Saturday, September 12, 2015

The Most Holy Name of Mary and the Siege of Vienna

From Belgrade to Vienna.


The Feast of the Holy Name of Mary.


The feast existed long before the Siege of Vienna, yet it was after the victory over the invading Turks that the feast was extended to the universal Church.
Before the Battle of Vienna in 1683, Polish king, John III Sobieski had placed his troops under the protection of the Blessed Virgin Mary. In the following year, to celebrate the victory, Pope Innocent XI added the feast to the General Roman Calendar, assigning to it the Sunday within the octave of the Nativity of Mary. - source
  • In the summer of 1683, the main army of the Ottoman Empire, a large and well-equipped force, besieged Vienna. The town was nearing the end of its ability to resist: but just as the capture of Vienna was becoming only a matter of time – not more than a week away, at most – an army came to its rescue. On September 12th, in an open battle before Vienna, the Ottoman army was defeated, and the city escaped pillage and destruction. There is probably no book on the general history of Europe that does not record these events. - source
Today's feast is considered a prodigy or triumph of the Holy Rosary, as is the major feast of Our Lady of the Rosary, October 7.  Each feast is a triumph of Christendom over the invading Muslims.  I'm not sure Catholics especially recognize the significance of these feast days - especially considering the current migration of Islamic peoples into Europe.  Oddly enough, Drudge headlined this weekends influx of Syrian refugees into Austria as "The Siege of Vienna."

A caution on the refugee crisis in Europe.


Fr. Z has an insightful post on the influx of Muslim refugees into Europe, stating: I don’t think that we are really taking stock of what is going on in the West. “Immigrants” are pouring into Europe across the Mediterranean via Lampedusa. “Immigrants” are pouring into Europe through Turkey toward Germany.


[Ed. note:  Now my deeply traditional Catholic roots are showing with this post.  I grew up with the Rosary.  The devotion was deeply imprinted upon me since earliest memory.  I was enthralled with the stories of miraculous victories obtained through the prayers of the Rosary.  I was, and I am, a child of Our Lady of the Rosary of Fatima.  Therefore I take very seriously what is going on with the rise of Islam in the world.  I think I know where Fr. Z is coming from on this - which is why I will link to another post he sites regarding recent developments in the West.]


The Final Hijra: A Warning on the Refugee Crisis ...

The first hijra conquered Jerusalem in 638. The second hijra conquered Constantinople in 1453. Two of the three oldest and holiest cities for Christians were conquered by Muslims.
Except for Rome.
This, now, is the third hijra. According to certain voices in the Islamic world, it will be the final hijra, the one that will conquer Rome.
In Islamic circles, there has been a long-held belief that Christianity — and specifically, the Catholic Church — is the main obstacle impeding Islam’s domination of all humanity under one religious and political system. Therefore, in order to realize this vision, the Christian faithful must not only be converted to Islam, but their sacred spaces must be taken from them and given to the dar Al-Islam – “the house of Islam.” If the Islamic conquest of Jerusalem led to the end of Christianity as the dominant religion in the Holy Land, and the same was true in the Byzantine Empire with the fall of Constantinople, the conquest of Rome and the Islamization of St. Peter’s Basilica would mean the effective destruction of the Church worldwide, and its replacement with Islam. - source

Just scare tactics.


I don't think so.  I think the threat is very real.  Faithless Western leaders and politicians don't believe it, won't believe it.  The United States destabilized the region - for oil.  The slicing and dicing into nations and territories came about because of British involvement.  We made the mess - so no doubt we are responsible for many of the displaced people streaming out of Syria and the former Iraq and elsewhere.  I'm not against the U.S. taking responsibility for that and taking in refugees.  Yet the European migration strikes me as a different matter entirely.

