31 March 2019

Eucharistic Miracle in Portugal

A short note and a video about the Eucharistic miracle of Santarem.

From The Eponymous Flower

From Bill Fall by way of Catholicism.org: When I was in Portugal in 2017 our group visited the church of St. Stephen in Santarem (derived from the name Saint Irene) where a more than  600-year-old bleeding Host is reserved above the high alter.  Lucia of Fatima attended Mass here when staying for several days with a benefactor, while awaiting word when she could see her bishop before being sent away for  schooling under the Dorothean nuns.  Our group of pilgrims from the U.S. also had the great privilege of being able, one at a time, to climb a little ladder behind the altar to view the precious Host up close, if only for a few seconds each because of the long line queued up to do the same.

A Bit of Thomist Humour

From the cartoonist, Ed Willock (co-founder of the lay Catholic magazine, "Integrity" in 1946).

Order of Malta Pushing Gay Heroes in Comics

Another venerable Catholic institution bites the dust, thanks to Francis!

From The Eponymous Flower

After the coup, the Order of Malta is rebuilt into a humanitarian NGO, pays homage to political correctness and, just before the 1,000 year anniversary of its founding, heads into an identity crisis.

(Rome) In the Sovereign Order of Malta in early 2017, a coup against the reigning Grand Master and Prince took place. Pope Francis was not its author, but its executor. The knights, who since then have exercised their power in the Order with papal backing, have issued a new order: it is no longer for the defense of Christianity, if necessary with the sword, or with the hospice. This is what the Order has done so far. Shortly before the completion of its millennial existence, a new order was issued. It reads: Political correctness on the way to becoming a humanitarian NGO - and a serious identity crisis.

"There was a time, about three years ago, when the Order of Malta still proved to be scandalized by the news that the Order was involved in international humanitarian projects in Myanmar, Kenya and South Sudan where contraceptives are distributed although this is in open contradiction to the social doctrine of the Church. "

Mauro Faverzani (Corrispondenza Romana), from whom these lines originate, places them in opposition to the current religious situation. In 2016, the leadership was still in a state of outrage, but it did not end well. The then Grand Master, the Briton Fra Matthew Festing, who resisted the creeping reorientation of the Order, was deposed by Pope Francis. Faverzani puts it a bit more precise and painful for the Church: the Grand Master was "put on one leg".

Those responsible for the new course, especially the Grand Chancellor of the Order, the German Baron Albrecht von Boeselager, remained in the saddle thanks to their good contacts with the Vatican Secretariat of State and with Pope Francis. For a year now, the Order has again a Grand Master and Prince. The shift in power towards the Chancellor and the "German group" in the Order did not change that.

The new agenda: migration

The new slogans with which the Order is making public today are: migration, multiculturalism and multi-religiosity. Slogans that are popular in the current Vatican. So it is not surprising that Chancellor Boeselager praised UNO's controversial Global Compact for Migration as "an excellent instrument for managing the phenomenon of migration". The Holy See had sent none other than Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Parolin to Marrakech to offer the papal blessing to the program of  new migration.

The "new" Order of Malta fulfills its agenda with German thoroughness and is also involved in the attacks against the Italian government, in which the Lega of Interior Minister Matteo Salvini sets new accents against uncontrolled mass immigration. Salvini announced last Sunday after the seventh election victory of his party within a year in a row: "And now we bring back Europe". Francis, on the other hand, sympathizes with the other side, who are involved in the project of the Eurocrats, which is also reflected in the Order of Malta

“Serious problems implied in the UN text, especially the threat to the freedom of the press and expression, have already become visible. Criticizing immigration will be banned in the EU and prosecuted by law. And with hard penalties. The Global Compact itself, " says Faverzani. "But the Maltese Knights either do not seem to know that, or they do not care, because they so enthusiastically and unconditionally agree with the project."

The new ways and the answer of Benedict XVI.

Grand Chancellor Boeselager announced another mega-front in which the oldest Catholic Order of Knights intends to play an active role: multi-religiosity and religious pluralism. In order to follow the words, deeds immediately follow, the Order will hold a conference in Rome "with representatives of different religions". Of course, she will also deal with the Order's humanitarian mission. The danger is obvious: Even in the course of the conflict between Grandmaster Festing and Grand Chancellor Boeselager had been warned that the "German group" wants to rebuild the Order into one of many, identityless humanitarian NGOs, which is little more than a compliant arm of left-liberal UN would be.

Benedict XVI. writes in his encyclical Deus Caritas Est of December 2005:

"The increasing number of organizations striving for man in his various needs is ultimately explained by the fact that the imperative of charity is inscribed by the Creator in the nature of man himself. But it is also a result of the presence of Christianity in the world, which repeatedly awakens and brings to life this often deeply darkened imperative. [...] It is all the more important that ecclesiastical action of love retains its full luminosity and does not simply merge as a variant of the general welfare system.”

And further:

"Inner awareness of the Catholic dimension of the Church will inevitably increase the willingness of the co-worker to coordinate with other organizations in service of the various forms of neediness; but this must be done in the light of the specific profile of the ministry that Christ expects of its disciples. [...] The practical action remains too little, if it does not feel the love of man himself, which nourishes the encounter with Christ. "

Politically correct to Aberophilia?

Even aberrophily has arrived at the time-honored order of knights. It does not appear on the official website of the order's administration, but on that of the Grand Priory of Rome. A press review featured an article in the daily La Repubblica, which Pope Francis said was the only newspaper he regularly reads. The article reports on a Roman comics festival on women's rights and "gender issues" of all sexual "affections" by creating "new images of contemporary heroines, lesbian love stories and women's friendship".

