Friday, May 30, 2014

The interior life is needed when we fall time and time again - Fr. Chautard

Fr. Jean-Baptiste Chautard, O.C.S.O
Taken from the book: "The Soul of the Apostolate"

"If the interior life did nothing more than procure for us the advantage of realizing our incessant danger, it would already be contributing very much to our protection against surprises along our way; for to foresee a danger is half the battle in avoiding it. And yet the inner life has an even greater utility than merely this. It becomes, the man engaged in the ministry, a complete set of armor (Eph 6: 11-17). It is a divine armor which permits him not only to resist the temptations and avoid the snares set before him by the devil, but also to sanctify his every act (“and stand in all things perfect)…

[In those still in pursuit of sanctity], even fervent souls, the supernatural life seems to suffer loss after more or less time spent in exterior occupations. Their less perfect hearts, too preoccupied with the good to be done to their neighbor, to absorbed with a compassion (for the woes to be alleviated) that is not nearly Supernatural enough, seem to send up to God flames less pure, darkened with the smoke of numerous imperfections.

God does not punish this weakness by a decrease of His grace, and does not demand a strict account for these failings, provided there is a serious attempt at vigilance and prayer in the midst of action, and that the soul is ready, when its work is done, to return to Him and rest and regain its strength. This habit of constantly beginning over again, which is necessitated by the combination of the active with the interior life, gives joy to His paternal Heart.

Besides in those who really put up a fight, these imperfections become less and less serious and frequent in proportion as the soul learns to return, tirelessly to Christ, whom we will always find ready to say to us: “Come back to Me, poor panting heart, athirst with the length of the course. Woe and find in these living waters the secret of new energy for other journeys. Withdraw thyself a little from the crowd that is unable to offer thee the nourishment required by they exhausted strength. Come apart and rest a little. In the peace and quiet thou shalt enjoy being with me, not only wilt thou soon recapture thy first vigor, but also wilt though learn how to do more work with less expense of strength. Elias, disheartened, discouraged, found his strength renewed in an instant by a certain mysterious bread. Even so, My apostle, in this enviable task of co-redeemer that it has pleased Me to impose upon thee, I offer the the chance, both by My word, which is all life, and by My grace, that is by My Blood, to direct thy spirit once again towards the horizons of eternity and to renew the pact of friendship between thy heart and Mine. Come I will console thee for the sorrows and decptions of the journey. And thou shalt temper once again the steel of thy resolutions in the furnace of My love. 

Come to me all you that labor and are heavily burdened and I will refresh you (Matt 9:28)."

He knocks, but only you can answer!

+Pray for Peter+

Scandal Continued... why Karl Keating must attack the Principle

(edit) Before you read this ask yourself if you are able to see a persons personality and their proposed theories as mutually exclusive.  Will you allow the chips to fall where they may?  Or are you unable to allow discussion on things that are not confirmed but remain theories.  Let the chips fall where they may on Geocentrism, read Palm, read Sungenis, let the evidence speak either way... be joyful of HIS amazing creation!!!


I saw this by Mark Shea's house.  Its Karl Keating's repose to last nights "Mic'd Up" episode related to all the hoopla surrounding the upcoming documentary "The Principle".  There are so many problems with the attack on the show and on the people involved... I just had to take a charitable shot at clearing things up:

My comments in RED

Karl Keating Does all the Heavy Lifting So I Don’t Have To
May 29, 2014 By Mark Shea 7 Comments
Does it not even bother Mr. Shea for a second that when mocking people that are putting together something they think is important and worthy of propagation that he not exaggerate what they claim.  In other words, Mark, they didn’t claim it was God’s work to make this, but a worthy pursuit.  Mockery is not from above.  Charity Mr. Shea on things not of the faith?

For the second time, Bob Sungenis and Rick DeLano appeared on Michael Voris’s “Mic’d Up” program to talk about their film “The Principle.”
DeLano, at his blog, had done his best to hype this evening’s show, but in …his promo he pretty much said what ended up being said on “Mic’d Up”: that the film’s producers had in their possession signed releases from those whose interviews are in the film and that the film has been taken on by a distributor.
I don’t remember anyone claiming that those interviewed, such as Lawrence Krauss and Michio Kaku, hadn’t signed releases, so that always was a non-issue. Krauss claimed a lack of memory of having been filmed, but a clip shown by DeLano on “Mic’d Up” made it clear that Krauss was aware that he was on camera.
What wasn’t made clear tonight–and apparently it wasn’t made clear to Krauss or Kaku prior to the interviews–was the undergirding argument of “The Principle,” that geocentrism is true.

