Sunday, 28 February 2010
Youth Defence are organising the following event to mark the 1992 Supreme Court ruling in the X case.
What: Annual Commemoration for Baby X
When: Saturday 6th of March @ 2pm
Where: G.P.O., O’Connell Street, Dublin
Saturday, 27 February 2010
We are happy to support the following:
Bishop Williamson's 70th birthday falls on 8th March and his publisher, Stephen Heiner, has come up with the idea of collecting birthday greetings by means of e-mail and Catholic forums. These greetings and birthday wishes will be collated and presented to His Lordship.
Please add birthday greetings for His Lordship to the Ignis Ardens thread linked below. It is not necessary to give one's name in public if one doesn't wish to. Registration at Ignis will be necessary to post a message if you are not already a member of the forum, but it is an easy process that simply requires an e-mail address.
Alternatively, if one wishes to send his Lordship a more personal message it may be done by sending the message in an e-mail to email@example.com with the subject line "birthday."
Friday, 26 February 2010
1. We read in the Catholic Encyclopedia
that during the early ages
or Houses of Hospitality
was a shelter
for the sick, the poor,
the orphan, the old, the traveller,
and the needy of every kind.
2. Originally the Hospices
of Houses of Hospitality
were under the supervision
of the Bishops
who designated priests
and temporal affairs
of these charitable institutions.
A Peter Maurin essay.
1. People who are in need
and are not afraid to beg
give to people not in need
the occasion to do good
for goodness' sake.
2. Modern society
calls the beggar
bum and panhandler
and gives him the bum's rush.
3. The Greeks used to say
that people in need
are the ambassadors of the gods.
4. We read in the Gospel:
"As long as you did it
to one of the least
of My brothers
you did it to Me."
5. While modern society
calls the beggars
bums and panhandlers,
they are in fact
the Ambassadors of God.
6. To be God's Ambassador
to be proud of.
The lodge and the money men are the enemy of Catholicism. Freemasonry and secret societies are condemned by the Church. Richard Greene is correct to point out the role of the lodge in the decision making. The secret rulers, money men run the show and their glove puppets, the various governments dance to their tune.
Former Grand Master of the Grand Orient de France, Jean-Michel Quillardet, has told the Belgian daily, Le Soir, that part of the freemason movement want to open a Brussels office to counter the increasing prominence of religion in decision-making in the EU.
He said: “The masonic orders should practice politics in the positive sense of the term: So that despite their own partisan divisions, they speak out on the side of secularism...I think we will one day manage to create a general masonic delegation, for the sake of free-thinking in the European institutions.”
Of course, the ascendency of Masonry in the institutions of the EU is no secret, as EU Commission head, Jose Manuel Barroso, met with representatives of various European lodges in 2008. In addition to this outward recognition, the masonic orders were then given significant internal recognition by the Commission in the form of representation in Bepa, the Bureau of European Policy Advisors, which is a EU Commission think-tank.
Cóir Spokesman, Richard Greene, comments that: “Here again, we see the influence of masonry within the EU. There are several open Freemasons in the senior ranks of the EU, and, of course, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, the architect, par excellence, of the EU Constitution, then renamed the Lisbon Treaty is proud of his masonic roots.”
“Apart from directly side-swiping Europe's Christian heritage, the EU have given a secret, all-male society internal representation on one of the bodies which actually helps to analyse and formulate EU Commission policy. Most Europeans would recognise Europe's Christian roots, but not the EU – as was painfully clear from their stand during the Constitution/Lisbon deliberations. And so, what we have is a un-elected Commission, amongst whose ranks are many masons, taking direction from a secret society on the issue religion in the EU.”
“Cóir respect the right of peoples to express different opinions in a democracy, and the right of people to form lobbying groups to try to influence the decision-making which goes on in a democracy. That is the world in which we live. However, we cannot condone the EU giving time and influence to a secret society. The masons hardly need to open an office in Brussels, when it is apparent that the masons within the EU institutions are in full contact with the masons outside the institutions of the EU.”
Wednesday, 24 February 2010
You can visit the link http://www.juliusevola.com/site/MenAmongtheRuins.pdf for
Postwar Reflections of a
Revolt Against the Modern World
9/11 was an ‘inside job’ for certain and there is clear evidence that they were demolished by a series of demolition charges.
Tuesday, 23 February 2010
This is from the Durendal weblog.
I hope that our readers will indulge the co-editor of this blog in a personal and perhaps somewhat sentimental post. It concerns recent happenings in the traditionalist world and two men whom I hold dearly in my heart. I've keep silent on the matters for a variety of reasons, but now realise I cannot remain so. I would hold myself as a miscreant and unworthy of the affection each man holds for me if I were to keep my fingers still.
The individuals in question are His Lordship Bishop Richard Williamson, and Mr. Stephen Heiner. The matter is the vile hit-piece published by Der Spiegel the first week of February (cf. http://freeinternetpress.com/story.php?sid=24384 and http://truerestoration.blogspot.com/2010/02/der-spiegel-real-story.html) -- a piece not so outrageous for its attack on Bp. Williamson (this is expected from the secular media) as for the things that came out of Menzingen to fuel the article.
Criticizing or opposing clergy is generally reserved for modernist clergy. I recognize the need for traditionalists to close ranks, and I further recognize the respect and deference due to our priests and bishops. But that said, even while giving every possible benefit of a doubt to the leadership of the S.S.P.X, I must with all due deference state that it is frankly appalling that senior clerics of the S.S.P.X feel the need to speak so badly of their comrade, comparing him to "a piece of uranium" and saying “He gets an idea into his head, becomes fixated on it and exaggerates. But he doesn't study the documents” (which is calumny if Fr. Pfluger actually knows Bp. Williamson's ways, and rash judgement based on ignorance if he doesn't). MAYBE, one could refrain from condemning such comments a year ago when the media storm was intense. But now, it is, again with the greatest of deference, an unconscionable way to treat a long-time comrade.
