God's Grandeur

These two poems of Hopkins deal with the reaction to the ruthless industrialism of the age.  The first poem is God's Grandeur and the second is The Sea and the Skylark.

The world is charged with the grandeur of God.
        It will flame out, like shining from shook foil;
        It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil
Crushed. Why do men then now not reck his rod?
Generations have trod, have trod, have trod;
        And all is seared with trade; Bleared, smeared with toil;
        And wears man's smudge and shares man's smell: the soil
Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod.

And for all this, nature is never spent;
        There lives the dearest freshness deep down things;
And though the last lights off the black West went
        Oh, morning, at the brown brink eastward, springs —
Because the Holy Ghost over the bent
        World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings.

 

The Sea and the Skylark

ON ear and ear two noises too old to end

  Trench—right, the tide that ramps against the shore;

  With a flood or a fall, low lull-off or all roar,

Frequenting there while moon shall wear and wend.

Left hand, off land, I hear the lark ascend,
      

  His rash-fresh re-winded new-skeinèd score

  In crisps of curl off wild winch whirl, and pour

And pelt music, till none ’s to spill nor spend.

How these two shame this shallow and frail town!

  How ring right out our sordid turbid time,
       

Being pure! We, life’s pride and cared-for crown,

  Have lost that cheer and charm of earth’s past prime:

Our make and making break, are breaking, down

  To man’s last dust, drain fast towards man’s first slime.

 

Roberto Fiore of Forza Nuova speaking on important matters relevant to society.

 

Money Talks

Counterfeit American Catholicism

Russia's Conversion

Eleison Comments CXII: Russia's Conversion

A remarkable yet possible plan of Heaven for today's world can be guessed at, if Orthodox Christianity is reviving within Russia in the manner described to me a few days ago in London by a Russian. His description corresponds to the impression brought away from Russia by an American friend visiting St Petersburg a few years ago - the average Russian has distinctly more spiritual substance in him then has the average spiritually wasted Westerner. Does this connect with Our Lady of Fatima...?

The Russian in London told me that the Orthodox Church in Russia is following rather than leading a revival of Orthodoxy amongst the people. Attendance at the Orthodox liturgy has increased by half over the last two years, and now 80% of Russians are at least calling themselves "Orthodox", i.e. believers. New parishes are springing up everywhere. Bibles are snatched up as soon as they come on sale. Religious literature is flourishing, whilst atheistic propaganda is dying. "Holy Russia" is rising from the grave in which Communism from 1917 to 1989 strove to bury it.

For when the Communist structures of the Soviet "empire of evil" (Pres. Reagan) collapsed in 1989, the Russians turned for an ideology to replace Communism not to Western Liberalism but to their national and religious roots in Russian Orthodoxy. What indeed had the decadent West had to offer to Russia's new needs in the 1990's ? In economics, the plundering of their wealth by capitalist vultures; in politics, the still on-going encirclement of their frontiers to ensure the United States' permanent global hegemony by the construction of a ring of military bases which are one, if not the real, reason for the disastrous occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan never to come to an end; in religion, the attempted push eastwards of Conciliar ecumenism, with which apparently the Russian churchmen want nothing to do - on the contrary, they are aware of the Traditional Catholic movement, and support it.

However, let us be under no illusion: Russian Orthodoxy welds together religion and patriotism in a not wholly godly mixture, and Orthodoxy is still schismatic by refusing the Papal Supremacy, and heretical by refusing a number of dogmas, so Russians do need to be converted to the truly Universal or Catholic Church. But if Our Lady of Fatima has singled out their country for the Consecration to her Heart, may it not be, not because the Russians are still wicked Communists but because the Russian people's huge sufferings from their 70 Babylonian years of Communist captivity are calling forth from the always religious depths of "Holy Russia" an upsurge of spiritual vitality which could save the true Church, presently wilting in the West, where Church Authority may still have large numbers but it has little Faith, whilst the Traditional remnant has the true Faith but little by way of numbers and less by way of Authority ?  God knows how the Western Church also needs conversion !

May it then be Russia's smashing of the encirclement in a Third World War leading to its occupation of Europe, which will at last drive the Latin Pope to consecrate Russia to Our Lady's Heart, as she has so long been asking for in vain?  Will at that moment the Russians' renewed religious vigor save our languishing Catholic Authority and Tradition, whose Truth will in turn cleanse their errors ?  If so, then God will once again have "concluded all in unbelief, that He may have mercy on all...How incomprehensible are His judgments, and how unsearchable His ways... To Him be glory for ever" (Rom. XI, 32...36).
Catholics, mainstream and of Tradition, pray your hearts out for the Consecration of Russia to the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of the Mother of God, or "Theotokos" as she is known in the Eastern Church.

                            
Kyrie eleison.
London, England

Sovereign Independent

http://www.sovereignindependent.com/

Smear campaign "pathetic"

http://www.coircampaign.org/index.php/news-articles/recent-news/177-smear-campaign-qpatheticq

The No to Lisbon campaign, Cóir, has described attempts by Minister Micheál Martin to smear their campaign as “entirely pathetic”. Spokesman Richard Greene added that the Minister’s comments “smacked of desperation, since he is clearly aware that Cóir’s canvassers are already having a significant effect right across the country.”

The Minister for Foreign Affairs accused Cóir of running a cynical campaign, but was unable to point to any evidence to his allegations. “The Minister can bluster as much as he likes, but the fact remains that the Lisbon Treaty does nothing for Ireland and Cóir are engaged in a nationwide campaign to ensure that voters understand the treaty and the reasons to vote No,” said Mr Greene.
The Cóir spokesman said that Mr Martin had previously “tried and failed” to attack Cóir by alleging they were a front for the highly successful pro-life organization, Youth Defence. “When will the Minister realize that voters have no problem with either Cóir’s pro-life stance or the fact that, while Cóir is an independent organization, we are lucky enough to have the support and energy of some Youth Defence members,” asked Mr Greene.
“Fianna Fáíl spent their time accusing Cóir of lying about Lisbon and abortion last year. Yet their own research showed that most people believed Cóir on the issue,” said Mr Greene.

He added that Fianna Fáil and the other political parties had thoroughly disgraced politics, and cost the taxpayer tens of millions of euro in tribunals investigating the murky and dishonest nature of Irish political life.

“They have made us a laughing stock before the world which now believes Irish politics to be run by gombeen men and crooks,” said Mr Greene. “And they have brought this country to economic ruin with disastrous effects for ordinary Irish families.”
Mr Greene said that the Minister’s real problem was that Cóir volunteers were busy canvassing and postering with the same excellent material produced last year and were having a significant effect on voting intentions.

 
“We're seeing an increase of 30% over last year in volunteers coming forward to help with campaign; a million leaflets are going out and 11,000 posters are being erected,” said the Cóir spokesman. “Anyone is welcome to join Cóir and they are doing so in increasing numbers. In the meantime, Fianna Fáil are terrified of going near the doors.”

They didn't respect your vote

No means No.