The learned philosopher and psychologist Mauro Faverzani adds:

"This is supplemented by the expressions of an unqualified and total agreement with the statements of Pope Francis, with particular attention to the topics of particular importance to him. They are the expression of a rediscovered idyll after the storms that took place a few years ago and led to a 'revision' of the Sovereign Knights and Hospitaller Order of St. John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and Malta, as its official name once implied.
The Order is certainly very obedient. But is he still really sovereign? "

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Corrispondenza Romana
Trans: Tancred vemron99@hotmail.com

Woman Compares Young Traditional Priest to ISIS and Taliban in Vicious Letter

The visceral hatred modernists have for the Faith is mind boggling!

From LifeSiteNews

By Joseph Shaw

March 26, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – A curious letter is doing the rounds on social media. It is from a parishioner of a Catholic church in Tasmania, Australia, in the small diocese of Hobart, addressed to the young, recently arrived parish priest. Maureen—for that is her name—notes that people have spat at Fr. Nicholas Rynne, and been unwelcoming to him. Far from condemning this behavior, however, she endorses it. Her criticisms are that he has started a Traditional Latin Sunday Mass in the parish, in addition to the two Ordinary Form celebrations, and that he wears clerical dress (read full letter below). 
It is not that she is obliged to attend this newly established Mass, or that clerical dress harms her in some direct way—how could it?. Rather, they represent the old days, the old beliefs and practices of the Church, and these fill her with rage. She claims to remember these, which suggests she is of the older generation.
It is possible that Maureen suffered personally from priests of the pre-1965 era (when Mass was still always in Latin): she mentions clerical sex abuse as an issue, although it is evident that translating Mass into the vernacular was not enough to solve that problem. In any case, bad experiences from that era can hardly be blamed on a priest who must be young enough to be her son, if not her grandson. And she can hardly imagine this young man is singlehandedly going to bring back the schools, convents, orphanages and other institutions of the distant past, simply by wearing a clerical collar. No, her reaction is irrational. By the same token, it is doubtless sincere. 
This is not the most common reaction of lay Catholics to zealous young priests, but it is a well-established phenomenon. One young priest in England was told by a parishioner, shortly after his arrival, that seeing him wear a traditional-style chasuble to say Mass made her feel ‘physically sick’. I heard of a resident of a Catholic old-folks’ home in California who was enraged by the saying of the Rosary. All over the world, older parishioners, older members of religious communities, and older diocesan clergy, have slowed or thwarted attempts to restore old devotional practices, the fabric of churches, and the celebration of the older form of Mass. Their objections can be summarized by that of one old lady in Oxford, who asked her priest, after he made some changes: ‘You aren’t going to bring all that back, are you, Father?’
Like Maureen in Tasmania, it is not so much the old Mass, or the altar rails, or the clerical collar, which is the problem, it is ‘all that’ which is somehow implied by those things. To rational and dispassionate observers of this conversation, one could make a distinction between the baby and the bathwater, which got thrown out together in the 1960’s and 1970’s. One could point out that if everything was darkness and suffering up to 1965, few at the time appeared to notice: it was a time when people joined the Church, whereas the period immediately after saw waves of laity lapsing from the practice of the Faith, and waves of priests seeking laicization.
It is difficult to imagine these observations making any impression on Maureen and her kind. Why the bitterness? Why the anger? 
In some cases, the revolution in the Church represents to these aging liberals a release from moral restraints. It means that they can find priests who will bless their second unions after divorce, or their children’s same-sex unions. It means that they can say to liberal non-Catholic friends that ‘all that’ about contraception has gone from the Church, at least at the local level. It means that they can fit into the wider culture with less friction.
But above all, Maureen represents that section of people in the Church who neither resisted the madness of the 1970’s, which wildly exceeded anything which could claim endorsement by the Second Vatican Council, nor left the Church in despair. For this small but vocal and active group, this was their moment to exercise power. It was mostly destructive: altars, stained glass, Catholic hospitals, all had to be obliterated. But they could justify it to themselves as a work done for God. Only when ‘all that’ is cleared away, they said, could the Church really flourish. The moment was just around the corner. It was held back only by the remaining ‘bastions’ of the Church: institutions, traditional practices, traditional attitudes. They would be thanked when the sun finally dawned. 
The non-appearance of this post-revolutionary paradise could always be blamed on others: the saboteurs. But what if opinion starts to turn, and a new generation wants to try another tack and put the program into reverse? Could they have been mistaken, after all? That is a possibility too dreadful to contemplate. They must insist that these young conservatives are misguided, evil, or even mentally ill. 
A retired bishop has been asked to investigate the parish in Tasmania. Let us hope that he recognizes that Maureen can’t be allowed to have a veto over the future development of the Church. As she might have said fifty years ago: the young must be allowed to try a new approach.

The NY State Assembly Must Reject Attack on Clergy-Penitent Privilege

DEFEND the FAITH by signing this Petition to STOP this Bill, which seeks to break the Seal of Confession. ***NOTE WELL: Catholics both in and outside of NY are asked to sign!!!***

