Long Live the Pope!

Folks,

Again and again and again Michael Voris of Real Cathoic TV tells the unvarnished truth in such a simple and common sense fashion that liberal progressivists, secular humanists and Marxist atheists cannot help but be silenced into simmering resentment. May God bless Mr. Voris, and as he exclaimed at the conclusion of this his most recent video, "Long live the Pope!" God's Rottweiler is hard at work rooting out apostasy and heresy within the Church, so if you're a liberal "Catholic", then beware the fangs the God's justice! 'Tis better to repent while there's time.

Benedict, Objectively Speaking

Ilario Pantano

Folks,

ILARIO PANTANO is running for the North Carolina’s Seventh Congressional District seat. He is 100% PRO-LIFE!



Please check him out at: http://www.pantanoforcongress.com/ and http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/pantanoforcongressm.

Will Breazeale, his opponent in the primaries next week, says he supports traditional marriage, but not when it comes to voting on an amendment stating that marriage is between a man a women. This is to be expected from a liberal progressive Democrat, but it is most disappointing when coming from a Republican

"Pantano said he supported amending the U.S. Constitution to reflect that marriage is between a man and woman while Breazeale said he supports traditional marriage but not the amendment to the constitution." The whole article may be read here:

http://www.whiteville.com/articles/2010/04/14/news/doc4bc36d6d7d340561958744.txt

Please, no matter what, vote to turn the tide against liberalism and progressivism. That means voting against both Democrats and RINOs. Therefore, please consider voting for Ilario Pantano for the Seventh US Congressional District this mid-term election.

St. Hilary of Poitiers on the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist

Folks,

In combating the heresy of Arianism that disputed the nature of the divinity of Christ, St. Hilary of Poitiers in the late 4th century AD uses the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist to show the folly of their rationale. The following is from Book VIII On the Trinity and may be used with equal appropriateness today in explaining the doctrine of Transubstantiation that the Church has always maintained since even New Testament times.

13. Now our Lord has not left the minds of His faithful followers in doubt, but has explained the manner in which His nature operates, saying, That they may be one, as We are one: I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in one. Now I ask those who bring forward a unity of will between Father and Son, whether Christ is in us today through verity of nature or through agreement of will. For if in truth the Word has been made flesh and we in very truth receive the Word made flesh as food from the Lord, are we not bound to believe that He abides in us naturally, Who, born as a man, has assumed the nature of our flesh now inseparable from Himself, and has conjoined the nature of His own flesh to the nature of the eternal Godhead in the sacrament by which His flesh is communicated to us? For so are we all one, because the Father is in Christ and Christ in us. Whosoever then shall deny that the Father is in Christ naturally must first deny that either he is himself in Christ naturally, or Christ in him, because the Father in Christ and Christ in us make us one in Them. Hence, if indeed Christ has taken to Himself the flesh of our body, and that Man Who was born from Mary was indeed Christ, and we indeed receive in a mystery the flesh of His body— (and for this cause we shall be one, because the Father is in Him and He in us)—how can a unity of will be maintained, seeing that the special property of nature received through the sacrament is the sacrament of a perfect unity ?

14. The words in which we speak of the things of God must be used in no mere human and worldly sense, nor must the perverseness of an alien and impious interpretation be extorted from the soundness of heavenly words by any violent and headstrong preaching. Let us read what is written, let us understand what we read, and then fulfil the demands of a perfect faith. For as to what we say concerning the reality of Christ's nature within us, unless we have been taught by Him, our words are foolish and impious. For He says Himself, My flesh is meat indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. He that eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. John 6:55-56 As to the verity of the flesh and blood there is no room left for doubt. For now both from the declaration of the Lord Himself and our own faith, it is verily flesh and verily blood. And these when eaten and drunk, bring it to pass that both we are in Christ and Christ in us. Is not this true? Yet they who affirm that Christ Jesus is not truly God are welcome to find it false. He therefore Himself is in us through the flesh and we in Him, while together with Him our own selves are in God.

15. Now how it is that we are in Him through the sacrament of the flesh and blood bestowed upon us, He Himself testifies, saying, And the world will no longer see Me, but you shall see Me; because I live you shall live also; because I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you. If He wished to indicate a mere unity of will, why did He set forth a kind of gradation and sequence in the completion of the unity, unless it were that, since He was in the Father through the nature of Deity, and we on the contrary in Him through His birth in the body, He would have us believe that He is in us through the mystery of the sacraments? And thus there might be taught a perfect unity through a Mediator, while, we abiding in Him, He abode in the Father, and as abiding in the Father abode also in us; and so we might arrive at unity with the Father, since in Him Who dwells naturally in the Father by birth, we also dwell naturally, while He Himself abides naturally in us also.

16. Again, how natural this unity is in us He has Himself testified on this wise— He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. John 6:56 For no man shall dwell in Him, save him in whom He dwells Himself, for the only flesh which He has taken to Himself is the flesh of those who have taken His. Now He had already taught before the sacrament of this perfect unity, saying, As the living Father sent Me, and I live through the Father, so he that eats My flesh shall himself also live through Me. So then He lives through the Father, and as He lives through the Father in like manner we live through His flesh. For all comparison is chosen to shape our understanding, so that we may grasp the subject of which we treat by help of the analogy set before us. This is the cause of our life that we have Christ dwelling within our carnal selves through the flesh, and we shall live through Him in the same manner as He lives through the Father. If, then, we live naturally through Him according to the flesh, that is, have partaken of the nature of His flesh, must He not naturally have the Father within Himself according to the Spirit since He Himself lives through the Father? And He lives through the Father because His birth has not implanted in Him an alien and different nature inasmuch as His very being is from Him yet is not divided from Him by any barrier of an unlikeness of nature, for within Himself He has the Father through the birth in the power of the nature.

17. I have dwelt upon these facts because the heretics falsely maintain that the union between Father and Son is one of will only, and make use of the example of our own union with God, as though we were united to the Son and through the Son to the Father by mere obedience and a devout will, and none of the natural verity of communion were vouchsafed us through the sacrament of the Body and Blood; although the glory of the Son bestowed upon us through the Son abiding in us after the flesh, while we are united in Him corporeally and inseparably, bids us preach the mystery of the true and natural unity.

18. So we have made our reply to the folly of our violent opponents, merely to prove the emptiness of their falsehoods and so prevent them from misleading the unwary by the error of their vain and foolish statements....

Some Thoughts from Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae by Pope Leo XIII

Folks,

Some thoughts from Pope Leo XIII's Encyclical Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae of 1899 are relevant to today's culture of relativism and license without responsibility:

The underlying principle of these new opinions is that, in order to more easily attract those who differ from her, the Church should shape her teachings more in accord with the spirit of the age and relax some of her ancient severity and make some concessions to new opinions. Many think that these concessions should be made not only in regard to ways of living, but even in regard to doctrines which belong to the deposit of the faith. They contend that it would be opportune, in order to gain those who differ from us, to omit certain points of her teaching which are of lesser importance, and to tone down the meaning which the Church has always attached to them. It does not need many words, beloved son, to prove the falsity of these ideas if the nature and origin of the doctrine which the Church proposes are recalled to mind. The Vatican Council says concerning this point: "For the doctrine of faith which God has revealed has not been proposed, like a philosophical invention to be perfected by human ingenuity, but has been delivered as a divine deposit to the Spouse of Christ to be faithfully kept and infallibly declared. Hence that meaning of the sacred dogmas is perpetually to be retained which our Holy Mother, the Church, has once declared, nor is that meaning ever to be departed from under the pretense or pretext of a deeper comprehension of them." -Constitutio de Fide Catholica, Chapter iv...

...Let it be far from anyone's mind to suppress for any reason any doctrine that has been handed down. Such a policy would tend rather to separate Catholics from the Church than to bring in those who differ. There is nothing closer to our heart than to have those who are separated from the fold of Christ return to it, but in no other way than the way pointed out by Christ.

The rule of life laid down for Catholics is not of such a nature that it cannot accommodate itself to the exigencies of various times and places. (VOL. XXIV-13.) The Church has, guided by her Divine Master, a kind and merciful spirit, for which reason from the very beginning she has been what St. Paul said of himself: "I became all things to all men that I might save all."

