Archbishop Vigano's battle cry

 Archbishop Vigano issues the battle cry here

The Archbishop says that, Catholics have "sacred and urgent duty" to resist Cardinal Cupich’s Latin Mass crackdown

The Antichrist wants Latin abolished in preparation for the rise of his dark Church, that counterfeit Church seen by Venerable Emmerich in her visions and which Fulton John Sheen warned was soon to arrive - the Mystical Body of Antichrist. 

See here.

Sorry Francis, moral goodness reflects and glorifies God more than any achievement whatsoever...

Once again Francis is taking a swipe at Faithful Catholics who adhere to sound doctrine and who understand that the teaching of the Living God is immutable.

Religion News Service reports:

"Pope Francis is calling for ordinary Catholics to live holy lives in whatever they do, stressing that the 'saints next door' are more pleasing to God than religious elites who insist on perfect adherence to rules and doctrine."

Really?

As Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand has reminded us:


"The attempt to make man the absolute center of the universe has in reality led to a progressive blindness toward the true nature of his dignity. The attempt to make a god out of man ended in making of him a more highly developed ape. The idolatry of great achievements shares the same fate...

When confronting the worship of great achievements, it is imperative to recall man's primary vocation. Great as is the range of values which man is capable of realizing, moral values hold a unique position in man's life. They alone are indispensable for every human being, whatever his special gifts and talents may be. They alone belong to the unum necessarium. Man is called above all to glorify God by his justice, his purity, his veracity, his goodness. 'Be you perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect.' (Mt. 5:48). Moral disvalues are an incomparable evil; they alone offend God; moral goodness reflects and glorifies God more than any achievement whatsoever....Compared with this vocation, the noblest talents and the creation of the greatest impersonal goods are secondary. Progress in the domination of nature, inventions, great achievements in science, cultural activities, and even the creation of masterpieces in art - great as they are in themselves, much as they manifest man's greatness - do not constitute man's primary vocation. No excellence in these fields can be compared at all with the value embodied in a saint." (Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand, The New Tower of Babel, pp. 181-182, Sophia Institute Press).


Archbishop Sheen once noted that, "Christian love bears evil, but it does not tolerate it. It is not broad-minded about sin."

The great Archbishop also made an important distinction: "Tolerance applies to the erring, intolerance to the error."  And again: "Tolerance does not apply to truth or principles. About these things we must be intolerant."

What Francis rails against, referring to as "rigidity" as "sickness," is authentic Christian love, as defined by 1822 of the Catechism.

Before labeling others as sick, Francis should reflect prayerfully on the fact that his one-time Superior General in the Jesuits referred to him as a "sociopath."  See here.

Under Francis, the emerging signs of the end times are intensifying...

Update: Catholic scholar says that the official persecution of faithful Catholics under Francis has begun.  See here.

An example of this persecution here.


"For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. But the one who restrains is to do so only for the present, until he is removed from the scene. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord (Jesus) will kill with the breath of his mouth and render powerless by the manifestation of his coming, the one whose coming springs from the power of Satan in every mighty deed and in signs and wonders that lie, and in every wicked deceit for those who are perishing because they have not accepted the love of truth so that they may be saved. Therefore, God is sending them a deceiving power so that they may believe the lie, that all who have not believed the truth but have approved wrongdoing may be condemned." (2 Thessalonians 2: 7-12).

Philip Johnson, in his book "Objections Sustained: Subversive Essays on Evolution, Law & Culture, tells a story which is both amusing and frightening at the same time. He writes: "I am convinced that conscious dishonesty is much less important in intellectual matters than self-deception...The German biologist Bruno Muller-Hill tells a memorable story to illustrate his thesis that 'self-deception plays an astonishing role in science in spite of all the scientists' worship of truth':

When I was a student in a German gymnasium and thirteen years old, I learned a lesson that I have not forgotten...One early morning our physics teacher placed a telescope in the school yard to show us a certain planet and its moons. So we stood in a long line, about forty of us. I was standing at the end of the line, since I was one of the smallest students. The teacher asked the first student whether he could see the planet. No, he had difficulties, because he was nearsighted. The teacher showed him how to adjust the focus, and that student could finally see the planet and the moons. Others had no difficulty; they saw them right away. The students saw, after a while, what they were supposed to see. Then the student standing just before me - his name was Harter - announced that he could not see anything. 'You idiot,' shouted the teacher, 'you have to adjust the lenses.' The student did that and said after a while, 'I do not see anything, it is all black.' The teacher then looked through the telescope himself. After some seconds he looked up with a strange expression on his face. And then my comrades and I also saw that the telescope was nonfunctioning; it was closed by a cover over the lens. Indeed, no one could see anything through it.'

Muller-Hill reports that one of the docile students became a professor of philosophy and director of a German TV station. 'This might be expected,' he wickedly comments. But another became a professor of physics, and a third a professor of botany. The honest Harter had to leave school and go to work in a factory. If in later life he was ever tempted to question any of the pronouncements of his more illustrious classmates, I am sure he was firmly told not to meddle in matters beyond his understanding.'" (pp. 156-157).

Do we honestly believe that this herd mentality is not to be found throughout our society and even in the Church? If so, we deceive ourselves. Pope Benedict XVI has warned of a liberal notion of conscience which is nothing less than a retreat from truth. In a keynote address of the Tenth Bishops' Workshop of the National Catholic Bioethics Center, on "Catholic Conscience: Foundation and Formation," he says that liberalism's idea of conscience is that: "Conscience does not open the way to the redemptive road to truth - which either does not exist or, if it does, is too demanding. It is the faculty that dispenses with truth. It thereby becomes the justification for subjectivity, which would not like to have itself called into question. Similarly, it becomes the justification for social conformity. As mediating value between the different subjectivities, social conformity is intended to make living together possible. The obligation to seek the truth terminates, as do any doubts about the general inclination of society and what it has become accustomed to. Being convinced of oneself, as well as conforming to others, is sufficient. Man is reduced to his superficial conviction, and the less depth he has, the better for him."

Is there really any difference between Harter's classmates, who insisted that they could see a planet and its moons when such was impossible, and those who succumb to social conformity and insist that an unborn baby is not really a human being when all the scientific evidence suggests otherwise?

