The priorities of a nation

Here's a difficult question: Which of these two groups is celebrated for the entire month of June and which is largely forgotten except for about 30 seconds while people grill a hamburger or a hot dog?

"The nation which forgets its defenders will be itself forgotten." - Calvin Coolidge 

"Those who have long enjoyed such privileges as we enjoy forget in time that men have died to win them." —Franklin D. Roosevelt

Duty, Honor, Country. The first as his guide,  the second he applied, for the third he died.

Related reading here

Senior US Army Doctor: Covid "vaccines " a greater threat to soldiers health than the virus

 As noted here:

A senior U.S. army doctor said that COVID vaccines are more dangerous to the health of American soldiers than COVID itself after she had ground 'three out of three soldiers' in only one morning due to adverse reactions to the vaccine.

Lt. Col. Theresa Long is a senior U.S. army aerospace medicine specialist who testified at an expert panel on vaccine injuries organized by U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin on November 2 in Washington, D.C.

Dr. Long has repeatedly warned against the risks of adverse events posed by the mRNA vaccines and in September filed an affidavit against the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate for service members.

Long gave a 15-minute testimony about COVID vaccines adverse events experienced by soldiers and denounced the efforts of the U.S. army to conceal them.

'I believe the COVID vaccine is a greater threat to soldier’s health and military readiness than the virus itself,' she told the panel."

_____________________________

As the article explains,  we stand to lose over 200,000 soldiers because of military vaccine mandates.   This comes as China becomes ever more aggressive.   See here and here.

This is the goal of NWO elites, to weaken the United States and her military and to foster Chinese Communist expansion. The Termite Nations will have their antichristic Great Reset and Masonic-Communist New World Order at any expense. 

Francis denigrates soldiers, referring to us as "warmongers."

Francis is now denigrating soldiers as "warmongers."  See here.

(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis celebrated the Feast of All Souls Day on Thursday commemorating all those who have died in war, reminding humanity not to forget past lessons and warning that the only fruit yielded by conflict is death.

His words of warning and his powerful condemnation of warmongers came during his homily at the Sicily-Rome American War Cemetery some 50 kilometers south of Rome.

_____________________________________


The Catechism of the Catholic Church (2310), explains that, "Those who are sworn to serve their country in the armed forces (the people Francis refers to as "warmongers") are servants of the security and freedom of nations. If they carry out their duty honorably, they truly contribute to the common good of the nation and the maintenance of peace." 

The Lord God has commanded us, "You shall not kill." There are nine words in Hebrew for taking a life. The word used in Exodus 20: 13 for "Thou shalt not kill" is ratsach, a strong verb used to indicate an intentional and unjustified act of murder, such as the murder of innocent unborn. It does not refer to killing in war ( unless such killing is directed against civilian non-combatants or prisoners of war).  It is therefore disgusting for Francis to suggest that all soldiers who kill in combat are engaged in "evil," and are "warmongers."

The French preacher Lacordaire once said that the vocation of a soldier is next in dignity to the priesthood, not only because it commissioned him to defend justice on the field of battle and order on the field of peace, but also because it called him to the spirit and intention of sacrifice.

It is the soldier's high calling to the defense of justice and freedom which makes him (or should) so loved.  It was a soldier who first spoke the words recalled by the Church during every Mass at Holy Communion: "Lord, I am not worthy to have Thee come under my roof; but only say the word, and my servant will be healed." (Mt 8:8).

The Breviary, which priests pray daily, praises Judas Machabeus, who refused to surrender to superior enemy forces and died saying: "Far be it from us to do such a thing as to flee from them.  If our time has come, let us die bravely for our brethren, and leave no cause to question our honor." (1 Macc 9: 10).

One soldier who served his country selflessly for twenty years was Camille "Joe" Melanson, my father, a non-commissioned officer who served in two wars - the Korean and Vietnam conflicts.  See here: http://www.leominsterhigh.com/lhs-military00.htm

Our family has a long tradition of military service.  I served with military intelligence and was marked for death by the NPA in the Philippines.  My uncle Arthur was lost over the Pacific during World War II.  His body was never recovered.

Warmongers?  Those who have served this country (and other countries) in the defense of freedom deserve better than to be denigrated in such a fashion.

Francis owes us an apology.  He has benefited from our sacrifices.  And this is what he thinks of us?