...But, beloved son, in this present matter of which we are speaking, there is even a greater danger and a more manifest opposition to Catholic doctrine and discipline in that opinion of the lovers of novelty, according to which they hold such liberty should be allowed in the Church, that her supervision and watchfulness being in some sense lessened, allowance be granted the faithful, each one to follow out more freely the leading of his own mind and the trend of his own proper activity. They are of opinion that such liberty has its counterpart in the newly given civil freedom which is now the right and the foundation of almost every secular state...

...These dangers, viz., the confounding of license with liberty, the passion for discussing and pouring contempt upon any possible subject, the assumed right to hold whatever opinions one pleases upon any subject and to set them forth in print to the world, have so wrapped minds in darkness that there is now a greater need of the Church's teaching office than ever before, lest people become unmindful both of conscience and of duty...

It is truly amazing that these words were penned more than a century ago and they are never more applicable than now in this post modern, neo-pagan age of moral relativism and liberal progressivism.

Democracy does NOT determine Truth. The Truth is NOT open to debate. Jesus Christ came to establish a Kingdom, NOT a Democracy, and the Church is the visible manifestation of that Kingdom here on Earth with the Pope as the Vicar of Christ Himself.

NO Democracy. NO liberalism. We owe our allegaince, our lives and our very souls to the King of kings and Lord of lords - period!

Prayer and Belief, and Benedict's Reforms

Folks,

Below are two more quite appropriate videos from Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV. The days of liberal progressivism in the Church are coming to a close. Be orthodox, or get out.

Prayer and Belief



Benedict's Reforms

Benedict and the New Dark Age

Folks,

From Real Catholic TV comes Michael Voris' daily installment of reason and common sense. Please DO take the time to read the Regensburg Address referenced in this video. It was for this that the Pope was villified and castigated by all the right - er, I mean, left - thinking people in the late summer of 2006, and that behavior on the part of those who cry for dialogue has not diminshed one iota in the intervening five years. The Lord Jesus is about to give them all the dialogue they can possibly handle.

Benedict and the New Dark Age

Too Big to Fail

Folks,

The following is from Dr. Pournelle's Chaos Manor web site. To all social justice Catholics out there who decry the free market of capitalism, read and understand:

Too Big to Fail

Regulating the market is a serous business. It needs great care.

Rationally, perhaps, a command economy ought to work better. Why do we need 22 brands of laundry soap, most of them chemically indistinguishable? We can calculate how much soap is needed, make that much, sell it for what it costs to make, and save all that excess soap that gets marked down and ends up in dollar stores. Same with agriculture, automobiles -- well, you get the idea. That argument appeals to undergraduates and many academicians. It appealed to me when I was young. Capitalism seemed wasteful, it had caused the Great Depression, boom and bust were built in. Smart people like Stuart Chase could explain how things could be so much better if we didn't have all that Renaissance hoopla and old fashioned institutions preventing rational people from fixing the system and ending those business cycles.

It turns out that the command economy doesn't work, and we have run the experiment often enough to know that. We need a market, and capitalism, for all its inefficiencies turns out to be more efficient than its alternatives. The command economy operates under the Iron Law like everything else, and pretty soon commands far more than laundry soap and automobile manufacturing. Meanwhile, economic theorists have shown -- with good theory anyway -- that even a command economy needs a market to determine prices, and goes on from there. Bottom line on all this: almost everyone agrees that we need a market, and without true markets the economy suffers badly.

And that's the problem with regulations: if you're not careful you kill the goose.

And all that is preliminary to commenting on the Dodd Bill and the general move to "reform" the market by regulating trade in derivatives. The goal is to damp down things down and end the Business Cycle. Obama has said as much. It's an amazingly arrogant thing for a sitting president to say, in my judgment. Perhaps, like Canute the Great, he's exaggerating for effect, claiming a power he knows he does not have? But certainly a major goal is to damp out big bubbles and save us from the effects of banks too big to fail making reckless investments that the taxpayers have to bail them out of.

There are two Wall Street Journals articles today that are quite relevant. One is "Taxpayers and the Dodd Bill" by Peter Wallison. It shows a number of possible -- even probable -- scenarios leading to massive costs to taxpayers once the Bill is implemented, and concludes

These are only a few of the land mines that litter this 1,400-page bill, which Senate Democrats are seeking to rush to judgment with a cloture vote today. Does anyone really know what's in this bill, or what other unintended consequences will flow from its adoption? The American people may detest Wall Street, but imagine what they'll think of senators who vote for this bill because Mr. Obama has told them it will not impose any costs on taxpayers.

One need not agree on the probability of the land mines to suspect that rushed vote on a 1400 page bill that changes the nature of the market is probably not a good idea. It's certainly drastic, and since I doubt that anyone has read it all -- I would bet that Dodd hasn't -- it is nearly certain to have effects no one expects. Unintended consequences.

The other relevant article today is "The Misguided Attack on Derivatives" by L. Gordon Crovitz, which is more technical and gets into the nitty gritty of just what happened with the Paulson-Goldman Sachs derivative affair, and argues that the function of those derivatives was real and useful.

I won't get into that.

My point is that there's a better way. Rather than poke about at the market so that we regulate investors so that those too big to fail can take high flyers knowing that the taxpayers will bail them out, wouldn't it be better not to have institutions too big to fail? If we had forty investment banks rather than the Big Five -- if Goldman Sachs had been fifteen companies rather than one single giant -- we'd never have had the problem in the first place. Not all those mini-Goldman companies would have played the game, and those that did and failed would have simply folded while those that played the opposite game would have thrived.

I agree that breaking up big outfits into smaller ones is a very tricky business, and the power to bust those trusts is an enormous power than needs to be applied with care; but I think we'd be far better off limiting just how big a share of the market anyone can have than intruding in the market rules. I don't come to that conclusion lightly. I don't like the notion that government gets to say just how big a company can be. Alas, the present system has created companies too big to fail, then bailed them out when they did fail. I agree that is not good; but neither is heavy regulation of the market. We need the market. We don't need companies that are too big to fail.

Block Diagrams on Revelation Chapters 2 through 18

Folks,

On Monday nights at one of the local parishes in Wilmington, NC, I participate in a Bible study discussion. For the past six months or so we have been studying the Book of Revelation. To aid in understanding, I prepared the following block diagrams (I am a picture-person - most men are). Please left click your mouse cursor on the picture of interest to expand its view on your screen so that any text becomes readable. Considering Catawissa Gazetteer's recent posts, I am just jumping on the bandwagon (if only because I happen to agree with him):

The Message of Akita
The Visions at Garbandal
The Visions at Medjugore

Get prepared, folks, because here it comes:

Catholic Baby Boomers

Folks,

Here is another timely video from Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV. Those who are Protestant and do not know any better may be excused. There is, however, NO excuse for the liberal progressive "Catholic," and thank God (as Mr. Voris notes) that these heretics and apostates are finally fading away.

Catholic Baby Boomers

How Nice Was Jesus - Really?

Folks,

We always hear about how nice and kind and open-minded and tolerant Jesus was during His earthly ministry. But are these descriptions true? Indeed, how exactly did Jesus respond to those Jews who (Scripture says) believed in Him?

John 8:31-59 provides a record for us. "Jesus then said to those Jews who believed in him, 'If you remain in my word, you will truly be my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.'" Then began the debate on what father these Jews had. What is important in all this isn't that they were Jews (sadly, people have used this section of Scripture to justify anti-Semitism). Again, the point is NOT that they were Jews, BUT that they "believed in Him." Indeed, in verse 44 Jesus says to these Jews who (as verse 31 says) believed in Him, "You belong to your father the devil and you willingly carry out your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in truth, because there is no truth in him. When he tells a lie, he speaks in character, because he is a liar and the father of lies..."

Jesus wasn't nice and kind and open-minded and tolerant of mere belief. He told people like that exactly who their father was - diabolos. That's what the Greek says - the great deceiver. It's about time our Bishops and Priests follow suit and start emulating Jesus' example. There are far too many inside the Church and outside it, too, who "believe in" Jesus, but whose father is diabolos. Obviously, belief isn't enough. It never has been and it never will be.

