On making boys into men

As a strong female with character, and growing up in a family and extended family of mostly boys, I have been around young men and older for years and years. I have taught all boy classes in the past at several schools and colleges. I like being with men, as I am a healthy woman, with a brain. However, at this point in history, many of my friends, who are single like I am, are asking, where are the men? What I am concerned about is that now we have in education boys teaching boys, rather than men teaching boys. What do I mean?

To be an adult human being who is male can be quite a challenge in the overly feminized Catholic Church and in a society which has systematically undermined the role of the father in marriage and the role of the masculine man in a culture of which eschews leadership.

The subject is much more complicated than what I can cover here in a short post, but I want to highlight a few points. As I have written on this before, especially in my previous blog, I can point to some of the same problems which were obvious in 2007.

That men are afraid to be men, as there is so much criticism about real men, I can understand. Many are put down by either females, who are feminists, for being too patriarchal, or for being less than "sensitive" or "vulnerable".  That men are hesitant to be like old-fashioned, strong men, is a given. How can we encourage those who naturally are leaders and want to be leaders in a family or relationship. These good men need to be encouraged.

From another point of view, men not only to be encouraged, but trained. How we train boys to be men is not obvious anymore. One way is to give young men responsibility at an early age, with rules, and let them do hard things. As one who has raised a boy to be a good and responsible young man, I can say that discipline and consistency are key. Boys are actually somewhat easy to raise if a parent is clear and fair; that is, if boundaries and rules are taught within a framework of Christianity.

On top of discipline and consequences, one must train a young man in practical skills, even if later on he chooses a profession, such as a doctor or lawyer. Learning to do basic things gives a young man confidence and a sense of self.  A parent must have a set of chores and set guidelines and consequences for the lack of fulfillment of such chores. Many mothers and even fathers over protect their children by not letting them do things, such as sailing, cooking, climbing, camping, fishing, and other skills in addition to sports. Sports are good training for leadership skills, but not the only ones. Boys learn from other boys. I think, for example, that the Boy Scouts in England and in France have proved to be excellent training grounds for young boys learning life-skills.

In the overly feminized world of academia, some of the relationships which occur and some of the courses which are offered now exclude men from serious consideration. The entire idea gender-studies has created a marginalization of men. In my previous faculty position, the vast majority of instructors were women. New appointments of young academics were most likely women. But, that is another question to consider in another post. The real point is that more girls are getting degrees than men, and the statistics show that more minority girls are getting exams than even white boys. This creates a leadership problem. The leaders are going to be the women who have higher education than the men.

Boys must be given opportunities for leadership skills to develop. The mixture of girls and boys on teams does not help, as we all know that boys take a back step to girls in those circumstances. One can see that the parishes with altar girls, which is the one of the worst decisions of the former Pope. Boys do not want to be in groups with girls at a certain age and should not be. To be continued..

If there was a war, would anybody come....?

We have a generation of Americans and possibly British and even Irish youth who may not ever volunteer to fight a war. Why I mention this is that the Catholic Church has held a competent theory of  "just war" throughout the ages, which clarifies the use of violence for certain reasons. Before going into some of those reasons, I would like to note that the neo-pacifists are not merely against a particular war, such as that in Afghanistan, but are against all wars. This has never been the Catholic position on war; that is, that all wars must be prohibited and only pacifism allow to the Christian.

Why some youth would never fight is that they have lost any type of good or holy allegiance to anything. If one has no fidelity either to the Catholic religion, or to a particular nation, or people, one would not defend either a populace or land.

What is lacking is the strong commitment  which forms a person's soul into wanting to defend righteousness. If a young man, especially a single man, has no alliance to any person or place, he is most likely not to be patriotic either. I suggest that a socialist and communist political philosophies undermines healthy patriotism, which is a minor virtue in Catholic teaching.

However, the Catholic Church, and to Aquinas, there are certain rules for war which are legitimate. There are rules for engagement. One can check the Catechism for these points:

• the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
• all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
• there must be serious prospects of success;
• the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power as well as the precision of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

It is important for students, even in home schooling, to learn these guidelines and the more complicated issues from Aquinas. The main reasons for this teaching, which some had a long time ago, basically comes down to a few succinct points. The first point is that there has to be a just cause, that is, like someone invading one's country. Defense is a reason which would be a just cause. The second point is that there must be a proper authority. Why this is important is that only nations which are sovereign can represent the people. Groups within a country cannot represent a people, such as in Palestine, for example, which is not a nation, but a geographical area of several groups of people. Third, the intention must be just, again such as defense. A pre-emptive war is never just, such as the recent wars in the Middle East. Such differentiation in making important distinctions in deciding when a war is actually just may seem foolish or like casuistry to some, but the rule of law demands such clarity. In a country which is ruled by law, such decisions should be made in retrospect, rationally, and not be mere reactions to something. Four, there must be some reason for absolute surety of success. This means that a war should not be started if it cannot be finished, or done with the possibility of a new and reasonable governance. Proportionality is the next point, number five. This means that the amount of resources and violence used must be in proportion to what is necessary and not overly so. For example, in the Battles of Vienna and Lepanto, many soldiers and sailors were necessary to stop the take-over of Europe by the Muslims. The entire continent was praying and fasting as well. The last point, six, is last resort, which means that all diplomatic resources have failed.

