"Socialism with a human face": Toward a New World Order

"They [the Soviets] intend...to induce the Americans to adopt their own 'restructuring' and convergence of the Soviet and American systems using to this end the fear of nuclear conflict...Convergence will be accompanied by blood baths and political re-education camps in Western Europe and the United States. The Soviet Strategists are counting on an economic depression in the United States and intend to introduce their reformed model of socialism with a human face as an alternative to the American system during the depression." (Anatoliy Golitsyn, The Perestroika Deception, 1990).

For more on Anatoliy Golitsyn, an intelligence officer who defected to the West and warned of long-range Soviet plans, read here.

"...all of us here at the policy-making level have had experience with directives...from the White House.... The substance of them is that we shall use our grant-making power so as to alter our life in the United States that we can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union."
H. Rowan Gaither, Jr., President - Ford Foundation
(as told to Norman Dodd, Congressional Reese Commission 1954)


Related reading here.

Patrick J. Buchanan on the emerging Moloch State...

"I am absolutely convinced that the gas chambers of Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Maidanek were ultimately prepared not in some ministry or other in Berlin, but rather at the desks and in the lecture halls of nihilistic scientists and philosophers."

- Viktor E. Frankl, 1905-1997.


"...being frequently driven into straits where rules are useless, and being often kept fluctuating pitiably between hope and fear by the uncertainty of fortune's greedily coveted favors, they are consequently, for the most part, very prone to credulity. The human mind is readily swayed this way or that in times of doubt, especially when hope and fear are struggling for the mastery...in adversity they know not where to turn, but beg and pray for counsel from every passer-by. No plan is then too futile, too absurd, or too fatuous for their adoption...."

- Spinoza



“I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel”
- The Hippocratic Oath


"At the other end of life's spectrum, men and women find themselves facing the mystery of death. Today, as a result of advances in medicine and in a cultural context frequently closed to the transcendent, the experience of dying is marked by new features. When the prevailing tendency is to value life only to the extent that it brings pleasure and well-being, suffering seems like an unbearable setback, something from which one must be freed at all costs. Death is considered 'senseless' if it suddenly interrupts a life still open to a future of new and interesting experiences. But it becomes a 'rightful liberation' once life is held to be no longer meaningful because it is filled with pain and inexorably doomed to even greater suffering.

Furthermore, when he denies or neglects his fundamental relationship to God, man thinks he is his own rule and measure, with the right to demand that society should guarantee him the ways and means of deciding what to do with his life in full and complete autonomy. It is especially people in the developed countries who act in this way: they feel encouraged to do so also by the constant progress of medicine and its ever more advanced techniques. By using highly sophisticated systems and equipment, science and medical practice today are able not only to attend to cases formerly considered untreatable and to reduce or eliminate pain, but also to sustain and prolong life even in situations of extreme frailty, to resuscitate artifi- cially patients whose basic biological functions have undergone sudden collapse, and to use special procedures to make organs available for transplanting.

In this context the temptation grows to have recourse to euthanasia, that is, to take control of death and bring it about before its time, 'gently' ending one's own life or the life of others. In reality, what might seem logical and humane, when looked at more closely is seen to be senseless and inhumane. Here we are faced with one of the more alarming symptoms of the 'culture of death', which is advancing above all in prosperous societies, marked by an attitude of excessive preoccupation with efficiency and which sees the growing number of elderly and disabled people as intolerable and too burdensome. These people are very often isolated by their families and by society, which are organized almost exclusively on the basis of criteria of productive efficiency, according to which a hopelessly impaired life no longer has any value.


For a correct moral judgment on euthanasia, in the first place a clear definition is required. Euthanasia in the strict sense is understood to be an action or omission which of itself and by intention causes death, with the purpose of eliminating all suffering. 'Euthanasia's terms of reference, therefore, are to be found in the intention of the will and in the methods used'.

Euthanasia must be distinguished from the decision to forego so-called 'aggressive medical treatment', in other words, medical procedures which no longer correspond to the real situation of the patient, either because they are by now disproportionate to any expected results or because they impose an excessive burden on the patient and his family. In such situations, when death is clearly imminent and inevitable, one can in conscience 'refuse forms of treatment that would only secure a precarious and burdensome prolongation of life, so long as the normal care due to the sick person in similar cases is not interrupted'. Certainly there is a moral obligation to care for oneself and to allow oneself to be cared for, but this duty must take account of concrete circumstances. It needs to be determined whether the means of treatment available are objectively proportionate to the prospects for improvement. To forego extraordinary or disproportionate means is not the equivalent of suicide or euthanasia; it rather expresses acceptance of the human condition in the face of death.

In modern medicine, increased attention is being given to what are called 'methods of palliative care', which seek to make suffering more bearable in the final stages of illness and to ensure that the patient is supported and accompanied in his or her ordeal. Among the questions which arise in this context is that of the licitness of using various types of painkillers and sedatives for relieving the patient's pain when this involves the risk of shortening life. While praise may be due to the person who voluntarily accepts suffering by forgoing treatment with pain-killers in order to remain fully lucid and, if a believer, to share consciously in the Lord's Passion, such 'heroic' behaviour cannot be considered the duty of everyone. Pius XII affirmed that it is licit to relieve pain by narcotics, even when the result is decreased consciousness and a shortening of life, 'if no other means exist, and if, in the given circumstances, this does not prevent the carrying out of other religious and moral duties'. In such a case, death is not willed or sought, even though for reasonable motives one runs the risk of it: there is simply a desire to ease pain effectively by using the analgesics which medicine provides. All the same, 'it is not right to deprive the dying person of consciousness without a serious reason': as they approach death people ought to be able to satisfy their moral and family duties, and above all they ought to be able to prepare in a fully conscious way for their definitive meeting with God.

Taking into account these distinctions, in harmony with the Magisterium of my Predecessors and in communion with the Bishops of the Catholic Church, I confirm that euthanasia is a grave violation of the law of God, since it is the deliberate and morally unacceptable killing of a human person. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written word of God, is transmitted by the Church's Tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium.

Depending on the circumstances, this practice involves the malice proper to suicide or murder.


Suicide is always as morally objectionable as murder. The Church's tradition has always rejected it as a gravely evil choice. Even though a certain psychological, cultural and social conditioning may induce a person to carry out an action which so radically contradicts the innate inclination to life, thus lessening or removing subjective responsibility, suicide, when viewed objectively, is a gravely immoral act. In fact, it involves the rejection of love of self and the renunciation of the obligation of justice and charity towards one's neighbour, towards the communities to which one belongs, and towards society as a whole. In its deepest reality, suicide represents a rejection of God's absolute sovereignty over life and death, as proclaimed in the prayer of the ancient sage of Israel: 'You have power over life and death; you lead men down to the gates of Hades and back again' (Wis 16:13; cf. Tob 13:2).