Perhaps Mr. Keating missed the whole part of the release that stated that the documentary would be used as part of film that would explore controversial aspects of cosmology.  Then consider the questions that are asked of them.  Which neither you Mr. Keating or David Palm or Mr. Shea have seen but you assume from your mountain top they are taken out of context.  When did you trust Krause again?  Or is it really just the grudge against Sungenis?  We both know.

The real issue never was whether those interviewed had signed releases but whether they had been told what the film was intended to argue toward. Nothing in tonight’s program would lead one to believe that Sungenis and DeLano had been up front with the interviewees.
Did they in the film misrepresent the views of Mr. Krause or the others?  Im confused.  Again they were told the topic and given questions that they answered.  If the PHD’s couldn’t reason to the topic by the questions given, well…. They might work for… never mind.

(The signed releases were shown on screen, to prove the interviewees had been paid for their time. The amounts paid were redacted except in one case, where the release showed that the interviewee was paid $1,500.)
As in the earlier edition of “Mic’d Up,” Bob Sungenis said very little. Most of the words came from DeLano, secondly from Voris.

Probably because if Mr. Sungenis says anything you will say every last word and even the word “the” is anti-Semitic and related to holocaust denial syndrome.  Mr. DeLano and Sungenis decided, obviously not to make it about Bob (personality wise) which I think is smart. 

The two of them posited the existence of a concerted effort by what Voris has dubbed “the Church of Nice” to undercut the film. Three people were named as ringleaders: Mark Shea, David Palm, and me. My name was mentioned just once in passing;* more or less the same for David Palm’s. But Mark Shea got considerable attention.

And justly so because he has a big mouth and appointed himself the defender of all things Catholic in the blogosphere.

DeLano showed on screen a tweet that Shea had made on Krauss’s Twitter feed in which Shea asked Krauss whether he knew that “The Principle” actually was made by people backing geocentrism.

This is what amazes me, whether or not the movie was made by geocentrists does not make that big of a difference to me because the focus is on the Copernican Priniciple and whether or not it is correct by looking into the most recent evidence on the topic and asking the experts in such fields their take on the matter.

In DeLano’s opinion, it was this query from Shea that made Krauss–and later the film’s narrator Kate Mulgrew–go public against the film.
Considerable time was spent on promoting the idea that Shea, Palm, and I have been trying to undercut the film by claiming it promotes anti-Semitism. This was an argument Voris repeatedly made, but none of us ever alleged anything of the kind about the film. We never have said or even implied that there is a hint of anti-Semitism in the film. We presume there isn’t.
What we have said–repeatedly, over many years–is that Bob Sungenis wrote many dozens of articles, at his website and elsewhere, against Jews, accusing them of being responsible for manifold political, social, and cultural evils. For instance, he argued that Jews were responsible for the destruction of the Twin Towers.

But the question is what does Bob’s views on Jewish polical issues have to do with the film?  Why does it need to be brought up?  Its ultimate and final goal is to discredit the film by discrediting the maker of it.  Come on Karl, be honest you cant stand Bob.  He cant stand you, but really?  Who cares about your petty games.  Let the movie stand or fall on its own merits not on preconceived intuitions.

I more than once noted that Sungenis seemed obsessed with Jews and that he freely and uncritically reproduced statements that placed Jews in a bad light–going even so far as to quote a high Nazi official against the Jews.

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH… Ok I hear the sob story, but on to the real issue that its really about the movie… right?

On tonight’s program Sungenis didn’t refer to any of his tens of thousands of words written against Jews. He just claimed that in his writings he criticized Catholics twice as often as he criticized Jews. No doubt a word count of the articles that appeared at his website would show that this is a grotesque exaggeration.

I was wrong, Karl is obsessed with Bob’s literature on the Jews.  By the way, why does Bob have to apologize for what he said which is the same as what any Church father would have said?  Political Judism is a real force to be reconned with in his mind.  It is a topic he explores.  Mr. Keating thinks its off limits, probably because he doesn’t want to be put on the ADL’s hit list like Bob or the Remnant… but whatever.

