to "dining, with the express purpose of masticating all the food so that one can savor it," as when we go to a fine restaurant to eat our favorite meal, perhaps making groans of pleasure as we eat. This puts a little distance from defining "trogo" as mere "chewing" or "munching," since animals do the same kind of chewing but without being cognizant of a fine gourmet meal shared with another.

Thus, Jesus can use "phago" in John 6:53 when he is referring to the Eucharist, since "phago" refers to "essential nourishment," which is true of the Eucharist — it leaves us with God's grace. In fact, Jesus completes John 6:53 with "unless you eat (phagete) the flesh of the Son of Man....you have NO LIFE IN YOU," showing a lack of nourishment (sanctifying grace) if one refuses to eat.

But in the next verses, John 6:54-55, Jesus says, "Whoever eats (trogon) my flesh...has eternal life...for my flesh is REAL food" (Greek: aleethos = truly, really). Notice that now the emphasis is on "REAL" food. In other words, Jesus is saying, "Look, I'm not kidding when I say I, personally, am food for you [as he just intimated in John 6:53]. In fact, I am so REAL that you will actually have to chew me [trogon me] as you would dine at a meal."

This distinction between "phago" and "trogo" wherein the latter refers more to intimate dining, would also explain why John 13:18 and Matt. 24:38 can opt to use "trogo" instead of "phago." John 13:18 uses "trogo" as a translation for the Hebrew "akal" in Psalm 41:9. "Akal" is the normal Hebrew word for "eat," being used in various forms about 800 times in the OT. But the Jews did not have a specific word for "chew" or "gnaw," which is probably why the LXX (Septuagint) never translated "akal," or the other Hebrew words for "eat" such as "barah," "lacham," "raah," "team," or "okel," into the Greek word "trogo." The Greeks had a word for everything.

John 13:18 is the scene in which Judas is betraying Jesus after sharing a most intimate meal with him. The horror of the betrayal is made even more severe by its stark contrast to the intimacy of dining together. Colloquially, Jesus would be saying, "The one with whom I shared a most intimate meal, is the very one who will betray me." This is why some translations render John 13:18 as "He who SHARES MY BREAD has lifted up his heel against me" (NIV). Although it would still be possible to use "phago" in John 13:18, "trogo" puts more emphasis on the intimacy of dining together.

In Matthew 24:38, we have almost the same picture. The scene is of an intimate wedding in which people are eating and drinking, oblivious of the coming deluge of Noah's flood. The use of "trogo" here portrays an intimate, sumptuous meal, which is common at weddings and which occupies the guests time and interest. In fact, much of the ceremony/celebration revolves around the food and drink, as was the case in the marriage feast of Cana in John 2. Matthew is trying to draw our attention to the act of enthusiastic dining among the guests, which in turn shows us why the guests are oblivious to their coming misfortune. It is also significant that there is not another instance in the New Testament in which "eating and drinking" is coupled with "marrying and giving in marriage," which shows that the intensity or emphasis afforded by "trogo" allows it to be uniquely coupled with an intimate marriage celebration.

Hence, in using "trogo" in John 6:54-58, Jesus is not merely saying that the Jews must "chew" him (like animals chewing a cud, or like humans taking a vitamin pill), but that they must chew as if they were dining at a fine meal of celebration, savoring every bite of him, thinking about the food as they eat it. This is why the Jews are upset at Jesus -- not only because he is telling them to eat him (phago, which, admittedly, could have been interpreted either physically or spiritually), but because he is treating himself, without equivocation, as if he were an intimate dining experience, which was indeed the nature of the Eucharist at the Last Supper and continues to be in the Mass. The Jews are no longer to eat like their ancestors who consumed manna in the desert merely to fill their stomachs, and who even complained that they didn't like the taste of the manna. No, the food that Jesus will give is a savory meal which one must intimately chew, taste and enjoy. We do this by contemplating who we are eating — God himself. Colloquially speaking, it is gourmet food that must be chewed and savored; you must really know what you are consuming, which starts by literally sinking your teeth into it. Since chewing connotes the idea of getting into the inner essence of the object, "trogo" is the most intimate and specific word afforded in the Greek language to get this point across — that God himself wishes to become a physical part of every part of our being. We can thus enjoy a "trogo experience" when we receive the Eucharist, literally savoring the presence of God in our mouth and then contemplating him permeating our entire body and filling us with his grace. Wow, what a rush!!
Robert Sungenis

On Spiritual Reading

2010-04-23T08:39:00.002-04:00

When we Pray we speak to God;
but when we Read, God speaks to us.

In Prayer, God hears our Petitions,
but in Reading, we listen to His Voice.

Spiritual Reading and Prayer are the Arms by which
Hell is conquered and Paradise won.

"Spritual Reading and Prayer are the arms by which Hell is conquered and Paradise won." ~Saint Bernard

"You will not see anyone who is really striving after his advancement who is not given to Spiritual Reading. And as to him who neglects it, the fact will soon be observed by his progress." ~Saint Athanasius

"We cannot always have access to a Spiritual Father for Counsel in our actions, and particularly in our doubts; but Reading will abundantly supply his place by giving us Lights and Directions to escape the Illusions of the Devil and of our own Self-Love, and at the same time to submit to the Divine Will." ~Saint Alphonsus

Recommended reading:

The Importance of Spiritual Reading by Saint Alphonsus Liguori">

INSTRUCTION ON GOOD FRIDAY (Rev. Fr. Leonard Goffine's The Church's Year)

2010-04-02T13:43:00.007-04:00

UPDATED (FOR EASTER!):

He is Risen! Haec dies quam fecit Dominus!

The Earth's Most Serious Wound-The Empty Tomb by Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen

The Victory of the Cross (Taken from the spiritual classic Divine Intimacy by Fr. Gabriel of St. Mary Magdalen, O.C.D.)

The Catechetical Instructions of St. Thomas Aquinas (instruction on the Apostles' Creed taken as a body of twelve articles of faith)

THE FIFTH ARTICLE (CONTINUED): "The third day He arose again from the dead."

We must necessarily know two things: the glory of God and the punishment of
hell. For being attracted by His glory and made fearful by punishments, we
take warning and withdraw ourselves from sin. But for us to appreciate
these facts is very difficult. Thus, it is said of God's glory: "But the
things that are in heaven, who shall search out?"[1] For those who are
worldly minded this is indeed difficult, because "he that is of the earth,
of the earth he is, and of the earth he speaketh;"[2] but it is easier for
the spiritually minded, because, "he that cometh from above is above all,"
as is said in the same place. Accordingly, God descended from heaven and
became incarnate to teach us heavenly things. Once it was difficult to know
about the punishments of hell: "no man hath been known to have returned
from hell,"[3] as it is said in the person of the wicked. But this cannot be
said now, for just as Christ descended from heaven to teach us heavenly
things, so also He came back from the region of hell to teach us about it.
It is, therefore, necessary that we believe not only that Christ was made
man, and died, but also that He arose again from the dead. Therefore, it is
said in the Creed: "The third day He arose again from the dead."

We find that many arose from the dead, such as Lazarus,[4] the son of the
widow,[5] and the daughter of the Ruler of the synagogue.[6] But the
resurrection of Christ differed from the resurrection of these and of all
others in four points.

SPECIAL CHARACTER OF CHRIST'S RESURRECTION

(1) Christ's resurrection differed from that of all others in its cause.
Those others who arose did so not of their own power, but either by the
power of Christ or through the prayers of some Saint. Christ, on the
contrary, arose by His own power, because He was not only Man but also God, and the Divinity of the Word was at no time separated either from His soul or from His body. Therefore, His body could, whenever He desired, take
again the soul, and His soul the body: "I lay down My life, that I may take
it again. . . . And I have power to lay it down; and I have power to take
it up again."[7] Christ truly died, but not because of weakness or of
necessity but rather of His own will entirely and by His own power. This is
seen in that moment when He yielded up the ghost; He cried out with a loud
voice,[8] which could not be true of others at the moment of dying, because
they die out of weakness. . . . For this the centurion said: "Indeed, this
was the Son of God."[9] By that same power whereby He gave up His soul, He
received it again; and hence the Creed says, "He arose again," because He
was not raised up as if by anyone else. "I have slept and have taken My
rest; and I have risen up."[10] Nor can this be contrary to these words,
"This Jesus hath God raised again,"[11] because both the Father and the Son
raised Him up, since one and the same power is of the Father and the Son.

(2) Christ's resurrection was different as regards the life to which He
arose. Christ arose again to a glorious and incorruptible life: "Christ is
risen from the dead by the glory of the Father."[12] The others, however,
were raised to that life which they had before, as seen of Lazarus and the
others.

(3) Christ's resurrection was different also in effect and efficacy. In
virtue of the resurrection of Christ all shall rise again: "And many bodies
of the saints that had slept arose."[13] The Apostle declares that "Christ is
risen from the dead, the first fruits of them that sleep."[14] But also note
that Christ by His Passion arrived at glory: "Ought not Christ to have
suffered these things and so to enter into His glory?"[15] And this is to
teach us how we also may arrive at glory: "Through many tribulations we
must enter into the kingdom of God."[16]

(4) Christ's resurrection was different in point of time. Christ arose on
the third day; but the resurrection of the others is put off until the end
of the world. The reason for this is that the resurrection and death and
nativity of Christ were "for our salvation,[17] and thus He wished to rise
again at a time when it would be of profit to us. Now, if He had risen
immediately, it would not have been believed that He died; and similarly,
if He had put it off until much later, the disciples would not have
remained in their belief, and there would have been no benefit from His
Passion. He arose again, therefore, on the third day, so that it would be
believed that He died, and His disciples would not lose faith in him.[18]

WHAT WE MAY LEARN FROM THE RESURRECTION

From all this we can take four things for our instruction. Firstly, let us
endeavor to arise spiritually, from the death of the soul which we incur by
our sins, to that life of justice which is had through penance: "Rise, thou
that sleepest, and arise from the dead; and Christ shall enlighten thee."[19]
This is the first resurrection: "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in
the first resurrection."[20]

Secondly, let us not delay to rise until our death, but do it at once,
since Christ arose on the third day: "Delay not to be converted to the
Lord; and defer it not from day to day."[21] You will not be able to consider
what pertains to salvation when weighed down by illness, and, moreover, by
persevering in sin, you will lose part of all the good which is done in the
Church, and you will incur many evils. Indeed, the longer you possess the
devil, the harder it is to put him away, as St. Bede tells us.

Thirdly, let us rise up again to an incorruptible life in that we may not
die again, but resolve to sin no more: "Knowing that Christ, rising again
from the dead, dieth now no more. Death shall no more have dominion over
Him. . . . So do you also reckon that you are dead to sin, but alive unto
God, in Christ Jesus our Lord. Neither yield ye your members as instruments
of iniquity unto sin; but present yourselves to God, as those that are
alive from the dead."[22]

Fourthly, let us rise again to a new and glorious life by avoiding all that
which formerly were the occasions and the causes of our death and sin: "As
Christ is risen from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also may
walk in newness of life."[23] This new life is the life of justice which
renews the soul and leads it to the life of glory.

(For "Questions for Discussion" see Chapter 6.)

ENDNOTES

1. Wis., ix. 16.

2. John, iii. 31.

3. Wisd., ii. 1.

4. John, xi 1-44

5. Luke, vii. 11-16.

6. Mark, v. 35-43.

7. John, x. 18.

8. Matt., xxvii. 50.

9. Matt., xxvii. 54.

10. Ps. iii. 6.

11. Acts, ii. 3~. Rom., vi, 4.

13. Matt., xxviii. 52.

14. I Cor., xv. 20.

15. Luke xxiv. 26.

16. Acts, xiv. 21.

17. From the Nicene Creed.

18. "Chirst did not remain in the grave during all of these three days, but
as He lay in the sepulchre during an entire natural day during part of the
preceding day and part of the following day, he is said, in very truth, to
have lain in the grave for three days, and on the third day to have risen
again from the dead" ("Roman Catechism," "loc. cit., 10).

19. Eph., v. 14.

20. John, xx. 6.

21. Ecclus., v. 8.

22. Rom., vi. 9, 11-14.

23. "Ibid.," 4.

† † †

Instruction on Easter

By Rev. Fr. Leonard Goffine's The Church's Year

What is the festival of Easter?

Easter, in Latin Pascha, signifies passing over, and has the following historical origin: Under Pharao, King of Egypt, the Jews in that country groaned under intolerable bondage. God had mercy on His people, and the hour of deliverance came. By His command the first-born of all the Egyptians was killed by an angel. The Jews had been ordered by God to be ready for emigration, but first to kill a lamb, eat it in their houses in common, and sprinkle the doorposts with its blood. And the angel of death, by order of God, passed the doors sprinkled with the blood of the lamb, and did no harm to any child of the Israelites, whilst he slew all the first-born sons of the Egyptians. In grateful memory of this passing their doors, the Jews observed the festival of Easter, the Pasch, or Passover. After the death of Jesus, the apostles introduced the same festival into the Church in grateful remembrance of the day on which Jesus, the true Easter Lamb, took away our sins by His blood, freed us from the angel of eternal death, and passed us over to the freedom of the children of God.

Where, during this time, was Christ's holy soul?

In Limbo, that is, the place where the souls of the just who died before Christ, and were yet in original sin, were awaiting their redemption.

What have we to expect from the resurrection of Christ?

That our bodies will rise again from death. (Rom. VIII. II) For if Christ our head is alive, then we His members must also become reanimated, because a living head cannot exist without living members.

What is meant by the Alleluia sung at Easter time?

In English Alleluia means Praise the Lord, and expresses the joy of the Church at the Resurrection of Christ, and the hope of eternal happiness which He has obtained for us.

Why does the Church on this day bless eggs, bread, and meat?

To remind the faithful that although the time of fasting is now ended, they should not indulge in gluttony, but thank God, and use their food simply for the necessary preservation of physical strength.

At the Introit the Church introduces Christ, her Head, as addressing His Heavenly Father in these words:

INTROIT I arose, and am still with thee, alleluia; thou hast laid thy hand upon me, alleluia: thy knowledge is become wonderful, allel., allel. Lord, thou hast proved me and known me: Thou bast known my sitting down arid my rising up. (Ps. CXXXVIII.) Glory be to the Father, etc.

COLLECT O God, who on this day, through Thine only-begotten Son, didst overcome death and open unto us the gate of everlasting life; as by Thy prompting grace Thou dost breathe on the desires of our hearts, so do Thou ever accompany them with Thy help. Through &c.

EPISTLE (I Cor. V. 7-8.) Brethren, purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new paste, as you are unleavened: for Christ our pasch is sacrificed. Therefore let us feast, not with the old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

EXPLANATION St. Paul here exhorts us that we should at this time remove by a good confession and true penance the leaven, that is, the sins we have committed, and partake of the Paschal lamb in holy Communion with a pure, sincere heart; as the Jews were on this day commanded to eat the Paschal lamb with unleavened bread, abstaining on this day from the old leaven.

During the octave of this festival repeat often with the Church: "Alleluia! Praise to the Lord, for He is good, and His mercy endureth forever. Alleluia! This is the day the Lord has made, Alleluia! Let us rejoice therein, Alleluia! Our Paschal Lamb is Christ who sacrificed Himself for us, Alleluia!"

GOSPEL (Mark XVI. 1-7.) At that time, Mary Magdalen, and Mary the mother of James and Salome, bought sweetspices, that, coming, they, might anoint Jesus. And very early in the morning, the first, day, of the week, they come to the sepulchre, the sun being now risen. And they said one to another: Who shall roll us back the stone from the door of the sepulchre? And looking, they saw the stone rolled back, for it was very great. And, entering into the sepulchre they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed with a white robe, and they were astonished. Who saith to them: Be not affrighted; you seek Jesus of Nazareth; who was crucified: he is risen, he is not here; behold the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples, and Peter, that he goeth before you into Galilee: there you shall see him, as he told you.

Why did the holy women desire to embalm the body of Jesus with slices?

Because it was the custom of the Jews to embalm the dead, and as the Sabbath was so near and the time so short that they could not do it before the burial, these pious women procured the spices, and immediately after the Sabbath, hurried in the early morning to the sepulchre, to perform this act of love. We are taught by their conduct, that true love is never indifferent or slow, and what is agreeable to God it does without hesitation.

Why did the angel send the women to the disciples, and especially to Peter?

Because the disciples were to announce the Resurrection of Christ to the whole world, and they were now much saddened, and disturbed because of His death. Peter was the head of the apostles, and on account of having three times denied our Lord, he was greatly dejected and faint of heart, and was, therefore, above all to be comforted.

What encouragement does the Resurrection of Christ give us?

It encourages us to rise spiritually with Him, and live henceforth a new life, (Rom. VI. 4.) which we do if we not only renounce sin, but also flee from. all its occasions, lay aside our bad habits, subdue our corrupt inclinations, and aim after virtue and heavenly things.

ASPIRATION I rejoice, O my Jesus, that Thou hast victoriously risen from death. By Thy triumph over death, hell and the devil, grant us the grace to subdue our evil inclinations, walk in a new life, and die to all earthly things. Amen.

INSTRUCTION It is certainly true that Christ, by His death on the cross and by His resurrection, has rendered perfect satisfaction; and effected man's redemption; (Heb. IX. 12.) but we must not imagine that there is no further need of doing penance, or of working out our salvation. For, as the children of Israel, though freed from Pharao's bondage, had to fight long and against many enemies in order to gain the Promised Land, so also must we, though freed by Christ from the servitude .of the devil, battle against our enemies to the end of our lives to obtain the promised, heavenly land, for no one is crowned unless he has properly fought. (II Tim. II. 5.) We must apply the merits of the redemption and satisfaction of Christ to our soul by the frequent reception of the holy sacraments; by imitating His virtues; by patiently bearing our trials and sufferings, and by a penitential life. The pious Angelus Silesius very appropriately writes:

"God is a Lamb that avails yon not, my Christian,
If you become not also a lamb of God.
The cross on Golgotha redeems not from evil,
If it is not also erected in thee;
The dear Christ's death aids you not, my Christian,
Until in Him and for Him you also have died:"

† † †

INSTRUCTION ON GOOD FRIDAY:

CLICK HERE

"Let us see then if His words be true, and let us prove what shall happen to Him, and we shall know what His end shall be. For if He be the true son of God, He will defend Him, and will deliver Him from the hands of His enemies. Let us examine Him by outrages and tortures, that we may know His meekness, and try His pat...ience. Let us condemn Him to a most shameful death: for there shall be respect had unto Him by His words. These things they thought, and were deceived: for their own malice blinded them" (Wisdom 2:17-21)...."For blessed is the wood [the cross of Jesus], by which justice cometh" (Wisdom 14:7)...."It was our infirmities that He bore, our sufferings that He endured, While we thought of Him as stricken, as one smitten by God and afflicted. But He was pierced for our offenses, crushed for our sins, Upon Him was the chastisement that makes us whole, by His bruises we were healed" (Isaiah 53:3-5)...."He Himself bore our sins in His body upon the cross, so that, free from sin, wemight live for righteousness. By His wounds you have been healed" (1 Peter 2:24).

The Way of the Cross by Saint Alphonsus Liguori: CLICK HERE

Act of Contrition

2010-04-02T10:07:00.000-04:00

My Lord Jesus Christ, Thou hast made this journey to die for me with love unutterable, and I have so many times unworthily abandoned Thee; but now I love Thee with my whole heart, and because I love Thee I repent sincerely for having ever offended Thee. Pardon me, my God, and permit me to accompany Thee on this journey. Thou goest to die for love of me; I wish also, my beloved Redeemer, to die for love of Thee. My Jesus, I will live and die always united to Thee.

O Oriens antiphon

2009-12-21T09:16:00.005-05:00

The O Antiphon for today is the "O Oriens".

Information on the O Antiphons

New Catholic Dictionary: O Antiphons; Great Antiphons

What Are The O Antiphons by Father William Saunders

The O Antiphons By Father John Zuhlsdorf

Excerpt

There is a little-known fact about the order of these ancient O Antiphons. This is not apparent in English, but it can be seen clearly in the official language of the Roman Catholic Church: Latin. The Latin versions of each of the titles of the Messiah: Sapientia (Wisdom), Adonai (Lord), Radix (Root), Clavis (Key), Oriens (Dawn), Rex (King), and Emmanuel (Emmanuel). Take the first letters of each of the titles and write them backwards, thus counting down the days of the feast: EROCRAS or "ero cras." This means in Latin "I will be (here) tomorrow"...The song "O Come, O Come, Emmanuel" is simply a slightly modified sung version of the seven O Antiphons.

O Antiphons (@FishEaters)

The O Oriens antiphon

O Oriens: O Radiant Dawn, splendor of eternal light, sun of justice: come, shine on those who dwell in darkness and the shadow of death. Isaiah had prophesied, The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; upon those who dwelt in the land of gloom a light has shown. (Isaiah 9:1).

“O Radiant Dawn” (Zechariah 6:12)
Symbols: Sun with Rays
Come, and shine on those seated in darkness, and in the shadow of death.
O Dawn, splendor of eternal light (Habakkuk 3:4), and Sun of justice (Malachi 3:20); come, and shine on those seated in darkness, and in the shadow of death (Psalm 107:10; Luke 1:78);
O Oriens, splendor lucis aeternae, et sol justitiae: veni, et illumina sedentes in tenebris, et umbra mortis. (Christian Prayer: The Liturgy of the Hours. Catholic Book Publishing Co. New York, NY; 1976, 130)

Here is my understanding of the O Oriens antiphon:

This is the O Antiphon that should make people aware of the “ad Orientem” liturgical custom of the Eastern and Latin Rites. I wrote a paper on this topic three years ago, but it is much too long to post here. Please click HERE for a brief explanation of the O Oriens antiphon and the ad Orientem custom:

The O Oriens antiphon of December 21st tells us that our Risen Lord is Light whom we must turn to through conversion at all times to obliterate the darkness within us which is sin so that we may gain salvation, that is, eternal life in Heaven at the particular and general judgments for “just as the natural Sun gives light and life to all upon whom its rays fall, so Christ, the Rising Dawn, dispels darkness and brings eternal life and light.” (Twelve Days of Christmas Kit. Grailville Writing Center. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1955. Excerpt on-line. Available from http://www.catholicculture.org/lit/activities/view.cfm?id=542) The logical question that follows from this is, “But what is the meaning of ad Orientem and how is it associated with the O Oriens antiphon?”

Ad Orientem is a phrase that derives from the Latin oriens meaning "the rising sun," "the East" or "the dawn" with the preposition "ad" expressing the direction "toward" or "to," hence "eastward" or "toward the East". (“Celebration of Mass Ad Orientem in a Parish Setting" By Father Timothy V. Vaverek, S.T.D.)

This is precisely why, for example, during the Traditional Latin Mass or "Extraordinary Form" of the Latin Rite the priest and the people face the same direction, toward the East. Some modern liturgists wrongly interpret this to mean that the priest "turns his back" to the people when, in fact, both priest and people are united as a people of prayer by praying toward one direction. But why toward the East and not toward the north or south or west or maybe toward all four directions during Mass?

The East is the place of the rising of the Sun and the Sun in many verses in sacred Scripture is regarded as a symbol of Divine Light. For example, Psalm 19:5-6, “The Sun, which comes forth like a bridegroom leaving his chamber” is a Christological verse that Saint Augustine and Saint Jerome believed symbolized Jesus who disperses the light and warmth of His grace throughout the world. (Calmet) And Malachi 4:2 is another verse representing cosmic symbolism with a definite notion of Christological typology: “But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of Righteousness arise with healing in his wings…” Zachariah 14:4 also speaks of our Blessed Lord and the symbolism of the East direction: “And his feet shall stand that day upon the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east.” Ezekiel saw "the glory of the God of Israel coming from the east" and it "entered the Temple by the gate facing east." (Ezekiel 43:4) Interestingly, in the Old Testament, God Himself is called “the East” in Zachariah 6:12: “The Orient (that is, ‘East’) is His name.”

The concept of Divine Light and Eastern “directionalism” is continued in the New Testament. In the Transfiguration on Mount Tabor, as was prophesied in the Old Testament, it is recorded that Jesus’ face "shone like the Sun" (Matthew 17:2). Symbolically, the Sun is a symbol of Jesus who is the Light of the World (John 8:12) as opposed to Satan who represents the power of darkness (Colossian 1:13). In the New Testament, the East is the same direction to which Christ ascended from the Mount of Olives when He ascended to Heaven after His death and resurrection (Acts 1:9-12) and it is this same Eastern direction from where He will return at the Second Coming (Acts 1:11). Jesus Himself said, "As the lightning comes from the east so will be the coming of the Son of man" (Matthew 24:27). The very last book of the Bible, the Book of Revelation or Apocalypse, says the Angel of the Lord will also come from the East at the end of time. He will be "ascending from the rising of the Sun" (Revelation 7:2). Earlier in the Book of Revelation, it is mentioned that when Jesus returns His face will be like "the Sun shining in full strength." (Revelation 1:16) and this is why in the early Church praying toward the East and the rising Sun was liturgically and theologically important because Jesus is the Sun of justice who ascended to the East and whose second coming and final judgment will begin from the direction of the East.

In the early Church, the Christians during that time were mostly converts from Judaism and so the ad Orientem direction of prayer was something that was quite familiar to them because in the Jewish tradition it was believed that the garden of Eden was located in the East and represented an earthly paradise made by God (see the Book of Genesis). Traditionally, Jews pray toward Jerusalem (Muslims pray toward Mecca). The early Christians, however, turned toward the East for theological or eschatologically different reasons because of Christ’s Ascension toward the East which points to the Heavenly realm and His Second Coming which will commence from the East. (Msgr. Klaus Gamber. Reform of the Roman Liturgy: Its Problems and Background. Fort Collins: Roman Catholic Books; 1993, 162)

This tradition in the Church of liturgical "directionalism" was also emphasized in the writings among many popular saints throughout the early Church. For example, St. Augustine:

"When we rise to pray, we turn East, where heaven begins. And we do this not because God is there, as if He had moved away from the other directions on earth …,but rather to help us remember to turn our mind towards a higher order, that is, to God." (Msgr. Klaus Gamber. Reform of the Roman Liturgy: Its Problems and Background. Fort Collins: Roman Catholic Books; 1993, 80)

A couple of centuries later, the eastern Church Father, Saint John Damascene (A.D. 675-749), also emphasized in one of his writings the ad Orientem custom when wrote:

"At His ascent into Heaven He went to the East, and so do the Apostles pray to Him; He will come again as the Apostles saw Him going, and so the Lord Himself says: 'As the lightening comes forth from the East and shines even to the West, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be.' Since we wait for Him, we pray toward the East. This is the unwritten tradition of the Apostles." (St. John Damascene. De fide Orthodoxa. IV, 12. PG 94:1136)

It is proper through the ad Orientem posture to recall the resurrection and to anticipate the coming of our Lord, the Sun of justice, who will come again in glory from the East to judge the living and the dead. We can and should do this by turning toward Him in worship 'ad Orientem' during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass lest we forget the indictment the Lord made through the prophet Jeremiah when he said: “They have turned their backs to me, and not their faces” (Jeremiah 2:27).

2009 All Rights Reserved. Kevin D. Dello Iacono.

ObamaCare is Evil! Oppose ObamaCare!

2009-08-14T09:50:00.013-04:00

While abortion and euthanasia are not explicitly mentioned in the health care bill, H.R. 3200, the bill does contain culture of death buzzwords and phrases that will lead to the sanctioning of the culture of death through the guise of "health care reform". Yes, our opponents are right when they say the bill does not bluntly state anything about abortion or euthanasia, but they are being completely dishonest because the bill, in fact, endorses these evils through carefully worded statements that are aimed to mislead and to persuade politicians and the general public.

The following video explains my point well using documented evidence from the bill itself,

American Life League Video: Obamacare: Abortion's Trojan Horse

Concerning The Murder of Late-Term Abortionist George Tiller

2009-05-31T16:44:00.028-04:00

I am deeply saddened over today's murder of late-term abortionist George Tiller (NEWS). My thoughts and prayers are with him and his family.

We still do not know the motive behind this terrible tragedy so it would be entirely wrong to claim that this was committed by a frustrated pro-life advocate until more information is released by the police.

Nevertheless, the pro-life movement does not favor the killing for any reason! We seek the conversion and not the killing of those whom we hope and pray will be won over by our love and by the love of Jesus as has happened with many former abortion providers and pro-abortionists like Dr. Bernard Nathanson (co-founder of NARAL) and Norma McCorvey (the "Jane Roe" of Roe vs. Wade) who are now pro-life. For a few examples, click here and here.

We as pro-lifers believe that God does not desire the death of the sinner, but that he repent and live (Ezekiel 18:32; 33:11). The most perfect way to understand this is through the Parable of the Prodigal Son (also known as the Parable of the Forgiving Father: Luke 15).