Tonight's Humor - The Lord Giveth and the Vet Taketh Away

Folks,

Sometimes life simply isn't fair.

Blessed be the name of the Lord!

(I won't have to raise a litter of kittens and find homes for them - thank God!)

Today's Humor - Cajuns ARE Smart!

Folks,

I received the following from a friend who works at a nuclear power facility up north:

From Larry the Cable Guy (reader be forewarned - much of Larry's humor is off-color):

"Even after the recent Super Bowl victory of the New Orleans Saints, I have noticed a large number of people implying with bad jokes that Cajuns aren't smart. I would like to state for the record that I disagree with that assessment. Anybody that would build a city 5 feet below sea level in a hurricane zone and fill it with Democrats is a [darn] genius."

Yesterday's Gospel Reading

Folks,

Yesterday's Gospel Reading in the daily Liturgy is coincidently related to the recent discussion at this forum on the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist, something that Protestants deny. John 6:52-59 states:

The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying,
“How can this man give us his Flesh to eat?”
Jesus said to them,
“Amen, amen, I say to you,
unless you eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood,
you do not have life within you.
Whoever eats my Flesh and drinks my Blood
has eternal life,
and I will raise him on the last day.
For my Flesh is true food,
and my Blood is true drink.
Whoever eats my Flesh and drinks my Blood
remains in me and I in him.
Just as the living Father sent me
and I have life because of the Father,
so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.
This is the bread that came down from heaven.
Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died,
whoever eats this bread will live forever.”
These things he said while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.

Notice that through the entire chapter six of John's Gospel not once does Jesus contradict the Jews who said, "How can this man give us His flesh to eat and blood to drink?" Indeed, John 6:60-69 in today's reading stated:

Many of the disciples of Jesus who were listening said,
“This saying is hard; who can accept it?”
Since Jesus knew that his disciples were murmuring about this,
he said to them, “Does this shock you?
What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?
It is the Spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail.
The words I have spoken to you are Spirit and life.
But there are some of you who do not believe.”
Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe
and the one who would betray him.
And he said, “For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me
unless it is granted him by my Father.”

As a result of this,
many of his disciples returned to their former way of life
and no longer walked with him.
Jesus then said to the Twelve, “Do you also want to leave?”
Simon Peter answered him, “Master, to whom shall we go?
You have the words of eternal life.
We have come to believe
and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.”

EITHER the consecrated Bread and Wine ARE the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, OR Jesus lied in John chapter six. To every and any Protestant (and faux liberal Catholic) reading this: which is it? Is Holy Communion our Saviour's flesh and blood, or is it a lie? Is Jesus the Son of God, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, or is it all a sham? Every question like this hinges on whether or not we BELIEVE In the Real Presence of Jesus within the Holy Eucharist.

Again, it's comical that Pentecostals and Baptists can believe in the literal interpretation of Moses words in Genesis chapters one and two (in the face of ALL scientific evidence to the contrary), but will NOT believe in the Holy Eucharist the Son of God Himself delineates in John chapter six.

Christian Rock

Folks,

This morning I was searching the internet for music to listen to and I came across: Christian Rock.net.

If you like rock music and you are disgusted with the perversion that excuses itself as lyrics in most secular songs broadcast today, then perhaps you may want to listen to Christian Rock Player. It is now an internet favorite of mine.

The Principle of the Non-Initiation of Force

Folks,

Yesterday on April 23rd Glenn Beck offered everyone to sign Martin Luther King Jr.'s Pledge of Nonviolence at his blogsite. This was done in response to the false accusations from liberal progressives that Conservatives and Constitutionalists are advocating violent over of the liberal regime currently in political ascendency within this country.

My friend Catawissa Gazetteer also posted a blog entry on this likewise entitled Pledge of Nonviolence. I had commented that the correct principle is the non-initiation of force, and that sometimes one must defend one's self against violence by the use of force. Catawissa then kindly posted that alternative point of view in the entry entitled A Nonviolent Difference of Opinion. Here is a true gentleman.

At this point I would like to expand on what I had written at Catawissa's blog site. First, the initiation of force is always and everywhere inherently immoral and evil. Just as the attack on Iraq on March 20, 2003 was evil, so also is shooting an abortion doctor evil. Regardless of the circumstances, no one has the right to initiate force. NO ONE.

Now I have had the privilege of standing at peaceful prayer protests near a local abortion clinic. Sometimes drivers of a liberal Democrat bent pass by in their vehicles and offer the middle finger or violent words of abuse. Some may even in the future spit at one's self, or otherwise harrass and offend. In circumstances like these the proper response is ALWAYS the nonviolent response. Matthew 5:10-12 states:

Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when they insult you and persecute you and utter every kind of evil against you (falsely) because of me. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward will be great in heaven. Thus they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

But there are other times when aggression can only be defeated with force. This is the principle of self-defense. Every one of us has the individual right to life and as such we have the right to defend ourselves against the initiation of force - aggression. This is described in 1st Maccabees 2:29-41:

Many who sought to live according to righteousness and religious custom went out into the desert to settle there, they and their sons, their wives and their cattle, because misfortunes pressed so hard on them. It was reported to the officers and soldiers of the king who were in the City of David, in Jerusalem, that certain men who had flouted the king's order had gone out to the hiding places in the desert. Many hurried out after them, and having caught up with them, camped opposite and prepared to attack them on the sabbath.

"Enough of this!" the pursuers said to them. "Come out and obey the king's command, and your lives will be spared."

But they replied, "We will not come out, nor will we obey the king's command to profane the sabbath."

Then the enemy attacked them at once; but they did not retaliate; they neither threw stones, nor blocked up their own hiding places. They said, "Let us all die without reproach; heaven and earth are our witnesses that you destroy us unjustly."

So the officers and soldiers attacked them on the sabbath, and they died with their wives, their children and their cattle, to the number of a thousand persons. When Mattathias and his friends heard of it, they mourned deeply for them.

"If we all do as our kinsmen have done," they said to one another, "and do not fight against the Gentiles for our lives and our traditions, they will soon destroy us from the earth."

On that day they came to this decision: "Let us fight against anyone who attacks us on the sabbath, so that we may not all die as our kinsmen died in the hiding places."

Now sadly some people from our midst will have to become martyrs like the Scribe Eleazar in 2nd Maccabees 6:18-31, or the Seven Brothers and Their Mother in 2nd Maccabees 7. But others of us have a responsibility to defend hearth and home against the evils of raw tyranny and the putrid, vile disease called liberalism and progressivism. This may require us to be a Mattathias or a Judas Maccabee.

Do NOT initiate force. Do NOT commit aggression. ALWAYS look and pray for a peaceful way to resolve disputes. But DO stand prepared with your ammunition dry, and your gun cleaned and ready. The evil that is Barack Hussein Obama and his demonic legions of liberals and progressives from the satanic depths of hell itself WILL initiate force, and do everything it can to destroy not just hearth and home, but Church and God. It won't succeed, BUT as we all know, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed periodically with the blood of tyrannts and patriots alike." Mattathias understood that in 165 BC almost two millennia before Thomas Jefferson penned those words.

The Suffering of Benedict 04-22

Folks,

As Michael Voris at Real Catholic TV explains, "The Holy Father is suffering at the hands of those inside the Church more than those outside the Church."

The one thing that really amazes me in this video is the report that many Deacons, Nuns and Priests have e-mailed Mr. Voris to thank him for his outstanding service to the Church in reporting on the infiltration of liberal progressivism throughout the Body of Christ, but they do so in secret for fear of the wrath that their liberal progressive superiors might visit upon their heads. They do so in fear of their Bishop! How can that be? That can be because the Church in America has far too many liberal progressive Bishops subservient to the false gospel of social justice and peace at any price. Indeed, one might maintain that even ONE such Bishop is too many. It's time for ALL such people - clergy and laity alike - to leave (or be forced out of) the Church en masse and go join the Protestant heretics.