A puzzler: Voris said that he didn’t know Mark Shea. Strange. They had a public debate at the Argument of the Month Club in St. Paul last October. Hundreds of people were in attendance. Has Voris forgotten that encounter already?

Mr. Keating why are you lying??  AGAIN WHY ARE YOU LYING?  It is here that I could devolve right into your line of thinking and say that since Mr. Keating lies in his facebook posts about someones character and representations then we cannot trust his companies work but that would be a logical fallacy, the very thing you again and again commit.

At the end of the program Sungenis and DeLano announced that “The Principle” would have its theatrical release on September 9. It will be shown, apparently, at one theater in one (unnamed) “major city.” The distribution is being handled by Rocky Mountain Pictures.

Good for them, I hope it draws attention and people can judge the film for what it is based on its own merits and not on preconceived notions by someone that has never seen it to begin with.

According to the website Box Office Mojo, this two-man organization has promoted 24 indie films. Five of them grossed more than a million dollars, the two best known being “2016: Obama’s America” ($33.4 million) and “Expelled” ($7.7 million). But 12 of the films brought in less than $100,000, the least bringing in $2,000.

And the point is?  It’s a film, if people want to see it good, if not fine.  But the implication is that this distributer is nothing to get excited about.  Pray tell how many distributers CA has ever dealt with?

The two big-grossers had famous names (Dinesh D’Souza and Ben Stein, respectively), which no doubt accounted for much of their box-office success. “The Principle” features no one of comparable fame.

The obvious point to be made is whether or not truth is dependent on income or popularity?  Regardless if the findings are true or not don’t put the cart before the horse.

Of the 24 films handled by Rocky Mountain Pictures, 15 appeared in 30 or fewer theaters–hardly enough to cover costs of production.

I know this may sound odd, but a half a year ago they didn’t have a distributer so having one is pretty good.  I don’t think their goal is to cover costs so much as to get the info out their.  If the goal was to cover costs they could have one week sessions where they declaire in what dire straights their in and how they need funding desperately or the show might stop.  Wait that’s you show Karl… whoops.

Box Office Mojo lists the production budget of only two of the 24 films. “The End of the Spear” brought in $12 million and cost $10 to produce, so it made a profit. “Atlas Shrugged: Part I” brought in $4.6 million but cost $20 million, so it had a big loss–surprising, perhaps, for a film based on a best-selling novel.

Again truth is dependent on popularity and numbers?... this is sooooo petty Karl. 

What can one expect for a documentary based, if it’s based on anything, on the non-seller** “Galileo Was Wrong”?

It should be painfully obvious at this point to any… and I MEAN ANY, rational mind that Mr. Keating is just using this opportunity to go after Bob Sungenis… PETTY KARL KEATING

The bottom line is that Sungenis and DeLano didn’t announced what, months ago, they promised to announce: Opening night in multiple cities with a major distributor handling their film. Rocky Mountain Pictures is a small outfit, and “The Principle” will open in just one city, presumably at just one theater. It will have to do very well there to go on the road.
(*I think my name was mentioned just once. The sound was off during a good portion of the program–there was a glitch at the studio–so it’s possible I was referred to more than once.)

(“Galileo Was Wrong” has an Amazon best-sellers rank of 7,874,135 among books.)

I would like to say that I enjoy some of the apologetical materials put forth by CA, but the more and more this goes on the more and more it is clear to me that His group and say National Catholic Reporter are not different in substance, but only in accidents.  When the Estates met before the French revolution they began to splinter off into different directions among themselves.  Most notably what we today call the left and the right or liberals (progressives) and conservatives.  The mistake is to see the two as opposed to one another, when in truth they are of one mind.  As GK Chesterton put it,

"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
You might say this is over reacting to the issue but I will give you two key examples:

How many times did conservative Catholic organizations link to articles on NCReporter because "well, their put out by John Allen, so they are worth it?  Do you know what you call giving drink to a drunkard?  Enabling, and in this case you are not just supporting John Allen but you support the heretical rag he writes willingly for, and you, YOU knowingly do so! When Bishop Finn ordered the rag remove Catholic from its title and was ignored he asked his brother Bishops to not enable the rag, but since its John Allen (AGAIN WHO KNOWINGLY WRITES FOR THE HERETICAL RAG!!!!) they went ahead and enabled the dissenters to maintain their evil propagation!  
The second example is how Mark Shea, a noted conservative, neo-con, w/e... goes out of his way to twist doctrine to his own ends making a mockery out of the faith.  You might think that I am way off here but I beg you to go to the following link HERE and then tell me im way off base.
The point is when you pretend to hold Keating, Shea and others out as the solution (which I dont think they propose themselves as) you will be seriously disappointed

As for me I'm looking forward to the Principle.  More discussion on things allowed not less


Thursday, May 29, 2014

The case against Anglican Orders by Michael Davies

Have you ever wondered why the Catholic Church declared anglican orders to be invalid, therfore null and void?

Enjoy the following video on the issue put together by the late and great Michael Davies, and read the encyclical promulgated by Leo XII entitled Apostolicae Curae:

h/t Matthew Olson!

Wednesday, May 28, 2014

The Eponymous Flower: Poland's Communist Dictator Died Reconciled to the Church

Great news I saw at Tancreeds blog:

(Warsaw)  two days ago the former self-confessed atheist and communist dictator of Poland, Wojciech Witold Jaruzelski (1923-2014), passed away on May 25th in Warsaw, provided with the last sacraments and reconciled with the Catholic Church.

Read the rest here

Friday, May 23, 2014

+Pray for the Pope on His Trip+

Thanks to Terry over at Abbey-Roads to reminding us all that the Holy Father is off to Israel for the weekend.!

I remembered at the beginning of the week seeing a story that he will not be using bullet proof cars for the events.  Although there is a confidence thing, perhaps its a tad imprudent and tempting, but my opinion is just that, and maybe this is what is needed

Anyway pray for the Holy Father as he goes to comfort our bretheren in the desolate holy land.

+Also pray for Syria and Egypt+

A Catholic Critique of the American Founding: James Madison, The Federalist, Nos. 10 and 51

I'm sure many of you are aware of those apologists out there like George Weigel, Michael Novak and now [?] John Zmirak who hammer on the greatness of Americas founding and the egalitarian joys this country celebrates.  If you love their work the following video is not for you [fyi]

The synopsis:

James Madison and The Federalist Papers were both instrumental in creating and achieving confirmation of the American Constitution. Dr. Bond shows how the ideas they expressed are very problematic for the Catholic world view. One special difficulty is, once again, their Lockean presumption that order is built upon maintaining and encouraging the disagreement and factionalism of many warring groups in society. Taken from: Regalism, Revolution, the Reign of Terror and the Assault on Catholicism (1648-1799) - 1998 VonHildebrand Institute

 h/t Matthew Olson @ Answering Protestants

Great to see Larry D back btw

Wednesday, May 21, 2014

On the Fr. Edwards Beck global warming thing that no one is asking...

so he said well you know.... but why didn't anyone ask him how having more air conditioners would reduce global warming?  Wouldnt it be the opposite?

More air conditioners = more "global warming" = offsets racism?

I Quit... Racism, Global warming... screw it

Monday, May 12, 2014

Forget Tolkien, the new controversy is whether Libertarianism is a heresy?

The Blaze
Just when you thought the Tolkien controversy was the greatest side stepping of real issues affecting the church today I give you this:

So on Saturday I came home from work and saw a story on the side bar of the blaze that made me laugh, then shake my head: Catholics Divided on Libertarianism as ‘Heresy’.  Ok so there is utter maddness about with the travels about of Cardinal Kasper, the generation from 18-23 year old actual Catholics being non existent, continued irreverence at least passively if not actively endorsed by Archbishop Gomez (at LA's education conference) or Pope Francis with Jesus Christ in plastic cups at world youth day.  There are so many things that are so much more important to this than trying to define libertarianism, which libertarians disagree with each other about to begin with, as heresy.

First if it is heresy then you have heretics not just identifying as progressives or consevatives, but actually quite a few traditionalists who are not prone to think only of post conciliar decrees as important would identify politically as libertarians.  People like Tom Woods (of How the catholic church built western civilization" book fame) and Judge Andrew Napolitano (who appears as a legal expert on many shows and makes it clear he is a pre-vatican II Catholic, which is confusing but he is not SSPX but probably more along the lines of FSSP).