In June 2008 the Irish people rejected the European Treaty of Lisbon after a democratic referendum. Unless ratified by all member states the Treaty is legally dead. But some European politicians have not accepted this reality and continue to push through the Treaty. It is the duty of everybody, whatever their political persuasion, to defend the democratic vote of the Irish people, which made their way to Brussels on the 15th of October 2008 for the European Council Meeting and demanding that all the heads of state present must RESPECT THE VOTE

St Augustine,Bishop of Hippo

Today is of course the Feast of St. Augustine, Bishop, Confessor and a Doctor of the Church. We also remember St. Hermes, Martyred under Hadrian about A.D. 132. St Augustine was converted to the true Faith by the prayers of his mother St. Monica.Prior to that he had been ensnared by error and corrupted by debauchery and impurity.
He was known for his great zeal,piety and learning. He died in A.D. 430.

Infowars Ireland protests EU Consumer Commissioner in Galway

Members from Infowars Ireland joined forces with women from the No-To-Lisbon
coalition in Galway today (Thur, 27 Aug,2009) to protest the arrival of EU Consumer Commissioner Meglena Kuneva, at the Meyrick hotel in the city centre.
The event at the Meyrick hotel was promoted as a "Women for Lisbon" gathering, but the brood of women assembled in the upstairs ballroom gave the impression they were awaiting the arrival of a reincarnated Yves Saint Laurent rather than the harbinger of a reincarnated treaty which the Irish people thought they had buried last June.
Mayor of Galway Declan McDonnell was one of the first officials to arrive and assume his position on the hotel steps - Commissioner Kuneva arrived soon afterwards and made her way to the hotel ballroom surrounded by her minions.
Details of a new EU initiative to 'provide better protection' for tourists was announced by Commissioner Kuneva, as expected, in what was a thinly veiled attempt to make EU bureaucracy appear to serve the public interest rather than the interests of the Euro-elite.

Leading the Yes Campaign

http://www.coircampaign.org/index.php/news-articles/recent-news/172-leading-the-yes-campaign

Richard Waghorne, Irish Daily Mail correspondent, has written a revealing article about the leaders of two well-funded Yes campaigns.

Mr Waghorne points out that Yes campaigners spent considerable time trying to smear those opposing Lisbon and then goes on to say: “What makes this so audacious is the shape the Yes campaign has taken the second time around. Concluding, understandably, that they are too discredited to sell the treaty themselves this time, ministers have largely stepped aside in favour of supposedly non-political pro-Lisbon groups. The problem is that the two people heading up the leading two pro-Lisbon front groups set up for this purpose are hopelessly compromised by the very real ghost of their political pasts.

The Ireland for Europe organization is one of the heavyweight bodies wheeled out to sell the treaty. The group’s campaign director is Pat Cox. He is a former President of the European Parliament. Less often mentioned is the fact that he is a lobbyist.

Brussels lobbying is a notoriously murky area. In a minimal attempt to clear up the sector, the EU asks, but does not require, lobbyists to sign up with the Commission’s register. This is where it gets interesting. Pat Cox is a director of two heavyweight Brussels lobbying firms, one called CAPA and the other called European Integration Solutions. So whatever else happens between now and polling day in six weeks’ time, we are presented with the odd spectacle of a man in the pay of a variety of vested interests heading the chief Yes outfit.
It gets worse, however. Neither of Mr Cox’s lobbying firms have signed up for the register. Neither details its work. Nor does either even do the public the minimal courtesy of providing a website.

These are operations that appear to be doing everything possible to avoid public scrutiny. Not the least of the problems with this is the fact that Pat Cox has been a special advisor to one of the EU Commissioners while retaining this lobbying practice. In more robust jurisdictions, that would be considered a conflict of interest. It is certainly an unconscionable one.

Matters do not improve with the group that is probably set to be the second most important pro-Lisbon front group, which is the organization styling itself ‘We Belong’. This end of the pro-Lisbon coalition was set up to leverage business money in a bid to attract younger voters. Their efforts so far has been fairly unimpressive, but I understand that they have been very well funded by sympathetic commercial elements and can be expected to campaign with more of a splash as the vote approaches.

What is crucial to know about this outfit is that it is headed and was founded by Olivia Buckley. Her record is even more interesting than Pat Cox’s. She is the woman who was Bertie Ahern’s trusted spin doctor while the former taoiseach was lying through his teeth to the country during Bertiegate. The role in which Olivia Buckley was advising Mr Ahern was as Fianna Fáil’s director of communications. She was central to his attempts at media management in the months when he was lying about money lodged in his private account while he was finance minister.
She is understood to have been responsible for conjuring up the idea of Bertie Ahern doing his infamous interview with Bryan Dobson on the Six O’Clock News, in which the then taoiseach told a long series of lies that succeeded for a time in disguising the full sordid nature of what was at stake.

Now she has resurfaced to head ‘We Belong’. This is particularly astonishing when one remembers that a main thrust of the Yes campaign has been to oppose disinformation concerning the Lisbon Treaty. Of course, everyone ought to oppose disinformation and for my money a vast torrent of it has come from the pro-Lisbon side of the argument.

What is remarkable is that a woman who was well paid to act on behalf of a disgraced taoiseach forced from office because of corruption concerns can turn around and present herself as an authoritative source for trustworthy information. It does say a lot about the official campaign to pass the Lisbon Treaty that two of their most crucial players seem so compromised.

But what does it say about the political culture in which this is possible? In some European countries their actions would not be a bar to future prominence in public life. In Italy, or perhaps France, that is certainly the case. But in many countries, it is inconceivable that this pair would be allowed to take on roles as the public face of a significant political campaign. Worse than that, they have been selected by the Irish political class to dispel the supposed lies about the Treaty. There is a very great deal our political class will tolerate before they excommunicate one of their own.

Voters could be forgiven for thinking that, if this pair constitute the sales team, there is something distinctly unappetising about the product that is the Treaty itself. “

No Catholic Funeral For Ted Kennedy!

Ted Kennedy should be denied a Catholic funeral and our American readers should contact their local Bishop to outline their objection. The Archdiocese of Boston can be contacted here http://www.bostoncatholic.org/About-The-Archdiocese/Contact-Us.aspx?id=262 

The phone number for the Archdiocese of Boston is
617-254-0100

Cardinal O'Malley's direct number: 617-782-2544

 

A Catholic funeral has been scheduled for this Saturday at the Basilica of Our Lady of Perpetual Help in Boston's Mission Hill section, near the Kennedy Library.
The phone number for OLPH Basilica is (617) 445-2600

Lisbon / Same Treaty / Same Answer / Same No

That instead of the Irish Government deciding who Ireland's Commissioner is, as at present, under Lisbon it will be Merkel, Sarkozy and Gordon Brown who will decide. Most people do not know that Lisbon entails this shift from a bottom-up process for appointing EU Commissioners to a top-down one that benefits the Big States.   The Government's White Paper ignores it, but it is true.  The reason is that it  completely subverts the value of the  promise of the EU Prime Ministers and Presidents that every EU  State will continue to have its own national Commissioner post-Lisbon.