More importantly, it's time to pray that the Lord strengthens Pope Benedict XVI as he continues the work in purging the Church of these heretics and apostates.
The Suffering of Benedict 04-22

Sloth : Not just a strange beast from South America

Folks,

Michael Voris from Real Catholic TV once again identifies with stunning precision the source of the problem within the Church in America (and perhaps elsewhere as well).

Oh, by the way, consistent with our discussion concerning the heresy OUTSIDE the Church, i.e., the heresy of Protestantism (or should I say, "Protester-ism"?), this video discusses the heresy WITHIN the Church (which also is "Protester-ism" against the Faith once delivered unto the Saints). I find this remarkably coincidental.

Indeed, the only way to defeat "Protester-ism" is to show it the door, and that's EXACTLY what those who are liberal progressive Bishops and Priests alike have NOT, do NOT and will NOT do. They say, "We're Catholic, we're Universal, so we're big enough for everybody." Mr. Voris attributes this to lethargy. Perhaps he is being too kind.

Sloth : Not just a strange beast from South America

More Humor - Luck Is Only an Inch Thick Sometimes

Folks,

That little dog doesn't realize that he's just an inch away from being a bite-sized snack.

Now maybe if we put yapping liberal Democrats on the other side of the glass......

;-)

I know, I know - time to go to Confession!

Adversus Haereses de Eucharistia

Folks,

I was reminded during today's reading of the Divine Office of what St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons wrote in chapter 2 of Book V in his work Adversus Haereses. Once again, the view that Presbyterians, Methodists, Nazarenes, Baptists, Pentecostals and most other Protestants have regarding the bread and wine of Holy Communion was considered heresy by the early Church Fathers who came directly after the Apostles. 

Note that Saint Irenaeus lived in the early second century Anno Domini well BEFORE the Christianization of the Roman Empire under Constantine in the fourth century. Indeed, unlike most Pentecostals and Baptist denominations that have been around for a mere 200 years or less, St. Irenaeus came directly after the Apostles themselves. So what gives certain people (who being Protestant are by definition Protesters) the right to place their 200 year old man-made tradition of heresy above the 2000 year old sacred practice of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church that Jesus Christ Himself founded on the Rock - Sanctus Petrus?

In summary: The bread and wine of the Eucharist ARE the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ. They are NOT merely a symbol. There are NOT just a memorial. I shall say this in Latin if the plain English above does not suffice.

Panis et vinum Eucharistiae SUNT corpus et sanguis, anima et divinitas nostri Beati Domini Iesus Christi.

To believe otherwise as Baptists and Pentecostals and most other Protesters against the Faith once delivered unto the Saints propose, IS and always HAS BEEN and always WILL BE HERESY - period. I didn't make that up. I didn't say that. St. Irenaeus said that almost 2000 years ago, well before the Baptists and Pentecostals and the rest of the Protesters came up with their man-made theology 200 to 500 years ago with their protestation that they falsely acclaim as a reformation. Please read what St. Irenaeus himself writes below.

1. And vain likewise are those who say that God came to those things which did not belong to Him, as if covetous of another's property; in order that He might deliver up that man who had been created by another, to that God who had neither made nor formed anything, but who also was deprived from the beginning of His own proper formation of men. The advent, therefore, of Him whom these men represent as coming to the things of others, was not righteous; nor did He truly redeem us by His own blood, if He did not really become man, restoring to His own handiwork what was said [of it] in the beginning, that man was made after the image and likeness of God; not snatching away by stratagem the property of another, but taking possession of His own in a righteous and gracious manner. As far as concerned the apostasy, indeed, He redeems us righteously from it by His own blood; but as regards us who have been redeemed, [He does this] graciously. For we have given nothing to Him previously, nor does He desire anything from us, as if He stood in need of it; but we do stand in need of fellowship with Him. And for this reason it was that He graciously poured Himself out, that He might gather us into the bosom of the Father.

2. But vain in every respect are they who despise the entire dispensation of God, and disallow the salvation of the flesh, and treat with contempt its regeneration, maintaining that it is not capable of incorruption. But if this indeed do not attain salvation, then neither did the Lord redeem us with His blood, nor is the cup of the Eucharist the communion of His blood, nor the bread which we break the communion of His body. (1 Corinthians 10:16) For blood can only come from veins and flesh, and whatsoever else makes up the substance of man, such as the Word of God was actually made. By His own blood he redeemed us, as also His apostle declares, “In whom we have redemption through His blood, even the remission of sins.” (Colossians 1:14) And as we are His members, we are also nourished by means of the creation [and He Himself grants the creation to us, for He causes His sun to rise, and sends rain when He wills (Matthew 5:45)]. He has acknowledged the cup (which is a part of the creation) as His own blood, from which He bedews our blood; and the bread (also a part of the creation) He has established as His own body, from which He gives increase to our bodies.

3. When, therefore, the mingled cup and the manufactured bread receives the Word of God, and the Eucharist of the blood and the body of Christ is made, from which things the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they affirm that the flesh is incapable of receiving the gift of God, which is life eternal, which [flesh] is nourished from the body and blood of the Lord, and is a member of Him?— even as the blessed Paul declares in his Epistle to the Ephesians, that “we are members of His body, of His flesh, and of His bones.” (Ephesians 5:30) He does not speak these words of some spiritual and invisible man, for a spirit has not bones nor flesh; (Luke 24:39) but [he refers to] that dispensation [by which the Lord became] an actual man, consisting of flesh, and nerves, and bones—that [flesh] which is nourished by the cup which is His blood, and receives increase from the bread which is His body. And just as a cutting from the vine planted in the ground fructifies in its season, or as a grain of wheat falling into the earth and becoming decomposed, rises with manifold increase by the Spirit of God, who contains all things, and then, through the wisdom of God, serves for the use of men, and having received the Word of God, becomes the Eucharist, which is the body and blood of Christ; so also our bodies, being nourished by it, and deposited in the earth, and suffering decomposition there, shall rise at their appointed time, the Word of God granting them resurrection to the glory of God, even the Father, who freely gives to this mortal immortality, and to this corruptible incorruption, (1 Corinthians 15:53) because the strength of God is made perfect in weakness, (2 Corinthians 12:3) in order that we may never become puffed up, as if we had life from ourselves, and exalted against God, our minds becoming ungrateful; but learning by experience that we possess eternal duration from the excelling power of this Being, not from our own nature, we may neither undervalue that glory which surrounds God as He is, nor be ignorant of our own nature, but that we may know what God can effect, and what benefits man receives, and thus never wander from the true comprehension of things as they are, that is, both with regard to God and with regard to man. And might it not be the case, perhaps, as I have already observed, that for this purpose God permitted our resolution into the common dust of mortality, that we, being instructed by every mode, may be accurate in all things for the future, being ignorant neither of God nor of ourselves?

Thought for the Day - Another Real American Hero in Iraq

Folks,

How true this statement is!

The Twelve Tribes - The Commonwealth of Israel

Folks,

In response to April 10's post on Boycott Wilmington's Azalea Festival (written because of the denial by the organizers of allowing a Respect Life booth at the Festival), a commenter reported the following:

The Commission [I assume the Azalea Commission] had no problem approving the Tall Ship PEACEMAKER to be part of the festivities. Tship is owned by the TWELVE TRIBES, a Cult. Please look at some of the many postings against it on the web.

Needless to say, I DID look and lo and behold, one can find out a great deal about this Peacemaker tall Ship at:

http://www.twelvetribes.com/peacemaker/

Apparently an organization calling itself  "The Twelve Tribes - The Commonwealth of Israel" owns and operates this ship:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_Tribes_(new_religious_movement)

The name is certainly odd, and the communal ways they espouse on their web site are likewise odd. From what I can see, they seem like the "Jesus People Hippies" of the 1970s, which doesn't necessarily make them bad, but the group has had run-ins with the State of Vermont (i.e., the State of liberal Democrat, dope-smoking hippies with Mao Tse Tung banners in downtown Brattleboro - "ya gotta see it to believe it"). And former NY State Attorney General Elliot Spitzer has accused the group of child servitude. Of course, with his reputation as the Governor who couldn't keep his liberal Democrat pants zipped up around the whores in Washington, DC, we can well see what the state of his credibility is.