The Petition

The Standing Committee on Children and Families of the New York State Assembly must reject bill A06662, which proposes to abrogate the Clergy-Penitent Privilege. 
The Catholic Faithful of New York, as well as Catholics from other jurisdictions, are strongly and unequivocally opposed to Bill A06662. It is a direct breach of the Seal of Confession. It would also place our good Catholic priests into ecclesiastical, ethical, and legal jeopardy. 
The Clergy-Penitent privilege is one of the oldest and most well-recognized privileges in the United States. In the Catholic Church, this privilege is even more deeply rooted as a tenet of the Faith. In 1215, The Seal of the Confessional was set forth in Canon 21 of the Fourth Council of the Lateran. Likewise, Canon 6 of The Council of Trent binds "If any one...saith, that the manner of confessing secretly to a priest alone, which the Church hath ever observed from the beginning, and doth observe, is alien from the institution and command of Christ, and is a human invention; let him be anathema." Additionally, St. Thomas Aquinas devoted an entire section of the Summa Theologiae to the Seal of Confession. 
Similarly, the Clergy-Penitent Privilege has a long history in New York case law and statute. A New York court decided the first known case in America recognizing the privilege in the case of People v. Philips, N.Y. Ct. Gen. Sess. 1813 (unpublished). In Phillips, the New York court held that free exercise of religion provisions would not force a Catholic priest to testify as to a confession made to him regarding a theft. The court stated that to do so would infringe upon the priest’s right to freely practice his religion. Fifteen years later, in 1828, New York enacted the first Clergy-Penitent privilege statute, which provided the privilege to priests, ministers, and similar religious denominations. The Clergy-Penitent privilege has also been acknowledged by The United States Supreme Court in Trammel v. United States, 445 U.S. 40,51 (1980). In Trammel, the Court held that the purpose of the privilege is the recognition of “the human need to disclose to a spiritual counselor, in total and absolute confidence, what are believed to be flawed acts or thoughts and to receive priestly consolation and guidance in return.”
Today, this essential privilege has come under attack. Assemblywoman Monica Wallace has introduced Bill A06662, “to amend the civil practice law and rules and the social services law, in relation to the ‘child abuse reporting expansion (CARE) act’”. 
This proposed legislation must be rejected for several reasons: 1. There would be a deterrent effect on Confessions; 2. The bill is a violation of the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses of the Constitution; 3. Enacting the bill would create a slippery slope, resulting in the total erosion of the clergy-penitent privilege; and 4. Since Catholic priests are forbidden to break the Seal of Confession under penalty of Excommunication, faithful priests would choose incarceration to protect the clergy-penitent privilege. This would render the bill completely ineffective, and would needlessly cause irreparable harm to the Catholic Faithful of New York. 
Wherefore, the undersigned demand that the Standing Committee on Children and Families reject Bill A06662 in its entirety. 

Nancy Pelosi: Pro-Lifers are “Dumb” For Believing Life Begins at Conception

Does this brain dead hag have anything between her ears, other than air?

From LifeNews

Never mind that science has confirmed for some time that human life begins at conception and the union of sperm and egg creates a unique human being with a DNA code that matches no one else ever conceived.
Nancy Pelosi believes pro-life advocates who think human life starts at conception are just “dumb.”
At Planned Parenthood’s annual gala last night, attendees and your PULSEr stopped laughing at comedian and emcee Tig Notaro just long enough to watch Nancy Pelosi receive the Margaret Sanger award for her work defending abortion rights. In her acceptance speech, Pelosi slammed abortion opponents, especially criticized the “personhood” laws some of them are pushing and said the struggle for reproductive rights will continue whatever SCOTUS decides on the contraception mandate.
–“When you see how closed their minds are or oblivious or whatever it is — dumb — then you know what the fight is about,” Pelosi said. “Whatever happens with the court…we must remember these battles will not be the end of the fight,” she added. Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg was also awarded.
Here’s how Marjorie Dannenfelser of the Susan B. Anthony List reacted, in an email to LifeNews:
Last night, Nancy Pelosi accepted Planned Parenthood’s highest honor – the Margaret Sanger Award – at their annual gala. Now, that’s enough to make most people’s blood boil.
Sanger – the founder of Planned Parenthood – was a racist eugenicist who called African Americans, immigrants and the poor “human weeds,” “reckless breeders,” “spawning… human beings who never should have been born.”
But wait until you read this – Politico is reporting that, in accepting the award, Pelosi called pro-lifers “dumb,” “closed-minded,” and “oblivious.” I don’t know how you feel right now after reading this, but frankly, I think pro-lifers should take these insults as a badge of honor.
Pelosi knows that abortion on-demand is absolutely indefensible, so she’s resorted to elementary school name-calling.
How is it “dumb” that we accept the scientific fact that life begins at conception?
And how is it “close-minded” that we want to protect women when study after study shows just how much abortion hurts women?
The truth is, I think we got under Nancy Pelosi’s skin yesterday.
You see, pro-lifers across the country participated in a TweetFest social media campaign to educate Nancy Pelosi about Margaret Sanger’s hateful legacy.
She was a well known eugenicist who thought birth control and abortion were the best way to “create a race of thoroughbreds.” Sanger believed in forced sterilization of “the feeble minded,” and said that “the most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
We presented Nancy Pelosi with facts about Margaret Sanger, and instead of attempting to defend the indefensible, she resorted to name calling instead.

Francis: Christian and Muslims Believe in the Same God

More heresy! Just don't ever tell a Muslim that Our 'Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father', is the same God as Allah!

From Gloria.tv

On the eve of his visit to Morocco (March 30-31), Pope Francis said in a video message on VaticanNews.va that “as Christians and Muslims we believe in God, the Creator and Merciful”.

He added that this God created men and women so that they might live as brothers and sisters, “respecting each other’s diversity and helping each other in their needs.”

This message repeats Francis heretical Abu Dhabi declaration according to which the diversity of religions that contradict each other and religions which deny the Trinity and Incarnation are willed by God.

Mothering Sunday

Today is Laetare Sunday, the Fourth Sunday of Lent. In Britain and Ireland, it is known as Mothering Sunday. Originally, it was a day to visit your 'Mother Church', the Church of your baptism, or the Cathedral, the 'Mother Church' of the Diocese. It has become a day on which to honour mothers, similar to Mothers Day in the US.

For those of us whose mothers have passed, it is a day to honour them by praying for their souls.
O God, who hast commanded us to honour our father and our mother; in Thy mercy have pity on the soul of my mother, and forgive her her trespasses; and make me to see her again in the joy of everlasting brightness. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.


