This is possibly one of the most powerful interviews with Jordan Peterson.
Well worth investing an hour this weekend to watch it!
This is possibly one of the most powerful interviews with Jordan Peterson.
Well worth investing an hour this weekend to watch it!
From American Life League
Nancy Pelosi, grand dame of the pro-aborts in Congress, recently shepherded a new bill through Congress known as the Equality Act.
According to Heritage Foundation:
“Where the original Civil Rights Act of 1964 furthered equality by ensuring that African-Americans had equal access to public accommodations and material goods, the Equality Act would further inequality by penalizing everyday Americans for their beliefs about marriage and biological sex. Similar sexual orientation and gender identity laws at the state and local level have already been used in this way.”
The article goes on to identify five groups that could be harmed by this bill: employers and workers, medical workers, parents and children, women, and nonprofits and volunteers. This is simply a bad bill.
Pelosi’s March 13 press statement regarding the Equality Act says:
“Today, the House Democratic majority took a momentous step toward securing the full blessing of equality for the LGBTQ community and our country.” Note the use of the word “blessing.” According to some, this new proposed law is anything but!
For example, New York Post reporter Mary Vought says that “sexual difference is inscribed in our genetic code. The Equality Act ham-fistedly redefines this basic fact about what it means to be human—at the expense of women.”
National Review writer Alexandra Desanctis opines:
The Equality Act defines “sex” to include “pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition,” and, as Representative Chris Smith (R., N.J.) explained on the House floor today, the term “related medical condition” in fact means “abortion.” From Smith’s remarks:
In the case Doe v. C.A.R.S., the Third Circuit stated, “We now hold that the term ‘related medical conditions’ includes an abortion.” Furthermore, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which enforces Title VII, interprets abortion to be covered as a “related medical condition.”
The bill also stipulates that those with “a related medical condition shall not receive less favorable treatment than other physical conditions,” a provision that would disallow physicians from refusing to perform an abortion.
So under the guise of equality, we find discrimination not just against babies preparing to be born, but against women as well. After all, females are not biologically the same as men.
Pelosi’s use of the word “blessing” is diabolical.
On May 22, Pelosi further dug in her heels on abortion. Her interview at the 2019 Center for American Progress Ideas Conference reveals the extent of her dedication to deception on the subject of killing the preborn. When asked about the “draconian” Alabama abortion law that was just signed by governor Kay Ivey, she commented “we are all pro-life” and then proceeded to say that bills like the Alabama law are actually about“lack of respect for [women].”
So what this Catholic-in-name-only Democrat, grandmother, and speaker of the House of Representatives is really saying is that until the baby is born, only the mother should have the right to decide whether she wants to be pregnant or not. Yet, we must understand that Pelosi does NOT use the word mother in her discussions of abortion. She speaks only of women and prefers to say that this is not about choice, but about a total lack of respect for women.
Listening to her rambling interview to a very receptive audience sickens me, but it also exposes the reality of what a female abortion disciple looks like and how she sounds. Abortion disciples like Pelosi exemplify the evil lurking beneath a culture of death agenda of propaganda and half-truth.
But as St. John Paul II reminded us in the Gospel of Life:
God proclaims that he is absolute Lord of the life of man, who is formed in his image and likeness (cf. Gen 1:26-28). Human life is thus given a sacred and inviolable character, which reflects the inviolability of the Creator himself. Precisely for this reason God will severely judge every violation of the commandment “You shall not kill.” . . . Only Satan can delight therein: for through his envy death entered the world. . . . He who is “a murderer from the beginning,” is also “a liar and the father of lies.” . . . By deceiving man he leads him to projects of sin and death, making them appear as goals and fruits of life.
Abortion disciples like Pelosi are the deceivers St. John Paul II describes.
Beware. Be vigilant. Never stop teaching truth.
SEE ALSO THESE ARTICLES:
Overwhelmed by illegal immigrants pouring into the West, many of whom are belligerent Muslims, criminals and little more than savages, who have no intentions of obeying the laws of our lands or integrating into our way of life, never has our need to call on our Blessed Mother Mary to come to our assistance been more urgent.
Europe’s greatest problems to restoring Christian values to our countries is a prevailing Culture of Death ideology that favours left-wing anti-family, pro-choice, anti-Christian, pro-Islamic immigration policies that fulfill Our Lady’s warning that “the errors of [atheistic] Russia” would be spread, leading to the annihilation of nations. That is where we stand today in Europe: on the brink of a total annihilation of Christendom and a takeover by atheism on one side and heretical Islam on the other.
Politicians that swim against the tide of the reigning godless ideology are beaten to pulp by the MSM that long ago sold its soul to the devil. All our institutions, even the Vatican, have been infiltrated by Satan. Italy’s Salvini, who is certainly no saint, is nevertheless working hard to hold back the devil’s armies in his country, and therefore has become a victim of a vicious hate campaign to get rid of him.
We need more ‘Salvinis’ to come out of these European elections being held today.
From Canada Free Press:
In a rally on Saturday, Salvini kissed his rosary, looked up to statue of the Blessed Virgin atop the 14th-century Milan Cathedral and said on behalf of the Italian people, “I entrust Italy, my life, and your lives to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, who I’m sure will bring us to victory.” He said, “I am the last among good Christians, but I am proud to always have a rosary in my pocket.”
That Vatican leaders should oppose Salvini is telling. Apparently they support the 500 undocumented African migrants that stormed and seized Terminal 2 of the Charles de Gaulle airport on Tuesday, and shouted, “France does not belong to the French.”
