Pascendi Part Two: Gramsci and America

Time for a Gramsci post. That Obama is the heir to Gramsci I have been trying to point out since 2007. However, few have listened, and the younger generation, I am told, simply do not care about Gramsci (see post below, http://supertradmum-etheldredasplace.blogspot.com/2012/01/on-this-post-post-modern-generation.html).

However, the recent events in the past two weeks prove my point that the Marx, Alinksy, Chomsky, Gramsci influences on this Administration hold firm. I want to highlight only two points I wrote about before on this blog-the idea of immanentism, condemned by several Popes and a key Gramsci idea, and the idea of hegemony of the mind.

I am doing this series on Pascendi (http://supertradmum-etheldredasplace.blogspot.com/2012/02/series-on-pascendi-dominici-gregis-part.html) and if there are seminarians out there who have read this great encyclical, do so now. You will need the information now and in days to come. If you understand the ideology of Gramsci and his ideas, you will be able to counteract the messy theology of social justice wafting across the Church in the States like poisonous gas.

But, first, let us look at the document's discussion of the heresy of immanence and then, Gramsci's use of the term. Pope St. Pius X writes that,  Concerning immanence it is not easy to determine what Modernists mean by it, for their own opinions on the subject vary. Some understand it in the sense that God working in man is more intimately present in him than man is in even himself, and this conception, if properly understood, is free from reproach. Others hold that the divine action is one with the action of nature, as the action of the first cause is one with the action of the secondary cause, and this would destroy the supernatural order. Others, finally, explain it in a way which savours of pantheism and this, in truth, is the sense which tallies best with the rest of their doctrines. 


In this small section, one can see that those agnostics or atheists who believe in a type of divine immanence place it firmly either in man or men, or in the movement of history, as some sort of power which is not of the supernatural order, but purely natural or human. Gramsci would see this power as a freedom from the rules, or laws of the Church, and place all power in some sort of historically based movement, almost like an evolutionary political utopian vision which grows within a people and a particular time period. As I noted in the post before this one, there is a momentum in this movement, the immanence no longer being ascribed to the Divine, but to humans, or to history. The denial of God and the denial of the Church allowed Gramsci to place immanence in the material-as he is a true materialist, as is Marx. All activity moves towards a goal of human freedom, almost like a utopian anarchy, except not quite. The "not quite" are the elite leaders, be they from the working class or be they from the academic class, the elite are part of this momentum towards freedom from all constraints.

The immanence is not a supernatural one, but caught in a context of history and even economic determinism.

This section from Pascendi should be memorized: Hence we have that distinction, so current among the Modernists, between the Christ of history and the Christ of faith, between the sacraments of history and the sacraments of faith, and so on. Next we find that the human element itself, which the historian has to work on, as it appears in the documents, has been by faith transfigured, that is to say raised above its historical conditions. It becomes necessary, therefore, to eliminate also the accretions which faith has added, to assign them to faith itself and to the history of faith: thus, when treating of Christ, the historian must set aside all that surpasses man in his natural condition, either according to the psychological conception of him, or according to the place and period of his existence. Finally, by virtue of the third principle, even those things which are not outside the sphere of history they pass through the crucible, excluding from history and relegating to faith everything which, in their judgment, is not in harmony with what they call the logic of facts and in character with the persons of whom they are predicated. Thus, they will not allow that Christ ever uttered those things which do not seem to be within the capacity of the multitudes that listened to Him. Hence they delete from His real history and transfer to faith all the allegories found in His discourses. Do you inquire as to the criterion they adopt to enable them to make these divisions? The reply is that they argue from the character of the man, from his condition of life, from his education, from the circumstances under which the facts took place - in short, from criteria which, when one considers them well, are purely subjective. Their method is to put themselves into the position and person of Christ, and then to attribute to Him what they would have done under like circumstances. In this way, absolutely a priori and acting on philosophical principles which they admit they hold but which they affect to ignore, they proclaim that Christ, according to what they call His real history, was not God and never did anything divine, and that as man He did and said only what they, judging from the time in which he lived, can admit Him to have said or done. 


I hope this sounds familiar to many sems and university students, as you are getting this heresy rammed down your throats, as I did in some theology classes. The last part of this section describes the new Marxists, who would not used violence to overcome, but supplant Catholic definitions, which are objective truth, which subjectivism and material immanence. Thus, Western democracies would be destroyed by a new hegemony of the mind, my second highlighted point here.