Where will radical subjectivism ultimately lead us? It was Romano Guardini [in his classic The Lord, p. 513] who reminded us that: "One day the Antichrist will come: a human being who introduces an order of things in which rebellion against God will attain its ultimate power. He will be filled with enlightenment and strength. The ultimate aim of all aims will be to prove that existence witout Christ is possible - nay rather, that Christ is the enemy of existence, which can be fully realized only when all Christian values have been destroyed. His arguments will be so impressive, supported by means of such tremendous power - violent and diplomatic, material and intellectual - that to reject them will result in almost insurmountable scandal, and everyone whose eyes are not opened by grace will be lost. Then it will be clear what the Christian essence really is: that which stems not from the world, but from the heart of God; victory of grace over the world; redemption of the world, for her true essence is not to be found in herself, but in God, from whom she has received it. When God becomes all in all, the world will finally burst into flower."

More than forty years ago, when things were much better than they are today, Pope Paul VI said, "There is a great uneasiness, at this time, in the world and in the Church, and that which is in question is the faith.  It so happens now that I repeat to myself the obscure phrase of Jesus in the Gospel of St. Like: 'When the Son of Man returns, will He still find faith on the earth?'  It so happens that there are books coming out in which the faith is in retreat on some important points, that the episcopates are remaining silent and these books are not looked upon as strange.  This, to me, is strange.  I sometimes read the Gospel passage of the end times and I attest that, at this time, some signs of this end are emerging."

If Pope Paul VI were still with us today, he would be alarmed at the growth of these emerging signs.  Under Francis, the perennial teachings of the Church are not simply in retreat, they are under full assault as those who adhere to them are silenced or demoted.  See here and here for example.

The Church is splitting into two camps: The Mystical Body of Christ and the Mystical Body of Antichrist.

The choice is ours as to which camp we identify with.  But there are consequences in the next life.

Obama defends the terrorists...

World Net Daily is reporting:

Barack Obama is being blasted for comments on why he avoids using terms such as “radical Islamic terrorism,” with one prominent voice saying the president sounds like a defense lawyer for the attackers.

“There’s no magic to the phrase ‘radical Islam,'” the president said Tuesday during remarks at the Treasury Department. “It’s a political talking point, not a strategy.”

He continued: “What exactly would using this language accomplish? What exactly would it change?”

“Would it make ISIL (ISIS) less committed to try and kill Americans?”

“Would it bring in more allies? Is there a military strategy that is served by this? The answer is none of the above,” he said. “Calling a threat by a different name does not make it go away.”

In response, top-rated radio host Rush Limbaugh said, “It sounds to me like it’s the way defense lawyers talk. You know, when there’s a suspect, you got a defense lawyer saying, ‘Well, there’s no conclusive evidence here. We’re still looking for a motive. We haven’t found the right motive.’ Obama comes out after every one of these things, every one of these events, and Obama ends up sounding like defense lawyers speak on behalf of their clients. He doesn’t reflect the national mood about these things. It’s not even close.”

“As far as he’s concerned, they’re just a bunch of ‘militants’ that got hold of some guns, as in Fast and Furious,” Limbaugh added.

“In his world, there’s nothing that sets these people apart from any other band of bad guys or criminals. And that’s how he talks about them, and that’s what makes me suspicious. There’s clearly a difference. These people announce their intentions, they announce their objectives, and then they go fulfill them.”

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton share this in common: both live in a fantasy world where Islam is a religion of peace and good will and acts of terrorism are the result of internet propaganda and a gun culture rather than the hate-filled venom found in the Qu'ran or Islamic fundamentalism.

 

 

 

As I noted in a previous post, in his book entitled Truth and Tolerance: Christian Belief and World Religions, Pope Benedict XVI makes a few observations which some Catholics would apparently find problematic. The Holy Father writes, "To what extent the new surge forward of the Islamic world is fuelled by truly religious forces is..open to question. In many places, as we can see, there is the danger of a pathological development of the autonomy of feeling.." (p. 104).



On page 204 of the same book, Pope Benedict XVI writes, "...even with Islam, with all the greatness it represents, is always in danger of losing balance, letting violence have a place and letting religion slide away into mere outward observance and ritualism."

Lee Harris, in his important book entitled The Suicide of Reason: Radical Islam's Threat to the West, notes how Islam's fanatical intolerance isn't limited to the Taliban or groups which openly call for Jihad. He writes, "Another example of the persistence of the fanatical intolerance of Muslims came to the world's attention in the same year as the cartoon riots. A Muslim in Afghanistan had converted to Christianity - the same Afghanistan that the United States had liberated from the fanaticism of the Taliban. But fanatical intolerance in Afghanistan clearly did not require an organization like the Taliban to keep it alive. Here again, it sprang up quite spontaneously from the religious and learned mullahs and from the bulk of the people. Islamic law demands that an apostate from Islam should be executed, and there were cries for blood that again took the form of riots and outrageous pronouncements from Muslim clerics, one of whom urged that the apostate be torn limb from limb by the people themselves. Fortunately, due to pressure from the West, the man was flown out of Afghanistan to sanctuary in Italy." (p. 210).

Hilaire Belloc wrote in The Great Heresies, "Mohammedanism...began as a heresy, not as a new religion. It was not a pagan contrast with the Church; it was not an alien enemy. It was a perversion of Christian doctrine. It vitality and endurance soon gave it the appearance of a new religion, but those who were contemporary with its rise saw it for what it was not a denial, but an adaptation and a misuse, of the Christian thing. It differed from most (not from all) heresies in this, that it did not arise within the bounds of the Christian Church. The chief heresiarch, Mohammed himself, was not, like most heresiarchs, a man of Catholic birth and doctrine to begin with. He sprang from pagans. But that which he taught was in the main Catholic doctrine, oversimplified. It was the great Catholic world on the frontiers of which he lived, whose influence was all around him and whose territories he had known by travel_which inspired his convictions. He came of, and mixed with, the degraded idolaters of the Arabian wilderness, the conquest of which had never seemed worth the Romans' while.

He took over very few of those old pagan ideas which might have been native to him from his descent. On the contrary, he preached and insisted upon a whole group of ideas which were peculiar to the Catholic Church and distinguished it from the paganism which it had conquered in the Greek and Roman civilization. Thus the very foundation of his teaching was that prime Catholic doctrine, the unity and omnipotence of God. The attributes of God he also took over in the main from Catholic doctrine: the personal nature, the all-goodness, the timelessness, the providence of God, His creative power as the origin of all things, and His sustenance of
all things by His power alone. The world of good spirits and angels and of evil spirits in rebellion against God was a part of the teaching, with a chief evil spirit, such as Christendom had recognized. Mohammed preached with insistence that prime Catholic doctrine, on the human side the immortality of the soul and its responsibility for actions in this life, coupled with the consequent doctrine of punishment and reward after death.