We do not fight violence with violence or murder with murder. We are committed to fighting the culture of death through prayer and through education. We are a movement that promotes the love and forgiveness of Jesus, the Divine physician, who came not to call the righteous or the just, but sinners who are in need of repentance (Mark 2:16-17; Luke 5:31-32). This has been the constant message of pro-lifer leaders and advocates for decades. Please read: Priests for Life Declaration on Non-Violence.

It is wrong for people who oppose pro-lifers to use this as an opportunity to accuse us with the false sweeping generalization that "pro-lifers" are prone to acts of violence. It is a well documented fact that "pro-choicers" commit more acts of violence compared to pro-lifers: Evidence.

Finally, as I stated earlier, I will keep George Tiller and his family in my thoughts and prayers. My heart is saddened for them as they face this tragedy. May they find joy and peace in the love and forgiveness of our Blessed Lord and Savior Christ Jesus.

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

Additional observations:

Some claim that Tiller's murderer was just in what he did because of Tiller's history as a late-term abortionist. Such reasoning seems to be valid and sound on the surface. After all, how can we as a nation that supposedly stands for moral justice look the other way while a "doctor" literally rips apart babies during the latter stage of pregnancy? The man who killed Tiller believed he was committing a moral act of justice because he was acting against a person who was involved in the grave evil of killing very young persons who have both body and soul as we do.

However, as St. Paul says, we may not do evil even if good comes from it (Romans 3:8). A good end does not justify an evil means. I also believe that the principal of double effect does not apply to yesterday's incident because one of the principles says that an act must not be bad in itself. The late Cardinal John O'Connor explains this well in the following essay. I strongly recommend everyone to read it: Cardinal O'Connor Addresses The Reason Why The Killing Of Abortionists Is Wrong.

Here is another very good article on this subject:

"Can The Killing Of Abortionists Be Justified?" by Dr. Charles E. Rice

Yesterday's incident does not hide the fact that abortion-on-demand is a grave evil and pro-lifers do not condone grave evil of any kind, including abortion and infanticide. It is really that simple. The abortion industry with help from the mainstream media are opportunists who are currently using yesterday's incident to demonize all pro-lifers. As a matter of fact, NARAL went further by encouraging the government to immediately act against us as a "terrorist threat"! These pro-abort organizations and their friends in the government are no different than the Gestapo. Their rhetoric is shameful and disgusting.

I am also disgusted over the way Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life has been treated by pro-abortionists on youtube which seems to be dominated by the lowest element of the human race. After he posted a response to yesterday's incident, all of the pro-aborts came out of the woodwork to attack Father with ongoing vile and slanderous comments. They have no credibility because they keep committing the logical fallacy called an "abusive ad hominem". They even have a nerve to bring up the false stereotype that priests are pedophiles and so Fr. Pavone has no credibility to address moral issues. In that case, teachers should not teach in our schools since studies show that sexual abuse takes place in the educational system far more frequently compared to the priesthood! CLICK HERE for a detailed special report on this subject.

They even bring up the false claim that the Church has only been opposed to abortion in recent years or that the Church is not concerned with other injustices.

Where did they receive their education in Church history? From Nancy Pelosi? The Catholic Church has always opposed abortion since her founding. It is a long established teaching held among the early Christians and the Early Church Fathers. But it was condemned even before the Church's founding!

1. Pre-Christian Sources

2. The Didache: The Lord's Instruction to the Gentiles through the Twelve Apostles (1st century)

The Didache is the earliest known Christian document that condemns abortion. It is the oldest source of Ecclesiastical law and, after the New Testament, the first Christian catechism. It condemns both abortion and infanticide.

3. Quotes from Early Councils

4. Quotes from the Early Church Fathers

Have they also not read or listened to any of the Popes who have raised concern about other important issues? For nearly thirty years of his pontificate, Pope John Paul II addressed human rights abuses throughout the world. He gave long addresses and wrote at length on this subject. Mother Teresa brought attention to the plight of the homeless in third world countries and elsewhere. The Church has established care centers for persons with HIV and AIDS. The Saint Vincent de Paul Society continues to feed the poor and care for the homeless along with Catholic Relief Services. Bishop Tobin of the Diocese of Providence, Rhode Island created the annual 'Keep the Heat On' campaign, a program that assists people in need of heat during cold weather in Rhode Island. Charity is the foremost principle of the Knights of Columbus. In 2005, they gave $136 million directly to charity and performed over 63.2 million man hours in voluntary service and care for people suffering with disabilities.

The Church has also condemned recent wars and unjust acts of violence in various regions throughout the world. But abortion is considered the most evil of all evils because it is far more gruesome and numerous "in kind and number". As Pope Benedict XVI stated when he was heading the CDF as Cardinal Ratzinger:

“Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia…While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.” (July 2004 Letter to Cardinal McCarrick, 3)

Related News:

Tiller's Killer Not Affiliated With Pro-Life Groups

Newsbusters: How Long Will It Take Media To Tag Tiller Murderer As Not Part of Prolife Movement?

The American Catholic: Obama Demonizes Pro-lifers With Reckless Rhetoric

Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights: The Politics of Tiller's Death

---------

What about the rhetoric of abortion? When will the likes of Obama, Holder and other government officials come to their senses and fight against the horror of abortion? At least pro-lifers are trying to create a culture of life whereas Obama and friends are doing all they can to build up a culture of death by supporting abortifacients, abortion, infanticide, assisted suicide and euthanasia along with the destruction of traditional marriage.

The preborn human persons who are killed through abortion on a daily basis in this so-called "morally just nation" are victims in need of love and compassion and not destruction. The problem with abortion is the fact that a veil has been placed over the issue. People were able to react to horror to 9-11 because they were able to witness it in person or on television. What would happen if abortion was finally seen by the public? We already have technology that shows the unborn live and in color: New Pro-Life Video Features Latest 4-D Ultrasound "Window to the Womb". They even ignore the scientific evidence that life or personhood begins at the moment of conception and not suddenly at some later stage such as birth: See What Is A Person?; and, Dialogue with an Abortion Supporter/li>.

The mainstream media and the government continue to cover-up the facts concerning abortion and the gruesome truth of what actually happens when the preborn are destroyed through abortion: See America Will Not Reject Abortion Until America Sees Abortion!; and, Former Abortionist Dr. Anthony Levatino Demonstrates An Abortion Procedure; and, The Hidden Truth video ***Viewer discretion is advised for this video.*** This is the hard truth about what abortion truly is.

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

Remember this?

"Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life Receives Post-Election Death Threat"

Did Obama and other prominent liberal politicians express concern for Fr. Pavone and other pro-life leaders who have received death threats from culture of death fanatics? The answer is, unfortunately, NO. Obama has never raised any concern for pro-life leaders who are victims of hate mail, death threats and acts of violence because he is obsessed with an agenda that promotes the culture of death business.

I am very worried for Fr. Pavone. I am uncomfortable over the kind of feedback he has received over the youtube videos he has posted during the past couple of days. They are disgusting, angry, violent and hate filled messages that just proves how they, the enemies of life, are the ones who are in dire need of the peace of Christ in their lives because the only thing they know and accept at this time are the deceptions and malice of Satan.

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

Current articles concerning Tiller and the aftermath of his death:

1. Abortion Proponents “Exploit” Tiller Killing, Label Pro-Life Advocates “Domestic Terrorists”

LINK

2. Commentary on June 1 News Reports - Hate-Mongering From Abortion Supporters Begins in Reaction to Tiller Shooting

LINK

3. Scapegoating O'Reilly

LINK

4. Liberals Blame O'Reilly for Tiller Murder, Silent on Military Recruiter Shooting

LINK

5. Recollections of a Taxi Cab Ride with Abortionist George Tiller

LINK

6. Population Research Institute Decries Murder of Tiller

LINK

7. Catholic Bishops Condemn Tiller Slaying

LINK

8. Number One Stupid and Irresponsible Comment On "Dr." Tiller

LINK

9. "Dr." Tiller and his SPOOKY Abortion Mill ...

LINK

10. UK, American, Canadian Pro-Life Groups Condemn Tiller Murder

LINK

11. Luhra Tivis: Former Abortion Clinic Staffer—Testimony of former Tiller employee Luhra Tivis, who quit the abortion business and became pro-life

LINK

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

Hear Tiller's Voice and Fr. Frank Pavone's Response‏

Brothers and Sisters,

[I invite you to read the following statement I released yesterday, and also to listen to some chilling audio from George Tiller and to watch and comment on a new You Tube video at the links below. – Fr. Frank Pavone]

The pro-life leadership has gone out of its way - and rightly so - to condemn the violence that took the life of abortionist George Tiller on Sunday. I join with those voices, as I always have done, that declare that the end never justifies the means, and that violence has no place in the effort to end abortion.

I have been asked what I think the biggest negative effect of this killing will be on our pro-life movement. Does it tar the movement's reputation? Yes, it does, despite the fact that those who kill abortionists are always disconnected from pro-life organizations. Does it make the government reach too far in clamping down on First Amendment activity against abortion? Yes, it does and it will.

But those are not the biggest dangers.

The biggest danger is the enemy within. It is the fear and self-doubt to which we can all too easily fall victim. It is the voice inside that makes us feel guilty for saying "Abortion is murder" or "Abortion is a holocaust" or "The babies who are being killed need to be defended now." It is the fear inside that keeps us from going out to the abortion mills and intervening to save the children scheduled to be killed there each day.

The biggest danger is that some will listen to those in the pro-abortion movement who try to lay blame for violence on us and who, as one person wrote on my blog, think that saying "Abortion is murder" should be prosecuted because it leads to violence against abortionists.

The Church teaches us that we have to look evil in the eye. John Paul II, in "The Gospel of Life", said that we have to call evil by its proper name. This is no time to shrink back from the reality of what is going on every day in abortion. Children are being killed, and the reason it continues is that too many of our fellow citizens are blind to it.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, in his Letter from the Birmingham Jail, responded to criticisms that the civil rights activists were fomenting violence. No, he said. That's like saying the person who owns money is fomenting the activity of the robber. To expose the violence that is already occurring, to call it what it is, and to sound the alarm that it has to stop, is not to foment violence.

The pro-life movement is a movement of non-violence. As Ghandi and Dr. King taught, and as we teach, non-violence is not passivity, and it is not obscurity. It is a force. It is a clear and strong response against violence, in whatever form that violence takes.

Let the outcry against Tiller's murder be loud and clear. And let the outcry against the murders he committed - and that other abortionists commit -- be loud and clear as well.

Click below to hear Dr. Tiller's words to prospective abortion clients. Notice, he makes no attempt to deny that this is a baby, and offers the parents the opportunity to view their dead baby and say goodbye with religious and other rituals. (06:43)

LINK

If you have trouble opening the link above, go to LINK

Please watch and comment on Fr. Frank’s You Tube video:

LINK

WARNING FROM CATHOLIC BLOG: some of the comments made by anti-Catholic youtube users are personal attacks against Fr. Pavone. They are vile, disgusting and slanderous. These members should be immediately banned by youtube for their actions which clearly violate youtube's user guidelines.

Additional note: Luhra Tivis Warren, who once worked at the Tiller abortion business, gave her testimony at a public conference of former abortion providers sponsored by the Pro-Life action League in Chicago on April 3, 1993. She described the crematorium on the premises which George Tiller used to burn the bodies of his victims, which included babies even in the third trimester of pregnancy. She states, "I could smell the babies burning."

Fr. Frank Pavone
National Director, Priests for Life and Gospel of Life Ministries

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

Unfortunately, the Spirit Daily article that I linked to above removed a link to a web-page showing a mother who terminated her baby in Tiller's abortuary after her baby was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis. The photos show her cuddling the gruesomely aborted infant on a bed with flowers and a picture of Jesus. Spirit Daily decided to remove the link "because it is simply too upsetting." I disagree with Spirit Daily's decision. People need to see the truth when it comes to the abomination of abortion and infanticide. People were horrified over the World War II holocaust after they viewed photos, videos or witnessed in person the victims. People were horrified after they viewed photos, videos or witnessed in person the terrorist attacks on 9-11 and people will not become aware of the evil of abortion and infanticide until they see this tragedy before their very eyes unless they are completely deranged and without conscience.

Here is the link: Wichita Memorial

WARNING: the page that I linked to above contains graphic material. Click on the link if you are willing to see and learn the truth about the tragedy of abortion and infanticide through words and pictures. It should be noted that the mother has repented and is now pro-life. Her letter expressing her guilt and regret is included on the web-page.

According to Saint Basil the Great...

2009-05-19T19:15:00.014-04:00

"It is necessary to confess our sins to those [Catholic priests] to whom the dispensation of God's mysteries is entrusted. Those doing penance of old are found to have done it before the saints. It is written in the Gospel that they confessed their sins to John the Baptist [Matthew 3:6], but in Acts [19:18] they confessed to the apostles."
(Rules Briefly Treated. A.D. 374), 288.

Top Vatican Official Condemns University of Notre Dame's Poor Decision To Award Pro-Culture of Death President Obama

2009-05-08T14:24:00.007-04:00

CLICK HERE to read story.

More articles:

1. 68 U.S. Bishops Oppose Notre Dame's "Serious Mistake"

2. Archbishop Chaput: Habit of "Vanity and Compromise" Led to ND Scandal

3. Fr. Corapi, Cardinal Newman Society Launch Prayer Campaign for Notre Dame "Travesty" on National Day of Prayer

The Church Teaches....

According to the U.S. Bishops 2004 statement on Catholics in Political Life, “The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.”

The Bishops have every right to raise concern over Notre Dame's decision concerning Obama because....

“Bishops have a particular responsibility to promote Catholic universities, and especially to promote and assist in the preservation and strengthening of their Catholic identity, including the protection of their Catholic identity in relation to civil authorities.” (Ex Corde Ecclesiae, no. 28)

Key websites:

1. Notre Dame Scandal

2. N.D. Protest

The Catholicity of the Church By Saint Francis de Sales

2009-05-04T07:23:00.005-04:00

That great Father, Vincent of Lerins, in his most useful Memorial, says that he must before all things have a great care to believe "that which has been believed by all [always and everywhere]" ... (1) such as the jugglers and tinkers; for the rest of the world calls us Catholic; and if we add Roman, it is only to inform people of the See of that Bishop who is general and visible Pastor of the Church. And already in the time of S. Ambrose to be Roman in communion was the same thing as being Catholic.

But as for your church, it is called everywhere Huguenot, Calvinist, Heretical, Pretended, Protestant, New, or Sacramentarian. Your church was not before these names, and these names were not before your church, because they are proper to it. Nobody calls you Catholics, you scarcely dare to do so yourselves. I am well aware that amongst you your churches call themselves Reformed, but just as much right to that name have the Lutherans, and Ubiquitarians, Anabaptists, Trinitarians, and other offshoots of Luther, and they will never yield it to you. The name of religion is common to the Church of the Jews and of the Christians, in the Old Law and in the New; the name of Catholic is proper to the Church of Our Lord; the name of Reformed is a blasphemy against Our Lord, who has so perfectly formed and sanctified his Church in his blood, that it must never take other form than of his all lovely Spouse, of pillar and ground of truth. One may reform the nations in particular, but not the Church or religion. She was rightly formed, change of formation is called heresy or irreligion. The tint of Our Savior’s blood is too fair and too bright to require new colors.

Your church, then, calling itself Reformed, gives up its part in the form which the Savior had established. But I cannot refrain from telling you what Beza, Luther, and Peter Martyr think on this. Peter Martyr calls you Lutherans, and says you are brothers to them; you are then Lutherans; Luther calls you Zwinglians (2) and Sacramentarians; Beza calls the Lutherans Consubstantiators and Chymists, and yet he puts them in the number of Reformed churches. See then the new names which the reformers acknowledge for one another. Your church, therefore, not having even the name of Catholic, you cannot with a good conscience say the Apostles’ Creed; if you do, you judge yourselves, who, confessing the Church Catholic and universal, obstinately keep to your own, which most certainly is not such. If S. Augustine were living now, he would remain in our Church, which from immemorial time is in possession of the name of Catholic.

THE TRUE CHURCH MUST BE ANCIENT, THE CATHOLIC

CHURCH IS MOST ANCIENT, THE PRETENDED QUITE NEW.

The Church to be Catholic must be universal in time, and to be universal in time it must be ancient; antiquity then is a property of the Chruch. And in relation to heresies it must be more ancient than any of them, and must precede all, because, as Tertullian excellently says: (3) "Error is a corruption of truth, truth then must precede." The good seed is sown first, the enemy who oversows cockle comes afterwards. Moses was before Abiron, Dathan, and Core; the Angels were before the devils; Lucifer stood in the light before he fell into the eternal darkness; the privation must follow the form. S. John says of heretics (I Ep. xix. 19): They went out from us; they were then within before they went out; the going out is heresy, the being within is fidelity; the Church then precedes heresy. So the coat of Our Lord was made whole before it was divided. And although Ismael was before Isaac, that does not signify that error was before truth, but that the true shadow, Judaism, was before the body, Christianity, as S. Paul says (Gal. iv.)

Tell us now, I pray you, – quite the time and place when and where our Church first appeared after the Gospel? – the author and doctor who called it together. I will use the very words of a doctor and martyr of our age, (4) and they are worthy of close attention.

"You own to us, and would not dare to do otherwise, that for a time the Roman Church was holy, Catholic, Apostolic. Certainly then, when it deserved those holy praises of the Apostle (Rom. i. xv. xvi.): Your faith is spoken of in the whole world... I make a commemoration of your always... I know that when I come to you I shall come in the abundance of the blessing of the gospel of Christ... All the Churches of Christ salute you... For your obedience is published in every place; then, when S. Paul, in prison free, sowed the Gospel; when S. Peter was governing the Church assembled in Babylon; when Clement, so highly praised by the Apostle, was stationed at the rudder; when the profane Caesars, like Nero, Domitian, Trajan, Antoninus, were massacring the Bishops of Rome; yea and then also when Damasus, Siricius, Anastasius, and Innocent were holding the Apostolic helm: this on the testimony of Calvin himself, for he freely confesses that at that time they had not yet strayed from the Evangelic doctrine. Well then, when was it that Rome lost this widely renowned faith? When did it cease to be what it had been? – at what time? – under what bishop? – by what means? – by what force? – by what steps did the strange religion take possession of the City and of the whole world? – what protest, what troubles, what lamentations did it evoke? How? – was everybody asleep throughout the whole world, while Rome, Rome I say, was forging new Sacraments, new Sacrifices, and new doctrines? Is there not to be found one single historian, either Greek or Latin, friend or stranger, to publish or leave behind some traces of his commentaries and memoirs on so great a matter?"

And, in good truth, it would be a strange hap if historians, who have been so curious to note the most trifling changes in cities and peoples had forgotten the most noteworthy of all those which can occur, that is, the change of religion in the most important city and province of the world, which are Rome and Italy.

I ask you, gentlemen, whether you know when our Church began the pretended error. Tell us frankly; for it is certain that, as S. Jerome says, (5) "to have reduced heresy to its origin is to have refuted it." Let us trace back the course of history up to the foot of the cross; let us look on this side and on that, we shall never see that this Catholic Church has at any time changed its aspect — it is ever itself, in doctrine and in Sacraments.

We have no need against you, on this important point, of other witnesses than the eyes of our fathers and grandfathers to say when your pretended Church began. In the year 1517 Luther commenced his Tragedy: in ‘34 and ‘35 they composed an act in these parts; Zwingle and Calvin were the chief players in it. Would you have me detail by list with what fortune and deeds, by what force and violence, this reformation gained possession of Berne, Geneva, Lausanne, and other towns – what troubles and woes it brought forth? You will not find pleasure in this account; we see it, we feel it. In a word, your Church is not yet eighty years old; its author is Calvin; its result the misery of our age. Or if you would make it older, tell us where it was before that time. Beware of saying it existed but was invisible; — for if it were not seen who can say that it existed? Besides, Luther contradicts you, who confesses that in the beginning he was quite alone.

Now, if Tertullian already in his time bears witness that Catholics refuted the errors of heretics by their posteriority and novelty, when the Church was only in her youth — "we are wont," says he (6), "to prescribe against heretics, for brevity’s sake, on the argument of posteriority" — how much more right have we now? And if one of the Churches must be the true, this title falls to ours which is most ancient; and to your novelty the infamous name of heresy.

THE TRUE CHURCH MUST BE PERPETUAL.

OURS IS PERPETUAL, THE PRETENDED IS NOT.

Although the Church might be ancient, yet it would not be universal in time if it had failed at any period. The heresy of Nicolaites is ancient but not universal, for it only lasted a very little while. And as a whirlwind which seems ready to displace the sea then suddenly is lost in itself, or as a mushroom, which is born of some noxious vapor in a night, appears and in a day is gone, — so every heresy, ancient as it may be, has at last disappeared, but the Church endures perpetually. (7)

I will say to you, as I have said above: show me a decade of years since Our Lord ascended into heaven in which decade our Church has not existed. The reason why you find yourselves unable to say when our Church began is that it has always existed. And if you would care to make yourselves honestly clear about this, Sanders in his Visible Monarchy, and Gilbert Genebrard in his Chronology would furnish you light enough, and particularly the learned Caesar Baronius in his Annals. But if you are not willing all at once to abandon the books of your masters, and have not your eyes blinded with too excessive a passion, you will, if you look closely into the Centuries of Magdebourg, see everywhere nothing but the actions of Catholics; for, says very well a learned man of our age, if they had not collected these there they would have left one thousand five hundred years without history. I will say something on this point afterwards.

Now, as to your Church, — let us suppose its lie to be truth, that it was in the time of the Apostles; it will not on that account be the Catholic Church, for the Catholic Church must be universal in time: she must the always continue. But, tell me, where was your Church a hundred, two hundred, three hundred years ago? Point it out you cannot, for it did not exist: therefore it is not the true Church. It existed, some one will perhaps say to me, but unknown. Goodness of God! Who cannot say the same? — Adamite, Anabaptist, everybody will take up this argument. I have already shown that the Church militant is not invisible; I have shown that she is universal in time; I will show you that she cannot be unknown.

THE TRUE CHURCH OUGHT TO BE UNIVERSAL IN PLACES AND PERSONS. (8)

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THUS UNIVERSAL, THE PRETENDED IS NOT

The universality of the Church does not require that all provinces or missions receive the Gospel at once, it is enough that they do so one after another; in such sort, however, that the Church is always seen, and is always known as that which has existed throughout the whole world or the greater part thereof; so that one may be able to say: Come let us go up into the mountain of the Lord. (Is. ii. 3). For the Church shall be as the sun, says the Psalm, and the sun is not always shining equally in all countries: enough if by the end of the year there is no one who can hide from its heat. (Ps. xviii.) So will it suffice that by the end of the world Our Lord’s prediction be fulfilled, that it behoves that penance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. (Luke. ult.).

Now the Church in the time of the Apostles everywhere spread forth its branches, covered with the fruits of the Gospel, as S. Paul testifies (Rom. i.) S. Irenaeus says the same of his time, (9) speaking of the Roman or papal Church, to which he will have all the rest of the Church subject on account of its superior authority.

Prosper speaks of our Church, not yours, when he says: (10) "In the pastoral honor, Rome, see of S. Peter, is head of the universe, which she has not reduced to her dominion by war and arms, but has acquired by religion." You see clearly that he speaks of the Church, that he acknowledged the Pope of Rome as its head. In the time of S. Gregory there were Catholics everywhere, as may be seen by the Epistles which he wrote to the bishops of almost all nations. In the time of Gratian, Valentinian and Justinian, there were everywhere Roman Catholics, as may be seen by their laws. S. Bernard says the same of his time; and you know well that it was so in the time of Godfrey de Bouillon. Since then, the same Church has come to our age, ever Roman and papal. So that even if our Church now were much less that it is, it would not cease to be most Catholic, because it is the same Roman Church, which has been ,and which has possessed all the provinces of the nations, and peoples without number: — but, it is still now extended over the whole world; in Transyvlania, Poland, Hungary, Bohemia, and throughout all Germany; in France, in Italy, in Sclavonia, in Candia, in Spain, Portugal, Sicily, Malta, Corsica, in Greece, in Armenia, in Syria, and everywhere.

Shall I add to the list the Eastern and Western Indies? He who would have a compendium of these must attend a general Chapter or assembly of the Religious of S. Francis, called Observantines. He would see Religious arrive from every quarter of the world, Old and New, under the obedience of a simple, lowly, insignificant man: so that these alone would be enough for the Church to fulfil that part of the prophecy of Malachy (i.): In every place there is sacrifice... to my name.

On the contrary, gentleman, the pretenders pass not the Alps on our side, nor the Pyrenees on the side of Spain; Greece knows you not; the other three parts of the world do not know who you are, and have never heard of Christians without sacrifice, without altar, without head, without cross, as you are; in Germany your comrades the Lutherans, Brentians, Anabaptists, Trinitarians, eat into your portion; in England the Puritans, in France the Libertines; — how then can you be so obstinate, and continue thus apart from the rest of the world, as did the Luciferians and Donatists? I will say to you, as S. Augustine said to one of your fellows: (11) "Be good enough, I beseech you, to enlighten us on this point; — how it can be that Our Lord has lost his Church throughout the world, and has began to have none save in you alone." Surely you reduce Our Lord to too great a poverty, says S. Jerome. (12) But if you say your church was already Catholic, in the time of the Apostle, show us that it existed at that time, for all the sects will say the same.how will you graft this little scion of pretended religion on that holy and ancient stock? Make your church touch by a perpetual continuation the primitive Church, for if they touch not, how can the one draw sap from the other. But this you will never do, unless you submit to the obedience of the Catholic [Church], you will never be, I say, with those who shall sing (Apoc. v. 9): Thou has redeemed us in thy blood, from every tribe and tongue, and people and natoin, and hast made us a kingdom to our God.

THE TRUE CHURCH MUST BE FRUITFUL. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

IS FRUITFUL, THE PRETENDED BARREN.

Perhaps you will say, at last, that after a time your church will spread its wings, and will become Catholic by process of time; but this is talking in the air. For if an Augustine, a Chrysostom, an Ambrose, a Cyprian, a Gregory, and that great multitude of excellent pastors, have not been able to manage well enough to prevent the Church from tumbling over soon after their time, how [shall] Calvin, Luther, and the rest [do so]? What likelihood is there that it should grow stronger now, under the charge of your minsters, who neither in sanctity nor in doctrine are comparable with those? If the Church in its spring, summer, and autumn has not been fruitful, how would you have one gather fruits from it in winter? If in its youth it has made no progress, how far would you have it run in its old age?

But I say further; your church is not only not Catholic, but never has been, not having the power nor the faculty of producing children, but only of stealing the offspring of others, as the partridge does. And yet it is certainly one of the properties of the Church to be fertile; it is for that, amongst other reasons, that she is called Dove. And if her Spouse, when he would bless a man, makes his wife fruitful, like a fruitful vine on the sides of his house (Ps. cxxvii.), and makes the barren woman to dwell in a house, the joyful mother of many children (Ps. cxii.), ought he not himself have a bride who should be fruitful, yea, according to the holy Word (Is. liv.), this desolate one should have many children, this new Jerusalem should be most populous, and have a great generation. The Gentiles shall walk in thy light, says the Prophet (Ib. lx.), and kings in the glory of thy rising. Lift up thy eyes round about and see; all these are gathered together, they are come to thee: thy sons shall come from afar, and thy daughters shall rise up at thy side: and (liii.): because his soul hath laboured ... therefore will I distribute to him very many. Now this fertility and these great nations of the Church come principally by preaching, as S. Paul says (I Cor. iv. 15): In the Gospel I have begotten you. The preaching, then, of the Church ought to be as a flame: Thy word is fiery, O Lord (Ps. cxviii. 140). And what is more active, lively, penetrating, and more quick to alter and give its form to other matters than fire?

Such was the preaching of S. Augustine in England, of S. Boniface in Germany, of S. Patrick in Ireland, of Willibrord in Frisia, of Cyril in Bohemia, of Adalbert in Poland, of Stephen in Hungary, of S. Vincent Ferrer and John Capistran; such the preaching of (13) .... Francis Xavier, and a thousand others, who have overturned idolatry by holy preaching; and all were Roman Catholics.

