THE STILETTO May 16, 2010

The stiletto is a small, yet, very sharp dagger, capable of penetrating deeply into the very heart of a man, causing excruciating pain that far exceeds the deceptive size of the blade. Modernist priests, given to mocking the things of Heaven often wield this lethal weapon in their wicked sermons of disreputable cant and impudence. Like the size of this knife, they come disguised as small indeed, for only a man of puny character would openly dare to laugh at Our Lady of Fatima, in order to discourage belief in the peril of the fires of Hell among other eternal verities. Not every slayer inserts the knife in the same manner. Some choose a clean cut, the act dispensed with quickly, with a minimum of suffering for the victim and themselves. Others prefer the torturous kill so as to inflict the most grievous wound, taking the jagged route.

Such [the latter form] was the sermon just two days hence of the great Feast of Our Lady of Fatima in a local parish and such is the subject of this fiery and blunt column!

Now the modern heretic is very clever, like his Father, the Father of Lies. He dispenses his poison in a friendly liquid, so as to disarm his audience. He starts off with a truism that no one in his right mind would deny; in this case, he denounces a horrid prayer he heard someone utter, to wit, the person praying was seeking to be ignominious or degraded in order to lift up the honor of God. Of course the person may have put matters inelegantly, while intending to ask for the grace of humility before the august, glorious God. However, let us take the priest at his word and cede his point that such a prayer was at best a distortion of Catholic piety, which is where he wants his parishioners to find themselves so as to place themselves within the ambit of his authoritative pronouncements; in other words, softening for the kill to come. He aims to take his time at slaying Tradition and popular devotion, a familiar theme of his, enjoying his position as a supposed intellectual with the gift of oratory: He has a captive gathering, for these well mannered folks hardly dare leave Sunday Mass.

This kind of preacher makes the same mistake over and over again, hoping the Catholics in the pew won't have the presence of mind to analyze his diatribe with any skill. He wants them to presume, along with himself, that because the first statement was on its face
accurate in its judgment, therefore all subsequent like assertions are equally so. This is like saying because A is true and because B resembles A, ergo A and B must be equal.  A is the misguided person supra. B is the Fatima Decade prayer that one repeats between the decades of every Rosary.

He embellishes his dissembling, on "popular piety" by stating that no Catholic is obligated to believe every word of a Saint --- he listed a few, such as St. Teresa of Avila, St. Therese of Lisieux and St. Francis of Assisi. He never says what writings of these Saints are to be set aside as if only revealed dogma is to be believed. 

Let me use an analogy. When my father said that he loved me, I believed him without reservation because his actions told me that he loved me more than words --- I had experience, although I knew my father's character, so that I would have believed him without any need of proof. My father's many counsels to me, while not dogma, that is, infallible, were cherished by me because I knew his uprightness and his heart. I loved him back and no one would have ever been able to convince me to disregard his wisdom. The writings of the Saints are like this but of even more worth, for often the Saint, who is not called to declare dogmas --- this is the task of Peter --- has been inspired by God, sometimes directly instructed by Him in a mystical vision, to provide special counsel to souls yearning to unite their wills with the Will of God because they seek Him and salvation above everything else. Such souls can be encouraged by particular Saints. No one says to his neighbor, ah, the wisdom of St. ------ is equal to that of God. Father Insolence insists that this is the case: to take notice of the wisdom of the Saints is itself unwise just because it does not have the declaration of a dogma. A strange utterance for a priest to make, for one of the dogmas of the faith, the dogmas he pretends to so carefully safeguard is the dogma on Hell itself. Father does not say there is no Hell, he simply says it no longer matters as we, like all good Protestants are already saved, which is to negate Hell in the practical, if not the theological sense, even if he does not realize this. He also neglects to reflect that if the Saints can be so easily dismissed, ought not his own declarations of derision be disregarded by his parishioners? After all, he has as yet to be canonized! What is good for the Saint is ever more so for the non-Saint, surely!

Having done away with Saintly counsels, counsels which never prevented the Saints themselves from attaining sanctification, Father Agenda finally launches into a frontal attack on the Fatima Decade prayer, in particular the "fires of Hell" aspect, which he has already demoted to a superstition by virtue of the context generated by his own dogmatic statements effected by taking Scripture out of context! The irony abounds. Meanwhile he overlooks that Saint Paul, one of the authors of Scripture, inspired by the Holy Ghost, wrote inerrantly, by definition. One of his sage counsels that no one who values his eternal happiness ought to set aside, is in Phil. 2: 12: St. Paul instructs us thus, "with fear and trembling work out your salvation." We might still go to Hell!

It is not the fact that any teaching or counsel comes from a Saint per se, but the ultimate source, the Saint being but the means of transmittal, that is germane.  Father Modernist does not mention this important reality. Now, Our Lady [Fatima] is not just any Saint, as if any Saint could possibly be any old anything, she is above the Saints and Angels, she is the Mother of God and the Queen of Heaven and Earth, and Spouse of the Holy Ghost. In the order of grace she is just below the Trinity. Little Jacinta, Francisco and Lucy were taught the Fatima Decade prayer by the Angel [St. Michael] at Fatima in the weeks preceding Our Lady's appearance, not on his own authority and for a sentimental pious devotion without validity for salvation. He was obeying the Queen he served and for a most relevant reason: Many souls were falling into Hell, Baptism and Father's wishful thinking not withstanding! And the source, the ultimate source? God Himself, for Mary does nothing without being in unity with the Blessed Trinity! Yes, the Decade prayer is not a dogma of the faith, but a person of humble faith is ever ready to receive with gratitude and submission an aid of grace when that help has been officially approved and promoted by Holy Mother Church. There is a law of the Church that says how we pray determines what we believe. Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi. A supplementary axiom of this is, tell me what you choose to disregard as to prayer, and I will tell you what you actually believe or do not believe in. If you do not think the fires of Hell are a possibility, your idea of sin will be radically different than someone who thinks quite the opposite. This priest is not only rash, brazen, impious and blasphemous, he is in grave danger of the fires of Hell. Every Saint was conscious of his sinful state and the dangers of Hell; those most certain of Hell are those who so cavalierly downplay it.

Father wanted to impress his starving, startled flock with the notion that it is Scripture as interpreted by him alone, that matters. The terrifying irony is that in Matt. 18: 6 we read: "But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in Me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea."

One of the mothers said to me, "How do I go home and undo what he just did?" She has several children, some of whom are minors. The scandal is grave, and it runs deeper than the slice of the stiletto and the depth of the sea. The irony went further. Father stressed the unity of the Trinity and the unity of the Body of Christ, yet he scattereth the flock more ignominiously than the demeaned prayerful person in his opening salvo.

He who begins by dismissing the Mother of God's wishes, later, if not sooner, ends with disbelief in her Son. To Jesus through Mary because this is the very will of God.

Our Lady told us that many souls go to Hell because they had no one to pray for them.

"O My Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of Hell, lead all souls to Heaven, especially those most in need."

"O My Jesus, it is for love of Thee, for the conversion of sinners and in reparation for sins committed against the Immaculate Heart of Mary, I offer this sacrifice to Thee."

Pray for this poor priest, who is old, before it is too late ...

COMMUNION ON THE TONGUE: Cant, Can't and Won't March 3, 2010

She said, upon hearing of the US Bishops' guidelines for receiving Holy Communion during the swine flu [non]-epidemic, which recommended Communion "in the Hand", 'Oh, I wouldn't take It on the tongue anyway ...' her conclusion being that the Traditional and only non-sacrilegious manner of receiving Our Lord was a most unpleasant experience. Another joined in the chorus of "can't and won't and why not" for him. Nothing we haven't all heard hundreds of times before. But the "can't" --- as in "I won't" --- is nothing less than cant, a form of sentimental jargon or hypocritical sophistry; I intend the latter meaning, especially since the young woman's intention does not comport with human reason. Of course, she is in high company since the Vatican's permission for "Communion in the Hand" does not square with human reason either, not to mention that it violates the dictates of the dogmatic counsels of the Council of Trent, an action that brings down upon us the wrath of God. If it were impossible for Churchmen to do such a thing, the Council of Trent would not have had to include its anathemas in the first place as they would be unnecessary and confusing. Just as St. Pius V, the Pope of Trent, issued anathemas with the bull Quo Primum on the Mass. Trent's anathemas are there because such a frightful possibility, the practical apostasy of shepherds, is always with us.

Those of you who agree with the lady [supra] might find my declaration the view of a troglodyte and not that of a sensible, faithful [to Rome], "compassionate" Catholic. This, too, I have heard a hundred times and more. By now you are perhaps asking yourself, why does she write, "does not comport with human reason"? The Holy See allows the practice, does it not?

Well, let's look at it this way, from human experience, specifically physical necessity; ontological necessity, that which exists in reality apart from our opinion on it; and the Vatican's own law here.

First, the Holy See did not give permission for the laity to self-communicate, meaning, take the Sacred Species in their hand to administer to themselves. They can't because this would be so radical a departure that even the modern Vatican would not dare. How the Vatican got around the violation of Sacred Tradition was that the Extraordinary ministers could not take the Host directly from the chalice themselves to communicate; if it were not so woefully unfunny, this would be comical, because then, while pretending the priest is communicating to them, they then proceed to take the Host directly from the chalice to communicate to everyone else! Obviously the Holy See expects us to not be able to make the necessary distinctions, that anyone with common sense can make. Although the Holy See can unwisely grant a permission or indult for a practice that might harm the faith, it can never abrogate that which is held sacred by Tradition. For instance, when Pope Paul issued his New Mass, people mistakenly thought that the Immemorial Roman Mass of Tradition given in perpetuity in Quo Primum, had been banned. Those of us who said otherwise were scorned and brushed aside by our fellow Catholics as if we were quaint, annoying bees to be endured under their bonnets. Years later --- three Pontiffs later --- we learned otherwise, as those of us who make it a priority to know these things had insisted on.  Let me restate this principle: a permission or indult is never a command to be imposed. When Pope John Paul II introduced the fourth set of Rosary mysteries, he said that it was voluntary, as in optional. He had no choice, because as liberal as he tended to be, he knew the traditional teaching on popular piety that is in keeping with the faith. He could not abrogate what Our Lady gave to St. Dominic. Not that I think he would have if he had thought he could. I know he genuinely loved the traditional Rosary. Unfortunately he seemed to have a love affair with novelty at the same time. 

St. Vincent of Lerins teaches: "This custom has always prevailed in the Church: that, the more religious a man was, the more promptly did he withstand novel inventions."

  Many a person considered those of us who took the Holy Father at his word and opted out of the Illuminative mysteries "disobedient." The modern Church is filled with contrarian notions, the mandatory is now an option and vice versa. The only "heretics" today are those who hold to Tradition and its traditions. Such is our lot. It is an adage of the Church according to the Saints that when God is angry with His people, He sends them bad priests. Bad can be defined in two ways: filled with vice as we know from the just revealed scandal concerning an aide to the Pope, or ignorant of and [or] hostile to Tradition and the dogmas of the faith in their full. If anyone thinks that we are not being chastised by God let him think again. The majority of diocesan priests are at least ignorant, and too many of those anti-Tradition as well. As one devout Catholic mother of seven recently said to me: "The laity will have to save the priests." It is supposed to be the other way around, of course. And as a middle-aged man acknowledged in my presence, shortly after her, "If they wanted to be Protestants, why didn't they just leave the Church? Now they are trying to make us all Protestants. I hope the Traditional Mass comes back as it once was." Both are younger than I am, yet wise beyond their years. And probably Saints in the making for they make sacrifices to keep the faith in their respective parishes while all around them is a crumbling Catholic facade.

On the rarest of occasions it is licit to permit a lay person to touch the consecrated species when no priest is available to take care of a discarded Host, for instance. Even then, the person should use a clean linen cloth if at all possible to envelop the Host. Thus, technically speaking, we cannot say that a lay person may never touch the Body of Christ with his hands. This crisis is much like that of a dying child in need of Baptism when no deacon or priest is available in time. Having recognized such an urgency and that the good of souls is the highest law of the Church, we all know that this exception is exactly that, an exception for the sake of a soul's eternal happiness with God. Now, no one goes around saying, "Since the Church allows an exception in this regard, why not allow the laity to Baptize regularly, thereby helping the priests with a shortage of time." No one agitates for this, even the most misguided liberal in the pew. Why not? There are not enough babies being born in the first place, and in the second, because they know that if the laity are permitted a regular indult that sooner, if not later, things will go awry and the integrity of the Sacrament will be lost or placed in doubt. Underneath it all they suspect on some level that this is what happened with "Communion in the Hand" in some way they are not able to articulate.  The discomfort hovers just below the surface of the confusion that enshrouds today's Catholic in a myopic miasma. They know somehow that things are not quite as they ought to be and have no idea how to set things right, if they had the power.

Ergo, the rare exception as to the Sacred Species in no way led anyone who held the Catholic faith whole and entire, to say to himself, forty years ago,  "I will pressure the Church for the 'right' to distribute Holy Communion at Sunday Mass."  The earliest known such dissident was none other than the first Protestant who rebelled against the Catholic faith and introduced the practice of "Communion in the Hand" --- the apostate Archbishop Cranmer with his so-called new Mass. He had no faith in the True Presence and knew that he could induce others to begin disbelieving by subtly shifting the focus from the sacerdotal priesthood to the priesthood of the laity, a far different reality. How many of today's Protestants believe in the Real Presence, apart from the fact they have no sacerdotal ministers to confect the Sacrament? Most likely only a few more than the number of Catholics who don't either ... The modern day Cranmers in the Church have learned their lessons well from their long ago mentor whose ghost lived on in the guise of the now deceased Archbishop Bugnini of the infamous Consilium.

No, the practice of "Communion in the Hand" began its horrific imposition as a bold-faced lie; they told us it was part of being a "good Catholic and following the Council" ---Vatican II. Permission had not been granted --- it was all illicit even under the liberalized Vatican rules. It was only after contacting the Chancery upon becoming suspicious and most uneasy when things got all together out of hand, no pun intended, did we learn we had another, you guessed it, option. Too many years --- too late --- to sound the alarm. When they are up to no good, the powers that be hide their intentions within a cluster of options; the single exception is when they know the traditional option is preferred. Then they hide the options within a conjured up mandate and hope we don't catch on. They own up to the "option" of Tradition [which is not optional for a true Catholic] only when there is no denying it any longer and it is mostly pro-forma anyway.

The sanctuary had already been overrun by invading hordes, the fort betrayed by those who should have defended her. Then, when enough Catholics, who had already begun to lose some of their faith --- and didn't know it --- had become accustomed to the practice and in widespread locales and numbers, an imprudent Holy See, whose permissions and policy-making are not protected from error as are dogmas, granted an indult. The rest, as it is often said, is history. Oddly, most irrationally, while rendering "licit" what is illicit, and what cannot be rendered licit whatever the rationale, what they themselves now permit, the Holy See simultaneously forbade and still forbids, self-communication, simply because by definition and ontological necessity, i.e., any lay person who takes the Host in his hands and then places It in his mouth is self-communicating. Otherwise words meaning nothing, and there is no such thing as a definition at all.

You resist reason, still? Okay, let us use a cogent metaphor. I am ill with a fast spreading infection and in need of an antibiotic immediately. I see my physician who prescribes something. He has nothing left in his office to administer to me directly as he sometimes does. His secretary calls the order in to my local pharmacist. I speed to his establishment, hand him the money he is owed. My situation is critical and every minute counts. The pharmacist pours me a cup of water, removing one of the pills, which he hands to me, then I place the pill in my mouth, actually on my tongue, and gulp it down with the help of the water. Now, there are a few people waiting for their prescriptions in the alcove of the pharmacy; they witness my taking the dose. None of them, being rational human beings, turns to the person at his side and says, "Oh the pharmacist administered the pill to her." No, if they comment at all, it is to say, in keeping with reality, "He gave her a pill and some water, but she gave the medicine to herself; she must be really sick not to wait until she gets home." I self-administered or self-communicated if you prefer. You see,  the doctor and pharmacist are the source of the medicine for what ails me, but the minister of the actual dose is me. No one can deny it because it is a self-evident fact to anyone with the use of reason. It is no different than if I had purchased a loaf of bread, and being ravenous and shaking with hypoglycemia, I removed a slice and ate it on the spot. I fed myself. The grocer was the supplier only.

Note that I deliberately said "on my tongue" above. Why? Not for the sake of the metaphor, which would turn it into an imperfect metaphor, but for the sake of reality itself. Thus the metaphor can be applied with acumen and precision. Why?

Because the reception is always on the tongue, realistically. How you might ask? Elementary my dear Watson. Those who take the Host from the priest into their hand, place it on the tongue in their mouths. No one I know takes the Host and wedges It between his tongue and jaw to purposefully avoid the tongue. Yet they think this is what they are doing, not receiving on the tongue. Go figure! The human mouth when ingesting any particle involves the tongue by God's design of physiological necessity. Try swallowing a bit of food without your tongue's assistance. Let me know how you make out. So why don't we all stop pretending we are doing other than what we are and just go back to basics with less hypocrisy? Not to mention the screaming irony! And even more the utter sacrilege!! I mean where is the rationality in the pretense? That we no longer receive the Host on our tongues? Because we do, each and every one of us that receives the Host because we can have wheat gluten. The only real difference is in who is administering and in the widespread loss of belief in the Real Presence. We should take pride in this???!!! Call it progress?

The latter is far more gruesome to contemplate than that young woman's revulsion at "receiving on the tongue", which we have just demonstrated is exactly what she is doing despite her denial. Do I mean to suggest that she intended to be cavalier about the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord? Not at all; she is poorly taught, which is not her fault in all likelihood. Archbishop Burke of the Vatican Signatura told Raymond Arroyo on EWTN that Catholics need to be better catechized, as we have been neglected for two generations, in so many words.

The Council of Trent teaches:

The Minister of the Eucharist

To omit nothing doctrinal on this Sacrament, we now come to speak of its minister, a point, however, on which scarcely anyone can be ignorant.

Only Priests Have Power To Consecrate And Administer The Eucharist

It must be taught, then, that to priests alone has been given power to consecrate and administer to the faithful, the Holy Eucharist. That this has been the unvarying practice of the Church, that the faithful should receive the Sacrament from the priests, and that the officiating priests should communicate themselves, has been explained by the holy Council of Trent, which has also shown that this practice, as having proceeded from Apostolic tradition, is to be religiously retained, particularly as Christ the Lord has left us an illustrious example thereof, having consecrated His own most sacred body, and given it to the Apostles with His own hands.

The Laity Prohibited To Touch The Sacred Vessels

To safeguard in every possible way the dignity of so august a Sacrament, not only is the power of its administration entrusted exclusively to priests, but the Church has also prohibited by law any but consecrated persons, unless some case of great necessity intervene, to dare handle or touch the sacred vessels, the linen, or other instruments necessary to its completion. [Emphasis added by me.]

Second, let us consider our reigning Pontiff, Pope Benedict XVI. Father Calvin Goodwin of the FSSP, informed us in his commentary during the Consecration of the exquisite new church at Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary in Nebraska, "the Pope only gives Communion on the tongue and to a kneeling communicant." Indeed. Pope Benedict knows the American Bishops, at the very least, as a whole, would not comply with any change that was mandatory in re Tradition and the sacred. Which is why he only suggests in his liturgical pronouncements, does not command. But he leads by example for those who are searching for the truth and all that is holy under Heaven. As Father Goodwin also noted, "At every Mass the walls of the church are white with Angels and all the Saints are there in adoration ..." The church is filled with Angels and we are there in tattered jeans, when we have a good dress or pair of slacks [for the men]  in the closet, our womanly heads shorn of modesty, some of us chewing gum, chatting before the Blessed Sacrament, self-communicating ... anyone not filled with dread and horror, has either never had the fullness of the Catholic faith or has simply lost it!