I further find is disturbing that the Spiegel reporters were not only given the time of day but sent to London to interrogate Bp. Williamson. Beyond disturbing, I must say that, considering Maximilian Krah is the retained legal counsel for the S.S.P.X in Germany, that
his arrangements with Der Spiegel appear to be a calculated plan to "show Bishop Williamson as unbalanced, ill, and outcast" (as Mr. Heiner says, cf. http://truerestoration.blogspot.com/2010/02/das-ist-geschehen-responding-to-herr.html) so as to effectively distance the S.S.P.X from him. If the leadership of the S.S.P.X feels that as a practical measure it must distance itself, so be it, but not like this. It is a grave injustice.
Now, I've said much to defend Bp. Williamson's dignity. How does this post defend Mr. Heiner? Well, firstly, I write this to show solidarity with him. I know that he is attacked for being "divisive" by writing as he has, but I agree with what he has done. While I have great respect for all that the leaders of the S.S.P.X have done, we cannot fall into the error of excessive obedience or a certain "papolatry" of our own. An injustice must be opposed even if said injustice is perpetrated by our friends, allies, or superiors.
As many good priests have said, the S.S.P.X is a human institution. Yet we should not be scandalised by all this as it is merely the this human aspect we see and by no means suggests we should abandon the S.S.P.X.
One might accuse me of being overly attached to Bishop Williamson's person. There may well be merit to that argument, as I consider His Lordship not only a spiritual father but a friend. The same could be said of my relationship with Stephen Heiner who is more of a peer when it comes to friendship. That said, it is the bonds of friendship that demands I speak out, but moreover, I do not believe my judgement has been totally clouded
Monday, 22 February 2010
A family farm should be encouraged and supported.
Sunday, 21 February 2010
There are moments when you appreciate the victories at fair value, so they are rare! It is indeed Catholics and defenders of Christianity who won earlier this afternoon on the porch of Notre-Dame in Paris ... Let us remember that the associations of homosexuals and their affiliates have received the prohibition of their "protest" outside the cathedral.
After a few kisses exchanged before the poor image of the place St Michel, a fifty provocateurs did not fail to go to Notre Dame to try to dirty again the Franco-Christian heritage through one of its the most notable symbols. But they found to talk ... defenders of natural law had responded to the call number at the rally launched by the RF and relayed sites friends. Conclusion: boos, a few clashes and a general decline of sodomites protected the police.
In two minutes in front of Notre-Dame was cleaned. So great victory, tempered by the arrest of four of our comrades. A small demonstration was organized to support the police station of the fourth arrondissement, in which thirty activists (mostly FR Ile-de-France) showed their presence loudly. The four arrested were released shortly before 19h. Faced with the provocations of small groups disturbed and immoral, we will always be present! Kiss-in? Kiss-out!
A participant on the Angelqueen Internet Forum offers this comment.
Posted by Padraig: Sat Feb 20, 2010
It's no secret that, by his remarks at that time and since, he has put the SSPX in a very difficult situation. For what? How many Jews were killed, and the means of the extermination. Like I said, I am wondering, "why?"
Why? You're really not sure why? How about because H.E.'s not a coward. That he has respect for and devotion to the truth, unlike just about any other Catholic these days, clerical or lay. He knows the truth, and when asked about it he's enough of a man to tell it. He's not a wimpy, effeminate wuss who'll kowtow to the Jewsmedia.
And the idea that it's not an important issue, or that it's not relevant to Catholic teaching or the goals of the Society -- absolutely ridiculous!
The "holohoax" is the reason that once-Christian/Catholic Europe has submitted to the oppression and tyranny of the Jews. If not for "the holocaust" why would a right thinking Catholic ever entertain the idea that white, Christian Europe "owes something to the Jews", who have done nothing but persecute and undermine the work of Christ and His followers for the last 2010 years? He never would. The very idea would be laughable.
For German Jews, the slightest deviance from the official propaganda is heresy of the first degree. And so making the smallest statement contradicting the official propaganda is to take on the full brunt of an angry Jewsmedia. For to deny the holocaust is to attack the cornerstone, the power base, the lynch-pin of the entire system of Jewish domination. And to ,so to speak, "resist to the face" the Jews is inseparable from Catholic action and teaching.
Because modernism and anti-Catholicism is from the Jews. Masons, Communists, progressives, usury (which allows capitalism), the invention of the printing press (which was used primarily to spread anti-Catholic propaganda), and now the modern propaganda spread throughout and infecting the modern school system -- all are either directly or indirectly linked to the Jews.
It is for this reason that all the popes until modern times (see especially A Quo Primum, Benedict the XIV) have preached that Catholics should fear and distrust the Jews. That they are not to have business dealings with them (because it's a virtue for Jews to cheat the "goyim"), that they are not to live in community with them (because Jews will corrupt the Faith of those that they come into contact with), that they are not to work for them as servants of a Jewish household (because it is not right for the higher to serve the lower except out of charity). . . . The list goes on and on.
And it is expressly because the modern popes have broken away from this doctrine in particular that we are seeing Jewry dominate the Catholic Church. Popes praying at synagogues, popes being reprimanded by Jews for not doing more for the Jews during WWII, popes making the outrageous statement -- a statement which more than any other heresy strikes with an ax at the root of Catholicism, for it makes Christ's entire life meaningless -- the outrageous statement that Judaism is salvific for the Jews.