Tom Brady doesn't get it...why we stand for the National Anthem

Father George Rutler on taking a knee during the National Anthem here.

"As a former NFL player, I am one American who will have nothing to do with any NFL Team that cannot find the corporate courage to stand for the millions of courageous past great Americans whose sacrifice gave meaning to our flag and national anthem and to the millions upon millions who still dream to come to its free shores."

Burgess Owens

From Cornell Law School: Standing for the National Anthem, here.

Turns out Tom Brady has deflated balls after all....

Tom Brady, enamored with his own celebrity, and completely ignorant of the extent of his intellectual paucity, has referred to President Donald Trump as "divisive" for asserting that NFL Football players should observe respect and proper protocol toward the United States Flag and the National Anthem.  See here.

Of course, President Trump is correct:


"Proper protocol for Star-Spangled Banner is found in a separate code under Title 36 of Patriotic and National Observances, Ceremonies,and Organizations, and listed under Chapter 3, Section 301 on the National Anthem:xx During a rendition of the National Anthem, when the flag is displayed, (a) all present should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart; (b) men not in uniform should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold the headdress at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart; and (c) individuals in uniform should give the military salute at the first note of the anthem and maintain that position until the last note; and (d) when the flag is not displayed, all present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed."

Source:

http://legionstuff.blogspot.com/2011/11/proper-protocol-for-allegiance-natl.html?m=1

But for sniveling simps like Tom Brady, who understand nothing of the sacrifices made by professional soldiers such as my father Joe Melanson and my uncle Arthur, whose body was never recovered, "freedom of speech" includes dissing the United Stated Flag and the National Anthem.

I think he may have received one too many concussions.

Pauline Hanson once said, "To survive in peace and harmony, united and strong, we must have one people, one nation, one flag."

To individuals like Tom Brady, infected by a sophomoric philosophy, the flag is nothing more than a useless symbol, so why respect it? And our national anthem is something to be pissed on in the name of political expediency and appeals to "freedom of speech," akin to Serrano's display of freedom of speech with his "Piss Christ."

Boycott the NFL.  And while you're at it, Tom Brady.

Saint Mary's Parish in Orange, Massachusetts: Resorting to violence to resolve conflicts is never the Christian way

In their zeal to promote the Cult of Softness and effeminacy in general, many within the Church advance a distorted notion of Christianity in which anger and violence are always and everywhere an "evil."

For example, at Saint Mary's Parish in Orange, Massachusetts, we read the following in the parish bulletin:

"As we celebrate Veterans Day this week, what should be the Christian attitude in resorting to violence to resolve conflicts?  Veterans are rightly honored for their role in defending the country, especially in time of conflict and violence.  Yet, resorting to violence as a means of trying to resolve human conflicts is not the Christian way to deal with relationships.  Jesus models the image of God in which all are valued and cherished as God's children, no matter who they are or which side they are on..."

Resorting to violence to resolve conflicts is never the Christian way?  Really?  While Jesus indicated that those who live by the sword will perish by it (Matthew 26:52), He also told His Disciples, as He gave them instructions for the Time of Crisis, "When I sent you forth without a money bag or a sack or sandals, were you in need of anything?" "No, nothing," they replied. He said to them, ^"But now one who has a money bag should take it, and likewise a sack, and one who does not have a sword should sell his cloak and buy one. For I tell you that this scripture must be fulfilled in me, namely, ‘He was counted among the wicked’; and indeed what is written about me is coming to fulfillment." Then they said, "Lord, look, there are two swords here.” But he replied, “It is enough!" (Luke 22: 35-38).

One who does not have a sword should buy one.  Why?  If resorting to violence always falls short of the Christian ideal, why then did Jesus exhort His followers to buy a sword.


The Sacred Scriptures show otherwise.  In the wonderful Catholic classic entitled "My Meditation on the Gospel," published by the Confraternity of the Precious Blood, Rev. James E. Sullivan provides us with the following meditation on Christian Fortitude:


"After a few days' stay at Capharnaum, Jesus and Mary and the first five Apostles made the journey to Jerusalem for the Passover. When they entered the Temple, they heard its usual peace broken by a great uproar. Men were shouting and bargaining, oxen and sheep were bleating. Jesus stiffened, His Father's house made into a market place! A fierce, set look came over His features. His hands seized some cords and tied them into a whip. His eyes never left the scene before Him. He walked forward then, arms outstretched. 'Take these things away!' He cried out. His voice was strong, yet trembling with anger. An uneasy fear came over the crowd, as His eyes burned into theirs. They hurried away their oxen and sheep, those in back urging on those in front. The money-changers alone held their ground. Jesus seized the end of their tables and sent them flying end over end. They became panic-stricken then. They grasped what coins they could and ran. Jesus stood alone in the courtyard. Peace settled again over the Temple.