A friend sent the following email on these issues, I'm using it without permission, which is why I post it anonymously - though I'm in complete agreement with what he says.
I also believe that as individual Christians, we have a duty to welcome the foreigner in our midst, especially when he comes to us broken and penniless. And this is why I applaud the pope's call for all European dioceses to welcome immigrant/refugee families.
However, I'm wondering how wise it is to insist that European governments take in all comers indefinitely as a matter of public policy. It's no secret that by and large, the huge numbers of Muslims who have come to Europe have not assimilated, but are openly hostile. I lived in Germany for two years, and it was frightening to see how common it was that Muslims living there had such utter and open contempt for their host countries. Vietnamese, Indians, Chinese, etc. entered seamlessly into German society, and enriched it, as did immigrants from elsewhere in the EU, but seeing women in niqab on the streets of Vienna was truly unsettling. Again, not the foreignness of it all, but the utter clash that this showed.
Granted, this might be Europe's just punishment for abandoning the Faith and contracepting their future out of existence. And they certainly bear the blame for their own demographic decline. But I just can't see how it's a recipe for anything other than disaster that thousands and thousands of young men are entering countries with close to 25% unemployment (like Spain) and with religious ideas that encourage open hostility.
Not all of Islam is hostile, but European mosques are almost all funded by radical Wahhabist Saudis, and yet rather than encourage evangelization of Muslims - and evangelization is the ONLY way Europe will ever be Europe again, whether a its of the migrants or the natives - it appears most bishops, Catholic and Protestant, actively discourage this kind of evangelization on the ground. The bishops of Germany, Belgium, France, etc. are bending over backwards to welcome not Muslims, but *Islam* to Europe.
So with all this, what should a nation do? Isn't the responsibility of a nation first and foremost to preserve its own people and their way of life? While refugees MUST be taken in, should Europe have to welcome all economic migrants, even into countries whose unemployment rates are something we've never even heard of over here? - friendly email
Befriending the stranger.


In Minnesota we have a large population of Somali immigrants - who appear to have problems with assimilation.  I've encountered many, especially in medical situations.  I also encounter many at Target and some grocery stores I visit.  Many I encounter definitely attitude problems.  I was at the ophthalmologist office several times, the Somalis always have an interpreter and rarely speak themselves.  Unless there is a problem and then they can get a bit shrill.  One day one woman parked in a fire lane and refused to move her car because it was an emergency - too cold to park in the ramp.  The receptionist later told me the Somalis were always very disagreeable and uncooperative.  I'm offering limited anecdotal evidence I know - but I frequently sense a certain level of hostility whenever I encounter them.  I smile, say hello to the men, or simply nod to the women - no response - ever.  Just saying.

We shall almost certainly have to reckon with Islam in the near future. Perhaps, if we lose our Faith, it will rise. For after this subjugation of the Islamic culture by the nominally Christian had already been achieved, the political conquerors of that culture began to notice two disquieting features about it. The first was that its spiritual foundation proved immovable; the second that its area of occupation did not recede, but on the contrary slowly expanded.
[…]
In my own youth the decaying power of Islam (for it was still decaying) in the Near East was a strong menace to the peace of Europe. Those old people of whom I speak had grandparents in whose times Islam was still able to menace the West. The Turks besieged Vienna and nearly took it, less than a century before the American Declaration of Independence. Islam was then our superior, especially in military art. There is no reason why its recent inferiority in mechanical construction, whether military or civilian, should continue indefinitely. Even a slight accession of material power would make the further control of Islam by an alien culture difficult. A little more and there will cease that which our time has taken for granted, the physical domination of Islam by the disintegrated Christendom we know. - Belloc

Fr. Z posts a short litany of Saints to deliver us. Today's feast points to the greatest saint of all, the one every Catholic should turn to. The one to whom our Lord has confided the peace of the world. Our Lady of the Rosary, Mediatrix of All Grace.


So many people today look for and await signs, heavenly warnings, visions and locutions. The signs are here present. The warnings have been given. The visions have been affirmed. Where are the eyes and ears of faith? Who is praying the rosary every day to obtain peace?



Holy Mary, Mediatrix of All Grace

Friday, September 11, 2015

Don't be crazy.



False mystics, false teachers, and the delusional...

I've been thinking about how false mystics can be likened to false teachers.  False teachers are usually not like mystics, though they may offer new interpretations of established doctrine.  I came across something during spiritual reading today, inspired by the Gospel 'can a blind person guide a blind person.'  I was led to a familiar passage from St. John of the Cross, wouldn't you know.  It made sense for me, especially in consideration of some moral issues I've been reading about online, and the need for careful discernment or vigilance.