And His Excellency Bishop Williamson is the last man standing who won't take this garbage anymore. He's the last one who just won't burn the incense. He rather go to jail, he'd rather pay a fine, he'd rather be disgraced, he'd (hopefully) rather die than tell a lie, than give in to the pressure of the Jewish propaganda, than tell the world that the lie of the twentieth century, the lie that has given the Jews domination over the Church, the lie that has forced the surrender of white Catholic Europe to the Jews, and the Muslims, and the Blacks -- that this lie is true.
And I applaud him for that. I'm going to say here what I titled the group that I created on "Facebook" (which has since been removed) in the days following the blowup over his statements. "I support Bishop Williamson because he is right" and "I support Bishop Williamson because he is a courageous defender of the Catholic Faith." Not because I support free-speech. Not because I because I just love him and am willing to ignore and forgive this little faux pas. Not just because he's a true Catholic bishop who confirmed me and who I sincerely wish (although it seems unlikely) will one day ordain me, and thus he deserves my respect even when he's "out of line" (which he in no was). No. Because he is right, because he's brave, and because he's truly Catholic. I can only hope to one day have the courage, the intellect, the holiness, and the fortitude of His Excellency.
Saturday, 20 February 2010
A news item from Britain.
NEARLY eight out of 10 Britons want immigration to be slashed, an official Government poll has revealed.
In a clear demonstration of the depth of feeling on the controversial issue, the latest update of the “citizenship survey”, which studies people’s views about community cohesion, showed that 77 per cent of people thought immigration should be cut.
More than half of respondents said they wanted immigration reduced by a great deal. And nearly a quarter of ethnic minorities thought the number of immigrants coming to Britain should be cut.
The poll comes days after the Daily Express revealed how councils were struggling to cope with the impact of high immigration.
Public services such as schools and hospitals are under enormous strain and beginning to crack, local authorities have admitted.
The survey, which has been conducted by the Department of Communities and Local Government since 2001, showed that negative attitudes towards immigration were not softening.
Students, better-paid workers and holders of degrees were far more favourable towards immigration than those further down the wage scale and people without qualifications, who often find themselves competing with migrant workers.
Labour MP Frank Field and Tory Nicholas Soames, co-chairmen of the Cross-Party Group on Balanced Migration, said: “As has been shown in poll after poll, the overwhelming majority of British people want immigration reduced. They are absolutely right. Net migration must be reduced to less than 40,000 in order to prevent the population reaching 70million, which official projections say it will do in 2029.
“It’s time that the leaders of the main parties responded to this legitimate concern, rather than leave the field wide open to extremists.” Shadow Immigration Minister Damian Green said: “The public are right to be concerned that immigration has run out of control under this Government
“A Conservative Government would make big cuts in the annual immigration rate, which would help our public services and reduce tensions between communities.”
The issue of immigration is shaping up as a key electoral battleground.
Labour argues that its points-based system for non-EU workers is helping to cut migrant numbers after a period in which it has been accused of operating an open door policy.
Home Secretary Alan Johnson has admitted that the Government has been maladroit in addressing the concerns of voters over the issue, with Labour particularly worried about losing core support in its traditional industrial heartlands.
The Tories have promised a yearly cap on migrants, although it is unclear how much room they would have to make a reduction given that they will not be able to stop people coming from the EU.
The Communities Department said the poll showed most people, whatever their origin, felt a strong sense of attachment to their neighbourhood and to Britain.
The survey comes after Immigration Minister Phil Woolas called for immigrants to learn how to queue properly to help them integrate more successfully. He claimed earlier this week that tension could spread across the country if commonly held rules of behaviour such as queueing were not observed by newcomers.
Mr Woolas proposed that if immigrants wanted to become British citizens they would have to learn the art of queueing for everything from buses to sandwiches.
“The simple act of taking one’s turn is one of the things that holds our country together. It is central to the British sense of fair play and it is better for everyone,” he said.
Friday, 19 February 2010
Thursday, 18 February 2010
Entrance of Jesus into the Garden of Olives
1st Prelude. Look at Jesus walking resolutely in the midst of His Apostles towards the Garden of Olives, to begin His dolorous Passion.
2nd Prelude. Beg the grace of meeting with firmness the difficulties which we encounter in the service of God and the practice of perfection.
POINT I. "When Jesus had said these things, He went forth with His disciples over the brook Cedron, where there was a garden, into which he entered." *
* In the meditations on the Passion, the headings of the three points are simply texts from the Gospel. It will therefore be very important to impress them well on the memory, because generally they contain the substance of the points.
Fix, O my soul, thy eyes on thy Saviour, whom thou hast so often chosen for thy model; see how resolutely He goes forth to the combat, and draws after Him by His words and example His faithful disciples. "But that the world may know that I love the Father, and as the Father have given Me commandment, so do I. Arise, let us go hence." Go where? To the battle, to death. How full these words are of love, obedience and courage!
You see in this the generosity, the great heart of Jesus. How different are you, who, far from resolutely meeting occasions of conquest and suffering, fly from them continually, with so much care and ingenuity! How shameful in you, who have made profession of imitating Jesus Christ more perfectly than ordinary men, who have the glory of bearing His name, fighting under His standard, and sharing with Him labours, privations, and sufferings! Examine yourself, with a sincere desire of knowing how far you merit these reproaches.
AFFECTATIONS and RESOLUTIONS
POINT II. "Then Jesus came with them into a country place which is called Gethsemani; and He said to His disciples, Sit you here, while I go yonder and pray."
CONSIDERATION. Remark how Jesus prepares for prayer. He retires into a solitary place, and separates Himself from the company of men, even of His intimate friends. He only invites them to watch and pray with Him. Sustinete hic et vigilate mecum (Matthew 26).
APPLICATION. O Jesus, how well dost Thou teach me how I ought to pray and meditate profitably on Thy holy law! After Thy example, when I enter the place where I am about to pray, I will say to all distracting thoughts, "Stay you here, while I go yonder and pray"; and then afterwards I will vigilantly shut them out from my mind and heart, or at least prevent them from fixing themselves there.