Francis’ globalist push for a centralized world government with open borders is unfortunately fueling the increasing insurgent attacks we have seen throughout Europe in recent months. As pope he should scrap his political aspirations and join Salvini in his noble attempt to protect Italy from evil. The fact that he doesn’t support Salvini raises serious questions about his pontificate and calls to mind Christ’s words: “He that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven.” (Matthew 10:33)
For the whole story, continue here…
“Personally, I entrust Italy, my life and your lives to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Let’s entrust ourselves to the six Patrons of Europe.”
When Turkey Destroyed Its Christians
From 1894 to 1924, a staggered campaign of genocide targeted not just the region’s Armenians but its Greek and Assyrian communities as well
An excellent analysis by blogger, One Mad Mom, in reply to the the tweet of the notorious media ‘Pied Piper’, i.e., Fr James Martin. He had the audacity to complain bitterly on Twitter about the resistance to his outspoken public promotion of ‘gays’ and their ‘rights’ from orthodox Catholic sites and groups. He just cannot understand why these pesky faithful Catholics don’t agree to his campaign to lead souls over the cliffs to Hell. Amazing! After all, he calls his incitement to grave sin simply, “helping his pals”! Yup, that’s what he calls it. Many thanks to OMM for her great response in showing up this clerical Pied Piper’s distortions of the Lord’s Divine Law and Church teaching, and why he is persona non grata in real Catholic Christian circles.
[Edit.- We apologise for the broken link to One Mad Mom’s post. It is now restored.]
Historian Yves Chiron, in his bestselling biography of Annibale Bugnini, notes the rising popularity of a phrase—today more likely to elicit the rolling of eyes—that was bandied about in the 1950s and 1960s:
The “active participation of the faithful” in the liturgy was one of this period’s recurring themes well before it became the watchword of the reform that Vatican II envisaged. In September 1953, Cardinal Lercaro, Archbishop of Bologna, made it the theme of his keynote address at the International Meeting for Liturgical Studies at Lugano, Italy: “Active participation, the fundamental principle of Pius X’s pastoral and liturgical reform.” Two years later, he published a diocesan liturgical directory for Bologna with this meaningful title: A messa, figlioli! Direttorio liturgico per la partecipazione attiva dei fideli alla santa messa letta (“To Mass, My Children! Liturgical Directory for the Active Participation of the Faithful at Low Mass”). This directory circulated widely.
As an author myself, I am often struck by the discrepancies between positions attributed to authors and the actual positions held by the same authors upon a closer look. Pope St. Pius X was held aloft as the author of this mantra “active participation,” but was Cardinal Lercaro—or any of the lesser lights who said the same kind of thing—actually being faithful to the thought of Pius X?
In the Motu Proprio Tra le Sollecitudini of 1903, Pope Pius X called for a reform to sacred music, not in order to bring it up to date (aggiornamento), but precisely to move it away from the fashions of the day—Italian operatic-style church music, which was very au courant—and back to a healthy condition characterized by music truly suited for the liturgy, which he identified as Gregorian chant and music inspired by and compatible with it, such as Renaissance polyphony. Before he lays down specific rules for sacred music, however, Pius X first enunciates the general rule that motivates and justifies his actions:
It being our ardent desire to see the true Christian spirit restored in every respect and preserved by all the faithful, we deem it necessary to provide before everything else for the sanctity and dignity of the temple, in which the faithful assemble for the object of acquiring this spirit from its indispensable fount, which is the active participation in the holy mysteries and in the public and solemn prayer of the Church.
As usual with older papal documents, the wording here is exquisitely crafted so that each idea fits into the whole in its proper order. The purpose or final cause for Pius X’s reform is “to see the true Christian spirit restored and preserved”; this he says against the backdrop of a Europe ravaged by anticlericalism and encroaching secularism. He then identifies the means by which this purpose will be achieved. First and foremost (“before everything else”), “the sanctity and dignity of the temple” must be provided for: all that conduces to the holiness and nobility of Catholic worship has to be put in place first, so that the second step may occur: the faithful assembling there to acquire the Christian spirit from its “indispensable fount.” The “active participation” of the people, a phrase used here for the first time, is not portrayed as the goal or end, simply speaking, nor has it priority over the soundness and fittingness of the worship.
Put more simply: the end is the true Christian spirit. The means are twofold: the public and solemn prayer of the Church itself, which ought to be correctly done, with sanctity and dignity; and the active participation of the faithful in that prayer, so that its spirit may become theirs. Note here that Pius X is assuming that the faithful will be assimilated to the spirit of the liturgy itself. What it is, they also will be; what it is not, they can never become.
Now, compare the above text to another one, this time from the Second Vatican Council’s Sacrosanctum Concilium of 1963, sixty years later.
In the restoration and promotion of the sacred liturgy, this full and active participation by all the people is the aim to be considered before all else; for it is the primary and indispensable source from which the faithful are to derive the true Christian spirit; and therefore pastors of souls must zealously strive to achieve it, by means of the necessary instruction, in all their pastoral work.
It cannot escape our notice that this text turns things on their head. Where Pius X had said that what should be “provided for before everything else” is the “sanctity and dignity of the temple,” Vatican II says that “the aim to be considered before all else” is “full and active participation by all the people.” In doing so, it inverts the hierarchy of goods. Now the worship of God and its right condition becomes secondary to the people’s involvement. The activity of the faithful is to take priority in liturgical reform and conduct.