Irish American Catholic Senator Edward Kennedy dies at 77

Irish Catholic Senator Edward Kennedy died today at the age of 77. His life is a life of scandal from his early days to his death. He strongly supported abortion and why the Vatican didn't excommunicate him is still the question of the day.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090826/us_nm/us_kennedy

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/6091344/Ted-Kennedy-dies.html

The world, especially Ireland, as noted below in the news, continues to praise him and even Obama thinks he was the greatest senator of our time.

DUBLIN — Nowhere outside the United States is the passing of Senator Edward Kennedy being mourned as much as in Ireland, the country from where his ancestors emigrated during the potato famine of the 19th century and to which he helped bring peace in recent years.

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/ireland/090826/ireland-loses-%E2%80%9Ctrue-friend%E2%80%9D

John 15:19 - If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

Fishermen call for 'No' in Treaty

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/furious-fishermen-call-for-no-in-treaty-1869161.html?r=RSS

IRISH fishermen furious at having to struggle to survive financially while being forced to dump their catches at sea are planning to oppose the second EU Lisbon Treaty.

The Irish Fishermen's Organisation (IFO) staged a special meeting in Cork yesterday -- and are now going to lobby for a 'No' vote after accusing Brussels of undermining their livelihoods.

The IFO also lobbied for a 'No' vote in the original Lisbon Treaty ballot last year.

Yesterday, angry Cork and Kerry fishermen said they were being driven out of business by Brussels' fishery policies, claiming that they blatantly favoured non-EU imports and fleets of larger EU member states.

Radioactive US weapons taking toll in Iraq

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=104356&sectionid=351020201

Years after the US attacks on Iraq, people in the Persian Gulf state are suffering form the consequences of radioactive contamination caused by the use of depleted uranium.
Iraq's Environment Minister, Narmin Othman Hasan, said Monday that depleted Uranium (DU) weapons used by US-led troops against Iraq during the1991 Persian Gulf War and the 2003 invasion still blight the country.

Othman Hasan said the use of super-tough weapons by the US-led forces had a devastating impact on the nation and has become a serious environmental challenge since they have contaminated several parts of the country.
Armor-piercing shells made of depleted uranium were first used in warfare by US-led troops during the1991 Persian Gulf War and then during the 2003 invasion, turning many parts of Iraq to radioactive toxic wastelands.
Depleted uranium --a radioactive metal twice as dense as lead-- has been blamed for a number of health problems, from cancer to birth defects. DU remains radioactive for about 4.5 billion years.

According to the Iraqi minister only a fraction of tanks and other wartime vehicles contaminated with depleted uranium -- which are radiating nuclear energy-- have been successfully treated and disposed of.
Following the 2003 US-led invasion, over 140,000 cases of cancer has been reported in Iraq, which are believed to be caused by toxic weaponry used by the occupying troops. It is reported that 2,000 tons of (DU) expenditure were used during the invasion of Iraq.
Several Human rights groups have called the US use of the toxic weapons against the people of Iraq as crimes against humanity since they are causing grievous harm and suffering to civilians in contaminated areas.
They have also accused the US-led troops of covering up and denying the damaging health effects of the DU's and blamed them for refusing to release information on the amounts, types and locations of these weapons in Iraq.
Iraq's Environment Minister also warned about the danger posed by the tens of millions of landmines strewn across the country.
"For one person we have one mine planted. We have 25 million mines in Iraq -- one quarter of the world's mines,” she said.

Lisbon / Same Treaty / Same Answer / Same No

1. Lisbon would put EU law-making on a pure population size basis, just as in any unitary or federal State. At present the Big States have 29 votes each in making EU laws and Ireland has 7 - a ratio of 4 to 1. Under Lisbon EU laws would be made by a majority of the EU Member States as long as they have 65% of the total EU population between them. Instead of the Big States having 4 times Ireland's voting weight, as now, this change to a pure population basis would give Germany 20 times Ireland's weight and France, Britain and Italy 15 times each. Ireland's present voting weight of 2% would be cut to 0.8% post-Lisbon (See Point 1 in document below for more details).

Under what conceivable circumstances can such a shift of power to the Big States be in Ireland's interests? How can Taoiseach Bertie Ahern and Foreign Minister Brian Cowen have agreed to such a bad deal when they signed up to the EU Constitution in 2004 - now repackaged as the Lisbon Treaty?

Perilous Sincerity

Eleison Comments CXI: Perilous Sincerity

If Benedict XVI is not a positive destroyer of the Church, then like John XXIII, Paul VI and John-Paul II before him, he is at least presiding over its destruction. A recent critique of Fr. Peter Scott's excellent analysis of Benedict XVI's latest Encyclical (accessible at angelqueen.org) raises once more the crucial question, have these Popes been aware of the destruction taking place under their responsibility ? Broadly speaking, there are three main answers.

Firstly, liberals and modernists deny that any destruction has been going on, so of course the recent Popes are unaware of being or having been destroyers. They have been good Popes, they are not to be blamed, they need only be followed. Secondly on the contrary, sedevacantists say these Popes have been responsible for a devastation of the Church, and they have all been far too well educated, they have known too well the pre-Conciliar Church (being all of them older men) and they have all sworn too often (in their younger days) the daunting Anti-Modernist Oath, for them not to have been awareof the destruction they have wrought. Not only must we blame them, but we cannot logically hold them to have been Popes, let alone fit to be followed.

Thirdly, as dawn and dusk are not contradictory or illogical simply because they mix night and day, but both are real happenings once every 24 hours, so the position of Archbishop Lefebvre and the Society of St Pius X is not contradictory simply because it is more complicated, falling as it does between the relatively simple positions of the liberals and sedevacantists. On the contrary it is more real than either, corresponding better to the complicated reality of these liberal Catholic Popes. (Archbishop Lefebvre used to say that a liberal Catholic is a walking contradiction.)
Against the liberals this third position holds that of course there has been a destruction of the Church under these Popes, who with their education, pre-Conciliar experience and solemn Oaths should certainly have known better. So all are to be blamed for failing in their grave responsibilities, even if the exact degree of blame due is known to God alone.

Against the sedevacantists however, in our profoundly sick modern age, while blindness like that of these Popes is objectively blameworthy, it can be subjectively more or less sincere. For instance in his post-war German seminary, the young Joseph Ratzinger was exposed to brilliant and no doubt charismatic modernist professors who will have taught him that the Traditional Church needed to be, if not destroyed, at least changed beyond recognition to fit modern man. And Joseph Ratzinger has believed it ever since: the Traditional doctrine, the Tridentine Church and its solemn Oaths were all good, even excellent in their day, but that day is past ! Objection: did not Pius X ("Lamentabili" #58) solemnly teach that Truth cannot evolve ? Cardinal Ratzinger said that "Lamentabili" too was excellent teaching - for the past !!