AFFECTIONS and RESOLUTIONS
POINT III. "And He taketh Peter and James and John with Him, and He began to fear".
CONSIDERATION. Why did the Saviour give such a glorious preference to these three disciples, and choose them to be near His person at the time of the great mysteries of His strife and His agony? The Gospel does not tell us; but we may believe that as they witnessed His glory and happiness on Mount Thabor, it was His will that they should witness also His humiliation and agony on the Mount of Olives.
APPLICATION. How inconsistent we are! We appreciate and envy the privilege of the three beloved disciples, whom Jesus allowed to be with Him in His agony, and we do not understand that it is a favour given to us when He sends us an occasion of suffering with Him. Far from being grateful for it, we complain, we give way to discouragement or distrust. Is this acting reasonably and with faith? Let us acknowledge our inconsistency, and humbly beg our loving Saviour to give us grace so to meditate on His sorrowful Passion that we may draw from it a love of the cross, sorrow for our sins, compassion and resignation.
COLLOQUY with Our Blessed Lord in suffering.
UP TO 100 protesters demonstrated yesterday in a rally against head shops in Castlebar, Co Mayo.
The protesters are concerned that two head shops are now operating locally. They are particularly concerned that the outlets are located on the approach route to two schools, Davitt College and St Joseph’s Secondary School. The rally began at a premises known as Cosmic Closet on Charles Street before moving on to the second outlet on Castle Street, about three-quarters of a mile away.
Some protesters carried placards claiming head shops were a blight on society whilst others angrily shouted, “head shops out, no head shops for Castlebar!” Speaking through a megaphone, the Mayor of Castlebar, Cllr Michael Kilcoyne, called on the Opposition in Dáil Éireann to put down a Private Members Bill to have the operation of head shops regulated. Mr Kilcoyne also called on the owners of rental properties to “examine their consciences” before renting to individuals who intended to operate such premises.
One protester Ernie Sweeney said: “Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right. There are a lot of things in this country that are legal and we all known they are not right.”
As the demonstration ended at Charles Street, Paul Bannon, who identified himself as the proprietor of the Cosmic Closet, defended his business activities. “What I sell is better than drugs or alcohol,” he said. “If there was a ban on head shops in the morning the drug sellers would move in.” Mr Bannon said he exercised self-regulation in that his premises didn’t sell to under-18s even though he was legally entitled to do so.
Wednesday, 17 February 2010
Series of Meditations on the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ
On the requisite Dispositions for the holy Time of Lent
1st Prelude. Represent to yourself Adam at the moment when, after his condemnation, he hears the humiliating words, "Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."
2nd Prelude. Beg of God that he will deign to penetrate you with the feelings the Church desires us to be inspired with today.
POINT I. First disposition requisite: Humility
CONSIDERATION. "Remember, O man, that dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." Who uttered these bitter words? God Himself, nearly six thousand years ago. To whom did He address them? To Adam, our first parent, as soon as, in punishment for his sin, the sentence of death had been pronounced on him and his posterity: "Because thou hast eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that thou shoudst not eat, cursed is the earth in thy work," said the Lord. "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return to the earth of which thou wast taken; for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." But why did God add these last words, which do not increase in any way the punishment already given? It was doubtless to subdue and annihilate the pride of Adam, and inspire him with such deep humility as would dispose his heart to salutary penance. Thus we see that Adam, who had begun to excuse himself, answered not, but accepted the penance imposed, and persevered in it, humble, penitant, and resigned for the long space of nine hundred years. God was pleased with this penance, and our first parent was saved by it through the merits of the future Redeemer.
APPLICATION. We have sinned in Adam, we have sinned ourselves, we are very guilty, we have great need of doing penance, of imploring pardon; God is ready to give it to us. But we have seen that the first feeling He seeks in the heart of a sinner is humility, and a conviction of his own unworthiness. The first disposition then into which we ought to try to enter and in which to persevere during Lent - that time of universal penance - is a profound humility, springing from the knowledge of our nothingness and our sins. It is this which should form the principal merit of our works of penance.
Here make AFFECTIONS and RESOLUTIONS
POINT II. Second disposition requisite: Compunction
CONSIDERATION. "Remember, O man, that thou art dust, and unto dust shalt thou return." Who is it that utters again, every year on this day, the same words that God pronounced in the terrestrial paradise? Our holy Mother Church by the mouth of her ministers. And to whom does she address them? To each of us, to all the faithful who assemble in the house of God. And at what moment? At the same moment when she places ashes on our foreheads - the emblem of death and penance. It is as if she said, O man, be thou who thou mayest, remember thou must die and become like unto this dust, because of sin; remember, that if thou dost not penance for thy sins, thou wilt only rise again from the dust of the tomb to pass in body and soul into a place of eternal torments.
APPLICATION. The Church obliges us to listen to those grave and terrific truths only to inspire us, from the first day of Lent, with holy and deep compunction. Compunction of heart is the second essential disposition for whomever desires to attain one of the principal ends of Lent - salutary penance. If our works of mortification and penance are accompanied by sentiments of true contrition and humility, they will be pleasing before God, for, says the royal Prophet, "a contrite and humbled heart, O God, Thou wilt not despise." Cor humiliatum Deus non despicies. If we are wanting in these dispositions, ought we not to fear that all the practices of Lent, even the most painful ones, will be of little use to us?
COLLOQUY with Our Lord.
Tuesday, 16 February 2010
Lent is nothing other than the preparation for the beautiful feast of Easter. Before becoming partakers in the Resurrection of Our Lord Jesus Christ, we must be partakers in His Passion, in His Redemption, in His Sacrifice.