In practice, we know what this led to: the holiness and nobility of worship done for God’s glory suffered grave damage because all attention was focused on getting people “involved” in ways both legitimate and illegitimate. Instead of placing the objective good of authentic liturgy first and the subjective good of participation second, which is the correct order, Vatican II implies that the subjective good takes precedence and should even determine the content of the objective good. It is interesting to note, as well, that whereas Pius X speaks in this connection of “holy mysteries” and “solemn public prayer,” Vatican II simply speaks of “the sacred liturgy.” Of course the phrase is not incorrect, but one sees a lessening of the note of majesty and mystery.
So, while superficially it may seem that the two documents are saying the same thing, a closer look shows that they diverge on a point of no small importance. Cardinal Lercaro blundered, therefore, in asserting that “active participation [is] the fundamental principle of Pius X’s pastoral and liturgical reform.”
Nor should we be surprised that Pius X’s views are much more akin to those of his immediate predecessor, Leo XIII, who—in his splendid letter Testem Benevolentiae of 1899—teaches that the primary work or activity of the laity is to live as faithful Christians in the world and to raise up prayer to God, while the primary work of the clergy is to preach sound doctrine and to celebrate glorious liturgies in honor of God, the Greatest and Best:
The Scriptures teach us that it is the duty of all to be solicitous for the salvation of one’s neighbor, according to the power and position of each. The faithful do this by religiously discharging the duties of their state of life, by the uprightness of their conduct, by their works of Christian charity and by earnest and continuous prayer to God. On the other hand, those who belong to the clergy should do this by an enlightened fulfillment of their preaching ministry, by the pomp and splendor of ceremonies, and especially by setting forth that sound form of doctrine which Saint Paul inculcated upon Titus and Timothy.
The Church will be better off when we have a lot more of “that sound form of doctrine” and “pomp and splendor of ceremonies,” so that before everything else, the sanctity and dignity of the temple may be duly provided for—and in this way, the faithful may come to participate most fruitfully in the holy mysteries.
First point to recall is Ven. Fulton Sheen’s perceptive observation:
And little St Jacinta of Fatima’s warning:
”More souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other reason.”
”If you desire to be chaste, be retired, be modest, be mortified.” –St Leonard of Port Maurice
“In temptations against chastity, the spiritual masters advise us, not so much to contend with the bad thought, as to turn the mind to some spiritual, or, at least, indifferent object. It is useful to combat other bad thoughts face to face, but not thoughts of impurity.” –St. Alphonsus Liguori
”The vow of chastity includes purity of body and soul; this is easily lost … This great treasure is deposited in a castle, which has many portals and openings, and if these are not well guarded and defended, the treasure is without security. My daughter, in order to preserve perfectly this vow, it is necessary to make an inviolable pact with thy senses, not to use them, except for what is according to the dictates of reason and for the glory of the Creator. After once the senses are mortified, it will be easy to overcome thy enemies, for only through them can they conquer thee; for no thoughts can recur, or be awakened to activity, unless fomented and excited by the images and impressions admitted through the exterior senses.” —Ven. Mary of Agreda
“When you have sought the company of a sensual satisfaction, what loneliness afterward! … To defend his purity, Saint Francis of Assisi rolled in the snow, Saint Benedict threw himself into a thornbush, Saint Bernard plunged into an icy pond . . . You . . . what have you done? Don’t say, ‘That’s the way I am—its my character.’ It’s your lack of character. Esto vir!—Be a man! Holy Purity is granted by God when it is asked for with humility. When you decide firmly to lead a clean life, chastity will not be a burden on you: it will be a crown of triumph.” –St. Josemaria Escriva
“A pure soul is like a fine pearl. As long as it is hidden in the shell, at the bottom of the sea, no one thinks of admiring it. But if you bring it into the sunshine, this pearl will shine and attract all eyes. Thus the pure soul, which is hidden from the eyes of the world, will one day shine before the Angels in the sunshine of eternity. The pure soul is a beautiful rose, and the Three Divine Persons descend from Heaven to inhale its fragrance. Like a beautiful white dove rising from the midst of the waters, and coming to shake her wings over the earth, the Holy Spirit issues from the infinite ocean of the Divine perfections, and hovers over pure souls, to pour into them the balm of love. The Holy Spirit reposes in a pure soul as in a bed of roses. There comes forth from a soul in which the Holy Spirit resides a sweet odour, like that of the vine when it is in flower.” –St Jean Marie Vianney (Curé d’Ars)
“Holy Purity, the queen of virtues, the angelic virtue, is a jewel so precious that those who possess it become like the angels of God in heaven, even though clothed in mortal flesh.”
–St John Bosco
+Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke
The following talk was given on 16 May 2019 at the Rome Life Forum on the theme “City of man vs City of God – Global One World Order vs Christendom”, organised by Voice of the Family.
Our happiness during our earthly pilgrim and at its destination, eternal life, depends on the conformity of our daily living with the truth, that is, with the good order with which God has created and sustains the world and, in a most particular way, man and woman. Our Lord Who alone is our salvation describes Himself as “the way, and the truth, and the life.” He also teaches us that the truth alone will make us free: “If you continue in my word, you will truly be my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.” He likewise describes His own vocation and mission as obedience to the will of the Father: “My food is to do the will of him who sent me, and to accomplish his work.”
It is the virtue of piety, an integral part of the sevenfold gift of the Holy Spirit, which expresses our recognition of the truth and our humble obedience before the truth. Louis Bouyer provides a succinct but full description of piety:
“The gift of piety, in the Thomistic synthesis of the spiritual life, in the service of charity not only perfects the virtue of religion (seen as the form of justice toward God), but also every practice of the virtue of justice. Just as our duties toward God are raised to the highest perspective of a supernatural filial relationship, our relationships with others are transfigured in the light of the brotherly fellowship within the divine charity poured into our hearts by the Holy Spirit (cf. Rom. 5,5; see St. Thomas Aquinas, Sum. Theol., Ia-IIae, q. 68, and IIa-IIae, q. 80 ff.). The virtues of filial piety and piety toward fatherland are more special; they are annexes of the virtue of justice, but the influence of the same gift gives them a specifically Christian coloring (ibid., q. 101).”