 If you dispute this, ask yourself, why it was that Pope John Paul II, felt the need to issue a letter to the American Bishops to follow the law of the Church regarding the use of extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist, yet inexplicably did nothing when by and large it was resisted and dismissed by both bishop and priest. One local pastor said, and I quote verbatim: "I know I should obey, but I have gotten used to things and I like it, and I am not going to comply." A lay person said, "If he can disobey, so can the laity." And she did just that, eventually, leaving the Church, the ark of safety, outside of which there is no salvation, not just the parish. Another asked whether our situation in the United States was a genuine emergency that met the guidelines of the Holy See. She seemed to think it was. I told her no, otherwise why the need to write the letter with the rules? It would be confusing and unnecessary.  If the bishops were already in compliance the Pontiff would not need to instruct them to obey. No, Pope John Paul had to issue it to the Bishops because they were not following the rules. Extraordinary had become ordinary. In mission countries where there is one priest for thousands of Catholics who have Mass once a month or so, for example, yes, a genuine need, not so in the western world, despite the decline in the clergy. There are no such "ministers" at the Traditional Mass and Mass is only a few minutes longer. Truly, it can be said it is sometimes shorter since there is no "handshake of peace" and the time taken up with the production of distributing all the ciboriums to the laity. If it is time that is the consideration, perhaps removing novelties, such as the noisy handshake and all the hand clapping events in the Sanctuary with the Blessed Sacrament there, after Mass, would resolve that.  It seems that hands are a big part of modern liturgy. The lines between the common priesthood of the faithful and the sacerdotal priesthood are now so blurred we have lost our sense of place and the sense of the sacred. But I suspect it is not time that matters, but the new religion that the new Mass of our modern Cranmers has spawned. Too many have been converted to it, most especially the priests who say this Mass day in and day out. These priests see their vocation as " a career".  What else should we expect from a priest who is content to let himself be called "a presider"? Just last week a local pastor referred to "his career." And this was in the context of getting more seminarians. Pray, tell how? Dioceses where the traditional orders are welcomed have fuller seminaries in general. Just ask Bishop Bruskewitz and Cardinal Pell! The new Mass, while valid, is freakish to contemplate in the light of all the Eucharistic miracles of the past centuries.  Two weeks ago a local parish had the Vatican exhibit on Eucharistic miracles, complete with pictures and a video; the priest, when encouraging his parishioners to attend, indicated that those who did not believe in the Real Presence might have second thoughts. Think about this! Here is a priest who gives Holy Communion to his parishioners some of whom he rightly presumes do not  believe as they ought. One would think that he would have long ago conducted a series of homilies on the dogma. Apparently it is not important enough to him to do so. The stigmatist of Breton,  Marie-Julie Jahenny had a vision from our Lord Who told her that a new Mass was coming, a  new Mass "whose words are odious to Me..." We need say no more.

You now ask, well, how can the Vatican issue an impossibility, that is, the law that we are not to self-communicate, then do so in essence?  Because modern Churchmen no longer operate under the rule of reason, nor do they rule at all, but by default or open neglect. There is nothing pastoral about the loss of so many souls, the emptying of the churches, convents and seminaries. So accustomed are modern Churchmen to contradiction, such as all those found in the pastoral documents known as Vatican II, that they are blinded by their own unreason. To put it another way, let us look at what a Sacrament is, how it operates as a sign that God's grace is given through its administration.

Every Sacrament has three necessary aspects, apart from the proper disposition of the one receiving it, and these are form, matter, and the minister. Let us go back to our example of Baptism. This Sacrament has a specific form, "I Baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." Anything added to the words, between the quotation marks, or deleted or changed, such as in the name of the "Creator", invalidates the Sacrament. The matter is clean water, it is not champagne, coffee, tea or milk, etc. Just water. Now, the water is to be poured over the head of the person being Baptized while saying the words of Baptism. Even with the immersion manner, the minister still pours water over the head of the person being Baptized. Just think of St. John the Baptist with his shell filled with water to Baptize Christ. The minister of the Sacrament must do this. He cannot give the water to an adult to be Baptized and have him pour it over his head, as this would also invalidate the Sacrament. No one can Baptize himself in any part. Because Baptism is the sine non qua of salvation, in His generosity, Christ permits anyone who intends to do what the Church intends in Baptism, to Baptize in an emergency. This is clearly understood, that the indult or permission is contingent on a genuine need, not a devised one because of someone's agenda and who created the crisis in order to have the emergency. A nun who had been in charge of vocations for her order told me that she deliberately did not seek them so as to have the laity with less nuns so that the lay-centered [c]hurch could be born. Not suprisingly, she was also a "gay" activist.

In the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, the three conditions also apply because these are for all seven Sacraments. Only with this Sacrament as with the Sacraments of Penance, Confirmation, etc. [excluding Marriage in a most unusual situation, only], the minister is always an ordained priest or bishop;  a deacon is also ordained and while he cannot confect the Blessed Sacrament, he may distribute It because he is a sacerdotal member, part of the clergy. If the priest is not validly ordained, there is no Blessed Sacrament, all appearances to the contrary. If he uses invalid matter, such as a piece of cake or bread with sugar and milk, for instance, in it, there is no confection of the Sacrament. If he changes the form, given by Our Lord and always used before and formally codified after the Protestant revolt in the Council of Trent, there is no Eucharist. The ministration is now done, the Sacred Species exists, the True Presence is there. For Baptism to be valid someone must receive it. For the validity of the Holy Eucharist, no member of the laity need receive it. A priest may say Mass alone and in traditional orders this happens quite often, where there are several side altars as in the church consecrated supra.

The distribution of Holy Communion is unique, for it is the direct application of the fruit of the Sacrifice of the Cross. Using illicit non-ordained laity to distribute it in a non-emergency as defined by Pope John in his letter, or "Communion in the Hand" does not invalidate the Sacrament, but it is a Sacrilege.

In closing, let me quote from the magnificent and ever timely article by John Vennari, editor of Catholic Family News, titled, Communion in the Hand is a Sacrilege, February 2006:

Communion in the hand and so-called Eucharist lay-ministers make a mockery of the Divine Truth that Our Lord is truly present in every particle of the Eucharist, and make a mockery of the holy rubrics used by the Church for centuries as a safeguard against desecration.

Because what happens with Communion in the hand?

The Host is placed in the hand, which is not consecrated. The communicant picks It up with his own fingers, which are not consecrated. The sacred particles fall to the ground, are stepped upon and desecrated.

Likewise with so-called Eucharistic lay-ministers, their hands are not consecrated; they should not be touching the Sacred Host. The sacred particles of the Host fall to the ground, are stepped upon and desecrated. The fingers of "lay-Eucharistic ministers" are not washed, so any particle remaining will also be desecrated.

No authority in the Church, not even the highest, can dispense a Catholic from the duty of preserving the necessary reverence owed to Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament. Any Church leader who does so labors under the "diabolic disorientation of the upper hierarchy" warned against by Sister Lucy of Fatima, and is derelict in his duty.

Only forty-five years ago, Communion in the hand was unthinkable in Catholic churches. It was recognized for the sacrilege that it is. Only forty-five years ago, Eucharistic lay-ministers were unthinkable in Catholic churches. It was recognized for the sacrilege that it is.

But now, these abuses are permitted and promoted by a liberal hierarchy who --- in this area and in many other areas --- suddenly approve what the Church always rightly condemned. This "suddenly blessing what the Church always condemned" is the hallmark of the Vatican II reforms.

The truth, however, is that God does not change, and man's duty of reverence toward the Blessed Sacrament does not change, even if we have many leaders who in their destructive liberalization of the Catholic Church, seem to care little or nothing for the true reverence we owe to Our Lord in the Holy Eucharist.

Thus, anyone who receives Communion in the hand, or who receives Communion from a Eucharistic lay-minister, or who is a Eucharistic lay-minister himself or herself -in the objective order --- is committing a sacrilege. It is a misuse of a holy thing. It is a mockery of what the Church has taught and practiced. It is a desecration of the greatest gift that God has given us: the Real Presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Eucharist.  Reprint #2075.


Thirty-seven years is a long time to endure any injustice, ever more so when the injustice is the abomination of abortion, upheld, protected, and financed, by our government, resolutely pro-abortion, by all three branches. The judiciary has the power to declare null and void by simple declaration all the laws legalizing abortion, simply because abortion is a grievous violation of the natural law, one that cries out to Heaven for vengeance by God---there are but four such sins that contravene the natural law with such penalty. No such law is licit and those in charge of ruling and or legislating the law are bound to respect the natural law's limits on human behavior. Any such law that transgresses the immutable natural law is invalid on its face and such a declaration of nullity requires no justification, for it is its own justification, by necessity and definition. For the first rule of law is the natural law, and the first rule of the natural law is this very mandate. To date the highest court in the land has refused to follow the natural law and its first law of operation; the bloody scourge continues and we are without excuse before God. The judgment at Nuremberg renders any plausible denial of culpability moot, if not mute.

Those of us who adore the holy will of God, adore His law, Divine and natural, because His law is not inseparable from Him---His Will is expressed clearly and succinctly in the law---and thus are bound to the sanctity of human life---its sovereign inviolability, live and work amidst a particularly pernicious form of apostasy that lends itself to the shielding of our eyes that we might not see the gravity of the evil we effectively endorse.

For all practical purposes, thirty-seven years is as much as forty, an entire generation, decimated by the enormity of the human slaughter of the most innocent among us. In reparation for this savage crime, and in constant preparation for moving the hearts and awakening the consciences of our fellow countrymen, we are engaged in a mighty spiritual battle, named Forty Days for Life. This action consists of prayer at abortion sites, fasting, and outreach to those contemplating an abortion and others in the local community. I am a soldier in the first cohort. It is a joyful work, for it is the work of God and Our Lady and nothing on earth save raising a family comes as close for a lay woman like I am. I have been fighting "the good fight" for almost as long as I have been married; I should be wearied---I am not; the anger is there, but it is tempered with hope through prayer and sacrifice. We know that our little efforts in Augusta at Family Planning, better known as Abortion Central on Thursdays are paying off. We save, through the grace of God, and not our own merits, babies, one at a time. Every so often a young couple approaches the site slowly, their vehicle stopping to pause at the gated entrance [left open during the killing hours and more]; then the car backs off, and moves down further past the gate and parks in a recess from the main road, called Gabriel Avenue, if you can take in the irony, then drives once more past the killing gate, then moves toward the major highway, sometimes waving or holding up a peace sign made with the hands. Or a couple enters the grounds, but leaves soon after and they give us a signal, what we interpret as a thank you sign. Other times, mostly, we fail, but not completely, such as when we witness a young woman---they are mostly younger than forty if appearances are a reliable gauge---with tears rolling down the side of her cheek as she exits the gate; she was there for hours so we know she did not change her mind. Her child is dead. The facility schedules abortions on Thursdays and the women are kept for four hours as a rule. The routine is routine, if killing can ever be considered routine. They do not come alone, someone drives them. Often the driver leaves and comes back later. Imagine what it must be like for a young, frightened woman or girl, actually, with no close support at the time of her greatest need. The brutality of abortion has a thousand different daggers. Who can calculate the weight of the silent stilettos that prick deep in the spiritual battle such a girl wages within herself? Certainly not us, although we might guess because we, too, are wretched sinners. So we pray either in gratitude for a baby saved or for the sorrowing mother we have just seen leave, and pass our way on her way to a far more harrowing journey than she originally reckoned with. The death purveyors do not talk of grief for a dead baby. And we also duly note those who leave after "the procedure" with defiant faces, sometimes clenched fists in our direction. They, too, are in much need of prayer. Perhaps more than anyone else. Prayer increases love, love increased, increases prayer.

We are first and foremost pro-life. Yes, we are against abortion, but we want to save babies scheduled for being killed. The impact has been big enough to cause "Family Planning" to post a campaign for funds to be pledged, so much per one of us, named "protesters". It was almost comical at one point, if such a hideous reality could ever be funny, because the amount of the pledges were emblazoned on a banner that was changed with such regularity and by such amounts down to the odd or even penny, which is very odd to say the least, that I was immediately suspicious, much the same as the so-called new jobs created by the Obama regime. The banality of evil and modern skullduggery has its own identifiable rhythm. Who ever donates funds to a cause in non-round amounts, say, $50.18? I duly noted that during the coldest part of the winter, the banner went unchanged, too convenient in keeping with the harshness of the climate, as if to say that during colder months the wallets of the abortionists were not open to protest against our protest by filling the coffers. After all it was the "giving season" as the pagans among us refer to Christmastide. My suspicion grew. Then one day the banner was removed. Did the money dry up or was the ruse simply too much to keep up under the raw Arctic-like wind? The ground, too frozen to accept the bloody sewage? Actually it does not matter at all. For if the abortuary was, indeed, gaining pledges because of our activity, the money was only blood money on its hands, not ours, and we remained---remain---tranquil, serene in prayer, out of love for the abortionists along with the babies and their mothers and fathers. Part of my suspicion was that the placement of the banner was for "our benefit", that is, to discourage us. If so, the campaign failed utterly, that banner tossed about in the wind, only spurred us on with urgency and our own audacity of hope! We are so much more than simple protesters, we are preservers, attestors, advocates forsave the lives of the babies scheduled for execution and the souls of those killing them! The greater portion of our task is little, if at all, understood by most our countrymen, and certainly not by the mass media outlets which control and "write" the flow of information. One reporter said that we did not look like protesters. Well, what exactly does a protester look like? Obviously in his mind he had a preconceived idea and expected his readers to have formed the same. He appeared to be genuinely taken with our prayerful demeanor. In strictly human terms the task seems daunting. But not so for those who see with the eyes of faith and have dedicated their lives to life. Any ballyhoo that accompanies modern life in America is beyond our ken, its allure an alien notion to us. The present socio-political climate of celebrity and cant is not so serene. It is permanent winter in America, now. And just as every winter brings its "February thaw", so, too, does the long cold, but ever, never really cold, war for the sanctity of human life. This year's thaw is heralded by the news that 51% of the polled public now considers itself "pro-life" whatever that truly means for those who answered so. It is a thaw without definition, yet easier to measure than the climatic sort. It is talk, not walk. The thermometer? The Tea Party movement and the mid-term elections, and most especially the pundits, right, left and so-called middle of the road. Show me an authentic middle of the roader and I will show you a man who is violating the rules of the road mandating common sense. When it comes to the sanctity of human life there can never be a middle of the road position, either innocent life is sacred or it is not. A baby is a baby or it is not.

When the Tea Parties sprang up I realized they were not for me, for the urgency that fired the bellies of the advocates were all financial and rights oriented, nothing wrong with these of course, perfectly normal and sound, but the critical, the underlying right that is above all human rights was not even a blip on the radar screen. The Tea party crowd will endorse pro-abortion fellows like Massachusetts' Scott Brown. Now, of course, it can rightly be pointed out that in politics we may not always have a perfect candidate. But it can also be more rightly rejoined that such perfect candidates exist but the Tea Parties are not motivated to seek them out, because abortion is not the sine non qua "issue" for them. And this is the root of the winter that will continue to plague America through the long not so hot anymore summer and beyond. Abortion is killing us, along with the babies being slaughtered. Abortion is killing our national soul. Like all hardened sin, the longer we are steeped in it, the harder it is to repent.

The irony screams, imposes itself upon the observer! The Tea Party people say they are there to keep the two parties honest, with transparency and the will to do the will of the people, but apparently the people have no will to will an actual end to abortion, just other ills they recognize. So the polls are half right and half wrong, meaning they are meaningless. Now I am very happy that the Obamacide of America has slowed a tad, and that Leviathan's food supply is running a bit low, thanks in large part to our Tea Parties. But along with the tea me thinks the adherents have imbibed some Kool Aid and a pretty hefty amount at that.

They want our natural rights from God upheld right down to the least important, but the most important one of all, the very one without which all other rights are endangered, is the sovereign right to life for the innocent. Even the guilty are entitled to a trial.

Until we rid the land of the guilt of innocent blood, God will not honor our attempts to right ourselves. He will punish us with our own self-willed blindness, the blindness that lets us think we can have our cake and eat it too, that we can put the cold-blooded murder of innocent babes in the womb [and out sometimes] on the back burner. The blindness keeps us from seeing the truth before our very eyes, i.e., if we are reluctant to save the innocent we could save now, and using the same means that we are not reluctant to use for our other aims, when the hour is nigh and the iron hot, when will we ever have the will in more opportune times? Those times will not come until we say no more abortion, then act as if we really mean it! God's grace is not ours for the asking when we sin so grievously, remaining unrepentant. God's sword will come as it always does in the form of the enemy within who will be rewarded at the last minute by some unforeseen event that will give it new impetus for power. The exultant so-called conservatives haven't a clue for now, let us pray fervently that they will receive the grace of grace itself. Meanwhile that enemy will be the Scott Browns among us who fancy themselves celebrities in women's magazines and without. If they have no sense of proportion of modesty, their first guard against corruption is already corrupted. Once more it is the party of abortion, Republican, Democrat, or Tea and none of them for me! Abortion is one of those crimes that blinds the upholders or those who look the other way by doing nothing. It is a most special form of self-abuse nationally speaking. In a talk on the Mass and the Third Secret of Fatima, Fr. Nicholas Gruner said that until the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary is done as requested by Our Lady, the Church will not be revitalized. It is a parallel that until we delegitimize abortion, can America regain her vitality. Abortion is killing us, along with the babies being slaughtered. Abortion is killing our national soul. Like all hardened sin, the longer we are steeped in it, the harder it is to repent.

The natural and liturgical seasons come and go in the cyclic dance of change and unchange, the colors and habits of a lifetime inhabiting our hearts and nurturing our souls, but for us in the trenches of the cultural war, fighting for life, it is always Lent, forty days at a time ...


This column continues our running series on the war against Christ and His Holy Mother being waged in divers ways in our land. Two recent events, on their face appearing to be disjoined, are thereby all the stronger as co-weapons striking at the sanctity of the eternal verities: There is but One True God, and that He took on human nature in order to be crucified upon the Cross in atonement for our sins and those of the whole world; that He received His human nature from His Holy Mother, Mary, ever a Virgin; that He is both True God and True Man and salvation is only through Him and His Holy Church, the Catholic Church.

As always the marauding hordes of malcontents interspersed with misguided do-gooders seek every opportunity to dim the Light of the World, Jesus Christ, in particular during the holy season of Christmas. The enemies of Christ are two-fold in kind: [1] the malicious who know what it is they do in so far as they are jealous of the power and rule of Almighty God, His perfection, His very essence and Being --- this kind is the most prevalent in the juridical sense; [2] and those who do not have the gift of true faith, who reduce the wholeness of the Truth of Jesus Christ by their diminution of the role of the Mother of God, Most Holy Mary, not only as a perpetual Virgin but as the mediatrix of all graces as willed by her Son, Jesus. These are more numerous in the practical, everyday sense. They are far more insidious because they come disguised as friends, not the enemy. Both deny Eternal Truth, one in frontal attacks by way of a concerted effort to have it banned from the public sphere, the other by the distortion of doctrine itself, thus the very suppression, the invasion of our hearts, minds and souls. We no longer can think and are almost afraid to say what we ought to believe and used to know, long ago. The two small but mighty cataclysms of which I speak come from these two armed camps arrayed against God in all His glory and in all truth.

I will address the second kind of attack herewith.

There is a former presidential GOP candidate, who has written a book, titled, A SIMPLE CHRISTMAS; at first blush the work seems to be inspirational, to uphold the real meaning of Christmas, and I am certain that this is precisely what the author intended. He is a former Baptist minister as I understand it, and typical of his class, filled with zeal, acquainted with the Bible and little else doctrinally speaking, certainly not the light of the only true religion, the Catholic faith. One of the lessons depicted in the book that he is most proud of is that Mary was just like every other human mother and that her virginal womb was not inviolate [he does not use this phraseology, but this is the very essence of his thesis] but that she bore Christ in physical agony. Where is the outcry against this blasphemy? Was the affront so subtle we missed it altogether? We no longer can think and are almost afraid to say what we ought to believe and used to know, long ago.