Lent is undoubtedly a time of penance. Therefore, we must make some efforts to deny ourselves usual satisfactions - in eating, drinking and the like. It is good to deny ourselves in these things in order to attach ourselves more to spiritual goods, forgetting temporal goods in order to elevate ourselves towards the eternal ones.
But God is more pleased by our observance of His Commandments than by our penances. God created us to be with Him one day. The way that leads us to Him through the years that we have to spend here below is set out by His Law. His Law is, in fact, nothing other than a series of road signs which Our Lord has placed along the way of our earthly life to lead us towards Heaven so that we may attain to its bliss.
What, then, are these Commandments of God? Our Lord Himself took care to remind us of them and St Paul repeats them too. They consist in loving God and loving our neighbour.
All the Commandments of God are summed up in this. In the very measure in which we love God and our neighbour and put this love into practice in our daily lives we are walking peacefully towards the happiness of Heaven.
How can we show our love for God in a particular way? I think that the most profound, the most essential way to do this is to pray. Our catechism has taught us all how to pray. I am speaking of the little catechism of old, since today’s catechisms have distorted everything and teach nothing clearly. We shall stay with the good definition of the old catechisms: prayer is an elevation of the mind to God.
It is simple, it is short, but it is much - to elevate the mind to God. I think that if we would put this definition of prayer more into practice, and elevate our minds to God, we should indeed be less attached to the goods of this earth and more attached to God Himself and goods of Heaven.
[…] I beseech you, during this Lent, to put yourselves into the hands of the Good Lord, to forget the things of this world in order to attach yourselves to Him. This is the first advice I shall give you: fulfil the Law of God, Who asks us to love Him.
The first tablet of the Law of Moses bore the three Commandments which relate directly to God. The second tablet shows us the laws of fraternal charity. How can we show our love for our neighbour? Undoubtedly we show it in the services we render [him ...] but we could also ask ourselves where we most frequently fail to love our neighbour.
[...] Let us make an effort to practise charity in our words and by this very fact charity in our thoughts. Thus let us avoid rash judgments, detractions, and calumnies, which are so easy and sometimes so tempting in our conversations. Unfortunately, some love to criticise this or that, dividing rather than uniting, rather than practising charity. Let us make efforts to show the love we have for our neighbour by striving to avoid detractions and calumnies - all the sins of the tongue. Such is, my dear brethren, the advice I deem good to give at the beginning of this Lent. †
[Archbishop’s last sermon, May 1990]
Monday, 15 February 2010
ELEISON COMMENTS CXXXV (Feb. 13, 2010) : MANE, THECEL...
Should a Catholic bishop leave to one side matters of economics on the grounds that he should keep to matters of religion ? By no means ! What a narrow view of religion one must take in order not to see that economics, or the art of managing the material goods necessary for life, is entirely governed by the view one takes of life, and the view one takes of life depends on religion. For how can religion (or its lack) be adequately understood except as the total view of life by which a man binds himself (or refuses to be bound) to the God who gave him his life ?
If multitudes of men today think that economics have nothing to do with God, it is only because beforehand they think that he is either non-existent or insignificant. And supposing that there is an after-life, think they, then Hell is either non-existent ("We all go to Heaven") or unimportant ("At least all my friends will be there", they joke). Upon which presuppositions follow the shift from the economics of yesterday, economics of thrift, to those of today, spendthrift economics.
Yesterday, do not spend more than you earn. Save, and do not borrow, to invest. Do not solve debt with more debt. Today, it is patriotic to spend. Everybody will be prosperous if you spend regardless of what you earn. Do not save, because idle money benefits nobody. By all means borrow to make profitable investments. And if your debts turn sour, borrow more to get out of them.
These eat-drink-and-be-merry economics were intellectualised in particular by the highly influential British economist, John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946), who once famously said, "In the end we all die". By the 1970's President Nixon (1913-1994) was saying, "We are all Keynesians now". And since the 1970's the Keynesian build-up has been continuous all the way to the 2000's orgy of lending, borrowing and spending, made possible only by the people's having given up on the old common sense of not spending more than you earn, and of shunning debt - "Owe no man anything but to love one another", says the Word of God (Rom. XIII, 8), and "The borrower is servant to him that lendeth" (Prov. XXII, 7).
Right now the world is enslaving itself to the money-men, the orgy is collapsing, and the collapse is by no means over. Unemployment is far higher than the politicians can afford to admit, yet still they garner votes by promising jobs and free lunches for the people. The politicians have encouraged these unreal expectations by which they rise to power but on which they will not be able to deliver. The people are about to rise up, are rising up, in anger. The politicians will have to start foreign wars to take the people's mind off domestic troubles.. War is around the corner, to be followed, if God permits, by the usurers' World Government. All because the people thought that God had nothing to do with life, and life nothing to do with God.
But see Daniel V, 5-6 and 24-28 ! The Lord God has our number ("Mane"), we have been weighed in his balance and found wanting ("Thecel"), our fun-land is over ("Phares"). It remains for us to take our medicine.
Sunday, 14 February 2010
The idea of a national all-party government would be great as it would show the people what nonsense the party political system really is. The Party System is worth reading. Belloc was, of course, a member of Parliament who resigned, calling Parliament nothing more than “secret government by the rich.” With power vested in the parties, the people seem to have little power to change things.
A large majority of the electorate believe there should be a national all-party government for the duration of the economic crisis, according to a Sunday Independent/ Millward Brown Lansdowne opinion poll.
The finding that 62 per cent want a national government is one of several in the nationwide poll, which highlights the intense frustration of people at the crippling effects of the crisis and the perceived inability of the current political system to deal with it.
In what amounts to a startling wake-up call to all politicians, a majority of declared supporters of each of the main parties believe such a government is now necessary.