Again, God alone is judge of the exact responsibility of the young Joseph and his teachers for his mind having fallen into the trap of evolving truth, but what is certain is that once a mind has fallen into that trap, it can, in today's environment, only with supreme difficulty be pulled out again. Until a divine Warning and/or Chastisement cleanses the environment, liberals can easily be in grave error, yet sincere.
SSPX, beware of that "sincerity" which makes error feel nice ! Truth first, and no lies or ambiguity, even if our sick world comes down on you like a ton of bricks !

Kyrie eleison.
London, England

Baptism

Immaculate Heart of the Blessed Virgin Mary

Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother and his mother's sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen. When Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple standing whom he loved, he saith to his mother: Woman, behold thy son. After that, he saith to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own. (Saint John 19,25-27)

 

http://thesaintsstories.blogspot.com/2008/07/immaculate-heart-of-mary.html

The Heart of Our Blessed Mother was not only one full of love for God and for neighbour.
It was the most humble and pure, the most devout and fervent in prayer.
I was the bravest heart, and even during her Son’s passion she never gave in to discouragement.
It was the most patient and most faithful heart. It was the one which was always united to God in intimate contemplation and at the same time had charity for all. It was the heart of the Mother of Jesus, and because of this, it was in all things like the heart of her Divine Son. Like Jesus and with Him, Mary loved and suffered in her heart for the salvation of all poor sinners.

In the Heart of Our Blessed Mother, as in the Heart of Jesus, there is a most ardent desire to save souls from Hell and from Purgatory. Mary prays continually to her Son for our salvation. She knows that Jesus came on earth especially for sinners. She does not forget that when he was dying, He made her the Mother of us all.

In spite of our sins, let us look up to our Blessed Mother and let us have confidence in her motherly heart. Then, even if we are sad or upset, we will feel peaceful and happy again.

Michael Collins was killed on this day in 1922

Michael Collins lying in state in Dublin City Hall, August 1922

Knock, Co. Mayo

On 21st August 1879, Our Lady, St. Joseph and St. John the Evangelist appeared at the south gable of Knock Parish Church here in Ireland

 

 

 

Farmers for No organisation

The Government can't take it for granted that every farmer will vote Yes on October 2nd. Don't stay at home. Go to the polls. Vote No and make a difference for the future generations

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/national-news/breakaway-farmers-group-calls-for-no-vote-1865578.html

A breakaway farmers' group has launched a campaign for a 'no' vote in the re-run of the Lisbon Treaty referendum in October.

The Farmers for No organisation says it currently has 50 members who believe the treaty puts the future of Irish farming in jeopardy.

They say it will weaken the voice of Irish farmers in the EU and have criticised the IFA for advocating a 'yes' vote.

The group also says it has concerns about the EU's stance in WTO negotiations, as well as the future of farm subsidies under the Common Agriculture Policy

Bishop Williamson on Orwells 1984

 

Do the assurances on abortion mean anything?

In regard to the Lisbon Treaty.

http://www.coircampaign.org/index.php/info-euguide/lisbon-and-abortion

What does the Charter of Rights in the Lisbon Treaty mean for the right of the Irish people to decide on social and moral issues? Research has shown that abortion and other ethical issues, such as euthanasia and family law, were of serious concern to voters who rejected the Lisbon Treaty. The Irish Government has sought assurances on these issues from the EU Council and has promised that the EU will allow a protocol on abortion to be attached to a future treaty at some future date.

But the assurances given by the EU Council are not legally binding in EU law, because they are not part of any treaty. They are simply political promises.As High Court Judge and Chairman of the Referendum Commission, Frank Clarke has confirmed, they won’t change the Lisbon Treaty.

• If a protocol on abortion is obtained at a future date (although no-one knows at this point what it will actually say), it is unlikely that, if the Lisbon Treaty is passed, such a protocol would stand against a legal challenge. This is because the power of the European Court of Justice to decide on human rights issues, such as abortion, will be vastly increased by the Charter of Rights attached to the Lisbon Treaty.

• This is the core of the problem. Any protocol on the right to life (or on family law) can come into conflict with the Charter – and the European Court of Justice can use the Charter to overrule a conflicting protocol and impose abortion on the Irish people.

• In other words, the matter will still be in the hands of the European Court of Justice if Lisbon is passed.

• Not a dot or comma of the Lisbon Treaty has been changed by these assurances – it’s still the same bad treaty we rejected in June 2008. Neither will any reference be made to assurances in the amendment to be put to the people on October 2nd.

On December 12th last, An Taoiseach, Brian Cowen, put the chief concerns of the Irish people with regard to the Lisbon Treaty before the European Council. Concerns regarding abortion and other ethical issues were at the top of the list. The European Council agreed that they would be willing to give what they called “assurances” in relation to these issues in order to have the Lisbon Treaty passed in a second referendum.
It was, on many levels, an extraordinary negotiation. Abortion, and issues such as euthanasia and family law, became hugely important for voters during the Lisbon Treaty referendum campaign, but the political parties had consistently denied that these issues had anything to do with the treaty. Indeed, they insisted, there was no need for the assurances offered by the European Council now, but they were happy to get these assurances if they would be useful in persuading many voters to support a second referendum

In both instances, the European Council and the Irish Government are being misleading - some would say being downright deceptive.
It is a fact that the Irish people will lose the right to decide on abortion and other social issues if the Lisbon Treaty is passed. And it is a fact that the assurances offered by the European Council are not legally binding in European Law and, as such, are worthless. It is also a certainty that any existing or future protocols on abortion will be challenged before the European Court of Justice in a bid to have abortion legalised here – and that the Lisbon Treaty will give the Court the power to find that a right to abortion exists for all EU citizens.
Abortion, and other social issues such as marriage rights, became important during the debate on the Lisbon Treaty because some key facts about the Treaty and the Charter of Rights attached to the Treaty were explained to the electorate.

THOSE INDISPUTABLE FACTS ARE:
1. The Lisbon Treaty, in Articles 1 and 47, would create a new EU state for the first time. This is a fundamental change to what previously existed. We would all then be made citizens of this new EU state by Article 9.
2. Article 6 of Lisbon would then make the Charter of Rights attached to the Treaty binding on all citizens in all EU member states – meaning that all citizens of the new EU state would have the same enforceable rights. Those rights are what are laid down in the Charter – and the Charter does not recognize the right to life of the unborn child or traditional marriage.
3. Interpretation of these rights would then be given to the European Court of Justice (ECJ), which would have the right to overrule our Constitution on all these matters. Declaration 17 on primacy in the Lisbon Treaty spells out that EU law will supersede the Irish Constitution.
4. If the European Court of Justice decided that a right to abortion exists under any clause in the Charter, then EU law will simply be held superior to Irish law and to the wishes of the Irish people.
5. Therefore if Lisbon is passed it will merely take a court case – such as the D case currently being funded by the Irish Family Planning Association - to come before the ECJ for our pro-life laws to be overruled. And there will then be absolutely nothing we can do about it. We will have voted away our right to decide.
6. The Maastricht protocol, which was designed to protect Ireland’s pro-life amendment (Article 40.3.3) – would certainly be challenged in the European Court, whose enhanced powers under the Lisbon Treaty would include the right to overrule that, or other, protocols, once the Charter of Rights attached to Lisbon came into effect, and we were all made EU citizens. 
7. The European Court of Justice already decided in the 1991 Grogan case ⁽¹⁾ that abortion was merely a ‘service’. Now the Lisbon Treaty would give them the right to enforce a similar judgment and to change our abortion laws against our wishes.