All these things being said, I agree with the commenter that if a fringe cult group like the Twelve Tribes can have a showing at the Azalea Faestival, then why not a Respect Life booth from a local Catholic Parish? Are fringe cult groups of questionable ethics acceptable for a public festival, but representatives from a 2000 years old Church that helped to found Western Civilization are not?

Out of the Mouth of Babes

Folks,

This video should be shown to every bishop, priest, deacon and parent thoughout these United States. We must give our children the true Gospel of Jesus Christ, NOT the false gospel of social justice and peace at any price.

Host Not Shown To Scale 04-20

Papal Homily at Biblical Commission Mass

Folks,

Peope Benedict XVI gave a noteworthy Homily to the Pontifical Biblical Commission yesterday (April 19). There are two very significant things that he points out:

1. Unlimited autonomy does NOT liberate
2. Penance IS a grace

In these thing, our Holy Father debunks with equal ease both the secular atheist idea of unlimited personal freedom, and the Protestant Evangelical or Pentecostal idea that penance is not required for conversion and change.

First, concerning the false secular atheist idea of unlimited personal freedom and autonomy, and the dictatorial requirement for conformity in today's society of spiritual and moral relativism, our Holy Father says:

...Modernity has spoken about man's liberation, of his complete autonomy, thus also liberation from obedience to God. There is no need for freedom anymore, man is free, he is autonomous: there is nothing more. But this autonomy is a lie: it is an ontological lie, because man does not exist from himself nor for himself, and it is also a political and practical lie, because collaboration, the sharing of freedom is necessary. And if God does not exist, if God is not accessible to man, only the consensus of the majority is supreme. Consequently, the consensus of the majority becomes the last word, which we must obey. And this consensus -- we know from the history of the last century -- can also be a "consensus in evil."

So we see that so-called autonomy does not truly liberate man. Obedience to God is freedom, because it is the truth, it confronts all that is human. In the history of humanity these words of Peter and Socrates are the true beacon of man's liberation, which knows how to see God and, in the name of God, can and must obey not men but God and therefore be freed from the positivism of human obedience. Dictatorships have always been against this obedience to God....

Today, thanks be to God, we do not live under dictatorships but there are subtle forms of dictatorship: a conformism that becomes obligatory, think like everyone thinks, act like everyone acts, and the subtle aggression against the Church, or even the less subtle, demonstrates how this conformism can really be a true dictatorship. For us this is true: one must obey God rather than men. But that means that we truly know God and truly want to obey him. God is not a pretext for one's own will, but it is really he who calls and invites us, even -- if it is necessary -- to martyrdom. This is why, faced with this word that begins a new history of freedom in the world, we pray above all to know God, to humbly and truly know him and, knowing God, to learn the true obedience that is the foundation of human freedom.

Second, concerning the Protestant false idea that grace in being without preconditions likewise does not require penance, our Holy Father says:

Christ the Savior gave Israel conversion and forgiveness of sin (Acts 5:31) -- in the Greek text the term is "metanoia" -- he has given us penance and forgiveness of sins. For me this is a very important observation: penance is a grace. There is a tendency in exegesis that says: In Galilee Jesus announced a grace without conditions, absolutely unconditional, so also without penance, pure grace, without human preconditions. But this is a false interpretation of grace. Penance is grace; it is a grace that we recognize our sin, it is a grace to know that we need renewal, change, of a transformation of our being. Penance, to be able to do penance, is a gift of grace. And I must say that we Christians, even in recent times, we have often avoided the word penance, it seemed too harsh to us. Now, under the attacks of the world that speaks to us of our sins, we see that being able to do penance is a grace. And we see that it is necessary to do penance, that is, recognize what is wrong in our life, to open up to purification, to transformation, this pain is grace, because it is renewal, it is the work of divine mercy. And thus these 2 things that St. Peter says -- penitence and forgiveness -- correspond to the beginning of Jesus' preaching: "metanoeite," that is, convert (cf. Mark 1:15). This is the fundamental point, then: "metanoia" is not a private thing, that could be substituted by grace; "metanoia" is rather the arrival of the grace that transforms us.

As usual, our Holy Father will please neither secular atheist nor Protestant Evangelical or Pentecostal. But the purpose of Truth is NOT to please; rather, it is to liberate the soul and spark the conversion of the will.

Pfleger Had Help 04-19

Folks,

My friend Catawissa Gazetteer has already covered the scandal that is "Father" Pfelger:

Father Pfeleger Is At It Again

Heresy: Chicago Style

That Cardinal George as President of the USCCB cannot or will not discipline this renegade liberal Democrsat priest for his heresy, using the example of how St. Paul dealt with Hymenaeus and Alexander in 1st Timothy 1:19-20 as the pattern to emulate, then the Church in America is in big trouble. There is no excuse for giving this liberal nitwit Democrat a lifetime achievement awrd while he openly blasphemes and utters heresy from the pulpit during Holy Mass. There is no room for this kind of maniacal behvior in the Roman Catholic Church, and there is no room these kinds of heretics, either. For those who disbelieve that "Father" Pfleger is a liberal nitwit maniac, just watch the video below that Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV has put out today. At this point, failing to excommunicate "Father" Pfeleger, Cardinal George become just as guilty.

P.S., And yes, folks, it is right and correct to "pick on" liberal nitwit Democrats because all the people like "Father" Pfleger ARE liberal nitwit Democrats and ARE polluting the Church with their heresy and apostasy and blasphemy. The Republican Party certainly isn't the Party of God, but the Democrat Party IS the Party of Satan with its support of abortion and homosexual marriage and all manner of vile, putrid filth.

Now for Michael Voris' video on "Father" Pfleger from Real Catholic TV:
Pfleger Had Help 04-19

St. Ignatius of Antioch on the Real Presence of Jesus

Folks,

St. Ignatius of Antioch was born in the year 50 AD and died in Rome between 98 and 117 AD. As such, he was a contemporary of the Apostles. In his Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, he writes against those who do NOT believe in the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity being under the appearance of bread and wine in the Holy Eucharist. He also writes about honoring the Bishop and uses the term "Catholic Church" or "Ecclesia Catholica." The more I think about, the more amazed I am at how deceived I was as a youngster being raised in a Pentecostal denomination. Everything the New Testament Church did was Catholic from the beginning.

Let no man deceive himself. Both the things which are in heaven, and the glorious angels, and rulers, both visible and invisible, if they believe not in the blood of Christ, shall, in consequence, incur condemnation. “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” Matthew 19:12 Let not [high] place puff any one up: for that which is worth all is faith and love, to which nothing is to be preferred. But consider those who are of a different opinion with respect to the grace of Christ which has come unto us, how opposed they are to the will of God. They have no regard for love; no care for the widow, or the orphan, or the oppressed; of the bond, or of the free; of the hungry, or of the thirsty.

They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that you should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion [of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved. But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.

See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.

Moreover, it is in accordance with reason that we should return to soberness [of conduct], and, while yet we have opportunity, exercise repentance towards God. It is well to reverence both God and the bishop. He who honours the bishop has been honoured by God; he who does anything without the knowledge of the bishop, does [in reality] serve the devil. Let all things, then, abound to you through grace, for you are worthy. You have refreshed me in all things, and Jesus Christ [shall refresh] you. You have loved me when absent as well as when present. May God recompense you, for whose sake, while you endure all things, you shall attain unto Him.

How Did the New Testament Church Celebrate on Sunday

Folks,

The second reading of the Divine Office within today's Liturgy of the Hours gives an excerpt from the writings of Justin Martyr who lived from 103 to 165 AD, immediately after the Apostles had died. Here he describes how the New Testament Church worshipped on Sunday. It is nothing like what the Pentecostals and Baptists do, and everything like what the Catholics and Orthodox do. And yes, the early Christians (unlike today's Protestants) believed in the real presence of Jesus in the Holy Eucharist: Body, Blood, Soul and Divinty. And they celebrated Holy Communion EVER Sunday. So why would someone choose to believe in the interpretation of Scripture given by a man-made organization founded in the late 1800s over the Church that Jesus Christ Himself founded in 30 AD or so?