This hegemony of the mind is a force against the domination of religion and the Church in the culture. The authority of the Church was to be undermined, slowly but surely, through historical movements of the human mind and activity, changing the culture incrementally, and creating crises to destroy religion. Does this sound familiar?

I grew up in the shadow of Alinksy's "rules for radicals". One of the main rules is never let a crisis go to waste. We have a crisis in the States concerning religious freedom and the Gramscians in power will not let it go to waste. Destroy religion and capitalism will fall naturally--this is the way of Gramsci.  To be continued.

The Death of the American Imagination

Many years ago, I taught a class which the students called the "isms" course. It was really a history of ideas and a history of the councils of the Church, but we had fun defining and identifying all the isms. I am reminded by my stay in Ireland that there is a lack of understanding among Catholics, whether lay or priests, that socialism has been condemned by the Church for over 150 years or so. A Catholic cannot be a socialist, and if one is a Catholic and a socialist, it means that there is a deep misunderstanding of the evils of this political and economic system. The Popes in the past have shown us that the definitions of the individual and the State in a socialist philosophy contradict the Catholic idea of a person, personal rights and responsibilities, and the nexus of freedom and rights-natural law.

I cannot tell you how many conversations I have had here and in England concerning socialism as supposedly being acceptable to the Catholic Faith. Today, I shall quote one of the many Popes who have condemned this tricky and insidious system. Here is Pope Pius XI in Quadragesimo Anno: But what if Socialism has really been so tempered and modified as to the class struggle and private ownership that there is in it no longer anything to be censured on these points? Has it thereby renounced its contradictory nature to the Christian religion? This is the question that holds many minds in suspense. And numerous are the Catholics who, although they clearly understand that Christian principles can never be abandoned or diminished seem to turn their eyes to the Holy See and earnestly beseech Us to decide whether this form of Socialism has so far recovered from false doctrines that it can be accepted without the sacrifice of any Christian principle and in a certain sense be baptized. That We, in keeping with Our fatherly solicitude, may answer their petitions, We make this pronouncement: Whether considered as a doctrine, or an historical fact, or a movement, Socialism, if it remains truly Socialism, even after it has yielded to truth and justice on the points which we have mentioned, cannot be reconciled with the teachings of the Catholic Church because its concept of society itself is utterly foreign to Christian truth.


Here is the rub. The view of society and the view of the person which is held by most Christians in America is out and out socialism. And, the current arguments in the Church over social issues reveal this confusion. One cannot be a good Catholic and a socialist. I am reposting this, as it is crucial to the understanding of the decay of the West. The individual is no longer respected, but only seen as the proverbial cog in the machine. Once a philosophy of the idolization of the State and State power takes over the imagination of a people, there is a momentum which is hard to turn back. A few strong voices, mostly Catholics such as Patrick Buchanan, have tried to show the demise of individual responsibilty connected with the bloating of government power. Sadly, many Catholics have fallen into the socialist trap via bad interpretations of Catholic social justice. I am concerned that the current administration is moving so fast that by next year at this time, we shall literally have lost several main freedoms in the Bill of Rights. The three which are on the line are freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to bear arms. This is not hysteria, but a cold evaluation of the takeover of the American imagination. Our imagination was based on English Common Law, Greek democracy, and the Enlightenment ideals. However, our American imagination was also based on Christianity, the Ten Commandments, Christian natural law philosophy, and the years of human rights justification as taught by the Holy Roman Catholic Church based on Tradition and Scripture. Such rivers of influence are all at odds with socialism. 

One may never do evil so that good may result from it

A painful family event in these days is the marriage outside of a Catholic or a Christian service of sons and daughter of practicing Catholics. Some of my friends have absented themselves from either the so-called marriage, civil marriage of a son or daughter to another person, either baptized or un-baptized. Some parents have gone and witnessed such non-marriages. In light of Valentine's Day, I felt it necessary to help clarify the situation, which I had to deal with in RCIA several times.

Firstly, when one attends a marriage, one is a witness to that marriage, not merely a guest. Especially a parent being present is a statement of agreement and support of the bond. One cannot be in person in silence, as silence is consent.

Secondly, the Church has made some rules in Canon Law much clearer in recent times to help us, the laity, as well as the clergy, sift through these problems.

Thirdly, if one is a baptized Catholic, that person is under Canon Law from baptism until death. There are no exceptions.