A thought from another Jesuit friend has been before my mind the past several days, which coincides somewhat with what St. John offers.  "I have said that the lack of one sole virtue necessarily brings about the ruin of all the others.  I add that one sole defect - one sole limitation regarding the object or some other circumstance - suffices to ruin a virtue completely.  To lose the faith, it is not necessary to believe nothing: it is enough not to believe one sole article; it is even enough to doubt it." - St. Claude La Colombiere

So you see why it is important to source what you receive; to submit to Catholic teaching, to heed the proper authority.  It is equally important to do so as regards private revelations and their so-called seers and prophets, as well as theologians, teachers and bloggers.

Anyway, this is the passage from St. John I consider important to mention again:
Even in our time God grants revelations ... to whom he wills.  He will reveal to some the number of days they have to live, or the trials they will have to endure, or something that will befall a particular person or kingdom, etc.  He will uncover and declare to the spirit truths concerning the mysteries of our faith - although this properly speaking would not be a revelation since they are already revealed; it would be instead a manifestation or declaration of the already revealed.
The devil can be a great meddler with this kind of revelation.  Since the truths are imparted  through words, figures, and likenesses, etc., he can make counterfeits more easily than when the revelations are purely spiritual.  If, in these two categories we mentioned, some new truth about our faith is revealed, or something at variance with it, we must by no means give assent, even though we have evidence it was spoken by an angel from heaven.
Since there are no more articles to be revealed by the Church about the substance of our faith, a person must not merely reject new revelations about the faith, but he should out of caution repudiate other kinds of knowledge mingled with them.  [...]  To deceive and introduce lies, the devil first lures a person with truths and verisimilitudes that gives assurance that give assurance; and then he proceeds with his beguilement ... - The Ascent, Bk II, Ch. 27
Marie-Paule Giguere (Mother Paul-Marie)
I know!


While searching for a photo to illustrate the post I came across a so-called mystic who actually inspired the title of the post, Marie-Paule Giguere.   I had completely forgotten about this story.  Among the spurious revelations was Marie-Paule's support of President Bush's war against Iraq.  "Mother Paul-Marie however reputedly received indications from "on high" that Sadaam Hussein did indeed have hidden weapons of mass destruction."  Evidently that message was sent to the president, though there is no evidence it influenced his decision.

The followers of such mystics search for signs of authenticity, insisting they submit to the decisions of Church authorities - despite the fact the private revelations can be condemned, the seer and/or cult excommunicated, or told they cannot identify themselves as Catholic, and so on.  They are duped - just as certainly as those in ministries not approved by the Church, such as New Ways Ministries.  Even priests and religious will insist they are faithful to the Church, yet repeatedly cite this or that portion of the message, or an instance of an apparent supernatural nature,  as being worthy of belief or consideration, while holding out hope the whole matter will be approved or validated.  As John of the Cross points out: "Since there are no more articles to be revealed by the Church about the substance of our faith, a person must not merely reject new revelations about the faith, but he should out of caution repudiate other kinds of knowledge mingled with them." 


Thursday, September 10, 2015

Interesting factoids.



Do you know why a gentleman held his cigarette aloft in a manner some might now term effeminate?
A gentleman would hold his cigarette between two fingers, his hand held aloft, to avoid annoying his company with the lingering smoke drifting into the parties faces.  Lifting the cigarette away from himself also helped avoid lingering smoke odor on his clothing and fingertips.  As he exhaled, he would tilt his head back while unobtrusively releasing the smoke into the airspace above the party, so as not to 'contaminate' the atmosphere.  Drama queens would do likewise, but with great flourish and extravagant gestures.


That's a load of crap.

Friendship explored...



Same sex friendship... again?

Ron Belgau has a new post, Friendship and Catholic Teaching on Homosexuality.  It's very good - especially because it summarizes Catholic teaching on the subject, and Belgau takes special care to highlight the importance given to chaste friendship in official documents, noting:  "Friendship has been an important theme in the Catholic Church’s pastoral guidance regarding homosexuality."