In addition to the above, Christ, as both St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas state, never condemned either war or the role of the soldier. In fact, he told soldiers how to behave fairly and not complain about their pay. In addition, when Christ returns in the Second Coming, He is pictured with a sword in Revelation, and with an army. 

There is a modern tendency for the sin of presumption; that is, that God will take care of one if one merely trusts in Him, and that there will be no future trials, wars, or even martyrdom. This is nonsense and irrational interpretations of Scriptures. It is the modern tendencies towards pacifism and quietism which deny that war is ever a necessity or even a possibility for Christians. However, it is. Nations must be concerned about justice and the rule of law, which sadly are both ignored. There can even be a case made for war in order to preserve religious freedoms and rights. To be continued...

Forgive us as we forgive those who sin against us....a repeat posting as it is necessary

I repeat this January post, as after three months, the Republicans I have met continually hate the British for past sins against the Church, forgetting that the Catholics in Britain also were painfully persecuted. That Irish Catholics constantly, and I mean daily, if not weekly, brought up the Troubles to me, is a proof of a lack of forgiveness on their part. This must end. Do they not realize that they are being formed by their hatred? "Great hatred in a small place..." William Butler Yeats. Here is the repeat post.


Last night in Londonderry, two Republican bombs were exploded. People in the area were evacuated quickly. This was not the headline in this morning's issue of the Irish Times online, but in the Wall Street Journal.

In the month I have been here, I have, almost daily, heard people, including women, go on about British occupation. I am sick of hearing about The Troubles. I am sick of the unforgiveness among Catholics, who like the "moderate" Muslims, do not condemn sectarian violence. Ireland is rotting from the inside out from hatred, prejudice and unforgiveness.

I lost family in both world wars. My grandmother's family, in what is now the Czech Republic, disappeared and their houses and land, and some were wealthy, confiscated by, first the Germans and then, the Russians. We assume many members of the family, most politically active, perished in the Holocaust. Some of my ancestors were Jews from Bratislava. We never knew what happened. I do not hate Germans and I do not hate Russians. I have personally experienced betrayal from someone I thought was my best friend, not once, but more than once. I forgave. I had to do so, as I was commanded by God to forgive. If we are obedient, we forgive.

I am reminded of the anime Gankutsuou: The Count of Monte Cristo. It is a powerful story based on the Dumas novel of hatred and revenge. It is terrifying. It is "true". In the anime version, the Count is overtaken by a demon. But, he already had some-the demons of revenge and unforgiveness. Thankfully, there is redemption at the end. That is what we desire, redemption, not revenge.

Four members of my family were abused by a priest for years. These family members never sued, and are still Catholic and raised their children Catholic. They forgave. They exhibit heroic virtue, as we all must.

Forgiveness is the necessity of all Catholics, all Christians, all Jews. Those who do not forgive will not see the Face of God. Matthew 6:15 But if you will not forgive men, neither will your Father forgive you your offences.

God said that. He means it. The evil of unforgiveness is that we become God. We play God. Here is the Count in the anime speaking:

Count of Monte Cristo: No show is as captivating as the death of a human being.

Count of Monte Cristo: Is it not as though we have become God?

I call this Evil. Like Lucifer, the Count was playing God.

Living among a people who dwell in unforgiveness is something I could not do for any length of time. I have never met, in modern times, people more prejudice than the Irish Republicans, and I lived in Missouri and Mississippi. The language of hate is in the speech like a reoccurring motif in poetry-except that it is deadly to those who speak it. Forgiveness creates healing. Forgiveness opens the door for reconciliation. It does not matter what or who on "the other side" do or not do. The power of forgiveness is in our hearts to use or not to use. Politicians here use the language of hate towards the Church, as the land is full of hatred. The beauty of Ireland is hidden in the fog of unforgiveness.

On the radicals who want the Church to sell everything...

OK, because this has come up too many times, I need to write about it. There are young people and old alike that think the Church is extremely wealthy and that all the lands, including the Vatican, should be sold and the money given to the poor. There are some who do not think the bishops should wear mitres or have rings with precious or even semi-precious stones.

Well, where do I start? First, the Institutional Church is a physical Church and not the "invisible Church", a phrase I referred to before as heretical, on this blog. Christ is Man and God and He created a hierarchical structure which is real, one can smell, touch, see, etc.

We are physical and spiritual entities. We are human.

Second, the Church is not wealthy. Having property does not make one a wealthy person, contrary to popular belief. In fact, the upkeep of property can positively be a drain on resources and cash.

Third, the aesthetically real experience frequently leads us to God, and God deserves the best we can offer of art and architecture. Only Puritans, or Calvinists, to be exact, disdain the Beautiful. God is Beauty. Our small, pedestrian minds and hearts should be raised up to God through Beauty. See my long January posting on this fact. http://supertradmum-etheldredasplace.blogspot.com/2012/01/thoughts-on-beauty-and-tridentine-mass.html

Fourth, Christ Himself said the poor are always with us, period, as they are our responsibility. However, ghd poor are not an institutional problem. That is socialism. We are to take care of our brothers and sisters in Christ, not an institution. And, Catholics fail on this point miserably. In fact, the very people who have been criticizing the Pope or the bishops for their miters and such, are the ones who do not involve themselves on a daily basis with the poor. God wants us all to respond in the best way we can, but to loudly proclaim that the Church should divest itself of religious symbols which include the signs of the Church Triumphant, is just plain heresy.