Piety is the part of the sevenfold gift of the Holy Spirit, poured forth into our hearts from the glorious pierced Heart of Jesus, which inspires and strengthens us to live the truth of our being as creatures created in the image and likeness of God to know, love and serve Him in this life, and to be happy forever with Him in the life which is to come.
I now reflect on an essential aspect of our daily life, which pertains to the grace of piety and the practice of the virtue of piety. It has to do with a truth which is called into question in our time. I refer to our relationship with our homeland, which demands of us the practice of that part of piety which is called patriotism. Before the challenges of our time, there are those who propose and work for a single global government, that is, for the elimination of individual national governments, so that all of humanity would be under the control of a single political authority. For those who are convinced that the only way to achieve the common good is the concentration of all government in a single authority, loyalty to one’s homeland or patriotism has become an evil. It is often called nationalism, a term which evokes the evils of a misguided or corrupt national identity, obscuring the truth of our natural identity with a certain land and its culture. Already in July of 2007, the 16thUniversité de Renaissance Catholique devoted itself to the theme: “Le patriotisme est-il un péché?” Given the contemporary somewhat widespread doubt and confusion about the virtue of patriotism, it will be helpful for us to spend some time now reflecting upon what the Christian life demands of us regarding our homeland and its civil government.
The virtue of patriotism reflects excellence in the fulfillment of the demands of the Fourth Commandment of the Decalogue, the first of the last seven commandments which treat our relationships with the world and others, in accord with the primary demands of our relationship with God, which is treated in the first three Commandments. While the Fourth Commandment commands us to honor our father and mother, to show to our parents the piety which flows from the recognition that they have cooperated with God in giving us the gift of human life, it also commands the piety owed to the wider community in which marriage and family are possible and indeed flourish. Saint Thomas Aquinas, in his Summa Theologiae teaches us:
“I answer that, Man becomes a debtor to other men in various ways, according to their various excellence and the various benefits received from them. On both counts God holds first place, for He is supremely excellent, and is for us the first principle of being and government. In the second place, the principles of our being and government are our parents and our country, that have given us birth and nourishment. Consequently man is debtor chiefly to his parents and his country, after God. Wherefore just as it belongs to religion to give worship to God, so does it belong to piety, in the second place, to give worship to one’s parents and one’s country.”
It is clear from the Angelic Doctor’s exposition that, not only is patriotism not a sin, but it is a requirement of nature itself. The term, worship, when applied to one’s parents and one’s country clearly, as Saint Thomas makes clear, is distinct from divine worship which is given to God alone. The second sense of worship is analogous and refers to the piety or devotion shown to those who cooperate with God for our good.
Reflecting upon the virtue of patriotism as an integral part of the gift and virtue of piety, in accord with the teaching of the Angelic Doctor, the New Catholic Encyclopedia illustrates how the practice of patriotism is a form of the charity by which we live fully the truth of our being in its relationship with God and with the rest of His Creation. The author of the entry on patriotism writes:
“But patriotism as a form of charity, or love, has a more specific object in its actuation than mankind or the human family as such. According to St. Thomas Aquinas, the particular love of one’s fatherland is an important aspect of that preferential form of charity that is called pietas (ST 2a2ae, 101.1). Through piety the person has an obligation of love to God, parents, and fatherland. Each is in some sense a principle of man’s being: God through creation; parents through procreation and education; fatherland through a formation of one’s cultural and historical identity.”
Patriotism is an aspect of the grace of piety, which in its turn is an essential part of the matter of charity. Christ gives the grace of piety, through the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, in order that we can live the truth of our human nature.
Patriotism as such is a precept of the natural law. We see it reflected, for example, in the story of Aeneas and his father Anchises, as it is recounted by the Roman author Virgil. In fact, Virgil describes the greatness of Aeneas with the adjective, pius. Commenting on the Aeneid of Virgil and, in particular, on the excellence of the virtue of piety in Aeneas, Anthony Esolen writes:
“The name that Virgil gives Aeneas is not Odysseus’ polytropon, the man of shifts and dodges, but the Latin word pius. Aeneas embodies a virtue we hardly recognize in our time: piety, which meant for the Romans a willingness to do your duty by your father and mother, your elders, your household gods, the city and state, and the great gods above.”
This piety is at once a deeply personal virtue and a powerful force to bring together the generations, allowing the young to take root in the soil of the old and the old to engraft their experiences onto the young, so that we sense that home is a place where the passing day partakes of long ages past and to come.
Through the grace of Christ, the piety of the pagan world is elevated and perfected to be a response to God, our Creator and Redeemer, who has desired to bring us to life in Christ in the family and in a homeland. In the words of Louis Bouyer, “our relationships with others are transfigured in the light of the brotherly fellowship within the divine charity poured into our hearts by the Holy Spirit.”
The exposition of the Fourth Commandment in the Catechism of the Council of Trent speaks of the honor due to civil rulers, intimately connected with the honor due to parents and the pastors of the Church. Making reference to Saint Paul’s teaching in the Letter to the Romans and the First Letter to Timothy, and to Saint Peter’s teaching in his First Letter, it underlines the truth that the honor given to civil rulers is essentially connected to the honor which we owe, above all, to God. It explains:
“For whatever honor we show them [civil rulers] is given to God, since exalted human dignity deserves respect because it is an image of the divine power, and in it we revere the providence of God who has entrusted to men the care of public affairs and who uses them as the instruments of His power.”