Before the referendum last June, Cóir made these issues a central plank of our campaign. Extensive research undertaken for the Government following the defeat of the Lisbon Treaty has since shown that abortion and other moral issues were major factors for up to 79% of No voters.

Millward Brown found that 79% of No voters felt that abortion issues were important for Ireland, while 66% of No voters were prompted to vote as they did by abortion concerns. Their findings were preceded by the results of a Sunday Business Post poll which found that 58% of voters believed that Lisbon could affect Ireland’s abortion laws – and of those 74% voted No. ⁽²⁾
This is because the threat of legalized abortion - and to our right to decide our own laws – is very clear from the Lisbon Treaty.
Leading Constitutional barrister Gerald Hogan remarked last year that, post-Lisbon, our Supreme Court would be “eclipsed” by the Charter of Rights attached to the treaty. ⁽³⁾ And Fidelma Macken, an Irish member of the European Court of Justice, said that it would be “foolish” to argue that the Charter will not affect national laws. ⁽⁴⁾
In an analysis published last June, the European Centre for Law and Justice argued that “If the European Court of Justice were to decide that abortion is a ‘right’ in interpreting the Charter of Fundamental Rights, it appears that this decision, would be binding on Ireland, Protocol 35 (the Maastricht protocol) notwithstanding.”

The law centre pointed out that the Maastricht Protocol only guarded against provisions of EU Treaty law, while they believed the threat to Irish pro-life laws would come from legislation or an EU Court decision that would declare abortion to be a fundamental human right. “This is not a remote possibility;” their report goes on to state, “in fact, given the recent history of the European institutions, this is more probable than not to happen.” ⁽⁵⁾

Archbishop Diarmuid Martin stated on 3 March 2009 that it would be “foolish to think that such protocols would be totally immune from any future legal challenge.” ⁽⁶⁾

And the European Centre for Law and Justice also warned of an EU Court judgment overturning Ireland’s Constitutional protection of marriage as being a union of a man and woman.
That definition of marriage has since received a bashing from the EU Parliament, who voted on 14th January this year to approve a resolution urging EU member states to recognize same-sex marriage and abortion rights.

In a blow to the denials of the Irish government on the effect of the Lisbon Treaty on Ireland’s moral and social laws, the resolution – called the Catania resolution – was actually based on the Charter of Rights attached to the Lisbon Treaty.
The significance of the Catania resolution is not just that it reveals the mindset of the EU Parliament – it also revealed what that Parliament believed the Charter of Rights attached to Lisbon to be – a Charter which could be used to attack the right to life and the traditional definition of marriage.
So what of much-touted “assurances”, “promises” and what the Government is calling “guarantees” on issues such as abortion, taxation and defence which have been offered by the European Council.
An Taoiseach, Brian Cowen, has argued that these statements made by the EU Council should ease concerns which led to the No vote.

This Government is being fundamentally dishonest.
Why? Because they know full well that all these assurances are utterly worthless; they are not part of any treaty and therefore have no legal effect in EU law. Writing about these assurances in the Irish Times on July 30th 2009, High Court Judge and Chairman of the Referendum Commission, Frank Clarke wrote that “these do not change the treaty”. He also described the assurances as “statements” – rather than using the deliberately misleading description of “guarantee” being bandied about by the Government and by Yes campaigners.
That’s because these statements are not guarantees – they are not legally binding on the EU Court of Justice, which is the only body that decides on and interprets EU treaties; despite the government’s insistence that lodging them with the United Nations gives them legal standing. As journalist Vincent Browne has remarked they might as well be lodged with Leitrim County Council.
The “guarantees” will not be referenced in the amendment which is now to be put before the Irish people on October 2nd – the planned date for the second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. This just confirms what we know to be true: these guarantees can have no effect on Irish or EU law.
And the EU Council has narrowed the scope of the Lisbon "guarantee" on protecting the right to life, family and education in the Irish Constitution to one small area of the Lisbon Treaty?

That’s the area of “Freedom, Security and Justice”, which is only one of 13 areas of shared competences in the EU, i.e. shared between the Union and its Member States.
The guarantee does not purport to protect the Irish constitutional position in the other areas of the Treaty – in relation to the internal market, or social policy, for example. The obvious question is why not?
But in any case, these “guarantees” have no legal effect in EU law. In fact, they are merely political promises – the sort that are broken daily – and even worse, they are promises about a future event or events over which we have no control whatsoever.
So now we know the assurances will not change the Lisbon Treaty – not a word or a jot.
But what of the future protocols promised by the EU – which may or may not be attached to a future treaty at some date. Several problems arise with this means of securing our right to decide on abortion and other issues.
Firstly, when the Government says that it promises to bring forward at some future date a protocol on, for example, abortion that’s a promise we cannot hold them to. We don’t know the wording of these proposed protocols or whether they will ever actually come to pass. To come into force such a protocol would have to be ratified by all 27 EU member states.
The June declaration by the EU Prime Ministers and Presidents stated that this future protocol “will clarify but not change either the content or the application of the Treaty of Lisbon.” So, it would remain an interpretative statement and would not be an opt-out from the treaty for Ireland as regards the right-to-life or any other fundamental right.
Secondly, and more importantly, while such protocols would have legal standing as an interpretative statement which the EU Court might, or might not, agree with, the same problem as before still arises (and is the reason why pro-life people voted No to Lisbon despite the Maastricht protocol). That problem is the Charter of Rights attached to the treaty.

If a protocol on abortion is obtained at a future date (although no-one knows at this point what it will actually say), it is unlikely that, if the Lisbon Treaty is passed, such a protocol would stand against a legal challenge. This is because the power of the European Court of Justice to decide on issues such as abortion will be vastly increased by the Charter of Rights attached to the Lisbon Treaty.
This is the core of the problem. Any protocol on the right to life (or on family law) can come into conflict with the Charter – and the European Court of Justice can use the Charter to overrule a conflicting protocol and impose abortion on the Irish people.
In other words, the matter will still be in the hands of the ECJ if Lisbon is passed.