When the headline finding is broken down, it reveals that supporters of Fianna Fail (66 per cent), Fine Gael (56 per cent), Labour (64 per cent), Greens (50 per cent) and Sinn Fein (64 per cent) want a national all-party government.
But our opinion poll clearly shows that such events had little or no impact on the lives of ordinary people who are continuing to struggle to cope as the economic crisis enters into a third year.
In fact, the poll starkly illustrates that events last week only served to heighten the distrust of the electorate towards the establishment as represented by politicians and the financial institutions.
A massive 58 per cent are "not at all satisfied", and 21 per cent are "not very satisfied" with the way in which the Government is handling the banking crisis; just 12 per cent have expressed any form of satisfaction.
An overwhelming 91 per cent want criminal prosecutions pursued against those in the banking sector found to have been in breach of the law, precisely the same finding as a year ago when the same question was asked in the last such poll.
The public is obviously dissatisfied that no such action has been taken against bankers in that year, despite the instigation of a number of investigations by various authorities.
It is this sense of drift in the midst of the economic crisis which is exercising the electorate, who seem to be critical of the length of time it is taking not to resolve anything.
The deep level of frustration among the public is also evident in other findings in our poll, to the extent that scepticism, if not downright cynicism, seems to be now embedded in the minds of the electorate.
A majority 54 per cent do not believe that the setting up of Nama will free up lending from the banks to businesses and the general public; only 23 per cent believe it will; and 23 per cent say they do not know.
Asked what they thought should be done with the banks, a significant minority, 38 per cent, said they should be left to fend for themselves even if that meant some did not survive -- a measure which all of the political parties have set themselves against; 27 per cent felt they should be fully nationalised and 26 per cent, or only a quarter of those polled, said they should be given continuous Government financial support, but not nationalised.
In the Sunday Independent today, Roger Jupp, chairman of Millward Brown Lansdowne, has interpreted the results of the opinion poll as an indictment of the body politic and the establishment in general.
He writes: "The results from this week's national opinion poll reveal a deeply troubled electorate, whose fundamental attitudes have been quite consistent over a year of economic turmoil.
"The underlying mood of the nation has not been hugely ruffled by the flying feathers of George Lee and its effect on Enda Kenny. It remains in a very wary and distrustful state, aching for change -- any change, as long as it is for the better.
"We know from recent research that the Irish people have never been as unhappy about authority, in its many guises. We express a lower level of trust in government in general, politicians and businesses, especially financial institutions, than virtually any other country in Europe.
"We are fed up with the barrage of negativity and simply wish that the heavy hand of financial pressure would loosen its grip on us."
On the issue of the week which so concerned the body politic, the country has emerged split over whether George Lee was right to resign at the time he did: 45 per cent said he was right, 43 per cent said he was not and 13 per cent did not know or had no opinion. Mr Lee will be relieved by the finding that a comfortable majority think he should be allowed to return to work in RTE: 58 per cent said he should, 31 per cent said he should not and 11 per cent said they did not know or had no opinion.
An even more comfortable majority (62 per cent) felt Mr Lee should not set up his own political party, but, interestingly, a not insignificant 27 per cent felt he should, while 11 per cent did not know or had no opinion.
The finding that more than a quarter of the electorate felt Mr Lee should set up his own party is another indication of the level of dissatisfaction at the current political system and the desire for change which probably propelled Mr Lee into the Dail as a Fine Gael TD eight months ago.
In the aftermath of the George Lee controversy, it has emerged in the poll that almost half the electorate (49 per cent) do not believe that Enda Kenny will lead Fine Gael at the next General Election; 38 per cent believe he will and 13 per cent do not know or have no opinion.
Only a slim majority of Fine Gael supporters (53 per cent) believe Mr Kenny will lead the party at the election.
Fine Gael's finance spokesman, Richard Bruton, is easily the preferred successor of Mr Kenny: 54 per cent of those polled opted for Mr Bruton, his closest rival being being Simon Coveney on eight per cent.
Saturday, 13 February 2010
And now we come to Bishop Richard Williamson.
In 1986 or 1987, I went to a seminary run by the SSPX in a place called Ridgefield in Connecticut. It's about an hour out of New York. Bishop Williamson was then Father Williamson. He had not been made a bishop at that time. He was the rector of the Seminary. (He was in charge of the seminary).
Now, I was sitting in the seminary like a little wide-eyed boy, akin to Hans Gibbenrath in Herman Hesse's 'The Prodigy'. Because I was in God's house.
All I really knew about him at the time was that he was English, and had grown up as an Anglican, and was a scholar, and had studied at university, and maybe been a professor or headmaster, but was converted to the Catholic faith one day when, in his spare time, he decided to read the Summa Theologica of St Thomas Aquinas (in Latin). So I knew for a fact, the man had a mind.
When you go to a seminary to study for the priesthood, there is an opening adress by the rector. And Fr Williamson gave his opening address.
I got the feeling listening to him that he thought that most of the seminarians were products of this modern age. And he was right. We all were. And he wanted to lay it down straight. Which he did. Now, most of them were American. And he was very conscious of this, so he said, "Love your country, but love it wisely." He was basically saying that Americans are over-patriotic and they will deny God to serve their country. Which is wrong.
And then he went on about how illiterate most people were. And he was right again.
And I was sitting there thinking, I really like this man. He speaks the truth.
But he was the rector of the seminary. And when God's grace acts upon your soul, you have a very salutary fear of your superior. When I say that, I mean, the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom.
And so, I entered the seminary, and sometimes Fr Williamson would take spirituality classes. In one particular class, he was talking about the history of heresies. Something he said made me think of a question. So I asked him a question. The lessons were 45 minutes long. I asked this question in the first minute of his lecture. He went on to answer the question and after 44 minutes, he said, "The lesson is over. I apologise if I haven't answered the question properly."