To concur with the intention of another person to commit suicide and to help in carrying it out through so-called 'assisted suicide' means to cooperate in, and at times to be the actual perpetrator of, an injustice which can never be excused, even if it is requested. In a remarkably relevant passage Saint Augustine writes that 'it is never licit to kill another: even if he should wish it, indeed if he request it because, hanging between life and death, he begs for help in freeing the soul struggling against the bonds of the body and longing to be released; nor is it licit even when a sick person is no longer able to live'. Even when not motivated by a selfish refusal to be burdened with the life of someone who is suffering, euthanasia must be called a false mercy, and indeed a disturbing 'perversion' of mercy. True 'compassion' leads to sharing another's pain; it does not kill the person whose suffering we cannot bear. Moreover, the act of euthanasia appears all the more perverse if it is carried out by those, like relatives, who are supposed to treat a family member with patience and love, or by those, such as doctors, who by virtue of their specific profession are supposed to care for the sick person even in the most painful terminal stages.

The choice of euthanasia becomes more serious when it takes the form of a murder committed by others on a person who has in no way requested it and who has never consented to it. The height of arbitrariness and injustice is reached when certain people, such as physicians or legislators, arrogate to themselves the power to decide who ought to live and who ought to die. Once again we find ourselves before the temptation of Eden: to become like God who 'knows good and evil' (cf. Gen 3:5). God alone has the power over life and death: 'It is I who bring both death and life' (Dt 32:39; cf. 2 Kg 5:7; 1 Sam 2:6). But he only exercises this power in accordance with a plan of wisdom and love. When man usurps this power, being enslaved by a foolish and selfish way of thinking, he inevitably uses it for injustice and death. Thus the life of the person who is weak is put into the hands of the one who is strong; in society the sense of justice is lost, and mutual trust, the basis of every authentic interpersonal relationship, is undermined at its root.

Quite different from this is the way of love and true mercy, which our common humanity calls for, and upon which faith in Christ the Redeemer, who died and rose again, sheds ever new light. The request which arises from the human heart in the supreme confrontation with suffering and death, especially when faced with the temptation to give up in utter desperation, is above all a request for companionship, sympathy and support in the time of trial. It is a plea for help to keep on hoping when all human hopes fail. As the Second Vatican Council reminds us: 'It is in the face of death that the riddle of human existence becomes most acute' and yet 'man rightly follows the intuition of his heart when he abhors and repudiates the absolute ruin and total disappearance of his own person. Man rebels against death because he bears in himself an eternal seed which cannot be reduced to mere matter'.

This natural aversion to death and this incipient hope of immortality are illumined and brought to fulfilment by Christian faith, which both promises and offers a share in the victory of the Risen Christ: it is the victory of the One who, by his redemptive death, has set man free from death, 'the wages of sin' (Rom 6:23), and has given him the Spirit, the pledge of resurrection and of life (cf. Rom 8:11). The certainty of future immortality and hope in the promised resurrection cast new light on the mystery of suffering and death, and fill the believer with an extraordinary capacity to trust fully in the plan of God.

The Apostle Paul expressed this newness in terms of belonging completely to the Lord who embraces every human condition: 'None of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. If we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord; so then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's' (Rom 14:7-8). Dying to the Lord means experiencing one's death as the supreme act of obedience to the Father (cf. Phil 2:8), being ready to meet death at the 'hour' willed and chosen by him (cf.Jn 13:1), which can only mean when one's earthly pilgrimage is completed. Living to the Lord also means recognizing that suffering, while still an evil and a trial in itself, can always become a source of good. It becomes such if it is experienced for love and with love through sharing, by God's gracious gift and one's own personal and free choice, in the suffering of Christ Crucified. In this way, the person who lives his suffering in the Lord grows more fully conformed to him (cf. Phil 3:10; 1 Pet 2:21) and more closely associated with his redemptive work on behalf of the Church and humanity. This was the experience of Saint Paul, which every person who suffers is called to relive: 'I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his Body, that is, the Church' (Col 1:24)." (Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae, Nos. 64-67).


Related reading here, here and here.

Preparation for the Reign of Antichrist: Airport Chapels removing Christian symbols

It is not without reason that Our Holy Father Benedict XVI addresses the supreme temptation of the Man of Sin in his book "Jesus of Nazareth" which was published in 2007. His Holiness explains that, "..the choice is between a Messiah who leads an armed struggle, promises freedom and a kingdom of one's own, and this mysterious Jesus who proclaims that losing oneself is the way to life...If we had to choose today, would Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Mary, the Son of the Father, have a chance? Do we understand him? Do we not perhaps have to make an effort, today as always, to get to know him all over again? The tempter is not so crude as to suggest to us directly that we should worship the Devil. He merely suggests that we opt for the reasonable decision, that we choose to give priority to a planned and thoroughly organized world, where God may have his place as a private concern but must not interfere in our essential purposes." (p. 41).


Related reading here.

"..it is a question of the violation of the divine law...and an attack on humanity

In its Declaration on Euthanasia issued on May 5, 1980, the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith had this to say:


"Human life is the basis of all goods, and is the necessary source and condition of every human activity and of all society. Most people regard life as something sacred and hold that no one may dispose of it at will, but believers see in life something greater, namely, a gift of God's love, which they are called upon to preserve and make fruitful. And it is this latter consideration that gives rise to the following consequences:

1. No one can make an attempt on the life of an innocent person without opposing God's love for that person, without violating a fundamental right, and therefore without committing a crime of the utmost gravity.

2. Everyone has the duty to lead his or her life in accordance with God's plan. That life is entrusted to the individual as a good that must bear fruit already here on earth, but that finds its full perfection only in eternal life.

3. Intentionally causing one's own death, or suicide, is therefore equally as wrong as murder; such an action on the part of a person is to be considered as a rejection of God's sovereignty and loving plan. Furthermore, suicide is also often a refusal of love for self, the denial of a natural instinct to live, a flight from the duties of justice and charity owed to one's neighbor, to various communities or to the whole of society - although, as is generally recognized, at times there are psychological factors present that can diminish responsibility or even completely remove it. However, one must clearly distinguish suicide from that sacrifice of one's life whereby for a higher cause, such as God's glory, the salvation of souls or the service of one's brethren, a person offers his or her own life or puts it in danger (cf. Jn. 15:14).