If you read the Blaze article it brings up three articles written very recently by Michael Winters of NCReporter (aka fishwrap, aka that paper that John Allen wrote for knowing that the paper was heretical yet people treat him to this day like he is a good source, when he really knew he was feeding error, oh he even was endorsed by my Bishop to give a speech, oh Milwaukee you are useless).  The other is by Mark Shea (the ubber reactionary of neo-cons, Mark lets be real you are reading this) which is the article that outright condemns libertarianism as a heresy.  The final article I will post on this is one by Joe Hargrave entitled Mark Shea's Economic inquisiton (Which Mark Shea has been whining about ever since because hes being picked on... put on your big boy pants Mark. Consider asking Jimmy Akin to write a piece entitled "9 things to know and share about how writing posts that counter Mark Shea posts is dastardly")

I take no position on the matter of libertarianism probably because I'm a distributist and of the monarchial view on government.  By the way does anyone else find it odd that Mark Shea who writes for Heresy central (AKA Patheos, think about it, its pure indifferentism) is calling others out for being heretics.

Also I have put two videos below with differing view points on the matter for those interested in seeing the two views.

The first is by a seminarian in Canada who always puts about great YouTube videos.  His view is that libertarianism is not enough.

The second is by Tom Woods from his recent show where he tries to show how it is compatible with Christianity

I do think that we can agree that atheistic libertarianism espoused by the likes of Ayn Rand is devoid of compatibility.  There was an interesting article on how the satanist Anton LaVey was greatly encouraged by Rand's works and recommends her stuff for what its worth on the Acton blog.

Meanwhile we whistle dixie

WYD 2013

WYD 2013

Sunday, May 11, 2014

Yes Deacon Greg Kandra protestants prancing around in clerics is a scandal

edited: it was not nice to call patheos types goombas... not nice, should have defined it first... im sorry

BTW, the only thing good I will say about this picture and the others on Patheos is that at least they are not afraid to be seen wearing their 'clerics' in the public
So my facebook feed had this on it tonight with yes that headline.  Now before you call me a hypocryt dont blame me I dont follow Patheos goomba patrols, blame Matthew Olson for commenting on it and therefore it being on my feed.

Where to begin?

I gather the source of scandal is the notion of a woman wearing a clerical collar (rather than the  concept of her wearing a tasteful black dress to go with it.)
Well, this isn’t really anything new. A lot of Protestant ministers, some of them women, wear the classic “tab” collar. They’ve been doing it for years.
Just your average Joe Deacon
Ok so to begin with there is obvious scandal in that there are many groups apart from the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church (extra ecclesiam nulla salus) that like to call themselves Christian parading about in what seems to be clerical garb which has the distinction of holding some authority.  One cannot consciously say there is no scandal.  Are you blind?  Do you only see clerical garb as clothing.... oh wait we are talking about Deacon Average Joe, I'm just like you.  For crying out loud, you Deacon Kandra have been given orders by an apostle of the Church to represent the Church, to stand out in the world not just in how you act but how you look.  We are not gnostics that merely see ourselves spiritually but materially as well and the way you dress speaks to the person or the office you hold.  If Barry comes out of the White House one day sporting a "wife beater" and sweat pants he does a disservice to the office because he is not above the office that he holds.  This is true for all people, especially those consecrated or ordained, they are to live in the world (some) but not be of it.  And giving a witness with the way you dress shows people the seriousness you take in filling that office within Holy Mother Church.  That protestants are mimicking Catholics in what they wear is a scandal in that it puts confusion in the hearts of the already non-formed faithful that are already prone to indifferentism.  This minimalist attitude of 'I dont wear my clerics because it doesnt matter, plus those who focus on such are clericalists' has got to be one of the most blind personal decisions to take hold since the council (well maybe the continuance of versus populum mass and other things are just as bad or worse, but hey the minimalists dont care in the Church of Nice).  That we pretend its ok for these laymen to dress like they hold a real office is a sham, they are laymen clinging to error and for some reason we are content to see to it that nothing is said about them mimicking and or mocking Catholics by using clerical garb to their ultimately evil ends because they are content to keep peace with material heretics by not offending their sensibilities