The rupture that would have engendered such pain would have penetrated through her physical perfection, beauty and purity, if not her spiritual "fullness of grace". This claim debases the Mother of God by raising us up to her equal, quite ironically. She isn't any more in nature than we are, thus we must be her equal in childbirth. He wants us to identify ourselves with her in our childbearing experience, or rather have her identified with ours. All human mothers, save one, are conceived with Original Sin, our heritage from our great great, so great grandmother of long ago, Eve. In the book of Genesis God tells women part of their punishment: that they will bear their children in pain. And so it has ever been. The new Eve, who is to be the mother of the new Adam, Christ, in order to be worthy to give her human nature to Him cannot be so conceived. Not only is her womb to be pure and inviolate, the marriage act by which God created her could not have passed on the taint of Original Sin. This is the perennial teaching of the Catholic Church. The Church has always taught that Mary is ever Virgin, and conceived without Original Sin so that she had no concupiscence, her virginity was not only physical, it was whole, that is in mind, heart and in her soul. Whole means that the physical cannot be separated from the rest. Her only object of love was God alone! She neither had any rupture from God, in sin, no matter how small, nor in her womb.

The great mystic Ven. Mary of Agreda was permitted sublime glimpses of the Divine mysteries; in her treatise on the Nativity of Jesus she writes [emphasis mine]:

"The most holy Mary remained in this ecstasy and Beatific Vision for over an hour immediately preceding her Divine delivery. At the moment when She issued from it and regained the use of her senses She felt and saw that the body of the infant God began to move in her virginal womb; how, releasing and freeing Himself from the place which in the course of nature He had occupied for nine months, He now prepared to issue forth from that sacred bridal chamber. This movement not only did not cause any pain or hardship, as happens with the other daughters of Adam and Eve in their child births; but filled Her with incomparable joy and delight, causing in her soul and in her virginal body such exalted and Divine effects that they exceed all thoughts of men. Her body became so spiritualized with the beauty of Heaven that She seemed no more a human and earthly creature. Her countenance emitted rays of light, like a sun incarnadined, and shone in indescribable earnestness and majesty, all inflamed with fervent love. She was kneeling in the manger, her eyes raised to Heaven, her hands joined and folded at her breast, her soul wrapped in the Divinity and She herself was entirely deified. In this position, and at the end of the heavenly rapture, the most exalted Lady gave to the world the Only-begotten of the Father and her own, our Savior Jesus, true God and man, at the hour of midnight, on a Sunday, in the year of the creation of the world five thousand one hundred and ninety-nine (5199), which is the date given in the Roman Church, and which date has been manifested to me as the true and certain one." [From THE MYSTICAL CITY OF GOD.]

By leading his readers to think of Our Lady as physically the same as you and I in the matter of Jesus' delivery in the stable at Bethlehem, the author oversimplifies to the point that one of God's greatest miracles is denied Him in actuality, for the Incarnation [and Birth of Jesus Christ] is truly such a miracle, beyond human comprehension at all without the gift of true faith which enlightens human reason. If Mary is conceived without Original Sin there is no need for the punishment of painful childbirth; not that the Mother of God is spared human suffering, but her daily trials and mortification are in union with that of her Divine Son in His human nature, not the kind of suffering that is merited because of sin; rather the suffering in reparation for the sins of others.

The simplicity of Bethlehem is worlds away from the simple Christmas, the banality of the modern world in denial of the Truth that can set us free. Mike Huckabee sees with "a glass darkly". The same author needs to be reacquainted with Scripture. He says: "Peace on earth and good will to men." The Gospel of St. Luke, Chapter 2:1-14 reads:

"AT THAT time, there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that the whole world should be enrolled. This enrolling was first made by Cyrinus, the governor of Syria. And all went to be enrolled, everyone into his own city. And Joseph also went up from: Galilee out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea to the city of  David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David, to be enrolled with Mary his espoused wife, who was with child. And it came to pass, that when they were there, her days were accomplished, that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her first-born Son, and wrapped Him up in swaddling clothes, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn. And there were in the same country shepherds watching, and keeping the night watches over their flock. And behold an Angel of the Lord stood by them, and the brightness of God shone round about them, and they feared with a great fear. And the Angel said to them: Fear not; for behold I bring you good tidings of great joy, that shall be to all the people; for this day is born to you a Saviour, Who is Christ the Lord, in the city of David. And this shall be a sign unto you: You shall find the infant wrapped in swaddling clothes, and laid in a manger. And suddenly there was with the Angel a multitude of the heavenly army, praising God, and saying: Glory to God in the highest and on earth, peace to men of good will."

 This, too, is worlds away from the former Arkansas governor's wishful phrase.

The juridical, frontal assault, as always has its roots in the Anti-Christ Litigating Union or ACLU & Company. The locale is Washington State of a curious liberal bent, aided by the sorely misguided, grace-bereft Supreme Court. The story goes like this. Last year the governor took some heat because she permitted non-Christian and anti-Christian displays at Christmas in the capitol rotunda. The rubric used to justify this blasphemy at Christmas, a sacred holiday, was "freedom of speech". Now our benighted court and its lower satrapies have held that freedom of speech demands that any and all such "speech" must be allowed on public grounds, at all times in the interest of fair and balance so to speak. To forego more public outrage the state is not having any displays at Christmas this year; the only symbol will be the "holiday" tree. In effect the atheists win anyway you count. The whole point of their tedious exercise is to blunt the proclamation of Christ; any evangelization for their cause is a bonus.

Now this action on the part of the state of Washington is to "reason" without the aid of grace and natural reason itself. There is no national holiday for Atheists United, no national holiday for Hanukkah and so forth. Christmas is a national holiday, the most sacred one of the year. Let us use an analogy. It is Martin Luther King Day. The festivities have been in the works for weeks. A renegade group arises, claiming to have an equal right to display their ideas, their doctrine of White Supremacy, and on a par and in the same venue as the speakers and displays honoring the slain civil rights hero. They insist they have a right to march in the local Martin Luther King parade. What has been the proper response in the past? Yes, common sense, not to mention plain old justice has up to now prevailed. Even the befuddled courts have said that no one who opposes an organization's beliefs and goals has a right to march in a parade sponsored by said organization. Thus the "Gay Pride" sect cannot march in a St. Patrick's Day parade. It is free to have its own parade at another time as we all know too well and much to our repulsion at such garish, depraved exhibitions. If the Washington pismires want displays in the rotunda to counterpose Christmas, let them petition their legislature for their own public holiday. If we were sane and still normal, this would be our approach to their reproach, their encroachment. Afraid to not invite them to the picnic, we declare a day of artificial rain and cancel the great event except in name only and only a half name at that. Some strategy: bargaining with the devil!

I repeat, Christmas, the annual remembrance of the birth of our Savior, Jesus Christ, is a national and state holiday. A nativity scene is the moral, metaphysical equivalent of a parade and should not be trampled on or assaulted by competing displays at that time and in that place. If the state of Washington thinks it has no choice but to permit Atheists and Festivists a place in the public square, then by all means, do so, some other time, in an "ordered" fashion. If the "Gay" activists cannot march in a St. Patrick's Day parade why should anti-Christians "march" in on the Christian crèche? Logically, they cannot. Having denied the Social Kingship of Christ in practice, we find ourselves hostage to the denial of right reason itself because we have spurned the grace of God and courted His anger. To scorn the filial fear of God is to show contempt for His holy love for filial fear is born of love. We are now denied the public expression of the love of the Infant Savior within our midst.

Atheists can intrude on Christmas, an irrationality, but homosexualists cannot intrude on St. Patrick, a rational norm. The Saint is greater than God. The principle is precisely the same in both cases, yet it is applied only in one. The blind leading the blind into complete chaos, social meltdown and the tyranny of the unnatural, anti-reason, and the absurd! We have exchanged the exquisite simplicity of human reason and right balance for the pose of simpletons who are interchangeable with Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum, dumb, dumber, now dumbest, revealing a death wish however we may protest otherwise.

We only have to look to Europe, at last rising up in response to the Islamization of their countries largely due to mass apostasy joined to an overbearing, unwise PC ethos that only benefits the interloper with an agenda and who holds no such ethic, but is practical and crafty enough to use it to gain a strong foothold by which to undermine western society from within. It appears that it is already too late now, there. Let us pray and hope it is not, here. I do not have much hope because our leaders are by and large in apostasy themselves, and where there is some semblance of the Christian creed, that creed has been cannibalized because heretical and or apostate Catholics and Protestants have thrown aside the gift of faith or have never had it to begin with. How much of the debacle is our fault, that of you and me, who have failed to bring others to Christ, to His One True Church, to the Truth? Only you and I can answer this in our hearts. The "Reason" for "the Season" cannot even be publicly honored, because we have lost the seasoning of "salt" and all human reason ...

Our Theologian-in-Chief Or the Audacity of Pious Fraud August 22, 2009

The state religion, that is---be nice, never show frustration with your double-dealing Congressman, keep your religious beliefs to yourself unless they are pagan or Muslim, celebrate "diversity", be scrupulous in obeying the tenets of Political Correctness, be sensitive in all matters except that which concerns Christians [if they are traditional], always trust the government which is wiser than you are, go along to get along---is in danger of imploding due to a sudden outbreak of over the top audacity of hypocrisy or pious fraud---on the part of Obama and his minions, in the White House, and especially in the majority media.

Our new theologian-in-chief, ever quick with a bit of Biblical scripture as a proof text that Jesus is a socialist, Bishop Barack, hopelessly incompetent and flailing about in a vituperative pit of demagoguery, held a conference call with selected religious leaders of the various faiths, including Jews and Muslims, to wit, a come to Jesus moment:

"We are our brother's keeper ..."

This was the clarion call from the Left Hand [of God] to support the annexation of health care and all the ills that will accompany anything social that the government touches, let alone controls through an unanswerable bureaucracy that weighs the people down with inane, burdensome regulations.

Barack Obama? Was it barely a year ago that he was in San Francisco, Pelosi's turf, mocking the folks back home in Pennsylvania, for "clinging to religion" among other important facets of ordinary life? What a flashback!

Fast forward to August, 2009: We have a "moral" imperative to support government run health care. Who is clinging to religion, now????

Indeed we are our brother's keeper as was Cain [Gen. 4:9] and we cannot harm any innocent person, nor can we refuse to aid him if the situation presents itself and we have the means that does not endanger those we already care for or are responsible to. The evangelical counsel to help another in need is generally the purview of the individual and not the government, apart from the expressed powers granted to it in the constitution. The government is to preserve the right to life and property [police power and national defense] and so forth, but not supply every means. For instance I need a car to travel as I do not live in a city. It is my means to acquire food to sustain life. Who dares to suggest that everyone like myself who needs an affordable car can demand that the government furnish me with such and such a model at the going price at your expense? Heck, the US government under Obama can't even deliver on the "Cash for Clunkers" scheme that temporarily served to make foreign auto manufacturers richer, not Americans. And we are supposed to trust it with personal medical decisions? The act of alleviating the suffering of a person who is ill or in medical distress is an act of charity, not justice. The government's domain, "Caesar", is justice, not charity. Obama wants to force us to render unto Caesar what belongs to the Good Shepherd and His flock, charity being the highest theological virtue. And it is a profoundly Christian virtue, for it is the Catholic Church that brought this kind of selfless ideal to a pagan world immersed in cruelty and debauchery.

Flashback to Europe and then Cairo, Egypt, some few months ago. Our imperious theologian-in-chief stood on the world stage to proclaim that America "was not a Christian country" but that in its diversity it is a "Muslim country". The kind of moral imperatives he is intoning hardly exist in Islam. He can't have it both ways, eschew our Christianity, then invoke it when it suits him. He surrendered any such right from that one brazen moment on, at last revealing his true loyalty.

Fast forward, Obama wants us to now incorporate one of the mainstays of Christianity to shore up support for his totalitarian vision of control over every aspect of our lives, to "transform" the very essence of "America." He aims to please himself and the stratagem is say what it will take, including a false guilt trip. Where is his guilt? Perhaps he left it behind on one of his jaunts.

But let us briefly, for the sake of argument, take this grandiose deceiver at his word, almost impossible to do by definition.

If we are our brother's keeper, I presume he means to include one's actual brother and or other relatives because does not charity and kindness begin at home?

Well, let us see now. Oh yes, I remember, he has a half-brother living in poverty in Kenya, which he bypassed for another country on the continent. Hmmm? Expansive, expensive date nights, vacations in Hawaii, the upscale Martha's Vineyard and so on. An aunt existing in substandard housing in Boston, while she awaits a hearing on possible deportation.

There is a verse from the New Testament that BHO-TIC forgot to cite, so conveniently:

"Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam in thy own eye, and then shalt thou see to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye." [Matt. 7:5]

Enough said on this point.

There are so many more, let us take up but a few.

Flashback to another Jesus moment---Obama's appearance at Jesuit-run Georgetown University in DC, where the price of homage was that any image of this God he so loved and followed had to be covered before he would awe the crowd. To this Catholic it was shock, as in outrage, not awe. It was blasphemy worthy of some adherents of Islam, actually.

And since Obama likes scripture, here are a couple of pertinent passages he seems to have missed:
"Then He shall answer them, saying: Amen I say to you, as long as you did it not to one of these least, neither did you do it to Me.

Matthew 25:45

  "It were better for him, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should scandalize one of these little ones."

Luke 17:2

The first concerns the least of our human brethren, the most vulnerable and helpless. In another words, the preborn baby and the newly born baby, all just blood and guts to be disposed of for the man who sold his soul to be the slave of the unnatural ideology of NARAL and Planned Parenthood. Any man who would refuse to back a law that protects a baby who survived an abortion, who is content to leave him or her to die on a cold table in a back room is hardly a man who has the moral authority to lecture anyone else on any matter. It is too monstrous a crime! This is and will always be the heinous reason why BHO is unfit for public office of any stature, for he cannot and must not be entrusted with our very lives; we can at least fight back a little, unlike the infant abandoned to die alone. This one crime didst beget another, reference the second citation above:

Campaigning for the chair of TIC, his magnificence in deceit and insolence, without any sign of a conscience, stood before his adoring fans to proclaim that abortion was something he would not hesitate to use if one of his little daughters became pregnant out of wedlock. He called the baby "a punishment". This would be scandal enough as it were, save for the fact that both of these innocent children of his were present. Imagine saying such a thing in front of one's young daughters! But, then, on the other hand, what's a little scandal for one's family when the same father exposed them to the lucre-filthy, racist screed and bitter harangues of the irreverent, dissembling minister in Chicago and for years on end. Let's repeat the passage, for it bears repeating, not only for Obama, but for ourselves, sinners everyone:

  "It were better for him, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should scandalize one of these little ones."

The problem that Obama has with his healthscare is that he always speaks in generalities, hesitant to provide too much detail, because if he did the game would be up, and not our reluctance to help our neighbor in genuine need, more of which we could do if our confiscatory taxes were lessened: the heart is willing, the purse empty, gratis big government with itching fingers. Details are what trips him up, every time. He could not even get his own familial history correct. This is why I think his college transcripts are shielded from public scrutiny. He is hiding something. I don't care about his supposed birth certificate, it is that transcript I want to see.

Any mere mortal would have been trapped in the web of lies he spun. Obama was the darling project of the news-making media and they were going to make news even if they had to lie for the liar. Corruption is not the exclusive characteristic of the DemoPublican party of abortion and self-aggrandizement.

The details on healthscare are becoming more clearer the further one delves into them. The disparaged "death panels" are alive and well in government "care" AKA the VA [Veterans Administration]. Sick veterans are regaled from a book on end of life decisions that those who have been through it tell us that the push is in one direction only, suicide or euthanasia, passive usually. If anyone thinks that government run health "care" is good, look to the VA and weep, nothing short of shame that those who sacrificed so much should be counted as so little.

This is why the Prez himself and the Congress have reserved an opt out of clause for themselves if this nightmare passes. Obama tells us if we like our coverage now we can keep it. Well, does not he and the Congress like their present coverage? You bet! Logic leads me to pose this question: If we can keep ours, can you not also, so why do you need an opt out of option that the rest of us cannot have? To ask is to answer. This is the most telling aspect of all!!!! The press does not have the fire in the belly to be inquisitive about the details that are tantamount to the preservation of life itself.

Perhaps one of the more singular examples of the misuse of the right to a free press is that of abortion, specifically in connection with religion or moral principles.

Flashback one more time: it can be any incident where the pro-lifers and abortionphiles are engaged in public demonstrations. One of the constant chants was "no one has the right to impose their moral beliefs or religion on another." Of course the natural law belongs to everyone who claims to be human and a society, to maintain civilization, must impose the natural law on itself; but let us not delay further. The media was all over this one, it became one of the mantras of the supposed good guys.

Flash forward: suddenly the media has discovered that religion or morals can and must be imposed, although it has no constitutional grant. The hypocrisy sickens as it thickens. Just as it does in the corresponding slogan, "It's my body!" Now it seems to be No!---it is only your body if you want to kill the baby who has a separate body of his own in utero, otherwise it is not your body, it belongs to the almighty state and the likes of abortion advocate, Kathleen Sebelius. The hypocrisy sickens as it thickens.

A short but powerful addendum to the supposed Christianity of TIC:

One of the religious leaders in on the confab was a certain female rabbi who was one of the participants in an illicit "Catholic" ordination of another woman. This is the kind of respect Obama has for the Catholic Church, whose earthly head is the very Vicar of Christ Himself! Whatever personal failings he may have as pontiff. So much for sensitivity. He is more solicitous for the rights of terrorists than he is for the rights of Catholics and their health care facilities. If he can get them to compromise there, he can break the fragile spine of the Church in America because once the compromise is solidified in the minds of the faithful, despair will be the disorder of the day and with it a great loss of faith endangering many many souls. Why should anyone be surprised at his contempt for practicing, faithful Catholics? After all, he has nothing but contempt for Christ!!!

Oh, weep for the Audacity of the Pious Fraud we have allowed to ascend to such power!


Fishermen know that the fish rots from the head first; perhaps there is no more putrid stench than a rotting fish, apart from eggs. The odiferous air emanating from Washington is like no other smell we have ever detected before. It reeks of hellish sulfur fit for such scoundrels who are given to embittered, elitist carping when the people, men who still have the use of their common sense, refuse to be hooked, line and sinker.

The Baracracy just cannot accept that we no longer will tolerate their lies and nefarious plans for us; no! this is an affront to all things totalitarian! So they take a page out of the book, Rules for Radicals, Obama's "bible", specifically the rule that says isolate your enemy and mock him to the elites so as to discredit him. An old trick that used to work more than it failed to do. No longer, no longer! Unlike our lying, craven rulers, we have actually read the bill. Imagine such treason! Theirs, not ours, no matter the howls from the Washington carp.

Pelosi and Company are outraged that we, the people, are truly outraged over the Obamascam on health "care". They do not want a healthy, robust debate, because this would reveal to all the world the real plan. And they know we know at last. We have the videos and newspaper reports from years ago, when the creature from the sea, Leviathan, was being hatched downstream. We know with infallible certainty that Baraccus and those of the Alinsky school told the elite that a single public payer plan was the ideal, but that it would not be possible at first, because this might alarm the populace, so that the plan was to work it in gradually. Even writers of the same ilk of bottom feeders were boasting of this!