I left the classroom, as we all did, and just went, "Stuff me, this man is a walking encyclopedia."
I have never met a man with a mind like Bishop Williamson. I thought God graced me with a good mind, but in comparison to his, I am a dolt.
He did not suffer fools, but he did have a sense of humour. He gave us a general talk one day and said, "You can all have one shower a week. There had better be a good reason if you want to take two." I raised my hand and said, "This talk is making me sweat, Father."
His response was, "You're a wag."
One night, I was out warming my hands by the fire. It's very cold in Connecticutt in winter. Fr Williamson came walking up, and I thought, this is the last thing I need - a dressing down by the rector for being out by the fire instead of in my cold room.
But he rubbed his hands together in front of the fire, and said, "My father just died. He was an Anglican. Can you please pray for his soul?"
And I guess I nodded and said yes.
I really don't remember what I said exactly. I was too nervous.
He is a very hard nut, Bishop Williamson. And there are times when I wish I could have a chat with him, because I admire him so much. But I console myself with the fact that I was blessed enough to come into contact with him.
He is currently in exile in Great Britain (or England - the Old Dart) because he told some media person in Germany that he didn't believe the holocaust happened. And apparently that is a crime in Germany. Which is absolute nonsense.
At the time he spoke his mind, he was the rector of the SSPX seminary in Argentinia. But the Argentinian government booted him out of the country for anti-Semitism. And the SSPX have come down a bit heavy on him, and banned him from doing a few things. (Which I don't agree with. If a man can't speak his mind, then what hope have we got in this world? It's not like he was speaking on a matter of faith or morals. He was just saying that he doesn't believe in the holocaust. But Spielberg does, and the world canonises him for his films???).
Bishop Williamson is not your average saint. But he is a saint. And God is making him suffer a bit of isolation at the moment. And you know what I think? He'd revel in it. Because he is a man.
In the Book of Life, all the names of the saved souls are written. St John's Apocalypse is such a mystical book that none of us will ever fully understand it unless we get to heaven. But he talks about the book of life, and to me, I have no doubt whatsoever in my mind that Bishop Richard Williamson's name is written in the book of life. He is a living saint.
Friday, 12 February 2010
Millions of Iranians across the country have taken to the streets to celebrate the 31st anniversary of the Islamic Revolution.
On this day back in 1979, the Iranian nation toppled the US backed Pahlavi regime, ending Iranian monarchy.
The Islamic Revolution, under the guidance of its founder late Imam Khomeini, brought a new political system based on Islam and democracy.
Huge demonstrations were held all across the nation on Thursday in commemoration of the occasion.
In the capital Tehran, an extraordinarily high number of people from all walks of life marched across the city and gathered at Azadi (Freedom) Square to take part in the festivities. They were carrying banners denouncing the enemies of the country.
Press TV Correspondent Gisoo Misha Ahmadi, covering other nationwide rallies in Iran, described the turnout as higher than expected.
"It was extraordinary, I followed news reports and the reports estimated the turnout of about five millions only in Tehran," she said.
These rallies were held in more than eight hundred other cities around the county and there were also massive turnouts, Ahmadi added.
Reports say Chairman of the Assembly of Experts Ayatollah Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and former President Mohammad Khatami attended the rallies in Tehran.
A few hundred of supporters of Iran's defeated presidential candidates also rallied in Tehran.
Supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi gathered in a western Tehran district.
Police stepped up security in the area to prevent possible disturbances. Defeated presidential candidate Mehdi Karroubi was seen among the protesters.
Iran's Council for the Coordination of Islamic Propagation also issued a resolution on behalf of Iranian demonstrators, declaring the Iranian nation has renewed its allegiance to the ideals of Imam Khomeini and the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei.
It declared that protecting the Islamic establishment and supporting the rule of the Supreme Jurisprudent is an obligation and a source of national unity.
The resolution added that the Iranian nation believes that acquiring peaceful nuclear technology is its legitimate right.
It also condemned those who question the results of Iran's presidential election and cause unrest in the country.
The statement called on those who have been deceived to recognize the will of the majority and return to the rule of the jurisprudent.
It further called on the judiciary to take firm action against rioters and eliminate the roots of corruption once and for all.
Senator Déirdre de Búrca today announced she has resigned from the Green Parliamentary Party and Seanad with immediate effect.
In a statement this morning, Ms de Búrca said she could not longer continue to support the Greens in Government.
“I have written to my party leader, John Gormley, explaining to him the reasons for my resignation” she said. “I believe that we have lost our way as a party and have gradually abandoned our values and our integrity since becoming part of this Government,” she said.
“I do not take the decision to tender my resignation lightly but am very clear that I cannot continue to be a part of what the Green Party is supporting in Government.”
A spokesman for the Green Party said they were aware of the resignation and would respond in due course. “It is disappointing but not unexpected,” he added.
In her resignation letter, the European affairs spokeswoman tells Mr Gormley, the Greens "in many respects have become no more than an extension of the Fianna Fáil party," adding she had lost confidence in his leadership.
Expressing her belief the party was "paralysed" by the electorate’s rejection of its candidates, including herself, she said: "Any suggestion that we challenge Fianna Fáil, or face it down over important issues, seems to bring up a great fear in us that we will have to leave government. In fact staying in government appears to have become an end in itself now for the Green Party.
"While I was always aware that our political inexperience as a party would leave us vulnerable to being manipulated by Fianna Fáil in Government, what I hadn’t predicted was the strong attachment to office that appears to have developed since we became part of government," Ms de Búrca said.
"It is with regret also that I must also inform you that I have lost confidence in you as party leader."