On the contrary, your ministers haven to yet converted any province from paganism, nor any country. To divide Christendom, to create factions there, to tear in pieces the robe of Our Lord, is the effect of their preachings. Christian doctrine is as a gentle rain, which makes unfruitful soil to bring forth; theirs rather resembles hail, which beats down and destroys the harvests, and makes barren the most fertile lands. Take notice of what S. Jude says: Woe to them who ... have perished in the gainsaying of Core (Core was a schismatic); these are spots in their banquets, feasting together without fear, feeding themselves, clouds without water which are carried about by the wind: — they have the exterior of the Scriptures, but they have not the interior moisture of the Spirit: — unfruitful tree of the autumn, — which have not the leaves of the letter nor the fruit of the inner meaning; twice dead — dead to charity by schism, and to faith by heresy; plucked up by the roots, unable any more to bear fruit; — raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own confusion — of disputes, contests and violent changes; wandering stars, — which can serve as guides to no one, and have no firmness of faith but change about it in every direction. What wonder then that your preaching is sterile? You have but the bark without the sap, and how would you have it germinate? You have only the sheath without the sword, the letter without the meaning; no wonder you cannot uproot idolatry. So S. Paul, (14) speaking of those who separate from the Church, protests that they shall advance no further. If then your church can in no way style itself Catholic up to this present, still less can you hope it may do so afterwards, since its preaching is so feeble, and its preachers have never undertaken, as Tertullian says, (15) the business or commission "of converting the heathens, but only of perverting our own." Oh what a church, then which is neither one, nor holy, nor Catholic, and, which is worse, can have no reasonable hope whatever that it will ever become so.

1. There is an hiatus in the MS. Here. In the earlier part of the broken sentence the Saint has apparently been saying that Catholics are called Romans by the lower orders. [Tr.]

2. This word and one or two other names in this sentence cannot be certainly made out. The argument is not effected. [Tr.]

3. De Praesc. xxix.

4. Campion, Decem Rationes, 7.

5. Adv. Lucif. 28.

6. De Praesc. xxx. Seqq.

7. Here occurs a passage on the perpetuity of the Church, which has already appeared, in somewhat fuller form, in Part I. chaps. ix., x. The reader is referred to these chapters and to the Preface. [Tr.]

8. This passage on the universality of the Church is the same as Part I. c. xi.; see previous note. [Tr.]

9. iii. 3.

10. De Igratis. 40.

11. Contra Don.

12. Contra Lucif.

13. There are four or five words here in the MS. Which we fail to make out. There is some indication of the names of (S.) Louis Bertrand, and Anchieta, the others appear to be Henrye and Lorier. [Tr.]

14. 2 Tim. iii. 9.

15. De Praesc. xlii.

"Jesus Wasn’t Always Nice" by Bishop Thomas J. Tobin

2009-04-06T15:31:00.005-04:00

From Bishop Tobin's "WITHOUT A DOUBT" weekly series in the Rhode Island Catholic.

Posted Mar 26, 2009

Jesus wasn’t always nice. I had to remember that in responding to some letters I received from readers who were disappointed by my recent article, My Interview with President Obama. Some folks didn’t like the rhetorical device I employed, namely the fictional interview I composed. Others felt that I was too hard on the President when I criticized him for using tax dollars to fund abortion overseas. They said that I was not being charitable as Jesus would have been.

For example, one letter writer complained that I presented the President as a clown. “I resent the insult to our President,” she said. One of my fans from Ohio wrote, “Wow! The venom really drips on this [column] . . . Easy to blast away from the comfort and security of your cemetery hermitage . . . What did you expect to accomplish?” And a third instructed me that “the Bible teaches us to love and pray for our enemies and to turn the other cheek and not attack them . . . Charity is patient and kind. It is not arrogant or rude.”

First I should note that I am seldom offended by people criticizing the things I’ve written. Inspiring healthy dialogue in the Church is one of the goals of my columns. I hope, though, that critics can always distinguish between my personal opinions and the essential teachings of the Church which, as Catholics they are obliged to accept.

I do find it intriguing, though, that the critics of the Obama column were more offended by my writing than the fact that the President is using their tax dollars to destroy unborn children. (And now to engage in the destruction of human embryos in stem cell research.) But it still seems to me that if the President’s anti-life actions don’t stir up moral outrage in you, nothing will; if they don’t offend your conscience, you need a conscience transplant, my friend.

The other premise of my critics seems to be that because we are Christians we should never be angry or challenge others. We should always be charitable, tolerant, kind and nice, they suggest. After all, isn’t that what Jesus would do?

Well, in fact, no. The Gospels are very clear that in confronting moral evil Jesus wasn’t at all nice or kind. We usually think of Jesus as a prophet of peace, and indeed He was. But His preaching also created bitter controversy and division. “I have come to set the earth on fire . . . Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division.” (Lk 12: 49, 51)

Think of Jesus cleansing the Temple, an incident recorded in all four Gospels. Jesus entered the Temple angrily, confronted the merchants and money-changers, made a whip out of cords, drove them away and upset their tables and booths. Doesn’t sound too charitable to me!

Jesus railed against the towns of Chorazin, Bethsaida and Capernaum for their lack of faith, and predicted a terrible judgment day for those towns. “You will go down the netherworld,” He warned. (Mt 11: 23) Doesn’t sound too charitable to me!

And of course there’s Jesus’ withering condemnation of the Scribes and Pharisees. He repeatedly called them hypocrites. He described them as “blind guides . . . whitewashed tombs . . . serpents . . . brood of vipers . . . and murderers.” (Cf. Mt, Chapter 23) Doesn’t sound too charitable to me!

There are other examples, but you get the point. In confronting moral evil, Jesus wasn’t nice, kind, gentle and sweet. He lived in a rough and tumble world and He took His message to the streets. He was a fearless prophet who spoke the truth sometimes with harsh and angry language. Jesus’ condemnations infuriated public officials and religious leaders, so much so that they were determined to kill Him. And indeed they did.

In using condemnatory language was Jesus being “uncharitable?” Of course not. It was precisely because He loved people, because He was concerned for their salvation, that He spoke the truth, that He condemned their immoral, sinful behavior.

And that should be the mission of the Church today. Sometimes as Catholics we’re hesitant to challenge the immoral behavior of others, including public officials, because we don’t want to appear judgmental or uncharitable. Our society urges us to be “tolerant” of other people and their behavior, even if it’s objectively wrong. But it’s precisely because we love others that we should never tolerate immoral behavior. As Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver has written so well, “Tolerance is not an end in itself, and tolerating or excusing grave evil in a society is itself a grave evil . . . And it is not a Christian virtue.” (Render Unto Caesar, p. 145-146)

If the language in my article about President Obama’s funding of abortions seemed harsh and offensive, so be it. It has nothing to do with my personal attitude about the man. Admittedly I’m not a fan, but as I’ve written before, I pray for him and his fine family and I wish him well. As a religious leader, though, charged with carrying on the prophetic mission of Christ, I have the right, and in fact the duty, to challenge his immoral actions. I do so because Christian charity requires me to do so, because I love my country and I believe in the sanctity of human life. As St. Paul said, “Woe to me if I do not preach the Gospel.” (I Cor 9:16)

Link to Original

Sacraments Cheat Sheet

2009-03-06T15:55:00.012-05:00

7 Sacraments

Baptism, Original Sin

* Gen 2:16-17 - the day you eat of that tree, you shall die
* Gen 3:11-19 - God's punishment for eating of the tree
* Rom 5:12-19 - many became sinners through one man's sin
* 1 Cor 15:21-23 - by a man came death; in Adam all die
* Eph 2:1-3 - we all once lived in the passions of our flesh

Infant Baptism

* Jn 3:5; Mk 16:16 - baptism required for entering heaven
* 1 Cor 15:21-22 - in Adam, all die; in Christ all made alive
* Mk 10:14 - let children come; to such belongs the kingdom
* Lk 18:15 - people were bringing even infants to him ...
* Col 2:11-12 - baptism has replaced circumcision
* Jos 24:15 - as for me and my house, we will serve Lord
* Mt 8:5ff - servant healed because of centurion's faith
* Mt 15:21ff - daughter healed because of Canaanite women's faith
* Lk 7:1f - just say the word, and let me servant be healed
* Acts 16:31 - believe in Lord Jesus you and house will be saved
* Acts 16:15 - she was baptized, with all her household
* Acts 16:33 - he and all his family were baptized at once
* 1 Cor 1:16 - I baptized the household of Stephanas
*

Regenerative Baptism

* Jn 3:5, 22 - born of water and Spirit; Apostles begin baptizing
* Tit 3:5 - saved us thru bath and rebirth and renewal by Holy Spirit
* Acts 2:37-38 - repent, be baptized, receive gift of Holy Spirit
* Acts 22:16 - give selves baptized and sins washed away
* 1 Cor 6:11 - you were washed, sanctified, justified
* Rom 6:4 - baptized into death; live in newness of life
* 1 Pet 3:21 - baptism now saves you
* Heb 10:22 - heart sprinkled, bodies washed in pure water

Confirmation

* Acts 19:5-6 - Paul imposed hands on baptized and received the Holy Spirit
* Acts 8:14-17 - laid hands upon them, they received Holy Spirit
* 2 Cor 1:21-22 - put seal on us and given Holy Spirit in our hearts
* Eph 1:13 - you were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit
* Heb 6:2 - instruction about baptism and laying of hands

Confession

* Mt 9:2-8 - Son of Man authority to forgive sins
* Jn 20:23 - whose sins you forgive are forgiven, whose sins you retain are retained
* Jn 20:22 - Jesus breathed on them and received the Holy Spirit (see Gen 2:7)
* 2 Cor 5:17-20 - ministry of reconciliation given to us
* James 5:13-15 - prayer of presbyters forgives sin
* Jam 5:16 - confess your sins to one another
* Mt 18:18 - whatever you bind and loose on earth, so it is in heaven
* 1 Jn 5:16 - there is sin that is not deadly

Anointing of the Sick

* Mk 6:12-13 - anointed with oil many sick, cured them
* James 5:14-15 - presbyters pray over sick, anoint, sins forgiven

Holy Orders

* Acts 20:28 - Holy Spirit appointed you overseers, to tend church
* Lk 22:19 - do this in memory of me
* Jn 20:22 - As the Father has sent me, I send you...receive the Holy Spirit
* Acts 6:6 - the apostles prayed and laid hands on them
* Acts 13:3 - they laid hands on them and sent them off
* Acts 14:22 - they appointed presbyters in each church
* 1 Tim 4:14 - gift received thru laying of hands
* 2 Tim 1:6 - gift of God you have thru imposition of hands
* Tit 1:5 - appoint presbyters in every town, as I directed you

Matrimony

* Mt 19:5-6 - leave father and mother, join wife and two become one in flesh
* Mk 10:7-12 - what God joined together, no man can separate
* Eph 5:22-32 - union of man and wife image of Christ and Church
* Heb 13:4 - let marriage be honored among all

Communion, Real Presence

* Jn 6:35-71 - Eucharist is promised. Note how when the Jews understand Jesus literally Jesus does not explain, he says the same thing over again. He also does not stop the crowd for misunderstanding him when they leave.
* Mt 26:26ff (Mk 14:22ff, Lk 22:17ff) - Eucharist instituted
* 1 Cor 10:16 - Eucharist is the participation in Christ's body and blood
* 1 Cor 11:23-29 – Paul’s account of the Last Supper with additional information; receiving unworthily, you are guilty of his body and blood
* Ex 12:8, 46 - Paschal lamb had to be eaten
* Jn 1:29 - Jesus is called Lamb of God
* 1 Cor 5:7 - Jesus called paschal lamb who has been sacrificed
* Jn 4:31-34; Mt 16:5-12 - Jesus talking symbolically about food
* 1 Cor 2:14-3:4 - explains what "the flesh" means in Jn 6:63
* Ph 14:4; Is 9:18-20; Is 49:26; Mic 3:3; 2 Sm 23:15-17; Rev 17:6, 16 - to symbolically eat and drink one's body and blood

SOURCE

Why do Catholics confess their sins to a priest?

2009-03-04T13:01:00.005-05:00

Please click on the photo of the confessional to listen to a two minute explanation by Catholic apologist John Martignoni on why Catholics confess their sins to a priest.

On Retreat with Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen (Topic: Confession)

2009-02-25T08:49:00.001-05:00

Youtube videos:

Confession (Part 1) - Archbishop Fulton Sheen

Confession (Part 2) - Archbishop Fulton Sheen

Confession (Part 3) - Archbishop Fulton Sheen

Confession (Part 4) - Archbishop Fulton Sheen

Everything You Wanted to Know about Lent by Father Francis J. Peffley

2009-02-25T07:45:00.012-05:00

What is Lent? Historically, Lent is the 40-day period before Easter, which the Church uses to prepare for the celebration of our Lord Jesus Christ’s Resurrection on Easter Sunday.

When does Lent begin? Lent begins on Ash Wednesday, which is the day on which the faithful have their foreheads signed with ashes in the form of a Cross. It ends at noon on Holy Saturday. The 40 days excludes the five Sundays of Lent.

Why do Catholics have their foreheads marked with a cross on Ash Wednesday? Because in the Bible a mark on the forehead is a symbol of a person's ownership. By having their foreheads marked with the Sign of a Cross, this symbolizes that the person belongs to Jesus Christ, Who died on a Cross. This is in imitation of the spiritual mark or seal that is put on a Christian in Baptism, when he is delivered from slavery to sin and the Devil, and made a servant of righteousness and Christ (Romans 6:3-18). It is also in imitation of the way the righteous are described in the book of Revelation: "Do not harm the earth or the sea or the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God upon their foreheads." (Revelation 7:3)

Why is the signing done with ashes? Because ashes are a biblical symbol of mourning and penance. In Bible times the custom was to fast, wear sackcloth, sit in dust and ashes, and put dust and ashes on one's head. While we no longer normally wear sackcloth or sit in dust and ashes, the customs of fasting and putting ashes on one's forehead as a sign of mourning and penance have survived to this day. These are two of the key distinctions of Lent. In fact, Ash Wednesday is a day not only for putting ashes on one's head, but also a day of fasting.

Is there another significance to the ashes? Yes. They also symbolize death and so remind us of our mortality. Thus when the priest uses his thumb to sign one of the faithful with the ashes, he says, "Remember, that thou art dust and unto dust thou shalt return," which is modeled after God's address to Adam (Genesis 3:19; Job 34:15; Psalm 90:3; Psalm 104:29, Ecclesiastes 3:20). This also echoes the words at a burial, "Ashes to ashes; dust to dust," which is based on God's words to Adam and Abraham's confession, "I am nothing but dust and ashes" (Genesis 18:27). It is thus a reminder of our mortality and our need to repent before this life is over and we face our Creator.

Where do the ashes used on Ash Wednesday come from? They are made by burning palm fronds which have been saved from the previous year's Palm Sunday, they are then blessed by a priest -- blessed ashes having been used in God's rituals since the time of Moses (Numbers 19:9-10, 17).

Why are ashes from the previous year's Palm Sunday used? Because Palm Sunday was when the people rejoiced at Jesus' triumphal entrance to Jerusalem. They celebrated His arrival by waving palm fronds, little realizing that He was coming to die for their sins. By using palms from Palm Sunday, it is a reminder that we must not only rejoice of Jesus' coming but also regret the fact that our sins made it necessary for Him to die for us in order to save us from Hell.

Why are Sundays excluded from the reckoning of the forty days? Because Sunday is the day on which Christ rose, making it an inappropriate day to fast and mourn our sins. On Sunday we must celebrate Christ's Resurrection for our salvation. It is Friday on which we commemorate His death for our sins. The Sundays of the year are days of celebration and the Fridays of the year are days of penance.

Why is Lent forty days long? Because 40 days is a traditional number of discipline, devotion, and preparation in the Bible. Moses stayed on the Mountain of God 40 days (Exodus 24:18, 34:28), Elijah traveled 40 days before he reached the cave where he had his vision (1 Kings 19:8), Nineveh was given 40 days to repent (Jonah 3:4), and most importantly, prior to undertaking His ministry, Jesus spent 40 days in the wilderness praying and fasting (Matthew 4:2). He also spent 40 weeks in His mother's womb.

Since Lent is a period of prayer and fasting, it is fitting for Christians to imitate their Lord with a 40-day period. Christ used a 40-day period of prayer and fasting to prepare for His ministry, which culminated in His death and resurrection, and thus it is fitting for Christians to imitate Him with a 40-day period of prayer and fasting to prepare for the celebration of His ministry's climax, Good Friday (His crucifixion) and Easter Sunday (His Resurrection).

Thus the Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "'For we have not a High Priest Who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but One Who in every respect has been tested as we are, yet without sinning' [Hebrews 4:15]. By the solemn forty days of Lent the Church unites herself each year to the mystery of Jesus in the desert." (CCC 540).

Why are the forty days called Lent? They are called Lent because that is the Old English word for Spring. Not just because it is the season of the year during which it falls, but because Lent is the Church’s Springtime during which we start fresh. This is something unique to English. In almost all other languages, Lent’s name is a derivative of the Latin term, Quadragesima, or "the forty days."

What is a day of Fast and Abstinence? Under current canon law in the Western Rite of the Church, a day of Fast is one on which Catholics who are eighteen to sixty years old are required to keep a limited fast. In this country, one may eat a single, normal meal and have two snacks, so long as these snacks do not add up to a second meal. Children are not required to fast, but their parents must ensure they are properly educated in the spiritual practice of fasting. Those with medical conditions requiring a greater or more regular food intake can easily be dispensed from the requirement of fasting by their pastor. A day of Abstinence is a day on which Catholics fourteen years or older are required to abstain from eating meat (under the current discipline in America, fish, eggs, milk products, and condiments or foods made using animal fat are permitted in the Western Rite of the Church, though not in the Eastern Rites.) Again, persons with special dietary needs can easily be dispensed by their pastor.

Is there a biblical basis for abstaining from meat as a sign of repentance? Yes. The book of Daniel states:

"In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia . . . 'I, Daniel, mourned for three weeks. I ate no choice food; no meat or wine touched my lips; and I used no lotions at all until the three weeks were over.'" (Daniel 10:1-3)

By giving up good things and denying them to ourselves we encourage an attitude of humility, free ourselves from dependence on them, cultivate the spiritual discipline of being willing to make personal sacrifices, and remind ourselves of the importance of spiritual goods over earthly goods. Since the Catholic Church only requires abstinence from meat on a temporary basis, it clearly does not regard meat is immoral. Instead, it regards it as the giving up of a good thing (which in less economically developed regions -- including the whole world until very recently -- was expensive and thus eaten at festive occasions, making it a sign of rejoicing) to attain a spiritual goal.

On what basis does the Church have the authority to establish days of Fast and Abstinence? On the authority of Jesus Christ Who told the Leaders of His Church, "Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in Heaven" (Matthew 16:19, 18:18). The language of binding and loosing (in part) was a Rabinnic way of referring to the ability to establish binding halakah or rules of conduct for the faith community. To approach the issue from another angle, every family has the authority to establish particular family devotions for its members. Thus if the parents decide that the family will engage in a particular devotion at a particular time (say, Bible reading after supper), it is a sin for the children to disobey and skip the devotion for no good reason. In the same way, the Church as the family of God has the authority to establish its own family devotion, and it is a sin for the members of the Church to disobey and skip the devotions for no good reason (though of course if the person has a good reason, the Church dispenses him immediately).

In addition to Ash Wednesday, are any other days during Lent days of Fast or Abstinence? Yes. All Fridays during Lent are days of Abstinence. Also, Good Friday, the day on which Christ was crucified, is another day of both Fast and Abstinence. All days in Lent are appropriate for fasting or abstaining, but canon law does not require fasting on those days. Such fasting or abstinence is voluntary, like a freewill offering.

Why are Fridays during Lent days of abstinence? This is because Jesus died for our sins on Friday, making it an especially appropriate day of mourning our sins (just as Sunday, the day on which He rose for our salvation is an especially appropriate day to rejoice) by denying ourselves something we enjoy. During the rest of the year Catholics in this country are permitted to use a different act of Penance on Friday in place of Abstinence, though all Fridays are days of Penance on which we are required to do something expressing sorrow for our sins, just as Sundays are holy days on which we are required to worship and celebrate God's great gift of salvation.

Are acts of repentance appropriate on other days during Lent? Yes. Thus the Code of Canon Law states:

"All Fridays through the year and the time of Lent are Penitential days and time throughout the universal Church" (CIC 1250).

What are appropriate activities for ordinary days during Lent? Giving up something we enjoy for Lent, doing physical or spiritual Acts of Mercy for others, Prayer, Fasting and Abstinence, attention to our duties, and going to Confession and other acts expressing repentance in general.

Why are Acts of Repentance appropriate at this time of year? Because it is the time leading up to the commemoration of Our Lord's death for our sins and the commemoration of His Resurrection for our salvation. It is thus especially appropriate to mourn the sins for which He died. Humans have an innate psychological need to mourn tragedies, and our sins are tragedies of the greatest sort. Due to our fallen nature, humans also have a need to have set times in which to engage in behavior (which is why we have Sundays as a set time to rest and worship, since we would otherwise be likely to forget to devote sufficient time to rest and worship), it is appropriate to have set times of Repentance. Lent is one of those set times.

Is the custom of giving up something for Lent mandatory? No. However, it is a good and beneficial custom, and parents or caretakers may choose to require it of their children to encourage their spiritual training, which is their prime responsibility in the raising of their children.

Since Sundays are not counted in the forty days of Lent, does the custom of giving up something apply to them? Customarily, no. However, since the giving up of something is voluntary to begin with, there is no official rule concerning this aspect of it. Nevertheless, since Sundays are days of celebration, it is appropriate to suspend the Lenten self-denial on them, in a spiritual and non-excessive way, we may celebrate the day of Our Lord's Resurrection so that that day and that event may be contrasted with the rest of the days of Lent and the rest of the events of history. This heightened contrast deepens the spiritual lessons taught by the rest of Lent.

Why is giving up something for Lent such a good and beneficial custom? By denying ourselves something we enjoy, we discipline our Wills so that we are not slaves to our pleasures. Just as indulging the pleasure of eating leads to physical flabbiness and, if this is great enough, an inability to perform in physically demanding situations, indulging in pleasure in general leads to spiritual flabbiness and, if this is great enough, an inability to perform in spiritual demanding situations, we when the demands of morality require us to sacrifice something pleasurable (such as sex before marriage or not within the confines of marriage) or endure hardship (such as being scorned or persecuted for the faith). By disciplining the Will to refuse pleasures when they are not sinful, a Habit is developed which allows the Will to refuse pleasures when they are sinful. There are few better ways to keep one's priorities straight than by periodically denying ourselves things of lesser priority to show us that they are not necessary and focus our attention on what is necessary.

Is the denying of pleasure an end in itself? No. It is only a means to an end. By training ourselves to resist temptations when they are not sinful, we train ourselves to reject temptations when they are sinful. We also express our sorrow over having failed to resist sinful temptations in the past.

Is there such a thing as denying ourselves too many pleasures? Most definitely. First, God made human life contingent on certain goods, such as food, and to refuse to enjoy enough of them has harmful consequences. For example, if we do not eat enough food it can cause physical damage or (in the extreme, even death). Just as there is a balance between eating too much food and not eating enough food, there is a balance involved in other goods. Second, if we do not strike the right balance and deny ourselves goods God meant us to have then it can generate resentment toward God, which is a spiritual sin just as much as those of engaging in excesses of good things. Thus one can be led into sin either by excess or by defect in the enjoyment of good things. Third, it can decrease our effectiveness in ministering to others. Fourth, it can deprive us of the goods God gave us in order that we might praise Him. Fifth, it constitutes the sin of ingratitude by refusing to enjoy the things God wanted us to have because He loves us. If a child refused every gift his parent gave him, it would displease the parent, and if we refuse gifts God has given us, it displeases God because He loves us and wants us to have them.

Aside from Ash Wednesday, which begins Lent, what are its principal events? There are a variety of saints' days which fall during Lent, and some of these change from year to year since the dates of Lent itself change based on when Easter falls. However, the Sundays during the Lenten season commemorate special events in the life of Our Lord, such as His Transfiguration and His Triumphal Entrance into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, which begins Holy Week. Holy Week climaxes with Holy Thursday, on which Christ celebrated the first Mass, Good Friday, on which He was Crucified, and Holy Saturday -- the last day of Lent -- during which Our Lord lay in the Tomb before His Resurrection on Easter Sunday, the first day after Lent.

QUINQUAGESIMA SUNDAY

2009-02-22T14:02:00.006-05:00

Short Sermons On The Gospels
by Rev F. Peppert
(Joseph F. Wagner. New York. 1914)
Nihil Obstat: Remegius Lafort DD., Censor
Imprimatur: John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.
New York, August 12, 1914

A blind man sat by the wayside begging,
St. Luke 18: 35.

St. Gregory tells us that we ought to consider our Saviour's miracles, not only so as to acquiesce in the truth of the facts recorded, but also so as to regard them as types of other higher truths.

Thus in to-day's gospel we think with admiration of our Lord's mercy and power in restoring sight to the blind man, but at the same time we learn to regard the man suffering from physical blindness as a type warning us against spiritual blindness. The gospel teaches us to avoid the latter, since it makes us incapable of seeing what tends to our eternal salvation, blind to the guidance of those desirous of helping us, blind to everything that does not flatter our own self will and sensual inclinations, blind to the truth, to duty and to heaven.

"A blind man sat by the wayside begging."

All theologians refer these words to the misery of spiritual blindness; especially St. Francis of Sales has chosen these words as representing vividly the intense wretchedness of a spiritually blind soul. A blind man is in a pitiable state; he sees none of the natural objects around him; sky and earth are adorned with all God's wonderful works, but he cannot see them, cannot, like those who have sight, be roused to admiration and delight by the contemplation of their beauty.

When Tobias became blind, he described his sad condition in words that call forth our sympathy, saying: "What manner of joy shall be to me, who sit in darkness and see not the light of heaven?" This literal blindness typifies spiritual blindness and ignorance. The most important truths concerning our salvation are concealed from one who is spiritually blind, and he understands nothing of them. "Blind men of this sort," says an old author, "do not see God above them who will judge them, nor Satan before them, who will drag them down, nor death behind following them, nor hell below awaiting them."

Be grateful for the opportunities given you by God in His goodness, of raising the eye of your minds straight to the light of the true faith, the knowledge of what conduces to your salvation. Pray that God may enlighten your hearts and minds more and more with His light; beg Him never to let your hearts grow blind to faith, hope and charity. The blind will never see Jesus, and it is only if, by no fault of our own, we have passed our lives here in blindness, that we shall nevertheless behold Him in everlasting light.

A blind man sat by the wayside. The fact that he sat indicates the inability of the spiritually blind to do anything meritorious. "What else could he do?" says St. Francis of Sales, "or where should he go? He had no alternative but to sit idle, dirty, despised and a burden to himself. In the same way the spiritually blind are devoid of good works and are habitually entangled in sins, laden like prisoners with fetters." The Christian who has faith and spiritual sight, who looks up to Jesus and makes good use of every hour of his life, striving to do everything for love of God, stamps all his works, even the most trivial, with the mark of merit, but the spiritually blind man wastes his time, doing nothing to secure his salvation, for what he does is done merely from some worldly motive, and not through faith and love of God, and therefore it gives him no claim upon heaven. At the end of his life he might as well have done nothing; he is like the servant who buried his talent in the earth and won no merit, hence, when he dies, he appears before his Judge empty-handed.

Let the love of God guide you in all your works, for it is the light without which we can earn no merit for eternity. As St. Paul says in to-day's epistle: "If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal" (1 Cor. 8: 1).

Nothing is of any good unless we love God. Say often in your hearts: "All for love of Thee, O God!"

The blind man sat by the wayside. Jesus said: "I am the way," but the spiritually blind man is on a different road from that indicated by our Lord, for he is in unbelief or sin, and sits by the way on which the fleeting things of earth appear of the utmost importance. In the Book of Wisdom we have a description of the spiritually blind who lament saying: "We have erred from the way of truth, and the light of justice hath not shined unto us, and the sun of understanding hath not risen upon us. We wearied ourselves in the way of iniquity and destruction, and have walked through hard ways, but the way of the Lord we have not known" (v. 6 – 7). May you never have cause to utter such a lamentation! Avoid the first step off the path of faith and goodness. The hour when a man in his blindness turns away from Jesus is the saddest in all his life. In vain does he deceive himself, thinking: "I shall soon come back; I am taking only a little step." At the very beginning of the wrong path a sort of glamour lays hold upon us, leading us further and further astray. Our feet are entangled in cunningly laid snares, and it is only when the evil one is practically sure of his prey that the fascination vanishes, and all the attractive things around us are revealed in their true colours, all the friendly faces appear to be hideous masks, and the garlands adorning the paths of sin prove to be scourges.

The right way is far distant, scarcely visible though bright and clean, and the wanderer thinks it a hopeless undertaking to return to it. Whence shall a soul, weakened by sin, derive courage enough to find it? She has for a long time in her folly rejected the grace of God; — will she now have confidence enough to rely upon this grace? Above all things fear the first step on the wrong road.

A blind man sat by the wayside begging.