It's true.  It's also important for us to understand the importance of same sex friendship for gay people especially.  Ron Belgau recognizes that through experience.  He cites an early friendship which included some sexual temptation - yet the friendship was never 'violated'.
Though that relationship was far from perfect (and involved some sexual temptation), it was chaste, and played an important role in solidifying my commitment to chastity. It was also at least the beginnings of the sort of friendship encouraged by the Church. - Belgau
I think that's important.  Many people shy away from friends or potential friends because they fear sexual attraction/temptation.  "Normal" people seem not to have such fears.  Obviously straight guys aren't afraid of male friends.  Normally, straight guys aren't afraid of gay men either - they work together, live next door to one another, some have even lived together - in college, the military, seminary, monastery, and so on.  I was surprised after leaving religious life to find out several of the novices and monks were gay.  I never had an issue with any of them.  When I moved to Boston I lived with a former Franciscan, slept in the same room, became best friends - I never knew he was gay until a decade later.  Sexual temptation just wasn't even part of the friendship.  He was young and handsome and well built and fun - never a thought of even a near occasion of sin.  It wasn't my desire, interest, or purpose.

Friendship happens - it isn't a study, a methodology - it isn't exploitation or control of another.  It's disinterested.  I don't know why that is so difficult to grasp?

Gay people are not always looking for sex - unless they maybe have issues or are deeply damaged in some sense.  Boundary issues?  Maybe they are natural born lust-ers - always on the make?  I suppose what I'm saying is same sex friendship does not have to be an occasion of sin for the same sex attracted.  People worry too much.  A guy will ask himself, 'Did I sin when I looked at him tucking in his shirt?'  'Is this fondness I feel lust?'  'Am I getting possessive?'  Some people worry so much about 'inclinations' and making mistakes, they think the friendship is itself evil.  Some may believe they have sinned already and then put the make on someone who could have simply been a friend.

That said, often, even in a 'relationship' same sex interest in one another eventually ceases to exist.  Those who struggle with sexual temptation would do so with or without a same sex friend.  For many reasons, spiritual, psychological, emotional, even socially, healthy, non-sexual same sex friendship is an essential component for growing in wholeness and holiness.

Ron Belgau helps clear up the suspicion surrounding the issue.  At least I think he does.  He gives the reason for the existence of the Spiritual Friendship website, as well as the 'movement' it appears to have generated.

According to the Catechism, both marriage (see 2360) and friendship (see 2347 above) lead to spiritual communion, echoing on the human level the communio personarum of the Trinity. From its earliest responses to the modern push for accepting sexual relationships between persons of the same sex, the Church has emphasized the importance of recovering a true understanding of friendship, which means not only understanding friendship as God meant it to be, but also understanding how it can be corrupted by the fall.
A central premise of this blog is that we gain substantial insight into homosexuality by thinking of it not solely as a disorder of the sexual faculties, but also as a distorted form of friendship. Seeing it in this light not only helps us to understand the phenomena itself more clearly, it also allows us to offer pastoral care rooted in sound Catholic anthropology. - Belgau

There is a lot I don't readily understand - first and foremost the need for a 'movement', nor the extended distinction of Side A and Side B gay-Christian theory.  Nevertheless, the Catholics involved have valuable insights which may help those troubled by homosexual inclination or the understanding of themselves as gay - work through their conflict in peace and the assurance of God's love and mercy.

I'm not 'afraid' of these guys anymore.  Pro-gay movements have already influenced the Church - Sr. Gramick and New Ways Ministry for instance.  So far Spiritual Friendship - the Catholic - Side A version remains faithful to Catholic teaching.  If what they say doesn't jive with Catholic teaching - call them out, challenge them, or simply move on.  If it's false - it will fail.  If they are wrong, they will be corrected.  So called homophile movements have come and gone since the 19th century.  The Church remains the same.

You got to have friends.  Making friends is hard for some people - they have to learn to be a friend.




And afterwards, she bought a laptop and started to blog and lived happily ever after.




In a van.

Wednesday, September 09, 2015

Something else to worry about: Russian forces have begun participating in military operations in Syria.

It could be true.


Talk about a crisis.