I can partly understand this false argument when young people who are over-zealous see the Church as some sort of treasure house of riches, but for older, middle-aged persons to go on about this seems blatantly stupid.

In the French countryside

Oh my goodness, but the French countryside is beautiful. I kept hearing about how green Ireland was and is, but here, in the Diocese of Lucon, the grass is just as green and the birds as plentiful. A monastery was established in this area of the Vendee as early as the seventh century, but the diocese dates to the fourteenth.  The present Bishop is Alain Castet and he has an excellent reputation. The Vendee is a lovely, agricultural area, as well as vacation spot. One has a sense of history here, but as in other places in France, the Catholic history has been marked with terrible persecution. That the State is in control even of some areas which Americans would demand a separation of Church and State is here obvious.

More tomorrow....

Where are the European Conservative Catholics?

For those who want more political postings, I would like to mention that there is a lot of self-deceit in the in Catholic populations of at least three islands, Ireland, England and Malta, as to the lack of true conservationism among even traditional Catholics. I find this odd, but have met it in the United States, albeit not recently, as the lines are being drawn in the sand, as it were, concerning morality vs. immorality and religious rights vs. tyranny in the States. In the small but significantly important Catholic communities of the islands mentioned, the truly conservative and "right" side of the aisle. Why the conservatives in Great Britain, for example, are pro-civil union for gays and also pro-abortion proves the lack of a grass-roots Catholic movement. That so many of the traditional Catholics I met at two Latin Masses express support for the socialist agenda in Ireland and Malta was an amazing contradiction of positions.

The schizophrenia of morals, religious practice and politics highlights the successful infiltration of Marxist ideals in Europe at a whole. Although, technically, the Communist party is outlawed in some nations, the agendas have been adopted by the so-called conservative Catholics. The recent discussions, first in Ireland, about the dissolution of Catholic public education, and the push for the "right-to die" by the conservative government in Great Britain indicate a capitulation of conservative values. Why this has happened is partly these following reasons:

One, the lack of education, especially classical education, has led to a few generations of political "sheep", that is, Catholics who cannot and do not think through the issues. The lack of logic in the curriculum, for example, means that Catholics cannot see beyond the propaganda or the popular message to the roots of political posturing.

Second, the lack of catechesis for at least three generations in Ireland, Great Britain and Malta, means that Catholic adults simply do not know their faith. None I have met had ever heard of the Popes' long battle in encyclicals and other teachings against socialism. One wonders what they have been taught until one meets the teachers, who themselves, are not teaching Catholic social doctrine, but the doctrine of Marx.

Third, Catholics are lazy. No offense, but until one decides to BE a Catholic adult and take responsibility for one's faith, (see my earlier blog in January), and stop blaming bad priests or the lack of homilies, one remains childish and sheep-like, easily led by those who are more clever and more persistent in their agendas.

Four, and this is the sad truth, too much socialism has come out of Rome, not at the level of the Papacy, but through other documents, as we saw last Autumn. This infiltration of socialist, even communist ideals, pollutes the untrained mind and undermines the authority of the Papacy.

Five, there is a lack of lay leadership in the Catholic Church, Catholic politicians who stand up for Catholic, that is natural law and universal values.

The grass-roots movements in the States,and the happy coalition of the Evangelicals and Catholics can possibly change even the presidency. That Catholics are involved in the pro-life political movements and the anti-homosexual agendas in the States points to adult understanding of the Faith. Sadly, that is missing here.

Goodbye to Ireland and the Nightingale

Well, as I am not Celtic in any of my genes, I suppose I lack the necessary sentiments about leaving Ireland. I shall miss some excellent friends I met, Kathleen, Seamus, Father David Jones, Dave and others. However, I would not recommend a visit in the winter! I have lived in Alaska and in Alberta, and Ireland feels colder. Partly, the lack of central heating in many of the houses and the dampness accounts for some of the cold, but the Irish are, simply, hardier than I am. They can take it.

I wish them all well. Many years ago, I took two classes, one on Irish Drama and one on Irish Poetry. Here is a poem which sums up my overall view of the three month visit. From Seamus Heaney--

A Dog was Crying Tonight in Wicklow Also


When human beings found out about death
They sent the dog to Chukwa with a message:
They wanted to be let back to the house of life.
They didn’t want to end up lost forever
Like burnt wood disappearing into smoke
Or ashes that get blown away to nothing.
Instead, they saw their souls in a flock at twilight
Cawing and headed back for the same old roosts
And the same bright airs and wing-stretchings each morning.
Death would be like a night spent in the wood:
At first light they’d be back in the house of life.
(The dog was meant to tell all this to Chukwu)

But death and human beings took second place
When he trotted off the path and started barking
At another dog in broad daylight just barking
Back at him from the far bank of a river.

And that is how the toad reached Chukwu first,
The toad who’d overheard in the beginning
What the dog was meant to tell. “Human beings, ‘ he said
(And here the toad was trusted absolutely),
“Human beings want death to last forever.’