If anyone sets down those points that orthodox Catholicism has in common with Mohammedanism, and those points only, one might imagine if one went no further that there should have been no cause of quarrel. Mohammed would almost seem in this aspect to be a sort of missionary, preaching and spreading by the energy of his character the chief and fundamental doctrines of the Catholic Church among those who had hitherto been degraded pagans of the Desert. He gave to Our Lord the highest reverence, and to Our Lady also, for that matter. On the day of judgment (another Catholic idea which he taught) it was Our Lord, according to Mohammed, who would be the judge of mankind, not he, Mohammed. The Mother of Christ, Our Lady, "the Lady Miriam" was ever for him the first of womankind. His followers even got from the early fathers some vague hint of her Immaculate Conception.

But the central point where this new heresy struck home with a mortal blow against Catholic tradition was a full denial of the Incarnation. Mohammed did not merely take the first steps toward that denial, as the Arians and their followers had done; he advanced a clear affirmation, full and complete, against the whole doctrine of an incarnate God. He taught that Our Lord was the greatest of all the prophets, but still only a prophet: a man like other men. He eliminated the Trinity altogether.

With that denial of the Incarnation went the whole sacramental structure. He refused to know anything of the Eucharist, with its Real Presence; he stopped the sacrifice of the Mass, and therefore the institution of a special priesthood. In other words, he, like so many
other lesser heresiarchs, founded his heresy on simplification.

Catholic doctrine was true (he seemed to say), but it had become encumbered with false accretions; it had become complicated by needless man-made additions, including the idea that its founder was Divine, and the growth of a parasitical caste of priests who battened on a late, imagined, system of Sacraments which they alone could administer. All those corrupt accretions must be swept away.

There is thus a very great deal in common between the enthusiasm with which Mohammed's teaching attacked the priesthood, the Mass and the sacraments, and the enthusiasm with which Calvinism, the central motive force of the Reformation, did the same. As we all know, the new teaching relaxed the marriage laws but in practice this did not affect the mass of his followers who still remained monogamous. It made divorce as easy as possible, for the sacramental idea of marriage disappeared. It insisted upon the equality of men, and it necessarily had that further factor in which it resembled Calvinism the sense of predestination, the sense of fate; of what the followers of John Knox were always calling 'the immutable decrees of God.' Mohammed's teaching never developed among the mass of his followers, or in his own mind, a detailed theology. He was content to accept all that appealed to him in the Catholic scheme and to reject all that seemed to him, and to so many others of his time, too complicated or mysterious to be true."

Islam is useful to those who wish to promote a humanitarian religion in which Christ is regarded merely as a man. The Incarnation must be rejected, the God-Man must be replaced by the man-God. As Archbishop Fulton Sheen warned:
"A common spirit will eventually bind all atheists together to produce the man-god, as there is a common spirit which unites those who live by Christ....The mere denial of God is not emptiness and a negation but the affirmation of man as God. It does not take a gift of prophecy to see that humanity is presently polarizing and that all men are beginning to fall into the ranks of accepting either the man-god or the God-Man." Much of the liberal mainstream media has a real hatred for the Catholic Church and Christianity in general. They view Christianity as no longer fit for "modern man," as a religion which must be purged of its dogmas and made to fit with a new order.

The Holy Spirit teaches us through the Apostle John that, "This is how you can know the Spirit of God: every spirit that acknowledges Jesus Christ come in the flesh belongs to God, and every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus does not belong to God. This is the spirit of the Antichrist that, as you heard, is to come, but in fact is already in the world." (1 John 4: 2-3).

And that dark spirit is growing daily.

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton exemplify this dark spirit.

Pope Francis: Do you want to pray the Creed?

Dorothy Sayers, in her classic work Creed or Chaos, reminds us that, "The Christian faith is the most exciting drama that ever staggered the imagination of man — and the dogma is the drama.

That drama is summarised quite clearly in the creeds of the Church, and if we think it dull it is because we either have never really read those amazing documents, or have recited them so often and so mechanically as to have lost all sense of their meaning.  The plot pivots upon a single character, and the whole action is the answer to a single central problem: What think ye of Christ?

The Church's answer is categorical and uncompromising, and it is this: That Jesus Bar-Joseph, the carpenter of Nazareth, was in fact and in truth, and in the most exact and literal sense of the words, the God "by Whom all things were made."  His body and brain were those of a common man; His personality was the personality of God, so far as that personality could be expressed in human terms.  He was not a kind of dæmon or fairy pretending to be human; He was in every respect a genuine living man.  He was not merely a man so good as to be "like God" — He was God…This is the dogma we find so dull — this terrifying drama of which God is the victim and hero.

If this is dull, then what, in Heaven's name, is worthy to be called exciting?  The people who hanged Christ never, to do them justice, accused Him of being a bore — on the contrary; they thought Him too dynamic to be safe.  It has been left for later generations to muffle up that shattering personality and surround Him with an atmosphere of tedium. We have very efficiently pared the claws of the Lion of Judah, certified Him "meek and mild," and recommended Him as a fitting household pet for pale curates and pious old ladies.  To those who knew Him, however, He in no way suggested a milk-and-water person; they objected to Him as a dangerous firebrand."

For authentic Christians then, the Creeds are essential.  They are our response to the question, "What think ye of Christ?"

But for Pope Francis, the Creed seems to be of little importance.  As related here, when challenged on some of his views (which many consider far to the left), Francis responded, "..if they want me to recite the Creed, I can!"

First of all, the Creed is a prayer.  It should be prayed and not simply recited.  Secondly, we should possess the desire to pray the Creed, and not simply recite it as some sort of formula to convince others that we really believe.

It was Archbishop Fulton Sheen who cautioned, "The modern man must decide for himself whether he is going to have a religion with thought or a religion without it. He already knows that thoughtless policies lead to the ruin of society, and he may begin to suspect that thoughtless religion ends in confusion worse confounded.

The problem is simple. The modern man has two maps before him: one the map of sentimental religion, the other the map of dogmatic religion. The first is very simple. It has been constructed only in the last few years by a topographer who has just gone into the business of map making and is extremely adverse to explicit directions. He believes that each man should find his own way and not have his liberty taken away by dogmatic directions. The other map is much more complicated and full of dogmatic detail. It has been made by topographers who have been over every inch of the road for centuries and know each detour and each pitfall. It has explicit directions and dogmas such as, 'Do not take this road - it is swampy,' or 'Follow this road; although rough and rocky at first, it leads to a smooth road on a mountaintop.'