St. Francis of Sales remarks that blind people are generally so situated that they are poor and forced to ask alms of others. The spiritually blind, however, are weighed down by much more distressing poverty, and we may apply to them what St. John says in the Apocalypse: "Thou sayest: 'I am rich and made wealthy and have need of nothing,' and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable and poor and blind and naked" (3: 17). If you give yourselves up to unbelief and sin, you may possess all the riches in the world, and still be poor and worthy of pity. He alone is rich whose heart is rich; and the man who is spiritually blind is poor; his soul is poor in God's grace; his imagination is poor in thoughts of a glorious future; his memory is poor in the remembrance of good works; his will is poor in good resolutions to do right; and his heart is poor in Divine love and heavenly comfort.

He begs the world for true peace of heart, and the world passes him by, flinging him some paltry alms; worldly pleasures go by, giving him perhaps a fleeting hour of amusement; worldly honors go by, and give him money that satisfies the eyes, but not the heart. Now and then the blind man is happy, but, just as the little coins flung to a beggar are soon spent, so the trifling joys afforded by earth may for a moment deaden the pain of his heart, but can never give it lasting peace.

Peace will come only when he cries: "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy upon me." Therefore, do you also cry earnestly: "Jesus, Son of David, Light of the World, I will be faithful to Thee until death, may I never lose my sight, and never live in such a way as that the sorrowful words: 'A blind man sat by the wayside begging,' may be applicable to me." Amen.

An Excerpt From Pope Leo XIII's Encyclical 'Sapientiae Christianae'

2009-02-03T10:54:00.008-05:00

SAPIENTIAE CHRISTIANAE

ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII
ON CHRISTIANS AS CITIZENS

14. But in this same matter, touching Christian faith, there are other duties whose exact and religious observance, necessary at all times in the interests of eternal salvation, become more especially so in these our days. Amid such reckless and widespread folly of opinion, it is, as We have said, the office of the Church to undertake the defense of truth and uproot errors from the mind, and this charge has to be at all times sacredly observed by her, seeing that the honor of God and the salvation of men are confided to her keeping. But, when necessity compels, not those only who are invested with power of rule are bound to safeguard the integrity of faith, but, as St. Thomas maintains: "Each one is under obligation to show forth his faith, either to instruct and encourage others of the faithful, or to repel the attacks of unbelievers."(12) To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe. In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind. This kind of conduct is profitable only to the enemies of the faith, for nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good. Moreover, want of vigor on the part of Christians is so much the more blameworthy, as not seldom little would be needed on their part to bring to naught false charges and refute erroneous opinions, and by always exerting themselves more strenuously they might reckon upon being successful. After all, no one can be prevented from putting forth that strength of soul which is the characteristic of true Christians, and very frequently by such display of courage our enemies lose heart and their designs are thwarted. Christians are, moreover, born for combat, whereof the greater the vehemence, the more assured, God aiding, the triumph: "Have confidence; I have overcome the world."(13) Nor is there any ground for alleging that Jesus Christ, the Guardian and Champion of the Church, needs not in any manner the help of men. Power certainly is not wanting to Him, but in His loving kindness He would assign to us a share in obtaining and applying the fruits of salvation procured through His grace.

CLICK HERE to read the entire encyclical.

Monsignor William B. Smith, S.T.D., has passed away at 69

2009-01-25T20:00:00.015-05:00

source

Monsignor William Smith, professor of moral theology at Saint Joseph's Seminary in Yonkers since 1971 and one of the leading Catholic voices in the U.S. on medical ethics, died yesterday at St. Joseph's Hospital in Yonkers.

Smith, 69, was a Yonkers native who grew up in St. Denis parish.

He was ordained a priest in 1966 and shortly thereafter was chosen by Cardinal Terence Cooke to pursue a doctorate in moral theology and return to teach at his hometown seminary.

Smith became a leading Catholic spokesman on issues like abortion, reproduction, euthanasia, stem-cell research and cloning.

A wake will be held tomorrow from 2-4 p.m. and 7-9 p.m. at the Saint Joseph's Seminary chapel, Seminary Avenue in Yonkers. The wake will continue from 2-4 p.m. on Tuesday.

A Mass of the Holy Eucharist will be celebrated at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday at the seminary. Bishop Gerald Walsh, rector of the seminary, will be the celebrant. The Rev. Donald Haggerty will be the homilist.

A Mass of Christian Burial will be celebrated at 10 a.m. Wednesday at Immaculate Heart of Mary Church, 8 Carman Road, in Scarsdale, where Smith had celebrated weekend Masses for many years. Cardinal Edward Egan will be the principal celebrant. Monsignor James O'Connor will be the homilist.

+ + +

A few more details concerning the passing of Msgr. Smith are provided by EWTN News. Click here

+ + +

Prayers

Pro defuncto nominatim
For a Deceased Man
(A prayer from the Roman Missal*)

INCLINA, Domine, aurem tuam ad preces nostras, quibus misericordiam tuam supplices deprecamur, ut animam famuli tui Monsignor William B. Smith., quam de hoc saeculo migrare iussisti, in pacis ac lucis regione constituas et Sanctorum tuorum iubeas esse consortem. Per Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen.

INCLINE Thine ear, O Lord, unto our prayers, wherein we humbly pray Thee to show Thy mercy upon the soul of Thy servant Monsignor William B. Smith., whom Thou hast commanded to pass out of this world, that Thou wouldst place him in the region of peace and light, and bid him be a partaker with Thy Saints. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.

*Taken from the Raccolta #600 (S. P. Ap., March 14, 1923 and June 24, 1936).

A prayer for a Priest who has passed away

O God, Thou didst raise Thy servant, Monsignor William B. Smith, to the sacred priesthood of Jesus Christ, according to the Order of Melchisedech, giving him the sublime power to offer the Eternal Sacrifice, to bring the Body and Blood of Thy Son Jesus Christ down upon the altar, and to absolve the sins of men in Thine own Holy Name. We beseech Thee to reward his faithfulness and to forget his faults, admitting him speedily into Thy Holy Presence, there to enjoy forever the recompense of his labors. This we ask through Jesus Christ Thy Son, our Lord. Amen.

Prayer excerpted from Schouppe, Father F.X., Purgatory: Explained by the Lives and Legends of the Saints. Rockford: TAN, 1991. "Appendix 3: Prayers for the Poor Souls", pp. 413-427. Imprimatur, Nihil Obstat.

+ + +

Note From Dr. William E. May on Msgr. Smith.

Sunday, January 25, 2009.

Link

Dear Father Connor,

Father William Smith, a great personal friend of mine, was not only a splendid moral theologian but also a warm, loving, giving person. During the Christmas holidays in 1980 my son Tom was injured in a car accident while coming home from college and was hospitalized near Dunwoodie. I called Father Smith who immediate went to visit him and pray for him before I could come. An example of his Christ like love. I and others will miss him. May he rest in peace.

Sincerely in our Lord,

William E. May

+ + +

John Mallon remembers Msgr. Smith

We have lost yet another great friend and great soldier in the battle for orthodoxy. The last of what I thought of as the great triumvirate of New York Monsignors: George Kelly, Michael Wrenn, and now William Smith. I was never an “official” member of the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars, of which they were among the founders, but I was always welcomed with warmth and affection at the few meetings I was blessed to attend, especially by these priests—true priests in every sense.

In honor of Monsignor Smith I present below an in-depth interview I conducted with him for the Sooner Catholic in 1995, of which I was then editor. Looking the text over, now, almost 14 years later, it is sad to see that the interview is as relevant today as it was then, if not more so.

It was for interviews such as these that I was kicked to the street from my job by dissident clergy, landing flat on my face. In the following years I took heart that Msgr. Smith was on our side. In phone calls with Monsignor Kelly, he, as a perceptive, compassionate, manly priest, would sense my discouragement and exclaim, “don’t be discouraged, we need you! We need you!”

Once when I called Msgr. Wrenn, he interrupted me saying, “I’ll send you $500!” Startled—because I didn’t call to ask for any money—though I need it badly—I said “Really?” and he said, “Well, we’ve got it! What’s your address?”

I also remember sitting at a table swapping war stories into the night after a Fellowship meeting with Fr. Joe Fessio, Jim and Helen Hitchcock, a then-obscure bishop from Washington state named Francis George, and Msgr. Smith. When someone related yet another egregious insult to the Truth, I noticed the fierce disgust and rage on Msgr. Smith’s face. I was impressed and comforted.

I could go on. I loved these three men, and now the last of them is gone from our sight. May they rest in peace and assist us now from on high. Imagine the welcome they received! Well done, good and faithful servants.

—John Mallon

January 25, 2009, Feast of the Conversion of St. Paul

Link

+ + +

Tim Reidy pays tribute to Msgr. Smith

Msgr. William B. Smith, R.I.P.
Posted at: 2009-01-26 10:38:00.0
Author: Tim Reidy

The New York church lost another distinguished priest this weekend. Just over a month after the death of Avery Cardinal Dulles, and two weeks after the passing Richard John Neuhaus, Msgr. William B. Smith died after a short hospitalization. Msgr. Smith was a longtime professor of moral theology at St. Joseph's Seminary in Yonkers, also known as Dunwoodie. He was a regular presence on EWTN, and can be seen here on YouTube speaking about "The Moral Magisterium of John Paul II."

I should also note Msgr. Smith was an old family friend who was on the altar when I was married and presided at the funeral of my brother. His homily on the latter occasion was a model of pastoral sensitivity and Scriptural insight and remains a source of comfort these many years later. May he rest in peace.

Link

+ + +

To read a testimony to this great priest and theologian by Brian Caulfield of the Knights of Columbus, To read a testimony to this great priest by Brian Caulfield of the Knights of Columbus, click here Click here.

+ + +

Articles, Audio, Video

"The Moral Magisterium of John Paul II" by Msgr. William B. Smith, S.T.D., (articles and a youtube video) Click Here

"Catholic Morality and the Catechism with Msgr. William Smith" (EWTN audio archives) Click Here

Keep the Faith's online catalog: Monsignor William Smith Click Here

1995 interview with Monsignor Smith by John Mallon on contraception and other moral issues. Click here

"Aquinas Held All Abortions A Grave Sin" (a letter to the editor (NewYork Times) in 1984 by Msgr. William B. Smith. Click here

'Together For Life' by Msgr. William. B. Smith -'Questions Answered' column of the 'Homiletic and Pastoral Review', Nov. 1994 issue, p. 70. A critique of Msgr. Joseph Champlin's widely used marriage preparation manual, 'Together For Life.' Click here

Pulpit Abuse by Msgr. William B. Smith

Newman and the Church on Conscience by Msgr. Smith

+ + +

Plays check this blog for regular updates on news and commentaries concerning Msgr. Smith, especially stories by people who personally knew him.

It's Official! SSPX Excommunications Have Been Removed

2009-01-24T10:24:00.006-05:00

Decree of the Congregation for Bishops

CONGREGATIO PRO EPISCOPIS

By way of a letter of December 15, 2008 addressed to His Eminence Cardinal Dario Castrillón Hoyos, President of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, Mons. Bernard Fellay, also in the name of the other three Bishops consecrated on June 30, 1988, requested anew the removal of the latae sententiae excommunication formally declared with the Decree of the Prefect of this Congregation on July 1, 1988. In the aforementioned letter, Mons. Fellay affirms, among other things: "We are always firmly determined in our will to remain Catholic and to place all our efforts at the service of the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ, which is the Roman Catholic Church. We accept its teachings with filial disposition. We believe firmly in the Primacy of Peter and in its prerogatives, and for this the current situation makes us suffer so much."

His Holiness Benedict XVI - paternally sensitive to the spiritual unease manifested by the interested party due to the sanction of excommunication and trusting in the effort expressed by them in the aforementioned letter of not sparing any effort to deepen the necessary discussions with the Authority of the Holy See in the still open matters, so as to achieve shortly a full and satisfactory solution of the problem posed in the origin - decided to reconsider the canonical situation of Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson, and Alfonso de Galarreta, arisen with their episcopal consecration.

With this act, it is desired to consolidate the reciprocal relations of confidence and to intensify and grant stability to the relationship of the Fraternity of Saint Pius X with this Apostolic See. This gift of peace, at the end of the Christmas celebrations, is also intended to be a sign to promote unity in the charity of the universal Church and to try to vanquish the scandal of division.

It is hoped that this step be followed by the prompt accomplishment of full communion with the Church of the entire Fraternity of Saint Pius X, thus testifying true fidelity and true recognition of the Magisterium and of the authority of the Pope with the proof of visible unity.

Based in the faculty expressly granted to me by the Holy Father Benedict XVI, in virtue of the present Decree, I remit to Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson, and Alfonso de Galarreta the censure of latae sententiae excommunication declared by this Congregation on July 1, 1988, while I declare deprived of any juridical effect, from the present date, the Decree emanated at that time.

Rome, from the Congregation for Bishops, January 21, 2009.

Card. Giovanni Battista Re
Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops

Available on the Vatican website in Italian. Click here

+ + +

Press Release by Bishop Fellay, Superior General of the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X

The excommunication of the bishops consecrated by His Grace Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, on June 30, 1988, which had been declared by the Congregation for Bishops in a decree dated July 1, 1988, and which we had always contested, has been withdrawn by another decree mandated by Benedict XVI and issued by the same Congregation on January 21, 2009.

We express our filial gratitude to the Holy Father for this gesture which, beyond the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X, will benefit the whole Church. Our Society wishes to be always more able to help the pope to remedy the unprecedented crisis which presently shakes the Catholic world, and which Pope John Paul II had designated as a state of “silent apostasy.”

Besides our gratitude towards the Holy Father and towards all those who helped him to make this courageous act, we are pleased that the decree of January 21 considers as necessary “talks” with the Holy See, talks which will enable the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X to explain the fundamental doctrinal reasons which it believes to be at the origin of the present difficulties of the Church.

In this new atmosphere, we have the firm hope to obtain soon the recognition of the rights of Catholic Tradition.

Menzingen, January 24, 2009

+Bernard Fellay

Link to original

+ + +

Bishop Fellay's letter to the faithful

Women Who Regret Their Abortions Will Speak Out at Upcoming March for Life

2009-01-22T08:04:00.004-05:00

By Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
January 21, 2009

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- The pro-life movement has a rich history of focusing not just on the death of an unborn child in an abortion but on the pain and regret millions of women fell following an abortion. Some of those women who wish they could undo their abortion decision and choose life will speak out again at this year's March for Life.

Members of the Silent No More Awareness Campaign, a network of men and women harmed by abortion, will give their personal abortion testimonies at Thursday's event.

They will join the hundreds of thousands of marchers in the nation's capital, but they will also be on hand in San Francisco, where more than 25,000 pro-life advocates from the western part of the nation are expected to gather for the Walk for Life West Coast.

“The Silent No More women and men have suffered years of torment because of abortion,” Janet Morana, co-founder of the group, told LifeNews.com.

"This week they will stand in front of the Supreme Court and on the streets of San Francisco to proclaim that the time for healing has begun," she explained. "To be pro-life is to be pro-woman. Everyone still locked in silence and shame can come forward and embrace new hope and peace.”

Georgette Forney, a keynote speaker at Saturday’s Walk for Life West Coast and a woman who regrets her own abortion decision, says those who speak out are not doing so to judge other women who are comfortable with their own abortions.

“We who oppose abortion do not oppose those who have had abortions; rather we embrace them with love,” she said.

At the same time, Forney wants to help women who may consider abortion in the future to understand the medical and mental health ramifications of such a choice. They can do that by sharing their own stories of regret, grief and both physical, spiritual and psychological scars.

“We who have lived with the pain and regret of abortion declare to our nation that abortion is unjust, cruel, and oppressive. If hope is truly to be restored, abortion must end," he said.

The public testimonies follow a group of new studies showing women suffer from a myriad of mental health complications following an abortion.

In December, Dr. Priscilla Coleman, a professor of Human Development and Family Studies at Bowling Green State University, and her colleagues published a study in the Journal of Psychiatric Research showing the abortion-mental health link exists.

The research team found induced abortions result in increased risks for a myriad of mental health problems ranging from anxiety to depression to substance abuse disorders.

The number of cases of mental health issues rose by as much as 17 percent in women having abortions compared to those who didn't have one and the risks of each particular mental health problem rose as much as 145% for post-abortive women.

For 12 out of 15 of the mental health outcomes examined, a decision to have an abortion resulted in an elevated risk for women.

"What is most notable in this study is that abortion contributed significant independent effects to numerous mental health problems above and beyond a variety of other traumatizing and stressful life experiences," they concluded.

A second study from December had researchers at Otago University in New Zealand reporting their findings in the British Journal of Psychiatry. They showed women who have abortions have an increased risk of developing mental health problems.

The study found that women who had abortions had rates of mental health problems about 30% higher than other women. The conditions most associated with abortion included anxiety disorders and substance abuse disorders.

Abortions increased the risk of severe depression and anxiety by one-third and as many as 5.5 percent of all mental health disorders seen in New Zealand result from women having abortions.

A third study, from a team at the University of Queensland and published in the December issue of the British Journal of Psychiatry, found women who have an abortion are three times more likely to experience a drug or alcohol problem during their lifetime.

The study showed that women who had experienced an abortion were at increased risk of illicit drug and alcohol use compared with women who had never been pregnant or who gave birth.

Since the launching of the Silent No More Awareness Campaign in 2003, 2,739 women and men have shared their testimonies publicly at over 325 gatherings in 44 states and seven countries.

Related web sites:
Silent No More Awareness Campaign

Please Pray For My Friend, Philip Gerard Johnson

2009-01-10T00:38:00.005-05:00

Please pray for one of the finest men to ever serve the Navy and our country, Philip Gerard Johnson, who is currently being treated for brain cancer. He is scheduled to enter the seminary next Fall. You can keep track of his progress by visiting his blog, In Caritate Non Ficta.

From Philip's blog, In Caritate Non Ficta:

"On October 15, 2008, after two years as an officer in the Navy, my life changed when I was diagnosed with an inoperable brain tumor. Putting my concerns in the hands of the Blessed Virgin Mary and my trust in Our Lord Jesus Christ, I pray that I may be faithful to the Holy Catholic Faith and serve the Church for the rest of my life."

When Does The Christmas Season Begin And End?

2008-12-27T14:29:00.010-05:00

If you go by the standards of the world, the Christmas season begins long before Thanksgiving Day and ends on Christmas Day. The radio stations in Rhode Island played Christmas season beginning in early November and returned to their normal programming format on Dec. 26. The stores are already removing their Christmas displays and are advertising gifts, including cards and candy boxes, for Saint Valentine's Day.

This begs the question: When does the Christmas season officially begin and end? Since it is a holy season established by the Catholic Church and concerns the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, Jesus who is the Logos, the Word made incarnate, then the answer can only be found in the Church's "General Norms for the Liturgical Year and the Calendar".

General Norms for the Liturgical Year and the Calendar

IV. Christmas Season

32. Next to the yearly celebration of the paschal mystery, the Church holds most sacred the memorial of Christ's birth and early manifestations. This is the purpose of the Christmas season.

33. The Christmas season runs from evening prayer I of Christmas until the Sunday after Epiphany or after 6 January, inclusive.

34. The Mass of the vigil of Christmas is used in the evening of 24 December, either before or after evening prayer I.

On Christmas itself, following an ancient tradition of Rome, three Masses may be celebrated: namely, the Mass at Midnight, the Mass at Dawn, and the Mass during the Day.

35. Christmas has its own octave, arranged as follows:

a. Sunday within the octave is the feast of the Holy Family;

b. 26 December is the feast of Saint Stephen, First Martyr;

c. 27 December is the feast of Saint John, Apostle and Evangelist;

d. 28 December is the feast of the Holy Innocents;

e. 29, 30, and 31 December are days within the octave;

f. 1 January, the octave day of Christmas, is the solemnity of Mary, Mother of God. It also recalls the conferral of the holy Name of Jesus.

36. The Sunday falling between 2 January and 5 January is the Second Sunday after Christmas.

37. Epiphany is celebrated on 6 January, unless (where it is not observed as a holyday of obligation) it has been assigned to the Sunday occurring between 2 January and 8 January (see no. 7).

38. The Sunday falling after 6 January is the feast of the Baptism of the Lord.
Link

+ + +

"The Church primarily celebrates Christmas from Christmas Day until the Solemnity of the Epiphany, which commemorates the manifestation of Christ as the Savior of the whole world (cf. Mt. 2:1-12). The Church has also traditionally celebrated Christmas for 40 days, culminating on the Feast of the Presentation a.k.a., ""candlemas" (Feb. 2). During this time, the birth of Christ is celebrated as one continuous festival. It is just as important to celebrate during the Christmas season as it is to prepare for Christ during Advent."
Link

+ + +

Since Pope John Paul II, the Nativity scene at the Vatican remains in Saint Peter's Square from Christmas Eve on Dec. 24 till the Feast of the Presentation on February 2.

Related topic...

The Liturgical Season of Advent by Fr. William Saunders

Excerpt:

"The liturgical season of Advent marks the time of spiritual preparation by the faithful before Christmas. Advent begins on the Sunday closest to the Feast of St. Andrew the Apostle (Nov. 30). It spans four Sundays and four weeks of preparation, although the last week of Advent is usually truncated because of when Christmas falls. (For instance, this year, the fourth Sunday of Advent is obviously on Sunday, and then that evening is Christmas Eve.)" Link

UPDATE: comments received concerning this post

Kristi Kille at 11:08am December 27
I celebrate the Birth of Christ all the way through the traditional date it ends---Feb. 2nd., Candlemas Day!! Most people don't know that that's the traditional ending of Christmas!!!

-----

Rebecca Mansergh Long at 11:42am December 27
Kristi, that's what I do too, but I need a source for the skeptics, do you have one?

-----

Kristi Kille at 12:13pm December 27
Hi, Rebecca. Perhaps this web site, that I just found, is a good source. It's definately interesting!!! http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/liturgicalyear/activities/view.cfm?id=787

God bless you!!!

-----

Laura G. Broussard at 12:23pm December 27
I'd never heard of Candlemas until a few days ago. We always celebrate Christmas until Twelfth Night (Epiphany), and that's when Mardi Gras starts!

-----

Kristi Kille at 12:39pm December 27
Candlemas Day is also the Feast of the Presentation of Jesus in the Temple and the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary. I don't think I've heard of Candlemas Day until within the last 15 years or so. It wasn't something I grew up with.

-----

Rebecca Mansergh Long at 2:52pm December 27
Thanks Kristi, here's another article on Candlemass you might like
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?topic=6150&post=21924&uid=2442495043#/topic.php?uid=2442495043&topic=6150

-----

Désirée Caron at 7:20pm December 27
At our house the nativity scene and wreaths stay up until Candlemas (Feb. 2nd--also my birthday!), although the tree comes down at the end of the Feast of the Epiphany.

-----
Krista Potter at 9:51pm December 27
I like that idea--January seemed like a drag, but not any more! Too bad my family won't go along with this. But I know that the real Von Trapp family did this (check out their liturgical celebrations book found in the EWTN document library!)

-----

Emily Eidem at 10:41pm December 27
"Candlemas is also the day that Christmas is put away, since this is the last day we see Christ as an infant in the Gospel reading." - from 'Celebrating the Faith in the Home - Advent and Christmas for the Christian Family' by Teresa Zepeda and Laurie Gill. This is a great spiral bound sourcebook. They also have one for the lent and Easter seasons. It's at http://www.emmanuelbooks.com/product_detail.cfm?ID=491

-----

Jessica A. Condon at 11:26pm December 27
I JUST started getting my family to leave things up until the Epiphany, lol! I always loved Christmas and celebrated it until Jan. 6th but my family is a bunch of scrooges! :oP

-----

Fatherhector Perez at 11:29pm December 27
Fr. Gueranger following Tradition says that there are 40 Days of Christmas. In Rome all churches keep up their Nativity Scenes till the day after Candlemas (Feb. 2). Since Poep John Paul Ii started having the outdoor Nativity scene, and especially now with Benedict XVI, all the nativity scenes in St. Peter's are kept up. The Presentation is the end of the Christmas cycle while the season after the Epiphany or "ordinary time" are part of the Easter cycle and just overlap but do not contradict each other. So enjoy the Octave, the Twelve Days till the Epihany, and the Forty Days of Christmas! We have to be counter cultural. I was enjoying awonderful Christmas concert on Dec. 25, ca. 11pm when all of the sudden my XM-Sirius radion cut offf to some sports station. The Christmas stations were all gone in a flick. SO now I listen to my CD's - till Candlemas, at least. Marry Christmas!

-----
Kristi Kille at 4:24pm December 28
Thank you, Rebecca, for the information!!! Thank you, also Father, for the info!!! God bless!!!

ON "LUTHER" AND "INDULGENCES"

2008-11-21T13:09:00.002-05:00

Taken and adapted from a article By David Goldstein LL.D, 1943.

A Jewish convert to Catholicism. Named a "Knight of St. Gregory" by Pope Pius XII in 1955.

One of the vicious impressions made upon the minds of non-Catholics , is that the Catholic Church sold indulgences during the 16th century, and so continues. The term indulgence always impressed this columnist as unfortunate; as it conveys to many minds the notion that it means the gratification of improper desires, the condoning of them; whereas the Catholic concept of the term is the direct opposite. The moral and historical use of the term indulgence by the Catholic Church, beng of a spiritual nature, permits not of improper thoughts or actions; nor does it forgive sins committed through improper thoughts or deeds. The definition of an indulgence, given in Webster's International Dictionary, which is Catholic, is as follows: "Remission of the temporal punishment due, by divine justice, for sins whose eternal punishment has been pardoned by the reception of the sacrament of penance."

The State acts with prisoners, in the granting of pardons, as the Church acts in the granting of indulgences. This is evidenced when a governor grants a parole. He remits the temporal punishment of the prisoner, by releasing him from captivity, yet his crime is not thus condoned. The Governor grants a pardon by the power of the State; whereas the Church grants indulgences by the power of the Keys; the authority to bind and to loose, which was conferred upon her by Jesus Christ (St. Matt. 16:13-20; and 18:17-18).

WHAT AN INDULGENCE IS AND IS NOT: An indulgence is a favor granted by Christ through His Church.

An indulgence is not self-indulgence, for that is a sin.

An indulgence is the fruit of self denial, the effect or reward of it,-in labor, prayer, alms, charity, deeds, etc.

An indulgence cannot be bought or sold; it can only be gained by the person who fulfills the moral requirements of the Church; the person who does the works enjoined.

An indulgence is of no avail to one who gives money to a worthy cause, even if it be a million dollars, unless the giver is in a state of grace.

An indulgence relates to the punishment due to sins of the past, and is never for future sins.

An indulgence applies only' to the person whose sins are forgiven, or to the souls in purgatory.

An indulgence remits temporal punishment only, that is deserved penances.

An indulgence promotes the practice of good works.

An indulgence is motivated by the desire to have greater honor and glory given to God.

To profess to love Christ, as do Protestants, while lauding the disrupter of the unity of Christendom; to hold as an ideal personage a murderer of peasants; a furtherer of a bigamous union; the utterer of "'Table Talk" of a shocking, devilish, degenerate nature; a violator of solemn vows, is simply amazing.

Luther's "Table Talk" proves the founder of Protestantism to have been the filthiest-mouthed, the filthiest talking man that ever claimed to speak in the name of Christ. Every reliable historian blames him for the Peasant's War, and the Thirty Years War (1524 - 1525). He encouraged the Peasant's to revolt, Heaping the blame on the lords. It was their opposition to him---"preaching of the Gospel"---which had brought about this war. "It is not the peasants who have risen against you, it is God Himself." The tide of war turned once the princes formed a military alliance. In the one major battle that took princes formed a military alliance. In the one battle that took place, Frankenhausen the peasants were annihilated.

The peasant were slain by the thousand everywhere in reprisal, and Luther, now converted for ever from his sentimenetal confidence in the common man, He turned upon the Peasants with ruthless fury, calling upon the "nobles" to kill those "children of the devil"; to track them down like dogs, as the "nobles" did. Luther continued to urged on the princes in a murderous little tract, "Kill them, strangle them; what else is to be done the mad dog who leaps at you? Strike, throttle, stab, secretly or openly. . . there is nothing more poisonous, more hurtful, moredevilish, than a rebel." A hundred thousand of them are said to have been killed in the revolt that Luther initiated, " And years later he complacently praised himself, "It was I who slew all the peasants in the insurrection, for it was I who commanded them to be slaughtered' their blood is on my head. . .But I throw the responiblility on our Lord God Who instruced me to give this order" He celebrated the funeral of the dead peasants by marrying a nun, saying "to make the mad and stupid peasants still more mad, I married," blasphemously declaring that it was the result of an inspiration, "the Lord has suddenly thrown me into marriage with that nun, Catherine Bora."