II.
EUTHANASIA

In order that the question of euthanasia can be properly dealt with, it is first necessary to define the words used. Etymologically speaking, in ancient times Euthanasia meant an easy death without severe suffering. Today one no longer thinks of this original meaning of the word, but rather of some intervention of medicine whereby the suffering of sickness or of the final agony are reduced, sometimes also with the danger of suppressing life prematurely. Ultimately, the word Euthanasia is used in a more particular sense to mean "mercy killing," for the purpose of putting an end to extreme suffering, or having abnormal babies, the mentally ill or the incurably sick from the prolongation, perhaps for many years of a miserable life, which could impose too heavy a burden on their families or on society. It is, therefore, necessary to state clearly in what sense the word is used in the present document. By euthanasia is understood an action or an omission which of itself or by intention causes death, in order that all suffering may in this way be eliminated. Euthanasia's terms of reference, therefore, are to be found in the intention of the will and in the methods used. It is necessary to state firmly once more that nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult, an old person, or one suffering from an incurable disease, or a person who is dying. Furthermore, no one is permitted to ask for this act of killing, either for himself or herself or for another person entrusted to his or her care, nor can he or she consent to it, either explicitly or implicitly. nor can any authority legitimately recommend or permit such an action. For it is a question of the violation of the divine law, an offense against the dignity of the human person, a crime against life, and an attack on humanity. It may happen that, by reason of prolonged and barely tolerable pain, for deeply personal or other reasons, people may be led to believe that they can legitimately ask for death or obtain it for others. Although in these cases the guilt of the individual may be reduced or completely absent, nevertheless the error of judgment into which the conscience falls, perhaps in good faith, does not change the nature of this act of killing, which will always be in itself something to be rejected. The pleas of gravely ill people who sometimes ask for death are not to be understood as implying a true desire for euthanasia; in fact, it is almost always a case of an anguished plea for help and love. What a sick person needs, besides medical care, is love, the human and supernatural warmth with which the sick person can and ought to be surrounded by all those close to him or her, parents and children, doctors and nurses."

In New Hampshire, there is a proposed bill to eliminate those who deserve such love and supernatural warmth. Concerns have been expressed that the federal government might become involved in euthanasia.

The Psalmist tells us that, "Unless the Lord builds the house, they labor in vain who build it" (Psalm 126). This scriptural truth holds for the building of families, societies, nations, international communities and, most of all, Churches. Ignoring this immutable truth, the culture-of-death advocates are determined to create a Moloch state where the God of love is replaced by "the god of technocracy who experiments and flouts the law of love in the laboratory" (Fr. Miceli).

Having abandoned the God of love, the Supreme Creator, 21st-century man is now ready to worship himself and to usurp the divine powers of creation and destruction. In the words of Dr. Edmund Leach of King's College at Cambridge: "The scientist can now play God in his role as wonder-worker, but can he - and should he - also play God as moral arbiter?...There can be no source for these moral judgments except the scientist himself. In traditional religion, morality was held to derive from God, but God was only credited with the authority to establish and enforce moral laws because He was also credited with supernatural powers of creation and destruction. Those powers have now been usurped by man, and he must take on the moral responsibility that goes with them" (Edmund Leach, "We Scientists Have the Right to Play God," The Saturday Evening Post, November 16, 1968, p. 16).

But make no mistake about it, when man becomes God society becomes, in the words of the French philosopher Gabriel Marcel, "a termite colony." We are still in the twilight. But unless we take a stand now, we will have the Moloch state. As at Auschwitz, men will determine who has quality of life and who should be "mercifully terminated."

Catholic League: Bill implies federal government may become involved in euthanasia

Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, issued the following statement in response to Section 1233 of H.R 3200, the health care reform bill that was introduced in the House:


There is language in this section of the bill that implies that the federal government may become involved in euthanasia. So over the past two days, July 27-28, Catholic League staff contacted the following persons, committees or offices looking for clarification:

Rep. Nancy Pelosi; Rep. John Dingell; Rep. Rob Andrews; Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr.; Rep. Charles Rangel; Rep. Pete Stark; Rep. Henry Waxman; Rep. George Miller; Rep. Dale Kildee; Rep. Carolyn Maloney; Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius; HHS Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives; HHS Office of the Assistant Secretary for Aging; HHS Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Legislation for Discretionary Health Programs; HHS Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Legislation for Mandatory Health Programs; HHS Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; HHS Congressional Liaison Office; HHS Office of Human Services Policy; HHS Office of Disability, Aging and Long-Term Care Policy; HHS Office of Planning and Policy Support; HHS Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Legislation for Human Services; Ways and Means Committee; Education and Labor Committee; Energy and Commerce Committee; Oversight and Government Reform Committee; Budget Committee; White House Health Reform Office.

No one with whom we spoke said the government is entering the business of euthanasia. But this is not enough. We need to know exactly what is meant by the following: “An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available….” We also need to know exactly what is meant by “The Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register proposed quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning….” The public has a right to know exactly what is meant by terms like “end-of-life services” and “quality measures.” Now is the time to settle this issue.

Contact healthreform@hhs.gov


Related reading: New Hampshire: En Route to Mass Murder?

New Hampshire House Bill 304 (and especially Section XIII), is chilling. And brings to mind a decree issued by Adolph Hitler in October of 1939 and back dated to September 1, 1939, which widened, "the authority of certain physicians to be designated by name in such manner that persons who, according to human judgment, are incurable can, upon a most careful diagnosis of their condition of sickness, be accorded a mercy death."

Is that where health care in the United States is heading? Are we traveling a familar road to euthanasia?

Photo is of Hitler's euthanasia order.

Homosexual Hate Movement: Transsexual strips naked and attacks priest during Mass

In numerous previous posts, some of which may be found here, here, here, here and here, I have documented the intolerance and anti-Christian bigotry of the Homosexual Hate Movement. Homosexual activist Paul Varnell has admitted that "..the gay movement, whether we acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a sexual liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people's view of homosexuality."

And it is a revolution which has often relied on violence and intimidation to achieve its goals. Recall the attacks on Christian and Mormon Churches from homosexual activists enraged over Proposition 8 in California.

New Hampshire: En Route to Mass Murder?

For the Nazis, "euthanasia" (which is translated as "good death") represented a euphemistic term for a clandestine murder program created for the systematic killing of mentally and physically disabled patients living in institutional settings throughout Germany. The National Socialist's "Euthanasia" program would set the stage for the Holocaust: the mass murder of Jews and others who were deemed either racially inferior or ideologically unsuitable. In the words of Dr. Leo Alexander, Chief U.S. Medical Consultant at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials: 'Whatever proportions these crimes finally assumed, it became evident to all who investigated them that they had started from small beginnings."

Dr. Alexander referred to "a subtle shift in emphasis in the basic attitude of physicians." These physicians came to accept the notion that there is such a thing as a life not worthy to be lived. We are witnessing what appears to be a similar "subtle shift in emphasis" with regard to human life in the state of New Hampshire. New Hampshire House Bill 304 (HB304), which was introduced on January 8, 2009 and is currently retained in committee (read the proposed bill here), would radically redefine who is eligible for "assisted suicide." See here.