Laetare Sunday is also known as "Mothering Sunday" because of the Epistle reading that speaks of how not the Jews, but those who come to Christ, regardless of their ancestry, are the inheritors of Abraham's promise:
Galatians 4:22-31
For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, and the other by a free woman. But he who was of the bondwoman, was born according to the flesh: but he of the free woman, was by promise. Which things are said by an allegory. For these are the two testaments. The one from mount Sina, engendering unto bondage; which is Agar: For Sina is a mountain in Arabia, which hath affinity to that Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But that Jerusalem, which is above, is free: which is our mother. For it is written: Rejoice, thou barren, that bearest not: break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for many are the children of the desolate, more than of her that hath a husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he, that was born according to the flesh, persecuted him that was after the spirit; so also it is now. But what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son; for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the free woman. So then, brethren, we are not the children of the bondwoman, but of the free: by the freedom wherewith Christ has made us free.
The old practice of visiting the cathedral, or "mother church" of the diocese on this day is another reason for the name. In England, natural mothers are honoured today, too, in a manner rather like the American "Mother's Day." Spring bulb flowers (daffodils, for ex.) are given to mothers, and simnel cake is made to celebrate the occasion (this cake has also become an Easter Cake of late, however). The word "simnel" comes from the Latin "simila," a high grade flour:
Simnel Cake

1 cup margarine, softened
1 cup light brown sugar
4 eggs
1 3/4 cups self-rising flour
1 1/3 cups golden raisins
1 cup dried currants
2/3 cup candied cherries, rinsed, dried and quartered
1/4 cup candied mixed fruit peel, chopped
2 tablespoons grated lemon zest
2 teaspoons mixed spice
1 pound almond paste
2 tablespoons apricot jam
1 egg, beaten

Preheat oven to 300 degrees F. Grease and flour an 8 inch spring form pan. Line the bottom and sides of pan with greased parchment paper. In a large bowl, cream together the margarine and brown sugar until light and fluffy. Beat in the eggs one at a time. Beat in the flour. Stir in the golden raisins, currants, candied cherries, mixed fruit, lemon zest and mixed spice. Pour 1/2 of batter into prepared pan.

Divide almond paste into 3 equal portions. Roll out 1/3 of the almond paste to an 8 inch circle. Place the circle of almond paste on the cake batter in pan. Cover with remaining cake batter. Bake in the preheated oven for 2 1/2 hours, or until evenly brown and firm to the touch. If the cake is browning too quickly, cover with foil after an hour of baking. Let cool in pan for 10 minutes, then turn out onto a wire rack and cool completely. Set oven to broil. When the cake has cooled, brush the top with warmed apricot jam. Roll out 1/3 of the almond paste into an 8 inch circle and place on top of cake.

Divide the remaining 1/3 of almond paste into 11 pieces and roll into balls. These represent the 12 Apostles minus Judas. Brush the almond paste on top of cake with beaten egg. Arrange the 11 balls around the outside edge on the top of cake. Brush the balls lightly with egg. Place cake under the broiler for 8 to 10 minutes, or until almond paste is golden brown.

The Golden Rose

The rose vestments on Laetare Sunday are a custom originating in the fact that, as a symbol of joy and hope in the middle of this sombre Season, popes used to carry a golden rose in their right hand when returning from the celebration of Mass on this day (way back in 1051, Pope Leo IX called this custom an "ancient institution.")

Originally it was natural rose, then a single golden rose of natural size, but since the fifteenth century it has consisted of a cluster or branch of roses wrought of pure gold in brilliant workmanship by famous artists. The popes bless at least one every year, and often confer it upon churches, shrines, cities, or distinguished persons as a token of esteem and paternal affection. (The Golden Rose at right was given to the Shrine at Knock, Ireland)

The golden rose represents Christ in the shining splendor of His majesty, the "flower sprung from the root of Jesse," and it is blessed with these words:

O God! by Whose word and power all things have been created, by Whose will all things are directed, we humbly beseech Thy Majesty, Who art the joy and gladness of all the faithful, that Thou wouldst deign in Thy fatherly love to bless and sanctify this rose, most delightful in odor and appearance, which we this day carry in sign of spiritual joy, in order that the people consecrated by Thee and delivered from the yoke of Babylonian slavery through the favor of Thine only-begotten Son, Who is the glory and exultation of the people of Israel and of that Jerusalem which is our Heavenly mother, may with sincere hearts show forth their joy. Wherefore, O Lord, on this day, when the Church exults in Thy name and manifests her joy by this sign, confer upon us through her true and perfect joy and accepting her devotion of today; do Thou remit sin, strengthen faith, increase piety, protect her in Thy mercy, drive away all things adverse to her and make her ways safe and prosperous, so that Thy Church, as the fruit of good works, may unite in giving forth the perfume of the ointment of that flower sprung from the root of Jesse and which is the mystical flower of the field and lily of the valleys, and remain happy without end in eternal glory together with all the saints.
After the rose is blessed, the Pope incenses musk and balsam and then places them inside the cup of the largest rose. Then the entire rose is incensed and sprinkled with holy water.

Note: you can remember to differentiate between Advent's Gaudete Sunday and Lent's Laetare Sunday -- the two "rose vestment" Sundays -- by remembering that Laetare Sunday comes in Lent, both of which begin with the letter "L."

Defend the Faith at Immaculate Conception!

It seems that the Diocese of Nashville has its own Jimmy Martin. Please sign the petition in support of the Faith.