It’s becoming so common, in fact, that most suppliers of clergy apparel now cater to both men and women.
This led me on a fascinating Google search I never thought I’d undertake: “Clergy shirts for women.”
Yet another aspect of the scandal is that the faithful, who again are not taught the faith of Our Fathers to any meaningful extent now see women prancing about in clerics fostering more indifferntism.  Yes women wearing clerical garb is a scandal because it is not proper to them be they lay or "ordained" by heretics who have no authority themselves(which they are because calling them ministers is only a feel good, non confrontational way of perpetuating insanity).  Just because it is the thing for Protestants to do now in ordaining women doesn't mean we are silent on the issue.  JPII, when the episcopalians "ordained" the active same sex attracted guy cut off all talks with the Anglicans (one of the few things I applaud him for btw).  But to some there would be no scandal there because, hey, their protestants thats what they do, so lets let bi-gones be bi-gones.  Cowards, they mock Christ and call themselves Christians, and you are content giving them that title.  And another thing why is a deacon of the Church wasting his time searchig for such things.... what about the so called new evangelization?

People who are upset about that image at the top of this post are falling prey to a manufactured outrage that isn’t really all that outrageous—and the issue is older than some realize. The simple fact is: it’s not uncommon for non-Catholic ministers to dress like Catholic clergy. It’s just that now, a growing number of those ministers are women.
Lest we forget: nearly 70 years ago, David Niven was depicted as an Episcopal bishop with both the tab collar and—spoiler alert— a wife.
So in other-words the Deacon has fallen, himself, prey to complacency.  And complacency breeds contempt, especially for those that dont just take a ho-hum approach to those that have chosen to separate themselves from Christ.  That this issue is not brought up today is outrageous because their is no zeal to call out confusers of truth.  When they dress as they do they cause scandal because their is no distinction between those with true authority and those that are self-appointed buffoons of error.

It’s also worth noting that the clerical collar itself is a relatively modern invention. In fact, its roots aren’t even Catholic. Wikipedia points out:

Which makes me wonder more why Catholic clerics give their assent to such things.  The Roman Cassock is the clerical garb of the Church from time immemorial yet you will hardly ever see it worn by a cleric in the confines of the Church or in public because they worry that they will be perceived as being clerical and not friendly.  Take for instance my own archdiocese.  One priest wished to wear a cassock and was called into the Bishops office for having had the gull to do so, when the USCCB made specific allowances (theres double speak for you) so priests that chose to do so would not be persecuted as being clericalists.  When in reality most priests in this diocese will not be caught dead in public wearing their clerics and even sneer at those that do.  Give witness to the faith not just in the actions and thoughts but in the way you look because then the world will know you stick out like a sore thumb to them calling them to something greater than yourselves, the office you hold

Also, why are so many Fathers in the faith removing their Fr. status from their Facebook pages?  Is this tryng to prevent clericalism or more liberal pandering to a world devoid of fathers to begin with?

Dear Average Joe Deacon Kandra dont be complacent with this but give testimony to the true scandal that it is!!

Look at that lace! What a Clericialist!!!!

G.K. Chesterton on Motherhood

"Supposing it to be conceded that humanity has acted at least not unnaturally in dividing itself into two halves, respectively typifying the ideals of special talent and of general sanity (since they are genuinely difficult to combine completely in one mind), it is not difficult to see why the line of cleavage has followed the line of sex, or why the female became the emblem of the universal and the male of the special and superior.

 Two gigantic facts of nature fixed it thus: first, that the woman who frequently fulfilled her functions literally could not be specially prominent in experiment and adventure; and second, that the same natural operation surrounded her with very young children, who require to be taught not so much anything as everything. Babies need not to be taught a trade, but to be introduced to a world. To put the matter shortly, woman is generally shut up in a house with a human being at the time when he asks all the questions that there are, and some that there aren’t. It would be odd if she retained any of the narrowness of a specialist.

 Now if anyone says that this duty of general enlightenment (even when freed from modern rules and hours, and exercised more spontaneously by a more protected person) is in itself too exacting and oppressive, I can understand the view. I can only answer that our race has thought it worth while to cast this burden on women in order to keep common-sense in the world.