Patriotism is the recognition of the good order which God has placed in civil society, so that those who govern must respect, first and foremost, God’s law, and so that those who are governed respect the civil community in which the common good is to be safeguarded and promoted.
The Catechism goes on to treat the situation of wicked rulers, reminding us that the honor shown to them is not reverence toward their wrongdoing but rather toward “the authority from God which they possess.” At the same time, the Christian citizen must not obey their commands, if they are contrary to the moral law. The Catechism teaches us:
“However, should their commands be wicked or unjust, they should not be obeyed, since in such a case they rule not according to their rightful authority, but according to injustice and perversity.”
In our time, many governments fail to or refuse to recognize that their authority comes from God, and, therefore, make laws which violate directly and grievously the moral law, for example, regarding the respect owed to all human life, from the moment of conception to the moment of natural death, regarding the integrity of human sexuality ordered to marriage and the family, and regarding the free exercise of religion itself. In many societies, there dominates an anti-life, anti-family, and anti-religious culture in open rebellion before the good order with which God has created us.
The practice of the virtue of patriotism thus faces a great challenge: the challenge to show due respect for our homeland and its government, while at the same time refusing to comply with unjust laws. Here it is important to note the witness of numerous faithful individuals and families who heroically live the faith without compromise in totally secularized cultures. Before evil laws and the pressures of a totally secularized culture, they follow the example of Saint Peter and the Apostles who, when they were brought before the high priest, demanding that they deny Christ and His teaching, replied: “We must obey God rather than men.” The Christian citizen must frequently fulfill the demands of patriotism today by martyrdom, which is often white but sometimes red. His witness to the truth of the moral law regularly meets with the white martyrdom of indifference, ridicule and persecution, and even, in some circumstance, with the red martyrdom of death.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church promulgated by Pope Saint John Paul II on August 15, 1997, in its treatment of the Fourth Commandment, contains a lengthy exposition on the duties of civil authorities and of citizens. It makes clear that the authority which the civil government exercises comes from God and must respect the law which He has written in nature. It declares:
“The exercise of authority is measured morally in terms of its divine origin, its reasonable nature and its specific object. No one can command or establish what is contrary to the dignity of persons and the natural law.”
The Catechism goes on to explain that the exercise of authority in civil society must respect the God-given rights of the individual and, therefore, should safeguard and promote the common good.
Regarding the duties of citizens, the Catechism of the Catholic Church repeats the constant teaching of the Church which requires that “[t]hose subject to authority should regard those in authority as representatives of God, who has made them stewards of his gifts.” It reminds us that “[t]he love and service of one’s country follow from the duty of gratitude and belong to the order of charity,” specifying the moral obligation “to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend one’s country.”
The Catechism of the Catholic Church then takes up the obligations of “more prosperous nations … , to the extent that they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin.” Such welcome, as is clear from the text, is not indiscriminate, for it depends on the capacity of nations to accept such refugees from their homelands and on the impossibility of the refugees to find the means to live in their homelands.
The paragraph goes on to specify that “[p]olitical authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants’ duties toward their country of adoption.” The Catechism further underlines the obligation of immigrants “to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.”
The Catechism then repeats the perennial teaching of the Church regarding a citizen’s obligation in conscience “not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel.” It should be noted that the rights of persons in question are those rights inherent to the God-given moral order, not the many so-called rights, for example, the right to define life and death, and the right to define sexual identity and marriage, which have been invented by man in our time. In accord with the perennial moral teaching, resistance to unjust laws of a state does not permit a refusal to carry out one’s fundamental duties toward the state.
The Catechism also spells out the moral requirements for a legitimate “[a]rmed resistance to oppression by political authority.” Five conditions are given for legitimate armed resistance before an unjust political authority: “1) there is certain, grave, and prolonged violation of fundamental rights; 2) all other means of redress have been exhausted; 3) such resistance will not provoke worse disorders; 4) there is well-founded hope of success; and 5) it is impossible reasonably to foresee any better solution.” Clearly, the Christian citizen is obliged to be steadfastly involved in fostering a just and charitable society. Such engagement may lead, in situations which meet all of the necessary conditions, to the use of resistance, in order to exercise faithfully the virtue of patriotism.
Finally, the Catechism of the Catholic Church takes up the situation of most states in our time, whose philosophical foundations and modus operandi are totally secular, that is, states do not recognize “man’s origin and destiny in God, the Creator and Redeemer.” Quoting the teaching of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, the Catechism indicates that the refusal to recognize and obey an objective order of things leads to a totalitarian state, as history sadly illustrates. The Church, therefore, does not confuse herself with the political community, in accord with Our Lord’s own teaching in the Gospel, but exercises her responsibility to be “both the sign and the safeguard of the transcendent character of the human person.” In that regard, the Catechism repeats the perennial teaching of the Church, set forth in the Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes of the Second Vatican Council: “It is part of the Church’s mission ‘to pass judgments even in matters related to politics, whenever the fundamental rights of man or the salvation of the soul requires it’.”
Times does not permit me to deepen further these initial reflections, but I trust that they provide the foundations for addressing the very serious demands of the virtue of patriotism in our time. Patriotism teaches us to recognize our natural condition as members of a family and citizens of a homeland. Our personal identity comes principally from the family but also, and indeed because the family thrives only in wider society, from our homeland. That natural condition defines our rights and duties as a citizen.