The world at war.  That's a big one.
Russian forces have begun participating in military operations in Syria in support of government troops, three Lebanese sources familiar with the political and military situation there said on Wednesday.
The sources, speaking to Reuters on condition they not be identified, gave the most forthright account yet from the region of what the United States fears is a deepening Russian military role in Syria's civil war, though one of the Lebanese sources said the number of Russians involved so far was small.
U.S. officials said Russia sent two tank landing ships and additional cargo aircraft to Syriain the past day or so and deployed a small number of naval infantry forces.
The U.S. officials, who also spoke on condition of anonymity, said the intent of Russia's military moves in Syria was unclear. One suggested the focus may be on preparing an airfield near the port city of Latakia, a stronghold of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
U.S. officials have not ruled out the possibility that Russia may want to use the airfield for air combat missions.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry spoke to his Russian counterpart for the second time in four days to express concern over reports of Russian military activities in Syria, warning that it could fan more violence.

The White House said it was closely monitoring the situation. - Source



My favorite Jesuit...

I don't know - there are so many!

St. Peter Claver, S.J.


Happy feast day to all Jesuits who minister to those who are on the peripheries.

No Fault Divorce and Easier Annulments.



I'm not married, I've never been married, never wanted to be married, never will be married.

I have no kids, never had kids, never wanted kids, never will have kids.

So the recent freeing up of the annulment process makes no difference to me.  I'm not sure why it makes a lot of difference to anyone, except maybe those who have been abandoned by a spouse or have been divorced, or need to leave a bad marriage - and only then if they either desire an annulment - or object to the the former spouse seeking an annulment.  (I think the reforms are good BTW.)

My only real concern would be the kids.

What about the kids?

Divorce is hard on kids.

Annulment has to be too.

They're not 'bastards' - but they might feel like they are.

Remember the kids.

Muslim Refugees/Immigrants Converting in Droves ...



It's like a miracle.

BERLIN (AP) — Mohammed Ali Zonoobi bends his head as the priest pours holy water over his black hair. "Will you break away from Satan and his evil deeds?" pastor Gottfried Martens asks the Iranian refugee. "Will you break away from Islam?"
"Yes," Zonoobi fervently replies. Spreading his hands in blessing, Martens then baptizes the man "in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost."
Mohammed is now Martin — no longer Muslim, but Christian.*
Zonoobi, a carpenter from the Iranian city of Shiraz, arrived in Germany with his wife and two children five months ago. He is one of hundreds of mostly Iranian and Afghan asylum seekers who have converted to Christianity at the evangelical Trinity Church in a leafy Berlin neighborhood. - Finish reading here.

I think it is wonderful.

Nothing to worry about.  If they turn out to be false conversions, German Christian sects can always institute an Inquisition after things settle down, to determine which conversos are authentic - or not.  It's been done before.




*Zonoobi hopes to begin a blog - a sort of apologist website, and plans to do speaking engagements asap.  I think he already has a Paypal and GoFundMe site.

Tuesday, September 08, 2015

Here's a thought ...


Our Lady's Birthday. Cause of our Joy!


Sweet Child Mary, destined to be the Mother of God and our sovereign and loving Mother, by the prodigies of grace you lavish upon us, mercifully listen to my humble supplications. In the needs which press upon me from every side and especially in my present tribulation, I place all my trust in you.


O Holy Child, by the privileges granted to you alone and by the merits which you have acquired, be merciful to me this day. Show that the source of spiritual favors and the continuous benefits which you dispense are inexhaustible, because your power with the Heart of God is unlimited. Deign through the immense profusion of graces with which the Most High has enriched you from the first moment of your Immaculate Conception, grant me, O Celestial Child, my petition, and I shall eternally praise the goodness of your Heart.


Hail Mary!  Full of grace!  Hail Mary!  Full of grace!  Hail Mary!  Mediatrix of all grace!  Have mercy upon me a sinner!  Hail Mary, full of Grace, the Lord is with thee!

"I am all thine, and all that I have is thine, O most loving Jesus,
through Mary Thy most holy and Immaculate Mother."

Monday, September 07, 2015

The Annulment Process: Will the Pope "speed up the process of declaring a marriage invalid"?

Let 'em have it Franz.


Don't forget, Pope Benedict XVI is the Pope who asked "the Vatican's highest appeals court to consider reviewing church rules on marriage annulments."

Tomorrow two motu proprios are scheduled to be released and some people are so scared ...   Yet Benedict is the one who initiated the review, and Francis is the one issuing the decree.  Everyone seems to be parsing the Pope's words on everything, and today spittle flecked nutties are slobbered all over online.  Desthpicable!