Lastly, Canon Law specifies that a Catholic cannot marry an unbaptized person without permission of a Bishop, which will be examined at the end of this entry. This is called "disparity of cult" and is a huge problem.

The motu proprio of Pope Benedict XVI, Omnium in mentem clarified many points, a few which I shall outline here. The publication date was in December of 2009. I was aware of this having been involved in RCIA, which demands that the coordinator asks pertinent questions regarding the marital states of those wanting to come into the Church. Such problems which arise are then sent to the Canon Lawyers in the marriage tribunals or, if the priest in the parish is aware of the laws, to the priest.

Firstly, a person can no longer formally leave the Church, as in a formal apostasy. The ruling clears up private and public apostasy. If one is a lapsed Catholic, one is an apostate and incurs the penalties. Can. 1364 §1. Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 194, §1, n. 2, an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication; in addition, a cleric can be punished with the penalties mentioned in ⇒ can. 1336, §1, nn. 1, 2, and 3.


One must consult a Canon Lawyer, better if he is a priest, if one has been away from the Church, as one may need the special faculties of a priest who can lift such an excommunication, specifically in the case of a woman who has undergone an abortion. Not all priests have this faculty. Confession, of course, is required. By the way, not all parish priests know the laws. The humble ones admit this and get the information. The lay person must be aware of some basic rules, all for the sake of souls. Eternity is a really long time.

Secondly, the fact that Canon Law covers a Catholic from baptism to death means that there is not a period of time when one can claim "immunity". However, the status is such that a person who has contracted a civil marriage may remarry in the Catholic Church after being reconciled. The problems occur if one has been married before in a Protestant ceremony. In most cases, an annulment is required.

Thirdly, the authority to whom one must apply for  marriages is the Bishop, or priests to whom the Bishop has given permission to grant the dispensation for a mixed marriage. "Marriage between two baptized persons, one of whom was baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it after baptism, and the other a member of a Church or ecclesial community not in full communion with the Catholic Church, cannot be celebrated without the express permission of the competent authority". 

Fourthly, it must be discussed whether all Christian marriages in other denominations are truly Christian. A reminder that not all congregations which call themselves "Christian" are. For example, Mormons are not Christian, nor are independent churches which baptize in the Name of Jesus only. The lack of a true Trinitarian Baptism, which constitutes the Sacrament, is missing in both cases. In addition, some Christian denominations now allow such practices as words or practices from Hindu or Native America wedding services to be part of the vows, which would invalidate the Christian marriage, as it is no longer Christian but something New Age. This does happen more than one would think. A parent should not witness such a New Age wedding ceremony.

Lastly, the question of disparity of cult was clarified. Here is the ruling: "A marriage between two persons, one of whom was baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it, and the other of whom is not baptized, is invalid". So, as now it is clear that a parent cannot witness a civil union or a union under disparity of cult, it remains for the individuals involved to try and discuss such matters rationally and calmly, being open to the Church's laws which are for the good of our souls.

May I add, especially in England, where this is more common, that woman are not priests. Anglican orders are not valid. One can be confused on both of these issues, but both Pope Leo XIII and Blessed John Paul II wrote documents clarifying both situations. These are found here and there.

This is more common than one would think. I admire and applaud those parents who have not attended, or rather, witnessed such invalid marriages of their baptized offspring. We cannot be complicit in sin or evil and I am afraid that the English are very bad at these types of decisions, so as not to upset family members, who are entering into sinful lifestyles. We cannot judge the degree of ignorance, but we can teach and be witnesses to the Truth, for the sake of the immortal souls of the sons, daughters and those witnessing. The CCC has an excellent section on formation of conscience. Here is the link. And, a few quotations. ...charity always proceeds by way of respect for one's neighbor and his conscience: "Thus sinning against your brethren and wounding their conscience . . . you sin against Christ."⁵⁷ Therefore "it is right not to . . . do anything that makes your brother stumble."⁵⁸

Faced with a moral choice, conscience can make either a right judgment in accordance with reason and the divine law or, on the contrary, an erroneous judgment that departs from them.

Man is sometimes confronted by situations that make moral judgments less assured and decision difficult. But he must always seriously seek what is right and good and discern the will of God expressed in divine law.

To this purpose, man strives to interpret the data of experience and the signs of the times assisted

May I add that Catholic weddings must occur in a Church. No beach weddings, please. And, lax priests who allow this are just plain wrong.

