Spirit Digest stands with U.S. District Judge David Bunning

The doctrine on the necessary conformity of civil law with the moral law is in continuity with the whole tradition of the Church. This is clear from John XXIII's Encyclical: "Authority is a postulate of the moral order and derives from God. Consequently, laws and decrees enacted in contravention of the moral order, and hence of the divine will, can have no binding force in conscience...; indeed, the passing of such laws undermines the very nature of authority and results in shameful abuse". This is the clear teaching of Saint Thomas Aquinas, who writes that "human law is law inasmuch as it is in conformity with right reason and thus derives from the eternal law. But when a law is contrary to reason, it is called an unjust law; but in this case it ceases to be a law and becomes instead an act of violence". And again: "Every law made by man can be called a law insofar as it derives from the natural law. But if it is somehow opposed to the natural law, then it is not really a law but rather a corruption of the law".

This is not understood by many today.  Including many Catholics.  See here.

The owner of Spirit Digest asserts that the Judge is correct in this situation. 

Antichrist arising...

From The American Conservative, Antichrist arising.

There are all too many Catholics who scoff at the idea of an Antichrist.  Such people have already lost their faith or are well on their way toward doing so.  Such people, enamored with their own intellectual abilities and puffed up with pride, view the idea of a personal Antichrist as a legend of man's fantasy. But the truth regarding the Man of Sin comes to us from God revealing it to His prophets, His Apostles, and to His Church throughout salvation history. Fr. Paschal Huchede, in his excellent work entitled "History of Antichrist," explains:


"Some have thought that the word Antichrist is only a generic term by which all the enemies of Christ are designated, a word comprising in its signification all heretics, schismatics, apostates, infidels - in a word, all the impious or antichristian empire. St. John seems to hold this opinion when he says, "Even now there are become many Antchrists. He who denieth that Jesus is the Christ, this is Antichrist." (1 In. 2:18-22). But that this supposition is erroneous is proved by the context of the same epistle. "Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that Antichrist cometh, even now there are many Antichrists."

Let it be remembered that in the Greek or original text, the article 'O is employed in connection with Antichrist in the first instance, and not in the second, and the Greek article serves to determine persons and things; whence, it follows that St. John did not mean that all the enemies of Jesus Christ were to be comprised in one generic term expressed by the word "Antichrist". On the contrary, he very succinctly, but clearly, distinguishes Antichrist personally from all the other adversaries of Christ.


Moreover, the Sacred Scriptures speak of Antichrist in various places as being a particular person or individual. "The Man of Sin," "Son of Perdition," terms such as these cannot mean a collective body since the individual is specifically pointed out, while it is easy to explain why St. John employs the same word to distinguish the enemies and adversaries of Christ. The similitude of tendencies and actions suffices to justify the identity of names. The priests, prophets, and kings of the old law were called "Christs". This, however, did not hinder the Jews from believing in the coming of Christ, the Anointed par excellence, source of all sacerdotal, prophetic, and royal unction. And is not the same thing true of Antichrist and the Antichrists, that is, of the enemies of Christ? But there shall come an Antichrist of whom all the others are only the precursors. And this Man of Sin will combine in himself all the malice collectively found in all the others. All the Fathers and theologians unanimously concur in this belief as to Antichrist's individuality. And consequently, his personal existence and future event must be considered as an object of divine faith, such as stated by Suarez and Bellarmine." (History of Antichrist, pp. 11-12, Tan Books).

"Antichrist will pervert some in his day by exterior persuasion...He is the head of all the wicked because in him wickedness is perfect...As in Christ dwells the fullness of the Godhead, so in Antichrist the fullness of all wickedness. Not indeed in the sense that his humanity is to be assumed by the devil into unity of person...but that the devil by suggestion infuses his wickedness more copiously into him than into all others. In this way all the wicked that have gone before are signs of Antichrist." (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa III, 8:8).

Related: Toward a one-world religion here.

To the President of Anna Maria College: Please learn the difference between a holy and an unholy distraction

By now you've probably heard of how Bishop Robert McManus of the Diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts, asked Anna Maria College to rescind its invitation to atheistic humanist Victoria Kennedy to speak at its 2012 Commencement.  Now the Catholic Free Press is reporting that Sister Yvette Bellerose, chairwoman of the Board of Trustees, and Jack P. Calareso, president of Anna Maria College, have asked Bishop McManus not to attend the Commencement either.  It has been asserted that the Bishop would be a distraction. 

What of it? No doubt Victoria Kennedy would have been a distraction for students who actually accept the Church's teaching.  The Catechism of the Catholic Church tells us that, "..a distraction reveals to us what we are attached to." (2729). Not all distractions are bad. Some are even holy. As Raissa Maritain, writing about Saint Thomas Aquinas, notes: "When he wept and prayed in this way, or when he was trying to find the answer to a difficult question, very often he did not hear nor feel what was going on about him. So one day, when he was at the table of the King Saint Louis, the two saints seated side by side, Brother Thomas, forgetful of the circumstances and the place, rapped loudly on the table and cried out: 'So much for the heresy of the Manicheans!' 'Master,' said the Prior who accompanied him, 'be careful, you are at the table of the King of France.' And saying this, he pulled at his cloak to bring him out of this state of holy distraction." (See here).

In the Gospel of Luke, Chapter 10 verses 38-42, we read: "As they continued their journey he entered a village where a woman whose name was Martha welcomed him. She had a sister named Mary [who] sat beside the Lord at his feet listening to him speak. Martha, burdened with much serving, came to him and said, 'Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me by myself to do the serving? Tell her to help me.' The Lord said to her in reply, 'Martha, Martha, you are anxious and worried about many things. There is need of only one thing. Mary has chosen the better part and it will not be taken from her.'"

A distraction reveals to us what we are attached to. By the grace of God, there are still people who are attached to truth or those who promote and defend it. Like Mary who sat at the very feet of Truth, they are attracted by the beauty of truth and by its sheer power.

Now Catholic News Service is reporting that: "Pope Benedict XVI called on America's Catholic colleges and universities to reaffirm their Catholic identity by ensuring orthodoxy in theological studies and accepting the oversight of bishops."  If officials at Anna Maria College honestly accept the oversight of Bishop McManus, wouldn't they want Bishop McManus in attendance?

The CNS article continues: "While he [Pope Benedict XVI] acknowledged recent efforts by America's Catholic institutions of higher education to 'reaffirm their distinctive identity in fidelity to their founding ideals and the church's mission,'" he also said that "much remains to be done."  And the Holy Father is quoted as having said that, "discord harms the church's witness and, as experience has shown, can easily be exploited to compromise her authority and her freedom."

The CNS article notes how, "U.S. bishops have clashed with the administrations of Catholic colleges and universities on a number of occasions in recent years, with some of the most prominent cases involving invited speakers who dissent from Catholic moral teaching.

In March, Anna Maria University in Worcester, Mass., retracted its invitation to Victoria Reggie Kennedy, widow of the late Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., to speak at the university's commencement, after Bishop Robert J. McManus objected to Victoria Kennedy's support for legalized abortion, contraception and same-sex marriage."

I don't believe for one minute that officials at Anna Maria College are really concerned about Bishop McManus being a distraction to their 2012 Commencement proceedings.  Their request that the Bishop not attend smacks of passive aggressive retaliation for his courageous decision to ask school officials to rescind Victoria Kennedy's invitation. 

The real distraction in this whole sordid affair has been the unholy distraction which was created when Anna Maria officials decided to invite an atheistic humanist to speak at the school's Commencement.

What a shame.