So anyway - this is what Pope Benedict had to say before he resigned and before anyone even heard of Francis...  Speaking to the members of the tribunal of the Roman Rota:
Benedict said "lack of faith" on the part of the spouses can affect the validity of a marriage.
While the Catholic church forbids remarried divorcees from taking Communion, church tribunals can declare a marriage void if it can be demonstrated that some key elements -- such as a commitment to have children -- were missing in the first place.
Catholics who obtain an annulment for their first marriage can then remarry without facing church sanctions.
In his speech to Rota judges, Benedict stressed he wasn't suggesting an automatic link "between the lack of faith and the invalidity of marriage," but seemed to equate a "lack of faith" with other justifications for an annulment.
The pope said he wanted to "draw attention to how such a lack may, although not necessarily, also hurt the goods of marriage," since faith in God is "a very important element for living in mutual dedication and conjugal fidelity." - Source


Song for this post here

Sunday, September 06, 2015

Kim Davis and Christian resistance.



Kim Davis is a Christian.

If she was a Catholic, would her resistance have more merit?  Could she have claimed some precedent or saintly example?  I ask that because of something Fr. Longenecker wrote, distancing himself from the Kim Davis supporters, saying:
If Ms Davis had been a Catholic rather than a Protestant Christian she might have had some historic examples of saints to guide her decision. I think she should have resigned. This is following a principle that one should always avoid martyrdom and persecution as much as possible while still being faithful to the gospel and to one’s conscience. - Standing on my Head

That said despite his contention she should have followed Thomas More's example and simply resigned her position as county clerk ... Thomas More is a saint.  I know he knew that - just saying.   I suppose out of work and penniless would be a heroic choice as well, but I wonder if that would have caught anyone's attention that there is something wrong with the State?

But that's not my point here.

I have a little difficulty with what Fr. Longenecker said.

“A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself.” - CCC

If Kim Davis had been a Catholic ... she might have had some historic examples of saints to guide her position.  In the first place, one doesn't need to be Catholic to be inspired by, or seek the intercession of saints.  Recently Pope Francis pointed out the profound union which exists through martyrdom when commenting on the Coptic Christians slaughtered by ISIS.  As a Christian, Kim Davis, despite what anyone says to the contrary is suffering for the Christian faith.

The many comments and criticisms online, as well as judgments concerning Davis' past life, used to discredit her resistance today, remind me of those who counselled Franz Jägerstätter not to follow his conscience as a conscientious objector.  To save time I will link to the Vatican biography of Franz Jägerstätter here.  For those who aren't familiar with him, Jägerstätter was an Austrian conscientious objector, refusing to fight for the Nazis. Jägerstätter was imprisoned, sentenced to death and beheaded. He has since been beatified by the Catholic Church.



His bishop and priest tried to dissuade Bl. Jägerstätter from his refusal to fight in the war for the Third Reich.

His parish priest and other good Catholics recommended that he give in for the sake of his wife and family.  They suggested compromise.  Though Blessed Franz offered to serve as a medic, his offer was refused.
Jägerstätter was criticized by his countrymen, especially Catholics who had served in the military, for failing in his duty as a husband and father. The municipality of Sankt Radegund at first refused to put his name on the local war memorial and a pension for his widow was not approved until 1950. - Source

One doesn't have to be a Catholic to follow one's conscience, nor to stand fast in Christian witness to the Gospel.  One doesn't have to be Catholic to claim precedent from the saints - but if you're looking for an example - Jägerstätter set a fine precedent for lay people.

Divine Love does not want to limit His action to a few privileged souls, He longs to give Himself everywhere - to conquer the entire world. - P. Marie-Eugene, O.C.D.

As for the critics of Kim Davis, who point out her former marriages as evidence against her own moral character, I want to recall something one of the Gorcum martyrs said before being killed:
One of the secular priests killed was notorious for his unchastity. When accused of this by his captors, he offered his famous reply, “Fornicator I always was, but heretic I never was.” - Source

One doesn't have to jump on any bandwagon in support of Kim Davis, but I'd definitely refrain from judging her determination to follow her conscience.  Fortunately, Fr. Longenecker takes the situation further, rightly pointing out some of the consequences the arrest of Kim Davis bodes for others who refuse to participate in same sex weddings.