Second reading
From the first apology in defense of the Christians by Saint Justin, martyr
(Cap. 66-67: PB 6, 427-431)
The celebration of the eucharist

No one may share the eucharist with us unless he believes that what we teach is true, unless he is washed in the regenerating waters of baptism for the remission of his sins, and unless he lives in accordance with the principles given us by Christ.

We do not consume the eucharistic bread and wine as if it were ordinary food and drink, for we have been taught that as Jesus Christ our Savior became a man of flesh and blood by the power of the Word of God, so also the food that our flesh and blood assimilates for its nourishment becomes the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus by the power of his own words contained in the prayer of thanksgiving.

The apostles, in their recollections, which are called gospels, handed down to us what Jesus commanded them to do. They tell us that he took bread, gave thanks and said: Do this in memory of me. This is my body. In the same way he took the cup, he gave thanks and said: This is my blood. The Lord gave this command to them alone. Ever since then we have constantly reminded one another of these things. The rich among us help the poor and we are always united. For all that we receive we praise the Creator of the universe through his Son Jesus Christ and through the Holy Spirit.

On Sunday we have a common assembly of all our members, whether they live in the city or the outlying districts. The recollections of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as there is time. When the reader has finished, the president of the assembly speaks to us; he urges everyone to imitate the examples of virtue we have heard in the readings. Then we all stand up together and pray.

On the conclusion of our prayer, bread and wine and water are brought forward. The president offers prayers and gives thanks to the best of his ability, and the people give assent by saying, “Amen.” The eucharist is distributed, everyone present communicates, and the deacons take it to those who are absent.

The wealthy, if they wish, may make a contribution, and they themselves decide the amount. The collection is placed in the custody of the president, who uses it to help the orphans and widows and all who for any reason are in distress, whether because they are sick, in prison, or away from home. In a word, he takes care of all who are in need.

We hold our common assembly on Sunday because it is the first day of the week, the day on which God put darkness and chaos to flight and created the world, and because on that same day our savior Jesus Christ rose from the dead. For he was crucified on Friday and on Sunday he appeared to his apostles and disciples and taught them the things that we have passed on for your consideration.

About 33 Minutes: Protecting America in the New Missile Age

Folks,

Please take the 7 minutes and 48 seconds to watch the following video either at the web link below or here at this blog site. Given Barack HUSSEIN Obama's emasculation of the defense of these United States, we should be very, very concerned.

About 33 Minutes: Protecting America in the New Missile Age

Holy Mother

Folks,

My friend Catawissa Gazetteer had posted the following video at his blog site and I just had to do the same here. I played this video for my Catechism class this morning (which means that Catawissa unknowingly helped me to teach my class today even though he's perhaps a thousand miles removed from me). Everytime I watch and listen to this, tears come to my eyes. When my former spouse rejected me (quite literally into the snow bank) some three years ago, all I had were my Rosary Beads. If it weren't for the Blessed Virgin Mary, then I would surely have returned to drinking and drugging again, and had died with a heroin needle in one of my veins.

Holy Mother

The Downfall of Dr. Richard Dawkins - "Arrest the Pope Edition"

Folks,

The following video has been circulating in the Catholic blogosphere. It quite accurately depcits the little temper tantrum our athiest friend, Dr. Richard Dawkins, will have at the failure of his attempt to "arrest the Pope for crimes against humanity" when he visits Britain later this year. Of course, the grandiloquent academician denies making any such statement: Richard Dawkins calls for arrest of Pope Benedict XVI.

Once again the best liberal progressive is the defeated, muzzled and emasculated liberal progressive, and in this video, Doktor Bonkers meets two of the criteria: defeated and emasculated - muzzling won't do for otherwise there would be no means to hear his cries of protest against the finger of the God whom he denies.

Dawkins Downfall ("Arrest The Pope" Edition)

Rush Limbaugh: Thank You Mr. President

Folks,

This time Rush Limbaugh is 100% correct:

Rush: Thank You Mr. President

Identifying Nuclear Workers

Folks,

My friend Catawissa Gazetteer has posted a timely article called "ID Tattoo Right Around the Corner." He cites the report from Information Week called "Invisible RFID Ink Safe For Cattle And People, Company Says."

Apparently a company called Somark Innovations has "...successfully tested biocompatible RFID ink, which can be read through animal hairs...This proves the ability to create a synthetic biometric or fake fingerprint with biocompatible, chipless RFID ink and read it through hair....The process developed by Somark involves a geometric array of micro-needles and a reusable applicator with a one-time-use ink capsule. Pydynowski said it takes five to 10 seconds to 'stamp or tattoo.'"

The article also notes that "The ink also could be used to track and rescue soldiers...It could help identify friends or foes, prevent friendly fire, and help save soldiers' lives...It's a very scary proposition when you're dealing with humans, but with military personnel, we're talking about saving soldiers' lives and it may be something worthwhile."

By using the excuse of nuclear security and protecting the public through weeding out potential terrorist infiltrators from the regular work force, nuclear industrial facilities (nuclear steam supply vendors and the power plants run by utilities) will be among the first to employ this method of personnel identification. This RFID mark will eventually be mandated by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission for every person at a nuclear power plant having access to protected or vital areas. It will be endorsed by the Nuclear Energy Institute and the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations. It is the obvious and most cost-effective way of securing the work force and monitoring entry and exit from a nuclear facility. Gone will be hand geometry readers, card readers and all the other current mechanisms that take a lot of money, time and man-hours to design, install and maintain. A simple tattoo reader in the Security Building at the plant main entrance, and at every protected or vital area door will be sufficient. The first to be tattooed will be members of a plant's Security Force and Operations Department. Next will be the engineers and technicians required for plant maintenance. And finally will be the plant's administrative staff. The system will prove to be such a success that it will then be marketed to the airline, pharmaceutical, medical, and other industries vital to public health and safety. Before long, so that one may prove citizenship and have a job, the tattoo will become mandatory for all citizens. Having once been sovereign citizens under a Christian Constitutional Republic, we will now become mere subjects under National Socialist Democracy. For those who doubt this, let them witness how airline passengers are treated by the TSA, all in the name of protecting against terrorism. Without this mark, no one will be allowed to buy food, obtain medical care or housing, or obtain employment.

As Revelation 13:16-18 states:

It [the beast from the earth - the False Prophet] forced all the people, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to be given a stamped image on their right hands or their foreheads, so that no one could buy or sell except one who had the stamped image of the beast's name or the number that stood for its name. Wisdom is needed here; one who understands can calculate the number of the beast [from the sea - the Antichrist] , for it is a number that stands for a person. His number is six hundred and sixty-six.

Under whose reign of terror are these things proceeding? Under the reign of the Obamination of Desolation. Maybe Obamolech is not THE antichrist, but with his baby-murdering ways, he sure is one of the little ones like Maximillen Robespierre, his spiritual forefather.

The Fruit of the Tree of Life

Folks,

Today's Second Reading from the Divine Office within the Liturgy of the Hours is a sermon by Saint Theodore the Studite. This sermon is on the precious and life-giving cross of Christ and is reprinted below. Genesis chapter 3 describes two Trees in the Garden of Eden: the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Tree of Life. The snake had beguiled Eve into partaking of the fruit of the first, and Eve in turn offered the same to Adam. Verses 22 and 23 then record:

Then the LORD God said: "See! The man has become like one of us, knowing what is good and what is bad! Therefore, he must not be allowed to put out his hand to take fruit from the tree of life also, and thus eat of it and live forever." The LORD God therefore banished him from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he had been taken.

Now Saint Theodore the Studite in his sermon describes the Cross of Christ as the Tree of Life, and so too the fruit thereof. That fruit, as we all know, is the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. John 6:53-56 records Jesus Himself explaining it in this fashion:

Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.