It is clear that we and our homelands have responsibilities within the international community, but those responsibilities can only be fulfilled through a sound life in the family and in the homeland. Patriotism, in fact, fosters the virtue of charity which clearly embraces citizens of other nations, recognizing and respecting their distinct cultural and historical identity. Such charity is fostered by the Church’s exercise of her moral authority, not assuming the role of Caesar but insisting that Caesar obey the divine authority which makes legitimate and just his governance. The divine authority, in accord with the order written upon the human heart, does not make just and legitimate a single global government. In fact, the divine law illumines our minds and hearts to see that such a government would be, by definition, totalitarian, assuming the divine authority over the governance of the world. Not without reason, the sinful pride which inspires the pursuit of a single global government has been likened to the pride of our ancient ancestors, after the Deluge, who thought that they could unite heaven with earth by their forces alone, building the Tower of Babel. On the contrary, God meets us and orders our lives for the good in the family and in the homeland.
Thank you for your kind attention. May God bless you, your families, and your homelands.
For footnotes see HERE
From Fr George W. Rutler’s ‘Weekly Column’
After Paul and Barnabas had proclaimed the good news to that city and made a considerable number of disciples, they returned to Lystra and to Iconium and to Antioch. They strengthened the spirits of the disciples and exhorted them to persevere in faith, saying, “It is necessary for us to undergo many hardships to enter the kingdom of God.” They appointed elders for them in each church and, with prayer and fasting, commended them to the Lord in whom they had put their faith.
Then they traveled to Pisidia and reached Pamphylia. After proclaiming the word at Perga they went down to Attalia. From there they sailed to Antioch, where they had been commended to the grace of God for the work they had now accomplished. And when they arrived, they called the church together and reported what God had done with them and how he had opened the door of faith to the Gentiles.
Book of the Apocalypse (21:1-5)
Then, I, John, saw a new heaven and a new earth. The former heaven and the former earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. I also saw the holy city, a new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, God’s dwelling is with the human race. He will always be with them as their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes, and there shall be no more death or mourning, wailing or pain, for the old order has passed away.”
The One who sat on the throne said, “Behold, I make all things new.”
When Judas had left them, Jesus said, “Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in him. If God is glorified in him, God will also glorify him in himself, and God will glorify him at once.
My children, I will be with you only a little while longer. I give you a new commandment: love one another. As I have loved you, so you also should love one another. This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
One Sunday in a mass specially celebrated for married couples a priest preached about marriage. At the end of the service he was giving out small wooden crosses to each married couple. He said, “Place this cross in the room in which you quarrel the most and you will be reminded of Jesus’ new commandment “love one another” and you won’t argue much.” One woman came up and said: “Father, you had better give me ten crosses.”
No number of crosses on the walls of our homes or around our necks will make us Christians unless we practice Jesus’ commandment of love which is of course so very hard to follow. All of us struggle to put into practice this great teaching of Jesus. Today’s readings remind us that as suffering and death on the cross was the necessary prelude to Jesus’ exaltation and enthronement in heaven and so are our hardships to inherit true peace and joy in life here on earth and in heaven. We read in the Acts of the Apostles that two of the apostles, Paul and Barnabas, returned to Antioch to strengthen the believers and to encourage them to persevere in faith. In the previous chapter (13:50) to today’s text we are told, “The Jews stirred up a persecution against Paul and Barnabas and expelled them from their territory.” So despite the animosity and persecution, the two apostles went back to the city and continued to preach to the people there boldly. They said, “It is necessary for us to undergo many hardships before we can enter the kingdom of God.” In other words, they warned the believers that suffering is an essential part of Christian life. The apostles did not only warned others of suffering, they also gave witness of suffering. In his letter to the Romans (8:35) Saint Paul emphasizes the apostles’ commitment and faithfulness to Christ. He says, “Can anything cut us off from the love of Christ – hardships, distress, persecution, lack of food and clothing, threats or violence; as scripture says: For your sake we are being massacred all day long, treated as sheep to be slaughtered?”
The exhortation is a reminder to all Christians. Can you and I, courageously and willingly, go back to the palace where we have been shamed, rejected, humiliated, defamed and beaten? Can we love someone who has offended us? Can we bear the suffering for the sake of Christ? Each of us, at some time or other, experience and will experience suffering and hardships for our belief in the Lord Jesus but we are called upon not be cowed by them. In his book “The Way”, the founder of Opus Dei, Saint Josemaria Escriva writes, “If you accept difficulties with a faint heart you lose joy and your peace, and you run the risk of not deriving spiritual profit from the trial.” We may not be called to undergo the same kind of persecution for God’s cause as were Paul and Barnabas or the early Christians but we must follow in the footsteps of Jesus and be unselfish in our love for and service to others.
In today’s gospel we hear Jesus’s commandment. He commands us, first, “to love one another as He loves us”, and second “to love in such a way that others are able to identify or recognize that we are his disciples.” How can we love others as Jesus loves? There are several things which Jesus has given us as example, things that apply to our own everyday lives. Jesus is the Son of God, the Messiah, our Savior, the sinless, truly divine but he is also truly human. He shows compassion for the sick. He cares for the poor. He feeds the hungry. He is kind to sinners. He comforts the afflicted. He forgives those who are cruel to him. These are a few examples from scripture which we all can follow and obey, so we can love others really like Jesus loves. But we may not be able to love perfectly as Jesus does. To love like Jesus loves, we must place others above ourselves and to daily empty ourselves and emulate the one who did so unconditionally, wholesomely and successfully and it is not easy. Even though we strive to be like Jesus, sometimes we fail. However, we can always rededicate our life to Christ by truly repenting for our sins and by honestly making sacrifices in reparation for them.