Then Chukwu saw the people’s souls in birds
Coming towards him like black spots off the sunset
To a place where there would be neither roosts nor trees
Nor any way back to the house of life.
And his mind reddened and darkened all at once
And nothing that the dog would tell him later
Could change that vision. Great chiefs and great loves
In obliterated light, the toad in mud,
The dog crying out all night behind the corpse house.

I feel that it is a country "half in love with easeful Death", as Keats wrote in his great Ode to a Nightingale. In fact, a Nightingale was singing on a line at dusk only a few feet away from me. It came out of the hedge by the walk, by the field of sheep and one rabbit, and sang its amazing song. If you have never heard a Nightingale, the song is like a series of trills and whistles and is quite loud. I have heard these in England as well, years ago. Goodbye for now, Nightingale.

Oliver Plunkett II

The Examination of Edward Fitzharris. The Arraignment and Please of Edward Fitzharris. The Tryal and Condemnation of Sr. Oliver Plunket. An Answer to the Protestation of the Nineteen Lords Against the Rejecting of the Impeachment of Mr. Fitzharris.

I am holding in my hands the original 1681 book, bound in white leather, as it was once presented to a Pope, given by Cardinal Conway to Msgr. John Hanly, the Postulator of the Cause of St. Oliver Plunkett, on 21 June 1976. I am honored and humbled to be able to see, old and use this book.

This book, published in1681, in London, for Thomas Fox, at the Sign of the Angel in Westminster-hall, was printed by the order of the House of Commons. The Speaker of the House W. Williams ordered and approved the printing. It is made up of sections, printed at different times.

It is a treasure of Catholic history. I shall lightly refer to the section on Edw. Fitzharris and the Popish Plot, returning to that in another blog, as I want to concentrate on the section relating to St. Oliver Plunket, here spelled with one t.

That Edward Fizharris was accused of attempting to kill the King, along with armies from Holland, Flanders, France and Italy, and connected with the murder of Sir Edmund Bury-Godfrey, along with so-called conpiracy involving the Duke of York and a certain Father Bedingfield is set out. Another printing from the Spring Term of 1681 carries on the trial proceedings, which obviously fall short of any fair trial as determined by Magna Carta, and this is seen in the trial of St Oliver Plunkett. There are no attempts at real information. The entire trial is printed, with all the notes regarding the Jury and all the dialogues. That the jury was “stacked” with anti-Catholics and that the Lord Chief Justice, and the witnesses convicted a man of treason for being a Catholic is clear. This sets the stage for the non-trial judgement of St. Oliver Plunket. Despite the lack of justice, I am impressed with the details of the trial proceedings and the minutiae of the notes, which were taken down verbatim by hand and then printed into the book I know have before me.

The section on the Tryal and Condemnation of Fitz-Harris and Dr Oliver Plunket, were printed for Francis Tyton and Thomas Basset, Booksellers in Fleetstreet, in 1681. Francis Pemberton, the Lord Chief Justice (L. C. J. below) appointed these printers.The evidence of two witnesses were enough to have a person condemned. What one had to do was discredit those witnesses. But, of course, the condemnation was purely because of this part of the trial. Here are some of the notes regarding the witnesses.

Mr. Serj Jefferies. :What Religion is Mr. Fitz-Harris of?

Mr. Everard: he was always looked upon to be a Papist?

Fitz-Harris: When did you see me at Mass?

Mr. Att. Gen. Hath he not owned himself so?

Mr. Everard. He hath owned himsrlf at several times to be a Papist.

And so on...

With the Tryal of Dr Oliver Plunket, the sham is more obvious. The saint was arraigned on May 3, 1681 “for High-Treason, for endeavouring and compassing the Kings Death, and to levy War in Ireland, and to alter the Religion there, and to introduce a Forreign power.”

That the saint could not get witnesses from Ireland because of bad sea winds did not seem to interfere with the puppet show. Plunket defended himself, having excellent legal training in Rome. His great intelligence is seen in the transcript of the trial, and one must remember that he had been imprisoned in Ireland and in England for nineteen months before this trial. The Popish Plot for which Plunkett was supposedly guilty saw the execution of Lord Staffor, on of the five Catholic lords who had been imprisoned in the Tower in connection with the plot. He was 85 when executed and was Cardinal Howard's uncle, the family which helped Oliver Plunkett in prison. That the Protestant were allowed to hold sway over such false proceedings showed the political need for Charles II,(to whom Oliver Plunkett had written a plea or petition of freedom), to prove his loyalty to the Church of England, and Parliament. The hypocrisy of the times may be highlighted in the fact that his own queen, Catherine of Branganza, had as many as twenty chaplains housed in her palace, who she allowed and encouraged, to work in London and the surrounding areas at night, while they slept most of the day.

Plunket asked for a deferral of the trial for ten days to allow his witnesses, but he was denied.

The details of the trial and the so-called veracity of the two witnesses make for interesting but frustrating reading, as one knows the outcome. I shall skip to the end of the trial and the conversation between Plunket and the Lord Chief Justice.