Two malodorous Marxist carp, Pelosi and Boxer of California, wouldn't you just know, are putting out the word that the people are simple minded "astro turf" [fakes essentially] and our dissent from slavery is "manufactured" or organized. Pelosi calls the people the "mob". The same number with the same passion, if there in support of our demise would be labeled, something quite different, we can bet on this! Boxer is a most peculiar kind of carp, the larger tawny-toned fish to the left with Pelosi the green fish under her belly: she is given to ruminating on her credentials as an US senator who resents being addressed as Ma'am by a military officer, insisting she is called "senator", although all military personnel are trained to say Ma'am as a matter of respect. Her ignorance is outmatched only by her insolence. Flailing and lurching from the net she set for herself, she swims swiftly deeper downstream into the next, lecturing a Black leader on how he ought to think; curiously when he did not address her as senator, she refrained from a repeat scene. Apparently only White men have to submit to her ego-driven tirades. Her racist tendencies are surely amok. At last, faced with rebellion from a people who want to remain free as is our natural right from God, she is reduced to ridiculing the attire of the town hall protesters. Barbara Carp finds that they are "too well dressed" to be citizens with authentic grievances. Imagine that! The press, NBC, that is the National Barack Corporation, ABC, or All for Barack Corporation, and CBS, Cover for Barack System, and CNN, Censoring all Natural Nonconformity [against Obama], have given this absolutely laughable, yet heinous attempt to silence the bare bones truth the easy pass treatment, as if to say she never said it as she said it. Barbara is the most vicious of all the female carp. She ignores the fact that a number of the people attending the town hall are Democrats, some of whom are outraged, too, while others are there in support of the socialist nightmare. From my vantage point they were all dressed in casual clothes, without distinction. How did she sort through the crowd to determine her omnibus defamation??? The derision is an exemplary sign of desperation.

The anger? Yes, when the likes of Sebelius says she has not read the bill, although she will be part of the rigid death mandating enforcement mechanism. Philly Specter says it is a thousand pages and too large to read in such a short time. This is contempt for the people and bold lies. We know it and they know we know it! We must be demonized!

Now there are all kinds of carp [s]: large mouth, freshwater, shell cracker, steelhead, among others. Take your pick, any one of these describes Barbara to a tee. She needs to be reeled in for good before she pollutes the political waters further, for her own good as much for the republic.

Speaking of fish, the White House is teeming with rotten refuse, the corrupt variant of carp, one of which had the audacity to post a blog caveat to wit that the populace who are stirring and swimming against the tide, to free themselves from the offal and bilge are doing so on a "fishy" basis. Imagine this!!! The blog asks people who receive suspicious or "fishy" e-mail, that is, the truth about what is contained in the health bill that our unrepresentatives are running from or refusing to read at all, is "disinformation". Such e-mail is to be sent to the White House. No one knows what the Gestapo or secret police intend to do for reprisal to stifle debate. Healthy fish of the world, unite against the stinking rotten fish in DC, laugh out loud and keep swimming gloriously free as God intended.

It is so laughable it is to laugh out loud indeed that the Obama school is afraid of organized dissent, since that school of sharks is organization central. Recall that Obama said that one of the qualifications for the US presidency was community organizing. His octopi are skilled at emitting dark poison at their opponents for starters, per the Rush Limbuagh show of today. Every political convention and campaign is organization plus. Plus in the case of Obama is the special treatment, such as the organized pressure put recently to the city of Cambridge, Massachusetts, as well as the fix to squelch the prosecution of his special buddies, criminals, the Black Panthers, both being the new face of racism, Chicago style. H stands for Hussein, but even more it stands for Hypocrite!

He keeps saying "It isn't about me ...". It is all about him and only him and his hatred of normalcy and the American republic. [To a Congressman dissenter: "You will ruin my presidency!"] He is not an uniter, he is a divider so as to conquer. He is not a builder, he is a destroyer, a radical no less radical than his sycophants and hangers-on and wannabes. The ultimate neo-xenophobe and the ultimate fascist, who believes that the ends --- the end of America itself, justifies any and all means. He does not believe in America, he believes and aspires to AmeriCorps [ACORN reborn] and all the hell on earth it will bring within its wide wake.

Baraccus selachii and his sharks don't want us to know about the teams of brown shirts that will be making regular visits to the elderly to instill them with the ethic of the good little Nazi to seal their doom with "an end of life plan" --- read euthanasia. If compliance is not immediately forthcoming, they will come again to put on the big squeeze to kill off the small fry, the old, the frail, the easily frightened. One of Baraccus's sharks [czars] is for killing children who were born with difficulties, euthanasia for those over 65, and other atrocities ---   symptomatic of the problem with the supposed health care plan. It is not about health care, it is about control of people for the sake of the race of supermen, the elite in Washington and the co-opting of the Catholic hospitals so as to destroy the Church finally. The US Congress and Baraccus himself are on public record as stating that they will be exempt from the bill. If for no other reason this should raise the alarm!

It is not about health care: As Rush Limbuagh says, "It is all about a monument to himself and the establishment of a power base that can never lose." Exactly!

We must not allow ourselves to be uplifted to the point of complacency. The diabolical, both carp and shark, will not lose gracefully: they will fight to the death by hook, by crooked hook. Having successfully, with the help of ACORN, held salmon runs upstream to spawn illicit voting, in California, Minnesota and elsewhere, if the people will not put up with canceled town hall meetings and the chum's rush, and go to the polls resolutely not to be easy prey once more, the Baraccus school will launch cheating at the polls stream wide and full-blown. If caught, they will carp and scream, claiming they voted Republican to really reel in the vote and suppress liberty. I am telling you that we may have to resort to the recall yet, and even this may be up for grabs with the selachii circling vengefully in their blood lust.

And do not be led astray by deliberate misdirection ---  the cost of the bill, it is the bill in any form itself that is the threat to survival. The federales only need one fin in the water to devour everything smaller in sight and they will because of the evil in their guts ...

Rush Limbaugh, fisherman extraordinaire, is the only one on the public scene who has waded into the foul waters with intrepid, perfect vision and insight. He has sliced open the shark and knows the kind of shark he has within his deft grasp. I apologize to this giant of patriotism. I once discounted him quite a bit because the first day I tuned in to the program he had as a guest [seldom an occurrence] Bill Bennett, hardly a conservative, but whose praises he was touting of a sort. Well, I don't think Bill Bennett and his school of minnows are likely to be paragons in Rushland anymore.

Bravo Rushbo, and may God bless you abundantly with long life and ever and ever more brilliance and courage, for what you are doing to help save the republic! God bless you, always!

Mystery Solved! June 10, 2009

As I was preparing to sit down to write this column, I decided to tune into the Rush Limbaugh show, an hour into the program. Apparently Dave Letterman, a late night TV entertainment host, on what network I have no idea, as I don't watch such junk, attacked Sarah Palin. My ears perked up as she is the subject, a timely occurrence. Letterman had hurled aspersions against Mrs. Palin's daughter, the likes of which I cannot describe because of the vileness. A caller, obviously not a Rush fan, provided Limbaugh with an opportunity for some satire which was brilliant, especially because it revealed the truth about the media. While the media treatment of Palin is my topic for today, Rush happened to touch upon the comment from a pundit that Obama "was like God." For the media, this actually translates to "is God." The call-in critic could not offer one example to back up his complaint. Rush proceeded to demonstrate his acerbic wit that is always on point. I will slightly recap a small portion; bear with me for this is related to the purpose of my column:

"What do Obama and God have in common?"
[Grammatical typo removed from early posted edition.]

"What is the difference between Obama and God?"


"What is the difference between Obama and God?"

[This line is a slight paraphrase, I don't recall exactly the actual words, however this is what he conveyed.]

"What is the difference between Obama and God?"

Precisely. In uttering his commentary, Rush means no dishonor to God, but is merely illustrating the truth, stripping the media of its crass pretensions and its frenetic attempt to protect their anointed one from all critique. As Rush said, "when you utter the truth, they hate you." Indeed! And thus the Obama domestic war team's assault to squelch Rush.

Contrast this with the media's treatment of Sarah Palin, long after the election. As the slurs and invective increase against her and members of her family, both in ugly tone and content, I have been pondering why? Oh, we all know they feared her popularity and common sense ideas during the campaign. But Obama has been in office for 6 months now, yet one would think the election was in full swing. Of course it is, on the part of Obama and his Chicago-style machine. The central cause for any megalomaniac is himself. Obama is in eternal campaign mode, forever promoting himself while under the guise of running the country. Here, we remove the first n in running, substituting an i. If the media were honest they would say ruining the country, not running the country.

While covering for Obama, they are angry they cannot uncover any real dirt on Palin, who was absolved of all ten ethics counts levied against her, patently obvious a political tactic to damage her. So they make it up as they go along and dirt has never been so dirty. Sarah Palin and her daughter are not soiled, the media is, with regular folks who are not so easily fooled.

I asked myself again and again, why the venomous vitriol? It is beyond the pale and so over the top that there has to be another agenda, apart from fearing her political potential.

And then, the cobwebs slipped away. It is because of her young son who was born shortly before the campaign. Sure enough they despise her strong pro-life stance, nothing new or unexpected there. In fact, if they even so much as liked Sarah Palin just a little, conservatives would have second thoughts. She was hopelessly mismatched with McCain who has some friends, if few, in media land. What he gave with his right hand he withdrew with his left. Normally the media likes a good loser, which is what Palin was, yet they can not seem to let matters be. The slime rolls off their libelous lips in a frenzy.

It is Trig, her son. They hate her, and when I say hate, I mean loathe with all the fury of Hell. Not because she is so much pro-life, but because she gave birth to a baby the elites think is unworthy of life. They hate him, for what he is and what they think he can't be. Our liberals, our progressive nihilists despise purity, the purity of a completely innocent child who will always retain his innocence, a child that cannot be corrupted with their pernicious poison of all things that are against the natural and Divine Law. Hence the brilliance of Rush's observations.

How can you know? you ask. Well, I am surmising somewhat, I admit, but I know something about human nature, and human nature combined with the culture of death mentality. You see, I know a number of families with a Down's child, a child who was also welcomed and is loved and cherished. Five of them at least. In four of the cases, behind the back of the mother, a liberal or progressive nihilist ---- take your pick it is all the same harm to society ---- said to me, and every time these exact words: "Why didn't she just get an abortion?" Meaning, how dare she give birth to a defective!

It is from this cult of superficial perfection that such an attitude is cultivated and instilled. It is also revealing that in those four cases as it was with the fifth, that the families are self-supporting, happy, intact families that place no burden whatsoever on the nay-sayer in each case. The real threat of Sarah Palin is that through her son, a public figure so to speak, because of the exigencies of public service, virtue for its own sake is once more front and center. And the self-sacrifice that virtue demands. This is the underlying threat to their pride and pomposity. The "beauty" they espouse has been rendered utterly ugly because they reject the sublime beauty of love espoused to the virtue of the joy of sacrifice because of that love.

They only sully themselves, how sad and pitiful.

Go, Rush go!

Upward, Sarah, upward and onward!


Liturgical Justice June 18, 2009

Today is the Feast of St. Ephrem, aSyrian deacon who wrote his meditations in poetry, in the Syriac Aramaic language which was a dialect of the same language spoken by Our Lord and the Apostles. Living for most of his life in the city of Edessa, he wrote with such beauty on so many subjects that he is esteemed as one of the Doctors of the Church. He died in 373 A.D.

The Catholic world, indeed the world itself, is longing for the language of the soul, hushed to an almost imperceptible whisper because of man's arrogance and self-love. Theologians and prelates in the Church have not always been immune from such rank, debased influence. It is no coincidence that 1973 was the pivotal year, the year of the horrendous despoliation of the Ancient Immemorial Mass ---- the English Mass of Pope Paul VI
---- and the year in which the natural law was stripped from the memory of the shards of western Christendom: at one and the same time two injustices inherently interwoven with one another. Liturgical injustice and a crime against humanity, abortion on demand! The latter, Roe v Wade, was executed fraudulently with outright deceit, dressed up as a penumbra, inJustice Black's term ---- the meaning literally is a partial eclipse ---- a kind of veil or cloud in the atmosphere. Black, acting for the new enlightenment could not have been more dishonest in so many ways, one of which is that Roe V Wade was not only a partial eclipse of truth and justice, the natural law which is inviolate per se and the reading of the US Constitution, the limited powers of the court, it was the total eclipse of reason itself! The war against normalcy had begun in open earnest in the secular sphere, having begun in the occult sense, with the Masonic mystique that pervades the American spirit.

Shortly thereafter another rupture with normalcy shook the world, the New Mass of Paul VI with its crude, banal, doctrinal-eclipsing verbiage of the continually updated vernacular, distorting the language of salvation itself. In both cases it was as if man willed his own death in that, in the one, innocence no longer had any safeguard against willful murder, and in the other, the purity of Tradition was sullied, its "innocence" cavalierly shunned to the side much like many a tabernacle.

In both cases the womb was violated: in abortion the natural bond of mother and child was severed; in the New Mass itself and in its vernacular wasteland, the tabernacle, the holy of Holies was breached. When I said there was no coincidence I meant it literally, for the first tabernacle was the sacred womb of Mary, Most Holy, the Great Mother of God. There is an old saying in the Church that when the Church is holy [in its Sacraments and members] that society is more virtuous. It was the Church that failed first, not in the characteristic of indefectibility, which can never fail, but in its impeccability, from which there is no guarantee by Christ. The Church failed to protect its patrimony in the sanctuary to which every Catholic has a right just as Adam failed to protect the sanctuary in the Garden of Eden when he did not guard Eve as head of the human race, when she was tempted alone by the devil. Adam and his wife brought on the great ruin, the human tragedy of Original Sin, which has passed down to every creature save Our Lady: man has had to labor with the sweat of his brow [and or the burden of worry] and his wife has brought forth their offspring in pain. Even before the English translation of the New Mass was promulgated, the American and Canadian bishops had rejected Paul VI's 1968 encyclical, Humanae Vitae, which continued the ban on contraception, once more as the Church has always done. The Canadians said, with Lucifer, "We will not serve", by denouncing the encyclical officially. The Americans were more pragmatic, being thoroughly American [cravenly clever, if you will, to cover their own backs], and simply did not teach it, uphold it in practice, nor have their priests proclaim it as de fide. The sanctity of marriage was violated, the womb, too, ultimately, and the members of the Church here lost many graces for society through their disobedience and enslavement to lust. So that when Roe v Wade was imposed by revolution
---- the court making law through its own raw fiat, seizing illicit power, the populace was shocked but acquiesced because it did not rise up with a call to impeach the nine in blackened robes. Our duty to safeguard the natural law shrank before the horror as if a deed so mighty had stilled our conscience. Society had already lost too much of the grace that enlightens the intellect and strengthens the will because the Church in its new pastoral approach, although not in its Magisterium, forsake Tradition, "the natural law" of the Church, so to speak. One blindness begetting another.

And too, when the New Mass and its desacralized form was foisted on the Catholic people, there was only a handful here and there that objected to the novelty that was revolution itself, having forgotten the warning about novelty from
St. Vincent of Lerins and the diabolical disorientation foretold by Our Lady of Fatima. We were becoming inured to defilement and its nihilistic trajectory. That shame continues to weaken our will to resist evil; it is rendered almost painless because it is absorbed then seared into our dislocated sensus fidelium on the installment plan. Again war on normalcy, for what was foolishly permitted by indult became rigorously enforced as if a mandate and what was to be retained by mandate of Sacred Tradition became optional only and that option was disparaged as second best at best by the powers that be, the very definition of revolution!

In a parallel, in the realm of the polity, we prefer the "easy" euthanasia or painlessness of subjection to the ruthless, the absurd, the monstrous even, rather than the hard and very painful effort to regain the natural law as the foundation for society and its laws. We go on pretending that we are a "nation of laws" rather than of men, yet it is the very opposite in reality. President Obama and his thugs are violating his own prescriptions of transparency and some of the legislation he supported as a senator and even the very Constitution itself, so that their unnatural dreams and socialistic schemes are both standard and means
---- revamping itself with the disorder of the day. Part of the disorder, which occurs when men rewrite the law through practice in violation of natural, inherent rights, is that speed is of the essence once the subtle dislocation and demoralization has been effective, lest someone at last, through a special grace from God might sound the alarm just before the coup d'etat. Bills too big and deceptive to read are passed, one gross novelty after another so that one can scarcely have time to react and mobilize, the chicanery all by design, diabolical design. Saul Alinksy, whose spawn is Obama, dedicated his book, Rules for Radicals, to Satan. Having sold his soul to protect infanticide outside of the womb, he is preparing to deliver up the very nation to soulless madmen and their politics sundered from the rights of God. One of the definitions of madness is that one keeps doing what has proven to be harmful over and over again.

Again, in a parallel, as I wrote in a previous column:

"A culture that no longer respects the sanctity of the womb will refuse to respect the sacredness of the sanctuary itself. Cut adrift from our own humanity and our connection with the least of our unseen brothers, we see nothing wrong with the profane on the altar. Catholicism is the most breathtaking and all-encompassing of any religion because of the fullness of its Incarnate dimension. Disturb the untouchableness of its womb, the language of the unchanging Divine, Latin, you destroy the faith over time, and in just a few short years, too. This is why the young man no longer thinks like a Catholic, because he does not know how, nor does he know that he does not. He does not necessarily need to know Latin to think with reason, but he needs to be in an environment that respects it in of itself and gives it pride of place; such a place lends itself to the dignity of reason combined with the faith. Latin is the only language that can capture the essence of the faith and the Mass, and give it accurate expression, because it is dead not living!"

Now word from the press has it that:

Over 150 US bishops will "fine-tune" the ICEL translation of the Mass to conform more closely to its Latin original. Note the phrase is "more closely", and not correspond faithfully. The report from a San Antonio web newspaper is that

"They'll seek more effective ways to spread their stated-but-little-known ministry goals. And they'll approve a new Mass of Thanksgiving.

"Supporters and critics closely watch the bishops' meetings for clues about the future of the church and its 68 million members in the United States. For the event's host, San Antonio Archbishop José Gomez, the liturgy rightly is at the top of the list.

" 'We are teachers of the faith, so it makes sense that we give a lot of attention and time to the liturgy,' he said. 'The biggest challenge we have is that Catholics do not know the Catholic faith. They know it, but not as much as they need.'

"Masses in contemporary, spoken languages were permitted — and translated from the original Latin — after the Second Vatican Council in the 1960s.

"The English-language Mass was published in 1973, according to the conference, and has been memorized by two generations of English-speaking Catholics in America.

"In 2001, the Vatican called on all bishops to review those translations for accuracy, and the revisions are expected to be released next year after some promised training. Some worry the change will cause confusion. Others say it'll clarify meaning lost in the first translation to English."

Now they tell us.

As I also wrote, this time in November of 2005 about a similar meeting of the US Bishops:

"As many of you probably know by now the Vatican has issued a document on the liturgy, LITURGICAM AUTHENTICAM, the FIFTH INSTRUCTION FOR THE RIGHT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONSTITUTION ON THE SACRED LITURGY. It is addressed to the ICEL [International Commission for the English in the Liturgy] and for the English-speaking Bishops]. The current head of the Bishops' Liturgy Commission is Bishop Donald Trautman, S.T.D., S.S.L., who is no friend of tradition, certainly not the Immemorial Roman Mass. A select group of like-minded bishops, without any impetus from the main body of the US bishops has made certain recommendations, to wit a wholesale rejection of the authentic translation of the Latin text, with perhaps two exceptions [and these are not definite at this time]. The rationale for public consumption is that the liturgy belongs to the people, that is "they own it now" and that after so many years, although the present translation is "inaccurate and sometimes banal" it would be unwise "to disturb the laity". I am paraphrasing somewhat as I did not take notes, but I am certain I am so close to the verbatim quotes that I am taking no liberties. It is difficult to forget descriptions that include inaccurate and banal, for instance.

"Of all the irony, the crushing bitter irony and sheer hypocrisy! Back about 1970 the Bishops had no concerns about disturbing the faith of the laity, foisting disastrous change upon change at a heady pace, so much so that millions of Catholics simply walked away and a good number of them lost their faith. One bishop was afraid to make corrections because the churches were emptying. In other words he would rather his few people "perish for a lack of knowledge" rather than save their souls and perhaps gain many more. The truth is its own appeal since our 'hearts are restless until they rest in Thee', O God, Who art all Truth.