Is it a coincidence that the four sponsors of HB304 (Charles Weed, Barbara Richardson, Rick Watrous and Bonnie Mitchell) are all Democrats with no religious affiliation?

In his Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, Pope John Paul II reminded us that:

"Authentic democracy is possible only in a State ruled by law, and on the basis of a correct conception of the human person. It requires that the necessary conditions be present for the advancement both of the individual through education and formation in true ideals, and of the "subjectivity" of society through the creation of structures of participation and shared responsibility. Nowadays there is a tendency to claim that agnosticism and sceptical relativism are the philosophy and the basic attitude which correspond to democratic forms of political life. Those who are convinced that they know the truth and firmly adhere to it are considered unreliable from a democratic point of view, since they do not accept that truth is determined by the majority, or that it is subject to variation according to different political trends. It must be observed in this regard that if there is no ultimate truth to guide and direct political activity, then ideas and convictions can easily be manipulated for reasons of power. As history demonstrates, a democracy without values easily turns into open or thinly disguised totalitarianism."

We ignore this warning at our own peril.


Related reading here and here.

Father John Catoir: Only half the truth

In his Catholic News Service column Spirituality For Today, in a piece entitled "Free from needless guilt," Fr. John Catoir laments that, "The church was poisoned by heresies over the centuries. The better you understand these errors, the better you will be able to cope with the problem of needless guilt." Fr. Catoir then cites various heresies [all of which were condemned by the Church, so it is inaccurate to suggest that "the Church was poisoned" by them; Rather, some Catholics were influenced by them] including Manichaeism, Albigensianism and Jansenism.

To be sure, the "needless guilt" Fr. Catoir refers to has been a problem for some members of the Church past and present. Pope John Paul II, in his Letter to all the Bishops of the Church on the Mystery and Worship of the Eucharist (Dominicae Cenae) says that: "..our Catholic communities certainly do not lack people who could participate in Eucharistic Communion and do not, even though they have no serious sin on their conscience as an obstacle. To tell the truth, this attitude, which in some people is linked with an exaggerated severity, has changed in the present century, though it is still to be found here and there. In fact what one finds most often is not so much a feeling of unworthiness as a certain lack of interior willingness, if one may use this expression, a lack of Eucharistic 'hunger' and 'thirst,' which is also a sign of lack of adequate sensitivity towards the great sacrament of love and a lack of understanding of its nature." (No. 11). But His Holiness then addresses a more serious problem and one which is much more prevalent today:

"However, we also find in recent years another phenomenon. Sometimes, indeed quite frequently, everybody participating in the eucharistic assembly goes to Communion; and on some such occasions, as experienced pastors confirm, there has not been due care to approach the sacrament of Penance so as to purify one's conscience. This can of course mean that those approaching the Lord's table find nothing on their conscience, according to the objective law of God, to keep them from this sublime and joyful act of being sacramentally united with Christ. But there can also be, at least at times, another idea behind this: the life of our communities to lose the good quality of sensitiveness of Christian conscience, guided solely by respect for Christ, who, when He is received in the Eucharist, should find in the heart of each of us a worthy abode. This question is closely linked not only with the practice of the sacrament of Penance but also with a correct sense of responsibility for the whole deposit of moral teaching and for the precise distinction between good and evil, a distinction which then becomes for each person sharing in the Eucharist the basis for a correct judgment of self to be made in the depths of the personal conscience. St. Paul's words, 'Let a man examine himself,' are well known; this judgment is an indispensable condition for a personal decision whether to approach Eucharistic Communion or to abstain." (No. 11).

The worthy reception of Holy Communion requires a clear conscience. Because of this, someone in the state of mortal sin is not eligible to receive: "Anyone who desires to receive Christ in Eucharistic communion must be in the state of grace. Anyone aware of having sinned mortally must not receive communion without having received absolution in the sacrament of penance." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1415).

Fr. Catoir writes, "For centuries, the fear of eternal damnation, even for petty offenses, was taught in the name of religion. George Carlin, the late comedian, abandoned his faith because he saw the absurdity of believing in a God who would send you to hell for all eternity for eating meat on Friday. Many Catholics left the Church for the same reason. Winning them back will take a massive re-education process."

But as Dr. Germain Grisez explains, "Traditionally, the eucharistic fast,required by the Church for the sake of reverence, was considered a grave responsibility which did not admit of parvity. Now, since the requirement is more easily fulfilled, its violation is even harder to excuse...someone who deliberately disregards the eucharistic fast out of irreverence for Jesus or contempt for the Church's law plainly is guilty of grave sin. And, knowing that the fast has been broken , whether by accident or on purpose, in a significant way, anyone as reverent and obedient as he or she should be, will not receive Holy Communion except for a reason sufficient to justify an exception to the Church's law (see CMP. 11.G. 6-7)."

Did George Carlin really leave the Church because he had a problem with the Church's traditional teaching regarding the Eucharistic fast or might not there have been other factors involved in his decision to abandon the Church of Christ? I seem to recall a troubled man who had serious personal problems and who celebrated the use of profanity with a levity which was just disturbing.

Pope John Paul II, in the same Dominicae Cenae, No. 7 writes, "I have already drawn attention to the close link between the sacrament of Penance and the sacrament of the Eucharist. It is not only that Penance leads to the Eucharist, but that the Eucharist also leads to Penance. For when we realize who it is that we receive in Eucharistic communion, there springs up in us almost spontaneously a sense of unworthiness, together with sorrow for our sins and an interior need for purification.."

This is not the result of "needless guilt." It is the result of reverence before Our Eucharistic Lord. Fr. Catoir needs to present the full truth to his readers.

Christian prayers for children at bedtime

Try teaching your Christian child these bedtime prayers. They will enjoy learning and praying these simple prayers:

Father, We Thank Thee

Father, we thank thee for the night,
And for the pleasant morning light;
For rest and food and loving care,
And all that makes the day so fair.
Help us to do the things we should,
To be to others kind and good;
In all we do, in work or play,
To grow more loving every day.

-Rebecca Weston - 1890

Children's Bedtime Prayer

Now I lay me down to sleep,
I pray the Lord my soul to keep:
May God guard me through the night
And wake me with the morning light.
Amen.

Child's Evening Prayer

I hear no voice, I feel no touch,
I see no glory bright;
But yet I know that God is near,
In darkness as in light.
He watches ever by my side,
And hears my whispered prayer:
The Father for His little child
Both night and day doth care.