 But when people begin to talk about this domestic duty as not merely difficult but trivial and dreary, I simply give up the question. For I cannot with the utmost energy of imagination conceive what they mean. When domesticity, for instance, is called drudgery, all the difficulty arises from a double meaning in the word. If drudgery only means dreadfully hard work, I admit the woman drudges in the home, as a man might drudge at the Cathedral of Amiens or drudge behind a gun at Trafalgar. But if it means that the hard work is more heavy because it is trifling, colorless and of small import to the soul, then as I say, I give it up; I do not know what the words mean.

 To be Queen Elizabeth within a definite area, deciding sales, banquets, labors and holidays; to be Whiteley within a certain area, providing toys, boots, sheets, cakes and books, to be Aristotle within a certain area, teaching morals, manners, theology, and hygiene; I can understand how this might exhaust the mind, but I cannot imagine how it could narrow it. How can it be a large career to tell other people’s children about the Rule of Three, and a small career to tell one’s own children about the universe? How can it be broad to be the same thing to everyone, and narrow to be everything to someone? No; a woman’s function is laborious, but because it is gigantic, not because it is minute. I will pity Mrs. Jones for the hugeness of her task; I will never pity her for its smallness."

 -What’s Wrong with the World by G.K. Chesterton

Saturday, May 10, 2014

The Importance of a Good Priest for ones Interior Life

Taken from the book:  The Soul of the Apostolate

 by Jean-Baptiste Chautard, O.C.S.O

If the priest is a saint (the saying goes), the people will be fervent; if the priest is fervent, the people will be pious; if the priest is pious, the people will at least be decent. But if the priest is only decent, the people will be godless. The spiritual generation is always one degree less intense in its life than those who beget it in Christ.

 “The good morals and the salvation of the people depend on good pastors. If there is a good priest in charge of the parish, you will soon see devotion flourishing, people frequenting the Sacraments, and honoring the practice of mental prayer. Hence the proverb: like pastor, like Parish. According to this word of Ecclesiasticus (10:2) ‘Those who dwell in the state, take after their ruler (St. Alphonsus, Homo Apost., 7:16)

Thursday, May 8, 2014

Fr. Hardon rebukes Von Balthasar

I came across this audio the otherday, and since this remains a hot topic I have put it on YouTube to be shared.  He also mentions Fr. Fessio S.J. seeking his (Fr. Hardon's) approval for publishing Von Balthasar's works for Ignatius Press (you will find his answer to Fr. Fessio surprising):

I have also included some more videos on Topics Fr. Hardon Covered below

Wednesday, May 7, 2014

URGENT!!! Harvard Club to Host Black Mass With Consecrated Host

Christ is being Crucified Again!!!!

UPDATE: I just spoke to Priya Dua, PR director for The Satanic Temple and she has confirmed that yes, they have obtained and will use a Consecrated Host during this “re-enactment”. She is hopefully putting me in touch with someone who will answer my questions about how the Host was obtained, what they think they’re doing by using a Consecrated, as opposed to unconsecrated Host, and more.


Friday, May 2, 2014

A story you might not have heard about Thomas Aquinas

A while back I heard a story about St. Thomas Aquinas that I have found few people know about and would like to share it with you today.

Most people know that Thomas Aquinas was on his way to meet with the Pope for the upcoming Ecumenical Council at Lyons i
n France which was intended to find a way to bring the Orthodox back into communion. While headed there he hit his head on a tree branch and fell off his donkey.  (Isn't it odd that he was riding his donkey at this point, when at other times he refused to put such a burden on the donkey.  But he was old so give him a pass)

He was taken to the Cistercian monastery of Fossanova near Terracina in the Papal States (modern day Italy). He died there on March 7th in the Year of Our Lord 1274 and his body remained with the Cistercians at the monastery until the Dominicans called on them to return the amazingly in-corrupt body to their possession so he may be justly venerated by those he was closest to.  The Cistercians were not all too happy with this call from the Dominicans because they wished to keep the Saint in their possession.  Under pressure they relented and agreed to send him back, but here is the interesting part.