My Lord, how I admire You in ths scene! We are so liable to think that being a Christian means being a weakling and a 'mouse'! How wonderful to see that distorted notion so firmly dispelled by the example of Your magnificent courage! Your Father's house was being desecrated; there was reason for the fighting - so You fought! You didn't care what they thought or what they would say. His glory was primary! Nor did it matter to You that You were alone against them all. Your courage was so great and Your cause so just that the entire crowd fled before You."

Does the cleansing of the Temple represent a failure to live the Christian ideal?  Of course not.

In a previous post at this Blog, I noted how it is possible to "be angry and sin not" (Ephesians 4: 26), something which liberal Christians do not understand. Writing for Touchstone Magazine, Dr. Leon J. Podles explains that, "..many Christians have a false understanding of the nature and role of anger. It is seen as something negative, something that a Christian should not feel.

In the sexual abuse cases in the Catholic Church, those who dealt with the bishops have consistently remarked that the bishops never expressed outrage or righteous anger, even at the most horrendous cases of abuse and sacrilege. Bishops seem to think that anger at sin is un-Christian. Gilbert Kilman, a child psychiatrist, commented, 'What amazes me is the lack of outrage the church feels when its good work is being harmed. So, if there is anything the church needs to know, it needs to know how to be outraged.'
Mark Serrano confronted Bishop Frank Rodimer, asking why he had let his priest-friend Peter Osinski sleep with boys at Rodimer’s beach house while Rodimer was in the next bedroom: 'Where is your moral indignation?' Rodimer’s answer was, 'Then I don’t get it. What do you want?' What Serrano wanted Rodimer to do was to behave like a man with a heart, a heart that is outraged by evil. But Rodimer couldn’t; his inability to feel outrage was a quality that had helped make him a bishop. He would never get into fights, never rock the boat, never 'divide' but only 'unify.' Rodimer could not understand why he should feel deep anger at evil, at the violation of the innocent, at the oppression of the weak.
Emotional Deformation

The emotions that are now suppressed are hatred and anger. Christians think that they ought not to feel these emotions, that it is un-Christian to feel them. They secretly suspect that Jesus was being un-Christian in his attitude to the scribes and Pharisees when he was angry at them, that he was un-Christian when he drove the moneychangers out of the temple or declared that millstones (not vacations in treatment centers) were the way to treat child abusers.

Conrad Baars noticed this emotional deformation in the clergy in the mid-twentieth century. He recognized that there had been distortions in 'traditional' Catholic spirituality. It had become too focused upon individual acts rather than on growth in virtue; it had emphasized sheer naked strength of will. In forgetting that growth in virtue was the goal of the Christian’s moral life, it forgot that the emotions, all emotions, including anger and hate, are part of human nature and must be integrated into a virtuous life.
Baars had been imprisoned by the Nazis. He knew iniquity firsthand and that there was something wrong with those who did not hate it:

A little reflection will make it clear that there is a big difference between the person who knows solely that something is evil and ought to be opposed, and the one who in addition also feels hate for that evil, is angry that it is corrupting or harming his fellow-men, and feels aroused to combat it courageously and vigorously.
Just Wrath

Wrath is a necessary and positive part of human nature: 'Wrath is the strength to attack the repugnant; the power of anger is actually the power of resistance in the soul,' wrote Josef Pieper. The lack of wrath against injustice, he continued, is a deficiency: 'One who does good with passion is more praiseworthy than one who is ‘not entirely’ afire for the good, even to the forces of the sensual realm.'

Aquinas, too, says that 'lack of the passion of anger is also a vice' because a man who truly and forcefully rejects evil will be angry at it. The lack of anger makes the movement of the will against evil 'lacking or weak.' He quotes John Chrysostom: 'He who is not angry, whereas he has cause to be, sins. For unreasonable patience is the hotbed of many vices, it fosters negligence, and incites not only the wicked but the good to do wrong'..." (Full article here).