Paula D'Arcy to speak at the "Gather Us In" Conference

In previous posts, which may be found here and here, I have shown why there is reason to be concerned about the Worcester Diocesan Commission for Women and its agenda. Another guest speaker to appear at the Commission's 2009 "Gather Us In" Conference is Paula D'Arcy. As noted here, Ms. D'Arcy has worked with dissident Catholic priest Fr. Richard Rohr (read this article to see how disturbing his theology really is), who has promoted the occult Enneagram and has officiated at a lesbian "wedding."

Ms. D'Arcy has promoted the labyrinth, which is a pagan-based prayer method. See here. For more on the occult nature of this pagan-based prayer method, read here.

As Donna Steichen noted in her important book entitled "Ungodly Rage: The Hidden Face of Catholic Feminism": "Among America's educated elites, including Catholic elites, religion is now understood as a symbol for personal opinion, faith as a metaphor for imagination, mysticism as altered consciousness however achieved: meditation on the self, sensory deprivation, hallucinatory drugs, vigorous exercise or standing on one's head. The religious impulse is turned away from the transcendent Creator to center on subjective consciousness as the source of spiritual truth, the principle of moral judgment, the object of veneration and service and the explanation for the persistence of traditional belief among the simple peasantry. Every man is his own god, every woman her own goddess. Little interest is shown in questions of ontological truth; many believe there is no truth, and the rest behave as though they agree. Accordingly, individual feelings outweigh intellectual and moral criteria, and it is to emotion rather than objective truth that public debate is directed." (p. 193).

Before the Man of Sin reveals himself, the Church must be undermined from within.

A church in their own image and likeness...in other words, an idol

Episcopal "Bishop" V. Gene Robinson, at his Blog "Canterbury Tales from the Fringe," writes about a hearing he attended recently which he found to be "inspiring and uplifting." He writes, "Last night's hearing on moving beyond B033 [the Episcopal church's moratorium on ordaining more homosexual "bishops" and blessing homosexual unions] was inspiring and uplifting. It helped me remember why we do this work. Story after story of how gay and lesbian people have found hope in The Episcopal Church and its proclamation of God's inclusive love, after years of abuse and exclusion by other churches. Most profound of all were the testimonies of numerous young people, who spoke eloquently and movingly about the kind of church they want to be a part of, in which there truly are no outcasts.." Full Blog post here.

Of course, such a "church" would not be Christian. The God of both Old and New Testaments loves all but has been known to be exclusive. Remember the Ark which saved Noah and his family? Outside there was wailing and gnashing of teeth.

When Jesus began His public ministry, He did so with the word "repent" (Matthew 4:17). And He advised the woman caught in adultery to "sin no more" (John 8:11). Likewise, in the case of the man cured at the Pool of Bethesda, Jesus advised him to "sin no more lest something worse befall thee" (John 5:14). When queried on the subject of how many would be saved, Jesus replied "few" because the "gate" to Heaven is "narrow" (Matthew 7:13-14). And while no one can pinpoint the precise meaning of the word "few," still, it is sobering that Jesus chose the image of a narrow gate.

Jesus is likened in the gospel to a stern master who has lazy servants flogged and murderous ones put to death (Matthew 21:41; Luke 12:47). And while it is true that Jesus is Mercy, He is also Justice. And for every parable illustrative of His mercy, there are three or four threatening divine retribution. The Judgment Day is always described as a day of wrath and never as a day of rejoicing (Proverbs 11:4; Zephaniah 1:15; Sirach 5:10; Romans 2:5; Revelation 6:17).

Just as some were excluded - almost all in fact - (because of their own sinfulness) from that salvation which was found in Noah's Ark [a figure of the Church], so too some will be excluded from the Heavenly Kingdom because they preferred their own will to God's: "The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all who cause others to sin and all evildoers. They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth." (Matthew 13: 41,42).

For "Bishop" Robinson, the Church's authentic teaching regarding homosexuality [see here] constitutes "abuse." This should not surprise us. For the Holy Spirit tells us through Saint Paul that when individuals refuse to acknowledge God and His Eternal Law He hands them over "to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper" (Romans 1: 28). In other words, the intellect is darkened.

For more on Gene Robinson and his anti-Catholicism, read here, here and here.

"Satan will appear without the Cross, as the Great Philanthropist and Social Reformer.."

In his Life of Christ (Image Books, 1977, p. 10), Archbishop Fulton John Sheen wrote, "We do know that at the end of time, when the great conflict between the forces of good and evil takes place, Satan will appear without the Cross, as the Great Philanthropist and Social Reformer to become the final temptation of mankind." Indeed, Paul Henri-Spaak, who served as Belgian Prime Minister and gained international prominence in 1945 when he was elected chairman of the first session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, had called for such a "Great Philanthropist and Social Reformer":

"We do not want another committee, we have too many already. What we want is a man of sufficient stature to hold the allegiance of all people, and to lift us out of the economic morass in which we are sinking. Send us such a man* and be he God or the Devil, we will receive him."

It would seem that the world is ready to receive such a man. Read this article and watch the commercials which have appeared on CNN.

* St. John of the Cleft Rock (14th century): "It is said that twenty centuries after the Incarnation of the Word, the Beast in its turn shall become man. About the year 2000 A.D., Antichrist will reveal himself to the world."

Related reading here and here.

CCC, 675.

Our Lady of Mount Carmel will save us

It was Saint Dominic, to Brother Angelus, who prophesied that "..one day, through the Rosary and the Scapular, she [Our Lady] will save the world." Full prophecy here.





Many Catholics, some of them priests and religious, will no doubt scoff at this. But it was Father Vincent P. Miceli who said, "The history of salvation closes with Mary as Mother with Child even as it began with Mary as Mother with Child. The circle of salvation history will close with Christ and His Mother as it opened with the Mother of God and her Son. The Woman, the Mother of God, and Christ and His Church, which is the camp of the saints, have all been foreseen and rightly considered from the beginning of time, the great and fearsome adversaries of the Serpent-Dragon, his mini-antichrists and his supreme Antichrist...And so when many modernist priests and intellectual Catholics downgrade devotion to Christ through Mary, when they cut off the spiritual life line of zealous love for the Hearts of Jesus and Mary, it is small wonder they lose a sense of their own identity, of the meaning of being a Christian. It is small wonder that they become tepid, confused and fall victims to Satan's snares. For the devil and his Antichrist are conquered by men and women of God, men and women of Mary...Today Mary's war continues to be waged victoriously against the Antichrist and against all who imitate and follow him. But victory over these forces of evil depends on man's fidelity to the Holy Mother and her divine Child. Mary, who was never for an instant a slave of Satan, is doing and will continue to do her prayerfully omnipotent utmost to assure victory over the Serpent-Dragon and his Antichrist. But the peace and joy of that victory will be tasted eternally only by those who never cease to trust and follow her guidance." (The Antichrist, p. 270).