Father Steve Wolf, Pastor at Immaculate Conception Catholic Church in Clarksville, TN, is encouraging, promoting, and preaching views that are inconsistent with the teachings of the Church, especially regarding human sexuality and the family.  Father Wolf advocates that any action - including but not limited to homosexual unions - is not sinful if the person doing it doesn't believe it is a sin, and they are therefore free to receive the Eucharist.  What he is teaching is not Catholic, and as a priest, he has a duty to defend and uphold the Church.
Concerned parishioners have repeatedly begged for Bishop Mark Spalding to take action and end Father Wolf's promotion of his LGBTQ ideology and moral relativism.  Bishop Spalding continues to assert that Father Wolf is an effective pastor - even though he is going against the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 2357-2358).
What We Want to Happen:
  • Remove and reassign Fr. Steve Wolf to a penitential post, where he can prayerfully work on aligning his views with those of the Church.
  • Ban Fr. Wolf's book, Gay Respect in the Good News, from all Catholic parishes and bookstores in the diocese, and release a statement that it is spiritually misleading.
  • Issue a letter from Bishop Spalding, to be read at every Mass in every parish in the Diocese, publicly acknowledging that Fr. Wolf has taught error, and affirm the Diocese's commitment to the views of the Catholic Church.
Until these steps are taken, we who sign this petition withdraw our monetary support from the parish and the Diocese of Nashville. 
Bishop Spalding - take action to defend the Church! 
More Information on Father Wolf and his views:

John Medaille on Distributism & Economics

Links of the show found here https://athanasiuscm.org/2015/06/23/i... John Medaille, a retired professor from the University of Dallas and the author of The Vocation of Business, and Toward a Truly Free Market, as well as many other writings in periodicals from Res Publica to the Remnant. We talk about Distributism and the economic issues facing Distributist economic theory, government, labor and many other issues which delve deeper into Distributism than the normal reflections on Chesterton. NB: Views and opinions elsewhere expressed on this website are not necessarily shared by John Medaille or the University of Dallas. NB#2: Please forgive my Distributist chickens which you can hear in the background towards the beginning. They are no doubt looking for mic time.:) The Vocation of Business Towards a Truly Free Market John Medaille on the Distributist Review John Medaille on the Remnant

Word of the Day: Abbacy of St Jerome

ABBACY OF ST. JEROME. Founded by Pope Pius XI in 1933, to replace the pontifical commission created by St. Pius X in 1914 for the revision of the Vulgate. Its scope is to restore, as far as possible, the primitive Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible confirmed by the Council of Trent, to prepare editions for publication, and to engage in other pertinent studies. The abbacy belongs to the Benedictine Congregation of France, and the work on the Vulgate is under the direction of the Holy See.

Continuing a Legacy of Dissent

Thomas Storck refutes a heretic of the Austrian School of Papally condemned, laissez-faire, finance capitalism.


By Thomas Storck

One of the Acton Institute's publicists, one Kishore Jayabalan, has given us distributists a kind of left-handed compliment recently - that is, he mentioned us, he recognized that distributists do exist! With regards to what he said about us, his article was simply misinformation, but that, unfortunately, is par for the course with Acton. But what exactly did he say? Mr. Jayabalan was engaged in continuing Acton's long-time project of misrepresenting John Paul II's 1991 encyclical, Centesimus Annus. He wrote,

Another distinctive aspect of JP II's social teaching is his insistence that the "Church has no models to present" (CA, n. 43); there is no Catholic "third way" between capitalism and socialism. This is a hard teaching for distributists and others who think there once existed a special form of Catholic economy or polity (aka Christendom) that the Church should still officially support.

There is a lot to unpack here, because there is a lot of misinformation in that short paragraph. Maybe I should begin by admitting that yes, indeed, I am one of those who thinks that "there once existed a special form of Catholic economy or polity (aka Christendom)". Indeed, I thought that it was pretty much acknowledged that there really was such a thing as the Middle Ages, and that it did have both a polity and an economy unlike those of today. As far as whether "the Church should still officially support" that economy, it is not difficult to find explicit papal statements regretting the passing of that "special form of Catholic economy or polity." Here is one from Pius XI's great encyclical Quadragesimo Anno.

At one period there existed a social order which, though by no means perfect in every respect, corresponded nevertheless in a certain measure to right reason according to the needs and conditions of the times. That this order has long since perished is not due to the fact that it was incapable of development and adaptation to changing needs and circumstances, but rather to the wrong-doing of men. Men were hardened in excessive self-love and refused to extend that order, as was their duty, to the increasing numbers of the people; or else, deceived by the attractions of false liberty and other errors, they grew impatient of every restraint and endeavored to throw off all authority. (no. 97)

But let us return to Mr. Jayabalan and continue with our unpacking. "Another distinctive aspect of JP II's social teaching is his insistence that the `Church has no models to present' (CA, n. 43); there is no Catholic `third way' between capitalism and socialism." There are two elements to this claim: 1. that the Church has no models to present, and 2. that this somehow means "there is no Catholic `third way' between capitalism and socialism."

As regards the first claim, what does the actual text of Centesimus Annus say in no. 43?

The Church has no models to present; models that are real and truly effective can only arise within the framework of different historical situations, through the efforts of all those who responsibly confront concrete problems in all their social, economic, political and cultural aspects, as these interact with one another.

It can be seen that John Paul is not denying the possibility of new economic models, rather he is contrasting models that are handed down by the Church ready-made, and those that arise out of actual concrete situations. This is indeed the way that the "special form of Catholic economy or polity (aka Christendom)" arose. Neither the rural feudal system nor the urban craft guilds came about because Alcuin or St. Anselm or St. Thomas Aquinas or anyone else assembled a committee of theologians and drafted a plan for the regulation of economic life. No, they, along with the other aspects of that "social order which ... corresponded ... in a certain measure to right reason according to the needs and conditions of the times" came about in response to the needs and possibilities of time and place, in accordance with the profound human and Christian sensibilities of medieval man. Indeed, it was the capitalist model of the 18th century that arose in a top-down manner, in response to the writings of Enlightenment intellectuals, and was gradually imposed by state power, regardless of the needs of the time, and regardless of the immense damage which it did to the fabric of European society.