"At the time that the US Supreme Court abrogated the natural law when it ruled in Roe v Wade that women had a right to an abortion based on the Constitution's "penumbras" of privacy, it broke with precedent and all reason. Now we are told that to overturn Roe as Dred Scott was overturned over a century ago would be to "break with precedent" and thus unwise. This same irony and hypocrisy! Even liberals who welcomed the right to abortion in case law recognized that the reasoning of the majority was faulty, including a current Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsberg. Later the Court had an opportunity to revisit Roe, in fact more than once: the Casey and Webster cases. Finally it decided that although Roe was badly decided the right to abortion was established and it would be too much for society to accept, and that individuals have a right to decide reality and the meaning of life on their own.

"Four of the Bishops stood to object to the proposed guidelines that in effect contravene the Vatican, saying that whenever they have taken the time to explain necessary changes the people have been receptive; two of them recognized that the select committee was violating the first principle, that translations must be accurate, and urged that the ICEL representative's recommendations [he favors the Vatican's document] be adopted. The other two had similarly worded objections.

"One bishop, who was not identified by Bishop Trautman loud enough for me to hear his name, noted that one of the footnotes in the US Bishop's proposal admitted that the body of bishops had not requested going against the Vatican. A spokesman for the Trautman clique and who was on the dais gave some double talk to quell further discussion of this aspect. I did not comprehend his all-too glib phrasing. I cannot even repeat it here with any coherence. Marginalization, spin and denial are the hallmarks of the liberal's modus operandi when committing crimes against the Faith.

"Afterwards Raymond Arroyo of EWTN and Father Jerry Pokorsky of ADOREMUS discussed the conference highlights, specifically the liturgy and the LEMS ... They both noted that the present translation is "debased and banal" as Mr. Arroyo pointed out, including mentioning the irony as noted above. I got the idea that in the end... because so few have any courage left ... that Rome will back down, as it did with the admission of homosexuals to the priesthood and so many other disciplinary actions that went nowhere fast. One of the Vatican changes involves the translation of "pro multis" in the Consecration as "for many" the correct wording, rather than "for all". Bishop Trautman said that 125 of the bishops favor keeping the incorrect translation but did not say how many favor "for many" or were non responsive. The number is less than a half of the bishops so I suspect this may be a factor in his not elaborating further. For the bishops the full breakdown of responses was posted but not available for viewing by the television audience.

"I recall that when this deliberate disorientation from the Canon of the Mass codified by the Council of Trent, a doctrinal council, as opposed to the merely pastoral council of Vatican II, was made, we were told that there is no actual word for many as such in the Aramaic, which was a form of spin since the Missale Romanum is always in Latin, first and foremost. The Council of Trent, which had the full protection of the Holy Ghost, had no problem deciphering the Scriptural intent of Christ. And neither did Mel Gibson's The Passion of Christ. And, too, this retort completely ignored that Scripture translations in the Douay-Rheims version, at least, had no problem with "many are called, but few are chosen ..." and "the way to perdition is wide and many are there who find it ..." etc. At the time I wondered if this means that women and children [included because many means all to the English-speaking bishops] are called to the ordained priesthood and that all souls go to Hell, rather than the many [Ibid.]. I still do. I suppose the liberals hope we are not cognizant of their deception. They simply cannot have it both ways. Of course all of this is totally unnecessary, if the bishops were true shepherds following Tradition, simply because no Bishops'conference ---- a recent concoction ---- can substitute for the rightful authority of the bishop over his own see. It occurs to me, as a long time observer on the scene and as a victim of Newchurch tactics that many of the bishops prefer not to take this disciplinary fact of the Faith into account because it lets them "off the hook" when controversy arises ---- they just refer back to the conference as if the decisions made there were binding under pain of sin. And do they hope we do not notice? Imagine if you and I are acted as mothers and fathers by committee? Our particular judgment involves us as individual persons, with no committee to assist us in our defense. As parents we are all too aware of the terrible thing it is to 'fall into the hands of the living God.' It would behoove us all, if our shepherds were more mindful, lest Christ say to each of them who failed in his duty because of the misguidance of some committee, 'get behind Me, Satan.' "

Enough said for now, I await the almost endless wait of the living in the land of the dead. Will the Bishops choose the vainglory of wishful thinking and bad theology or will they choose Christ, through His Vicar? The first is the Roe v Wade of the Church and the latter the "Be it done unto me" of Our Lady, whose pure, virginal body was the first tabernacle.

Leviathan Rising v. the Reign of Mary
in Three Parts
---- Originally intended to be filed by PAULY FONGEMIE, July 4:
Published July 16, 2009


  Today is our annual memorial of the Declaration of Independence from two kings ---- the king of England and Christ the King. The national charter contains no mention of the rights of Almighty God, in the Person of Christ the King, although it speaks of the rights of the people. Kingship of any kind was entombed in the mausoleum of history. The Declaration was formulated by the future third president, Thomas Jefferson, between June 11 and June 28, 1776. Jefferson was the Founding Father who went through the New Testament, scratching out the precious, holy name of our Savior, Jesus Christ. Apparently he considered the name of Jesus odious. Like many of the Founders he was what is known as a "Deist", or one who subscribes to an impersonal God Who grants natural rights but is not directly involved in the affairs of men, His creatures. They had neither belief in nor devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, a profoundly intimate, merciful God.

One of the primary agitators for independence, Thomas Paine, who wrote the influential pamphlet, Common Sense, was an agnostic, saying "I believe in God, and nothing more." While George Washington was a high-degree Mason who was inaugurated wearing his Masonic apron and taking his oath upon a Masonic bible, the Founders who were not members of a lodge [two-thirds] were instilled with the same spirit
----- what I call the Masonic mystique, that is, the "enlightenment" that filled worldly, educated men with the idea that faith was to be determined by reason alone, e.g. what seems reasonable, that one's faith did not so much matter as long as it was for all practical matters, a non-sectarian, "Christian" one, the great amalgamation of 'the brotherhood of egalitarian man', virtual irreligion, if you will, very similar to that of the Fraternity, Liberty, and Equality of the Founders' close allies in France. That country, too, borrowing heavily upon the American and French lodges, endured a bloody revolution that openly persecuted the Church and those faithful to Her. Sacrilege became the eighth "sacrament". The apotheosis of that revolution was the French gift of a goddess "statue", Lady Liberty, to use the colloquial idiom, to the Americans, a hollow structure epitomizing the French prostitute who was brought in to dance upon the sacred altar of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris, mimicking a pagan goddess. France's revolutionaries conducted this disgraceful ceremony to celebrate their freedom or independence from the rule of Christ by desecrating the sanctuary dedicated to His Holy Mother. To Christ through Mary, a thoroughly Catholic belief, haughtily overthrown! Catholics knowledgeable about actual history, rather than "patriotic" legend, cannot help but feel saddened every time they pass by the statue in New York Harbor. Our taxes are used for upkeep of what is a reminder of shame! Because the revolutionary, ever changing spirit of Protestantism ---- except in its penchant to envelop and enervate Catholicism ---- cloaks the land from sea to sea, most Americans are unaware, in all innocence of the travesty of justice and the charity that is owed the descendants of the first settlers of America. Much less are they aware of their obligations to Almighty God as citizens.

The enclosure of the term, Christian, [supra] within
quotation marks is intentional, for the roots of the Craft's mystique are in ancient, pagan Egypt; the Freemasons adopted and adapted some of those religious and numeric symbols [the number 13, for instance], along with that of Judaism's Kabala. The "Sons of Liberty" chose the serpent as one of their unifying emblems, sectioned off in 13 parts representing the original 13 colonies. Now none of the revolutionaries were responsible for the number of colonies ---- it was the Father of Lies who could organize things impelled by his burning hatred of Christ; ultimately the original 13 were his orchestration after he had been banned from Mexico by Our Lady of Guadalupe's triumph over Aztec sway; his new domain: the high-degree members of the Craft, either willingly or unknowingly. And ultimately, the god of Freemasonry is Lucifer who can disguise himself as an angel of light. All the phrases chosen for the national seal contain 13 letters each, and so forth. Hardly a coincidence. There is nothing insidious about the number 13 in of itself, for it only stands for a number between 12 and 14. It is the import given to it that is significant, for it reveals dedication to a cunning plan beneath the ostensible revolt against King George in accord with the dialectical materialism of 33-degree Freemasonry. Their graven seal upon the seal as it were.

The symbols of Freemasonry on the dollar, the National Seal, Washington, DC, etc.: Why should they matter?

1. Because it mattered to the Founding Freemasons and so much so that they went to such effort, when necessary, in secret.

2. Because symbols are powerful weapons in any war, especially in the war on Christ. If you do not think so, then just ask any ACLU plaintiff who objects to a simple cross. To ask is to provide the very answer.

3. Symbols are not silent but continually communicate to those who casually dismiss them as of no account. If you consider it is otherwise, ask why the culture has become so coarsened simply from immodest dress and pornographic images everywhere? Most people do not purchase pornography outright, nor do they march regularly around in skimpy swim suits, yet, almost everyone has reduced expectations of daily comportment in dress, language and other modes of self-expression; we have become unreasonably tolerant, thus endorsing them unofficially. Acquiescense is consent.

In modern times the fruit of the war against Christ as waged by Masonry and its allies is communism. Communism in its spirit, if not always identified with any country. Communism is a habit of the mind and will, not necessarily a political party. While it can destroy whole nations that can be counted, it always destroys souls, too numerous to count or be known. As with all false and pernicious systems of belief the insignia and the rites of Freemasonry evolve and recoalesce into whatever can be used in the culture of the time to advance the revolution, while retaining the underlying meaning that is hidden from all but the adepts. Pragmatism is not wanting, nor is man's ability to outwit himself. Masonry and its foul-smelling breath is essentially revolutionary, for not only is it the arch-enemy of Christ and His one true Church, it is a rebellion against nature itself, in spite of its religion being naturalism, paradoxically:

Most of its adherents are low-degree and have no knowledge of the true aim of Masonry; some of the higher-degree members manage to delude themselves [the late Jack Kemp, for example] even as did twelve of our Founders, who still subscribed to the natural law; the thirteenth, Benjamin Franklin, a 33-degree adept, is believed to have more than dabbled a bit in the occult or what some considered strange friendships and may have aspired to more dubious dreams. At one point this impious Founding Father said that he no longer believed in miracles as such and that he could perform the same wonders as Jesus Christ!, adding blasphemy to his list of achievements. In fact Franklin conjectured that there may be gods, not just a higher "SOMETHING". The penultimate deist!

As I wrote in the introduction to my twelve part monograph, Masonry, 2006:

"Like Franklin, most of the Founding Fathers were not Christians. Although they often made references to the Deity, the God they invoked was their God, ... the God of nature in Christian dress. In fact the most influential among them were not so much Deists as thoroughgoing pantheists, for, being avowed rationalists, they looked for divinity only in nature.

"In the first line of our preamble is set the Masonic ideal: 'We, the people in order to form a more perfect union.'  ... Not only a union of states but a unity of the whole people is the basis upon which all American institutions are founded. 'All Freemasons should know that the idea of union originated in Colonial Freemasonry, was developed and advocated by Freemasons, and was realized under their leadership.' [Cited by a Masonic web site.]

"Freemasonry was held by all the principles, from George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Paul Revere, John Paul Jones, Patrick Henry to Alexander Hamilton to be the only institution in colonial times in which the leaders of all the different colonies could meet upon common ground.

"The Revolution was for the very purpose to form the union of the colonies ... the spirit of national unity in the thirteen original colonies lay deep in their common heritage ... The faith of nearly all was grounded in the English Bible [King James version]. But the Puritans of New England, with their Congregational form of church government, did not look favorably upon the Established Church of the other colonies, holding its clergymen with only a little less abhorrence than they held for the Papacy. Although the principles of British constitutional and common law were shared by all, local governments differed widely in form and spirit. The town meeting system of New England and the parish and vestry system of the southern colonies differed vastly.

  " 'Only the Masonic lodge was the same institution in every part of the Colonies.' [Ibid.] With the lodge colonial leaders were taught the same principles and practice of civil arrangement. In their lodge communications and other fraternal meetings, American Masons established a common meeting ground where "men of every race, and of the most diverse religious and political views, whether rich or poor, could come together in the spirit of harmony." The Masonic historians all claim that there was ample evidence that the Masonic lodge, derived from the ancient Anglo-Saxon gild, was indeed the "primordial cell" of the American state with the New England Town Meeting derived from the Anglo-Saxon spirit."

"The members of the Constitutional Congress who predominated were very suspicious about the tyranny of the masses that could be engendered by a democracy and at the same time too strong a central government, wise and prudent concerns, indeed, given the nature of man since Original Sin.

"Yet they took the very course that ultimately led to the very fears they so correctly had foreseen. It was almost as if a contrarian spirit had seized them in irony. Perhaps some of them did not realize that because they honored 'the God of Nature' in the Declaration of the Independence, and not the One True God, they were committing public blasphemy. And again, because the venture they undertook, independence from England conducted in a bloody, unjust manner, despite the faults of the English Crown, the evil they wrought for the sake of a sought for, hoped for good would sow the very seeds of destruction they wanted to avoid. They were in practice working for the Father of Lies who drives a hard, costly bargain."

However and why, suffice it so say that the foundation laid for the rights of men by our Founders was weakened because the law-giver, God, was not given full honors, pride of place, as He is, in His Triune essence, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, but was acknowledged to be but an "Architect", an essential of the gnostic-occultic underpinning of Masonry. It was not as if these men had no prior knowledge of God as He is, because it had been less than two hundred years since the other great revolution on earth against the social reign of Christ the King, founded in animus and pride, Protestantism! Most, if not all Protestants, believe in the Holy Trinity. The first revolution against the Incarnate Second Person of God erupted in the ante-chambers of Heaven when Lucifer [and his followers] intoned "Non serviam!" The terminus always ends as it must, with the destruction of the very claims of those who espouse them. Thus, in our time, the revolution succeeded beyond the Founders' intent, the natural law has been effectively banished, that men more worldly than educated, and more insolent than worldly, might pursue a purely natural happiness in a most unnatural manner.

The new republic was established by wrenching tradition from its rightful guardianship, with much of the riotous forerunners [such as looting and burning private homes] instigated for the very purpose of unsettling an agrarian, peace-loving [although unduly taxed] people and provoking the British. While school students are led to believe that the Stamp Act was the primary cause of the revolution, the event that broke the dam holding back insurrection was King George's grants of rights to Catholics in Canada [Langguth below]. Since the populace was not given to the outbursts of vehemence demonstrated and organized by the so-called "Sons of Liberty" at all, they had to be induced by drawing upon and evoking the prejudice against the Catholic Church that was prevalent in twelve of the thirteen colonies at the time.
What they called "popery", itself a nasty pejorative. In the thirteenth, Maryland, Masonry had its Osirian foot in the door, for the Catholic Carrolls had let their guard down and in at least one quarter, made common cause with the enemies of Christ the King on an informal, expedient basis. One of the Carrolls was known to have held lodge membership, an excommunicating act. In her exposé on Americanism, the Star-Spangled Heresy, Solange Hertz reveals that Daniel Carroll, one of the sons of the John Carroll dynasty, and his cousin, Charles were both lawyers who turned to politics, having important roles in the revolution; their activities consisted of a series of quasi-Masonic plots that led to the adoption of the Declaration of Independence in 1776. Significantly, Charles was the only Catholic to sign the document, but it was Daniel who joined the lodge in 1780, rising as high as a Master Mason, although two Pontiffs in his lifetime had denounced Masonry. [See Randy Engel, THE RITE OF SODOMY, 2006.]

Again from Masonry, Foundation of Revolution, 2006:

"Masonry works to absorb religion by weakening it through compromise and heretical ideas implanted within, taking advantage of the natural weakness of men who prefer goodwill to the normal conflicts that can arise in any milieu, rather than deliberately destroy religion which makes for Martyrs. By religion, I mean the Catholic Church primarily and to a lesser extent traditional or evangelical Protestantism" as opposed to the mainline sects.

 "Can our actual foundations as an 'independent' group of states explain why honest patriots and true countrymen who fight for sovereignty and ordered liberty in the authentic meaning of these necessary aspects of republican nationhood are so vexed by conflicting, contrarian, irrational forces hell-bent on the very opposite? Could it just be that the seeds of decay and the devolution of society preordained by the Holy Trinity are planted deep within the Americanist ethos of the 'brotherhood of man', instead of the Fatherhood of God Almighty," and the social reign of His Son?

"The popular scientific writer Roger Burlingame coined the phrase, 'America was discovered; the United States was invented.' He meant only to make a distinction between a principle and its application, but the eyes of faith see deeper than that: America is the creation of Almighty God, but the United States, being merely a political contrivance, can qualify only as a human invention. Mistaking one for the other has disastrous consequences, for contrivances may fall apart without warning as the United States nearly did during its so-called Civil War and may now do by internal collapse.

"Catholics who mistake the United States for God's America may further fall more easily into the heresy formally defined by Pope Leo XIII as Americanism. Basically, it is naturalism in American dress, and it accommodates itself to all the ideals of the Enlightenment. French radicals of the last century expected it then to produce a major schism in the Church under the able leadership of Catholic bishops in the United States."

One of the little known, still buried facts is that once upon a time America was Catholic, primarily south of the Carolinas and west of the Mississippi and that even after the insurrection, those large land tracts were held by a thoroughly Catholic people, until the ascendancy of Protestantism and its American prism through which all must submit to partake of the American "democratic" enterprise. [See Gary Potter, "When America Was Catholic," AFTER THE BOSTON HERESY CASE, 1995.]

That overarching prism reached its zenith with the infamous act of apostasy uttered by John Kennedy who promised America's Protestant powers that he would not let Catholicism influence his governance, to his shame. Non serviam. By that time the stultifying spirit of Masonry was so all-encompassing that too many Catholics who sought high office or social position were self-censoring, doing the work of the foe. Kennedy went so far as to forbid Jackie the open display of a jeweled pendant in the form of a cross while he was in the White House. He attempted the same for their young daughter, Caroline, but Jackie would not go that far. Only after she became a widow did her cross appear on the outside of her garb. A cross, mind you, hardly a Crucifix!

In his seminal work, Patriots, the Protestant A. J. Langguth, published by Simon and Schuster, 1988, instructs the reader about the "Pope's Day" rallies that were conducted over a period of a few years. He describes Samuel Adams as a master tactician of them. [page 94] The mere sight of an image of the Vicar of Christ was so incendiary that any instance for burning an effigy was enough to draw the people from countryside and town, thereby to stir their wrath and incite the volatility of the emotions. One such violent day was November 5, 1765, in Boston, insightfully portrayed in the book; the author documents the appeal of the Pope's Day demonstrations in conjunction with violence four times in the period leading up to 1776. The background of the leading figures is too complex to quote here. I suggest that anyone interested might check out the book on inter-library loan and use the index entry "Pope's Day". This is the politically incorrect part of the American Revolution those who cite the nobility of the cause do not want us to know about. Unscrupulous machinations taint even the loftiest of undertakings, to which the American Revolution in all probability does not belong, if bold and daring. Suffice it to say that those who wield draconian power now, much of it attained through devious means, expect us not to revolt against them and their burdensome nation-destructive programs of largesse for themselves, fellow-travlers, and cronies, in the same manner, while lauding the Founders, in an exercise of rank hypocrisy. I am not advocating violence as we approach the last Fourth of July as we have always known it, but then, neither would I
have joined those who schemed so blasphemously against "Sweet Christ on earth", to quote St. Catherine of Siena. We have natural rights from God, as the Founders rightly predicated, but as they neglected to say, not being Catholic overall, and virulently anti-Catholic at that, we have these inalienable natural rights from God, because we have supernatural obligations to Him, above everything else. This presupposes the social reign of Christ the King.