The simple map is very easy to read, but those who are guided by it are generally lost in a swamp of mushy sentimentalism. The other map takes a little more scrutiny, but it is simpler in the end, for it takes you up through the rocky road of the world's scorn to the everlasting hills where is seated the original Map Maker, the only One who ever has associated rest with learning: 'Learn of Me...and you shall find rest for your souls.'

Every new coherent doctrine and dogma add to the pabulum for thought; it is an extra bit of garden upon which we can intellectually browse; it is new food into which we can put our teeth and thence absorb nourishment; it is the discovery of a new intellectual planet that adds fullness and spaciousness to our mental world. And simply because it is solid and weighty, because it is dogmatic and not gaseous and foggy like a sentiment, it is intellectually invigorating, for it is with weights that the best drill is done, and not with feathers.

It is the very nature of a man to generate children of his brain in the shape of thoughts, and as he piles up thought on thought, truth on truth, doctrine on doctrine, conviction on conviction, and dogma on dogma, a very coherent and orderly fashion, so as to produce a system complex as a body and yet one and harmonious, the more and more human he becomes. When, however, in response to false cries for progress, he lops off dogmas, breaks with the memory of his forefathers, denies intellectual parentage, pleads for a religion without dogmas, substitutes mistiness for mystery, mistakes sentiment for sediment, he is sinking back slowly, surely, and inevitably into the senselessness of stones and into the irresponsible unconsciousness of weeds. Grass is broad-minded. Cabbages have heads - but no dogmas."

A religion with thought or a religion without it.  Which do you think Francis advances?

Related reading here.

Pope Francis' attitude toward dogma and his Brothers in the Episcopate: Evidence of Satanic pride?

"Pride is to be avoided, that pride of intellect which is more dangerous and more difficult to overcome than the pride of will, as Scupoli says.

This is the pride that renders faith and obedience to superiors difficult. One wants to be self-sufficient; the more confidence one has in one's own judgment the more reluctantly does one accept the teachings of faith, or the more readily does one submit these to criticism and to personal interpretation. In like manner, one so trusts to one's own wisdom, that it is with repugnance that others are consulted, especially superiors. Hence, regrettable mistakes occur. Hence comes also obstinacy of judgment, resulting in the final and sweeping condemnation of such opinions as differ from our own. Herein lies one of the most common causes of strife between Christian and Christian, at times even between Catholic writers. St. Augustine calls those who cause unfortunate dissensions, destructive of peace and of the bond of charity, 'Dividers of unity, enemies of peace, without charity, puffed up with vanity, well pleased with themselves and great in their own eyes.'*

To heal this intellectual pride: 1) we must first of all submit ourselves with childlike docility to the teachings of faith. We are undoubtedly allowed to seek that understanding of our dogmas which is obtained by a patient and laborious quest with the aid of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, especially St. Augustine and St. Thomas; but as the Vatican Council says, this must be done with piety and with discretion, following the maxim of St. Anselm: 'Faith seeking understanding.' Thus we avoid that hypercritical attitude that attenuates and minimizes our dogmas under pretense of explaining them. We submit our judgment not only to the truths of faith but to the directions of the Holy See.." (Fr. Adolphe Tanquerey, S.S., D.D., The Spiritual Life: A Treatise on Ascetical and Mystical Theology, p. 388, Tan Books).

Docility  to the teachings of faith is a remedy for pride of intellect.  But do we witness such docility in Pope Francis?

Recently he told an Argentinian newspaper that, “The world has changed and the Church can not withdraw into supposed interpretations of dogma."

Supposed interpretations? The Church's dogmas represent more than "supposed interpretations" of truth.  As the Catechism explains in paragraphs 88 and 89.

It was Archbishop Fulton Sheen who said that, "The modern man must decide for himself whether he is going to have a religion with thought or a religion without it. He already knows that thoughtless policies lead to the ruin of society, and he may begin to suspect that thoughtless religion ends in confusion worse confounded.

The problem is simple. The modern man has two maps before him: one the map of sentimental religion, the other the map of dogmatic religion. The first is very simple. It has been constructed only in the last few years by a topographer who has just gone into the business of map making and is extremely adverse to explicit directions. He believes that each man should find his own way and not have his liberty taken away by dogmatic directions. The other map is much more complicated and full of dogmatic detail. It has been made by topographers who have been over every inch of the road for centuries and know each detour and each pitfall. It has explicit directions and dogmas such as, 'Do not take this road - it is swampy,' or 'Follow this road; although rough and rocky at first, it leads to a smooth road on a mountaintop.'

The simple map is very easy to read, but those who are guided by it are generally lost in a swamp of mushy sentimentalism. The other map takes a little more scrutiny, but it is simpler in the end, for it takes you up through the rocky road of the world's scorn to the everlasting hills where is seated the original Map Maker, the only One who ever has associated rest with learning: 'Learn of Me...and you shall find rest for your souls.'

Every new coherent doctrine and dogma add to the pabulum for thought; it is an extra bit of garden upon which we can intellectually browse; it is new food into which we can put our teeth and thence absorb nourishment; it is the discovery of a new intellectual planet that adds fullness and spaciousness to our mental world. And simply because it is solid and weighty, because it is dogmatic and not gaseous and foggy like a sentiment, it is intellectually invigorating, for it is with weights that the best drill is done, and not with feathers.

It is the very nature of a man to generate children of his brain in the shape of thoughts, and as he piles up thought on thought, truth on truth, doctrine on doctrine, conviction on conviction, and dogma on dogma, a very coherent and orderly fashion, so as to produce a system complex as a body and yet one and harmonious, the more and more human he becomes. When, however, in response to false cries for progress, he lops off dogmas, breaks with the memory of his forefathers, denies intellectual parentage, pleads for a religion without dogmas, substitutes mistiness for mystery, mistakes sentiment for sediment, he is sinking back slowly, surely, and inevitably into the senselessness of stones and into the irresponsible unconsciousness of weeds. Grass is broad-minded. Cabbages have heads - but no dogmas." (The Electronic Christian, pp. 74-74).

We have a pope who says that he likes to argue with "conservative" Bishops (read orthodox, political terms do not belong in the Church).  Does this suggest humility or pride?

Could this be the reason Fulton Sheen's cause has been stalled?