L.C. J. Look you, Mr. Plunket, You have been here indicted of a very great and hainous Crime, the great and most hainous of all Crimes, and that is, High Treason; and truly yours is a Treason of the highest Nature, 'tis a Treason in truth against God and your King, and the Countrey where you lived. You have done as musch as you could to dishonor God in this Cafe; for the bottom of your Treason was, your setting up your false Religion, than which, there is not any thing more displeasing to God, and more pernicious to Mankind in the world. A Religion that is ten times worse than all the heathenish Superstitions, the most dishonorable and derogatory to God and his Glory of all Religions or pretended Religions, whatsoever, for it undertakes to dispense with Gods Laws, and to pardon the breach of them. So that certainly a greater Crime there cannot be committed against God, than for a man to endeavour the Propagation of that Religion....”

a bit later, after St. Oliver Plunkett had pointed out legal errors in the trial, he stated:

“God Almighty bless your Lordship. And now my Lord, as I am a dead Man to this World, and as I hope for Mercy in the other World, I was never guilty of any of the Treasons laid to my Charge, as you will hear in time; and my Character you may receive from my Lord

Chancellor of Ireland, my Lord Berkley, my Lord, Essex and the Duke of Ormond.

Then the Keeper took away his Prisoner, and upon Friday the first of July, he was executed according to the Sentence. FINIS.

In a letter, his last, to Mr. Michael Plunkett, written on June 16, 1681, the saint wrote:

On the 8^th of this month I was put on trial, accused of trying to bring in the Catholic religion, of having seventy thousand men ready for a rebellion, of having collected money for them, of having surveyed all the fortresses and ports in Ireland, and of having assigned the port of Carlingford for a landing of the French. I insisted that I should have time to bring my witnesses from Ireland, but in vain.

I objected that a crime alleged to have been committed in Ireland ought to be tried there also, and that the jury of twelve should be taken from there so that the character of the persons involved in the case might be better known. But all was denied to me. The chief accusers were two Franciscan relgious, viz., one McMoyer and Hugh Duffy, as well as a priest for the MacClaves. Four laymen also appeared, i.e.. two O'Neills, one Hanlon and Florence MacMoyer: these four I never laid eyes on in my life.

Master MacMoyer swore that he had seen with Neil O'Neill who went to the congregation of the Propaganda, letters sent by me to Cardinal Baldeschi, Prince Colonna and the bishop of Aix for the purpose of procuring forces from abroad for an invasion of Ireland. When I brought forward the argument that it had never been known that anybody cited for a particular crime before a tribunal in Ireland should again be summoned here to be tried, it was of no avail—the judge replied that a certain O'Rourke had been summoned here and tried. I answered that this man had been declared a rebel by public edict and had been arrested in Scotland. Sentence of death had been passed against me without any hope of reprieve. Thus those who once beheaded my statue have now achieved the same object in the case of its prototype, through the agency of two of their brethren. It was Friar MacMoyer who persuaded the other friar and laymen to do what they have done. I forgive them all, and with Saint Stephen I say, “Lord do not lay this sin to their charge”. I believe I am to die about the end of this month.

Please show this letter or its contents to all my friends, and beg them ardently that they pray for me. I never tried to introduce the Catholic religion except by teaching and preaching only. I have never in conscience been guilty of any conspiracy or rebellion, directly or indirectly. Oh how I wish I were are free of every other crime and sin against the divine precepts as I am of this! It is essential therefore that all my friends pray for me, as I hope they will.

Your kinsman, Oliver Plunkett.

By the way, Msgr. Hanly has the original painting, which is copied here, with the difference that the pike is not broken in the original, as Msgr. asked for this change when the IRA decommissioned their weaponry. This copy is in the church, at the shrine, in Drogheda. Msgr. explained to me the symbolism in the painting. Of course, St. Oliver is dressed as a bishop of his day. The children on the right represent his school which he started with his own money, under the care of the Jesuits, in Drogheda. The many people represent all the thousands of Irish the saint confirmed. The priest in the front represents those men he ordained, and the renewal of the priesthood he demanded in Ireland. The ruins on the left-hand side represent the fact that Rome stands, although Ireland fell, and that the Church will last through persecution. The gallows is self-explanatory.

On Oliver Plunkett I

The Letters of Saint Oliver Plunkett

Edited and Translated with an introduction by Monsignor John Hanly 1979

I have spent several delightful hours over the past few days listening and discussing St. Oliver Plunkett with the former rector of the Irish College in Rome and the postulator for St. Oliver, Mgsr. John Hanly. I have discovered so many treasures in the Letters, pointed out to me by Msgr. Hanly, to now have a new perspective on the erudition and greatness of the last martyr of Ireland and England.

The Letters need to be studied, not merely read, not only for the history of the penal times, and not only for the revelation of the character of the great saint, but for the insights and timeliness of the state of the clergy and education in Ireland in the 17^th century. Of all the many themes, all important, I chose to highlight a few references from the Letters regarding the importance of seminary training. If I had time, I would write more on the beauty of the Letters themselves, written by a great scholar of classical education, with legal training and humor.