Sadly, not all priests follow the laws. I had one priest tell me he did not want to be bothered with such things. This attitude and willful ignorance impedes the laity in striving for holiness. And, as a reminder, those who have been in cohabitation, that is living in sin, must go to Confession and live chastely before the wedding. A person who is in mortal sin cannot get grace in the Sacrament of Marriage. I shall pray for all who read this.


I dedicate this to my brave two friends, who did not go to a sibling's and a son's wedding.

With apologies to those who hate Valentine's Day

Are my friends in Kent aware that some of the earliest poetry regarding St. Valentine's Day is from John Gower of Kent? Here is a snippet (1400, after Chaucer) in which the Dame Elizabeth Brews writes to her cousin about his wanting to marry her daughter:
 And, cousin mine, upon Monday is Saint Valentine's Day and every bird chooses himself a mate, and if it like you to come on Thursday night, and make provision that you may abide till then, I trust to God that ye shall speak to my husband and I shall pray that we may bring the matter to a conclusion.


And, we have Chaucer's earlier famous line from The Parlement of Foules (1382):
For this was sent on Seynt Valentyne's day  Whan every foul cometh ther to choose his mate.

I guess the Medievals were not chicken about giving valentines. Sorry, had to say that....Take the poll on the side...Will you give or get a valentine?

Praise God for Those Who Answer His Call-A Hermit and the Extraordinary Form

See my post below from last Sunday. 


Fr. David celebrates a Sung High Mass in the Extraordinary Form in the Church of St. Michael the Archangel, Staholmog, Co. Meath.

Sunday: 1pm, 
First Friday: 11am and 
Holy Days announced: 1pm or 11am where no conflict with parish celebrations.

Santorum and Sharia and Religious Freedom

I had posted this in January, but "it got deleted'. I post it again now, as Santorum is the only candidate who has spoken against the idea that sharia law is incompatible with our Constitution. Good article from Politico here. We must discuss this in the States at all levels of government. It is too bad that his win in Iowa came so late, as it originally caused his campaign to lose momentum. It is picking up now.

"We need to define it and say what it is. And it is evil. Sharia law is incompatible with American jurisprudence and our Constitution."

Santorum, invoking New York Rep. Peter King’s hearing this week on the alleged radicalization of American Muslims, said that the vast majority of Muslims don't want to it either.

"They left because of Sharia law," he said, referring to why he believes Muslim immigrants left their home countries to come to the United States.

Santorum added, "Sharia law is not just a religious code. It is also a governmental code. It happens to be both religious in nature an origin, but it is a civil code. And it is incompatible with the civil code of the United States."

Santorum, a devout Catholic, warned about Sharia at CPAC last month, and his latest comments set up a stark contrast between his world view and President Obama's efforts to court support in the Muslim world.

Santorum had gained momentum coming out against the efforts of the Obama camp to restrict freedom of religion and conscience. This is one reason why his poll numbers are soaring. Romney can't really say much as his Romneycare has the same restrictions of conscience. Catholics need to pay attention to detail.

Another big posting day...so many important issues are coming to a head for us Westerners and Catholics.

Santorum Moves

From Creative Minority Report


Rick Santorum: Frontrunner!

Even when Rick Santorum surprised in Iowa, he was never considered a top contender because he never really budged in the national polls. But there is no doubting that Rick is a contender now after sweeping three states last week.

But now something incredible is happening. There were two national polls yesterday that showed Santorum now second to Romney in one and in a virtual tie for first. But the really interesting thing was the dailies on those polls showed a huge momentum shift toward Rick in the past few days. And now comes this bombshell.

Riding a wave of momentum from his trio of victories on Tuesday Rick Santorum has opened up a wide lead in PPP's newest national poll. He's at 38% to 23% for Mitt Romney, 17% for Newt Gingrich, and 13% for Ron Paul.

A fifteen point lead! Now it is one poll and PPP, but you couple that with the other polls and it is easy to conclude that we have a new frontrunner in this race.

Rick Santorum!

Lies and Political Illusions

Just in case any Americans are stupid enough to accept the so-called compromise, look at this reference given by Margaret on Father Z's blog. Chilling reminder of the deceitfulness surrounding us at this time.