The Lutheran Church would not have outlived the days of its founder, were it not for the aid of the German princes, who shared in the spoils of the confiscated Catholic churches, monasteries, lands, etc. Luther rallied the people to their civic banners, declaring "Cujus Regio, Illius Rehgio," the religion of the people must be the religion of the rulers. It was this submission to those in civil authority, that is said to have prompted Luther to give Philip of Hesse, patron of the "Reformation," father of seven children, a dispensation to take unto himself a second wife, while living with his first wife. Luther's action toward the Jews was as devilish as was his action toward the peasants. He recommended that their synagogues be burned; their homes destroyed; their gold and silver confiscated; and their rabbis forbidden to teach under penalty of death. Referring to this Luther viciousness, The Jewish Chronicle said a few weeks ago, "Once Luther was secure in power, his diatribes against the Jews became more and more frequent and vicious. The fiery persecution of 'heretics' and public oppression of conscience by Luther's henchmen were undreamed of in Roman Catholic Germany" (London, Eng., Oct.14, 1955).

Luther is historically in the forefront of notorious excommunicated priests, who violated their priestly vows, made to Almighty God. This major offense, condemned in the Bible, which is supposed to be your one and only rule of faith (Num. 30:2-5; Eccles. 5:3-5), is always due to pride, intellectual conceit, lust, or a lunatic strain, all of them afflictions that the founder of your Church suffered. Pray, tell me, how can Lutheran ministers consistently demand an irrevocable vow from Lutheran youth during confirmation; a solemn promise that they will never leave the Lutheran Church, under threat that violation of the vow means loss of their soul's salvation; when their Church owes its origin, and functions under the name of the foremost violator of solemn vows, made to Almighty God on bended knees, that the world has known?

A proper evaluation of the life of the apostate father of Protestantism would cause Lutherans to be ashamed to function under his name. His sensual excesses; his indulgence in vices and concupisences that the Lutherans of today condemn; his favorable-ness to bigamy; his anti-Semitism; his venomous action during the Peasants War, which he encouraged; Are actions one might expect from the anti-Christ, rather than one who pretends to be a reformer of Christian practices. These are but a few of the many things that caused some Protestant foremost enemies of the Catholic Church to condemn Luther. Zwingli said, "When l read a book of Luther (evidently having his Table Talk in mind) I seem to be looking at an obscene pig, grunting among the flowers of a fair garden." Erasmus said of Luther, that he was "a savage beast, a furious wild boar." And Calvin said of him, "Would to God that he would think a little more of his own vices." Let us examine some of the safer statements (some of Luther's statements are more fitting of a X rated Website than a Christian one) made by Luther and compare them to those of Christ:

On Sin

Christ: "Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication . . . murder . . . and suchlike. And concerning these I warn you, they who do such things will not attain the Kingdom of God." (Galatians 5:19-21)

Luther: "Sin boldly but believe more boldly. Let your faith be greater than your sin . . . Sin will not destroy us in the reign of the Lamb, although we were to commit fornication a thousand times in one day." (Letter to Melanchthon, August 1, 1521, Audin p. 178)

Christ: "And do not be drunk with wine, for in that is debauchery." (Ephesians 5:18) "Keep thyself chaste." (I Timothy 5:22)

Luther: "Why do I sit soaked in wine? . . . To be continent and chaste is not in me." (Luther's Diary)

On Good Works

Christ: "What will it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith, but does not have works?" "As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without good works is dead also." (James 2:14,26)

Luther: "He that says the Gospel requires works for salvation, I say, flat and plain, is a liar." (Table Talk, Weimer Edition, III, p. 137)

On Truth

Christ: "Do not be liars against the truth. This is not the wisdom that descends from above. It is earthly, sensual, devilish." (James 3:14-15) "Do not lie to one another" (Col. 3:9) "The Lord hateth a lying tongue . . . a deceitful witness that uttereth lies . . . " (Proverbs 6:16-17) "A thief is worse than a liar, but both of them shall inherit destruction." (Ecclesiasticus 20:27)

Luther: To lie in case of necessity, or for convenience, or in excuse, would not offend God, who is ready to take such lies on Himself." (Eisenrach Conference, July 17, 1540)

On Marriage

Christ: "Whosoever shall put away his wife and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if the wife shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery." (Mark 10:11-12)

Luther: "As to divorce, it is still a moot question whether it is allowable. For my part, I prefer bigamy." (De Wette, Vol. 2, p. 459)

On Free Will

Christ: "Woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! it were better for that man if be had not been born." (Matthew 26:24) "Let no man say when he is tempted that he is tempted by God; for God is no tempter to evil." (James 1:13)

Luther: "Judas' will was the work of God; God by His almighty power moved his will as He does all that is in this world." (De Servo Arbitro -- Against man's free will) Accosted on all sides by charges of heresy, even by many of his former associates in the Protestant movement, Luther found refuge in this, the strangest of all his beliefs. No man is accountable for his actions, Luther taught, no matter how evil. Not even Judas!

Such are the teachings of the so-called "reformer" of Christ's Church! If Luther was a man divinely inspired or called in an extraordinary manner, why did God permit him to fall into so many absurdities in points of doctrine? It is not suprising, then, that in his History of Heresies, Saint Alphonsus Maria de Liguori said of Luther, "That pig is howling in hell."

It takes a peculiar Lutheran mental slant to insist upon exacting a vow at Confirmation to remain Lutherans until death; while lauding in terms of the highest the founder of Lutheranism, who violated the vow, made to God, of obedience to the Christ-instituted Catholic Church, and to the Augustinian Religious Order, as well as the vows of celibacy and poverty, all of which he violated. A violator of the vow of obedience to his Church is a traitorous enemy of God; which is even worse than being a traitor to one's country, bad as it is.

The presentation of Luther as a saint, instead of a sinner, at the expense of truth, by misrepresenting Catholic teachings and practices, is a moral offense, of which the initiators and producers Protestant history are guilty.

Fr. Frank Pavone of Priests for Life Receives Post-Election Death Threat

2008-11-12T19:01:00.003-05:00

Commentary by Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director, Priests for Life

WASHINGTON, November 11, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - I received the following message on my blog (http://www.priestsforlife.org/blog) the day after the elections:

IMPORTANT MESSAGE FOR FATHER FRANK PAVONE

“I am predicting that there will be more anti-abortion terror because of this election. I AM ALSO PREDICTING THAT THIS TIME IT WILL BE ANSWERED IN KIND BY PRO-CHOICE COUNTERTERRORISTS, who will mount similar terrorist attacks against well-known right-to-lifers. FATHER FRANK will be a natural target for pro-choice counterterrorists.

“I therefore advise you, Fr Frank, if you read that there has been another abortion-clinic shooting or bombing, get out of town immediately. Take a vacation abroad. Go visit the Vatican. If there is another act of anti-abortion terror, your life will not be safe in the USA.

“Good luck.”

Some other pro-life leaders received a similar message, and it has been reported to law enforcement.

Pro-abortion extremists call the pro-life movement "violent." Yet it's the most peaceful movement of social reform in our nation's history. In fact, the most confrontational aspect of our movement, Operation Rescue, brought about over 70,000 arrests from 1987 to 1994, yet not a single one of them was for violent activity.

We also know that any time a movement is as big as ours, there will be a handful of people - disconnected from the movement - who embrace violence as a tactic. The same was true of the civil rights movement and the abolitionist movement.

But of no movement is it more true than the pro-abortion movement. It's just that the public doesn't know of their fanatical violence. It starts in the womb, of course - the very action they promote as a "right" is in fact violence. "Typically, the skull is brought out in fragments rather than as a unified piece," abortionist Martin Haskell testified in court in 1999 regarding the legal "D and E" abortion procedure.

And their violence extends beyond the womb. Just visit http://www.prochoiceviolence.com to see that our movement has been able to document 8519 acts of violence (and counting) by the other side. Pro-abortion fanatics have attacked pro-life demonstrators, have kidnapped women to force them to abort, have murdered born babies, and much more.

So for the visitor to my blog to send that message just reinforces the truth about the "abortion-rights" fanatics. Violence is their way of life.

But why blame Obama? Of course, he is the most pro-abortion person elected to the Presidency. Perhaps they're thinking back to President Clinton, whose attempts to stop peaceful intervention coincided with the killing of some abortionists. Or perhaps they're thinking of President Kennedy's assertion, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

But we already have a peaceful revolution - and not only is it possible, it's growing! As long as I have anything to say about it, there won't be any "anti-abortion terror." Instead, there will be peaceful vigil, 24-hours a day, around abortion centers. That both stops abortions and stops the killing of abortionists.

Link to Original

A statement against the mainstream media and the Obama-Biden socialist, pro-culture of death agenda

2008-10-27T17:56:00.011-04:00

The mainstream media's coverage of the 2008 presidential election has proved to be radically biased and in such a way that an unjust election will likely take place on voting day this November 4th since this systematic bias has generated a multitude of voters who are not properly informed on the key issues.

The media camps outside of "Joe the Plumber's" home and the liberals use goverment computers to find information on him in order to smear his good name, but they [the media] still refuse to tell people about Obama's shady past and his associations with unrepentant terrorists and other criminals and anti-Americans. His support for the killing of unborn and newborn babies is horrific and yet this too has hardly been reported by the media. Instead, the media mimics Tokyo Rose, liberal style by attacking McCain-Palin while they continue on a daily and nightly basis to give Obama-Biden a free pass.

An Obama presidency will surely be the most pro-death presidency in the history of the United States of America. His vow to Planned Parenthood back in July of 2007 to sign the so-called "Freedom of Choice Act" as the first thing he will do as president and his promise to this same group to support sex-education for children in kindergarten and his goal to sign out of law the Defense of Marriage Act will give unprecedented power to the culture of death and to those who desire to suppress the Catholic Church and anyone who dare to call themselves Christian.

Please PRAY as much as possible during the next week. Only God can save us from being delivered into the hands of two liberal politicians, Obama-Biden, who have a wicked agenda to re-create America into a socialist nation full of immoral laws and the suppression of religious freedom and free speech.

Meanwhile, here are several links concerning Obama-Biden. Some of them were posted by a friend of mine on facebook.

1. ABC News: "Media's Presidential Bias and Decline"

LINK

2. "Joe Biden on WFTV in Florida - He Lies, Spins, and Distorts in Interview with Barbara West"

Barbara West asks Joe Biden some real questions. She is an actual journalist. The Obama Thug Patrol will be going after her hard. Send her your support and encouragement: barbara.west@wftv.com

LINK

Sources: "Like Orlando, Biden Bans Philadelphia Station After Tough Interview"

LINK

3. "(Audio) proof that Obama is a Marxist"

Link

5. "O’Reilly Confronts William Ayers"

LINK

6. "Obama and Khalid Al Masour"
Yet another tie the media ignore

LINK

7. "Obama’s Ties to Rashid Khalidi"
Yet another terrorist tie the media will ignore

LINK

8. "Virginia Officials Illegally Discard Military Votes, Allow Out-of-State Votes"

LINK

9. "Biden Wrong About ACORN-Obama Connection"

LINK

10. "Palin Hanged in Effigy in Hollywood for Halloween"

LINK

11. "Democrats Cover Up Fannie/Freddie" (Video)

LINK

12. In Obama's own words, he wants to go to war against Americans who work for a living! Claims '60s era civil rights activism did not go far enough by not forcing a redistribution of wealth based on past social grievances.

LINK

13. "Shocking 1995 Obama Audio Found"

LINK

Newsbusters: "Obama Race Baiting Interview From 1995 Revealed, Will Media Ignore?"

LINK

14. "Obama campaign sends Secret Service to harass pro-life mother of three based on a false allegation"

15. From Paul C.

"Obama campaign sends Secret Service to harass pro-life mother of three based on a false allegation"

"I thought you may want a link to this story posted on your profile. This is not the first time the Obama campaign has intimidated and harassed those who have different opinions from them. Obama wants to put into law the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" which will essentially outlaw conservative radio. The Obama campaign refuses to appear on WFTV anymore because a reporter, Barbara West, an objective liberal journalist who once worked for Peter Jennings, actually had the nerve to ask Obama's V.P.nominee Joe Biden, tough questions! This says a lot about the major news networks that you often cite for liberal bias because the Obama campaign still appears on these networks which means they each are tossing them softball questions thus providing voters with slanted views concerning Obama-Biden."

LINK

16. "Obama is a Socialist-Archives Prove Obama was a New Party Member"

LINK

"Barack Obama's Campaign of the Lie"

LINK

Democrat proves Obama was born in Kenya thus making him constitutionally ineligible to run for the presidency of the United States of America

2008-10-24T14:05:00.010-04:00

"A former Democratic state attorney general who filed a lawsuit claiming Obama was born in Kenya charges that by failing to respond, the presidential candidate has admitted to the accusations...Hear Michael Savage interview Democrat attorney Philip J. Berg, former deputy attorney general of Pennsylvania, about his lawsuit demanding Barack Obama present his original birth certificate to prove he was born in the United States and qualified to serve as president."

To listen to the interview, CLICK HERE.

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

Articles

1. Obama Crimes--ObamaCrimes.com is the official website for the plaintiff's in the Obama citizenship court case.

2. Democrat: Obama's grandma confirms Kenyan birth --'This has been a real sham he's pulled off for the last 20 months'

3. Obama 'admits' Kenyan birth?--Campaign doesn't respond to claims in lawsuit over birth certificate

4. WND's Corsi probing Obama's Hawaiian birth--Unraveling evidence in questions over citizenship

5. Is Obama A Non-Citizen? A Clintonista Wants To Know!

Several Reasons Why Voters Must Not Support Senator Obama for President

2008-10-11T21:31:00.009-04:00

The following are links to news stories from various sources on Senator Barack Obama. They contain important information that the mainstream liberal media (print and television) refuses to cover for fear the truth will be known about Obama. This is precisely why global news networks like CNN and MSNBC lack balanced reporting and have mostly targeted McCain and Palin for criticism whereas Obama-Biden have received mostly positive coverage, the kind that can cause poll numbers to show in the latter's favor. Yes, there is a socialist liberal agenda in the U.S.A. during this year's presidential election and its victim is truth.

UPDATED: 18 October 2008

1.Obama: No Hand on Heart for National Anthem

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2007/10/20/obama-no-hand-heart-pledge-either-will-msm-notice

Obama Camp Scraps National Anthem

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Obama_Camp_Scraps_Nationa/2008/10/18/141746.html

2. Obama & ACORN Fact Sheet

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/rnc-obama--acorn-fact/story.aspx?guid=%7B29569FA1-136D-4B95-9D51-4EF9E87ED547%7D&dist=hppr

3. Fact Sheet: William Ayers-Barack Obama

http://www.nationalrepublicantrust.com/ayersfactsheet.html

4. Abortion Survivor Jessen Responds to Obama

http://www.lifenews.com/nat4366.html

5.Former Clinton advisor Dick Morris– "Problems Looming for Obama"

http://www.newsmax.com/morris/obama_rezko_ayers/2008/10/13/139891.html

6. Obama Wants You - Obama on the Issues

http://obamawantsyou.com/issues.html

7. "Obama's Plan: Driver's Licenses for Illegals"

http://www.nationalrepublicantrust.com/index.html

"Obama wants to give a driver's license to any illegal alien who wants one. The 9/11 plot depended on such licenses."

8. Media Bias: CBS News Provides Cover for Obama, No Exposure of Pro-Abortion

http://lifenews.com/nat4463.html

9. Obama's International Socialist Connections

http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/ckincaid/2008/ck_0215p.shtml

10. The latest Ayers-Obama outrage

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=77888

11. A Politician's Promise: No Right to Life! No Freedom!

http://www.patersondiocese.org/article.cfm?Web_ID=2752

12. The Year The Media Died
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=7689
1. Barack Obama News Highlights

11 October 2008

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/oct/08100716.html

Excerpt:

"THE VIDEO THAT COULD COST OBAMA THE ELECTION: YouTube video of Barack Obama in Kenya supporting Marxist associated Raila Odinga, the election and violence afterwards."
+ + +

1. "Analysis Shows Mainstream Media Silent on Barack Obama's Pro-Abortion Position"

http://lifenews.com/nat4426.html

Excerpt:

"TV reporters barely mentioned Obama’s pro-abortion stance during the primaries — from the launch of his candidacy in January 2007 through the end of the primaries in June 2008, just six out of 1,289 network evening news stories about Obama (0.46%) mentioned his position on abortion; none discussed it in any detail."

2. "ABC NEWS Censors Pro-Life Ad Criticizing Barack Obama's Pro-Abortion Record"

http://www.lifenews.com/nat4432.html

Excerpt:

"The ad asks Obama when he will apologize for calling the group "liars" for pointing out how he misrepresented his votes in the Illinois legislature against bills that would require medical care for babies who survive failed abortions....Two nonpartisan groups, FactCheck.org and PolitiFact.com have verified NRLC's claims as true -- leading the pro-life group to produce the ad."

3. "Non-Partisan Analysis: Barack Obama Misrepresented Key Pro-Abortion Vote"

http://www.lifenews.com/nat4428.html

Excerpt:

"Another analysis from a nonpartisan group shows Barack Obama misrepresented his votes in the Illinois legislature against bills to provide medical care for newborns who survive failed abortions. The analysis says a pro-life group was right and that an Obama ad on the issue was misleading."

4. Obama Born-Alive Cover-up Coverage Index

http://www.stopobamainfo.org/coverup.html

Excerpt:

"Newly obtained documents prove that in 2003, Barack Obama, as chairman of an Illinois state Senate committee, voted down a bill to protect live-born survivors of abortion -- even after the panel had amended the bill to contain verbatim language, copied from a federal bill passed by Congress without objection in 2002, explicitly foreclosing any impact on abortion. Obama's legislative actions in 2003 -- denying effective protection even to babies born alive during abortions -- were contrary to the position taken on the same language by even the most liberal members of Congress. The bill Obama killed was virtually identical to the federal bill that even NARAL ultimately did not oppose."

5. Obama Supports the Freedom of "Choice" Act (this is the controversial bill that would outlaw any existing restrictions (federal or state) against abortion once it is signed by a president)

http://www.nrlc.org/FOCA/index.html

Excerpt:

"The first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do." -- Senator Barack Obama, speaking to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, July 17, 2007

Video Proof of Obama: http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/07/one_year_annive.html

6. "Barack Obama opposes parental notification of minor girls before they abort":

(Media Matters corroboration)

http://mediamatters.org/items/200712140004

Excerpt:

Wash. Post's Solomon ignored Planned Parenthood support for Obama's abortion votes
Summary: In an article on "what you might not know about" Sen. Barack Obama, The Washington Post's John Solomon wrote that, as a state senator, Obama "declined to take a position" on parental notification legislation, "voting 'present' instead of 'yes' or 'no.' " Solomon continued: "But five years earlier, he had filled out an issues questionnaire ... opposing such notifications." But Obama's "present" votes were reportedly part of a strategy he had worked out with the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, which opposed the measures.

+ + +

1. Priests for Life 2008 Elections webpage:

http://www.priestsforlife.org/elections/index.htm

+ + +

Other issues related to Sen. Obama

1. "Ultimately, the piper must be paid"

http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/1008/1008piperpay.htm

Excerpt:

"Barack Obama's incessant drumbeat about the failure of the economic policies of the last eight years is either gross ignorance or, more likely, political blame-shifting. The cause of the current meltdown is clearly the Democrat's insistence upon giving federally-guaranteed mortgages to people who could not afford them. Even now, Democrats insist, not on the minimum government involvement possible, but on adding all sorts of give-away ornaments on the bailout Christmas tree. Obama is also promising to take over the energy industry, the health industry, and to give tax credits and even refunds to some people with money he shamelessly takes from others. This is redistribution of wealth - pure socialism."

2. (Obama and ACORN): http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb-staff/2008/10/03/mrcs-seton-motley-fncs-fox-friends

Excerpt:

"Seton addresses the long relationship Illinois Senator Barack Obama has had with ACORN, first as an attorney for the organization than for years as a trainer of their voter registration activists. As Chairman of the Board for Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers's Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), Sen. Obama directed large sums of CAC money to ACORN."

3. "N.Y. Times whitewashes Obama-Ayers connection:Fails to report key associations, ignores incriminating documents given to paper"

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=77075

Excerpt:

"One law professor and blogger who was interviewed for the Times piece says he provided the newspaper with key documentation showing Ayers was directly involved in the formation of the board of an education organization on which Obama served as chairman...But the Times did not present that information and instead made the claim Ayers was not involved in the selection of Obama as chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, or CAC, which was founded by Ayers."

4. "Walsh: 'Ayers-Obama Ties Deeper Than Reported'"

http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_ayers_ acorn/2008/10/09/139114.html

Excerpt:

"After CAC closed down, Obama served on a successor group for “change” called the Leadership Council of the Chicago Public Schools Education Fund. And guess who served with him -- Ayers’ brother John and their father Thomas."

5.[Barack Obama's Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Connection]:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,423701,00.html

Excerpt:

"Now remember: Obama's ads and stump speeches attack McCain and Republican policies for the current financial turmoil. It is demonstrably not Republican policy and worse, it appears the man attacking McCain — Sen. Obama — was at the head of the line when the piggies lined up at the Fannie and Freddie trough for campaign bucks...Sen. Barack Obama: No. 2 on the Fannie/Freddie list of favored politicians after just four short years in the Senate...Next time you see that ad, you might notice he fails to mention that part of the Fannie and Freddie problem."

6. McCain Letter Demanded 2006 Action on Fannie and Freddie by Human Events

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28973

Excerpt:

"McCain's letter -- signed by nineteen other senators -- said that it was '...vitally important that Congress take the necessary steps to ensure that [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac]...operate in a safe and sound manner.[and]..More importantly, Congress must ensure that the American taxpayer is protected in the event that either...should fail.' Sen. Obama did not sign the letter, nor did any other Democrat."

Bishop Robert Finn on the Freedom of Choice Act

2008-10-03T13:18:00.003-04:00

...which Senator Obama says he will sign if he becomes president; Proof: Video of Obama

Read Bishop Finn's article via the following links:

Bishop Finn on FOCA, It's Supporters and Their Apologists

Bp. Finn of Kansas City, MO, on the Freedom of Choice Act

New York Catholic Bishops: Make Pro-Life Issues First Priority When Voting

2008-10-03T13:14:00.007-04:00

"Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights -- for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture -- is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination" (Pope John Paul II, Christifideles Laici, 1988, n.38; quote provided by Catholic Apologetics of America).

By Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
October 1, 2008

Link to Original

Albany, NY (LifeNews.com) -- The Catholic bishops of New York have released a new statement urging voters to make pro-life issues their first priority when voting. They say the destruction of 50 million children and the injury of countless millions of women eclipses any other political issue.

Edward Cardinal Egan and the Catholic Bishops of New York issued the appeal in statement entitled Our Cherished Right, Our Solemn Duty.

The bishops warn against voting solely out of party loyalty or self interest and say voters should be guided by the pro-life teachings of the Catholic Church.

While noting that there are many issues of great importance facing the country, the protection of human life rises above all other issues, the bishops said.

"We Catholics are called to look at politics as we are called to look at everything – through the lens of our faith," they wrote.

"It is the rare candidate who will agree with the Church on every issue. But as the U.S. Bishops’ recent document Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship makes clear, not every issue is of equal moral gravity," they explain.

"The inalienable right to life of every innocent human person outweighs other concerns where Catholics may use prudential judgment, such as how best to meet the needs of the poor or to increase access to health care for all," they add.

“The right to life is the right through which all others flow,” they wrote. “To the extent candidates reject this fundamental right by supporting an objective evil, such as legal abortion, euthanasia or embryonic stem cell research, Catholic should consider them less acceptable for public office.”

In the statement, the bishops stressed that voters have an obligation not only to learn the positions of the presidential candidates, but of all of the candidates, including those running for the state legislature.

“Many of the most compelling moral issues of the day play out at the state level" -- including "commonsense restrictions on abortion" are debates that "occur in the halls of the state Capitol in Albany.”

"Our national and state elected officials have profound influence on countless matters of great importance, such as the right to life," the Catholic leaders say.

Abortion/Infanticide IS the single most important issue in the 2008 Presidential Election!

2008-09-27T16:07:00.008-04:00

"Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights -- for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture -- is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination" (Pope John Paul II, Christifideles Laici, 1988).

"You Wouldn't Even Ask"

By Fr. Frank Pavone
National Director, Priests for Life

Link to Original

If a candidate who supported terrorism asked for your vote, would you say, "I disagree with you on terrorism, but where do you stand on other issues?"

I doubt it.

In fact, if a terrorism sympathizer presented him/herself for your vote, you would immediately know that such a position disqualifies the candidate for public office -- no matter how good he or she may be on other issues. The horror of terrorism dwarfs whatever good might be found in the candidate's plan for housing, education, or health care. Regarding those plans, you wouldn't even ask.

So why do so many people say, "This candidate favors legal abortion. I disagree. But I'm voting for this person because she has good ideas about health care (or some other issue)."

Such a position makes no sense whatsoever, unless one is completely blind to the violence of abortion. That, of course, is the problem. But we need only see what abortion looks like, or read descriptions from the abortionists themselves, and the evidence is clear. (USA Today refused to sell me space for an ad that quoted abortionists describing their work because the readers would be traumatized just by the words!)

Abortion is no less violent than terrorism. Any candidate who says abortion should be kept legal disqualifies him/herself from public service. We need look no further, we need pay no attention to what that candidate says on other issues. Support for abortion is enough for us to decide not to vote for such a person.

Pope John Paul II put it this way: "Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights -- for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture -- is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination" (Christifideles Laici, 1988).

False and illusory. Those are strong and clear words that call for our further reflection.

"I stand for adequate and comprehensive health care." So far, so good. But as soon as you say that a procedure that tears the arms off of little babies is part of "health care," then your understanding of the term "health care" is obviously quite different from the actual meaning of the words. In short, you lose credibility. Your claim to health care is "illusory." It sounds good, but is in fact destructive, because it masks an act of violence.

"My plan for adequate housing will succeed." Fine. But what are houses for, if not for people to live in them? If you allow the killing of the children who would otherwise live in those houses, how am I supposed to get excited by your housing project?

It's easy to get confused by all the arguments in an election year. But if you start by asking where candidates stand on abortion, you can eliminate a lot of other questions you needn't even ask.

For more election related articles and information, visit Priests for Life 2008 Election Action Center

+ + +

"Obama and Abortion/Infanticide"

Click Here for articles on this subject.

"When he was in the state senate, Barack Obama worked hard against a bill that would provide health care for a baby who survived an abortion…. This is called 'selective infanticide'.... There’s been a media cover-up on this…"

-Bill Donohue, "Fox and Friends," May 15, 2008

+ + +

"Obama and Abortion: Is the Democratic Frontrunner Most Pro-Abortion Ever?"

Link to Article

Excerpt:

“Based on his record he appears to be the most pro-abortion candidate ever to seek the presidency,” said David O’Steen, executive director of the National Right to Life Committee. “It’s hard to be more pro-abortion than Hillary Clinton, but he seems to have managed to do that.”

Obama has promised that his first act as president would be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act, a bill that if enacted would prevent any federal, state or local government entity from restricting access to abortion. O’Steen said this indicates that to Obama, “the most important thing facing America is to promote abortion.”

Both Clinton and Obama currently have 100% ratings from NARAL for their pro-abortion voting records in the U.S. Senate. But unlike Clinton, Obama has opposed legislation to protect babies who are born alive following unsuccessful abortions.

In 2002, Clinton voted in favor of the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, which was approved unanimously by the U.S. Senate. Obama was not sworn in as a U.S. Senator until 2005, but he opposed similar state legislation in 2001 while serving as an Illinois state senator.

+ + +

"Mainstream Media Mum on Revelation That Barack Obama Misled on Abortion (infanticide)"

Link to Article

+ + +

"Obama Cover-up Revealed On Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Bill"

(Commentary by NRLC)

Link to Article

+ + +

"How Babies Were Left to Die: Nurse Recounts Horrors of Infanticide Practice Barack Obama Protected"

Link to Article

+ + +

"Mexican Actor Rips Obama on Abortion"

Link to Article

+ + +

Another reason why NOT to vote for Obama......

"Obama receives ringing endorsement from Planned Parenthood Action Fund president"

Link to Article

+ + +

"Barack Obama's Catholic Problem: His Pro-Abortion Views Turn Off Millions"

Link to Article

+ + +

"WATCHDOG GROUP SAYS BARACK OBAMA MISLEADING ABOUT ABORTION, INFANTICIDE BILL"

Link to Article

+ + +

"Obama's VP Pick Biden is a "Slap in the Face" to Catholics"

Link to Article

"Catholic leaders react to Biden pick; Bishops say he should refrain from Communion"

Link to Article

+ + +

"NARAL president rails against McCain's pro-life positions in DNC speech"

Link to Article

+ + +

"REPUBLICAN PARTY PLATFORM PROPOSAL RETAINS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AGAINST ABORTION"

Link to Article

Whereas....