Over the last twenty years or so, I have only encountered two priests who took the time to promote the Rosary and Scapular at Holy Mass. One of these two priests is Father David Phillipson, who celebrates the Traditional Latin Mass at Immaculate Conception parish in Fitchburg, Massachusetts. This is a real tragedy. Our Lady has provided us with the tools for fighting and overcoming the devil, his Antichrist and all their followers. Why then the silence? Why aren't more priests promoting these spiritual weapons?

Priests and religious who oppose the Rosary and Scapular as being somehow "childish" or "medieval" are themselves immature in faith. Solid food is for adults as Saint Paul tells us in Sacred Scripture. And the Rosary and Scapular are "solid food." Would anyone [who is not insane] accuse Pope John Paul II of being "childish" or "medieval" in his outlook? As explained here, Pope John Paul II received his first Brown Scapular of Mount Carmel at age ten and continued to wear it into his papacy.

John Paul II, Supreme Pontiff, mystic, theologian, philosopher, poet, playwright and best-selling author. And he wore the Brown Scapular of Mount Carmel throughout his life and prayed the Rosary every day.

How about you?

Settled Law or Judicial Fabrication?

Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor said on Tuesday that she considers the question of abortion rights to be "settled law" and that there is a constitutional right to privacy. See here. Here is where we enter the murky world of judicial fabrication. In its infamous Roe v. Wade decision, the Supreme Court said that, "The Constitution does not explicitly mention any right to privacy...This right of privacy [which the Court said is implied, my note] whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty..or..in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." (For full text of Roe v. Wade go here). The paragraph cited may be found on page 5.

Now astute readers will note how the Court stated clearly that there is no explicit mention of "any right to privacy." Nevertheless, the Court insisted that there is an implied right to privacy, which they couldn't locate with any certainty - unsure whether it may be found in the Ninth or Fourteenth Amendment - and that this implied and hard-to-locate "right to privacy" was nevertheless "broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy" - in other words, whether or not to have her child murdered.

If that's what Sonia Sotomayor calls "settled law," God help her. And us.

Related reading here.

Father John Dietzen on ordaining homosexual men to the priesthood

In his latest "Questions and Answers" column, Father John Dietzen answers a question from a reader in New York, "Can the Catholic Church ordain homosexual men to the priesthood? Some fellow parishioners say, What's the difference? If they do their job and remain celibate it's not a matter of contention. Others say it is an issue because the person is not whole, is not reconciled in this important part of his personality, has set God aside in his life and would be a negative example blocking God's grace for others. What is your answer?

Father's response: "First, I need to say that this second description and judgment of homosexuality in men (or women) is questionable, to put it mildly. Surely it does not reflect the attitude of the church, which teaches that homosexuals do not choose their condition and must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity, and without discrimination. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 2358). To declare that homosexual persons have set aside God, are not reconciled in their physical makeup and block God's grace to others is at best a rash judgment and, furthermore, does not fit experience....To answer your question, a Vatican instruction on admission of men with homosexual tendencies to seminaries and holy orders, dated Nov. 29, 2005, prohibits men with 'deep-seated homosexual tendencies' from entering the seminary. The precise meaning of this phrase was not spelled out, apparently leaving it to bishops and seminary authorities to interpret it more specifically. And many have done so...It will require time and experience to learn how the prohibition should work out in practice."

What of this? Let's begin with Father Dietzen's citation of No. 2358 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Father Dietzen (and this is an old story*) fails to cite the entire paragraph. Yes, we must accept homosexual persons with "respect, compassion and sensitivity." But we're also told in 2358 that the homosexual inclination is "objectively disordered." And this paragraph does not say that homosexual persons must be accepted "without discrimination." Rather, it states clearly, "Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided." What's the point I'm trying to make? Not all discrimination is unjust. No one has a right to Holy Orders. As I explained back in 2001, in the pages of The Wanderer:

"On October 1, 1986, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published an instruction entitled, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on Pastoral Service for Homosexual Persons, signed by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and approved by Pope John Paul II. In this Instruction, Cardinal Ratzinger writes, 'It is necessary to point out that the particular inclination of a homosexual person, though not a sin in itself, nevertheless constitutes a more or less strong tendency to an intrinsically evil behavior from the moral standpoint. For this reason, the very inclination should be considered as objectively disordered.' (No. 3).

This would appear to be especially significant since Canon 1040 of the Code of Canon Law states that: 'Persons who are affected by a perpetual impediment, which is called an irregularity, or a simple impediment, are prevented from receiving orders.' Now, irregularities arise either from defect (ex defectu) or from crime (ex delicto). It seems clear to me that a homosexual inclination, which Cardinal Ratzinger has referred to as 'objectively disordered,' constitutes an irregularity ex defectu. In fact, when asked by a Bishop if it is licit to confer priestly ordination to men with manifest homosexual tendencies, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments replied with a letter signed by Jorge Cardinal Medina Estevez which stated that, 'Ordination to the diaconate and the priesthood of homosexual men or men with homosexual tendencies is absolutely inadvisable and imprudent and, from the pastoral point of view, very risky. A homosexual person, or one with a homosexual tendency is not, therefore, fit to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders.'"

A person with a homosexual tendency "is not..fit to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders." And yet, Father Dietzen tells us that "It will require time and experience to learn how the prohibition should work out in practice." Is Father Dietzen suggesting that the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments is wrong? Such would appear to be the case.

Perhaps the Catholic News Service should find another priest to write the "Questions and Answers" column?

* See here for example.

Kathleen Kennedy Townsend: A Straw in the Wind

Kathleen Kennedy Townsend is angry at the Holy Father and the Catholic Church. Why? Because the Holy Father continues to preach truth while confirming his brethren (Luke 22:32) and the Church founded by Jesus Christ does not feel free to change the law of God. Writing for Newsweek just prior to President Obama's meeting with Pope Benedict XVI, Ms. Townsend wrote:


"Tomorrow Pope Benedict XVI and President Barack Obama meet for the first time, an affair much anticipated and in some circles frowned upon by American Catholics in the wake of Obama's controversial Notre Dame commencement speech in May. Conservatives in the church denounced Obama's appearance as a nod by the premier Catholic university to a conciliatory politics that heralds the start of a slippery moral slope.

In truth, though, Obama's pragmatic approach to divisive policy (his notion that we should acknowledge the good faith underlying opposing viewpoints) and his social-justice agenda reflect the views of American Catholic laity much more closely than those vocal bishops and pro-life activists. When Obama meets the pope tomorrow, they'll politely disagree about reproductive freedoms and homosexuality, but Catholics back home won't care, because they know Obama's on their side. In fact, Obama's agenda is closer to their views than even the pope's.