Thus the first claim of Mr. Jayabalan turns out to be false. Let us look though at the corollary he tries to extract from his first claim, namely, that "there is no Catholic `third way' between capitalism and socialism." One important preliminary point here is that Mr. Jayabalan does not say what he means by capitalism. So if important reforms were instituted in the American economy, would that, could that, be something like a "Catholic `third way'"? Would Mr. Jayabalan deny that it would be possible to adopt, say, the German social market model, a model which would bring about a significant alteration in the way our economy operates. Could one call this a "third way"? Or would he deny that it is possible for a polity to promote, via legislation, worker-owned firms, or to favor small businesses at the expense of larger ones? If these latter two proposals were put into effect, we would be well on our way toward a distributist economy. And surely, if confronted with the abundant evidence in papal social teaching, Mr. Jayabalan would be forced to admit that the popes in their social teaching, from Leo XIII to Francis, have called for many of those very reforms. "The law, therefore, should favor ownership, and its policy should be to induce as many people as possible to become owners," wrote Leo XIII in Rerum Novarum, (no. 46), while Pius XI, again in Quadragesimo Anno, stated that "In the present state of human society, however, We deem it advisable that the wage contract should ... be modified somewhat by a contract of partnership" (no. 65). Perhaps Mr. Jayabalan would deny that were these and all the other mandates and suggestions contained in the body of papal social teaching actually implemented that this would constitute a "Catholic 'third way' between capitalism and socialism." So be it. If something like a distributist economy were established, I would not object too much if Mr. Jayabalan insisted that it was still capitalist. Names are not usually worth fighting about, and the important thing is that in the corpus of the Church's social doctrine there is sketched an approach to economic policy that varies significantly from our present capitalist system, especially as that exists in the United States. If Mr. Jayabalan wants to deny that, he will find that in the text of Centesimus itself this is clear. John Paul wrote, with regard to the collapse of Communism, "The Western countries...run the risk of seeing this collapse as a one-sided victory of their own economic system, and thereby failing to make necessary corrections in that system" (no. 56).
The Acton Institute and its numerous well-funded allies have for years promoted the untruth that John Paul II's encyclical Centesimus Annus oriented Catholic social doctrine away from its historic distrust of free-market economics. I have dealt with that claim more than once. (See here and here and here.) Benedict XVI went out of his way to clear up this point in his own social encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, saying that,

It is not a case of two typologies of social doctrine, one pre-conciliar and one post-conciliar, differing from one another: on the contrary, there is a single teaching, consistent and at the same time ever new. It is one thing to draw attention to the particular characteristics of one Encyclical or another, of the teaching of one Pope or another, but quite another to lose sight of the coherence of the overall doctrinal corpus. (no. 12)

But those Catholics who want to subvert the Church's teaching on the socio-economic order continue with their work of dissent. They take advantage of the ignorance of most Catholics as to what the popes have actually written since Rerum Novarum was issued in 1891. The most appropriate response to make is simply to quote what Pius XI wrote in his first encyclical, Ubi Arcano (1922), concerning those who do not conform their thinking and writing to the Church's social teachings: "In all this we recognize a kind of moral, judicial, and social Modernism, and We condemn it as strongly as We do dogmatic Modernism" (no. 61).

Consoling thoughts from Father Faber

‘Father! Forgive them, for they know not what they do!’ Beautiful, unending prayer, true of all sins and of all sinners in every time! They know not what they do. No one knows what he does when he sins. It is his very knowledge that the malice of sin is past his comprehension which is a great part of the malice of his sin. Beautiful prayer also, because it discloses the characteristic devotion of our dearest Lord.

31 March, Antonio, Cardinal Bacci: Meditations for Every Day

Entertainment and Sport
1. It is wrong to imagine that Christianity is a sad and gloomy religion. Quite otherwise, it is the religion of joy, of the real joy, that is, which comes from God, from the serenity of a sound conscience and from the hope and sure expectation of the immeasurable happiness of heaven after the trials of this world are over. Other pleasures are passing and often leave behind disillusionment, boredom and remorse. The happiness of living a sincere Christian life does not vanish even in the midst of suffering, for it bestows an inner peace which nothing else can give. “The kingdom of God,” says St. Paul, “does not consist in food and drink, but in justice and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” (Rom. 14:17) “The fruit of the Spirit,” he says in his letter to the Galatians, “is charity, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness...” (Gal. 5:22) St. John the Apostle, writing to the faithful of his time, encourages them to be joyful with the joy which comes from Jesus Christ. “These things we write to you that you may rejoice, and our joy may be full.” (1 John 1:4) It is not contrary to Christian teaching to indulge in lawful recreation and amusement. If a bow is drawn too tight, it snaps. Our physical constitution demands that after our work we should rest. Resting does not mean idleness and inactivity, but suitable recreation and entertainment. God Himself set aside six days for working and one for repose. This day of solemn repose, however, should be dedicated in a particular way to God by the fulfilment of the obligations which the Church prescribes. But there is no question of our being forbidden to refresh ourselves mentally and physically on this day by suitable entertainment.
2. Sport and amusement are particularly necessary for youth. Young people are full of life, and their exuberance must have an outlet. It is true that there are privileged souls, such as St. Aloysius Gonzaga and St. Dominic Savio, whose natural exuberance is completely channelled into the love of God and of their neighbour. But such people are rare. Normally, young people need entertainment and sport. Sport has made tremendous progress today. Far from being evil, this is an excellent development. If these forces of vitality were not diverted into athletic activities, they would probably find an outlet in other more dangerous pursuits. However, as our late Holy Father, Pius XII, often explained in his audiences for sportsmen, it is necessary that bodily exercises should be joined with those which are spiritual. Just as the body must be trained intensively to succeed in athletic competitions, so the will must be trained by means of daily sacrifice and self-denial to achieve victory over our unruly inclinations. This victory is eventually won by the grace of God and brings a far higher happiness than athletic conquests could ever give us.
3. Unfortunately, there are forms of amusement which are not lawful, either because they are sinful in themselves or because they present a grave danger to the soul. Certain uninhibited kinds of dancing, for example, can aim at arousing the basest instincts of the human organism. There are beaches where the healthy pastime of bathing is made only an excuse for indecent and exciting exhibitions. There are parties and receptions, moreover, at which we know well that we shall be subjected to serious temptation. All such places and occasions should normally be avoided. It is the wise advice of spiritual writers that we should always aim at uniting our amusements and recreations to goodness of thought and conversation. Moreover, we should often detach our minds from our worldly entertainments and think of the realities of Heaven.