The Democratic Party Platform is 100% in support of the "culture of death"

"Abortion Leader Confirms that Democratic Platform is More Pro-Abortion than Ever-Also delighted that document now pushes 'comprehensive sex education'"

Link to Article

+ + +

"America Will Not Reject Abortion Until America Sees Abortion! Show the American people what an abortion is!"

Link to Article/Graphic Images

Bishop Martino of Scranton Supports the Refusal of Holy Communion to Pro-Abortion ["Catholic"] Politicians

2008-08-31T15:16:00.008-04:00

To read the story, CLICK HERE.

Fr. Mitch Pacwa's response to the Speaker of the House on abortion

2008-08-28T02:06:00.003-04:00

Irondale, AL (EWTN) – EWTN Global Catholic Network TV Host Father Mitch Pacwa S.J., Ph.D. took Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to task on the August 26 edition of his Threshold of Hope program for misrepresenting Church teaching on abortion in an Aug. 24 interview with Tom Brokaw on Meet the Press.

CLICK HERE to read EWTN's article on Fr. Pacwa's response to Pelosi's comments and to watch and/or listen to video and audio recordings of Fr. Pacwa's response.

Pelosi the Heretic Defends Her Dumb Comments Concerning the Catholic Church and Abortion

2008-08-27T17:14:00.012-04:00

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments today on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s continued dispute with the Catholic Church:

“On August 24, Pelosi contested the fact that the Catholic Church has always been unequivocally opposed to abortion. After being roundly criticized by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, and many individual bishops—led by Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput—as well as ten Catholic congressmen, the Catholic League et al., Pelosi’s office admitted yesterday that ‘Catholic teaching is clear that life begins at conception.’ Unfortunately, after this confession of ignorance, the statement continued by offering the quip that ‘many Catholics do not ascribe to that view.’ The release also said she shared the view of St. Augustine on the subjects of abortion and ensoulment.

“Cardinal George Pell, Archbishop of Melbourne, Australia, wrote in his 1997 book, Issues of Faith and Morals, that St. Augustine ‘believed that the embryo was ensouled at 46 days. Nevertheless, he also believed that it was gravely wrong to kill a formed or unformed fetus.’ It is instructive to note that philosophical discussions about the soul, and research on embryology, continue to advance beyond the knowledge available in the 5th century. In any event, Pelosi will find no relief for her bizarre reasoning by citing St. Augustine, or any other Church Father.

“Nor does her argument gain strength by pointing out that not all Catholics agree with the Church on this subject. So what? There are plenty of Catholics living a life rife with sin that seek to justify their behavior by saying they disagree with the Church on the source of their delinquency. What the House Speaker doesn’t get is that the Church is no more a democracy than the Democratic and Republican parties are: none arrive at conclusions based on referenda. Moreover, in the instance of the Catholic Church, the Magisterium is not the functional equivalent of the DNC or the RNC.

“Maybe that’s the source of Pelosi’s confusion—she really doesn’t understand the difference between the teaching authority of the Catholic Church and the DNC.”

Link to Original

Important Quotes to Keep in Mind in Light of Rep. Pelosi's, et al., Statements on the Catholic Church and Abortion

"A second distinction separates official Church teaching from the expressed opinions of individual ecclesiastical writers. The Church may consider various opinions without adopting them as her official teaching. For example, in 1679 a decree of the Holy Office, under the authority of Innocent XI, condemned the positions of two important writers of that century: Thomas Sanchez and Joannis Marcus. Sanchez, a Jesuit theologian, held that abortion is lawful if the fetus is not yet animated when the intention is to prevent a girl, detected as pregnant, from being killed or defamed. Marcus, the Proto-physician of Bohemia, claimed that the fetus lacks a rational soul until birth."

Denzinger-Schoenmetzer, Enchiridion symbolorum (Rome: Herder, 1965), 2134-2135; Quoted in "The Roman Catholic Church and Abortion: An Historical Perspective"- Part I by Donald DeMarco, PhD. Published in the Homiletic & Pastoral Review (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, July 1984), 59-66.

+ + +

"In the course of history, the Fathers of the Church, her Pastors and her Doctors have taught the same doctrine [that human life must be protected and favored from the beginning, just as at the various stages of its development] - the various opinions on the infusion of the spiritual soul did not introduce any doubt about the illicitness of abortion. It is true that in the Middle Ages, when the opinion was generally held that the spiritual soul was not present until after the first few weeks, a distinction was made in the evaluation of the sin and the gravity of penal sanctions. Excellent authors allowed for this first period more lenient case solutions which they rejected for following periods. But it was never denied at that time that procured abortion, even during the first days, was objectively grave fault. This condemnation was in fact unanimous."

(Declaration on Procured Abortion, Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, (Vatican: Holy See, A.D. 1974) II, 7., approved by Pope Paul VI.

+ + +

In 1987, the Congregation reaffirmed the teachings found in the 1974 CDF Declaration on Procured Abortion:

"From the time that the ovum is fertilized, a new life is begun which is neither that
of the father nor of the mother: it is rather the life of a new human being with his own growth. ...” . . . This teaching remains valid and is further confirmed, if confirmation were needed, by recent findings of human biological science which recognize that in the zygote resulting from fertilisation the biological identity of a new human individual is already constituted.

Thus the fruit of human generation, from the first moment of its existence, that is to say from the moment the zygote has formed, demands the unconditional respect that is morally due to the human being in his bodily and spiritual totality. The human being is to be respected and treated as a person from the moment of conception; and therefore from that same moment his rights as a person must be recognized, among which in the first place is the inviolable right of every innocent human being to life.

Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Donum Vitae (Vatican: Holy See, 1987) I, 1.

+ + +

"The exact time when the fetus becomes 'animated' has no practical significance as far as the morality of abortion is concerned. By any theory of 'animation,' abortion is gravely wrong. Why so? Because every direct abortion is a sin of murder by intent. It is, to say the least, probable that every developing fetus is a human being. To deliberately kill what is probably human is murder."

Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., "A Catholic View" The Human Life Review, Fall 1975, 46.

+ + +

"Whatever one would want to hold about the time of animation, or when the fetus became a human being in the strict sense of the term, abortion from the time of conception was considered wrong, and the time of animation was never looked upon as a moral dividing line between permissible and immoral abortion,"

Fr. John Connery, S. J., Abortion: The Development of the Roman Catholic Perspective (Chicago: Loyola Univ. Press, 1977), 304.

+ + +

"The Roman Catholic Church and Abortion: An Historical Perspective"- Part I
by Donald DeMarco, PhD:

In the seventeenth century, two scientists—Thomas Fienus and Paolo Zacchia —who rejected the Aristotelian theory of delayed animation, made important historical contributions that led ultimately to the Church's abandoning the speculation that there is such a thing as unanimated (or non-human) fetus.

Fienus, a professor of medicine at Louvain, published a biomedical treatise in 1620 on the formation of the fetus (De formatrice fetus liber). He concluded that the soul is infused on the third day. The Aristotelian notion of a succession of souls or "functions" of one soul (first vegetative, then sentient, and finally rational) made no sense to him. He developed nine lines of argumentation to support his thesis. In general, Fienus argues that the soul must be present at the beginning in order to organize the body. Moreover, in order to avoid an unnecessary multiplicity of explanatory factors, there must be one soul from the beginning that establishes the specific unity and individual continuity of the developing embryo. (Thomas Fienus (Feynes), De formatrice fetus liber (Antwerp: 1620), pp. 157-181.18))

Concerning the Septuagint passage in Exodus, Fienus stated that it does not oblige one to believe that the unformed fetus has no rational soul, but only that it is an incomplete man. He also points out that the Latin (Vulgate) text, which is authoritative in the Church, makes no distinction between the formed and unformed fetus. St. Jerome had translated the Bible into Latin directly from Hebrew and therefore avoided the erroneous Septuagint version of the celebrated Exodus passage.

Zacchia, physician general of the Vatican State, published a book, also in the year 1620 (Quaestiones medico-legales) in which he argues a position remarkably similar to that of Fienus. He concludes that the rational soul is created and infused at conception. He also maintains that the development of the fetus is a continuum, rather than a series of distinct stages. Like Fienus, he reasons that the soul must always organize the body if development is to be determined from within.(Paolo Zacchia, Quaestiones medico-legales (Lyons: 1701), lib. 6, tit. 1, qu. 7, 16.))

The rejection of the theory of delayed animation by these two scientists was met with considerable opposition. Nonetheless, the reasonableness of their arguments—which received added confirmation from the scientific research of Harvey, who discovered the circulation of the blood, Gassendi, DeGraaf, and others—gradually found acceptance. By the end of the seventeenth century important theologians such as Caramuel of Prague and the Spanish Jesuit, Juan Cardenas, found the distinction between the animated and unanimated fetus to be of no practical significance. Cardenas argued that abortion to save the life of the mother is impermissible if there is any reason to suspect the presence of a rational soul. But, Cardenas added, this suspicion is always present. It took another century, however, before immediate animation was generally accepted.

In 1869, Pope Pius IX officially removed the distinction between the animated and unanimated fetus from the penal legislation of the Church. This was, of course, disciplinary and in no way involved Church teaching on abortion.(Codicis Iuris Canonici Fontes, 9 vols. (Rome, 1923-39), n. 552.)) Henceforward, every direct killing of human life after conception would be treated in the same way, that is, the penalty of excommunication applied to all abortions.

The Code of Canon Law, promulgated in 1917, states that all who procure abortion ("not excepting the mother") incur an automatic excommunication.(Canon 2350, paragraph 1) It further advises that all aborted fetuses, if delivered alive should certainly be baptized and if doubtfully alive, should be baptized conditionally.(Canon 747) In addition, it directs the baptism of a child in its mother's womb if there is no hope that it will be born in a normal manner.(Canon 746) These canons make it clear that the Church recognizes that the unborn child is a person at every stage of its development.

+ + +

Please pray to St. Michael the Archangel and all the saints for the conversion of Rep. Pelosi, Senator Biden, Sen. Obama and all politicians who continue to defend as a so-called "legal right" the most gruesome and vicious human tragedy the world has ever witnessed, abortion.

Cardinal Egan Scolds Rep. Nancy Pelosi For Her Embarrassing Errors on Church Teachings And Abortion

2008-08-26T17:02:00.005-04:00

Statement on Remarks by Speaker Pelosi

August 26, 2008

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 26, 2008

STATEMENT OF HIS EMINENCE, EDWARD CARDINAL EGAN CONCERNING REMARKS MADE BY THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Like many other citizens of this nation, I was shocked to learn that the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States of America would make the kind of statements that were made to Mr. Tom Brokaw of NBC-TV on Sunday, August 24, 2008. What the Speaker had to say about theologians and their positions regarding abortion was not only misinformed; it was also, and especially, utterly incredible in this day and age.

We are blessed in the 21st century with crystal-clear photographs and action films of the living realities within their pregnant mothers. No one with the slightest measure of integrity or honor could fail to know what these marvelous beings manifestly, clearly, and obviously are, as they smile and wave into the world outside the womb. In simplest terms, they are human beings with an inalienable right to live, a right that the Speaker of the House of Representatives is bound to defend at all costs for the most basic of ethical reasons. They are not parts of their mothers, and what they are depends not at all upon the opinions of theologians of any faith. Anyone who dares to defend that they may be legitimately killed because another human being “chooses” to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the name.

Edward Cardinal Egan

Archbishop of New York

August 26, 2008

Link to Original

+ + +

Recommended reading:

1. Catholic Leader Blasts Nancy Pelosi for Misrepresenting Church Abortion Position

2. Denver Archbishop Corrects Rep. Nancy Pelosi's Embarrassing Errors on Church teachings and abortion

3. "Catholic Bishop: 'Speaker Nancy Pelosi Can't be Catholic and Pro-Abortion'" (from March 2, 2007)

LifeNews Article

LifeSiteNews Article

4. "The Arrogance of Nancy Pelosi" by Rush Limbaugh (a must read!)
taken from Rush's August 25, 2008 radio show

Other Related Topics

1. NON-PARTISAN WATCHDOG GROUP SAYS BARACK OBAMA MISLEADING ABOUT ABORTION, INFANTICIDE BILL

2. REPUBLICAN PARTY PLATFORM PROPOSAL RETAINS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AGAINST ABORTION

3. Obama's VP Pick Biden is a "Slap in the Face" to Catholics

4. Catholic leaders react to Biden pick; Bishops say he should refrain from Communion

Memo to "CINO" Senator Joe Biden: Catholics who support abortion should not receive Holy Communion, says the Vatican's Archbishop Burke

2008-08-23T11:23:00.007-04:00

Related article: Archbishop Charles Chaput scolds heretic Biden for his pro-abortion stance

Rome, Aug 19, 2008 / 10:00 am (CNA).- The prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, Archbishop Raymond Burke, said this week that Catholics, especially politicians, who publically defend abortion should not receive Communion, and that ministers of Communion should be responsibly charitable in denying it to them if they ask for it, “until they have reformed their lives.”

In an interview with the magazine, Radici Christiane, Archbishop Burke pointed out that there is often a lack of reverence at Mass when receiving Communion. “Receiving the Body and Blood of Christ unworthily is a sacrilege,” he warned. “If it is done deliberately in mortal sin it is a sacrilege.”

To illustrate his point, he referred to “public officials who, with knowledge and consent, uphold actions that are against the Divine and Eternal moral law." He then gave the example of politicians who "support abortion, which entails the taking of innocent and defenseless human lives. A person who commits sin in this way should be publicly admonished in such a way as to not receive Communion until he or she has reformed his life,” the archbishop said.

“If a person who has been admonished persists in public mortal sin and attempts to receive Communion, the minister of the Eucharist has the obligation to deny it to him. Why? Above all, for the salvation of that person, preventing him from committing a sacrilege,” he added.

“We must avoid giving people the impression that one can be in a state of mortal sin and receive the Eucharist.”

He explained that when the person is allowed to receive Communion, a second form of scandal consists: “leading people to think that the public act that this person is doing,” a sin, “which until now everyone believed was a serious sin, is really not that serious.”

“If we have a public figure who is openly and deliberately upholding abortion rights and receiving the Eucharist, what will the average person think? He or she could come to believe that up to a certain point it is okay to do away with an innocent life in the mother’s womb,” he warned.

Archbishop Burke also noted that when a bishop or a Church leader prevents an abortion supporter from receiving Communion, “it is not with the intention of interfering in public life but rather with the concern of the spiritual state of the politician or public official who, if Catholic, should follow the divine law in the public sphere as well.”

“Therefore, it is simply ridiculous and wrong to try to silence a pastor, accusing him of interfering in politics so that he cannot do good to the soul of a member of his flock,” he stated.

It is “simply wrong” to think that the faith must be reduced to the private sphere and eliminated from public life, Archbishop Burke said, encouraging Catholics “to bear witness to our faith not only in private in our homes but also in our public lives with others in order to bear strong witness to Christ.”

Original Article

+ + +

Recommended reading:

"Bishops Have Denied [Holy] Communion Before"

Priests for Life Election Action Center

Voting With a Clear Conscience by Fr. Frank Pavone (Catholic Version) Interdenominational Version

America Will Not Reject Abortion Until America Sees Abortion

The Scriptural Support For The Dogma Of Mary's Assumption

2008-08-15T10:00:00.003-04:00

Q: Can you describe the Scriptural support for the dogma of Mary's Assumption.

Link to Original

A: Like the dogma of Mary's Immaculate Conception, the dogma of the Assumption is not explicitly stated in the Bible. The teaching that 'at the end of her earthly course, Mary was assumed into heavenly glory, body and soul' was dogmatically defined by Pius XII in 1950 in Munificentissimus Deus. This encyclical mentions many "holy writers who ... employed statements and various images and analogies of Sacred Scripture to illustrate and to confirm the doctrine of the Assumption..." (#29) Though admitting that these "theologians and preachers ... have been rather free ... in their use of expressions taken from Sacred Scripture to explain their belief in the Assumption" (#26), Pius XII maintained that in defining the dogma of Mary's Assumption, he merely fulfilled his divine commission to "faithfully propose the revelation delivered through the Apostles" not to "manifest new doctrine" (#12). The Catholic Church believes this dogma to have been present in Sacred Scripture or Apostolic Tradition, at least implicitly. Hence, scriptural interpretations accomodated to Mary by 'prophetic expandability' may be legitimate, not because of academic evidence or "any merely human effort" (#12), but as signs of the "protection of the Spirit of Truth" (#12) in the Church.

Some of the biblical texts used in the encyclical to illustrate the doctrine of Mary's Assumption include:

Arise, O Lord, into thy resting place: thou and the ark, which thou hast sanctified. (Ps 131:8)[the Spouse of Canticles] that goeth up by the desert, as a pillar of smoke of aromatical spices, of myrrh, and frankincense [Cant 3:6]

The Woman clothed with the Sun [Rev 12]I will glorify the place of my feet. [Is 61:13]

Who is this that cometh up from the desert, flowing with delights, leaning upon her beloved? [Cant 8:5]

Consider how these passages could be related to the Assumption dogma. Commentators often compared Mary to the bride in Canticles. Her arising like incense to God, or coming up to lean on her beloved could be interpreted as assumption into Jesus' company. Mary was also likened to the Ark of the Covenant; since she contained the Eternal Word in her Womb. Hence, arising to rest with the Lord could allude to Mary's Assumption. The Woman of the Apocalypse appeared as 'a great sign in the heavens'. Mary is called 'Woman' in John's Gospel. At her Assumption, she is said to enter 'into heavenly glory'. Revelation 12 could be a poetic description of these facts. Finally, the place of the Lord's feet mentioned in Is 61, His resting place at the Incarnation, was Mary. The glorification mentioned could refer to glorification in heaven.

The encyclical also offers a number of scripturally based arguments of fittingness in support of Mary's Assumption. For example, the fullness of grace ascribed to Mary in Lk 1:28, and the accomodation of Gen 3:15 to her, indicate that Mary "was exempted from the fourfold curse that had been laid upon Eve" (#30) (e.g. bodily death and corruption). Also, the commandment to honor parents (cf. Ex 20:11) was seen to imply Jesus' care for Mary's body after her death (cf. #35). Finally, the bodily resurrection won by Jesus' Resurrection in which "Death is swallowed up in victory." (I Cor 15:54), is applicable to Mary as to all believers. However, because Scripture and Tradition indicate the close link between Jesus and His Mother on earth, the link between Jesus' bodily Resurrection and Mary's share in it was assumed to be equally close. None of this constitutes explicit Scriptural proof of the doctrine of Mary's Assumption. Its status as infallibly revealed dogma rests on the living authority of the Church as the interpreter of Scripture, especially as to its comprehensiveness and overall finality. However, the Catholic Church considers this Marian privilege to be "in wonderful accord with those divine truths given us in Holy Scripture." (#24)

Recommended reading:

1. DEFINING THE DOGMA OF THE ASSUMPTION . "Munificentissimus Deus" . Apostolic Constitution of Pope Pius XII issued November 1, 1950

Munificentissimus Deus

2. Her Assumption Befits the Mother of God By Fr. Valentine Long, OFM (Chapter 8 of The Mother of God, 1976)

3. Mary's Death and Bodily Assumption By Fr. Lawrence P. Everett, C.Ss.R., S.T.D. (Mariology, 1957)

4. Immaculate Conception and Assumption - Pamphlet by Catholic apologist Karl Keating of Catholic Answers in answer to Christian Fundamentalist objections

5. Mary's Last Earthly Home? By Kim Lawton. A look at the house in western Turkey (Meryemana Kultur Parki) where many people believe Mary spent her last days on earth

+ + +

Although modern theologians generally teach that Mary "died", Pope Pius XII, when he defined the Assumption as dogma in Munificentissimus Deus, never defined that Mary, in fact, "died" a natural death. All he mentioned on this issue was that the Blessed Virgin "completed the course of her earthly life" (44).

Some early Chuch Fathers and several saints, including St. Louis de Montfort and St. Francis de Sales, believed that Mary "died" but this must be properly understood. The latter and former saint believed that while Mary died she did not experience corruption since she was Immaculately Conceived and free from Original Sin and all its consequences. They believed that she died a "death of love" which was vuluntary because she wanted to fully conform to her Son ("christoformity") who died to redeem mankind. I believe Lumen Gentium, 58 teaches the same.

Keep in mind that her death was more like a "fallen asleep" in that she never experienced pain and suffering which are consequences of Original Sin so her death should never be confused or equated with the type of death that we will experience. The Eastern Rite and Orthodox have traditionally referred to Mary's death as the "Dormition" (which is the title of an ancient feast in the Church) in that she "fell asleep". Some Eastern churches have the name "Dormition" as part of their title, e.g., "Dormition of the Mother of God Byzantine Catholic Church". I believe this is the proper way of understanding Mary's "death" and this is perhaps the understanding that modern theologians have in mind. Think also of the incorrupted saints in comparision to the Blessed Virgin Mary! This will help skeptics to appreciate the Blessed Virgin Mary and to accept teachings on the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption for Mary is certainly far more incorruptible in body and soul compared to all of the saints who have ever lived and will live.

There are Early Church Fathers who maintain that Mary did not die a natural death. For example, St. Epiphanius (Panarion, haer. 78, nn. 10-11,23: G.C.S., 37, 461-462; 474) and St. Ephraem (Ephraem, De nativitate domini sermo 12, sermo 11, sermo 4; Opera omni syriace at latine, Vol. 2, 415). Timothy of Jerusalem (5th-8th centuries) has the most explicit teaching on this subject. He taught the following: "...the virgin is immortal...he who dwelt in her transported her to the regions of her assumption" (PG 86, 245C).

+ + +

St. John Damascene (d. 749) also recorded an interesting story concerning the Assumption: "St. Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, at the Council of Chalcedon (451), made known to the Emperor Marcian and Pulcheria, who wished to possess the body of the Mother of God, that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles, but that her tomb, when opened upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; wherefrom the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to heaven."

source

St. Epiphanius said in A.D. 377, "Let them search the scriptures. They will not find Mary's death; they will not find whether she died or did not die; they will not find whether she was buried or was not buried. More than that: John journeyed to Asia, yet nowhere do we read that he took the holy Virgin with him. Rather, Scripture is absolutely silent [on Mary's earthly end] because of the extraordinary nature of the prodigy, in order not to shock the minds of men. . . . Neither do I maintain stoutly that she died. . . ." (Panarion, haer. 78, nn. 10-11,23: G.C.S., 37, 461-462; 474).

St. Francis de Sales speaks of a dying “in love, from love and through love”, in that the Mother of God "died" out of love for her Son Jesus (Treatise on the Love of God, bk. 7, ch. XIII-XIV).

+ + +

From "Where Is That In The Bible?":

Revelation 12:1-8 shows us that Mary, Ark of the New Covenant, is truly the mother of all Christians (even those who refuse to acknowledge her as their mother). This passage also shows us a vision of Mary, queen of Heaven, and hints at her Assumption. This gift of suffering no corruption in the grave and being "caught up" into heaven while still alive is perfectly in accordance with Scripture. Similar assumptions are described below, and are promised to some Christians in 1 Thessalonians.
Genesis 5:24 - Enoch walked with God, then was no more, because God took him.
Hebrews 11:5-6 - It was because of his faith that Enoch was taken up and did not experience death: he was no more, because God took him; because before his assumption he was acknowledged to have pleased God. Now it is impossible to please God without faith, since anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and rewards those who seek him.
2 Kings 2:11 - Elijah was assumed into heaven in a fiery chariot
Matthew 27:52 - many saints who had fallen asleep were raised
1 Corinthians 15:52 - we shall be instantly changed at the last trumpet
1 Thessalonians 4:17 - caught up to meet the Lord in the air
Revelation 11:19 - 12:1 - ark in heaven represents the woman clothed with the sun. (this woman is Mary)

Denver Archbishop Recalls "Progressive" Nuns to Obedience to the Church By Hilary White

2008-08-10T08:24:00.005-04:00

Link to Original

DENVER, August 7, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - At a meeting of leaders of US Catholic religious orders, Denver's Archbishop Chaput has urged members to return to the principle of "holy obedience" to the teaching and authority of the Church. The meeting, held this year in Denver, was for the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), a group notorious among faithful Catholics for their disregard for Catholic teaching on moral and doctrinal issues, especially sexual morality.

Citing the example of saints and founders of religious orders, Archbishop Chaput called obedience the "yardstick of love," especially for people who have taken the three religious vows of poverty, chastity and obedience.

"Christian discipleship," including the religious life, he said, "demand more than a polite relationship with Jesus and His Church." "He is our Lord and God...What he deserves is our love - a love that is expressed in our worship, in our service to others and in our obedience to the Church."

In his brief welcoming address, Chaput spoke to about 800 members of LCWR and the Conference of Major Superiors of Men (CMSM), at the annual meeting that in 2004 unapologetically hosted Mary Robinson, the former Irish President and United Nations Human Rights Commissioner noted for her international abortion crusading.

Chaput's message was of a radically different kind than is usually heard at the LCWR/CMSM meetings. "The kind of radical love expressed in obedience - an obedience that can make our hearts ache and bruise our vanity - is the seed of renewal in every age of the Church," he said. Conceding that obedience to religious authority can be difficult, Chaput said, "I entered religious life because I wanted to be one of those seeds, because I knew my own happiness depended on it. I am sure you want to be those seeds of renewal too."

This year, after Archbishop Chaput's brief welcoming address, the meeting featured Richard Rohr, a priest whose "spirituality centre" and books promote a number of occult practices including the enneagram, and whose writing is notorious for supporting homosexuality as a legitimate "lifestyle choice." At the 2001 Religious Education Congress in Los Angeles, Father Rohr stated, "Everything the Catholic Church offers in the way of its sacramental rituals and moral and doctrinal teachings is an obstacle to having a relationship with God."

LCWR is an umbrella organization for religious orders, founded in 1956, that has become one of the leading bodies of hard left political lobbying in the Catholic Church in the US. At the same time, the actual religious communities it represents are rapidly dying out, with aging sisters and virtually no new vocations.

LCWR and its member communities are well known for their hostility to the new "conservatism" of younger Catholics who embraced traditional Catholicism under the papacy of John Paul II. While the numbers in men's orders have remained relatively stable, the ideologies of radical feminism that infiltrated the women's orders represented by LCWR have been shown to be instrumental in the collapse of women's vocations. While thousands left their orders in the 1960s and '70s, the number of young women applying to enter the LCWR communities dropped to nearly nothing and has not significantly increased.

Fr. Richard John Neuhaus, the editor of the Catholic periodical First Things, wrote that the LCWR took a prominent role in the 1960s and '70s in "getting women religious to follow the lead of progressive theologians in 'renewing' themselves into virtual oblivion."

"Among [communities] associated with the LCWR," Neuhaus wrote, "many of the active remnant are among the most aggressively disaffected groups in the Church, and some publicly declare that the vocation of their community is to go out of business".

Archbishop Chaput, himself a member of the Franciscan religious order, said, "The Church belongs to Christ, the Church is His spouse and we find His peace through love and obedience to His Church, which is finally not an institution or corporation or bureaucracy, but our mother and teacher."

Chaput's comments about religious obedience have been proved in many of the newer and more faithful communities being founded and developed in the US Church. The Sisters of Life in New York, the Dominican Sisters of St. Cecelia in Nashville and Mother Theresa's Missionaries of Charity, have experienced a steady influx of young vocations, and are all examples of his principle that obedience to and love of the authority of the Catholic Church are the "seeds of renewal."

Meanwhile, LCWR continues to focus its activities on its usual leftist "social justice" issues such as anti-war protests, environmentalism, and anti-poverty political work based on heavily left-leaning economic theories. While the organisation does not officially concern itself with abortion, position papers emphasize immigration, "empowerment of women", wetlands and water resources, "climate change", opposition to the death penalty and "Incorporating the Principles of the Earth Charter."

Earlier this year, Pope Benedict XVI, made a similar appeal as Archbishop Chaput to a group of women religious, saying they were undergoing "a difficult crisis due to the aging of members, a more or less accentuated fall in vocations and, sometimes, a spiritual and charismatic weariness."

The Pope reminded them of their fundamental duty, in accordance with Canon Law, of "keeping the harmony with the magisterium, which avoids creating confusion and bewilderment among the people of God."

University of Minnesota Refuses to Penalize Myers

2008-08-01T11:11:00.007-04:00

Source: Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights

The Chancellor of the University of Minnesota, Morris (UMN) released a statement today regarding the intentional desecration of the Eucharist by Professor Paul Z. Myers. “I believe that behaviors that discriminate against or harass individuals or groups on the basis of their religious beliefs are reprehensible,” said Jacqueline Johnson. Importantly, she added that the school’s Code of Conduct prohibits such behavior. However, she also stressed that academic freedom allows faculty members “to speak or write as a public citizen without institutional discipline or restraint….” Nowhere did she say Myers would be disciplined.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue responded as follows:

“This is classic: Johnson admits that Myers has violated the UMN’s Code of Conduct and then proceeds to tell us why he is being allowed to do so with impunity—it’s a matter of academic freedom.