It's fitting that Obama's visit comes just days after the publication of "Charity in Truth," a Vatican encyclical that declares unions, regulation of capitalism's excesses, and environmentalism to be ethical imperatives. The document gives moral credence to Obama's message and to progressive politics writ large.

Even more intriguing is the pope's support for political activism, which he refers to in the encyclical as "the institutional path … of charity, no less excellent and effective than the kind of charity which encounters the neighbor directly." As a member of a family that preached that politics is an honorable profession, I see that he is opening the church to roles that for too long have been neglected. Here Obama (the community organizer from Chicago) could teach the pope a lot about politics—and what a Catholic approach to politics could entail. They agree, too, on poverty and Middle East peace. So far so good on papal-presidential concordance.

But there they part ways. Politics requires the ability to listen to different points of view, to step into others' shoes. Obama might call it empathy. While the pope preaches love, listening to the other has been a particular stumbling block for the Catholic hierarchy (as it is for many in power). The hierarchy ignores women's equality and gays' cry for justice because to heed them would require that it admit error and acknowledge that the self-satisfied edifice constructed around sex and gender has been grievously wrong. Before he became John Paul II, Karol Wojtyla had a telling all-or-nothing formulation: "If it should be decided that contraception is not an evil in itself then we should have to concede frankly that the Holy Spirit is on the side of the Protestant Churches."

That attitude has resulted in some heinous decisions. Most famously, in the lead up to the encyclical "Humanae Vitae" in 1968, an advisory body of theologians and laity empaneled by the pope advised that the church should reverse its position on birth control and concede that the issue should be a question for morality and for science. But authority—not truth, not love—prevailed: Pope Paul VI, listening to the advice of Wojtyla, disagreed with the majority of these advisers, who had voted 69 to 10 for change, fretting that to change this position would weaken his authority.

In the same vein, American bishops in the 1970s struggled to produce a paper that would address the concerns of women. After nine years of effort, they gave up. Why? According to Bishop P. Francis Murphy, bishops see themselves as "teachers, not learners: truth can not emerge through consultation." Pope Benedict, having lived in the safety and security of the Vatican for much of his professional life, is part of this culture that silences dissent. (His last job was as the enforcer of doctrine.) "

And so, because the Church founded by Christ to teach men and to bring them to salvation refuses to justify sinful contraception, homosexuality and lesbianism and will not ordain women - it cannot do so and remain faithful to Christ - Ms. Townsend would accuse Christ's Mystical Body of lacking "empathy."

In his Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, No. 46, Pope John Paul II writes, "Nowadays there is a tendency to claim that agnosticism and skeptical relativism are the philosophy and basic attitude which correspond to democratic forms of political life. Those who are convinced that they know the truth and firmly adhere to it are considered unreliable from a democratic point of view, since they do not accept that truth is determined by the majority or that it is subject to variation according to different political trends."

Ms. Townsend cares little (if at all) for truth. And especially religious truth. This is tragic. For as the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches us authoritatively: "Man tends by nature toward the truth. He is obliged to honor and bear witness to it: 'It is in accordance with their dignity that all men, because they are persons...are both impelled by their nature and bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth once they come to know it and direct their whole lives in accordance with the demands of truth." (2467).

Ms. Townsend, filled with rage because Pope Paul VI upheld the Church's constant and clear teaching regarding contraception in his Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae and because the current Pontiff also refuses to abandon the law of God, has no sense of history. If she did, she would know that all of the Christian churches held contraception to be gravely sinful prior to the Church of England's Lambeth Conference of 1930.

The Catholic Church doesn't roll dice or draw straws to determine what she believes. The Holy Father is not a politician, even if his office requires great political skill. He doesn't wet his finger to see which way the wind is blowing. The only "wind" he heeds is the wind of the Holy Spirit Who brings truth.

The Church is not, and never will be, a democracy Ms. Townsend. But this shouldn't trouble you for too long. Like the relativistic culture in which you live and move and have your being, your convictions will no doubt change. Like a straw being blown about by the wind, you have no roots. Your morally bankrupt culture has no roots. Which is why it is dying.

Meditation: John 15: 1-10

Is White House coordinating attack on DOMA?

From the OneNewsNow article:

"Attorney Mat Staver is convinced the Obama administration is behind a federal lawsuit filed yesterday in Boston challenging the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act."

Staver, who is with Liberty Counsel, says, "That's [Obama's] political preference [that DOMA be overturned]...There's no doubt in my mind, absolutely no question at all, that he and some of those in the Department of Justice are coordinating with individuals - and perhaps even the attorney general in Massachusetts - to literally bring these lawsuits and have a very weak defense so that the courts will ultimately overturn it without having the politicians and the president go on record showing that they are in favor of same-sex marriage."

The Catholic Action League of Massachusetts has issued a statement which may be found here. Behind Obama's radical homosexual agenda is the desire to turn vices into gods. See here.

More on the Worcester Diocesan Commission for Women and the "Gather Us In" Conference

"For this reason, the most eminent and most revered Fathers of the Holy Office exhort all Ordinaries as well as the superiors of Religious institutes, rectors of seminaries and presidents of universities, effectively to protect the minds, particularly of the youth, against the dangers presented by the works of Fr. Teilhard de Chardin and of his followers." (Holy Office, June 30, 1962).


As I mentioned in a previous post, the Worcester Diocesan Commission for Women has had New Age advocate Joyce Rupp as a guest speaker at its "Gather Us In" Conference. One guest speaker at this year's conference is Virginia Blass. Ms. Blass is involved with the Campion Renewal Center in Weston, Massachusetts. A page at the Campion Renewal Center website, which may be found here, states that, "Her major focus was the development of spiritual programs in parishes and eco-theology with the writings of Thomas Berry, CP."

Thomas Berry was a priest of the Passionist order and was considered a leader in the tradition of Teilhard de Chardin. Fr. Berry studied and was influenced by the work of the French Jesuit whose ideas are not compatible with Catholic teaching. See the Wikipedia article for background on both Fr. Berry and Pere Teilhard de Chardin here. The Church's monitum (or warning) regarding the writings of Pere Teilhard de Chardin, S.J., still stands. See here.

The Holy Rosary: A sling for Christians in the spiritual battle

“God has established not just one enmity but ‘enmities’, and not only between Mary and Satan but between her race and his race. That is, God has put enmities, antipathies and hatreds between the true children and servants of the Blessed Virgin and the children and slaves of the devil. They have no love and no sympathy for each other. The children of Belial, the slaves of Satan, the friends of the world, - for they are all one and the same - have always persecuted and will persecute more than ever in the future those who belong to the Blessed Virgin, just as Cain of old persecuted his brother Abel, and Esau his brother Jacob. These are the types of the wicked and of the just. But the humble Mary will always triumph over Satan, the proud one, and so great will be her victory that she will crush his head, the very seat of his pride. She will unmask his serpent's cunning and expose his wicked plots. She will scatter to the winds his devilish plans and to the end of time will keep her faithful servants safe from his cruel claws.