Some commentators have said that it would be better for pro-life people to lobby the European Union politically than to oppose the Lisbon Treaty. But this simply doesn’t make sense in regard to our abortion laws. The European Court of Justice cannot be lobbied – nor will its judgments be reversed even in the unlikely event that the EU Parliament ever favoured a ban on abortion.
Yes campaigners have pointed to the precedent set down by the Danish government following the rejection of the Maastricht Treaty in a referendum there in 1992. In that case the Danish government sought and secured legally binding opt-outs from the central provisions of Maastricht - the euro-currency, EU military and security commitments, and Maastricht’s provisions on EU citizenship.
We are in quite a different position to the Danes however, in that our government – unlike the Poles and the British - has not sought an opt-out from the Charter of Rights. In relation to Irish social and family law then, the Charter could be used to overrule any future protocol, which was not the case in relation to any Danish concerns.  
The fundamental problem lies in the desire of the EU to become ever more centralized and federalized. They want Ireland (and the other smaller states especially) to give up more and more of our sovereignty and our voting power in making EU laws. In short, they want us to hand over our right to decide.
While that may not seem so important when we are discussing banana sizes or patio heaters, it becomes a very serious matter when it comes to the right to decide our own laws. Lisbon will take from each of you, from every Irish person, the right to decide on abortion, euthanasia and other crucially important issues.

NOTES
(1) (SPUC v. Grogan, Case C-159/90), 4 October 1991
(2) Millward Brown IMS: September 2008. Post Lisbon Treaty Referendum Research Findings. Sunday Business Post: June 2008.
(3) Irish Times. 24 April 2008. Charter ‘could eclipse’ Supreme Court.   Carol Coulter
(4) Open Europe: June 2007. The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Why a fudge won’t work,
(5) European Centre for Law and Justice: May 2008.  Legal Analysis of Select Provisions of the Lisbon Treaty
(6) Archbishop Diarmuid Martin: 03 March 2007 speaking to the Institute of International and European Affairs as reported on Catholicireland.net

"Dover Beach"

The sea is calm to-night.
The tide is full, the moon lies fair
Upon the straits; on the French coast the light
Gleams and is gone; the cliffs of England stand;
Glimmering and vast, out in the tranquil bay.
Come to the window, sweet is the night-air!
Only, from the long line of spray
Where the sea meets the moon-blanched land,
Listen! you hear the grating roar
Of pebbles which the waves draw back, and fling,
At their return, up the high strand,
Begin, and cease, and then again begin,
With tremulous cadence slow, and bring
The eternal note of sadness in.

Sophocles long ago
Heard it on the A gaean, and it brought
Into his mind the turbid ebb and flow
Of human misery; we
Find also in the sound a thought,
Hearing it by this distant northern sea.

The Sea of Faith
Was once, too, at the full, and round earth's shore
Lay like the folds of a bright girdle furled.
But now I only hear
Its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar,
Retreating, to the breath
Of the night-wind, down the vast edges drear
And naked shingles of the world.

Ah, love, let us be true
To one another! for the world, which seems
To lie before us like a land of dreams,
So various, so beautiful, so new,
Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,
Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain;
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.

(Matthew Arnold) circa 1851

"Thoughts"

From the Archives: "Thoughts" on AQ, September 2005

One month ago, I made public on the Internet the opinion that an agreement between Rome and the Society of St Pius X "seems impossible", for "if the Society rejoined Rome, the resistance of Catholic Tradition would carry on without it", and if the Pope came over the positions of the Society, he would face a merciless war on his left.

In other words, between Catholic Tradition and the positions of today's Rome, there is "a great gulf fixed" which depends not upon the persons taking these positions but upon the positions they take. Between these two positions, any reconciliation is impossible. Take for example two mathematicians: if the one says that 2 and 2 are 4 while the other says that they are 5, the positions are irreconcilable. Our two mathematicians may personally come to an agreement, in the truth or in error, but 2 and 2 will never make at the same time 4 and/or 5.
Thus in the present difference between Rome and the Society, the persons of Rome may come over to the Society's position, or the persons of the Society may "theoretically!" go over to the positions of Rome. But the conciliar positions of today's Rome would still be as false as 2 and 2 are 5, while the Traditional positions would still be as true as 2 and 2 are 4. That means that even if the Society "God forbid!" were to abandon the Traditional positions, they would nonetheless go on being defended by the remaining friends of Tradition, just as if the Pope for his part were to abandon completely the conciliar positions, these would go on being defended (to the death) by unrepentant friends of the Council.
This is what I meant by saying that if the Society were to rejoin Rome, the resistance of Catholic Tradition would carry on without it. I in no way meant that Catholics defending Tradition, or the Society of St Pius X, are on the brink of a split due to the audience granted on August 29 by the Holy Father to the Society's Superior General.

I think that a good number of those who read the August "Thoughts" understood what they meant, but some people hope for a split in the Society as much as others fear it, which is why both can be so quick to pick up on the least indication of a division.
However, there is for the moment no sign of any such thing. The four Society bishops are of one mind in holding that on the one hand the Second Vatican Council imperiled the dogma of the Faith, but on the other hand the authorities of the official Church are to be respected as such; that the rescue of the Catholic Church depends on their returning to the positions of Catholic Tradition, and so the Society must do all it can to help along such a return. For this purpose, first and foremost the Society must not itself abandon Tradition, on the contrary, it must by its example show how that Tradition, which was supposed to die off in the modern world, is alive and well and bears as good fruit as ever.

But I have just said "for the moment", so does that mean I fear a split coming the day after tomorrow? No, it does not! When I say "for the moment", I am merely repeating last month's reminder that remaining faithful to the Truth is a grace of God that is owed to nobody, therefore "let him who thinks he stands, take care lest he fall", as St. Paul says ( I Cor. X, 12)
And so, as long as the authorities of Mother Church are suffering from the leprosy of the heresy of neo-modernism, let us pray to God for us to keep the right balance by neither getting so close to them as to catch their leprosy, nor keeping so far away from them as to abandon our Mother. It is a delicate balance, but the four Society bishops, following Archbishop Lefebvre, mean to keep it, with the help of God and His Most Holy Mother.
September 13, 2005

La Reja, Argentina

Abortion and our Modern Democracy

Slaughter of the Innocents in Scotland

Catholic Truth have drawn attention to the following:

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/health/39Eight-12yearolds-have-had-abortions.5557071.jp

ABORTIONS were carried out on nearly 100 girls aged 14 or younger in Scotland last year, according to new figures.

And over the last nine years, nearly 3,000 girls aged 15 or younger had abortions.
Eight of the youngsters who underwent terminations between 2001 and 2008 were just 12, the figures revealed.
The figures were disclosed in response to a Freedom of Information request.
Public Health Minister Shona Robison said: "The number of 12- and 13-year-olds who get pregnant and have terminations is low but still a cause for concern."
Last year 343 abortions were carried out on girls under 16. Of these, 248 were 15, 82 were 14, and 13 were under 14.
Since 2000, a total of 2,871 abortions have been performed on girls under 16. Of these, 2,081 were 15, 695 were 14, 87 were 13, and eight were 12.
The minister said the Scottish Government was working with health boards and councils to ensure "appropriate" education on sex and relationships was delivered in all schools.
"Health boards and councils are providing young people's sexual health 'drop-in' services either within or near every Scottish school," she said.