“Academic freedom is not the issue: academic malpractice is. For example, Section 10.21 (b) of UMN’s Tenure Code explicitly says that a tenured faculty member can be terminated or suspended for ‘unprofessional conduct which severely impairs a faculty member’s fitness in a professional capacity.’

“In 2001, this part of the Tenure Code was invoked against a professor at UMN because he had images of child porn on his computer. It should now be invoked against Myers, and that is why we will appeal to UMN’s Board of Regents to do just that. It strains credulity to maintain that Christian students can expect fair treatment by a faculty member who has publicly shown nothing but contempt for their religion.

“It is a sure bet that UMN would not tolerate a white professor who worked a comedy club on weekends trashing blacks. Indeed, it would say that such behavior disqualifies his ability to be objective. In many respects Myers is worse, and that is why sanctions are warranted.”

Contact Myers at myersp@morris.umn.edu
Contact President Robert Bruininks at bruin001@umn.edu

Related Articles:

1.UNIV. OF MINN. CHANCELLOR ON MYERS: HE’S IN THE CLEAR (Catholic League)

2. Myers and Anti-Catholic Bigotry By Father Joseph Jenkins

3. "Come Down From The Cross" By Jeff Miller

4. Atheist Professor Follows Through on Promise and Desecrates Eucharist By Hilary White

5. Calls for action, prayer follow professor's desecration of host By Catholic News Service

+ + +

Related News

EUCHARIST MOCKED IN RHODE ISLAND PLAY

+ + +

His Hour: A Holy Hour of Reparation

To Jesus Abandoned

With Mary Immaculate, let us adore, thank, implore and console, the Most Beloved and Sacred Heart of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament.

O Divine Jesus, lonely tonight in so many Tabernacles, without visitor or worshipper I offer Thee my poor heart. May its every throb be an act of love for Thee. Thou art always watching beneath the Sacramental Veils; in Thy Love Thou dost never sleep and Thou art never weary of Thy vigil for sinners. O lonely Jesus, may the flame of my heart burn and beam always in company with Thee.

O Sacrament most Holy, O Sacrament Divine!
All praise and all thanksgiving be every moment Thine!

+ + +

Pray

Prayers in Reparation for Blasphemy and Insults

+ + +

Something to think about.....

"Anti-Catholicism is deeply embedded in the fabric of America-so much so that Harvard historian Arthur Schlesinger, Sr., once termed it 'the deepest bias in the history of the American people'" (Anti-Catholicism in American Culture, Edited by Dr. Robert P. Lockwood)

Apostolic Succession According to the Early Church Father, Pope St. Clement of Rome

2008-07-12T13:06:00.003-04:00

Taken from St. Clement of Rome's Letter to the Corinthians 42,44

A.D. 80

The apostles have preached the Gospel to us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ [has done sol from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by God, and the apostles by Christ. Both these appointments, then, were made in an orderly way, according to the will of God. Having therefore received their orders, and being fully assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and established in the word of God, with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth proclaiming that the kingdom of God was at hand. And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first-fruits [of their labours], having first proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of those who should afterwards believe. Nor was this any new thing, since indeed many ages before it was written concerning bishops and deacons. For thus says the Scripture a certain place, "I will appoint their bishops s in righteousness, and their deacons in faith." ... Our apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, and there would be strife on account of the office of the episcopate. For this reason, therefore, inasmuch as they had obtained a perfect fore-knowledge of this, they appointed those [ministers] already mentioned, and afterwards gave instructions, that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them in their ministry. We are of opinion, therefore, that those appointed by them, or afterwards by other eminent men, with the consent of the whole Church, and who have blame-lessly served the flock of Christ in a humble, peaceable, and disinterested spirit, and have for a long time possessed the good opinion of all, cannot be justly dismissed from the ministry. For our sin will not be small, if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily fulfilled its duties. Blessed are those presbyters who, having finished their course before now, have obtained a fruitful and perfect departure [from this world]; for they have no fear lest any one deprive them of the place now appointed them. But we see that you have removed some men of excellent behaviour from the ministry, which they fulfilled blamelessly and with honour.

+ + +

Catholic Encyclopedia: Pope St. Clement I

New Catholic Dictionary (Patron Saints): Pope Saint Clement I

A 30-Part Course in Defence of the Catholic Faith

2008-07-12T12:17:00.002-04:00

Lumen Verum Apologetics
A 30-Part Course in Defence of the Catholic Faith
by Robert M. Haddad

Click Here

Anglican bishop seeks union with Rome

2008-07-12T11:48:00.004-04:00

London, Jul. 9, 2008 (CWNews.com) - An Anglican bishop has indicated a desire to enter the Catholic Church, and perhaps bring many thousands of faithful with him, after the synod of the Church of England approved the ordination of women as bishops.

In a column appearing in England's weekly Catholic Herald, the Anglican Bishop Andrew Burnham of Ebbsfleet pleads for "magnanimous gestures from our Catholic friends" to accommodate those Anglican traditionalists who now seek to enter the Catholic Church.

Confirming reports that have circulated in Rome and London during the past week, the Catholic Herald reveals that Bishop Burnham has talked recently with Vatican officials about the possibility that a large number of conservative Anglicans might seek to enter the Catholic Church. The Herald reports that he has spoken with Cardinal William Levada, the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; and Cardinal Walter Kasper (bio - news), the president of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity. Another Anglican prelate, Bishop Keith Newton of Richborough, was reportedly involved in the conversations.

Bishop Burnham indicated that he hopes for a Vatican decision that will open the door to a large number of Anglicans, allowing entire parishes to enter the Roman Church. He says that many Anglican clerics are interested in establishing full communion with the Holy See, but hope to give their congregations the same option. "Most of all we ask for ways that allow us to bring our folk with us," the Anglican bishop writes in his Herald column.

Because he is married, Bishop Burnham himself cannot expect to become a Catholic bishop. (While married Anglican priests have been accepted into the clergy of the Roman rite, the Catholic Church has maintained the rule of celibacy for bishops.) Nevertheless Bishop Burnham pleads for some measure from Rome that will allow Anglicans to retain their distinctive identity.

The Anglican bishop asks for a generous gesture "especially from the Holy Father, who well understands our longing for unity, and from the hierarchy of England and Wales."

Explaining his decision to break with the Church of England, Bishop Burnham says that he cannot accept any compromise gestures intended to reassure traditionalists. "Codes of practice are shifting sands," he writes. "The sacramental life of the Church must be built on rock." He adds that traditionalist Anglicans can no longer accept in good faith the promises of the Anglican hierarchy, since "every suggestion we have made for our inclusion has been turned down flat."

Bishop Burnham acknowledges, in his Catholic Herald column, that Anglican dissidents should not view the Catholic Church simply as a refuge. "You become a Catholic because you accept that the Catholic Church is what she says she is and the Catholic faith is what it says it is," he writes.

While making his case for "magnanimous gestures" from the Vatican, the Anglican bishop says, "Meanwhile we retreat into the wilderness and watch and pray."

link to original

Pope prefers Communion on the tongue, Msgr. Marini says

2008-06-26T09:47:00.004-04:00

"In interview published in the Wednesday edition of L'Osservatore Romano, Pope Benedict’s new Master of Pontifical Liturgical Celebrations, Monsignor Guido Marini, says he believes that people receiving Communion kneeling and on the tongue will become common practice at the Vatican...."

To read the entire article, CLICK HERE.

Related thread (posted on CAA's sister blog, Semper Fidelis): Communion in the Hand?

PCED’s Card. Castrillon Hoyos: celebrate TLM in parishes even when it isn’t requested

2008-05-04T20:41:00.001-04:00

From Fr. John Zuhlsdorf's "What Does The Prayer Really Say?" blog...

(Link to Original)-An alert WDTPRSer, our friend Henry, caught an interesting comment in an article from CNA on the new DVD being made by the FSSP - which I haven’t seen yet and therefore reserve comment about.

Let’s take a look at the comments of Card. Castrillon Hoyos. The issue of the DVD, while interesting, is just a side item compared to the meat of the Cardinal’s comments:

FSSP to distribute free copies of new Latin Mass DVD

Denton, NE, May 2, 2008 / 05:31 am (CNA).- The Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), in cooperation with EWTN, will soon release an instructional video on the 1962 Latin Mass. A free copy will be available to any priest or seminarian who reserves the video on its web site.

The video includes over three hours of footage on two DVD discs, giving a step-by-step explanation and demonstration of the Low Mass in the Extraordinary Form. The production includes multiple appendices with instructions on the general principles of gesture and movement, as well as commonly encountered variations in the elements of the Mass.

Also featured is a real-time demonstration of the Mass, which is viewable from multiple camera angles on demand. A spiritual commentary on the Mass, as well as an explanation from an FSSP priest on the liturgical principles of the Extraordinary Form are also included.

Dario Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos, President of the Pontifical Ecclesia Dei Commission, provides an introduction for the DVD. The Ecclesia Dei Commission is tasked with the implementation of Pope Benedict’s Motu Proprio on the 1962 Latin Mass.

In the cardinal’s introduction, he explains that Pope Benedict XVI hoped to foster a “spiritual and theological richness” by promoting wider use [NB: This says "promoting", not just permitting.] of the Mass of St. Pius V through the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum.

The cardinal also emphasized that this Mass was a universal gift.

“All this liturgical richness, all this spiritual richness, and all the prayers so well-preserved during the centuries, all of this is offered by the Rome of today for all. As a gift for all, it is not a gift merely for the so-called traditionalists. No, it is a gift for the whole Catholic Church,” Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos said.

The “sacred silence” and contemplation of the ancient rite, the cardinal said, “makes present the Lord Jesus in an expression of rich liturgical beauty, as the conqueror of death and sin… this rite brought unity to the faith and became the single expression through which the Church adores God.”

The cardinal said that parishes and priests should make available the Extraordinary Form so that “everyone may have access to this treasure of the ancient liturgy of the Church.” He also stressed that, “even if it is not specifically asked for, or requested” it should be provided. [! Did you get that? Even if it is not requested?] Interestingly, he added that the Pope wants this Mass to become normal in parishes, so that “young communities can also become familiar with this rite.” [So… CNA says that Card. Castrillion, Pres. of the PCED says that the POPE wants the TLM as a normal part of parish life.]

The DVD has also been reviewed by Bishop Arthur J. Serratelli, Chairman of the Committee for Divine Worship of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

So, according to Card. Castrillion Hoyos, the Holy Father desires that the TLM be a normal part of parish life. He also says that priests should offer it in their parishes even if there is no specific request for it.

This is really huge.

Some people have contended that priests may not celebrate a public TLM in their parish unless they have first received a petition from a "stable group" (though that not a good translation of what Summorum Pontificum has in the Latin). Then some bishops, contra legem, have treid to limit the public celebrations of TLM’s even more by trying to impose a minimum number of people in such a "stable group".

Now we are getting the sense that priests should simply start using the 1962 Missale Romanum in their parishes so that people can get to know it and benefit from this gift.

The Catholic Church and the New Testament Canon by Kevin D. Dello Iacono

2008-03-08T07:41:00.002-05:00

The following term paper is one that I recently composed for a course called "Early Church History". This is a course that is taught at the graduate school level at Providence College. I am unable to provide the graded paper that includes notes from my professor (in all humility, they are mostly single-word compliments like "yes" "right" and "exactly"; etc.), but I provide the overall review that my professor wrote on the cover of my paper (I only posted it here to show proof of endorsement.)

The paper was written using the Chicago-Turabian style (the standard and recommended formatting style in Theology). Therefore, it includes a cover page along with end notes and a bibliography.

If you wish, you may use this paper for your own self-study or for apologetics purposes or for any other reason just as long as you kindly remember to cite me as the original source.

Note: the format of this "note" version appears slightly differently here compared to the original.

Pax vobiscum,

Kevin

---

Semester grade 96 A.

Dear Kevin

This is an excellent paper! Your study of the Church's role in the development of the New Testament Canon is done with care and careful dialogue with the perspective and scholarship of eminent theologians. The presentation is insightful and offer excellent supporting documentation, Congratulations on a very fine paper! (Fr. Thomas McGonigle, O.P.)

---

The Catholic Church and the New Testament: A Study of the Church’s Role in the Development of the New Testament Canon

Kevin D. Dello Iacono
RST-571-001
Rev. Thomas McGonigle, O.P.
14 December 2007

Dello Iacono 1

One of the most contentious and misunderstood topics in the history of religion concerns the Canon of sacred Scripture and its development and usage in the early Church. By means of a two-fold perspective, this paper will address the New Testament Canon and its formation. The first will concern the belief that the Catholic Church preceded the New Testament and the second will address the claim that this same Church either rejected or approved of certain books when compiling what would come to be known as the “New Testament”.

The Church Before the New Testament?

The Right Rev. Henry Graham, author of Where We Got the Bible: Our Debt to the Catholic Church, wrote a chapter under the heading “The Church Precedes the New Testament.” Therein, he makes mention of the fact that the Catholic Church preceded the Bible and that it was oral tradition and not the use of a complete Canon of sacred Scripture that served as the primary and efficient way for the disciples of Jesus and their successors to spread the Gospel and win souls for Christ and His one, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church.1 Fr. Graham’s assertion is shared by many of his non-Catholic colleagues, including Dr. Henry Chadwick, who wrote:

In the first century the Christian Bible had simply been the Old Testament (read in the Septuagint version). Authority resided in this scripture and in the words of the Lord, which long circulated in oral tradition, as is apparent in the letter of Clement to the Corinthians. The authoritative standing of this oral tradition continued to be high even after the sayings and doings of the Lord had been written down in the ‘gospel’ according to Mark, Luke, Matthew, or John. Even as late as the time of Irenaeus (c. 185-90) this oral tradition of the words of the Lord was regarded as an authority that had not yet been wholly merged with the written gospels.2

It was long after the death and resurrection of Jesus in A.D. 33 when only five out of His twelve Apostles composed writings that have been preserved. Some scholars, including Fr. Graham, place the date of the first of the New Testament books, the Gospel of Saint Mark, around the year A.D. 45. Hence, the teaching authority that Jesus gave to His Church through the power of the Holy Spirit preceded the compilation and publication of a book called the Bible.

Dello Iacono 2

This does not imply, by any means whatsoever, that the four Gospels and a few Epistles were not read in some form by the early Christians in the first century and sometime thereafter. As a matter of fact, Fr. Graham mentions that some of the Gospels and Epistles were each read aloud to the faithful who attended the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass every week in order to fulfill their Sunday obligation (just as the baptized faithful do today). What must be understood is that a complete Canon was not assigned to each and every Christian community, but selected writings were occasionally dispersed to individual communities not long after they had been written in order to address specific issues. According to Fr. Graham, “One Gospel [was dispersed] here, another there; one Epistle of St. Paul in one place, another in another; all scattered about in various parts of the world where there were bodies of Christians.”3

Therefore, the scriptures that were read were “scattered” and did not represent a complete Canon. It was the sole teaching authority of the Church that proliferated these writings and as a living voice she alone interpreted and explained them during homilies or in the writings of Popes and bishops, for example, Saint Clement.4

The deposit of Catholic faith was being passed on to people via word of mouth which was a traditional custom in the ancient world.5 The work of the apostles and the missionary activity of the early Catholic Christians in numerous lands inspired the conversion of thousands of people who came to belief in the Gospel of Jesus without ever having read a published Bible as we have it today in a variety of translations. Fr. Graham explains this more clearly:

How, then, did they become Christians? In the same way, of course, that Pagans become Catholics nowadays, by hearing the truth of God from the lips of Christ's missionaries. When the twelve Apostles met together in Jerusalem, and portioned out the known world among themselves for purposes of evangelization, allotting one country to one Apostle (such as India to St Thomas), and another to another, how did they propose to evangelize these people? By presenting each one with a New Testament? Such a thing did not exist, and, we may safely say, was not even thought of. Why did Our Lord promise them the gift of the Holy Ghost, and command them to be 'witnesses' of Him? And why, in fact, did the Holy Ghost come down upon the Twelve and endow them with the power speaking in

Dello Iacono 3

various languages? Why but that they might be able to 'preach the Gospel to every creature' in the tongue of every creature.6

The counter-argument that is often utilized by opponents who disregard the enduring conviction that the Church preceded sacred Scripture is that the early Church Fathers appealed to “Scripture alone” (“sola Scriptura”) as their sole rule of teaching authority on matters of faith and morals, especially when it came to dissensions within the early Christian communities and elsewhere. A careful examination of Patristic texts, however, reveals a contrary position to the one presented by the Church’s opponents. Many examples from the Patristic era clarifies this issue by making known the fact that the Fathers believed the Catholic Church preceded the New Testament. According to their mindset, the Church expressed the faith to people as a living voice of living tradition. As Saint Gregory of Nyssa (A.D. 335-394) wrote:

For it is enough for proof of our statement, that the TRADITION has come down to us from our fathers, handed on, like some inheritance, by succession from the apostles and the saints who came after them. They, on the other hand, who change their doctrines to this novelty, would need the support of arguments in abundance, if they were about to bring over to their views, not men light as dust, and unstable, but men of weight and steadiness: but so long as their statement is advanced without being established, and without being proved, who is so foolish and so brutish as to account the teaching of the evangelists and apostles, and of those who have successively shone like lights in the churches, of less force than this undemonstrated nonsense?7 (emphasis mine)

The earliest Patristic work amongst the Fathers related to this topic that is worthy of note is by Saint Irenaeus (A.D. 125-202). He believed that Scripture and Tradition represents a double dimension of the Church’s primary sources of teaching. He expressed concern over the Gnostic sect who believed knowledge was private and secretive and, consequently, they thoroughly rejected the concept of “oral tradition” as something false. St. Irenaeus countered their errors when he wrote in defense of the authority of the Church to pass on the faith by way of tradition:

Suppose there arise a dispute relative to some important question among us, should we not have recourse to the most ancient Churches with which the apostles held constant

Dello Iacono 4

intercourse, and learn from them what is certain and clear in regard to the present question? For how should it be if the apostles themselves had not left us writings? Would it not be necessary, [in that case,] to follow the course of the tradition which they handed down to those to whom they did commit the Churches?8

The early Christians believed that the deposit of faith, when it is spread throughout each community and is found to be one and the same, is not the result of error. It is of tradition. It was considered “reckless” to claim that it was an error made on the part of those who handed on “the tradition”.9

The fact that the early Church represented the sole rule of teaching the faith and served as a living testimony of Jesus who is the Logos, the Word Incarnate, has been admitted by a few Protestant scholars, amongst them, Dr. John Kelly (Early Christian Doctrines)10 and Dr. William Barclay (The Making of the Bible)11. The latter opines that the most surprising aspect in the creation of the New Testament is the length of time it took before it finally became a complete Canon. He admits the first time a list of New Testament books appeared, one that accurately corresponds with today’s Canon, was the “Thirty-Ninth Easter Letter” of St. Athanasius (sometimes called the “Festal Letter”) in the fourth century, A.D. 367. This proves that the early Church, for the most part, grew in spite of not having all of the Gospels or a complete Canon of sacred Scripture. As Dr. Barclay wrote:

But for long the Christian Church had no literature of its own, and the book which was read was the Old Testament, for, when the Church began, there was no such thing as a book called the New Testament or any part of it, for the books of the New Testament had still to be written. And here we come upon another surprise. Clearly the centre of the Christian message is the life and death of Jesus, and the extraordinary thing is the long delay before the Gospels were written.12

Similar to Fr. Graham, Dr. Barclay explains the dating of the Gospels, yet he slightly differs from Fr. Graham by claiming that St. Mark’s gospel cannot be placed before A.D. 60. He dates the gospels of St. Mathew and St. Luke between A.D. 80 and 90. St. John’s gospel is dated by Dr. Barclay around A.D. 100.13 Therefore, according to a Protestant scholar, the main corpus of

Dello Iacono 5

teaching put in common practice by the early Church was not the New Testament in a complete written volume, but the teachings of Jesus and of His Apostles as expressed through oral tradition, through words and deeds, through living tradition.

The relevant passages in the New Testament that gives place of honor to Apostolic tradition (next to the authority of sacred Scripture) are the following passages: 1 Corinthians 11:1-3; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Thess.2:14; and 2 Timothy 2:2. One passage that stands out is 2 Thess. 2:14. In this letter, Saint Paul encourages the faithful to “stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle” (emphasis mine).

When a person was unable to comprehend what was passed onto them then a living voice amongst the Church’s authority was sent in order to explicate the teachings of the faith in person. To cite just one example, in Acts 8:30-31 Saint Philip, an original Apostle of Jesus, verbally explained the Book of Isaiah to the Ethiopian Eunuch.

As the previously mentioned Patristic Fathers, along with Catholic and Protestant scholars, have routinely shown, the New Testament is not a collection of books that suddenly fell from the sky or were instantly written during the life of Christ or in the immediate years following His death and resurrection. The Church preceded the Bible. A half a century elapsed from the time the Gospel of St. Matthew was written to the time St. John wrote his gospel around the end of the first century. Jesus Himself, at least as far as recorded history is concerned, never wrote a single line of Scripture and He never commissioned His Apostles to become authors but to evangelize, teach, convert and baptize new members in the faith and to do so in the name of the Blessed Trinity (Matthew 28).

Scripture is unambiguous when it mentions that Jesus instructed His disciples to “Go and teach all nations,” “preach the Gospel to every creature,” and “He that heareth you heareth Me.” Jesus was simply commanding His followers to spread the Word of God orally the way He had done, that is, through a living authoritative teaching voice. He did not command them to leave to each

Dello Iacono 6

individual a book so that persons were left on their own authority to interpret a gospel or an epistle, but that they would propagate the faith orally and aid the faithful and prospective converts by vocally correcting, teaching and defending the faith on their journeys to various lands. Fr. Graham makes this same point:

What He [Jesus] commanded and meant them to do was precisely what He had done Himself, viz.—deliver the Word of God to the people by the living voice—convince , persuade, instruct, convert them by addressing themselves face to face to living men and women; not entrust their message to a dead book which might perish and be destroyed, and be misunderstood and misinterpreted and corrupted, but adopt the more safe and natural way of presenting the truth to them by word of mouth, and of training others to do the same after they themselves were gone, and so by a living tradition, preserving and handing down the Word of God as they had received it, to all generations.14

Dr. Barclay’s opinion on this subject corresponds with that of Fr. Graham. In a similar manner, Dr. Barclay defends the claim that the early Church was dominated by persons and not by a book or books. It was through holy people who were commissioned by Christ and His apostles and by their successors that the Gospel was propagated and the work of the Church was accomplished. Instead of a letter, it was Saints Peter and John who visited Samaria when the power of Christ began to grow in that area (Acts 8:14). It was Saint Barnabas, rather than a letter, who was sent to Antioch when the Gospel was first preached to the Gentiles (Acts 11:22). Although St. Paul certainly wrote letters, he often made use of St. Timothy or Titus or St. Mark along with the written Word of God in order to evangelize (1 Corinthians. 4:17; 16:10-12; 2 Cor. 7:6; 8:6; Philippians 2:19; Colossians 4:10; 1 Thess. 3:2). Dr. Barclay explains this process in a more technical manner as follows:

The very word used of the spread of the Gospel are all speaking words. To receive the Gospel and its facts is paralambanein, and to pass it on to someone else is paradidonai (1 Corinthians 11:23; 15:3), and these are the Greek words which are characteristic of and special to oral tradition. The Gospel itself is euaggelion which is good news, glad tidings, and which only later came to mean a kind of book. To preach the Gospel is expressed by the word kerissein, which literally means to proclaim as a herald. The supreme function of the Christian is marturia, which is personal witness. The Gospel itself is logos akoes, which literally means the word of hearing, the word which is heard (1 Thessalonians 2:13;

Dello Iacono 7

Hebrews 4:2). Certainly in the beginning it was in terms of speech and not of writing, in terms of persons and not of books that the Church thought-and it still remains true that the best epistle of all is a living epistle known and read of all men (2 Corinthians 3:2; emphases in original).15

The Catholic Church Compiled and Approved the Canon of the New Testament?

The early Church faced several individuals and groups who promoted pseudo-Christian teachings called heresies that countered Divine Revelation. Most of these errors were Christological heresies as embodied in groups that lacked any link whatsoever to Apostolic authority and Apostolic tradition, especially the Gnostic sect. According to Dr. Patrick Reid:

During this period, and the third century, the Church fathers, in connection with the struggle with gnosticism which appealed to a secret or esoteric understanding of the Christian revelation, began to develop certain criteria for acceptance or rejection of books in the Christian canon. These were: conformity with the rule of faith, or the simple creed taught to converts at baptism, apostolic authorship or connection with the preaching of an apostle, and wide usage in most of the churches.15

How the Church compiled and approved the complete Canon of the New Testament since the fourth century is of such historical magnitude that a summary of it must be mentioned in order to visualize the claim that the Bible came from the Church. The summarization of this process is as follows:

In A.D. 382, Pope Damasus followed the Council of Rome by issuing a decree that listed the present Old and New Testaments (all 73 books) of the Holy Bible; in A.D. 393, the Council of Hippo sanctioned the 73 books of the Old and New Testaments and this list was further established in the year A.D. 397 at the Council of Carthage. Pope St. Innocent I, in the year A.D. 405, sent a letter to Bishop Exsuperius of Toulouse and confirmed these same 73 books that were officially sanctioned several years earlier by the aforementioned councils. In A.D. 419, the Second Council of Carthage also confirmed the 73 books of the Old and New Testaments. In A.D. 1441, the ecumenical Council of Florence formally defined all 73 books and in A.D. 1546, the ecumenical Council of Trent formally defined the entire Canon of the Bible thus making it, according to recent

Dello Iacono 8

scholars, a “closed canon” and this was followed in 1869 by the ecumenical First Vatican Council which reaffirmed the Tridentine list of canonical books.16

In latter times, this process was confirmed by Catholic and non-Catholic scholars, including Dr. Frederick Fyvie Bruce, who stated in respect to the fourth century Councils of Hippo and Carthage that “these appear to have been the first church councils to make a formal pronouncement on the canon.”17 Dr. Jaroslav Pelikan recently acknowledged this formerly ongoing development in his book, Whose Bible Is It? He wrote:

The West followed the lead of Athanasius. In 382, a synod was held at Rome under Pope Damasus, at which the influence of Jerome secured the adoption of a list of books answering to that of Athanasius. This was ratified by Pope Gelasius at the end of the fifth century. The same list was confirmed independently for the province of Africa at Hippo Regius in 393 and at Carthage in 397 and 419 under the leadership of Augustine of Hippo. The second canon of the Second Trullan Council of 692, known to canon lawyers as the Quinisext, may be taken to have formally closed the process of the formation of the New Testament canon for East and West.18

In What is the Bible?, Henri Daniel-Rops explains how this process featured two criteria used by the Church whenever she determined what books should and should not be included in the New Testament Canon. One was “catholicity” and the other “apostolic nature”. A text was approved only if it was directly associated with the traditional Christian communities as a whole. They favored certain texts due to their theological reliability, that is, they were orthodox (“right doctrine”) and were rooted in Apostolic traditions in such a way that each Christian community elicited a profound sense of orthodpraxi (“correct practice”).19 According to Daniel-Rops:

As the liturgy crystallized, the custom of reading pages from the Epistles and Gospels during Mass exposed their contents to a public test; when the Christian conscience, illuminated and guided by ecclesiastical authority, had recognized a certain number of them as bearing the mark of the Holy Spirit, the choice was made. And as in these primitive communities the apostolic connection was fundamental, those writings were retained which living testimony established as emanating directly from the disciples of Jesus.20

It is the ancient Muratorian Canon, discovered and published in 1740, that scholars generally point to in order to prove how sacred Scripture came from the Church long after the Christian era officially commenced in A.D. 33.

Dello Iacono 9

This ancient work contains a list of Scriptural books that were compiled in Rome around the year A.D. 200. The Church at that time had the same canon as the Church has today, albeit one that was still considered an “open canon” as opposed to a “closed canon” which would not come to fruition until much later, especially during the fourth session at the Council of Trent in the 16th century, whose official pronouncement on the Canon of sacred Scripture was recognized over a century later by the Eastern Orthodox Christians in the year 1672!21

Conclusion

It is clear from what has been written throughout this composition that the formation of the collection of the New Testament was “informal and decentralized. A drawn-out affair that of increasing consensus which was completed only in the fourth century.”22 That is, “completed” in the sense that it was formally defined.