Times are changing.

Something to ponder from Franz Jägerstätter:

“Today one hears it said repeatedly that there is nothing any more that an individual can do. If someone were to speak out, it would mean only imprisonment and death.
True, there is not much that can be done anymore to change the course of world events. I believe that should have begun a hundred or even more years ago. But as long as we live in this world, I believe it is never too late to save ourselves and perhaps some other soul for Christ.
One really has no cause to be astonished that there are those who can no longer find their way in the great confusion of our day. People we think we can trust, who ought to be leading the way and setting a good example, are running along with the crowd. No one gives enlightenment, whether in word or in writing. Or, to be more exact, it may not be given. And the thoughtless race goes on, always closer to eternity. As long as conditions are still half good, we don’t see things quite right, or that we could or should do otherwise….
“If the road signs were stuck ever so loosely in the earth that every wind could break them off or blow them about, would anyone who did not know the road be able to find his way? And how much worse is it if those to whom one turns for information refuse to give him an answer or, at most, give him the wrong direction just to be rid of him as quickly as possible?”  - Franz Jägerstätter: Letters and Writings from Prison


Woe to an age when the voices of those who cry in the wilderness have fallen silent, outshouted by the noise of the day or outlawed or swallowed up in the intoxication of progress, or growing smothered and fainter for fear and cowardice. The devastation will soon be so terrifying and universal that the word "wilderness" will again strike our hearts and minds. I think we know that. - Alfred Delp 

Behind the Scenes Chaos at Patheos Catholic Channel.



The scheming and conniving to capture the Managing Editor position after Scalia.

It's rough - or so I'm told.  Kat fights and accusations of apostasy.  No more Catholic and enjoying it I guess - some deeks may even be benched.  Or so I'm told.  Which is why Patheos is looking out of network for the new editor.  Or so I'm told.



Here's a short list of the top contenders - or so I'm told.

Ann Barnhardt (Blow 'em Up Good Blog)

Pat Archbold (National Remnant Minority)

Carol McKinley (Throw The Crusaders Out)

Louie Verrecchio (Fruits in the Vatican)

Christine Niles (Church Militant Fashions)


Who?  Me?







More on the Spiritual Friends Movement ...

Totally disinterested.


From Austin Ruse.

I very much like Austin Ruse.  He has a very good essay on Crisis - again - on the subject of the New Homophiles - the group he has now conceded to refer to as Spiritual Friends.  I'm very serious when I say I admire Mr. Ruse and Deacon Russell for keeping watch on this 'movement' and challenging the orthodoxy of the project.  He adds much to the conversation - steers the less knowledgeable or easily influenced back on track regarding Catholic moral teaching.

Austin's post is pretty much a review of the book, Living the Truth in Love: Pastoral Approaches to Same-Sex Attraction.  Since he so highly recommends the book, I'll see what I can do to read it - down the road.  Please read the article at Crisis.  It's quite fair.  A comment from Joseph Sciambra is especially good.

What I really want to say is something I think people may miss about Austin Ruse - his humor.  I think they mistake it for sarcasm or snark - but whatever it is, I chuckle when I come across it.  Remember when he pointed out how Eve Tushnet and Joshua G. were pictured in their stocking feet for the newspaper interview they did?  I've made similar cracks about how these spokespersons occasionally appear in public - but it's pretty much to add a bit of comedy.

That said, I laughed out loud when I came across the following in Austin's article, discussing Rachel Lu's contribution to the book in his review, he writes:

She (Rachel Lu) says it necessarily requires the separation of “homoerotic attraction into different components or strands, rejecting the more explicitly carnal and affirming those that are less directly related to sex.” Eve Tushnet, for instance, writes that homoerotic love can be expressed by making soup for a girlfriend. - An Intellectual Challenge to the Spiritual Friends

 "Eve Tushnet, for instance, writes that homoerotic love can be expressed by making soup for a girlfriend."

I laughed so hard.

My apologies.  But it was funny...






No offense intended.

N.B. I think I may be wrapping things up with these conversations.


Song for this post here.