Catholic Moral Dress Code

This is a very useful but above all necessary link. See the extracts below. Click on the link for the full article. May devotion to the Holy Family help us in our Crusade for Purity!

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/morality/modesty/dress.htm

There are many different ways in which we can sin or cause others to sin such as: our words, actions, neglects and immorality; however, in this day and age the most frequent way we cause ourselves to sin is by our immorality by being immodestly dressed.

Sexual self-consciousness, shame and the covering up of the body follow the Fall in the Garden of Eden (Gn 2:25; 3:7; 3:10-11). The wisdom of biblical literature warns against the snares of feminine shamelessness (Prov.2:16;5:3; 7:5-27). In the New Testament modesty in looks, words and general behavior is inculcated (Matt. 5:28; Eph. 5:3-20; 2 Peter 2:14). General sexual modesty - "a gentle and quiet spirit" - sshould characterize the Christian woman (1 Tim. 2:9-12; 1 Peter 3:1-6)

Saint Thomas treated modesty (pudicitia) as a part of chastity, not a distinct virtue from it. All kinds of things could be and were considered in St. Thomas' context - words, looks, touches, embraces, kisses, fantasies, the nude in art, dress, reading, bathing, dancing, theatrical shows in recent times, movies and television shows (Before Vatican II, each year we had to stand up in Church and Make a vow to God not to go to indecent movies which consisted of anything that was on the Banned List at the back of the Church which would now be ratings such as PG, R, X, XX, XXX. Are these vows being made in any Church now?)

There is a saying that in proportion to the amount of flesh mortal sin seems to increase. This being the case, one would assume that at least our Catholic women and girls would have the good sense to ALWAYS wear clothes that tend to conceal, rather than reveal or call attention to the body. This moral dress code should be Universal, just as our Church is Universal or Catholic. There should be no excuse for moral dress codes being different just because a person lives in a different country; either a person is dressed decently or he is not! True Roman Catholics should wear decent clothes that would show they are conscious to the fact their bodies are "temples of the Holy Ghost".

Women often deny that their semi-nude attire is the source of numerous and serious temptations to the opposite sex. Some reject any responsibility for leading others into sin. Others try to cover their own guilt by such statements as: "He must have a dirty mind. Scanty attire in men doesn't affect me at all. Why should men be tempted by the scanty attire of women?" When a woman is dressed immodestly, she becomes the temptress for men. Remember Our Lord's words to men who fall prey to such allurements: "Whoever shall look on a woman to lust after her hath already committed adultery with her in his heart." (Matt. 5:28) Indirectly, immodest woman are included in this indictment, being cooperators with the sins of men. God has made woman beautiful and attractive to men so as to fit with His plan for procreation in lawful wedlock. As a result of Original sin, mankind must constantly struggle to regulate this attraction. Unless both men and women fortify themselves by prayer, sin quickly enters their immortal souls.

Many women will say they wear the modern fashions because they are more comfortable, and the weather is hot (Remember, it is very hot in Hell). This brings us to the area of sports. Regretably, all too many sports are taboo for us Catholics, not that they are in themselves a sin or a near occasion of sin, but because of the skimpy attire that such sports "require". Think of these sports and the clothes people usually wear when playing the following sports or activities: swimming, baton twirling, tennis, basketball, dancing (disco dancing and little girls who take dancing lessons) and gymnastics. Let us tak swimming for an example, since people usually wear less clothes when swimming than any other sport. Swimsuits have no sleeves, have very low necklines, no coverings for the legs and usually has the whole back exposed. When we think of the saying, "in proportion to the amount of flesh exposed mortal sin seems to increase", shouldn't we avoid the bathing suits like the plaque? Do you think this suggestion is crazy? You say yes, then let us ask another question. Do you prefer to have the mortal sin of immodesty on your soul and the untold number of mortal sins of your being a temptress or tempter and causing others to sin?

One might say that our little girls can't do anything. You are wrong, because, if you modify the costumes and attire that the girls wear, in most cases they can still participate if you are Catholic enough to stand up for the proper moral dress code. In addition to the modifications, our girls can go bicycle riding and horse back riding if they have a full skirt and the skirt reaches at least to the middle of the calf; and, of course, skating can be done in a skirt. Our girls should be pursuing lady-like activities and hobbies which will prepare them for marriage and their proper role as mother and wife. They should be learning to sew, embroider, knit, crochet, cook, make rosaries, sing good Catholic songs and other decent, patriotic songs, play musical instruments (we'll need an organ player eventually for our chapel), paint and draw. Above all they should be learning to talk, dress, sit, walk, stand, kneel, stoop and act like a lady at all times. Our girls have many options open to them, if they will only pursue them in a moral decent manner.

Our Sorrowful and Immaculate Mother, whom God has presented to us as the Perfect Model of Modesty and Purity, is being terribly saddened by the immodest and the impure. However, it has not all happened by accident. Satan planned it this way. As he has done with such evil movements as Feemasonry, Atheistic Communism, Socialism, Modernism and Liberalism, so also has he planned out a program of gradual, not sudden, destruction of the sense of modesty and purity. A mere look at the past 50 years or more shows us very plainly how gradually it was all done, first by apparently innocent abbreviations of garments and by slight revelations of bare flesh and by subtle little displays of the figure, and then, as protests died down, by more and more abbreviations and displays until the crude immodesty of our day became a shocking reality.

Many living today have seen it all happen before their very eyes. They have lived through it and, if they have managed to retain their God-given moral sense, they find the barbarian immodesty of this day intolerable and they look upon it as a sin crying to Heaven for the vengeance that must inevitably come if sinners continue to refuse to amend their ways.

Several Popes have spoken out with authority on the subject of modesty. Pope Benedict XV (1914-1922) and his two successors, Popes Pius XI and Pius XII, have promoted modesty in dress. These are a few words of Pope Benedict XV: "One cannot sufficiently deplore the blindess of so many women of every age and station. Made foolish by a desire to please, they do not see to what degree the indecency of their clothing shocks every honest man and offends God. Most of them would formerly have blushed for such apparel as for a grave fault aginst Christian modesty. Now it does not suffice to exhibit themselves on public thoroughfares; they do not fear to cross the threshold of churches, to assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and even to bear the seducing food of shameful passions to the Holy Altar, where one receives the Heavenly Author of Purity."

It is necessary for us to promote standards of attire for Catholic women and girls, standards such as Pope Pius XI had in mind when he said: "A dress cannot be decent which is cut deeper than two fingers breath under the pit of the throat; which does not cover the arms at least to the elbows; and scarecely reaches a bit beyond the knees. Furthermore, dresses of transparent materials are improper." Ladies, men, girls and boys should always wear underwear and no beige material (it leaves the impression at a distance of having no clothes). If a skirt is snug, it should reach well below the knees; no shorts, no bathing suits, and no pants (for females).