Relic of St. Thomas Aquinas
They decided it would be better to return him, not in the in-corrupt state he was in, but in a more efficient way.  The Cistercians boiled Thomas's in-corrupt body in wine leaving behind only the bones of the formally in-corrupt saint. Even more weird is the fact that when they boiled the saint in wine this left a pink hue entrenched in all of his relics to this day.  Another interesting thing is that, out of perhaps shall we call it pastoral concern, the Cistercians lopped off one of Thomas's in-corrupt hands and sent this to his living sister as a personal remembrance of her now deceased Saintly-Brother.  The hand, gloriously, remained in-corrupt for what its worth. 

Ok so thats the story... its an oddity, I will grant you. But it shows just how strange and in a morbid way beautiful the churches history is.

I recently finished an art piece of St. Thomas meeting with St. Louis IX.  I have posted the picures below because I am proud of the piece and give thanks to God for all his help

Thursday, May 1, 2014

Correcting some false narratives about Padre Pio

I have recently come across a number of posts that are setting up false narratives about a great Saint that demand a correction.

First there is a notion out there that Padre Pio offered the Novus Ordo (Ordinary Form) mass.  Generally people like to make reference to a few pictures or a video about Padre Pio offering mass versus populum, ergo he offered the new rite.

Only problem is that he died in 1968, a year before the new rite was promulgated.  Second just because mass is offered versus poplulum doesnt mean it is an ordinary form mass.  People forget, or choose to, that the time from 1965-1969 was an era of liturgical insanity in the church, with experimentation with the liturgy being prominant throughout the church.  This is also true with the Capuchin order which Padre Pio was under obedience to.  Therefore if his superiors ordered him to offer the ancient rite as such he will obey because of his vow before God and man.  The only things that can be said about these pictures and videos is that Padre Pio said the ancient rite versus populum, and that is it.  It doesnt speak to his will to do so, only that it was offered.  We also know that Padre Pio at this time was unable, do to his health to stand at the high alter, hence he is sitting down at a make shift altar.

The other thing to note is the supposed meetings that Padre Pio had with some notable Catholic leaders are often spoken of in ways that are pious yet fictional.

The first is his meeting with a young Fr. Karol Wojtyla (later JPII).

This encounter took place around 1947 or 1948. At that time in post-war Italy, it was possible to have access to Padre Pio, since travel was difficult and great crowds were not besieging the Friary. The young priest spent almost a week in San Giovanni Rotondo during his visit, and was able to attend Padre Pio’s Mass and make his confession to the saint. Apparently, this was not just a casual encounter, and the two spoke together at length during Fr. Wojtyla’s stay. Their conversations gave rise to rumors in later years, after the Polish prelate had been elevated to the Papacy, that Padre Pio had told him he would become Pope. The story persists to the present day, even though on two or three occasions "Papa Wojtyla" denied it.      Recently, new information about this visit has come to light, according to a new book in Italian published by Padre Pio's Friary, Il Papa e Il Frate, written by Stefano Campanella (1).  As reported in this book, the future Pope and future Saint had a very interesting conversation.  During this exchange, Fr. Wojtyla asked Padre Pio which of his wounds caused the greatest suffering. From this kind of personal question, we can see that they must have already talked together for some time and had become at ease with each other. The priest expected Padre Pio to say it was his chest wound, but instead the Padre replied, "It is my shoulder wound, which no one knows about and has never been cured or treated." This is extremely significant, not only because it reveals that Padre Pio bore this wound, but because, as far as is known, the future pope is the only one to whom Padre Pio ever revealed existence of this secret wound. 

The other is that Archbishop Lefevre was condemned by Padre Pio for actions yet to happen.

The meeting which took place after Easter in 1967 lasted two minutes. I was accompanied by Fr. Barbara and a Holy Ghost Brother, Brother Felin. I met Padre Pio in a corridor, on his way to the confessional, being helped by two Capuchins.
I told him in a few words the purpose of my visit: for him to bless the Congregation of the Holy Ghost which was due to hold an extraordinary General my Chapter meeting, like all religious societies, under the heading of aggiornamento (up-dating), meeting which I was afraid would lead to trouble...
Padre Pio kissing Archbishop Lefebvre's ring.
Then Padre Pio cried out. 'Me, bless an archbishop, no, no, it is you who should be blessing me!' And he bowed, to receive the blessing. I blessed him, he kissed my ring and continued on his way to the confessional...

I do hope this clears up some things about Padre Pio that are commonly said in haste.