Way back in the 1970's, I purchased an excellent book written by my hero and good friend Fulton J. Sheen entitled "The Electronic Christian" and published by the Macmillan Publishing Company. In this important book (indeed every book written By Sheen could be labelled as important), the saintly Archbishop who thoroughly intrigued his audience throughout the 1950's as "Uncle Fultie" - a Catholic counterpart if you will to Milton Berle's "Uncle Miltie," explains the importance and indeed the necessity of a religion with Dogma. Here is his essay:


The modern man must decide for himself whether he is going to have a religion with thought or a religion without it. He already knows that thoughtless policies lead to the ruin of society, and he may begin to suspect that thoughtless religion ends in confusion worse confounded.

The problem is simple. The modern man has two maps before him: one the map of sentimental religion, the other the map of dogmatic religion. The first is very simple. It has been constructed only in the last few years by a topographer who has just gone into the business of map making and is extremely adverse to explicit directions. He believes that each man should find his own way and not have his liberty taken away by dogmatic directions. The other map is much more complicated and full of dogmatic detail. It has been made by topographers who have been over every inch of the road for centuries and know each detour and each pitfall. It has explicit directions and dogmas such as, 'Do not take this road - it is swampy,' or 'Follow this road; although rough and rocky at first, it leads to a smooth road on a mountaintop.'

The simple map is very easy to read, but those who are guided by it are generally lost in a swamp of mushy sentimentalism. The other map takes a little more scrutiny, but it is simpler in the end, for it takes you up through the rocky road of the world's scorn to the everlasting hills where is seated the original Map Maker, the only One who ever has associated rest with learning: 'Learn of Me...and you shall find rest for your souls.'

Every new coherent doctrine and dogma add to the pabulum for thought; it is an extra bit of garden upon which we can intellectually browse; it is new food into which we can put our teeth and thence absorb nourishment; it is the discovery of a new intellectual planet that adds fullness and spaciousness to our mental world. And simply because it is solid and weighty, because it is dogmatic and not gaseous and foggy like a sentiment, it is intellectually invigorating, for it is with weights that the best drill is done, and not with feathers.

It is the very nature of a man to generate children of his brain in the shape of thoughts, and as he piles up thought on thought, truth on truth, doctrine on doctrine, conviction on conviction, and dogma on dogma, a very coherent and orderly fashion, so as to produce a system complex as a body and yet one and harmonious, the more and more human he becomes. When, however, in response to false cries for progress, he lops off dogmas, breaks with the memory of his forefathers, denies intellectual parentage, pleads for a religion without dogmas, substitutes mistiness for mystery, mistakes sentiment for sediment, he is sinking back slowly, surely, and inevitably into the senselessness of stones and into the irresponsible unconsciousness of weeds. Grass is broad-minded. Cabbages have heads - but no dogmas. (pp. 74-74).

It would seem that "modern man," as Sheen so generously referred to him, has made his choice: he has opted for a religion without thought, a religion where dogma is considered a liability.  Could this be why the Archdiocese of New York has stalled Fulton Sheen's cause.  See here: http://www.pantagraph.com/news/local/sheen-sainthood-process-suspended/article_d43c4d13-dea7-5af5-b8bc-97ed8184cd21.html

The same Archdiocese which has just decided to allow homosexuals and lesbians march in the Saint Patrick Day's Parade.  We have now entered the time of the final confrontation between good and evil, Gospel and Anti-Gospel. The Devil is sending false prophets to prepare the way for his Antichrist who will do his best to destroy the Catholic Church. We've witnessed false prophets of a humanitarian religion and a theology of violence. We have seen a priest of the Boston Archdiocese advance a sentimental religion free of dogma. And we have watched as the Boston Archdiocese permits "Gay Pride" celebrations while calling evil good and good evil.


More false prophets will come. And many will be seduced by them because they do not have a love for the truth and because they do not pray. Fr. Vincent Miceli notes that, "The contrast between Christ and the Antichrist could not be more pronounced than in their respective relations to revealed truth. The Incarnate Truth has chosen the poor, uncultured, and simple to preach the inestimable truths of the Gospel. The Antichrist, the condemned man, whose form the apostate angel, Satan, possesses at the end of the world, chooses the wise of this world, the double-minded, the arrogant intellectuals to preach lies about revealed truth." (The Antichrist, p.78).

Romano Guardini alludes to this in his book The Lord. He notes how those who refuse to accept the specious arguments of the arrogant intellectuals and the "wise" of this world will be a source of scandal:

"One day the Antichrist will come: a human being who introduces an order of things in which rebellion against God will attain its ultimate power. He will be filled with enlightenment and strength. The ultimate aim of all aims will be to prove that existence without Christ is possible - nay rather, that Christ is the enemy of existence, which can be fully realized only when all Christian values have been destroyed. His arguments will be so impressive, supported by means of such tremendous power - violent and diplomatic, material and intellectual - that to reject them will result in almost insurmountable scandal, and everyone whose eyes are not opened by grace will be lost. Then it will be clear what the Christian essence really is: that which stems not from the world, but from the heart of God; victory of grace over the world; redemption of the world, for her true essence is not to be found in herself, but in God, from whom she has received it. When God becomes all in all, the world will finally burst into flower." (The Lord p. 513).

Is there really any doubt that the Man of Sin will soon reveal himself to the world? When he does, he will attempt to tear the very idea of God from the consciousness of men. And according to Scripture, God's Holy Word, he will succeed in seducing the vast majority of believers away from Christ and into his own ranks of the idolatrous. But those who do not trust in their own intellect or powers and who seek refuge in the Immaculate Heart of Mary will find it. For the humble Virgin, Mother of the Church, will crush the Devil's head - the seat of his intellect - as surely as Judith saved her people by slaying Holofernes. Recall

how she accomplished this


Related reading here: http://lasalettejourney.blogspot.com/2014/07/pope-francis-man-is-king-of-universe.html

Pope Francis advances a counterfeit charity based on a "live and let live" philosophy

"For generations now, we have denied the food of revealed truth to our
children; and we have permitted the moral polluters to dump their garbage
into our culture with abandon. Why then, are we surprised that ours
has become a stunted and sick society?" - Patrick J. Buchanan

The times are growing very dark.  Everywhere signs are emerging which point to the appearance of the Man of Sin.  A Brazilian heavy metal band is announcing the Age of Antichrist (see here).  We have a Pontiff who preaches a "live and let live" philosophy (see here) which is nothing less than a counterfeit charity.