An article entitled “Nothing But Squid Ink” at NRO’s Corner is pointing out that the “proposed regulations” just WENT INTO LAW YESTERDAY. Unchanged. Not even with Obama’s fig leaf compromise included. Money quote from the OFR.gov PDF file (p. 19): “Accordingly, the amendment to the interim final rule with comment period amending 29
CFR 2590.715-2713(a)(1)(iv) which was published in the Federal Register at 76 FR 46621-
46626 on August 3, 2011, is adopted as a final rule without change.” (my emphasis)

Those who have time check out the original source and make comments, please.

On being a soldier of Christ from the CCC

If the Pope called a Crusade, would anybody come?

III. The Effects of Confirmation

1302 It is evident from its celebration that the effect of the sacrament of Confirmation is the full outpouring of the Holy Spirit as once granted to the apostles on the day of Pentecost.

1303 From this fact, Confirmation brings an increase and deepening of baptismal grace:
- it roots us more deeply in the divine filiation which makes us cry, "Abba! Father!";¹¹⁵
- it unites us more firmly to Christ;
- it increases the gifts of the Holy Spirit in us;
- it renders our bond with the Church more perfect;¹¹⁶
- it gives us a special strength of the Holy Spirit to spread and defend the faith by word and action as true witnesses of Christ, to confess the name of Christ boldly, and never to be ashamed of the Cross:¹¹⁷

Recall then that you have received the spiritual seal, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of right judgment and courage, the spirit of knowledge and reverence, the spirit of holy fear in God's presence. Guard what you have received. God the Father has marked you with his sign; Christ the Lord has confirmed you and has placed his pledge, the Spirit, in your hearts.¹¹⁸

1304 Like Baptism which it completes, Confirmation is given only once, for it too imprints on the soul an indelible spiritual mark, the "character," which is the sign that Jesus Christ has marked a Christian with the seal of his Spirit by clothing him with power from on high so that he may be his witness.¹¹⁹

1305 This "character" perfects the common priesthood of the faithful, received in Baptism, and "the confirmed person receives the power to profess faith in Christ publicly and as it were officially (quasi ex officio)."¹²⁰

Do we need reminders of our Confirmation duties and gifts? It is not an option for a confirmed Catholic to sit on the fence, do nothing, or worse, chose error over Truth.

We have power, and can you imagine for one moment what a different world it would be if all the confirmed Catholics lived the full life of grace, never compromised, and were soldiers for Christ in the world? 

On Purgatory and Living in the Darkness of Our Individualism

Once St. Macarius of Egypt found a human skull while walking in the desert. When Abba Macarius touched the skull with a palm branch, a voice came from the skull. When the elder asked, "Who are you?," the skull answered, "I was a pagan priest and lived in this place. Abba Macarius, have pity on us who are in eternal torment, and pray for us, for your prayer brings us comfort." The elder asked, "What comfort comes to you from my prayers?" The skull answered, "When you pray for us, light appears, and we begin to see one another."

Do not be immersed in the worldly....

When is grace with us? When we do not offend this benefaction, do not despise this gift. Who then in offending this grace can preserve it and not be deprived of it? God has granted thee absolution of sins, how then can a good mood or action of the Spirit abide with thee, if thou dost not retain it by good deeds? The cause of all good things lies in the grace of the Spirit always abiding with us. It leads us to every good thing, and when it leaves us, we remain abandoned and we perish. Let us not leave it! It depends on us whether it remains with us or not. It remains when we take care for the heavenly; it leaves when we are immersed in the worldly." St. John Chrysostom

A Series on Pascendi Dominici Gregis: Part One

Every time I read the great Encyclical, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, by Pope St. Pius X, I am amazed at how prophetic it was and how timely it is today. I would like to quote a few sections which apply directly to the politics of several nations in the West and within the Church

We make no delay in this matter is rendered necessary especially by the fact that the partisans of error are to be sought not only among the Church's open enemies; they lie hid, a thing to be deeply deplored and feared, in her very bosom and heart, and are the more mischievous, the less conspicuously they appear. We allude, Venerable Brethren, to many who belong to the Catholic laity, nay, and this is far more lamentable, to the ranks of the priesthood itself, who, feigning a love for the Church, lacking the firm protection of philosophy and theology, nay more, thoroughly imbued with the poisonous doctrines taught by the enemies of the Church, and lost to all sense of modesty, vaunt themselves as reformers of the Church; and, forming more boldly into line of attack, assail all that is most sacred in the work of Christ, not sparing even the person of the Divine Redeemer, whom, with sacrilegious daring, they reduce to a simple, mere man.