Saint Theodore the Studite (who lived in the late 8th century AD) explain things thusly:

How precious the gift of the cross, how splendid to contemplate! In the cross there is no mingling of good and evil, as in the tree of paradise: it is wholly beautiful to behold and good to taste. The fruit of this tree is not death but life, not darkness but light. This tree does not cast us out of paradise, but opens the way for our return.

This was the tree on which Christ, like a king on a chariot, destroyed the devil, the Lord of death, and freed the human race from his tyranny. This was the tree upon which the Lord, like a brave warrior wounded in his hands, feet and side, healed the wounds of sin that the evil serpent had inflicted on our nature. A tree once caused our death, but now a tree brings life. Once deceived by a tree, we have now repelled the cunning serpent by a tree. What an astonishing transformation! That death should become life, that decay should become immortality, that shame should become glory! Well might the holy Apostle exclaim: Far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world! The supreme wisdom that flowered on the cross has shown the folly of worldly wisdom’s pride. The knowledge of all good, which is the fruit of the cross, has cut away the shoots of wickedness.

The wonders accomplished through this tree were foreshadowed clearly even by the mere types and figures that existed in the past. Meditate on these, if you are eager to learn. Was it not the wood of a tree that enabled Noah, at God’s command, to escape the destruction of the flood together with his sons, his wife, his sons’ wives and every kind of animal? And surely the rod of Moses prefigured the cross when it changed water into blood, swallowed up the false serpents of Pharaoh’s magicians, divided the sea at one stroke and then restored the waters to their normal course, drowning the enemy and saving God’s own people? Aaron’s rod, which blossomed in one day in proof of his true priesthood, was another figure of the cross, and did not Abraham foreshadow the cross when he bound his son Isaac and placed him on the pile of wood?

By the cross death was slain and Adam was restored to life. The cross is the glory of all the apostles, the crown of the martyrs, the sanctification of the saints. By the cross we put on Christ and cast aside our former self. By the cross we, the sheep of Christ, have been gathered into one flock, destined for the sheepfolds of heaven.

More on News Media Sensationalism of Sex Abuse from Real Catholic TV

Folks,

Michael Voris' last two videos on the sensationalism of the sex abuse scandal by the liberal progressive news media are provided below.

What the Media DOESN'T say

A Bishops' Plea

The Illogic Underlying Protestant Belief on the Infallibility of Scripture

Folks,

My friend Catawissa Gazetteer made the following comment to yesterday's post, Wednesday Night's Bible Study, and he is 100% correct (again). First, let's be clear about something: both Catawissa and I do believe in the infallibility of Sacred Scripture. But once again, Truth rests on the three legged stool of Sacred Scripture (2nd Timothy 3:16), Sacred Tradition (2nd Thessalonians 2:15) and the Magisterium of the Church (1st Timothy 3:15). Most Evangelical and Pentecostal Protestants deny the last two (in violation of the very Scripture which they claim to revere), and liberal progressive Catholics (with their Episcopalian cousins) even deny the first. Now for Catawissa's statement:

Another example of the lack of logic underlying Protestant belief on the infallibility of Scripture:

"Though Luther did not challenge the infallibility of Scripture he most emphatically challenged the infallibility of the church. He allowed for the possibility that the church could err, even when the church ruled on the question of what books properly belonged in the Canon. To see this issue more clearly we can refer to a distinction often made by Dr. John Gerstner. Gerstner distinguishes between the Roman Catholic view of the Canon and the Protestant view of the Canon in this manner:


• ROMAN CATHOLIC VIEW: The Bible is an infallible collection of infallible books.


• PROTESTANT VIEW: The Bible is a fallible collection of infallible books.


The distinction in view here refers to the Catholic Church’s conviction that the Canon of Scripture was declared infallibly by the church. On the other hand, the Protestant view is that the church’s decision regarding what books make up the Canon was a fallible decision. Being fallible means that it is possible that the church erred in its compilation of the books found in the present Canon of Scripture.


When Gerstner makes this distinction he is neither asserting nor implying that the church indeed did err in its judgment of what properly belongs to the Canon. His view is not designed to cast doubt on the Canon but simply to guard against the idea of an infallible church. It is one thing to say that the church could have erred; it is another thing to say that the church did err.


Gerstner’s formula has often been met with both consternation and sharp criticism in evangelical circles. It seems to indicate that he and those who agree with his assessment are undermining the authority of the Bible. But nothing could be further from the truth. Like Luther and Calvin before him, Gerstner has been an ardent defender of the infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture. His formula is merely designed to acknowledge that there was a historical selection process by which the church determined what books were really Scripture and what books were not Scripture. The point is that in this sifting or selection process the church sought to identify what books were actually to be regarded as Scripture."

[Source: “The Establishment of Scripture” Sola Scriptura! The Protestant Position on the Bible. (Don Kistler, ed. Morgan, PA: Soli Deo Gloria, 1995), found in the electronic edition of Sproul’s Chapters in Symposium Volumes]

Just as you stated above, "...they pick and choose what they wish to take at face value, and denote the rest as mere symbology when it does not appeal to them."

Protestants try to dodge the issue of Church authority by stretching logic well beyond the breaking point. They would have us believe that the Church is fallible except in this one instance where God protected it from error. PUHLEEEEEZE!!!

Of course, we don't have much room to talk. Catholic Bishops have spent the last forty years doing exactly the same thing on the issue of "social justice".

Happy Birthday, Holy Father!

Folks,

The American Catholic blog site reports that today is Pope Benedict XVI's 83rd birthday, four days removed from the anniversary of his election to the Seat of Saint Peter.

Happy Birthday, Holy Father!

Wednesday Night Bible Study - More on Correctly Interpreting Scripture

Folks,

 

This is a follow-on to yesterday's post, Wednesday Night Bible Study, in which I lamented the imperfect understanding which many non-Catholics (and sadly most Catholics too, for that matter) have on correctly interpeting Sacred Scripture. To address this issue among Catholics at my parish, in November of 2009 one of my fellow parishioners and myself presented the following training course to our Catholic Apologetics class that meets on a Thursday evening once per month. I offer this for the reader's understanding:

Foundational principles for reading and interpreting Sacred Scripture are found in Paragraphs 10 and 11 of Dei Verbum – see full text online at the Vatican web site.

“Sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the word of God, committed to the Church. But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.” (Paragraph 10 in Dei Verbum)

The essential problem involved in interpreting scripture (exegesis) is expressed by Hans Urs von Balthasar as follows:

“Scripture says of man that he has never seen God, that God dwells in unapproachable light, that no created being can fathom His inner life. How then can man, who is created with an orientation towards God and constantly seeks Him, begin to interpret Him?”

Only God, who has the vision of His own wisdom, is able to reveal His wisdom.

“No one has ever seen God. The only Son, God, who is at the Father's side, has revealed him (autos exegesato in Greek). John 1:18

God firstly reveals Himself in the Incarnation of His Son.

Man’s interpretation presupposes that “the love of God has been poured into our hearts by the Holy Spirit who has been given to us” (Romans 5:5). It will then become clear how we can understand God’s interpreting Himself through man without canceling out his mysterious character, or alternately, how the abiding mysteriousness of God does not hinder a real understanding by man.

As true man, Christ can make God intelligible to us through human words, gestures, deeds, and sufferings.

At the same time He still shows us something boundless, which sets us towards deeper comprehension.

Next, the Holy Spirit aids us in understanding, but always in such a way that reminds us we can only understand when we surrender ourselves in faith to the self-revealing God. As the Gospel ceaselessly tells us, not before the Holy Spirit has been sent to them do the Apostles understand what Jesus is telling them.

“But they understood nothing of this; the word remained hidden from them and they failed to comprehend what he said.” (Luke 18:34)

The Spirit is not a second interpretation of God, but rather the perfection of the first and only interpretation.

“But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming. He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.” (John 16:13-14)

The interpretation of the Spirit takes place within the structures erected and protected by Him.

These are the Church with the Holy Scriptures and the deposit of Sacred Tradition belonging to it, including the distinction between the “Shepherd” and the “flock” characterizing it. These elements are the presupposition for an ever continuing, living interpretation of the Spirit.