Do you think, dear reader, that I mean to imply that all the Founders were base men without any sense of traditional morality and the duties of citizenship? Not at all; in fact, George Washington held firmly to the belief that sound morals and religion were necessary to self-governance and ordered liberty. Of course that "religion" of his was essentially Masonry, whatever official sect he attended. The men who took part in the Constitutional Convention prayed before each session, asking for the blessing of God; their intentions may have been honorable overall, apart from Franklin, but they had not the light of true faith and perhaps did not know that they did not know. Two examples, italics, mine:

"No one can rejoice more than I do at every step the people of this great country take to preserve the Union, establish good order and government, and to render the nation happy at home and respectable abroad. No country upon earth ever had it more in its power to attain these blessings than United America. Wondrously strange then, and much to be regretted indeed would it be, were we to neglect the means, and to depart from the road which Providence has pointed us, so plainly; I cannot believe it will ever Come to pass. The great Governor of the Universe has led us too long and too far on the road to happiness and glory, to forsake us in the midst of it. By folly and improper conduct, proceeding from a variety of causes, we may now and then get bewildered; but I hope and trust that there is good sense and virtue enough left to recover the right path before we shall be entirely lost." [George Washington, June 29, 1788]

"It may be the will of Heaven that America shall suffer calamities still more wasting and distresses yet more dreadful. If this is to be the case, it will have this good effect, at least: it will inspire us with many virtues, which we have not, and correct many errors, follies, and vices, which threaten to disturb, dishonor, and destroy us. The furnace of affliction produces refinement, in states as well as individuals. And the new governments we are assuming, in every part, will require a purification from our vices, and an augmentation of our virtues or there will be no blessings ... But I must submit all my hopes and fears to an overruling Providence; in which, unfashionable as the faith may be, I firmly believe." [John Adams, July 3, 1776

As you can see, the Founders in their more lucid moments were deeply worried about the survival of the Republic although they perceived not the actual cause of the brink of cataclysmic ruin [CATASTROPHE, Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, 2009] in 2009, placing their trust in a "balance of powers" as set forth in the US Constitution, with its delegated and strictly limited enumerated powers. But there was division among the Founders over how reliable their schemata for the new government truly was:

Benjamin Franklin is thought to have answered a lady who approached him on the street to ask how the work of the constitutional meeetings was progressing. "Dr. Franklin," she asked, "what have your meetings given us?" And he answered, "A Republic, Madam, if you can keep it."

A democratic republic relies upon men and women of virtue, with self-control, modesty, humility, forbearance, and disinterested justice, and with less ambition for the things of this world, than for eternity in great enough number to sustain any breach by a self-indulgent, libertarian/anarchic minority. Otherwise human nature weakened by Original Sin, without the grace that comes with Baptism and a life of righteousness and nobility is fractured by competing factions that intend to dominate, by lying, and other forms of cheating if deemed necessary in order to succeed. Overweening egos and ambition guarantee the worst and never more than in the worst of times.

Scarcely was the ink dry on the Constitution itself when the judicial branch, intended to be the least powerful of the three because of its potential for tyranny, since its members are not elected, began to garner power by declaring the right to "interpret the law" as opposed to applying it in matters where there is disagreement. [The Marbury v Madison case.] The trajectory of liberalism was on its way to its inexorable descent into despotism some two hundred years later. It is instructive to remember that the US Constitution, the framework of which was written by James Madison granted tenure on the court, including the Supreme, in regard to "good Behaviour", not for life. How far astray we find ourselves from the original design!

The less self-mastery by submission to the holy will of God, the more need for laws and regulations to protect the weak from the dominance of the strong and the unscrupulous. The final defluxion involves crushing the less powerful, rather than safe-guarding the natural, inalienable rights all men have, because power not only tends to corrupt, power leads men to lust for more power, which corrupts absolutely. [Lord Acton.] Petty, but burdensome regulations by unelected bureaucrats and self-insulated representatives who manage to exempt themselves from the ill effects of their loathsome pharisaic prescriptions are one of the more parlous manifestations of absolute power.

Be that as it may, for now, let us take things from another viewpoint.


The prophet Isaiah [Chapter 27:1-5] reminds us thusly about the punishment of the oppressors of God's people and the Lord's favor to His Church:

In that day the Lord with His hard, and great, and strong sword shall visit leviathan the bar serpent, and leviathan the crooked serpent, and shall slay the whale that is in the sea. In that day there shall be singing to the vineyard of pure wine. I am the Lord that keep it, I will suddenly give it drink: lest any hurt come to it, I keep it night and day. There is no indignation in Me: who shall make Me a thorn and a brier in battle: shall march against it, shall I set it on fire together? Or rather shall it take hold of My strength, shall it make peace with Me, shall it make peace with Me?

Nota bene that "Leviathan" is, the devil, the great enemy of the people of God. He is called the bar serpent from his strength, and the crooked serpent from his wiles; and the whale, from the tyranny he exercises in the sea of this world. He was spiritually slain by the death of Christ, when his power was destroyed. [Douay-Rheims bible footnote.]

Today's Leviathan, the perpetuator of the parasitic, lies sprawled in luxuriate hubris and self-confidence upon the land, poised to devour everything within its merciless claws. We now behold it rising within our midst, emerging from the mist and murk, the contours taking shape at last to be recognized for the imminent menace it is ---- we must repel it, smite asunder the tyranny that is being established under the feint of justice, the "saving of the planet" in the country it seems to so despise, no matter the protestation. It is a myth that government has no religion; despotic rule, as opposed to normal monarchy, is its own religion. The religion of the servile state will brook no dissent from its politically correct orthodoxy. And every religion must have its savior or idol for worship by which to appease whatever threatens the stronghold of power. It was Obama who proclaimed "I will change the world with your help!" Meaning whether we want to or not because he wants and intends to. So much for the virtue of humility. You and I have all we can do to change ourselves day to day since the acquiring of sanctity is a fearsome, trembling task. Appeasement in the 21st century as it did with the ancient Aztecs who worshipped the sun god, means the sacrifice of innocent ones for the sake of expediency, ideology and willful neglect. Like the Aztecs, Obama ascended to power through blood, but not blood lines ---- the blood of millions of infants butchered on the altar of usurped "rights" the sine qua non of his campaign promises. Their blood runs still, belying our claim to righteousness. This outpouring of innocent blood will not be enough to sate the ambition of Leviathan: the people of the one true God, who seek to restore the natural law [1] basis of self-rule, who resist Leviathan, are slated to be immolated further; however, mere sacrifice will not be enough, their very subjection, humiliation in a fierce class and generational warfare must precede their annihilation under Obama[s]care. This time the bar serpent comes from the class of the bar [lawyers who twist the letter of the law to alter by subterfuge the spirit of the law, and vice versa], ergo, the crooked serpent. The parsed phrase has taken on a entirely new dimension to be deciphered like a secret language.

So many Americans look up now, if they dare to, that is, and scarcely know where to turn. One ordinary, quite normal American, genuinely mystified, asked, "How could this have happened?" The person was kindly disposed to Obama and would not permit anyone to be a naysayer well after the election. Until now. A hundred days is like a lifetime. The how is easy enough to understand once one grasps the why, which is power for the sake of transforming America into his own evil empire, to be taken up shortly.

"Transformation" is one of the code words Obama employs, such as when he welcomed homosexuals as part of the month long celebration of the ascendancy of deviancy, with Michelle by his side; what the vainglorious creature we enthroned spews with one tongue, he snaps away with another. By creature I mean, made by the media, protected by the media, for a quixote venture that will end in man-made madness. During the campaign, knowing that the country as a whole did not support "gay" marriage, he forsook it as an official goal and too many people believed him. Abortion on demand and infanticide and the vice of sodomy go hand in hand, wherever you find the one, you find the other. Hatred of normalcy feeds on itself in its variant forms. I did not believe a word from the future POTUS who was brazen enough to design and display his presidential seal before the election ---- he was toying with us as he was with everything else.

The White House released a proclamation recognizing June as "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month." The proclamation was signed by President Obama and mentioned the record number of homosexuals he has nominated and chosen for positions in his administration. It also called for equal justice under the law for homosexuals and transgendered Americans.

Now he tells the perverts [activists, not people with certain temptations who strive to live chaste lives] that "transformation" of society begins at the bottom, not the top, encouraging them as Michelle's head bobbed up and down with a wide beam across her face. A wink and a nod in surreal disguise. I had to resist the image of a brightly dressed marionette on a stage. In all reality Obama subscribes to the use of power from the top for transformation, the very hallmark of his quest for consolidating power. Translation: "It is not politically astute for me at this time to reveal my true position, so I have to fudge it for the common folks who are not like you and me; but, please, guys, keep the social pressure up and we will triumph in the end through attrition." Normal people reach exhaustion and discouragement more quickly than the fiendish do. The common man does not always recognize evil until it is already within striking distance; the evildoer knows full well his foe and suffers not the restraint and reluctance of the pure of heart.

The how is accomplished by legerdemain, with our approval although most of us beg to differ otherwise. Gigantic congressional bills, running into the thousands of pages, such as the "stimulus bill" [pork stew], into which are embedded social and political time bombs, like the one that served as the first phase of government controlled medicine, render it nigh impossible for every national legislator ----- if he willed to in the first place ---- to read and apprehend the consequences thereof. How can I be certain? If a Congressman was upright in his intentions, truly dedicated, he would decry massive bills that are unreadable and would insist that this cease immediately; he would call upon his fellow legislators who are above suborning to join him in the effort and the practice would soon die the death it merits. Where is the indignation? Very telling is it not, and its own commentary? Others know what is contained therein and read through the lens of their statist dreams, the same as if they had never read the contents. Some lawmakers are refusing to read the bills if they can. They simply want the license to pass whatever measures they want without taking any responsibility for them at all. A conservative group seeking to require that bills be read before passage was contemptuously rejected by a number of our national legislators or should I say regulators? So bills are passed in deception, by deception, for deception. The core stratagem is the policy of including disparate bills as amendments to one another so that those who want to pass the original are forced to pass the secondary
---- instant camouflage for those who prefer the latter, and so forth. This has been going on for generations and in this one it reaps the rotten fruits that were unavoidable, given the trajectory. Accountability is converted into mockery! We continue to countenance the election of representatives who no longer have the will to answer to the electorate and refuse to change the rules for the distribution of spoils. The very notion that 2 phone numbers are sufficient for millions of citizens to reach their Congressional members is ludicrous on its face. Hence the crash of the system the night before the energy tax bill ["Cap and Trade", a misnomer].

The paucity of phone lines in the technology age is convenient cover. E-mail the Congress? You receive an e-mail back stating that they do not respond to such missives. Of course they do, because they just did
---- to say they don't. [Sen. Susan Collins.] Her staff, though, is always respectful and she is one of the few Senators who are concerned by the appointment of so many Czars without Congressional approval or oversight, to her credit. At least she has this much clarity of vision and the guts to raise the issue at all.

What they mean is "We want to make it more difficult for you to demand accountability from us. It's an intricate web of back room dealing, back scratching, and back home bacon [earmarks], in other words, a system of bribery essentially that has become the way of doing business here, so get used to it. We know you are appalled, but you are the sort of unsophisticated folks who are backward."

Actually we are forward,
for equal protection under the law for all human beings, including the unborn, for limited government, for lower taxes, for using constitutional grants of power, such as curtailing the expansive jurisdiction of the federal courts that legislate from the bench. Send a snail mail? You receive either a form letter that says little bearing on your concerns, a polite but curt dismissal, unless perchance you agree with a stance they took, then they can't be polite enough; or an indignant reply indicating you are out of line for merely asking where they stand on a singular hot button issue. [Sen. Olympia Snowe's staff.]

Listeners to the Rush Limbaugh show the week prior to the Fourth of July were given a wake-up call. Americans who asked their Congressmen and Senators if they were going to vote to opt out of Obamacare for themselves and their families were treated rudely and never given either a yes or a no. The great stall is on because the fix is sure to be in. Furthermore, if you call the local Congressional or Senate office to ask them to respond in a letter, chances are you will not receive even this courtesy until it is too late, so to speak, and that is if at all to begin with. Common courtesy is in short supply within those environs if you do not applaud the legislator. When push comes to shove, the staff can be blamed and on and on it goes. After several fruitless attempts I have given up on Senator Snowe. Repeated requests to one of her staff for a letter from her went unheeded. Only the grace from the Rosary can reach her now. This whole regimen of pick-and-choose communication is insulation, insulting and insolent! Yet most of these scalawags will be re-elected if past is prologue. In Maine, only liberals and so-called "moderates" count, apparently. Well, those of us who "don't count", can. Not until the next election, because there are always only two candidates, both liberal to the core, forget the party tag. We pretend that we are hedging our bets or splitting power by always electing Democrats to the House and Republicans to the Senate. Mainers are the most confounding of citizens because we end up with one party, the party of abortion, etc. We are counting the days until enough of us hear the alarm and do something authentically apropos for once!


The Obama engine for the police state is one of feverish speed, using deliberately-engineered crises by a lack of government oversight, which become the ostensible rationale, or, the 'fear factor'. Colin Powell, erstwhile Republican and Obama supporter thinks that Obama has made a mistake here. He does not perceive that Obama is succeeding for now ---- the pell mell speed IS THE VERY cornerstone of his strategy. Those of you familiar with this column may recall that I wrote in MORAL CONCEIT AND POLITICAL DECEIT, February 13: "Bush was Obama lite, a wanna be without realizing it and Obama is Bush saturated ... we suffer a fatal disease of the heart, body and soul." What Bush and his presidential forebears misguidedly, ineptly began, Obama will finish tooth and nail, to finish off America as she was once upon a time, in our everyday arrangements and how we raise our families. Bush and his buddies were never capable or venal enough to undertake such fulsome intrigues. The messianic, megalomaniac Obama, mastermind of sophistry and the double-speak of the demagogue, or in this case, demi-god, was in a rush at a break-neck pace to seize the presidency because he was astute enough to recognize the signs of the times. So many looming disasters that give birth to one another in succession, that a citizen seriously intending to keep abreast and informed is almost helpless to do so. This is, of course, the aim.

These crises, begun in simple mismanagement or incompetence, devolve into subversion: policy consisting of manufactured urgency to "fix" a problem by doing more of what caused it; as one of Leviathan's henchmen said on national television, "crises are opportunities". The lie is that while blaming everything on Bush, the new carpet-baggers were secretly reveling in the incipient chaos because they needed the pretext for their unnatural, grandiose scheme.

Socialism is being "imposed" in conjunction with mandates enforced by unelected bureaucrats, unaccountable to the people at large except the Democrats who install them in their satrapies. No one in his right mind would have voted for the gargantuan maze of secrecy, misdirection and mischievous interference operating today. Socialist party candidate for President, Norman Thomas, after several campaigns gave up, not because he had failed, but because he said his candidacy was no longer necessary since the Democratic party had adopted all the planks of socialism. At least there existed one leftist who was clear about what is what and not afraid to say so. Would that were still so. One of Obama's appointed satraps is an avowed communist and anarchist, another an advocate of Shariah law, and still a third, an anti-Christian bigot. Guess wherein they have been empowered? Where they can cause havoc: environment, health and human services, and faith-based! Either a colossal mistake or a most nefarious ploy. I opt for the latter, gullibility being a luxury I cannot afford. This is why a democratic, open society, demands the work of eternal vigilance, for those who despise a republic such as ours is supposed to be, are free to use our very way of life as a weapon to defeat us. Irony of ironies.

Note the use of quotation marks that enclose the verb imposed [supra] is purposeful. Why? you ask. Because the people are not rising up in enough number to repel the beast within. Having voted for him, human pride makes it difficult for us to admit our cavalier folly at the polls; we appear ambivalent, thus far, about ousting those who shirk their duty by fanning the flames breathed forth by the serpent, rather than pour cold water on it. We may not be able to slay the dragon, but surely we can cut off his food supply! I suggest this emphatically because the polls are split, Obama enjoys high personal approval with a declining job approval, among all political affiliations, including Independents and Republicans, except in the two hardest-hit states. If we were truly alarmed and serious, earnest citizens with a sense of patriotic fervor, no matter how tired we all are, recall petitions would already be in circulation for those who serve 6 year terms. A veto proof Senate could bring the Obama express to a screeching halt, giving us time to elect enough good men and women to circumvent him completely, rendering him a "maimed" duck. We prefer tea parties and wishful thinking. No wonder Congress turns its back on us, perhaps we deserve it, for this behemoth is our very concoction! He who is silent consents, or he who votes for the same gets the same. Sooner, if not later, our national disgrace will realize the threat to their sinecures of malfeasance, impudence and unmitigated power, and will work diligently under the cover of night, to see that the laws on the books that govern recall and impeachment procedures are changed to prevent what they were meant to do or at least make it virtually impossible in mere human terms given the exigencies of modern life. We don't have time for tea parties. We must be somber, ever alert, and more outraged than tea party protests, otherwise the next gathering you hear will be our wake, before the funeral for the republic being dismantled piecemeal before our very eyes ...

The creature from the sea, described as a serpent in biblical times may be characterized in a post-Christian era as a 13-armed monster, with each tentacle representing the following, somewhat borrowed from the Morris/McGann book: Please be advised that the authors did not employ this analogy in their blockbuster analysis, nor is the order provided by them. Except for the last item on the agenda, I had already come to the same conclusions plus as the authors before I read their book. One of the most doctrinaire, hard-core statist tentacles is the menace of green, or environmental and energy policies that will impoverish the middle class through morbid taxation, guaranteeing their dependence on big government just to survive, that is, if they have not frozen to death first in the northern states. The authors do not have an entire chapter analyzing the key to Obamascare ---- "global warming" or environmental dogma; as they do not on the China factor; I had even had more than a germ of a grasp pertaining to the last agenda item, but had no idea how actually dangerous, if potentially, modern financial policies are. That chapter [Chapter 13 ---- on Shariah Law] was a stunning revelation! Also be advised that much of the commentary within each number on the list is mine, and not that of the authors, hence, what I mean by plus.

The top-ranking Democrat in the Senate [Byrd] wrote President Obama a letter saying that these czars are unconstitutional, an unprecedented power grab centralizing authority in the White House, outside congressional oversight and in violation of the Constitution. Of course, if congressional oversight means anything anymore, no one is sure, given the mortgage fiasco under the tender loving undersight of Barney Frank, et al.

Obama is certainly creating jobs! Lucrative government positions for those who think they know better than we do about what is good for America and ourselves. Rules, not governs. This is why I wrote, "the last Fourth of July as we have always known it."

The disbursement of wealth is the task of charity and simplicity of life. The idea that government officials have more virtue by virtue of their appointment as overlords, than the general populace is untenable and does not comport with common sense. The countries with the worst human rights violations are non-Catholic, non-Christian countries; the further away from Christ, the crueler the culture. Catholics in America have failed miserably to convert the nation, or at least enough Americans to the Faith. I plead guilty first and foremost, as I hang my head in shame and strive to make amends. Our culture is rampant with conspicuous consumption, especially in Washington [a $1000 dollar clutch bag for Michelle and luxurious travel for Congress], the idolization of celebrity, tolerance of the vulgar that would make the ancient Romans envious. True, we don't have the Colosseum replete with hungry lions, but we don't need them because we Catholics are eager to please. The most dangerous Catholic today is the one with a media forum and who is afraid to be 100% believing! Appeasement, not Martyrdom, is our habitual state. Now we make our descent into savagery itself, with bodily mutilations, the glorification of the weird and abnormal, excess of every kind including the new gladiators ---- girls beating each other up on video for public display, women taking up the so-called sport of boxing itself. Every week brings another low blow to the human spirit, such as the elevation of the value of animal life on a par or superior to that of human life. [Pelosi's pet mouse.] Animal rescuers are ballyhooed while baby rescuers are booed. I don't think that there is any disagreement that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg's comment, without fear of reprisal or shame, about abortion ridding us of "those populations we don't want" is prima facie case #1.
 The modern bureaucrat is a special sort of vulgarian, steeped in hubris without self-restraint. It is not the role of government to decide how you and I are to be charitable, this is a work of God, forged within the human heart, each according to his obligations and with the advice of his confessor who represents Christ. It is all too facile to simply assign a general category of "redistribution of wealth" to those who are no longer civilized in the traditional sense. In fact, it is assured to be an arrangement whereby the ordinary family's meager savings, if any, is snatched from it as if they had acquired them by unChristian and or unjust means. In the end the rich always get richer, or if they do not, they go where they can, abandoning working men to shift for themselves. The powerful in office fare best of all, lifetime employment mismanaging our tax dollars with fat pensions for all too many. Those who leave office early receive big book deals or are welcomed back as lobbyists. Why? Because we are a society that is not Christian, save in name only. It is Christianity, that is, Catholicism, that truly transforms society, not socialism. The blood of the Martyrs, the grace won by them, converted Rome and the ancient world. The hatred Karl Marx bore towards Christ reverted it back again.