In the recent past, Pope Benedict stated that the grave problems involved enemies within the Church. These are those who do not obey the Teaching Magisterium of the Church in matters of correctly forming their consciences to conform to Tradition and Revelation, as in the matters of contraception and abortion.

The saintly Pope Pius X writes that the Modernists,  are wont to display a certain contempt for Catholic doctrines, or the Holy Fathers, for the Ecumenical Councils, for the ecclesiastical magisterium; and should they be rebuked for this, they complain that they are being deprived of their liberty. Lastly, guided by the theory that faith must be subject to science, they continuously and openly criticise the Church because of her sheer obstinacy in refusing to submit and accommodate her dogmas to the opinions of philosophy; while they, on their side, after having blotted out the old theology, endeavour to introduce a new theology which shall follow the vagaries of their philosophers.

We can see this in the so-called pro-choice Catholic politicians, or in the Catholics who maintain that civil unions for homosexuals do not contradict either natural law or the Church's teaching. And, the brilliant Pope continues, Concerning immanence it is not easy to determine what Modernists mean by it, for their own opinions on the subject vary. Some understand it in the sense that God working in man is more intimately present in him than man is in even himself, and this conception, if properly understood, is free from reproach. Others hold that the divine action is one with the action of nature, as the action of the first cause is one with the action of the secondary cause, and this would destroy the supernatural order. Others, finally, explain it in a way which savours of pantheism and this, in truth, is the sense which tallies best with the rest of their doctrines.

This is the great error in the thinking of the leaders in the United States, who contradict natural law on the basis that somehow, God is working in some sort of false progressivism (the Star-Trek heresy) which holds that we, in 2012, are smarter and holier than the 2,000 years of Christians who have gone before us. Arrogance stands firm against the Church. Of course, when natural law is ignored or twisted into some type of relativism, the supernatural order in a nation erodes and, finally, is destroyed. We have had plenty of warning, over a hundred years, in fact, to get ready for the onslaught on religious freedoms we see today. This encroachment of Modernism did not suddenly happen. The date of this Encyclical is 1907.

The prophetic nature of this document will even more clearly be seen in my second part which I shall post in a day or two, on the nature of Church and State relations. But, look carefully at the inspiration in this section: God was trying to get our attention 105 years ago. Who was paying attention?

For we are living in an age when the sense of liberty has reached its fullest development, and when the public conscience has in the civil order introduced popular government. Now there are not two consciences in man, any more than there are two lives. It is for the ecclesiastical authority, therefore, to shape itself to democratic forms, unless it wishes to provoke and foment an intestine conflict in the consciences of mankind. The penalty of refusal is disaster. For it is madness to think that the sentiment of liberty, as it is now spread abroad, can surrender. Were it forcibly confined and held in bonds, terrible would be its outburst, sweeping away at once both Church and religion. Such is the situation for the Modernists, and their one great anxiety is, in consequence, to find a way of conciliation between the authority of the Church and the liberty of believers.

More to come...

On the Coming of St. Valentine's Day

Father Z, on his wonderful blog, is correctly full of righteous anger and disgust concerning Valentine Day's commercial icky and stupid promotions. I, for one, want to use the upcoming day to thank Jesus, the Second Son of the Blessed Trinity for dying and rising to set me free from sin and eternal death. Thank you, God, for being Love. May the real spirit of St. Valentine's Day be in our hearts and minds. And, here is the link to Pope Benedict XVI's encyclical, Deus Caritas Est as a little valentine for all on the blog-a link and some photos of beautiful English roses.

For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in him, may not perish, but may have life everlasting. John 3:16

Assassination Plot of Pope Hits Press, but Is It True?

The past two weeks, I feel like we have been living in a chapter of Lord of the World, by Robert Hugh Benson. Now, to top off the attacks on the Catholic Church in America and Ireland, a leading cardinal has revealed a plot to kill Pope Benedict XVI to the Vatican. An investigation may have occurred in the Vatican.

In today's Telegraph, Nick Squires scoops Cardinal Paolo Romeo's claims of an assassination plot. A believable source had led to a serious inquiry, at least on the part of the Telegraph. Note that:

The extraordinary comments were written up in a top-secret report, dated Dec 30, 2011, and delivered to the Pope by a senior cardinal, Dario Castrillon Hoyos, a Colombian, in January.