IN LUMINE FIDEI: 31 MARCH – FOURTH SUNDAY OF LENT (LAETARE SUNDAY): Dom Prosper Guéranger: This Sunday, called, from the first word of the Introit, Laetare Sunday , is one of the most solemn of the year...

31 March, A Chesterton Calendar

MARCH 31st

As Mr. Blatchford says, ‘The world does not want piety, but soap— and Socialism.’ Piety is one of the popular virtues, whereas soap and Socialism are two hobbies of the upper middle class.

‘What’s Wrong with the World.’

Chesterton, G. K.. The G. K. Chesterton Collection [50 Books] (Kindle Locations 43877-43881). Catholic Way Publishing. Kindle Edition.

1 April, The Roman Martyrology

Kaléndis Aprílis Luna vicesima sexta Anno Domini 2019

April 1st 2019, the 26th day of the Moon, were born into the better life: 

At Rome, the holy martyr Theodora, sister of the great martyr Hermes. 
She suffered by order of the judge Aurelian, under the Emperor Hadrian, and is buried beside her brother upon the Salarian Way, not far from the city. 
On the same day, the holy martyr Venantius, Bishop of Toledo. 
In Egypt, the holy martyrs Victor and Stephen. 
In Armenia, the holy martyrs Quintian and Irenaeus. 
At Constantinople, [about the year 830,] the holy Confessor Macarius, who died in exile, under the Emperor Leo, because of his defence of holy images. 
At Grenoble, holy Hew, [born 1053, died 1132,] Bishop of that see, who passed the latter part of his life, even for many years, in the wilderness, and passed away, famous for miracles, to be ever with the Lord. 
At Amiens, the holy Abbot Valery, at whose grave miracles are oftentimes wrought. [Monk of Luxeuil, and first Abbot of Leuconais, in the year 619.] 
V. And elsewhere many other holy martyrs, confessors, and holy virgins.
R. Thanks be to God.

Memes of the Day

30 March 2019

Arctic Ghost Ship

Just a fascinating bit of  history.

A list of sightings of SS Baychimo after her abandonment:

  • A few days after Baychimo had disappeared on 24 November 1931, the ship was found 45 mi (72 km) south of where she was lost, but was again ice-packed.
  • After several months, she was spotted again but about 300 mi (480 km) to the east.
  • In March of the following year, she was seen floating peacefully near the shore by Leslie Melvin, a man travelling to Nome with his dog sled team.
  • A few months after that, she was seen by a company of prospectors.
  • In August 1932, she was boarded by a 20-man Alaskan trading party off Wainwright, Alaska.[4]
  • March 1933, she was found by a group of Alaska Natives who boarded her and were trapped aboard for 10 days by a freak storm.
  • August 1933, the Hudson's Bay Company heard she was still afloat, but was too far a-sea to salvage.[4]
  • July 1934, she was boarded by a group of explorers on a schooner.
  • September 1935, she was seen off Alaska's northwest coast.[4]
  • November 1939, she was boarded by Captain Hugh Polson, wishing to salvage her, but the creeping ice floes intervened and the captain had to abandon her. This is the last recorded boarding of Baychimo.[5]
  • After 1939, she was seen floating alone and without crew numerous times, but had always eluded capture.
  • March 1962, she was seen drifting along the Beaufort Sea coast by a group of Inuit.
  • She was found frozen in an ice pack in 1969, 38 years after she was abandoned. This is the last recorded sighting of Baychimo.

Off to Mass!

I'm about to go to Mass. Just a reminder that the intentions of all my readers are included in my prayers at every Mass and in my own daily intentions.

Why It’s Absurd for Mexico’s President to Ask Pope to Apologize for Conquest

Enough apologising!