Practical aids in interpretation of Scripture

Principles for the interpretation of scripture are contained in article 12 of Dei Verbum. There are two main divisions within the article. The first pertains to ascertaining the meaning intended by the human author by the understanding of the contemporary ways of speaking and writing, and by consideration of the types of literature employed. The second pertains to how Holy Scripture is to be read and interpreted within the Sacred Spirit in which it is written. Under Division 1 (in bold italics for emphasis), there are three subdivisions.

Division 1:

a. However, since God speaks in Sacred Scripture through men in human fashion, the interpreter of Sacred Scripture, in order to see clearly what God wanted to communicate to us, should carefully investigate what meaning the sacred writers really intended, and what God wanted to manifest by means of their words. To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to "literary forms." For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse.

b. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture.

c. For the correct understanding of what the sacred author wanted to assert, due attention must be paid to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking and narrating which prevailed at the time of the sacred writer, and to the patterns men normally employed at that period in their everyday dealings with one another.

Division 2:

But, since Holy Scripture must be read and interpreted in the sacred spirit in which it was written, (a) no less serious attention must be given to the content and unity of the whole of Scripture if the meaning of the sacred texts is to be correctly worked out. (b) The living tradition of the whole Church must be taken into account along with (c) the harmony which exists between elements of the faith (the analogy of faith). It is the task of exegetes to work according to these rules toward a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture, so that through preparatory study the judgment of the Church may mature. For all of what has been said about the way of interpreting Scripture is subject finally to the judgment of the Church, which carries out the divine commission and ministry of guarding and interpreting the word of God.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church helps in interpreting the points raised in paragraph 12 of Dei Verbum, so let us take a look at the elements of this statement. (CCC 109)

1. This section refers to the use of the historical critical method. The following is from the document on the historicity of the gospels issued by the Pontifical Commission in April, 1964.

“This method thoroughly investigates the sources, and analyzes their nature and value, relying, on the help of textual criticism, literary criticism, and linguistic knowledge.

The commentator will pay heed to the insistent admonition of Pius XII. "Let him prudently examine what the manner of expression or the literary genre used by the sacred writer contributes to a true and accurate interpretation; and let him rest assured that this aspect of his work cannot be neglected without grave detriment to Catholic exegesis." The admonition of Pope Pius XII's lays down a general principle of hermeneutics, valid for the interpretation of both the Old and New Testament, because the sacred writers used the patterns of thought and expression native to their contemporaries.”

2. It is the Holy Spirit who guides the Church in the understanding of scripture, and without whom, the scripture would be a dead letter. This is the role that Jesus foretold. “I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear it now. But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming.” (John 16:12-13)

Ignace de la Potterie writes:

“The fundamental principle that guided the Fathers in their way of reading and understanding the Bible was that of the New Testament itself.”

2nd Timothy 3:16 states:

"All scripture is inspired by God and can be profitably used for teaching.”

The Bible is the work of the Spirit, the place of the presence and action of the Spirit: the human word of the Biblical writers is the word which God himself addresses to us. It follows that the Bible contains a divine sense, a sense deeper than the historical and human sense; it is the sense willed by the Spirit, the spiritual sense. As Origen says:

“The scriptures were written under the action of the Spirit of God: and they have, beyond their apparent sense, a certain other sense which eludes most readers. For what is found in it is at one and the same time the figure of certain mysteries and the image of divine realities.”

Saint Jerome comments:

“Whoever….understands Scripture otherwise in the sense required by the Holy Spirit, by whom it was written, even if he does not distance himself from the Church, can nonetheless be called a heretic."

The principle has two complementary aspects, equally important: one is subjective, the other objective. According to the subjective aspect, the interpretation of Scripture ”in the Spirit” is not possible except in the light of faith. Origen says that only the Church understands Scripture, because the Church, “is converted to the Lord” in the faith: for the Church, for her alone, “the veil falls.” (2 Corinthians 3:16). To understand Scripture spiritually, the believer must participate in the Church’s movement of conversion: it is unthinkable, “that an unbeliever should see the word of God.” St Gregory the great affirms this: “The words of God absolutely cannot be penetrated without wisdom; for if one has not received the Spirit of God, he cannot in any way understand the words of God.”

But the objective aspect is no less important: one must read and interpret Scripture “in the same spirit by whom it was written.” It is precisely because of this action of the Spirit in writing the biblical text that it becomes Holy Scripture, Word of God, and that it reveals to us the salvific plan of God, the truth of salvation. Saint Augustine expresses the depth of Scripture;” Wonderful is the depth of Your oracles, whose surface is before us, inviting the little ones; and yet wonderful is the depth, O my God, wonderful is the depth.” Jerome echoes, “Let us not think that the Gospel is in the words of the Scriptures: not on the surface, but in the marrow, not in the leaves of the words, but in the root of comprehension.

To explain this dimension of interiority in the Scripture, the Fathers gladly return to the idea of “mystery” that is contained in the biblical accounts. St Gregory comments on the story of Jacob and Esau explaining that to understand this episode more profoundly, “he must rise at once from history to the mystery.” The peculiarity of Holy Scripture is that “with one and the same word it tells a story and unveils a mystery”. This sense that goes beyond the letter the Fathers ordinarily named allegory.

The three subdivisions under Division 2 are summarized by the Catechism of the Catholic Church as follows:

a. Paragraph 112: Be especially attentive "to the content and unity of the whole Scripture." Different as the books which comprise it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God's plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.

b. Paragraph 113: Read the Scripture within "the living Tradition of the whole Church." According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church's heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God's Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture ("according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church").

c. Paragraph 114: Be attentive to the analogy of faith. By "analogy of faith" we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.

The four Senses of Scripture

The principles of the Fathers took on a more systematic form in the medieval period and continues for almost a thousand years. There has been a revival in the modern times and the Catechism of the Catholic Church covers this in paragraphs 115-118.

A famous Latin couplet summarizes the four senses as follows, The Letter speaks of deeds; Allegory to faith; The Moral how to act; Anagogy our destiny.

1. The Literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by sound scholarship. All other senses are based on the literal.

2. Allegory is the very object of faith: it is the mystery that is unveiled in history, namely Christ.

3. The moral sense pertains to the moral and religious life of the Christian.

4. The anagogical is the movement toward the final ends, an implicit eschatology.

Note that the word “anagogy” means “interpretation of a word, passage, or text (as of Scripture or poetry) that finds beyond the literal, allegorical, and moral senses a fourth and ultimate spiritual or mystical sense.” It derives from the Greek word “anagoge” which is a derivative of “ana + agein”, meaning to “lead forth” or to “lead again.”

There is under all this the fact that there is only one true sense of Scripture, one unique Mystery signified through all of Scripture, that is “the Mystery of Christ, prefigured or made present by the events, interiorized in the soul of the individual, consummated in glory” (Henri de Lubac)

Paragraph 134 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

All Sacred Scripture is but one book, and this one book is Christ, "because all divine Scripture speaks of Christ, and all divine Scripture is fulfilled in Christ" (Hugh of St. Victor)

Conclusion:

Truth is like a stool resting on three legs:

1. Sacred Scripture (2nd Timothy 3:16)
2. Sacred Tradition (2nd Thessalonians 2:15)
3. The Church Herself (1st Timothy 3:15)

If any one of the legs are removed, then the edifice collapses.

Indeed, regardless of how devout one may consider one's self, and regardless of one's religious denomination, one cannot claim to have God as his Father without the Church being His Mother. Wilfull, knowledgeable rejection of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church

• IS rejection of God the Father,
• IS rejection of His Son Jesus Chirst, and
• IS rejection of the Holy Spirit which enlivens and empowers the mystical Body of Christ under the See of Peter.

Renegade liberal progressive Catholics are as guilty of this as any Protestant, and perhaps because they KNOW better, they are even MORE culpable, and will one be held appropriately responsible before the Judgement Seat of God Almighty. It will be quite ironic to see Pentecostal and Baptist and Holiness people who were truthful to the Faith as they imperfectly understood it enter those Pearly Gates, while liberal progressive Catholics are cast into outer darkness where they by their evil deeds have always choosen to go.