I shall quote from Letter 100 in the book, written in Dublin, on the 27 of September, 1671. and in Italian, as most of the letters were written. At this time, St. Oliver Plunkett had some freedom to work and act in Ireland, but of course, this was not to last:

I have been a year and seven months in this country now, and I think I have given so many reports on the spiritual affairs of my province that my superiors can almost touch with their hands and see with their eyes what its condition is, and of what temper it is. In fact, it is in many ways unwell and there is the danger that the illness may progress and become more serious, if our superiors (in Rome) and physicians-in-chief do not provide us with medicines, purgatives and preservatives. Generally speaking, the lack of learning on the part of the clergy is great, despite the fact that the Irish, and especially the Ulstermen, are intelligent and quick-witted; what us is this if their talent cannot be cultivated?

Plunkett write on to state that despite his founding of schools, there still are not “men fit to be leaders or to hold controversy with Protestant ministers or laity”

He continues, “In my poor opinion it would be a great act of charity to help....give them an education in Catholic countries and especially in Rome.. Those who are educated in Rome are less suspect to the present government, which regards Rome as a neutral state not attached to either Spain or France; and besides, these young men are more loyal to the spritual interests of Rome...those trained in Rome understand better the mind of the holy see, they have grasped its principals, they know better how to correspond with Piazza di Spanga: Propaganda, in a word, all Rome is a great book”

Those who closed the Irish embassy should listen to St. Oliver Plunkett...

May I add that the great saint was also very clear as to the heresies of the day, the aberrations of sacramental life, the laxity of the orders, and the need for catechesis. Does this sound familiar?

In addition, one of the most eloquent pleas from this man was the desire for truth with regard to the lax bishops and clergy. One of his phrases, in Letter 195 notes, “As the proverb says, the blind man is no judge of colour...and thus Father..., who is himself quite ignorant, is no judge of ….'s learning.

Would that the recent Visitations would be so honest. Pray to St Oliver Plunkett for excellent clergy in Ireland, a change in the seminary training to come back to the classics and to orthodoxy. 

Enough--record nine blog day....

If you don't look at Maru listed on my blog list....

My son added the caption.

It's Pi Day

POTUS has Mao-Envy

Take a look at this....the States are in trouble if the Narcissist can get away with this and has his party's support. Ugh!

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/vets-angry-over-american-flag-featuring-obama/nLR5Q/#comments

More Persecution of Christians to Come in Northern Ireland, England, Scotland and Wales

I know I have several posts today, but I need to refer to the new movement in England to ban the wearing of crosses or crucifixes in the workplace. Here is the news item. Although Muslims, Sikhs and other persons can wear their symbols, the cross seems to bother some Conservatives in the government. This is out and out persecution of Christians. Thankfully, some Anglicans, including the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Carey, have come out against this. Carey said ministers and courts were "dictating" to believers, calling it another example of Christianity being marginalized in the public square."The reasoning is based on a wholly inappropriate judgment of matters of theology and worship about which they can claim no expertise," he charged. "The irony is that when governments and courts dictate to Christians that the cross is a matter of insignificance, it becomes an even more important symbol and expression of our faith," he added. 

The Pope and the Irish Eucharistic Congress

Today, on the news in Ireland, it was announced that the Pope, Benedict XVI, will broadcast on live television, some type of homily or commentary at the last Mass of the Eucharistic Congress. He will not be in Ireland, contrary to rumors here.

On Benedictine Balance

This is a dangerous posting. So many people have fallen into hedonism and selfishness that to write about not being vigilant and strict with one's self all the time may seem inappropriate. However, I want to caution some of my traditional friends on being too harsh with themselves. Perhaps my perspective is so Benedictine, a way which always considers the weak, that I write this cautionary tale from St. Anthony Abbot:   A desert hunter saw Anthony Abbot “horsing around” with his fellow monks. The hunter expressed shock, even scandal, when he saw the monks enjoying themselves at some recreation. Anthony Abbot told the hunter to string his bow and shoot at a near target. The hunter did so. Then, the Abbot told the hunter to shoot another arrow. The hunter did so. When the Abbot asked the hunter to shoot a third, the hunter replied, “If I bend my bow so much at a time, it will break.” Anthony Abbot replied. “So it is with my monks. If I do not give them rest and recreation, they will break.”

The point of this story is relatively clear. But I think the larger question has to do with the works of piety and prayer. Christ warns us not to pile on repetitious prayers one after another. He decidedly does tell us to pray and fast. Fasting is ignored for the most part today. And, so much fasting is what I call “token fasting”, such as giving up luxuries, such as chocolate or going out to dinner. Such is the wealth of the States, that fasting resembles ordinary life for the rest of the world.

However, there is a stage wherein the great words of St. Benedict apply to all. When he writes of the balance of work, study and prayer, he indicates that all three activities are important in a day for a person pursuing holiness. An entire day of prayer is not natural for us lowly humans. The necessity of work and the need for study, such as the reading of Scripture daily, create a rhythm of activity, all focused on Christ. To omit one is folly and shows a lack of appreciation for the needs of the human, who is body and spirit. Above all rules, that of St. Benedict reveals an understanding of what it means to be an organized, healthy human being.

That Anthony Abbot recognized the needs of his community shows the Holy Spirit working within the Church in all ages.

To balance this approach, one must be more harsh with one's self than most people in the world. We cannot slack off in the pursuit of salvation, that is, in cooperating with grace. However, we are clay, and God has given us guidelines for the good of our bodies and our souls.