That’s why we gather week after week to report and share with each other what God does for us and how he opens the door of faith to us. In time, as Saint Paul says in Galatians (5:22-23) we will reap the benefits of stronger “faith, peace, joy, love, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, self-control and eternal life.” The more we sow in the Spirit, the more we will reap spiritual things.
Comment: No surprises here anymore. It’s been pretty evident for a long time that Ireland is heading the race down the fast track to a total abandonment of Catholicism. The small remnant of true Catholics in Ireland still clinging to the faith are being squeezed out. Fifty years of opening the doors wide to worldly values has brought the inevitable result: empty churches, empty seminaries, and finally, faithlessness. They have thrown off centuries of great sacrifices, and passionate love for the True Faith of the Irish ancestors, who were harshly persecuted by Protestants for their heroic loyalty. Among those still nominally Catholic today, many refuse to abide by Church teachings and discipline, as they welcome in every new erroneous fad, thus moving further and further away from the true Church. Even Pope Francis is no longer liberal enough for these traitors to the holy priesthood:
The reaction comes after the Pope revealed that the 2016 commission he appointed to study women deacons in the early Church could not reach a consensus on whether female ordination was the same as its male counterpart. “We had come to expect reactions like this from previous Popes, but we thought Francis was different, and consequently our disappointment is greater,” the Association of Catholic Priests said in response to the Pope’s comments.
“The equality of women is critical for the credibility and the future of the Church. Introducing women deacons is such a minimalist step that if he cannot move on that, there is little or no prospect of any real movement towards equality.”
The group added that the Pontiff’s remarks on female deacons “confirms that women are not good enough” and that in the eyes of the official Church, “men are more worthy than women”.
“It confirms that the Church continues to be a clerical hierarchical patriarchy. It confirms that injustice is built into the heart of the Church. This is an enormous blow to reforming the Church and bringing it into the 21st Century.”
Poor misguided fools! Do they not know that the Bride of Christ is way above the times, “always ancient, always new”?
Important UPDATE below. Please sign the petition.
From France Architecture News come a variety of startling proposals for the rebuilding of Notre Dame in Paris after the mysterious fire of 15th April destroyed the roof and spire of this magnificent cathedral, and part of the interior. So far there do not appear to be any ideas from the team of architects commissioned to design the rebuilding of Notre Dame that include traditional, orthodox Catholic beliefs. I would love to be proved wrong in this, so please let us know if you hear of any. [NB.- The parts marked in bold below, to emphasise the secular worldly nature of the proposals, are mine.]
Stockholm-based architecture firm Ulf Mejergren Architects (UMA) has proposed a giant swimming pool that spans the whole roof of the Notre-Dame cathedral which was exposed to a devastating fire on April 15, 2019.
During the fire, the roof of the cathedral was severely damaged and the spire collapsed in front of the crowd. Following this heart-wrenching fire, the French government announced that they would launch an international competition soon to design a new spire that “is adapted to the techniques and the challenges of our era”.
However, although the international competition has not officially been announced yet, international architects started to work on their proposals for the roof of the Notre-Dame to imagine the historic structure in futuristic and contemporary additions.
UMA’s proposal draws attention more to “publicness” of the cathedral and a giant swimming pool spans the whole structure as “a new meditative space with unmatched views over Paris.”
Then we also have this worldly “environment-friendly” option:
Belgian visualization design studio Miysis has reimagined the roof and spire of the Notre-Dame Cathedral, following the news that the France government will launch an international competition to design a new spire for the cathedral.
The studio proposed a fully-glazed roof that could respect both the original style of this iconic building, but that at the same time would also be representative of our time.
Releases with a set of images that show the cathedral in every climate, the proposal is envisioned to preserve the dimensions and volumes of the original roof, with an almost unchanged exterior aesthetic.
“Our images have no other objective than to transport you into an alternative future, which will probably never become,” said Miysis in its project description.
“A positive and inspiring future, respectful of the environment, that does not hide the history of Notre Dame, that accepts the ravages of the flames and that, from the ashes, sees the rebirth of this church, a little different and even more welcoming.” […]
“They could walk quietly through the volume of the roof that Notre Dame intimates called “The Forest”. What could be more natural than paying homage to this place through a real vegetated space,” said the studio.
The interior of the roof is filled with trees and seating places that allow visitors to spend time inside to feel the structure intimately. On the ground, the floor is reminiscent of the structure that has now disappeared. This same structure, some of which were reconstructed in the same way and took their symbolic place at the four ends of the roof.
Well why not go the whole hog and make the proposed green space into a full blown forest? It appears that is also on the cards for the transformation of this magnificent cathedral, once so beloved by ancient kings, queens, saints and martyrs, pilgrims and visitors… but loved not for worldly New Age innovations like those proposed here, but for its other-worldly, transcendent beauty. A transcendent beauty that lifted the mind and heart of the soul towards God, and – far above the “environmental-friendly” here and now – finally towards Heaven.
French ecological architect Vincent Callebaut’s firm Vincent Callebaut Architectures has reenvisioned the roof and spire of the Notre-Dame Cathedral with Gothic-styled roof and biomimetic forest.
Submitting many different proposals from all over the world, architects submit their ideas to expand the cathedral in a much more innovative ways by using today’s cutting-edge technologies, following the announcement of an international competition by the France government.