As Joseph Pronechen explains here, "Live and let live. Be nice. Be nonjudgmental. We must be more tolerant. So the sayings go.

'America, it is said, is suffering from intolerance,' wrote Servant of God Archbishop Fulton Sheen in his prophetic 1931 essay 'A Plea for Intolerance....It is not. It is suffering from tolerance: tolerance of right and wrong, truth and error, virtue and evil, Christ and chaos. Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broad-minded.'

But shouldn’t we be tolerant? Isn’t that charitable?

'Real love involves real hatred,' countered Archbishop Sheen. 'Whoever has lost the power of moral indignation and the urge to drive the buyers and sellers from the temples has also lost a living, fervent love of truth. Charity, then, is not a mild philosophy of live and let live.'

Adds Father Andrew Apostoli of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal, EWTN host and vice postulator of Archbishop Sheen’s cause, 'You can’t tolerate evil teachings and distortions of values against God’s laws and natural law to be accepted by society.'

It’s a daily challenge for many when confronted with today’s morally bankrupt political correctness masquerading as real tolerance.


True Tolerance
So how is a Catholic to walk the narrow road of true Christian tolerance with genuine love of neighbor and not stumble along the wide road of politically correct tolerance?
First, 'Love is not tolerance,' Archbishop Sheen wrote. 'Christian love bears evil, but it does not tolerate it. It is not broad-minded about sin.'

Then the archbishop made an important distinction. 'Tolerance applies to the erring, intolerance to the error,' he noted. 'Tolerance does not apply to truth or principles. About these things we must be intolerant.'

We condemn the sin, but not the sinner, as Father Apostoli puts it: “That’s the kind of distinction Bishop Sheen is making. We have to be tolerant toward the person who many be weak, confused, mistaken in good faith or may even be deliberately promoting distortions.”
____________________________________________________________________________

In his book "Apologetics: A Philosophic Defense and Explanation of the Catholic Religion," Monsignor Paul J. Glenn, Ph.D, S.T.D., writes, "Let Catholic apologists..not surrender the cause of Christ...by a milk-and-water philosophy of tolerance. Tolerance is for external conduct; it is not for the mind; the mind cannot tolerate error for an instant." (p. 278). And this because error and truth are not "equally good." In other words, we must always strive to tolerate people [including those who disagree with us; and our worst enemies], but we cannot tolerate error. Differing opinions are not equally valid.

And in his important work "The New Tower of Babel," Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand explains that, "Although the dethronement of truth manifests itself in the most drastic and radical way in Nazism and Bolshevism, unfortunately many symptoms of this spiritual disease are also to be found in democratic countries. For example, in discussions we sometimes hear the following argument: 'Why should your opinion be more valid than mine? We are equal and have the same rights. It is undemocratic to pretend that your opinion is preferable.' This attitude is extremely significant because it reveals the complete absence of the notion of truth, the tacit elimination of truth as the determining norm for the value of an opinion....The immanent theme of every opinion is truth; the only thing that matters here is whether or not it is in conformity with reality..This brings us to another slogan disclosing the dethronement of truth. It is the often repeated statement 'It is true for me, but it may not be true for you.' The truth of a proposition is essentially objective; a truth which as such would be valid for one person only is a contradiction in terms. A proposition is true or false, but it can never be true for one person and false for another. The statement that a certain action is morally good may be true or false; but if it is true, it can never be false for any other person.." (pp. 56-58).

Some might be tempted to believe that the rejection of error and falsehood [ and here, again, we are speaking of ideas not persons] is something "negative" and even cult-like. But such is simply not the case. Again, Dr. Hildebrand explains: "Perhaps never before has there been as much intellectual fraud as there is today. In the mass media - and even in discussions on university campuses - this intellectual fraud appears chiefly as the manipulation of slogans designed to bluff the hearer or reader, and prevent him from thinking clearly. For a typical example, let us consider how the terms positive and negative are now most often used to discredit the refutation of pernicious errors and to give credit to the most shallow speculations. The intellectual swindlers who play such an important role in public discussions will often denominate as 'positive' propositions and attitudes they favor. They thereby seek to forestall questions of truth and value by enveloping their prejudices in a vague suggestion of 'creativity,' 'originality,' 'openness,' 'unaggressiveness.' This is the device of the cuttlefish. The moment one tries to grasp it, it emits a murky substance to confuse and deceive.
In reality, the popular slogan usages of positive and negative is a distortion of the genuine meanings of the terms. In proper usage they can refer to existence and nonexistence or to value and disvalue. They can refer to desirability and undesirability, or to answers to questions and demands, or to results of tests and inquiries. But when these terms are applied to attitudes of mind or to theses - by way of suggesting an evaluation - an intellectual fraud is committed; for they are then being used to evoke vague associations that distract from the question that alone matters - namely: Is this attitude objectively called for? Or: Is this thesis true?...It is the nature of truth to exclude every contradiction of itself. Thus, the rejection of errors and falsehoods can never be separated from the affirmation of truth. The one implies the other...

To give the impression that affirmations are 'positive' and denials 'negative' is to misrepresent completely the nature of judgments and propositions. This abuse of the language transforms the terms positive and negative into deceptive slogans and thus amounts to an intellectual swindle..." (The Charitable Anathema, pp. 45-47).

We live in evil times.  And at a time when the Church needs sound moral and intellectual guidance, we have a shepherd who appears to subscribe to an Epicurean philosophy.

Strange days.  Evil days.  The diabolical disorientation grows.  The Age of Antichrist nears.

Tom Horn attacks Fatima on Sid Roth's "It's Supernatural"

Tom Horn sees demons everywhere. The Assembly of God pastor and author of numerous works of anti-Catholic theology-fiction such as “The Ahriman Gate,” “Nephilim Stargates” and “As It Was in the Days of Noah,” is now accusing the Catholic Church, the Church founded by Jesus Christ, of preparing to welcome “an alien savior.” In his new book entitled ‘Exo-Vaticana: Petrus Romanus, Project L.U.C.I.F.E.R., and the Vatican’s Astonishing Plan for the Arrival of an Alien Savior,” Mr. Horn warns that “Rome is busy now hypothecating the astonishing doctrines that will facilitate the coming of a Galactic Savior.”

Horn’s thesis (and that of his co-author Cris Putnam (whom the book touts as a “respected theologian and apologist) is that the Roman Catholic Church is searching the skies for demons who will soon arrive on planet earth in the guise of aliens and will baptize these demonic entities. Additionally, these two authors claim that the Church has been preparing for an alien savior for many centuries and that the Virgin Mary who appeared at Fatima was really a demonic deception Horn and Putnam write, “Considering Constantine’s fourth-century sighting got it started, the event in Fatima, and all the sightings over the Vatican, Roman Catholicism arguably qualifies as a UFO religion.” (P. 367).