St. Thomas More wore a hair-shirt and he said when in prison that he wished he had been harder on himself in order to prepare for his martyrdom. His example were the Carthusians being stretched on hurdles and taken to Tyburn, singing in the mud and grime. If one is called to such serious penances, one must have a spiritual director. But, for the lay person, the joyous accepting of daily sufferings without complaining may be enough penance. May we all realize that complaining is a sin and if we refrain, we change our entire outlook on life to one of gratitude and joy.

On the Laity Using the Breviary

Several months ago, Father Z on his famous and excellent blog, ran a poll on how many and what type of the Liturgy of the Hours were said by his readers. I was pleasantly surprised not only at the number of lay people who prayed the Breviary, but how many hours some actually covered in a day.

Now, I must admit, I rarely do more than either Lauds or Vespers, choosing one or the other depending on my schedule. Rarely do I do Sext, Prime and Terce, which are in my Monastic Diurnal, which is from St. Michael's in Farnborough. Now that the Baronius Press has published a three volume set of the Breviary in the Extraordinary Form, I shall be interested in looking at that in detail, although I am partial to my Benedictine Breviary.

What seemed a great blessing and encouragement to me were the numbers of the laity who said two or more of the hours per day. I find that a refreshing obedience to the call of several Popes in the past asking the laity to take part in the Daily Office. What does this trend mean?

I think, ironically, it means two habits among the laity which are distinct. The first is that there are more single lay people, who take time to say the Liturgy of the Hours alone, or possibly, in a group. That younger people have picked up the Daily Office and are using it for prayer exhibits a sign of renewal among the younger adults.

The second trend is that more married couples are praying the Divine Office, or parts of it, together. I am reminded of a humorous story told by an old Irish friend of mine, Paddy. He is in his eighties, and was telling me that his brother in his late sixties was getting married for a third time, being a widower twice. When his brother, Mike, went to the local priest, the priest asked him why he wanted to get married again, seeing that Mike and his wife-to-be were beyond child-bearing age. Mike did not miss a beat and answered, “I want someone to answer the rosary I start up every night.” Mike's point was that for him, praying was easier with someone than without. Several of my married friends pray with their husbands, especially now that some are retired. They find this so rewarding, that they admit they wished they had done this their entire married life instead of waiting until the children were raised and gone.

Here is a lovely painting of St. Dominic reading the Breviary. There is something to be said about praying out loud with others. The interaction between the body and the soul is important to us mortals. Community prayer also keeps us from too much introspection and selfish concerns. However, there are thousands of clergy and lay people who say the Divine Office daily alone.

Those of us single ones may find praying alone easy as we have been doing it for such a long time, but the point of using the Breviary as laity should be considered by all. May I quote St. Benedict, on the Opus Dei, whose Rule I have been revisiting here for a week or so. Please note that eleven of the chapters in the Rule are dedicated to praying, and for the Benedictine, this means praying the Divine Office. Indeed, nothing is to be preferred to the work of God.

Can Ireland become the Isle of Saints Again? Oliver Plunkett and Margaret Ball

I have had the joy and privilege of seeing the preserved head of St. Oliver Plunkett in Drogheda. Now, I have a personal tie to him, as part of him is at Downside Abbey, which is connected to my academic training. Also, I have met and spoken with the postulator of St. Oliver Plunkett, and the seventeen martyrs of Ireland, Msgr.  John Hanley, former rector of the Irish College in Rome and a great scholar as well as a gentleman. Msgr. Hanley's knowledge of St. Oliver Plunkett makes him the world expert on this saint and possibly all the seventeen saints of Ireland. He talked with me several times and gave a fantastic presentation in the local church on St. Oliver.


I would like to highlight one of the saints, St. Margaret Ball. Here is a link on these martyrs for your perusal. St. Margaret was betrayed by her son and husband, a cruel event, marking her as a martyr before her death in prison.


 Born Margaret Bermingham about 1515 in Skreen, Co Meath, she married Bartholomew Ball, a prosperous merchant in Dublin. Her eldest son, Walter, however, became a Protestant and an opponent of the Catholic faith. Margaret provided 'safe houses' for bishops and priests passing through Dublin and would invite Walter to dine with them, hoping for his re-conversion.

Walter was elected Mayor of Dublin. He had his mother arrested and drawn through the streets on a wooden hurdle, as she could no longer walk, to Dublin Castle. Here she remained imprisoned for the rest of her life. If she had renounced her faith she could have returned home, but she refused and died in prison aged 70 in 1584. The chapel-of-ease at Santry in Larkhill parish was named in her honour.

Thanks to wiki for the two photos of the Drogheda shrine. Above is the shrine at Downside. 

Indwelling of the Holy Trinity Part Two-charity

One of the marks of the real Christian is charity. Serenity in the face of interruptions to our lives or inconveniences caused by the real needs of others shows us the presence of charity in our hearts and minds.

In addition, as Garrigou-Lagrange tells us, only those who live in charity keep the Indwelling of the Holy Trinity. Why is that? That we receive the Trinity in Baptism and Confirmation marks us as Christians. That we preserve this Life of God in us means that we must cooperate with grace, sanctifying grace given only through the Sacraments.

There is no other way to obtain sanctifying grace except through the Sacramental Life of the Church. There is no running around the goal post in order to score. When the Church teaches that we are all saved through the merits of the Catholic Church, this is partly what is being taught.