Now, there is denial all around. But, Squire writes that: Cardinal Romeo also named Benedict's XVI likely successor as Cardinal Angelo Scola, the archbishop of Milan – meaning the papacy would return to an Italian after the German Benedict and his Polish predecessor, John Paul II.

He allegedly told his contacts in China that Pope Benedict could not stand Tarcisio Bertone, his Secretary of State and the Vatican's second most senior figure, amid reports of bitter power struggles going on within the Holy See.

However, the Vatican is now denying such a report or investigation. 

The Vatican's spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi, said the report was "so incredible that we cannot comment on it".

Zenit on the Boko Haram

I usually do not post this much (7th post today), but here is an interesting development. Zenit has a critical report on Boko Haram, mentioned on this blog before, the violent Islamist group, the name which translates, "Western Education is Evil". The fact that this media center from Rome is taking a lead in condemning such violence and drawing attention to the persecution of Catholics is a good. Here is the entire article.

EWTN Joins List of Lawsuits Against Administration

Catholic media network EWTN sued the federal government Feb. 9, challenging the Obama administration's rule requiring many religious ministries to subsidize contraception and sterilization in their health plans.

“We had no other option but to take this to the courts,” EWTN President and CEO Michael Warsaw said in an announcement about the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court on Wednesday. “There is no question that this mandate violates our First Amendment rights.”

“Under the HHS mandate, EWTN is being forced by the government to make a choice,” Warsaw explained. “Either we provide employees coverage for contraception, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs and violate our conscience or offer our employees and their families no health insurance coverage at all. Neither of those choices is acceptable.”

Catholic News Agency has reported and the above is part of the article found here

Things are heating up in the States, thank God.

LIfeSiteNews Article on Father Pavone and PFL Lawsuit against POTUS and Administration

Priests for Life sues Obama administration over contraception mandate

Ben Johnson

Thu Feb 09 18:48 EST

Abortion

STATEN ISLAND, NEW YORK, February 9, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) - Despite the fact that his organization is named “Priests for Life” and its national director is an ordained clergyman, Fr. Frank Pavone says the pro-life Catholic group does not qualify for the Obama administration’s narrow definition of a religious organization. Thus, the organization would be forced to pay for all contraception, including abortfacient drugs, under Obama’s controversial birth control mandate.

This morning, the New York-based pro-life group filed suit against the Obama administration, saying the new mandate violates its First Amendment rights.

The lawsuit, filed in California court, seeks injunctive relief from the HHS rules.

Since Priests for Life is a private association registered as an independent 501(c)(3) non-profit educational corporation, it does not qualify for the Department of Health and Human Services religious exemption - which covers only churches and religious orders. A press release from the organization says it “therefore must comply with these conscience-violating mandates, decrees, and punitive measures.”

Priests for Life says it must begin implementing the contraceptive rule by this August. Religious institutions other than churches have until August 2013 to comply.

“We don’t need a year, nor do we need a moment, to determine what we are going to do, or to ‘adapt’ to the rule,” Fr. Pavone said. “The rule is unjust. You don’t adapt to injustice; you oppose it.”

For legal assistance, the organization turned to Charles LiMandri, a San Diego-based civil rights lawyer who helped save California’s Mt. Soledad Cross monument from an ACLU lawsuit and was general counsel during the Proposition 8 campaign. “This is the first time in history any administration has used brute force to compel someone to violate his conscience or moral convictions,” LaMandri said. “It’s also antithetical to the core American principles of religious liberty and freedom from invasions of privacy.”

The plaintiff is ready to see the case go all the way to the Supreme Court, if necessary.

Despite media chatter about how the mandate will play in the 2012 election, Fr. Pavone said the issue can no longer be seen as “just a partisan political football.”

“It’s unthinkable that President Obama would force Americans of any faith to violate their consciences.” he said. “Yet here he is, arrogantly imposing these regulations that clearly discriminate against Catholics and all Christians, as well as people of any faith who believe in the sanctity of innocent human life. This has clearly become a human rights case.”

Fr. Frank Pavone added, “Religious freedom is not a right just of religious groups; it’s a right of every American.”