The spiritually mature Christian understands that not all anger is unjust. That there is such a thing as just or righteous anger. Such a Christian strives to control anger through prayer and by considering the example of Christ. Let's all pray for those in leadership positions in the Church. That they may come to a mature faith which is able to discern between just and unjust anger.

One shepherd [and he is that in every sense of the word] who possesses such a mature faith is The Most Rev. Fabian Bruskewitz, Bishop of Lincoln, Nebraska. His Excellency has been quoted as having said, "No words that are printable, or even conceivable, are adequate to express my outrage, fury, and depression upon learning that anyone, much less a priest, would sexually molest any children. Such a thing is an unspeakable abomination. Upon hearing such things, I must confess that I am tempted to look for my shotgun and baseball bat, much sooner that I am tempted to give any consideration to a possible 'sickness' in a perpetrator. Molestation victims and their families are certainly entitled to anger. Sometimes their excessive anger and demands, while often becoming unacceptable and unreasonable, are still understandable to me."

One last thought.  The "pastoral team" over at Saint Mary's Parish says that "veterans are rightly honored for their role in defending the country," and yet, I have been treated with nothing less than contempt even though I am a veteran who served this country during wartime.  I have been ostracized at Saint Mary's. 

We must give more than lip service to honoring veterans.  We must put our words into action. 

Worcester Diocese carries article in its official newspaper accusing U.S. Soldiers who kill in combat of "evil"

The "Catholic" Free Press, official newspaper of the troubled Worcester Diocese, is carrying a CNS article written by Chaz Muth which highlights the thinking of Melkite Father Emmanuel Charles McCarthy of Brockton, a co-founder of the dissident organization Pax Christi.

Father McCarthy believes that no priest should serve in the armed forces to provide religious care to military men and women because, "Being a commissioned officer in the military makes it impossible for that priest to maintain his objectivity when preaching the Gospel, which should include the message that killing any human is an act of evil..." (Catholic peace activists see conflict in priests serving in military, July 15 edition of the CFP).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains that, "Those who are sworn to serve their country in the armed forces are servants of the security and freedom of nations. If they carry out their duty honorably, they truly contribute to the common good of the nation and the maintenance of peace." 2310.

The Lord God has commanded us, "You shall not kill." There are nine words in Hebrew for taking a life. The word used in Exodus 20: 13 for "Thou shalt not kill" is ratsach, a strong verb used to indicate an intentional and unjustified act of murder, such as the murder of innocent unborn. It does not refer to killing in war ( unless such killing is directed against civilian non-combatants or prisoners of war).  But it is disgusting for a Catholic priest to suggest that all soldiers who kill in combat are engaged in "evil."

I'm not surprised that such hateful nonsense would be published in the "Catholic" Free Press, a publication with a long history of dissent from Church teaching owned and operated by a broken diocese which ordains homosexual men while excluding masculine men from ministry.

The French preacher Lacordaire once said that the vocation of a soldier is next in dignity to the priesthood, not only because it commissioned him to defend justice on the field of battle and order on the field of peace, but also because it called him to the spirit and intention of sacrifice.

It is the soldier's high calling to the defense of justice and freedom which makes him (or should) so loved.  It was a soldier who first spoke the words recalled by the Church during every Mass at Holy Communion: "Lord, I am not worthy to have Thee come under my roof; but only say the word, and my servant will be healed." (Mt 8:8).

The Breviary, which priests pray daily, praises Judas Machabeus, who refused to surrender to superior enemy forces and died saying: "Far be it from us to do such a thing as to flee from them.  If our time has come, let us die bravely for our brethren, and leave no cause to question our honor." (1 Macc 9: 10).

A soldier who does his or her duty honorably contributes to the common good and to authentic peace.

Leave it to the Worcester Diocese to publish the views of a bigoted priest who sees combat soldiers as engaging in evil.

Pathetic.

Do we honor veterans or do we simply forget about them?

There is an old saying: "Nobody loves a soldier until the enemy is at the gate." I have often reflected on that phrase and how at times it rings true. WBZ is reporting that the town of Hardwick has cancelled its Memorial Day Parade. Local veterans (and I'm one of them) are understandably upset. But then, the veteran has often been treated as something akin to a disposable razor: when he has served his purpose, he is promptly discarded. After returning home from Vietnam, Mr. Joe Szczepanek says, "people spit on me. I got hit in the head with a sign. I got called a baby killer." Many other veterans were treated with contempt or simply ignored altogether.