How sad that several generations of Catholics think they will get to heaven just because they are good.

There is no other way to obtain sanctifying grace except through the Sacramental Life of the Church. There is no running around the goal post in order to score. When the Church teaches that we are all saved through the merits of the Catholic Church, this is partly what is being taught.

How sad that several generations of Catholics think they will get to heaven just because they are “good”. This is not the teaching of Christ or the Church.

Many of the Church Fathers in the earliest centuries of our theology have pointed out the fact that the Holy Trinity dwells in those who are “in charity”. This means that if one “abides in Love”, as taught by St. John the Evangelist, and practices that Love (practice means pragmatic, that is reality, doing things, not merely feeling, but duty).

There are stages of love, just as there are stages of the interior life. Pope Benedict XVI in his encyclical on love, explains the different types, which have been mentioned on this blog as well. But, a married couple, for example, move from the romance of eros, to the self-dying pure love of giving without expectation, that is, Divine Love. A couple may have a life-time to learn this type of self-giving. But, the mark of the Christian is just this same type of charity.

Above is an icon of the Transfiguration. Christ left the glory of the Trinity to share Himself with us in the Incarnation. The ultimate charity is sharing who we are with others, not merely what we have materially. We have the lives of the saints to show us charity in action. We need only think of the Little Flower and her little way of accepting daily crosses and offering up sufferings to God. We have the charity of the great St. Vincent de Paul, or the love in action of St. Francis travelling to the Saladin in order to convert him. We have the example of the French Jesuits, who even after returning to France, came back to the States and were killed in horrible ways. But, charity can mean the simple acceptance of the loved one for who he or she is. The acceptance of another human being, the recognition and encouragement of that person's uniqueness and gifts, is also charity.

On the Indwelling of the Holy Trinity: thoughts for Lent

Theophoroi” or God-bearers. When was the last time you heard a sermon on the Indwelling of the Trinity? I referred to this Truth of the Catholic Church before on this blog, but I return to it today after several discussions with lay friends who had never heard of this before.

Garrigou-Lagrange is my basis for explanation, but we have the Fathers of the Church, and the Scriptures as the foundation of all following teaching. The great Dominican synthesizes centuries of teaching. I am not going to emphasize the Indwelling of the Trinity is all created things, but in the specific soul which is Baptized into Christ. Garrigou-Lagrange notes the Scriptures relating to the Coming of the Spirit in the Gospels, and particularly the Priestly Prayer of Christ in the Gospel of John. But, I want to move on from the references to the Holy Spirit and comment on the Indwelling of the entire Trinity, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. But, before I do that, I want to look at Garrigou-Lagrange's shedding light on the foundations necessary for this Indwelling.

Obviously, only those who are Baptized, and I capitalize the word for emphasis, have this Indwelling. But, there is more to the Life of God in each one of us than the first Sacrament of Initiation. The spiritual writer notes St. Thomas Aquinas, stating, that Pope Leo XIII (why is he not canonized?) used Thomistic explanations in his encyclical on the Holy Spirit Divinun illud munus: For God is in all things by His essence, power, and presence, according to His one common mode, as the cause existing in the effects which participate In His goodness. Above and beyond this common mode, however, there is one special mode belonging to the rational nature wherein God is said to be present as the object known is in the knower, and the beloved in the lover. And since the rational creature by its own operation of (supernatural) knowledge and love attains to God Himself, according to this special mode, God is said not only to exist in the rational creature, but also to dwell therein as in His own temple. So no other effect can be put down as the reason why the divine Person is in the rational creature in a new mode, except sanctifying grace. . . . Again, we are said to possess only what we can freely use or enjoy: but to have the power of enjoying the divine Person can only be according to sanctifying grace.

The great heresies of our time deny the need for sanctifying grace for salvation or for spiritual growth. Someone commented to me one time that to “be good” was the only thing necessary to get to heaven. Sadly, this is not the case, nor are the young taught, even in so-called Catholic schools, the real need for the Sacraments.

Notice in the above selection that the term “rational” in relationship to human nature is clearly delineated. Why? Catholicism stresses knowing God and loving Him, not merely experiencing Him in some sort of Quietist or Pentecostal manner. Do we not want to know everything about a person we love? Do we not want to find out all about that person? That sanctifying grace moves us to knowledge of the Indwelling of the Trinity demands that we receive the Sacraments on a regular basis. Without sanctifying grace, the initial gift of God at Baptism is starved of spiritual food.

Garrigou-Lagrange is clear that we all share in the Indwelling of the Trinity, only in degrees. This is true not only of all of us, but of the saints. The saint who has the fullness of the Indwelling of the Trinity is, of course, the Theotokos, the Mother of God. That the Doctors of the Church exhibit this rational knowledge and are God-bearers in a smaller sense than Mary, Mother of God, indicates a degree of holiness. But, Garrigou-Lagrange shows us over and over again, that all are called to such holiness, albeit in different degrees. God-bearers is the term quoted from St. Ignatius of Antioch, who used the term “theophoroi” or God-bearers. This term applies to us, the members of the Church Militant today, in 2012. I include an icon of St. Joseph of Arimathea, who brought Christ and the Grail to England. He, indeed, is a model God-bearer. To be continued...