 One of the most effective means for "redistributionism" is devaluation of our currency by printing money without an equivalent value to back it up. The dollar bill reads "legal tender". A tender lie, pardon the pun; it ought to read illegal tender. In the billions and we have scarcely just embarked on a life of criminal endeavor. If you and I wrote bad checks on empty bank accounts or ran off counterfeit bills, we would be prosecuted. This power of printing fraudulent dollars is unconstitutional; the government is to coin money, meaning that precious metal, which is used for coinage has value. Paper money backed up by gold is equivalent. Our system of government is such that the government only has the power to effect what we as individual citizens have the right to do under the natural law: any powers given to the national government in our stead is exactly that; we cannot delegate a right we do not possess ourselves. Leviathan's bank "rescue" scheme is the rationale for dictating salaries for the upper echelon. Once he succeeds here, the real agenda will be well under way in the mind of the deliberately blindfolded, delusionary media nation, control of wages and salaries for everyone except for the socialist elite, which should be a self contradictory term, but which, in fact, is one of the great hypocrisies of socialism and communism, the latter, the last and the crudest phase of the stifling of freedom. Elements of communism are in evidence because we now know that some of the executives were strong-armed with threats to go along. A gun by another name is still a gun.
"Restore local and national caps on the ownership of commercial radio stations, greater local accountability over radio licensing, and require commercial owners who fail to abide" by the new rules will be required to "pay a fee for public broadcasting", which is tantamount to state-run broadcasting. [page 130]

He need not worry about television stations, apart from FOX News, or newspapers, they are his already. Without the fix being in he would not have ascended to power at all. This leaves the internet, how he will crack down on dissent here is more complicated as we see in Iran and China. It can be done, however. Perhaps licensing here, too? I am certain the various czars are already hard at work to come up with a fool-proof plan for silencing the voice of dissent and common sense. Can an internet content-based czar under the guise of "security" be far behind?
What happened with the environmental/energy bill is instructive as to how Washington operates in general and in specific: First the bill is written to be over a thousand pages, too long to be completely published in time to be read by those voting on it; in the twelfth hour, 300 pages or more are added; when a Republican asks for a copy before he votes, the Democrats, with a lock on the rules of debate, etc., refuse to let him see it at all. This is the new politics of morality and high ethics that Pelosi and her pals promised us and that Obama promised he, too, wanted. You know, all that cooperative stuff between the two parties. Obamacram. According to The Center for Individual Freedom and the Heritage Foundation:

This massive "national energy tax" could cost the average family "nearly 3,000 per household per year."

     House Minority Leader John Boehner points out that it will "put millions of Americans out of work" as American jobs are shipped overseas or lost outright.

     Even President Obama admitted that under "Cap-and-Trade" legislation, "electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket."

     But that's not all. Apparently, few if any Members of the House of Representatives even bothered to read this massive "national energy tax" before voting on it. Does this sound familiar?

     According to Pioneer Press:

"Last week, the American Clean Energy and Security Act (the 'Cap and Trade Energy Bill'), or H.R. 2454, was 946 pages long. Over the weekend, it ballooned to 1,201 pages with no explanation for how or why."

     Then, to add insult to injury, on the day of the vote, the Pelosi-led Congress added another 255 pages to the bill (which no one had read to begin with) at 3:00 AM (EST) and limited debate to three hours before passing this massive "national energy tax" at 7:16 PM (EST).

     And when Boehner tried to read some of the provisions of this bill aloud on the floor of the House, liberals in Congress tried to shut him down.

"Democrats tried to shut me down as I read parts of Speaker Pelosi's national energy tax (also known as 'cap and trade') out loud on the House floor. For more than an hour I cited provisions that will destroy American jobs, raise prices for gasoline and electricity, and devastate middle-class families and small businesses," said Minority Leader Boehner.

Folks, this is only the beginning, for no one knows how the details will be put into play once the Senate approves it, if enough Republicans can be "brought along" as they were in the House.

Former VP Al Gore, whose "An Inconvenient Truth" video scare on "global warming" has not matched scientific research, promised a confab in the UK that the "impending virtual energy tax under the U.S. 'cap-and-trade' legislation will bring about 'global governance.' "

According to the National Tax Limitation Committee and Dick Morris:

"... rationing is coming, and coming soon. 

"To paraphrase Morris, if you need a CAT Scan or an MRI, forget it. If you need antibiotics, forget it.

"As for potentially life-saving or life-extending treatments, take a number and stand in line.

"Is that why Barack Obama wants to bankrupt the nation? "

Something else is quite instructive about how Obama thinks and what he actually intends, all rhetoric for public consumption aside. His administration, under Tiller the Killer supporter, Sebelius, is telling the American people that the drug companies and hospitals will make 10 billion in cuts, which was extolled as a whopping amount, worthy of note. Well, let us analyze this, shall we?

Ten billion is paltry compared to the trillion or more of projected cost to the taxpayer. Ironically, or should I say deliberately hypocritically, when the first stimulus bill was rushed through Congress there was 10 billion in pork at least. When this was pointed out, the powers that be scoffed, saying that 10 billion was a mere pittance. Hmmm ...

Cuts mean savings by cutting care, such as drugs needed to sustain life and adequate technology for proper diagnosis and treatment. The elderly and the dependent will be the first to go. How do we know? Obama told us himself during his health care "reform" town hall. A citizen has a mother who is in her nineties and healthy and happy, other than that she needed a pace-maker. Doctor #1 said it was useless given her age. But Obama and his goons did not have their fingers on the trigger of the killing machine, so she was able to have Doctor #2 evaluate her case. He opted for the pace-maker. That was five years ago and still counting, happily for that family. Obama answered the person by saying that we can't make medical decisions by such criteria as feelings or compassion can't play a role; meaning she would be dead under Obamacarenot. He also said that maybe grandma would be better off with pain-killers than actual treatment. Orwellian? Hegelian? No, simply Nazian! This is the same man, folks, who insists that the main criteria for justice is "empathy" another definition of which is compassion. He wants it both ways but only on his terms, not ours. Does he think we are so stupid we don't see his ruthless attitude and utilitarian double-standard?

As Morris and McGann convincingly write:

The title of this section is BREAKING THE OBAMA CODE ON MEDICAL RATIONING [pp. 106-107]

I paraphrase by way of a brief extrapolation. Bureaucrats will decide who is entitled to what tests or not, what medications or not, how long your stay in the hospital is to be and such. The emphasis will be on the least costly care, not the care one needs for optimum benefit. One of the methods Obama will utilize is standard medical reporting records in order to further regulate rationing.

I add:

 GE, which is the owner of the Obama network, NBC-MSNBC, has the virtual franchise for coordinating the medical data for every man, woman and child. GE is also the company that is heavily invested in the "green" movement. Obamanization is investing back to award GE a monopoly here by way of thanks for getting him elected. Obamascam and then some!

This section of the work is a valuable resource: I advise everyone to obtain a copy of the book for this chapter and the one on Shariah law. Ignore reading it to your own disadvantage.

Several elderly people I know voted for Obama because of health care costs, although every one of them is covered more than adequately compared to government controlled care in Canada and England where the death rate from curable cancers is higher than here. They signed their death warrant when they filled in the ballot. The press keeps saying we "need health coverage", echoing the mantra of the Obamamanians. What they fail on purpose to explain is that not everyone has insurance, but no one is without access to care. This is a difference with real distinction. Otherwise, if a lack of insurance were the culprit, would we not see dead people lining the streets in the hundreds of thousands? Every hospital is legally bound to provide health care to those asking for it. Then there are all the public clinics; I have lost count of how many free clinics I have been able to attend for blood pressure, cancer screening etc. And I have good insurance. "Coverage by government" is code for control, that is, rationing, by definition.

Government third party is still third party, but with less options. Obama says we will be able to keep our insurers, but already the one we have now is opting out of the business in anticipation and we have to get another one at the end of this year. How long will this last before there is only Obamacare and no right to have private options such as pay as you go fees?

The one aspect no one seems to be talking about is summed up in this question: Under Obamacare, will Catholic hospitals have to do abortions and other immoral procedures?

Well, I am waiting for an answer ...
Sotomayor, who will be confirmed although she says a justice cannot be impartial and has served on Hispanic boards that favor the dissolution of national sovereignty among other atrocities such as refusing to provide for parental notification in a minor child's abortion, is made to order. Obama hopes to preside long enough to reshape the court for the next generation or more. Like Obama being hailed the first "Black" President, Sotomayor is being packaged and marketed as the first Hispanic on the court, not only to play racial politics, but to shield her from real scrutiny in our squeamish age of sensitivity, which translates to patronization, an insult, actually; as if ethnicity or race should matter. Curiously, she will be the second Hispanic. The first was Benjamin Cardoza who rose to the highest bar in the days when trading on one's ethnic background, i.e. one's politically correct background, was not even thinkable, thanks be to God! Today Cardoza would be what is known as a "two-fer", a Sephardic Jew of Hispanic or Iberian lineage, which is what Sephardic refers to.

Sotomayor is the right kind of Catholic, as the left thinks. Look almost for complete silence on her religion. Then recall that Roberts and Alito were suspect on this basis alone and real fear existed about a monopoly of Catholics on the court. I suspect strongly that a back room deal was struck at the time because of the Cheshire catlike grin on Charles Schumer's face when leaving his office with Roberts. Smug did not begin to describe it. Schumer is one tenacious, very shrewd cat indeed. I have never known him to back down from the attack unless he has prevailed, by hook or by crook. The curious "dance" of the hearings was like a courtship for an arranged marriage. There will be no need for this dog and pony show with Sotomayor, and everyone knows it, although I am the only one who is saying so. The Cheshire cat is out of the bag, if I may put it like this.

Regardless, as Alioto and Roberts did, Sotomayar will, too, state for the public record that Roe v Wade is "settled law", that is, so-called precedent, although Roe was a break with precedent! Thus, at least three Catholics on the court no longer consider the natural law the basis of all law itself! Quite an admission for the price of one's soul! No law that violates the natural law is valid on its face.
The authors title this dynamite chapter SLOW SURRENDER and they mean it. The subtitle is How Our Banks and Investment Firms Are Opening the Door to Shariah Law and Muslim Extremist Domination.

Did you know that one of the "key tools" is "Shariah-compliant financing"?

I quote:

" ... orchestrated by Muslim extremists ... designed to use the oil-generated wealth and economic clout of key Islamic nations to hijack our institutions, our social policies, and ultimately, our values in the name of Islamic rule." [page 264]

What is Shariah Law? Succinctly put, it is the foundation of Muslim life, regulating every aspect for the devout Muslim, similar to the Talmudic law of Judaism. Well what do you mean by Shariah-compliance in financing? I have never heard of this, it sounds so farfetched, it can't possibly be true, you are probably saying to yourself by now.

The authors inform us that in the 1990s Islamic investors who controlled vast oil money initiated a policy of approaching American banks and other financial firms, asking for those companies to establish special investment fund portfolios that would exclude firms that violated Shariah law. Two examples: the pork and alcohol industries. Because these money men had so much wealth, the Americans were eager to comply. Dow Jones has an Islamic Index; in fact, Shariah scholars have been retained for the express purpose of guiding the Americans in this compliance. One of the worst aspects is that some of these so-called Shariah approved investment funds are terrorist fronts! Surprise, surprise!

Space does not provide for a list of the incongruities that require "purification" under Shariah.

Suffice it to say here that Shariah-compliancy means not providing funds to companies who manufacture weapons for American and or Israeli defense!

However and whatever, the fact remains that the foot of Shariah Law itself is in the door, which runs against the grain of the natural and common law under our American system of life. The bare foot will become the knuckle boot to require Shariah-compliant public schools [as in England]; then insistence on Shariah courts including honor killings being upheld as non-felonies under American law. The pressure will likely grow as our financial crisis is intensified by Obama's insane policies and the need for the infusion of capital from abroad grows.

At this moment AIG has a three-person Shariah Advisory Board, with members from Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Pakistan.

Did you know that because of Shariah law influence in American finance, with government assistance, Muslims receive special privileges in purchasing home mortgages, to the disadvantage of other Americans? Would you like to know where this stealth mortgage scam is most prevalent? I hope you are sitting down. In Minnesota, Tim Pawlenty's bailiwick. The governor is thinking of running for President. Yet, the ACLU is nowhere to be found for this violation of state and religion. As I have always maintained, the ACLU and other leftist anti-religion groups are not against religion per se, but only Christianity. They aren't against Judaism, but Jews in some quarters. It is Christ they hate, not those who love and serve Him; it is the Jews they hate, not the observances in the temple.

The authors provide the e-mail address for Pawlenty so you can drop him a line telling what you think:

1. What applies to the individual applies no less to civil society. Those invested with the power to govern derive their authority not from the people who elected them, in the case of a democracy, but from God. Legislators have no right to enact civil laws which conflict with the natural law, even if a majority of the people wish them to do so. All authority in church, state and the family derives from God, as Our Lord pointed out to Pontius Pilate. [Pope Leo XIII on True Liberty]


As the twilight closes in around what was once a republic, entering the hellish nightmare chained to the dominion of madmen, [
1] the time ticking away ---- a virtual countdown to the extinction of sovereignty and the dignity of the human person with inalienable rights under God, the first of which is the sacred right to life, the challenges we inexorably face are overwhelming, beyond human comprehension in the practical, everyday way of responding. What is one to do??

Johnnette Benkovic, an EWTN host was not simply perchance a guest on EWTN Live recently: animating the viewer not only with a sense of urgency, but with the great opportunity that we as Catholics have to bear witness, with even Martyrdom in the offing for some. She approached the stampeding madness from the perspective of Obamacare, specifically the loss of rights of the Catholic medical provider, among other sordid prospects, euthanasia, etc. She was at her best and unafraid.

Where does such determination and courage come from? the average American might ask. Ah, the Catholic consecrated to Mary sees with the eyes of faith, thinks in terms of the virtue of hope, rather than false optimism which always disappoints, and loves with the heart of ardent charity, all laid as a roseate bouquet before the feet of the Mother of God, our last haven, ark of salvation before the full weight of the descent into the great Apostasy foretold by St. Paul. To Jesus through Mary.

Our Refuge is Her, in mortification, fasting, sacrifice and unrelenting prayer.

True enough, it is, we live in a society that is antipathetical to this sublime certitude. And true enough, we retain the duty, the magnanimous duty of patria, love of country. Love of country as an act of gratitude, whatever the imperfections it may possess. The Pontiff's latest encyclical, Caritas in vertitate, speaks of love in truth. We must also insist on speaking of justice in truth.

As I wrote in my series, America on the Precipice, 2007:

"To stand up for the truth of what a moral action consists of and in what it does not, is not just charity, it is justice! All men deserve the truth for its own sake and for ... theirs. This is part of the practice of virtue, for it elevates both him and us. Virtuous men and women strengthen a nation beyond all measure. Those who cheat weaken a country beyond all reason.

"In other words, our motivation must be one of justice and love of neighbor, and love of our homeland, which are intricately and unavoidably intertwined.

"... once we have examined our motivation and are certain we are inspired by this trinity of purpose, then, and only then, can we proceed. Now comes the hard part, the real work. As Catholics ---- Christians ---- love of neighbor, as difficult as it is to perfect in practice, thirst for justice and patria ought to be second nature under normal conditions; these are not ordinary times so it is salutary and wise for us to ... remove this first obstacle before the difficult tasks ahead and the temptations and stumbling blocks that will assail us.

"To be sure ... all the problems that are hurting America ... are political. But first they are social, and social because ultimately the challenges we face are spiritual. The political perplexities and the quagmire that is the operating milieu got this way because of spiritual decay, moral perversion of every kind. A former Speaker of the House once said 'that all politics are local.' Indeed. And all politics are irrevocably and intrinsically about social arrangements; and social arrangements are about cultural matters; and cultural matters are about cult or religion. If no religion is proclaimed this in no wise alters the interplay of human nature because apostasy and atheism function as if a religion since they become the overarching raison d'être or ideology ... Human beings have no other way to go about human affairs simply because this is their nature as created by God ..."

The most important goal, the prize itself, as we strive to be effective in the proclamation of truth in justice and love, to present it anew to a nation rent asunder by competing claims and ideologies, alienated from God as He is in the vain pursuit of a god that does not exist except in the minds of men at war with their own best instincts, is to reassert the notion of the natural law [and with it the sanctity of the preborn in the womb], which has been assigned to a dusty corner in America's history. We must resurrect this ideal
---- the foundation for a noble, just, and sovereign society, dependent on God. We must extol it from the mountain tops, our housetops, in the public square, in our classrooms, in our neighborhoods, and in the halls of government and the boardrooms of business and in our parishes and families most of all. We must speak of the natural law in such manner that a surejoin is forthcoming, even if it isn't the one we want to hear. This is a beginning. Without a clear understanding of the role of the natural law, its underpinning for justice itself, nothing else will ultimately matter, for the world is on a collision course with the meaninglessness of nihilism, despair and slavery for billions in this world, and Hell in the next for so many.

For a brief overview of natural law concepts, you are directed to visit this page from the Catholic Encyclopedia Online [New Advent]:

Go there now, then bookmark this excellent link, and return here to conclude our column.

This is all we can reasonably hope to do, and can do, as ordinary citizens, for matters otherwise are now out of our hands. This is neither pessimism, nor gloom and defeat, it is a good dose of reality, which reserves our meager resources for upholding the essentials, for fighting the right battle at the right time, and not being misled by the misdirection of those who have other agendas, whether well-intentioned or not. Until the natural law is restored as the heart of human justice, everything else we strive for will come to naught. Much like putting a band aid on one's chest to heal a wounded heart.

While most people have forgotten the natural law as a real, binding mandate upon every nation, those who can still remember are often the very same people who insist that law must change with the times. Surely this might be true; but human nature cannot and does not change; the law must be in right relation to the purpose we were created for, for which it was established. Any law, whatever the age of man must comport with the natural law; there are no new circumstances that can make matters better if the natural law is set aside; this is the first law of the law.

The natural law is the constant essential of earthly law for it is bound to our very nature as creatures formed in the image and likeness of God; without which we are rendered less human, barely above that of the animals. It is the very fortress of the good, a redoubt against the principality of evil. The natural law versus merely the law of "positivism" is the difference between tradition and the cruelty of the arbitrary, between happiness and misery. It is the tree in the Garden that must be venerated, it is the limit on man's desire to limit God in pursuing an unlimited experiment in pride and self-love apart from Him. It is a great gift of a loving, personal God to His creation.

In so doing, it is not for us to keep score, to measure our progress, for precious time is wasted thus. Our part is to rely entirely on the will of Almighty God, not "the Deity", but the Triune, Undivided Blessed Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and in the Mediatrix of All Graces as granted through His Almighty will, the Trinity's greatest creation, the Holy Mother of God, in the order of dignity and of grace, above that of the Angels and the Saints. To believe God's word that childlike trust in her promises is to give honor to Her Son, and to the other Two Persons of the One Godhead, her mystical Father and Spouse. It is an assent to the perfecting of a life of grace, it is the beginning of sanctity. The innocent trust and loving submission of a faithful child is in itself a great source of grace that merits more grace, a stored up treasure trove of incommensurable wealth, the wealth the world does not understand save to disparage, but needs more than ever.