My own father served in Korea and during Vietnam. As a career military veteran, he was denied a hearing aid (he had become tone deaf after serving as a Tank Commander in Korea). And when he died, I had to fight just to obtain a flag marker for his grave. You cannot begin to imagine how that made me feel. In order to understand my hurt, you would have to know the depth of my love for a great man who consecrated his entire life to the United States military - both in the U.S. Army and the U.S. Air Force.

The Church had a policy years ago which was discriminatory toward military families. I addressed this in my previous Blog post entitled Cardinal Sean's rationale which may be found here. A woman named Colleen took exception to my post in a comment left at this Blog. She wrote: "Mr. Melanson, may I ask how old you are? The reason I ask is that the Church USED to, MANY years ago have a policy that families needed to be residents of the Parish associated with the Catholic school where they chose to send their children...simply because the parishioners in those days funded the majority of the happenings in the school. This ruling has been changed for YEARS now and any/all students are welcome to attend. Please get your facts straight before you falsely leading people astray. There is already enough of that going on without your help."

To which I responded: "Colleen, I submit that it is you who are engaging in dishonesty. Either that or your English comprehension skills are sorely deficient.

Cardinal O'Malley, in his feeble attempt to justify his decision to find a Catholic school for the ward of lesbian parents who are engaged in an illicit relationship, wrote, "Catholic schools exist for the good of the children and our admission standards must reflect that. We have never had categories of people who were excluded." The key word in this passage is "never." The Cardinal's statement constitutes [by your own admission in the comment you left] a falsehood.
Which is why I responded, "But His Eminence is mistaken, As my parents can testify, I was denied admission into Catholic schools because my father was career military. My parents were told that five years of residency was required before I could be enrolled. But because my father would receive new orders every three or four years, I was denied admission. Many other children of military families were similarly denied admission into Catholic schools for this reason."

Military dependents were in fact denied admission. You admit this writing that, "..the Church USED to, MANY years ago have a policy that families needed to be residents of the Parish associated with the Catholic school where they chose to send their children...simply because the parishioners in those days funded the majority of the happenings in the school. This ruling has been changed for YEARS now.."

Children of military parents who were serving this great nation were excluded. This is all the more outrageous since their parents were making great sacrifices to serve this great nation.

As for the child of lesbian parents, as Archbishop Chaput so eloquently put it, 'Our schools are meant to be 'partners in faith' with parents. If parents don't respect the beliefs of the Church, or live in a manner that openly rejects those beliefs, then partnering with those parents becomes very difficult, if not impossible. It also places unfair stress on the children, who find themselves caught in the middle, and on their teachers, who have an obligation to teach the authentic faith of the Church.' If anyone needs to get their facts straight to avoid 'falsely leading people astray,' it is yourself. At any rate, I stand by my statement. The Cardinal's statement was incorrect."

I doubt my response will produce the slightest crack in Colleen's wall of conviction. Some people are anxious to accommodate those who "don't respect the beliefs of the Church" or who "live in a manner that openly rejects those beliefs." What a shame that my parents [cradle Catholics who remained faithful to the Church's Magisterium and who served this nation so honorably] couldn't receive at least the same level of respect as those who view the teachings of Christ's Church with contempt and or indifference.

Nobody loves a soldier until the enemy is at the gate.

Related reading here.

Happy Thanksgiving!

There are so many reasons to be thankful. There are thousands of reasons on roughly 200 acres of land in Washington, D.C. At a place we call Arlington National Cemetery. Tomorrow, when you gather with family or friends to celebrate God's blessings, please remember the many men and women who died for our freedoms and who will not be celebrating with us.

We Shall Keep the Faith

by Moina Michael, November 1918

Oh! you who sleep in Flanders Fields,

Sleep sweet - to rise anew!

We caught the torch you threw

And holding high, we keep the Faith

With All who died.

We cherish, too, the poppy red

That grows on fields where valor led;

It seems to signal to the skies

That blood of heroes never dies,

But lends a lustre to the red

Of the flower that blooms above the dead

In Flanders Fields.

And now the Torch and Poppy Red

We wear in honor of our dead.

Fear not that ye have died for naught;

We'll teach the lesson that ye wrought

In Flanders Fields.