On Liberty of Conscience by Pope Leo XIII--June 20, 1888

Here is a quotation from the great Pope Leo XIII from his work On the Nature of Human Liberty, Libertas Praestantissimum. This work applies to the argument for religious freedom of conscience going on in the States. If this question is not resolved in favor of the protection of religion by the Constitution, the entire Western World is in danger, not just America. The time for action, prayer and fasting is now. If Catholics do not respond to the seriousness of this threat, we shall face further persecution. The impetus for change gathers support against the Church, as those fallen away Catholics and those who disagree with the Church, undermine freedom.

Another liberty is widely advocated, namely, liberty of conscience. If by this is meant that everyone may, as he chooses, worship God or not, it is sufficiently refuted by the arguments already adduced. But it may also be taken to mean that every man in the State may follow the will of God and, from a consciousness of duty and free from every obstacle, obey His commands. This, indeed, is true liberty, a liberty worthy of the sons of God, which nobly maintains the dignity of man and is stronger than all violence or wrong -- a liberty which the Church has always desired and held most dear. This is the kind of liberty the Apostles claimed for themselves with intrepid constancy, which the apologists of Christianity confirmed by their writings, and which the martyrs in vast numbers consecrated by their blood. And deservedly so; for this Christian liberty bears witness to the absolute and most just dominion of God over man, and to the chief and supreme duty of man toward God. It has nothing in common with a seditious and rebellious mind; and in no tittle derogates from obedience to public authority; for the right to command and to require obedience exists only so far as it is in accordance with the authority of God, and is within the measure that He has laid down. But when anything is commanded which is plainly at variance with the will of God, there is a wide departure from this Divinely constituted order, and at the same time a direct conflict with Divine authority; therefore, it is right not to obey.










 

Thoughts on a New Knighthood --an apt quotation from Archbishop Chaput

Guarantees of religious freedom are only as strong as the social consensus that supports them.

Americans have always taken their religious freedom for granted. Religious faith has always played a major role in our public life, including debate about public policy and law. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution explicitly guarantees this freedom. But that guarantee and its application are subject to lawmakers and the interpretation of courts. And lawmakers and courts increasingly attack religious liberty, undermine rights of conscience, and force references to God out of our public square. This shift in our culture is made worse by mass media that, in general, have little understanding of religious faith and are often openly hostile. As religious practice softens in the United States over the next few decades, the consensus for religious freedom may easily decline. And that has very big implications for the life of faithful Catholics in this country.

Entire address may be found here.

By Most Reverend Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., Archbishop of Denver, Colorado, USA

An address delivered on 25 October 2010 to Catholic Cadets at the United States Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colorado

St. Scholastica and the Gift of Spiritual Conversation: for Chris, Carole, Edmund, David, Bill, Bernie, Zach, William...

Be united in your convictions and united in your love, with a common purpose and a common mind. There must be no competition among you, no conceit; but everybody is to be self-effacing. Always consider the other person to be better than yourself, so that nobody thinks of his own interests first but everybody thinks of other people’s interests instead.  Philippians 2:2-4  Terce  modern version

Today is the Feast Day of St. Scholastica. I am reminded that she called down the storm to keep her brother at her monastery so she could talk with him of God. God answered her prayer because she loved. Her trust in God seemed to have superseded that of her famous brother, St. Benedict  who later saw her soul like a dove going up to heaven, a sign of her passing.

That siblings are both great saints in the Church is not unusual, especially among nuns and monks. St, Etheldreda, the patron of this blog, had a huge extended and immediate family of saints. One may ask why we have not seen this is modern times? Could it be that families are not taught mutual love and respect in our sad age of individualism? Susie has a television and computer in her room and Buddy has the same in his room. They both have cell phones, the Internet and subscriptions to Netflix. They do not need to talk to each other as Benedict and Scholastica did quite well. The art of conversation, either on secular or religious subjects is a lost art. My best friends and I can discuss for hours Scripture, the history of the Church, Church music, architecture, the Latin Mass, feasts days, movable feasts, saints, and the spiritual journey, We can discuss prayer, prayer intentions, the Indwelling of the Trinity, religious freedom of conscience and vestments, all things I have discussed with various friends in the past week or ten days.

So, why is spiritual conversation a lost art? Priorities. Just as Scholastica had to call on God to send a storm to keep her brother with her so she could talk with him before dying, so people choose what is important in their lives. Television or talking, computer or conversation, eating again or engaging, sports or spirituality, gaming or Godliness?  Scholastica's prayer was answered because God rewarded her choice of priorities. Spiritual conversations are gifts from God.