Again from Precipice:

"We are soldiers of Christ, for Christ, because of Christ and we are also soldiers of our country in a very real sense. What kind of a soldier who is trained for battle refuses to fight a just war? Or once in battle ducks for cover, abandoning his compatriots? No such soldier I ever met. A soldier fights because that is what a soldier does, is supposed to do. Christ will never abandon us if we place our trust in Him. With God any time is a good time for being a 'patriot'.

If not now, when?

"With our country, not so, sad to say. These are the times that try men's souls as one patriot was wont to say, so much so that these are the times that try the patriot himself. As if we are on trial. In the normal course of things it is the citizen who betrays his country, commits treason and abets the enemy. Now it is the country that betrays her citizens, especially her patriots who love her more than their own lives. It's a hard season for [the] lovers [of patria], but for those who love because not to love is foreign to them, they love even more because they are despised. Christian patriots most of all. We all know the elites who pretend they are tolerant while loathing serious Christians. Some hate Christ or deny Him before men. [Or] They are uncomfortable with our comfortableness with our Heavenly Mother. How can we not glow with our love for her, the Mother of God, who loves each one of her children, given by her Son from the Cross, more than any of us could love her back. Some of our detractors are Catholics in politics. We scare the devil in them, I wish it could be the devil out of them. Not because we are any better than they are, but because we want Heaven above all else, even before the praise of other men, of being considered tolerant, as defined by them. We won't compromise when asked to worship false gods or to render unto Caesar those things that do not belong to Caesar but they insist do. ... Whenever I see a once reliable politician "sell out" it is because he experiences loneliness and self-doubt, placing his trust in princes. He can't take the exile, the declamations of disapproval, so he worms his way back in, selling his soul by slow degrees. It's the sorriest sight on earth to see someone so high fall so low so fast, in a hurry to go nowhere. Then the litany of justification begins and before you know it, you and I are the 'bad guys'. So we know that we will be reviled, rejected for taking a stand that comports with the natural law, the law of reason, because it is the reliable guide. ... This is the price of patriotism, the ultimate price is our lives, but surely our lives by way of reputation, stolen from us by scorn and worse. We are soldiers, remember this. We are made of better things, for better things, and this is to love in the face of ridicule and rejection, to love more because we are not loved."

The world, having rejected Christ in His social reign, as King over every government, every nation, every man, woman, and child, as having been given all authority by His heavenly Father, has sided with with Pontius Pilate and his descendants, who ask "What is truth?"

As the world grew darker because it chose to smother the light of Faith, in every age after Christendom was repulsed by man's ambitions, God in His mercy for such a wrecked and savaged state of affairs, gave us His Mother once more as He did when He hung upon the Cross, this time, under various titles, each for a requisite and special need of the times, still yet always for the whole world.

The mother and motherliness are so much the substance of the inmost marrow of the human race that the concept of motherhood as the cultivating virtue is imbued throughout every culture. For instance, many countries use the affectionate name of "motherland" for their nation; there are those that do not, but the spirit of the tenderness of motherhood is expressed in other ways, albeit a bit mawkishly even pantheistic, such as "mother nature". Mariners who sail the seas name their ships a thousand names, but usually refer to those vessels as "she". For truly, the devoted mother is a vessel carrying precious cargo, and she will not suffer that one should ever be lost. The Catholic Church, of course, is the Bride of Christ, and we refer to her as "Holy Mother Church".

Many societies have special days honoring mothers; fathers, too, but those that honor mothers are more numerous and lavish, with tacitly handed down rituals, for it is the mother who brings forth and nourishes life; even in those cultures where the death penalty is applied to women, restraint has always been accorded that those with child are delayed their execution until after the babe is born. In those cultures where women are denied dignity with the sanction of the law, such as in Muslim society, there is one mother that is much revered, Mary [Miriam or Maryam], the Mother of Jesus, although Jesus, to the Islamic people is only a prophet and is even blasphemed, Islam being one of the great heresies. Incongruity? Yes, but this only demonstrates the significance of the dignity of motherliness, so that the Koran cannot completely subvert it.

The following poem is a small summary of that great last will and testament uttered from the Cross:

Mother of Mercy

'Neath the foot of the Cross, She faithfully kept her watch
Consoled by Saint John e'er so softly,
And from the Cross itself He bent down,
To give us a Mother of Mercy.

It was as if it was not enough to bear the Cross
That sinners wretched He might redeem,
More generous still, He bent down
To endow us with the fairest Queen.

Queen of Heaven, Queen of Angels, and Queen of all men,
Queen of Priests and Holy Souls awaiting,
Mistress to the pleading child in need,
Mother of Mercy: sweet succoring.

O Mother most merciful, Mother of compassion,
Ark of Salvation, Gate of Heaven,
Refuge of sinners and those in despair,
To Thee we fly, unto Thy leaven.

O Mother most sweet, most radiant, O Mother of mothers!
Mother most pure, Mother most dear,
Thee do we entreat sending up our sighs,
As Thou bendest to blot every tear.

O Mother most tender, most mild, O Mother of Mercy!
Masterpiece of God's holy design,
Font of all graces, Thine to dispense,
To the humble, repentant, uncondign.

'Neath the foot of our crosses, Thou maintains Thy watch,
That Thy servants persevere e'er fast,
  'Til from Cherubimed Throne He bends down,
And with Thee, welcomes us home at last.

The grace of the graces distributed by Mary are ever abundant still and never more in this time of times, for this is the "acceptable time" for mercy as we are able to perceive this more profoundly beginning with Our Lady's apparition in her title as Our Lady of Mount Carmel, bearing the holy Scapular as a shield and badge for her little cohort, the militia of the Immaculata. Her pledge for ours. The grace was offered ever again less than a hundred years after the French Revolution, Lourdes, Rue de Bac, Salette, the first two, to tenderly and humbly announce her magnificent title, The Immaculate Conception, and the third, a Mother with tears warning of the dawn of an unprecedented scourge of evil: the multiplicity of the sins of men coming upon the world. For now let us revisit Carmel ---- the following is taken from the words of Bishop Fulton J. Sheen:

"THE PERFECTIONS of God are so infinite that no single creature could possibly reflect His Power and Goodness. God therefore multiplied creatures that what one failed to reveal the other might declare. The same is true of the Incarnate Son of God, Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The richness of His Redemptive Blood would not be reflected in only one material way. Rather like the sun, the beauties of whose seven rays are reflected only by shining through the prism, the beauties of Calvary are only adequately revealed to us as they shine through the prism of Christ's Church and split up into the vivifying graces of the seven Sacraments.

   "Mary, the Mother of that Divine Savior, is only a creature, human and not Divine. But exalted to the high office of being the ciborium of Emmanuel for the nine months she bore about in her virgin flesh the Host Who is the lamb of God, it follows that she has so much dignity that no one title could exhaust it. That is why there is a Litany to her made up of many titles, as so many facets reflecting the various lights of the diamond of her Divine Maternity.

"In like manner, the tradition of the Church is full of various titles under which the intercessory power of the Blessed Mother may be invoked. At one time, it is as the Defender of Christianity when the Turks invaded Europe; at another as the Queen of Peace; at another as the Lady of Lourdes. One of these titles and one of the most glorious of them all is: 'Mary, Mother of the Scapular of Mount Carmel, or Our Lady of Mount Carmel.'

"Since we learn to love ends because we know their beginnings, so we are strengthened in our love of the Blessed Mother by being shown the foundation stones upon which it reposes. More than that, one sees in the scapular, which is a miniature clothing, a reversal of the penalties and effects of Original Sin. Before Adam sinned, he was naked but not ashamed. That was because of the integrity of his human nature by which senses were subject to reason and reason to God. His union with God was, as it were, the clothing of his whole being. But once that union was disrupted, he was naked and ashamed. He now had need of clothing. From that day to this, human nature has used either one of two kinds of clothing, depending upon whether they emphasized the nakedness of souls or the nakedness of the body. Those who are totally disinterested in God clothe themselves with jewels and finery to compensate, whether they know it or not, for their inner spiritual poverty.

"Those who love God, and therefore have souls clothed with the raiments of His grace, need never care about the richness of the external. We see something of the symbolism of this in the clothing of a nun. When the ceremony begins she is dressed in surpassing beauty and bedecked with jewels. But once she consecrates herself to God she clothes herself in the poverty-stricken garments of her community. Being clothed with the richness of Divinity, why should she concern herself with the superficial beauty of the world?

   "There must be something of this symbolism in Mary's gift of the scapular which was originally a habit. 'The beauty of the King's daughter is from within.' Mary's gift of clothing is just a simple garment, sufficient to cover the traces of Original Sin in us, but its very simplicity is also a witness to the fact that her own beautiful mantle covers our souls. The scapular bears therefore a double witness: to Mary's protection against the ravages of the flesh occasioned by the Fall, and to Mary's influence as Mediatrix of graces, who covers our souls with the richness of her Son's Redemption.

   "Mary has been constituted by her Divine Son as the intermediary between our needs and His wants; such was the role she played at the marriage feast of Cana, when she interceded for the needy guests to the miraculous power of Her Divine Son. It is a singular fact that in answer to her request Our Lord addressed her, not as 'Mother', but as 'Woman', as if to imply that once she began interceding for the humanity whom He was to redeem when "the hour" would come, she entered into a larger relationship than merely that of being His Mother, namely, that of 'Woman', the new Mother of redeemed men.

   "On the Cross this title is conferred again when Our Lord addresses her as "Woman! Behold thy son!". She had brought forth her "first born" in the flesh at Bethlehem, now she was to bring forth her first born in the spirit at Calvary, namely John, the beloved disciple. John was the symbol of men, whose motherhood Mary purchased at the foot of the Cross in union with her Divine Son. It is not by a figure of speech, nor by a metaphor that Mary is our Mother, but rather by virtue of the pangs of childbirth. As a woman can never forget the child of her womb, so neither can Mary forget us ..."

Some few centuries after Carmel, Mary's "simple garment" was her robe and mantle themselves, when she appeared to St. Juan Diego as Our Lady of Guadalupe, in the form of a Mexican queen radiant with the emblems of the moon and stars, a foreshadow of the Immaculate Conception, and resplendent with Her Child in the sacred womb. The greatness of simplicity! The response of the simple man with purity of heart was one of obedience and haste to fulfill the command in loving filial trust after being assured that he ought not be afraid, for she told him, "I am your Mother!" And lo! The fearsome Aztec human sacrifice was defeated and routed, the empire of the devil banished to the United States a little over two hundred years later, not America, the United States, where another two hundred years would pass that the evil one might rule unchained at last, once more demanding human sacrifice, the tribute of carnage and idolatry!

Between the first two hundred years and the second, she came as a special ambassador of mercy to a world ravaged by war on the eve of a greater war and an especially perilous time for the Church, as Our Lady of Fatima, this time not with the moon and stars, but the very sun itself, when she performed the Miracle of the Sun, her last appearance of a succession of appearances brought us full circle, back to Carmel and the Scapular, her garment of grace for souls dedicated to her, her pledge for theirs. Once more she appeared with Her Divine Child, offering the Scapular. Fatima is no coincidence. The tiny locale in Portugal bears the name of the daughter of Mohammed, the founder of Islam. Muslim women have been known to have a devotion to Mary as Our Lady of Fatima, maybe not as we would hope, but certainly a sincere piety as best as they know how, given the circumstances of their lives. Fatima, for these are apocalyptic times, with wars and uprisings one upon another, the mass of humanity subjugated by error, superstition, and blasphemy of every kind. Islam rejects and impugns the dictates of the natural law. Women, by their very nature as child-bearers participate most fully in the natural law in all of its dimensions. If the Muslim people turn away from heresy and embrace the one true Faith, it will be because of Mary as Our Lady of Fatima, and ultimately, Our Lady of Carmel.

What can be said of them is pertinent for America and western societies, perhaps more so. For the West, an open society, has always known that Jesus Christ is Divine, the Son of the Father, not merely a prophet or philosopher. Most Muslims are ignorant, with little opportunity to know otherwise. Americans, for instance, have openly rejected Christ, not as Divine, but in His social reign, His Kingship and Majesty, His sovereignty over the deeds of men, corporate and singular. Even now we witness an intense, hostile campaign to have the very name of God obliterated from our public institutions as we have with the Ten Commandments, the embodiment of the natural law which is part of the Divine Law, in its most succinct form. Our situation is so much worse because of our adamant pride and reliance on self-reliance. Having thus rejected the Son, in His Reign, it is only His Mother that can make reparation and restore all things in Christ by her Immaculate love, Mary the last refuge of the wretched, the uncondign! The children of Mary's little, but mighty militia, sometimes refer to this dependence and the wonders she performs in the conversion of men, as "The Reign of Mary".

Where to begin? Where she began the undertaking ordained for this age, at Carmel the Feast of which is July 16, 1251, in the first days, with the Brown Scapular and the Rosary, and which she continued at Fatima
---- the Scapular and the Rosary, in the last days. We start within our families and parishes, for there, this united devotion is lacking so often. How many Catholics no longer are invested with the Brown Scapular, and so few taught the Rosary! Where are the priests to promulgate it from the pulpits? So few, too few ... We begin the beginning with first teaching our parish priests, by speaking of the Brown Scapular, the Rosary, asking for our children and grandchildren to be enrolled in the Scapular when they make their first Holy Communion. If we are not enrolled ourselves, we remedy this as soon as possible. The Brown Scapular is not only a bulwark against Satan, it is a shield against vanity and impurity; the wearing of the Scapular at the very least will bring back modest fashions by its very nature, uniting us still more with the simplicity and humility of Our Lady.

We cannot control what our neighbor does, our US Senator does, or the President does, but we can and must subject ourselves to the service of Mary, as our last hope. If we change ourselves, return completely to the shelter of her Maternal Heart, she will not leave us abandoned, we only have to be faithful and trust. Look at what Christ did with twelve Apostles who went out into the world fortified with penance, petition, and the promises of Christ!

Our Lord told Sister Lucy, the oldest of the three Fatima seers, that he wanted devotion to Her Immaculate Heart spread, to be united with devotion to His Sacred Heart.

Rejoice, O Virgin Mary, for alone thou hast put and end to all heresies . . .

Tract from the Common of the Blessed Virgin Mary

The Church has always accorded Our Lady this title as She Who Destroys All Heresies, from the very beginning since we know from the account of the fall of our first parents, that Satan would be punished anew for his having deceived them: that he would wait for Our Lady's heel to crush him and his seed: among those seeds are the lies of heresy as he is the Father of Lies. The first act of disobedience was in the fore-heaven by Lucifer and his rebel Angels. The first heretical act was in the Garden of Paradise: that man had the right to choose for himself what is good and what is evil, not Almighty God.

Our Lady has always been instrumental in crushing heresy as the lives of the sainted Pontiffs and the Saints attest. No Saint, Pope or otherwise ever succeeded in stamping out or crushing a heresy in his time without having a special devotion to the Mother of God.

But it is to these last times, the time of the Apostasy that her role as the destroyer of heresy is most acute. Our Lady of Fatima's Third Secret, which was supposed to be revealed by 1960 if Sister Lucy was still living [if deceased, sooner], by the Pope, was set aside at that time and the Mother of God shunned. The greatest prophet of our century dismissed! The subsequent publication of the so-called 'Secret of Fatima' by the current Vatican curia is hardly what we can safely and surely surmise from the context of the preceding line just before the actual Secret, dictated to Sister Lucy years after the last apparition in 1917: "In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved etc." The "etc." written down by Sister Lucy herself, clearly indicates that Our Lady said more.

Every Fatima scholar of sound reputation agrees that Our Lady went on to say that in other parts of the world, the dogma of the Faith will be attacked and not preserved as it should, it may even be lost altogether. We must not allow ourselves to be victims of this creeping apostasy all around us. We must save our souls and save our dogmatic truths.

"In Portugal the dogma of the faith will be preserved." In other words, we know that heresy is the key, otherwise Our Lady would not have said such an amazing thing to Sr. Lucy. The year of 1960 is also key for by then the world had some idea of the great Apostasy even then in evidence. Our Blessed Mother told the children of Fatima that if people did not follow the "Peace Plan from Heaven" [the Rosary and reparation] Russia would rise and spread her errors throughout the world and that "various nations would be annihilated."  The errors of Russia are all heresy and can be summed up: [1] there is no God, and [2] Salvation is from the state which has the absolute right over life and death, including preborn children.

Our Lady said that unless the Holy Father consecrated Russia [not the world or any other specific nation as a substitute] to her Immaculate Heart that Russia's "errors" would take over the mentality of world, and it has. We are all socialists now, except for a very few; we think that the nation-state is the font of all solutions; we prefer the false security of the nanny-state and are willing to tax ourselves beyond the point of usury itself, to maintain it. Russia and its errors are a state of mind, not just a place. Most Americans think that the "Cold War" is over, conservative and liberal alike. In a way it is over, for Russia has won, we did not defeat its errors, they did not disappear with the fall of the wall in Berlin and the "opening up of Russia" and her satellite "republics". Instead the people have been deceived and accepted the slavery of materialistic-humanism, atheistic in practicality if not by law. If Russia was truly converted, would we not see instead of a continued rise of abortion, drunkenness, contraception and sins of every kind, persecution of the Catholic Church, the diminution of the same? Russia and communism, its evil system wherever it is is spreading over the whole world, it is a state of mind, a corruption of the heart and soul, a detachment from the natural law and all saving truth. This system is changing America a step at a time, filling us with the errors that will lead us astray and our own destruction.

The first Eve was formed from the side of Adam's rib, meaning she was of the same substance, because it is the rib portion of the body that contains the heart, from which flows the blood of life. She was formed from Adam's heart out of the love of Almighty God, for the purpose of love itself. The second Eve, Mary was mystically formed from out of the Heart of Jesus, her Immaculate Heart as one with His. To Jesus through Mary. To Jesus with Mary.


This, then is our immediate and continual task:

To reconsecrate ourselves to Mary's Immaculate Heart, to make the Five First Saturdays of Reparation as Our Lady requested, to encourage renewed devotion to the Brown Scapular and the Holy Rosary. To pray and work for the Consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart, the Pontiff with all the bishops on the same day. To make sacrifices for the conversion of sinners, and our own country, all the while educating ourselves and our fellow citizens on an ad hoc basis, each according to our circumstances, about the natural law. At the heart of the abortion crime which is robbing America of much needed grace and the light of reason is the broken heart of allowing ourselves to be unmoored from the natural law, one of the gifts of love from Almighty God. Until enough people are converted in their hearts, that legality does not confer legitimacy in such a case, and that remaining silent or accepting the status quo are not options, then will abortion be vanquished from its national endorsement and support and our ignominy and the malaise of will that is inherent in this shame. On that day and only on that day will there be any chance for our country. All that we are enduring and are about to endure, is permitted by God as our punishment; likewise the continual crisis of faith, the diminution of our former vibrancy, the witness of Holy Mother Church to the love of God in truth will remain muted, our chastisement from God for our own infidelity. Only the Mother of God, extending Her Divine Son with the Scapular outstretched to a world on the brink of ruin can defeat the sin and malice that ails us, slay the demon of abortion, which strikes at the very root of charity and justice, restoring the intimate bond of mother and the child in the womb!

Let us renounce our reluctance for the battle ahead, ask Mary for the grace of humility to rely on Her Maternal Heart to acquire the courage to be Martyrs to witness to the truth in love, as an act of charity and justice ...

1. For example, light bulbs containing mercury were produced in Kentucky. Because mercury is poisonous and harmful to the environment, the plants in Kentucky were closed; the need for light bulbs, still existing, the Red Chinese are supplying the light bulbs, filled with mercury, and with the cost of transportation across the sea, including oil, no help to "the planet" at all; Americans lost their livelihood to prevent the very mercury we are now importing. This is insanity, multiply this one incidence a thousandfold, and you will begin to comprehend where it is we are headed, the blind leading the blind to nowhere but desperation.