Callebaut’s design scheme presents a transcendent concept to be a symbol of a resilient and ecological future that offers the city a set of solutions. Inspired by biomimicry, the architect tries to define a common ethic for a fairer symbiotic relationship between humans and nature.
Called Palingenesis (in Greek παλιγγενεσία, meaning “rebirth”, “regeneration”), the project aims to assimilate the venerable stone nave, to blend in naturally as a vegetal graft harmonizing in one gesture – in one single curved stroke of pencil – the roof and the spire. […]
Constructed with cross laminated timber beams pre-stressed with carbon fiber slats, the new oak frame seeks to use the minimum amount of material to ensure a low-carbon footprint while offering the greatest transparency to the cathedral. Transparency, sharing and openness to our society’s development: such are the ideas conveyed by this new, diaphanous forest of Notre-Dame, outlining the new face of the Church in the 21st century. A dynamic, agile and contemporary Church.
Have the modernists learnt nothing from their disastrous experiments they tyrannically forced on the faithful these last fifty-plus years, all justified under their revolutionary banner, “Spirit of Vatican II”? Those Masonic innovations at the time (that we realise in hindsight were part of a sinister plan to trivialize and dilute Catholic doctrine, liturgy and devotional practices) have ended up all but destroying the Church in the West. Are we now going to permit them to hammer in one of the last nails in the coffin by the deformation of Notre Dame into a bio-friendly safe space museum or recreation centre?
After a fire destroyed the spire and the roof of Notre-Dame de Paris, Mr. Emmanuel Macron plans to rebuild it in a modernist fashion.
Some architects competing for the job, such as Olivier Leclercq, want to reinterpret the slender spire of Viollet-le-Duc by imagining “for example, a hole with a kind of arrow in negative from below”.
According to Professor Babeau, president of l’Institut Sapiens, “others propose to replace the boring roof providentially gone up in smoke by a magnificent greenhouse that would be a transparent secular space”.
Notre-Dame de Paris is not a laboratory for experiments in modernist architecture but a Cathedral consecrated to God for His worship.
Therefore, the only solution worthy of this jewel of Christian Civilisation is a faithful restoration to its former beauty.
Tell Mr. Emmanuel Macron and his Minister of Culture that you oppose their horrendous plans by immediately signing this petition.
Minister of Culture,
The commotion produced all over the world by the fire of Notre Dame and the fall of its spire generates in all countries an enthusiastic impulse to see it restored.
I learned with amazement that you are considering a “contemporary architectural gesture” for its reconstruction and that a competition of architects will be opened.
To risk introducing contemporary art in Notre Dame would disfigure this symbol of medieval art which amazes 13 million visitors every year. It would be an attack on the Christian identity of France that would taint your government forever.
I associate myself with the French who venerate Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris as bequeathed to us through its nine centuries of history, asking you to give up your projects and have it restored identically as it was.
Mr. President, Mr. Minister of Culture, please be assured of my highest esteem.
Please help by signing the petition and then share the following link:
Thanks for your help!
A Comment on NCR: Would this excellent news of the triumph over the Culture of Death in the Senate of Alabama have been possible were it not for a pro-life President? No way! “Truly these things have only come to pass under our President [Trump], who like the Magdalene, a reformed sinner raised up to bear testimony to the truth.”
Bishop Robert Baker of Birmingham said in April that the legislation reflects “the strong commitment that the people of Alabama have to life.”
MONTGOMERY – The Alabama Senate approved a bill Thursday that will outlaw nearly all abortion in the state. The bill, which is expected to be signed by Gov. Kay Ivey, is intended to be a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that declared unconstitutional state measures prohibiting abortion.
The Human Life Protection Act (HB314), if signed into law, will make attempting or performing an abortion a felony offense. Doctors who perform abortion would be charged with a Class A felony and could face between 10 years and life in prison.
The penalty would apply only to doctors, not to mothers, who, according to the bill’s sponsors, would not face criminal penalties for undergoing abortions.
The state Senate engaged in fierce debate last week, which ultimately erupted in a shouting match on the Senate floor, over whether an exemption for cases of rape or incest should be included in the bill. A vote scheduled for May 10 was delayed after exemption was removed from the Senate’s bill following a voice vote May 9.
The measure does include a provision that would allow abortions “in cases where abortion is necessary in order to prevent a serious health risk to the unborn child’s mother.”
The bill defines a serious health risk as a condition requiring an abortion “to avert [the mother’s] death or to avert serious risk of substantial physical impairment of a major bodily function.”
Opponents pledged months ago to challenge the legislation in court. This is exactly what the bill’s sponsors expected. Supporters say court challenges could lead to a reversal the Roe v. Wade decision.
Bishop Robert Baker of Birmingham said in April that the legislation reflects “the strong commitment that the people of Alabama have to life.”
In an April 3 statement, the bishop praised the lawmakers’ efforts.
“I strongly support these bills and stand behind the efforts of these legislators to promote life and to, hopefully in the near future, eliminate this evil we know as abortion from within the boundaries of the State of Alabama; and, eventually, to make the killing of unborn children in our country something that is no longer viewed as anything but the horrendous and inhumane killing of the most innocent among us that it is,” he said.
Rep. Terri Collins (R-Decatur), sponsor of the House bill, said the bill passed Thursday is designed to “confront a decision that was made by the courts in 1973 that said the baby in a womb is not a person,” Collins added. “This bill addresses that one issue. Is that baby in the womb a person? I believe our law says it is.”
“It is meant to actually use some of the same language that is addressed in Roe vs. Wade. So, hopefully it just completely takes it all the way to the Supreme Court eventually to overturn.”