Horn’s book is chock full of such items. On page 221, he questions free will: “..the question of human autonomy in accepting God and rejecting Satan is a matter of intense intermural debate among Christians and is by no means a given.” On page 235, Horn takes exception with the Church’s understanding of Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, asserting that the Church’s position represents “liberalized inclusivism”which is “considered heretical by Bible-believing Christians.” On pages 238 and 239, Horn suggests that the Catholic Church’s hierarchy has “been deceived by..evil supernatural intelligences.” On page 256, he asserts that the Middle Ages represented a “Dark Age” and a “Pornocracy” during which “..many in the priesthood were..involved in the occult arts and were not well trained in biblical theology.” On page 257, he accuses Albertus Magnus as having been “in league with the Devil.” On pages 259 and 260, he describes a vision which Nicholas of Cusa allegedly had and emphatically declares that this vision “went unchallenged by the Church” (Thereby displaying his ignorance regarding the Church’s teaching pertaining to private revelation - see Catechism of the Catholic Church, 67). On page 308, Horn and Putnam refer to what they see as “The absurdity of Catholic claims to an infallible teaching magisterium..” On page 270, Horn and Putnam assert that, “..the Roman Church [note how they omit the word Catholic) is forever besmirched by its capacity for murderous zeal.”

Chapter 14 of this anti-Catholic tome is entitled “Fatima: Harbinger of the Great Deception?” Horn and Putnam reject the miracle of the sun, asserting that, “..if the sun had actually moved in the described manner, the gravitational effects would have devastated the Earth.” The authors purposely ignore the fact that God created nature, that He is omnipotent, and that He can work in and through nature as He likes. The same God who parted the Red Sea and calmed the storm waters when His disciples became afraid can certainly move heavenly bodies. But in their desire to denigrate devotion to Mary (which they refer to as “Mariolatry”), Horn and Putnam insist that what the people at Fatima actually witnessed was not a miracle of the sun but an alien disc (demonic in origin) and that “entities behind the aerial phenomenon are influencing Catholic dogmas” - such as the Assumption of Mary pp. 367, 368).

Horn and Putnam assert that the miraculous apparitions of Our Lady to Bernadette Soubirous at Lourdes, France were the result of “Mariolatry,” and that the apparition was a story crafted, “..at a time when the status of the Virgin was being challenged within the Catholic Church.” (P. 368). The authors insist that, “The priest [St. Bernadette’s parish priest] spun this phantasm into evidence for Marian dogma, and the rest is history. Astonishingly, Bernadette was heralded as a mystic, canonized as a saint in 1933, and even given her own feast day on the sixteenth of April. See a pattern emerging? Like at Fatima, it always speaks through naive children...While a few credulous Portuguese children could be easily deceived by a supernatural entity, the events at Fatima had nothing to do with the biblical Mary.” (P. 368). The authors insist, however, that “Many scholars are now categorizing Fatima as a mass UFO sighting.” (P. 369).

Why are Tom Horn and Cris Putnam (not to mention Sid Roth who has promoted these two anti-Catholic bigots on his television program “It’s Supernatural”) so anxious to discredit Fatima and devotion to Our Lady in general? Because devotion to Our Lady is necessary for salvation. And because the Devil knows that the requests Our Lady made at Fatima represent the definitive solution to defeating the Devil and his agents. The Devil hates Fatima - and other approved apparition sites - for this reason. But especially Fatima. The Devil wants to discredit Fatima because he is a liar and a murderer from the beginning (see John 8: 44). The Devil knows that his time is short and that the prophetic mission of Fatima is still most relevant. This is why Pope Benedict XVI said, on May 13, 2010, that “He deceives himself who thinks the prophetic mission of Fatima is concluded.”

The Devil fears Our Lady. With each “Hail Mary,” all of Hell trembles. St. Louis de Montfort assures us of this. And so the Devil seeks (often using human agents to accomplish this goal) to draw the faithful away from Fatima and other Church approved apparitions.

It is most significant that Tom Horn reveals in his book that he had a family secret which he “could neither understand nor talk about.” The secret? His sister Vida and her daughter have had encounters with demonic spirits who he describes as “floating monstrosities” which “seemed to dematerialize like ectoplasm through a fantastic, spinning void” and which left behind the smell of sulfur and decaying flesh. (pp. 449-460). Why is this significant? Because demonic oppression can often run in families.

Tom Horn and Cris Putnam do not think much of Mary. This is why the denigrate devotion to her. But as Archbishop Fulton Sheen says in his classic work entitled ‘The World’s First Love,” “..The key to understanding Mary is this: We do not start with Mary. We start with Christ, the Son of the living God! The less we think of Him, the less we think of her; the more we think of Him, the more we think of her; the more we adore His Divinity, the more we venerate her Motherhood; the less we adore His Divinity, the less reason we have for respecting her....”

Sid Roth continues to promote Horn and Putnam’s book. He may be contacted at:

Sid Roth’s It’s Supernatural & Messianic Vision
P.O. Box 39222
Charlotte, NC 28278
704-943-6500

Father Thomas Massaro, S.J. and the Charter for Compassion: Breaking down dogma

Remember Father Thomas Massaro? The professor of moral theology at Boston College who appeared as a guest speaker at Father Bryan Hehir's Social Justice Conference last year?  In a previous post, I detailed how Fr. Massaro is a member of the Cambridge Peace Commission, an organization intimately linked with the GLBT agenda.

Fr. Massaro is now promoting the "Charter for Compassion," which is described as "..a document that transcends religious, ideological, and national difference" which is "supported by leading thinkers from many traditions."  In a review of Karen Armstrong's book entitled, "Twelve Steps to a Compassionate Life," which appeared in America Magazine [see here], Fr. Massaro writes, "..nothing could be more important than Armstrong's agenda to 'retrain our responses and form mental habits that are kinder, gentler, and less fearful of others.'  All people of good will and open minds will admire the Charter for Compassion and its promotion of more constructive patterns of social behavior."

The problem?  The Charter for Compassion is an assault on dogma.  It reads:


"The principle of compassion lies at the heart of all religious, ethical and spiritual traditions, calling us always to treat all others as we wish to be treated ourselves. Compassion impels us to work tirelessly to alleviate the suffering of our fellow creatures, to dethrone ourselves from the centre of our world and put another there, and to honour the inviolable sanctity of every single human being, treating everybody, without exception, with absolute justice, equity and respect.