But Mary's power over the evil spirits will especially shine forth in the latter times, when Satan will lie in wait for her heel, that is, for her humble servants and her poor children whom she will rouse to fight against him. In the eyes of the world they will be little and poor and, like the heel, lowly in the eyes of all, down-trodden and crushed as is the heel by the other parts of the body. But in compensation for this they will be rich in God's graces, which will be abundantly bestowed on them by Mary. They will be great and exalted before God in holiness. They will be superior to all creatures by their great zeal and so strongly will they be supported by divine assistance that, in union with Mary, they will crush the head of Satan with their heel, that is, their humility, and bring victory to Jesus Christ.” (Treatise On True Devotion To The Blessed Virgin, 54).

I have always viewed the sling which David used to slay Goliath as a harbinger, a sort of figure or sign pointing to the Holy Rosary which would be given to the faithful by Our Lady and by which they would “crush the head of Satan” – “the very seat of his pride” as Montfort puts it. We read in 1 Samuel 17:

“With his shield-bearer marching before him, the Philistine also advanced closer and closer to David. When he had sized David up, and seen that he was youthful and ruddy, and handsome in appearance, he held him in contempt. The Philistine said to David, ‘Am I a dog that you come against me with a staff?’ Then the Philistine cursed David by his gods and said to him, ‘Come here to me, and I will leave your flesh for the birds of the air and the beasts of the field.’ David answered him: ‘You come against me with sword and spear and scimitar, but I come against you in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel that you have insulted. Today the Lord shall deliver you into my hand; I will strike you down and cut off your head. This very day I will leave your corpse and the corpses of the Philistine army for the birds of the air and the beasts of the field; thus the whole land shall learn that Israel has a God. All this multitude, too, shall learn that it is not by sword or spear that the Lord saves. For the battle is the Lord’s, and he shall deliver you into our hands’…David put his hand into the bag and took out a stone, hurled it with the sling, and struck the Philistine on the forehead. The stone embedded itself in his brow, and he fell prostrate on the ground. Thus David overcame the Philistine with sling and stone..” (1 Samuel 17: 41-47, 49-50).

The Devil is the adversary of faithful Christians. And, like Goliath, he seems to cast a big shadow. But when we approach him on the battlefield [“For our struggle is not with flesh and blood but with the principalities, with the powers, with the world rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in the heavens,” Eph 6:12] we have our own sling as a weapon – the Holy Rosary. And every bead, every Hail Mary prayerfully recited, is hurled as a weapon against the Devil’s head, the seat of his pride. Therefore, Montfort exhorts us, “So arm yourself with the arms of God, with the holy Rosary, and you will crush the devil’s head and stand firm in the face of all his temptations. That is why even a pair of rosary beads is so terrible to the devil, and why the saints have used them to fetter him and drive him from the bodies of those who were possessed.” (The Secret of the Holy Rosary, 85).

Related reading here.

First Traditional Latin Mass at Immaculate Conception in Fitchburg, Massachusetts

Some background on the first Traditional Latin Mass at Immaculate Conception parish in Fitchburg, Massachusetts courtesy of Todd and Diana Tabbaa:

The first weekly Mass in the Extraordinary Form (Traditional Latin Mass) at Immaculate Conception Church in Fitchburg was held on Sunday, June 28^th. The Missa Cantata was very well attended by people of all ages. The superb acoustics in the large Romanesque Church accentuated the Latin prayers intoned by the celebrant, Reverend Father David Phillipson, as well as the traditional Gregorian chants and motets sung by the choir directed by Sam Schmitt, an organist, singer, conductor and composer who holds a Doctorate in musicology and other graduate degrees in liturgical music and music history. The seven altar boys in attendance added much to the reverent and transcendent atmosphere of the Solemn Liturgy: the incense from the thurible, the candlelight from the torches carried by the boys, and the sound of the bells rung at key points.

The following impressions from one of the attendees are typical of the responses expressed:

"I think it's fair to call this the beginning of the restoration of the immemorial Holy Mass codified by St. Pius V to the church of the Immaculate Conception. I'm glad to say that our (my family's) hopes were high, but we were entirely unprepared for the palpably sacred ambience that persisted in the church throughout the sacred liturgy and which accompanied us right out the door and into the church hall (where I spent most of my time talking about the Mass, I think). It brought back a flood of memories of the best days I'd seen when I was a boy and the blessed years we had the privilege of going to Mass at Holy Trinity in Boston (where our two girls were baptized). I had the distinct impression that Father, the altar servers, and the choir were actually praying (not acting out roles) as they solemnly carried out their offices with unaffected reverence. I trust that everyone could plainly see how beautiful the church is with its French blue and gold, especially in the magnificent statue of Our Lady, and the organ filling every corner, at times with sounds of reflection, at others with those of majesty; but even now when I recall the ensemble of those impressions, I'm overwhelmed. I think one cannot really overestimate the beguiling power of the truly sacred."

"My family thanks you and all those who worked so long, so hard, and with such loving devotion to bring the truly extraordinary Holy Mass back to Immaculate Conception Church. May Our Lord and His holy Mother and ours bless you abundantly with their most excellent graces here on Earth and forever in Heaven. With gratitude in Jesus and Mary,

John and Connie Mick and family."

All are invited to experience worship in this Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite which will be offered every Sunday at 8AM as a Sung High Mass when possible (or else as a Low Mass). The Sacrament of Confession takes place before the Mass from 7:15 to 7:50AM, and the Rosary is recited at 7:30AM. For more information, visit the website which is under construction at www.immaculateconceptionfitchburg.com.

Father David Phillipson was trained to offer the Ancient Roman Rite by the Fraternity of St. Peter and has worked in traditional parishes for several years. Father will also hold spiritual conferences and traditional devotions, and administer the Sacraments according to the Extraordinary Form. “Together with the Latin Mass Community, I wish to thank Bishop McManus and Father Thien for making available the celebration of Mass in the Ancient Rite in this beautiful Church. I look forward to serving the community and invite all to attend and experience Mass in the Ancient Usage. I am happy to help anyone to learn to follow the missal or to answer any questions they may have. Any priests who would like assistance in learning this rite are welcome to contact me: frdavidphil4@gmail.com.

Contributions to help with the start up costs for this endeavor are very welcome and may be sent to the Church at 59 Walnut Street in Fitchburg 01420. Please make your tax deductible donation to Immaculate Conception Church EF (EF designating the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite).

Paul M.