The overall goal of this paper was to prove the Catholic claim that the Church preceded the Bible and that she alone compiled and determined the Canon of inspired books in the New Testament. This has been ascertained by the study of sacred Scripture and Tradition and from the writings of the Patristics along with the works of Biblical and history scholars, both Catholic and non-Catholic. It would be prudent for both sides of the debate to engage in a similar study by reading the available data on this subject so that those who claim to follow the Blessed Savior, Jesus Christ, will come to the realization that the early Christians considered the Church, and not the Bible (it didn’t exist for early Christians), as the “pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15).

Perhaps as a result of their investigation they will understand, as St. Augustine and Martin Luther did, that the Bible is Catholic. Luther once said that, “We are compelled to concede to the Papists [Catholics] that they have the Word of God; that we received it from them, and that without them we should have had no knowledge of it at all"23 and the former stated that he “would put no faith in the Gospels unless the authority of the Catholic Church directed me to do so.”24

Dello Iacono 10

End Notes

1. The Right Rev. Henry Henry G. Graham. Where We Got the Bible: Our Debt to the Catholic Church (Rockford: Tan, 1977),17ff .

2. Dr. Henry Chadwick The Early Church (New York: Penguin, 1993), 43.

3. Graham, Where We Got The Bible, 29.

4. Chadwick, The Early Church, 42.

5. Dr. William L. Langer The Encyclopedia of World History: Ancient, Medieval, and Modern, Chronologically Arranged (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2001), 1.

6. Graham, Where We Got the Bible, 19.

7. Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius, 4:6. .http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/290104.htm

8. Irenaeus Against Heresies 3, 4:1. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103304.htm

9. Tertullian Prescription Against the Heresies, 28. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0311.htm

10. Dr. John Norman Davidson “J.N.D.” Kelly Early Christine Doctrines (New York: Harper and Row, 1960), 47-48.

11. Dr. William Barclay The Making of the Bible (New York: Abingdon, 1961).

12. Ibid., 44.

13. Ibid.

14. Graham, Where We Got the Bible, 18.

15. Barclay, The Making of the Bible, 73.

16. Dr. Patrick Reid Readings in Western Religious Thought: The Ancient
World (Mahwah: Paulist Press, 1987), 285.

17. Rev. Frank Chacon and Jim Burnham Beginning Apologetics 7: How to Read the Bible-A Catholic Introduction to Interpreting and Defending Sacred Scripture (Farmington: San Juan Catholic Seminars, 2003), 14.

Dello Iacono 11

18. Dr. Frederick Fyvie Bruce The Canon of Scripture (Westmont: InterVarsity, 1992), 97.

19. Dr. Jarsoslav Pelikan Whose Bible Is It? (New York: Penguin, 2005), 117.

20. Henri Daniel-Rops What Is The Bible? (New York: Hawthorn, 1958), 35.

21. Ibid., 34.

22. Dr. Williston Walker A History of the Christian Church (New York: Scribner, 1985), 73.

23.Martin Luther Commentary on Saint John Ch. 16; Quoted in Paul Whitcomb The Catholic Church Has the Answer (Rockford: TAN, 1986), 20-21 .

24.Saint Augustine of Hippo Against the Letter of Mani, 5, 6; Quoted in William A. Jurgens The Faith of the Early Fathers (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1970), Vol. 3, no. 1581.

Dello Iacono 12

Bibliography

Barclay, William. The Making of the Bible. New York: Abingdon,
1961.

Bruce, Frederick Fyvie. The Canon of Scripture. Westmont:
InterVarsity, 1992.

Chacon, Rev. Frank and Jim Burnham. Beginning Apologetics 7: How to
Read the Bible-A Catholic Introduction to Interpreting and Defending Sacred Scripture. Farmingtom: San Juan Catholic Seminars, 2003.

Chadwick, Henry. The Early Church. New York: Penguin,
1993.

Davidson, John Norman “J.N.D.” Early Christine Doctrines. New York: Harper
and Row, 1960.

Douay Rheims-The Holy Bible. Fitzwilliam: Loreto,
2005.

Graham. The Right. Rev. Henry. Where We Got the Bible: Our Debt to the Catholic Church. Rockford: TAN, 1977.

Gregory of Nyssa. Against Eunomius.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/290104.htm

Irenaeus. Against Heresies.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103304.htm

Jurgens William A. The Faith of the Early Fathers. Collegeville: Liturgical
Press, 1970.

Kelly, John Norman Davidson. Early Christine Doctrines. New York: Harper and Row, 1960

Dello Iacono 13

Langer, William L. The Encyclopedia of World History: Ancient, Medieval,
and Modern, Chronologically Arranged. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2001.
Pelikan, Jaroslav. Whose Bible Is It? New York: Penguin, 2005.

Reid, Patrick. Readings in Western Religious Thought: The Ancient World. Mahwah: Paulist Press, 1987.

Rops, Henri Daniel. What Is The Bible New York:
Hawthorn, 1958.

Tertullian. Prescription Against the Heresies.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0311.htm

Whitcomb, Paul. The Catholic Church has the Answer. Rockford:
TAN, 1986.

---
Copyright 2008. Kevin D. Dello Iacono. All Rights Reserved. This composition may not be published, broadcast, reposted, rewritten, or redistributed without the expressed written permission of its author.

The Priesthood by St. John Vianney

2008-03-08T06:54:00.008-05:00

Part One:

Click here

Part Two:

Click here

What Are the Origins of Ash Wednesday and the Use of Ashes? By Fr. William Saunders

2008-02-06T06:24:00.000-05:00

The liturgical use of ashes originates in Old Testament times. Ashes symbolized mourning, mortality and penance. For instance, in the Book of Esther, Mordecai put on sackcloth and ashes when he heard of the decree of King Ahasuerus (or Xerxes, 485-464 B.C.) of Persia to kill all of the Jewish people in the Persian Empire (Est 4:1). Job (whose story was written between the 7th and 5th centuries B.C.) repented in sackcloth and ashes (Job 42:6). Prophesying the Babylonian captivity of Jerusalem, Daniel (c. 550 B.C.) wrote, "I turned to the Lord God, pleading in earnest prayer, with fasting, sackcloth and ashes" (Dn 9:3). In the fifth century B.C., after Jonah's preaching of conversion and repentance, the town of Ninevah proclaimed a fast and put on sackcloth, and the king covered himself with sackcloth and sat in the ashes (Jon 3:5-6). These Old Testament examples evidence both a recognized practice of using ashes and a common understanding of their symbolism.

Jesus Himself also made reference to ashes. Referring to towns that refused to repent of sin although they had witnessed the miracles and heard the good news, our Lord said, "If the miracles worked in you had taken place in Tyre and Sidon, they would have reformed in sackcloth and ashes long ago" (Mt 11:21).

The early Church continued the usage of ashes for the same symbolic reasons. In his book, De Poenitentia, Tertullian (c. 160-220) prescribed that the penitent must "live without joy in the roughness of sackcloth and the squalor of ashes." Eusebius (260-340), the famous early Church historian, recounted in his The History of the Church how an apostate named Natalis came to Pope Zephyrinus clothed in sackcloth and ashes begging forgiveness. Also during this time, for those who were required to do public penance, the priest sprinkled ashes on the head of the person leaving confession.

In the Middle Ages (at least by the time of the eighth century), those who were about to die were laid on the ground on top of sackcloth sprinkled with ashes. The priest would bless the dying person with holy water, saying, "Remember that thou art dust and to dust thou shalt return." After the sprinkling, the priest asked, "Art thou content with sackcloth and ashes in testimony of thy penance before the Lord in the day of judgment?" To which the dying person replied, "I am content." In all of these examples, the symbolism of mourning, mortality and penance is clear.

Eventually, the use of ashes was adapted to mark the beginning of Lent, the 40-day preparation period (not including Sundays) for Easter. The ritual for the "Day of Ashes" is found in the earliest editions of the Gregorian Sacramentary, which dates at least to the eighth century. About the year 1000, an Anglo-Saxon priest named Aelfric preached: "We read in the books, both in the Old Law and in the New, that the men who repented of their sins bestrewed themselves with ashes and clothed their bodies with sackcloth. Now let us do this little at the beginning of our Lent that we strew ashes upon our heads to signify that we ought to repent of our sins during the Lenten fast." As an aside, Aelfric reinforced his point by then telling of a man who refused to go to Church on Ash Wednesday and receive ashes; the man was killed a few days later in a boar hunt. Since this time, the Church has used ashes to mark the beginning of the penitential season of Lent, when we remember our mortality and mourn for our sins.

In our present liturgy for Ash Wednesday, we use ashes made from the burned palm branches distributed on the Palm Sunday of the previous year. The priest blesses the ashes and imposes them on the foreheads of the faithful, making the sign of the cross and saying, "Remember, man you are dust and to dust you shall return," or "Turn away from sin and be faithful to the Gospel." As we begin this holy season of Lent in preparation for Easter, we must remember the significance of the ashes we have received: We mourn and do penance for our sins. We again convert our hearts to the Lord, who suffered, died and rose for our salvation. We renew the promises made at our baptism, when we died to an old life and rose to a new life with Christ. Finally, mindful that the kingdom of this world passes away, we strive to live the kingdom of God now and look forward to its fulfillment in Heaven.

+ + +

Fr. Saunders is president of the Notre Dame Institute and pastor of Queen of Apostles Parish, both in Alexandria.

This article appeared in the February 15, 1996 issue of "The Arlington Catholic Herald."

Courtesy of the "Arlington Catholic Herald" diocesan newspaper of the Arlington (VA) diocese. For subscription information, call 1-800-377-0511 or write 200 North Glebe Road, Suite 607 Arlington, VA 22203.

+ + +

Lenten Reflection

From Pope Pius XII's encyclical Mediator Dei (articles 157-158)

157. During the days of Septuagesima and Lent, our Holy Mother the Church over and over again strives to make each of us seriously consider our misery, so that we may be urged to a practical emendation of our lives, detest our sins heartily and expiate them by prayer and penance. For constant prayer and penance done for past sins obtain for us divine help, without which every work of ours is useless and unavailing.

158. In Holy Week, when the most bitter sufferings of Jesus Christ are put before us by the liturgy, the Church invites us to come to Calvary and follow in the blood-stained footsteps of the divine Redeemer, to carry the cross willingly with Him, to reproduce in our own hearts His spirit of expiation and atonement, and to die together with Him.

+ + +

Domine Iesu, Noverim me (Lord Jesus, Let Me Know Myself) By St. Augustine (354-430)

Lord Jesus, let me know myself and know Thee, And desire nothing save only Thee. Let me hate myself and love Thee. Let me do everything for the sake of Thee. Let me humble myself and exalt Thee. Let me think of nothing except Thee. Let me die to myself and live in Thee. Let me accept whatever happens as from Thee. Let me banish self and follow Thee, And ever desire to follow Thee. Let me fly from myself and take refuge in Thee, That I may deserve to be defended by Thee. Let me fear for myself, let me fear Thee, And let me be among those who are chosen by Thee. Let me distrust myself and put my trust in Thee. Let me be willing to obey for the sake of Thee. Let me cling to nothing save only to Thee, And let me be poor because of Thee. Look upon me, that I may love Thee. Call me that I may see Thee, And for ever enjoy Thee. Amen.
Delete

+ + +

Lenten Articles

I. The Sermons of St. Francis de Sales for Lent

http://www.oblates.org/spirituality/sundays_salesian/sermons_for_lent.php

II. Sermon XXXIX: on Lent, I By Pope St. Leo the Great

http://www.catholicculture.org/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=2215

III. History of Lent By Abbot Gueranger, OSB

http://www.ewtn.com/library/LITURGY/HISTLENT.TXT

IV. Mystery of Lent By Abbot Gueranger, OSB

http://www.ewtn.com/library/LITURGY/MYSLENT.TXT

V. Practice During Lent By Abbot Gueranger, OSB

http://www.ewtn.com/library/LITURGY/PRACLENT.TXT

VI. The Practice of Lenten Practices

http://www.domestic-church.com/CONTENT.DCC/19990301/FRIDGE/expl_lent.htm

VII. Is Lent Dead? By Fr. Paul A. Duffner, O.P.

http://copiosa.org/lent/lent_dead.htm

VIII. Attrition and Contrition By Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.

Taken from REALITY—A Synthesis Of Thomistic Thought, Chapter 41

http://www.ewtn.com/library/THEOLOGY/REALITY.HTM#41

+ + +

Copiosa apud eum Redemptio (With Him There is Plentiful Redemption - Psalm 130:7)

Home Page for Lenten/Easter Season
Celebrated 6 February (Ash Wednesday)
through 11 May 2008 (Feast of Pentecost)

http://copiosa.org/lent/index.htm

+ + +

Everything You Wanted To Know About Lent

http://copiosa.org/lent/lent_everything.htm

+ + +

On the Dolors of Mary By Saint Alphonsus de Ligouri

http://copiosa.org/liguori/liguori_dolors.htm

+ + +

The Act of Perfect Contrition

http://copiosa.org/sacraments/contrition.htm

+ + +

The Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation By Father Paul A. Duffner, O.P.

"....As to the fruits of this sacrament [Confession], they can hardly be summed up better than did Pope Pius XII in his Encyclical on the Mystical Body of Christ [MYSTICI CORPORIS CHRISTI]....

'We heartily recommend the pious custom introduced by the Church, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, of frequent confession. It gives us a more thorough knowledge of ourselves, stimulates Christian humility, helps us to uproot our evil habits, wages war on spiritual negligence and tepidity, purifies our consciences, strengthens our wills, encourages spiritual direction and, by virtue of the Sacrament itself, increases grace.'"

http://copiosa.org/sacraments/sacrament_reconciliation.htm

+ + +

From a letter by Saint Paul of the Cross

It is very good and holy to consider the passion of our Lord, and to meditate on it, for by this sacred path we reach union with God. In this most holy school we learn true wisdom, for it was there that all the saints learned it.

Therefore, be constant in practicing every virtue, and especially in imitating the patience of our dear Jesus, for this is the summit of pure love. Live in such a way that all may know that you bear outwardly as well as inwardly the image of Christ crucified, the model of all gentleness and mercy. For if a man is united inwardly with the Son of the living God, he also bears his likeness outwardly by his continual practice of heroic goodness, and especially through a patience reinforced by courage, which does not complain either secretly or in public. Conceal yourselves in Jesus crucified, and hope for nothing except that all men be thoroughly converted to his will.

+ + +

Saint Catherine of Bologna

Taken from "On the Seven Spiritual Weapons"

Whoever wishes to carry the cross for his sake must take up the proper weapons for the contest, especially those mentioned here. First, diligence; second, distrust of self; third, confidence in God; fourth, remembrance of Passion; fifth, mindfulness of one's own death; sixth, remembrance of God's glory; seventh, the injunctions of Sacred Scripture following the example of Jesus Christ in the desert.

+ + +

From the writings of Saint Rose of Lima

Our Lord and Savior lifted up his voice and said with incomparable majesty: "Let all men know that grace comes after tribulation. Let them know that without the burden of afflictions it is impossible to reach the height of grace. Let them know that the gifts of grace increase as the struggles increase. Let men take care not to stray and be deceived. This is the only true stairway to paradise, and without the cross they can find no road to climb to heaven."

"If only mortals would learn how great it is to possess divine grace, how beautiful, how noble, how precious. How many riches it hides within itself, how many joys and delights! No one would complain about his cross or about troubles that may happen to him, if he would come to know the scales on which they are weighed when they are distributed to men."
Delete

+ + +

Saint Gemma Galgani's Prayer

O my crucified God, behold me at Your feet; do not cast me out, now that I appear before You as a sinner. I have offended You exceedingly in the past, my Jesus, but it shall be so no longer.

Before You, O Lord, I place all my sins; I have now considered Your own sufferings and see how great is the worth of that Precious Blood that flows from Your veins.

O my God, at this hour close Your eyes to my want of merit, and since You have been pleased to die for my sins, grant me forgiveness for them all, that I may no longer feel the burden of my sins, for this burden, Dear Jesus, oppresses me beyond measure.

Assist me, my Jesus, for I desire to become good whatsoever it may cost; take away, destroy, utterly root out all that You find in me contrary to Your holy will. At the same time, I pray You, Lord Jesus, to enlighten me that I may be able to walk in Your holy light. Amen.

Abp. Ranjith on Kneeling for Communion and Communion on the Tongue

2008-01-28T09:33:00.000-05:00

Originally Posted by Shawn Tribe
New Liturgical Movement blog

Link to Original

Archbishop Ranjith believes that it is time to reconsider Communion in the hand

Libreria Editrice Vaticana has published a book, Dominus Est by Bishop Athansius Schnedier, where that Bishop analyzes the question of communion recieved kneeling and on the tongue.

Archbishop Malcolm Ranjith has written the foreward to this book, which the NLM is happy to present an unofficial translation here to follow. (Many thanks to a good friend of the NLM for providing the link to this, which came originally through, Associazione Luci sull'Est.

Without further adieu, the foreword of Msgr. Ranjith, Secretary to the CDW:

In the Book of Revelation, St. John tells how he had seen and heard what was revealed and prostrated [himself] in adoration at the foot of the angel of God (cf. Rev 22, 8). Prostrating, or getting down one one's knees before the majesty of the presence of God in humble adoration, was a habit of reverence that Israel brought constantly to the presence of the Lord. It says the first book of Kings, "when Solomon had finished putting this prayer to the Lord and this plea, he stood up before the altar of the Lord, where he was kneeling, with palms stretched heavenward, and blessed the whole assembly of Israel "(1 King 8, 54-55). The position of supplication of the King is clear: He was kneeling in front of the altar.

The same tradition is also visible in the New Testament where we see Peter get on his knees before Jesus (cf. Lk 5, 8); when Jairus asked him to heal her daughter (Luke 8, 41), when the Samaritan returned to thank him, and when Mary the sister of Lazarus asked for the life of her brother (John 11, 32). The same attitude of prostration before the revelation of the divine presence and is generally known in the Book of Revelation (Rev. 5, 8, 14 and 19, 4).

Closely linked to this tradition was the conviction that the Holy Temple in Jerusalem was the dwelling place of God and therefore, in the temple it was necessary to prepare one's disposition by corporal expression, a deep sense of humility and reverence in the presence of the Lord.

Even in the Church, the deep conviction that in the Eucharistic species the Lord is truly and really present, along with the growing practice of preserving the Holy Sacrament in tabernacles, contributed to practice of kneeling in an attitude of humble adoration of the Lord in the Eucharist.

[...]

...faith in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharistic species already belonged to the essence of the faith of the Catholic Church and was an intrinsic part of Catholicism. It was clear that we could not build up the Church if that faith was minimally affected.

Therefore, the Eucharist, bread transubstantiated in Body of Christ and wine into the Blood of Christ, God among us, is to be greeted with wonder, reverence and an immense attitude of humble adoration. Pope Benedict XVI... points out that "receiving the Eucharist means adoring him whom we receive [...] only in adoration can a profound and genuine reception mature."(Sacramentum Caritatis 66).

Following this tradition, it is clear that it became coherent and indispensable to take actions and attitudes of the body and spirit which makes it easier to [enter into] silence, recollection, and the humble acceptance of our poverty in the face of the infinite greatness and holiness of the One who comes to meet us in the Eucharistic species. The best way to express our sense of reverence to the Lord in Mass is to follow the example of Peter, who as the Gospel tells us, threw himself on his knees before the Lord and said, 'Lord, depart from me, for I am a sinner " (Luke 5, 8).

As we see in some churches now, this practice is decreasing and those responsible not only require that the faithful should receive the Holy Eucharist standing, but even eliminate all kneelers forcing the faithful to sit or stand, even during the elevation and adoration of the [Sacred] Species. It is ironic that such measures have been taken in [some] dioceses by those responsible for liturgy, or in churches, by pastors, without even the smallest amount of consultation of the faithful, even though today, more than ever, there is an environment desiring democracy in the Church.

At the same time, speaking of communion in the hand, it must be recognized that the practice was improperly and quickly introduced in some quarters of the Church shortly after the Council, changing the age-old practice and becoming regular practice for the whole Church. They justified the change saying that it better reflected the Gospel or the ancient practice of the Church... Some, to justify this practice referred to the words of Jesus: "Take and eat" (Mk 14, 22; Mt 26, 26).

Whatever the reasons for this practice, we cannot ignore what is happening worldwide where this practice has been implemented. This gesture has contributed to a gradual weakening of the attitude of reverence towards the sacred Eucharistic species whereas the previous practice had better safeguarded that sense of reverence. There instead arose an alarming lack of recollection and a general spirit of carelessness. We see communicants who often return to their seats as if nothing extraordinary has happened... In many cases, one cannot discern that sense of seriousness and inner silence that must signal the presence of God in the soul.

Then there are those who abuse takes away the sacred species to keep them as souvenirs, those who sell, or worse yet, who take them away to desecrate it in Satanic rituals. Even in large concelebrations, also in Rome, several times the sacred species has been found thrown onto the ground.

This situation not only leads us to reflect upon a serious loss of faith, but also on outrageous offenses...

The Pope speaks of the need not only to understand the true and deep meaning of the Eucharist, but also to celebrate it with dignity and reverence. He says that we must be aware of "gestures and posture, such as kneeling during the central moments of the Eucharistic Prayer." (Sacramentum Caritatis, 65). Also, speaking about the reception of the Holy Communion he invites everyone to "make every effort to ensure that this simple act preserves its importance as a personal encounter with the Lord Jesus Christ in the sacrament." (Sacramentum Caritatis, 50).

In this vein, the book written by Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of Karaganda in Kazakhstan entitled Dominus Est is significant and appreciated. He wants to make a contribution to the current debate on the real and substantial presence of Christ in the consecrated species of bread and wine... from his experience, which aroused in him a deep faith, wonder and devotion to the Lord present in the Eucharist, he presents us with a historical-theological [consideration] clarifying how the practice of receiving Holy Communion on the tonue and kneeling has been accepted and practiced in the Church for a long period of time.

Now I think it is high time to review and re-evaluate such good practices and, if necessary, to abandon the current practice that was not called for by Sacrosanctum Concilium, nor by Fathers, but was only accepted after its illegitimate introduction in some countries. Now, more than ever, we must help the faithful to renew a deep faith in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharistic species in order to strengthen the life of the Church and defend it in the midst of dangerous distortions of the faith that this situation continues to cause.

The reasons for this move must be not so much academic but pastoral - spiritual as well as liturgical - in short, what builds better faith. Mons. Msgr. Schneider in this sense shows a commendable courage because he has been able to grasp the true meaning of the words of St. Paul: "but everything should be done for building up" (1 Cor 14, 26).

MALCOLM RANJITH
Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship

The Latin Mass Explained By Fr. George Moorman

2008-01-26T12:14:00.000-05:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MEDIA ADVISORY
Catholic PRWire
1/26/2008 - 10:59 AM PST

CHICAGO, IL (JANUARY 26, 2008) - Everything Needed to Understand and Appreciate the Traditional Latin Mass. Fr. George Moorman. Extremely informative, but very easy to read!

The Latin Mass Explained tells the Catholic faithful what happens, prayer by prayer, in the Traditional Latin Mass (1962 Missale Romanum).

Why does the Church use Latin exclusively in the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite? What is the sacred silence of the Mass? Why does the altar boy ring the bells? What vestments does the priest wear and why?

Pope Benedict XVI’s motu proprio opening the door to celebration of the Latin Mass.

We are happy to offer The Latin Mass Explained at the very low price of $15.00 (USD), plus shipping and handling charges.

The Latin Mass Explained
Tells the Catholic faithful what happens, prayer by prayer, in the Traditional Latin Mass (1962 Missale Romanum)
Rev. George Moorman
185 pages, paperback

Click here to order
Contact: Canons Regular of St. John Cantius
Canons Regular of St. John Cantius website
Rev. Scott Haynes - webmaster, 312-243 7373

High Profile Abortion Activists Are Now Pro-Life

2008-01-22T14:57:00.000-05:00

Sandra Cano, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, and Norma McCorvey...The “Doe” of Doe v. Bolton, a co-founder of NARAL who coined the phrase “pro-choice”, and the “Roe” of Roe v. Wade are all now pro-life.

Link to Original

I. DR. BERNARD NATHANSON

Dr. Bernard Nathanson was one of the original founders of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL) in 1969. NARAL is the pro-abortion group currently spending $40 million to block all pro-life judges and legislation. He presided over 60,000 abortions and was one of the pioneering forces in the legalization of abortion on demand in the early 1970s.

Nathanson invented many of the political slogans that the pro-abortion movement is still using, such as “pro-choice,” “reproductive rights,” “freedom of choice,” and “a woman’s right to choose.” Through the technology of ultrasound, Nathanson saw for the first time the reality of what actually happens to the unborn child during an abortion and came to understand and support the pro-life position.

Quotes by Dr. Nathanson

! “The truth never emerged in any way, shape, or form from NARAL.”

! “One of the major functions of NARAL and its executive board was the dissemination of false statistics regarding illegal abortion and deaths from abortion.”

! “The figures that we were releasing to the press were largely dead-designed to influence American public opinion. They had very little link or nexus to reality at all.”

! “The statistics that we gave to the American public about illegal abortions annually; the statistics we fabricated regarding the number of women dying from illegal abortions annually; all of these matters were pure fabrication and still persist to this very day.”

! “We spoke of 5,000 to 10,000 deaths a year. I confess that I knew the figures were totally false. It was a useful figure, widely accepted, so why go out of our way to correct it with honest statistics?”

! “We in NARAL were in the business of coining slogans principally for the media . . . we scattered catchy slogans for them . . . to use . . . in their stories. Slogans like “reproductive rights,” “freedom of choice,” “pro-choice.” For many years we’ve known them to be hollow and meaningless. They’re just catchy and, essentially, without substance.”

! “It’s amusing to me that many of the slogans I coined . . . in those years are still being used by NARAL . . . as arguments. They were never meant to be arguments. They were only . . . slogans . . .and many other things, but never the truth.”

! For more information, Nathanson’s autobiography, The Hand of God, is available at (888) 219-4747.

II. NORMA MCCORVEY

Norma McCorvey was the “Roe” of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court case that legalized abortion on demand. Ironically, she never had an abortion. In 1969, when she found herself pregnant, she sought an abortion but could not get one because of strong pro-life laws in her home state of Texas. To garner sympathy for her case, McCorvey told people she had been raped. Still, she was not granted an abortion. She eventually placed the child she was carrying for adoption. In 1972 her case, Roe v. Wade, was heard by the United States Supreme Court. When the Supreme Court ruled on Roe v. Wade in January 1973, they reversed the laws banning abortion in every one of America’s 50 states. Before becoming pro-life, McCorvey worked in an abortion clinic.

Quotes by Norma McCorvey

! “The public had certain misgivings about abortion in the early seventies, but there was much greater acceptance of abortion in cases of rape, so even though I wasn’t really raped, I thought saying so would garner greater public support.”

! “This means that the abortion case that destroyed every state law protecting the unborn was based on a lie.”

! “I’ve never had an abortion, so I really wouldn’t know how it felt to have one, but I do know the faces that I’ve seen, the women I’ve talked to in the pro-life movement.”

! “A lot of the women that used to come into the abortion clinic used to tell me, . . . ‘You know why I’m doing this, don’t you?’ And I’m like, ‘No, and you don’t have to tell me, either’. . . . They said, ‘I’m just afraid I don’t know how to be a mom.’ And I thought, ‘That’s sad.’”

! “I really hadn’t been happy with anything I saw in the pro-abortion movement. . . . They don’t really care about women. All they care about is your money. If you can give them $295 plus $100 for a sonogram, then they like you, but once you’re gone, they don’t know you.”

! For more information, check McCorvey’s website: www.roenomore.org.

III. SANDRA CANO

Sandra Cano is the woman whose name was used against her will to legalize late-term, including partial birth, abortions in Doe v. Bolton, handed down by the United States Supreme Court in 1973. When Cano was pregnant with her fourth child, her children were put in foster care because her husband routinely abandoned the family. She sought legal help and, according to court documents, she sought an abortion but was turned down. Cano denies this. She tried to obtain this supposed request for an abortion from the abortion clinic, but the clinic claimed those records had disappeared. Even so, Cano’s alleged application for an abortion was used to legalize late-term abortions, and her name was the only one listed as a plaintiff in the class action suit that became known as Doe v. Bolton.

Quotes by Sandra Cano

! “I don’t think that was my signature, but I can’t be sure, because I signed a lot of papers with [my lawyer]. She did not tell me what they were, and I trusted her. Every one of those statements was false.”

! “I do not believe in abortion. I have never believed in abortion. I have always been pro-life.”

! “I’ve never believed in abortion. I’ve never had an abortion. Never would have an abortion, yet my name was used on a Supreme Court case that legalized late term abortions.”