It is also necessary in both public and private life to refrain consistently and empathically from inflicting pain. To act or speak violently out of spite, chauvinism, or self-interest, to impoverish, exploit or deny basic rights to anybody, and to incite hatred by denigrating others—even our enemies—is a denial of our common humanity. We acknowledge that we have failed to live compassionately and that some have even increased the sum of human misery in the name of religion.

We therefore call upon all men and women ~ to restore compassion to the centre of morality and religion ~ to return to the ancient principle that any interpretation of scripture that breeds violence, hatred or disdain is illegitimate ~ to ensure that youth are given accurate and respectful information about other traditions, religions and cultures ~ to encourage a positive appreciation of cultural and religious diversity ~ to cultivate an informed empathy with the suffering of all human beings—even those regarded as enemies.

We urgently need to make compassion a clear, luminous and dynamic force in our polarized world. Rooted in a principled determination to transcend selfishness, compassion can break down political, dogmatic, ideological and religious boundaries. Born of our deep interdependence, compassion is essential to human relationships and to a fulfilled humanity. It is the path to enlightenment, and indispensible to the creation of a just economy and a peaceful global community."

"New Church" Catholics who have embraced the tenets of Modernism and who desire to create a new humanitarian religion and a church made in their own image and likeness view the Church founded by Christ as "too dogmatic," "authoritarian," "rigid," "legalistic," "intolerant," "Medeival" and "triumphant."  Such modern-day Judases within the Mystical Body of Christ hurl these snide slogans against the Church because they have lost the faith and cannot steel themselves to admit it.  Their hatred of dogma is most significant.

Archbishop Fulton Sheen explains in his essay entitled "The sense of sin":  "It may be interesting to inquire at this point why the modern world has lost its sense of sin. It should be immediately evident that it is the obvious consequence of the loss of the value of man. Under traditional Christianity, a man was a theological creature, an adopted son of God and a member of the Mystical Body of Christ; in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries man became a philosophical thing bound to God by some vague ties of creaturehood. But man today is only a biological phenomenon with no other destiny than that of the worm he crushes under his heel. Once one loses hold on the primary dogma that man has a moral end, and that his actions, thoughts, and words in this life are all registered in the Book of Life, and therefore will one day determine his eternal destiny, sin becomes meaningless. The modern mind has forgotten the dogma of man, and hence cannot avoid forgetting the morals of man, for one is the corrollary of the other. Deny that God is interested in the behavior of men and you immediately create a society in which man is uninterested in the behavior of his fellow man."

In his book Wrath of God: The Days of the Antichrist, Fr. Fanzaga explains that, "...he [Robert Hugh Benson] also warns of a great danger for the Church which has to do with the 'great seduction' - the 'great prostitute' the Book of the Apocalypse calls it - that is, humanitarian religion. Only the Church, reduced to a tiny flock will resist. The Church will be tempted to follow the path of humanitarianism which would reduce Christianity to a form of humanism in which Christ is regarded merely as a man - although the greatest man ever born...At the same time, Benson foresaw that the tiny flock - of Paul VI - would resist the reduction of Christianity to humanitarian religion and that it would be branded a public enemy of the people and of progress. It would be accused of being out of step with the times and of belonging to the Middle Ages. Thus, Benson has prophesied [in his book The Lord of the World] both the seduction and the persecution of those who would uphold the supernatural dimension of Christianity." (Fr. Livio Fanzaga, Wrath of God: The Days of the Antichrist, p. 128).

The root of our identity crisis...

Archbishop Fulton Sheen, in his essay entitled "The sense of sin," writes, "It may be interesting to inquire at this point why the modern world has lost its sense of sin. It should be immediately evident that it is the obvious consequence of the loss of the value of man. Under traditional Christianity, a man was a theological creature, an adopted son of God and a member of the Mystical Body of Christ; in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries man became a philosophical thing bound to God by some vague ties of creaturehood. But man today is only a biological phenomenon with no other destiny than that of the worm he crushes under his heel. Once one loses hold on the primary dogma that man has a moral end, and that his actions, thoughts, and words in this life are all registered in the Book of Life, and therefore will one day determine his eternal destiny, sin becomes meaningless. The modern mind has forgotten the dogma of man, and hence cannot avoid forgetting the morals of man, for one is the corrollary of the other. Deny that God is interested in the behavior of men and you immediately create a society in which man is uninterested in the behavior of his fellow man."

Bearing this in mind, read what Joe Sacerdo and his team of Catholic bloggers have to say about the dismantling of Catholic identity at Caritas Christi in the Boston Archdiocese.

"Then all the earth will writhe in convulsions..."

Once again the Pro-Life movement has been betrayed as the Culture of Death advances. The forces behind the Socialist Society will not be deterred. They are determined to destroy the old society in order to build an atheistic society on its ashes. Archbishop Fulton Sheen writes, "Dostoyevsky, who understood atheism better than Nietzsche and who saw it coming in his own beloved land, knew that atheism had to be associated with the destruction of the old society. There was some suggestion that an overplanned or socialistic society had to be the prelude of an atheistic society. As he made one of his characters say: 'If Aloysha had not believed in God, he would have become a socialist.' For the man-god to grow in age and wisdom, two conditions must be fulfilled. The heavens must be emptied, and man must be secularized. Both will be achieved by turning freedom into license. Men will be asked to give up God because His Commandments 'enslave' and because our will often runs counter to His. When finally everyone has his own will and does whatever he pleases, then there will be a chaos due to the conflict of egotisms. It will then be necessary for Big Brother, or the state, to organize this chaos into a closed socialist society and the formulas given by the character, Shigalev, the theorist of the Communism to come: 'Having set out from unlimited freedom, I have ended up with unlimited despotism.' What Dostoyevsky was predicting through his characters, Nietzsche was saying through his philosophy. As he put it: 'I heralded the coming of the tragic era. We must be prepared for a long succession of demolitions, devastations, and upheavals...There will be wars such as the world has never seen. Europe will soon be enveloped in darkness. We shall watch the rising of the black tide.' And in another work, he wrote: 'A catastrophe is at hand. A catastrophe whose name I know*, whose name I shall not tell...Then all the earth will writhe in convulsions.'" (Fulton Sheen, essay entitled "The Death of God").

* John 5: 43.