Accusing Mr Gormley of refusing to take a stronger line with Brian Cowen and Fianna Fáil over core issues, despite being "asked many occasions over the past few months by the Parliamentary Party," she said Mr Gormley had "clearly been unable, or unwilling to do so".
The Senator said this unwillingness to act meant the Greens were "slowly haemhorraging support because of a growing public perception that we have lost the courage of our convictions and have become no more than an obedient ‘add-on’ to Fianna Fáil".
In the letter, Ms de Búrca refers to a report from Dr Niamh Brennan on the issue of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority and said she lacked the confidence the findings of the report "will be acted on in the timely and appropriate manner that the public interest requires".
Recently, there was speculation Ms de Búrca was being considered for a position on incoming EU commissioner Máire Geoghegan-Quinn’s cabinet.
The Senator contested the election in Wicklow for the second time in June 2007 but failed to secure a Dáil seat. In August 2007, she was nominated to the Seanad by then-taoiseach Bertie Ahern in the wake of her party's entry into Government.
Ms de Búrca has served as an elected member of the Green Party for eight years on Wicklow County Council. She failed to win a seat as an MEP in the last European elections.
The Green Party leadership has faced severe criticism from its members and supporters since it entered into a coalition Government in 2007.
Just over a year ago three councillors quit amid claims of a growing split between the leadership and grassroots.
When Letterkenny town councillor Neil Clarke resigned in December 2008 he said he had become disillusioned with the party chiefs and felt he could not go before voters again as a Green.
Within weeks, Cork city councillor Chris O’Leary and Dublin representative Bronwen Maher left the party.
Mr O’Leary, who had been one of the most senior party figures in Munster, said he believed the Greens had followed a “stay in government at all costs” agenda.
Ms Maher accused the leadership of unethical conduct and criticised its failure to speak out at Budget cuts.
Thursday, 11 February 2010
PARIS, February 10, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A French homosexualist organization will be staging a “kiss-in” at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris this Sunday, St. Valentine’s day. Dozens of homosexuals are expected to turn up and kiss for five minutes at 2 p.m., after services at the cathedral.
Organizer Arthur Vautier told a Paris homosexual magazine, Tetu, that the demonstration is meant to “ challenge the Church to question religion on the issue of love and marriage between gays and between lesbians.”
“We were probably over a hundred at the last kiss-in,” Vautier said.
The “Catholic Culture City” blog called on Christians to “respond firmly and courteously” to the “new provocation by the gay lobby and suspected complicity of the media.”
One French blogger noted that the choice of targets is selective. “Strangely, the extremists of the homosexual cause do not assemble to the Grand Mosque of Paris. However, it is in Muslim countries (that apply Sharia [law]) that homosexuals are executed!”
Vautier, however, said his group does not “fear a backlash” from Christians.
Recently we mentioned how Mary O’ Rourke, a Catholic politician came out in support of homosexual ‘marriage’ and here we have her launch an attack on Catholicism.
In a trenchant and stinging criticism of some of the church's attitudes, she warned it was "out of touch" and was "doomed to failure" unless it "starts to have an affinity again with ordinary people and their ordinary, everyday problems".
Deputy O'Rourke also stated that the church had an "extraordinary" attitude towards women. "It is as if we were a race apart or 'dirty people', only to be tolerated because we have the wombs to have the children," she commented.
She was speaking in the Dail last Thursday during a discussion on the recent report by the commission of investigation into the handling of clerical sexual abuse in the Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin.
The report was "shocking, damning and obscene," she said. "I could add many more adjectives which would not even begin to sum up all of this."
The Fianna Fail representative felt that the church was currently "sowing seeds for further disaffiliation with the people who claim to be churchgoers."
"It has lost affinity with its people," she stated. "To my mind, the reason for this is that the words of the Gospel by which we all, in various measures, strive to live are not exemplified in the institutions of the church which is riddled with out-of-date conformist rules which have no resonance whatsoever with ordinary people in terms of how they live their lives."
Deputy O'Rourke mentioned an article in The Irish Times last week discussing what she called "the church's archaic rules on contraception."
"Who pays heed to them?" she asked. "The church, however, clings to them as if they were a totem pole of wonderful knowledge.
"There are also the archaic rules on remarriage in which the church denies marriage to a person who wishes to remarry after a State divorce. The person cannot have a full marriage ceremony in a church.
"The church persists with an opaque and impenetrable system of annulment, which one can secure after something like 95 years and all sorts of tribunals of inquiry and so forth. Only then is one allowed to have a church marriage. It is appalling that when a couple part and divorce and each one wishes to marry again, they cannot go to a church of their choosing, if they are members of the Catholic faith, and ask that their second marriage be recognised.
"Until the church starts to have an affinity again with ordinary people and their ordinary, everyday problems, it is doomed to failure and we are doomed too," she said.
"I noticed that in the various interviews given by Archbishop Diarmuid Martin and other church personnel last weekend they all very quickly said the report was terrible and then continued with the word 'but'. I urge them to get rid of the buts; they should just say they are sorry without the word 'but' being added to it.
The local TD said she was "struck by the sheer discourtesy of a body called the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, or something with an equally convoluted title. This wonderful doctrine body, wherever it is, does not reply to letters.
"Consider the discourtesy of it, and the discourtesy of the head of the Vatican, parading around Ireland in his wonderful glitzy clothes but not replying to letters and not seeing fit to talk to his counterpart, whoever that is. It is just not good enough."
The Athlone TD concluded her remarks by saying: "The church's attitude to women is extraordinary. It is as if we were a race apart or "dirty people", only to be tolerated because we have the wombs to have the children, we give birth to them, enrol them in primary schools and have them come out of those schools as good children of the faith.
"There is much more to be done. The church should show that it is willing to take the necessary roads and to express itself as being more in touch with people than it has ever been previously."