Christ's words are very clear. His teachings about wearing about wearing apparel leave no doubt as to what He meant ("A woman shall not be clothed with man's apparel neither shall a man use woman's apparel: for he that doeth these things is abominable before God.") If Christ said that the sexes should not wear each others clothes and they understood Him, it stands to reason that there was a distinct difference in the men and women's clothes. If the people of Jeus' day could tell a distinction in the clothes, how much more so can we tell a distinction in the pants and dresses of the men and women of today? Many people lament the terrible state of immorality that is prevalent in our society, wondering what can be done about it. Among other things such as praying the rosary daily and reading the Holy Bible and the lives of the saints we can promote modesty by burning bathing suits and shorts and converting pants into decent skirts. Let us always keep in mind that the ultimate success is gaining heaven and nothing else really matters.

We are all born with a fallen nature and, consequently, we must keep our bodies covered in order to avoid the dangers of concupiscence. This fact, a
result of original sin, is deliberately ignored each time that naturalism attempts to insinuate itself into our Christian customs. Then it is that
the purpose of clothing is lost sight of, and instead of being an invitation to virtue, it becomes an incitement to sin. The Church, like a vigilant
Mother, full of tender care for the holiness and eternal salvation of Her children, has often been obliged to warn the faithful so that they might
avoid the errors of fashion, and to take the measures necessary to ensure that the holy places and sacred things should not be profaned by immodesty
in dress.
Unfortunately, we are living in times that have lost the sense of sin and, as a result, we see around us an eruption of styles of dress which are, in
every way, contrary to Christian modesty. Christian people must not allow themselves to be carried along by the spirit of the world but must firmly
resist such deviations... Jacinta Marto, one of the little seers of Fatima, although she was only eleven years old at the time, had a wisdom taught her
by the Mother of God.
She merits, therefore, our attention. Here is what she said with regard to  styles of dress: "Fashions will arise which will greatly offend God." When
we consider the fashions of our day, we are led to conclude that the times foretold by the little seer have arrived. Indeed, the styles of dress of
the women and girls of today such as: very tight clothing; dressing like men, including slacks and tights; low necklines; skirts with hemlines or
slits which do not cover the leg below the knee, are absolutely contrary to the norms of Christian modesty.

For this reason, in order to conform to the recommendations of the Holy See,  and in particular to the instructions of the Sacred Congregation of the
Council, we urge our faithful people to refrain from following such ways of dressing.
"Those who keep the Law of God", Jacinta said, "should not follow fashions". Our priests must try to apply the instructions of the Sacred Congregation of
the Council, without violence or rudeness, but with firmness. They must not let persons, dressed in the styles described above, receive the Sacraments
and, as far as possible, must not allow them access to the Temple of God. Furthermore, they must frequently remind the faithful of these regulations.
Also, when couples present themselves for marriage preparation, the priests  must tell them to inform their wedding guests of the rules for dress in
church. People dressed in these unacceptable ways must not be accepted as witnesses to the marriage and, after due warning, they must not be admitted
to Holy Communion.

 
It is highly recommended that these prescriptions be posted at the entrance to the church.
-Bishop Antonio de Castro-Mayer-

St. Philomena

http://ireland.sspx.net/eucharistic%20crusade/handmaids/2009/HandmaidJUL09.pdf

The tomb of this virgin and martyr, unknown until
the first years of the 19th century, was
providentially discovered in 1802 in the
catacombs. God by many miracles made the discovery of
Saint Philomena’s body famous, and the cult of the young
Saint spread everywhere with an extraordinary rapidity.
She received such exceptional homage that she deserves
to be placed in the first ranks of the virgin martyrs whom
the Church venerates. The Holy Curé of Ars called her his dear little Saint and
performed wonders, invoking her.

Certain revelations having the character of authenticity say that Saint Philomena was
the daughter of a Greek prince, who accompanied her parents to Rome on a journey,
and that her glorious martyrdom occurred there under Diocletian in the third century.
The two arrows engraved on her tombstone in opposite directions referred to the
efforts of the persecutor to slay her with a volley of arrows, after Angels preserved
her from death by drowning; the arrows turned against the archers. Finally she was
beheaded, like so many other miraculously protected heroes and heroines of Christ.
This opinion, which certain circumstances attending the translation of her relics in
1812 to the city of Mugnano appeared to verify, has prevailed. In that city devotion to
her has been extraordinary and remains so to this day; miracles have multiplied both
there and elsewhere for those who invoke her.
Other very serious studies maintain that she was a child of the Roman people,
immolated in the first century for Jesus Christ, at the age of twelve or thirteen years.
What is beyond doubt is that this Saint responds unfailingly to the faith of those who
invoke her. Invoked everywhere with wonderful success, she was entitled “the
wonder-worker of the 19th century”. She has shown herself to be the protectress, in

particular, of small children. A mother whose young son died despite her prayers,
placed a picture of the Saint on his corpse, begging that he be returned to her. And the
child rose as though from sleep, stood up beside his bed and had no more symptoms
of any sickness whatsoever. A little girl who had put out her eye playing with a pair
of scissors, which injury was declared irreparable by physicians, had her eye restored
when she washed her face in oil taken from the Saint’s lamp; and this eye seemed to
everyone more vivid and bright than the other.

Additional Information :
In 1802, the bones of a female between the ages of 13 and 15 were discovered in the
catacomb of St. Priscilia. An inscription near her tomb read "Peace be with thee,
Philomena", along with drawings of 2 anchors, 3 arrows and a palm. Near her bones
was discovered a small glass vial, containing the remains of blood. Because it was a
popular custom of the early martyrs to leave symbols and signs such as these, it was
easily determined that St. Philomena was a virgin and a martyr. Her popularity soon
became widespread, with her most memorable devotees being St. John Vianney, St.
Madeleine Sophie Barat, St. Peter Eymard, and St. Peter Chanel. After being
miraculously cured, Ven. Pauline Jaricot insisted that Pope Gregory XVI begin an
examination for the beatification of St. Philomena, who was to become known as the
"wonder worker". After hundreds of other miraculous cures, she was beatified in
1837. St. Philomena, who the pope named as the Patroness of the Living Rosary and
the Patroness of the Children of Mary, is the only person recognized as a saint solely
on the basis of her powerful intercession, although pertinent revelations regarding her
life have been recorded. Her relics are now preserved in Mugnano, Italy.

Prayer
O most pure Virgin, glorious Martyr, St.
Philomena, whom God in His eternal
power has revealed to the world in
these unhappy days in order to revive the
faith, sustain the hope and enkindle the
charity of Christian souls, behold me prostate
at thy feet. Deign, O Virgin, full of goodness
and kindness, to receive my humble prayers
and to obtain for me that purity for which
thou didst sacrifice the most alluring
pleasures of the world, that strength of soul
which made thee resist the most terrible
attacks and that ardent love for our Lord
Jesus Christ, which the most frightful
torments could not extinguish in thee. So,
that wearing thy holy cord and imitating thee
in this life, I may one day be crowned with
thee in heaven. Amen.