From LifeSiteNews

By Joseph Shaw

March 28, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – It has been reported that the newly installed President of Mexico, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, has called on King Felipe VI of Spain and Pope Francis to apologize for the treatment of the native peoples of Mexico during and after its conquest in the 16th century. The proposal has already been rejected by the Spanish Government.
President Obrador is often viewed as a populist, and this demand certainly has the hallmarks of a publicity stunt. In a country ravaged by drugs cartels and corruption, which Obrador was elected, like all Mexican presidents, to oppose, it is very convenient to fix national attention on the crimes of five centuries ago, committed by institutions today represented by people thousands of miles away.
This is not to suggest that there were no wrongs committed by Spanish Catholics during the period of the Conquest, or that the right of the Spanish crown to conquer the area in the first place is straightforwardly correct. These are complex issues.
But demanding apologies does little to clarify these issues or to promote reconciliation. If they have any impact at all, such gestures tend to reinforce one stereotype at the expense of another, when a more nuanced view is necessary for a just historical appraisal. Part of that appraisal would be an acknowledgment that Europeans did not import the institution of slavery into some kind of ideal, peaceful community, but found in central America a society characterized by slavery, exploitation, and human sacrifice on an industrial scale. Another would be that at key historical junctures the Church, and indeed the Spanish crown, worked to improve the lot of enslaved peoples, even at the risk of provoking civil war with slave-owners.
After this lapse of time, not only is demanding an apology risking absurdity: so is offering one.
Pope Francis is, of course, the successor of Pope Alexander VI, who permitted the Spaniards to enslave the natives of New Spain, but that is not to say that Pope Francis is Alexander VI. He cannot repent of the personal sins of Pope Alexander; he can only repent of his own personal sins. If we say instead that Pope Francis should merely acknowledge that those sins took place, this would have only the weight of his personal opinion as someone who had examined the historical evidence. It might be a reasonable judgment, but it would have no legal or theological significance.
Such considerations caused many to question the appropriateness of some of Pope John Paul II’s numerous apologies. Since then, however, conditions have changed markedly in ways which make further apologies even more problematic: namely, the growth of the culture of competitive victimhood. 
The status of the ‘historically oppressed’ has taken on an importance today which will no doubt baffle historians a century from now. It appears to confer rights and privileges upon certain people regardless of their current wealth or political power, and to remove rights from others, however vulnerable, like the Covington school-children. Anything which encourages or validates the hierarchy of victimhood, which is promoted in a wholly opportunistic way by left-wing activists, should clearly be avoided, as this is an inherently unjust project.
On the other hand, reparation for sins, even the sins of others, can be appropriate when apologies are not, and such a response would be a truly Catholic answer, especially to crimes which continue to bear directly on people alive today. Reparation can be made equally by descendants and representatives of the sinners and of the victims, and in this way it unites them in desiring to heal the past, rather than reinforcing division and resentment.
The concept of reparation is, of course, wholly foreign to modern political culture, as it re-focuses our attention to the offense done to God. God is the ultimate avenger of sins, and unlike the human agents who populate the historical narrative, it is the very same God who will judge the living and dead at the end of time as the God who judged the crimes of Aztecs and Conquistadors alike at the moment of their deaths. We should offer our penances and good works to God, to make up for the historic crimes of members of the Church, and of our predecessors in our national histories.
God alone has the ultimate power to heal our communities.
Something else in danger of being obscured is apology, and indeed, where appropriate, punishment, for sins of the more recent past, where the perpetrators are still alive. It is so much easier and less painful to acknowledge the crimes of others than it is to face the reality of one’s own sins, and their consequences. 
The clerical abuse crisis is in part a crisis of people in leadership positions refusing to fulfill their obligations towards victims, including many of the most vulnerable people in society. Many of these leaders, both clerical and lay, are not only still alive, but in office. If we wished to right historical injustices, those in which large numbers of wrongdoers are still able to repent in a meaningful way, for their own sins, would be a better place to start, than in the condemnation of soldiers and missionaries from five centuries ago.

The New Head of the New Ecclesia Dei: Msgr. Descourtieux

Good news from Rome on Tradition? Let us pray!

From Rorate Caeli

The new head of the former Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, transformed in a section of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) by the recent motu proprio of the pope, is Monsignor Patrick Descourtieux, who already works at CDF had for a long time contributed to the work of the Commission.

A priest of the Archdiocese of Paris, Msgr. Descourtieux was ordained in 1986, and has been in Rome since 1989, returning to Paris in certain periods. An excellent organist, he played at San Luigi dei Francesi for 5 years. He was also the rector of Trinità dei Monti, and has taught at the Augustinianum. He has a good knowledge of the Traditional Liturgy and was one of the priests delegated to celebrate the Traditional Mass in the Archdiocese of Paris.

Our friends in France tell us this is excellent news. Let's hope so!

(Tip and information from Le Salon Beige)

The Mistake about Distributism

Richard Aleman's talk "The Mistake about Distributism" at the 29th Annual American Chesterton Society conference held in Emmitsberg, Maryland.

Correcting Fr James Martin

The heretic does't need 'correction'. He needs to be laicised ad excommunicated!

From Fr Dwight Longenecker

Fr James Martin SJ has tweeted his rage against the firing of a gay teacher from a Catholic School.
The story is here in the New York Times. It concerns a female Catholic school teacher who “married” her girlfriend and was then dismissed from her job.
Fr Martin tweets:
Again, where are the comparable firings of straight employees who do not follow Catholic church teaching? Men and women living together before being married? Divorced and remarried without annulments? People using birth control? This is discriminatory.
I will try to cut through the fog of sentimental grandstanding here to try to clarify matters.
There are five common sense and simple objections to Fr Martin’s tweet, but first I should make clear that I am not discussing homosexuality per se, but the underlying logic (or lack of it) in Fr Martin’s twitter comment.
I have no opinions about the homosexual condition nor about homosexual activity that differ in any way from the clear statements of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
First of all, Fr Martin’s charge that straight employees are not removed from their jobs at Catholic institutions for breaking their employment contract over matters of sexual morality is simply wrong. The comments on his Twitter feed provide multiple examples of heterosexual employees being fired for breaking their contract by giving bad moral example and violating Catholic morality.
I worked in a Catholic school where a man and woman who worked there were in a relationship that destroyed the man’s marriage. They planned to re-marry, but had the dignity and respect for the school community to realize their plans contradicted their terms of employment and their example as Catholic school teachers. They resigned quietly and found new employment. They didn’t attempt to stay on in their job and play the public victim.
The second problem with Fr Martin’s tweet is to equate all sin–suggesting that gay people are discriminated against because the church does not fire Catholics who use artificial contraception or Catholics who are living together while not being married.
There are two aspects to this second objection. The first aspect is the common sense observation that not all sins are equal in value. We don’t blame someone on the same level for breaking the speed limit as we do for rape and murder. Some sins are, by their very nature intrinsically evil. What we mean by that extreme sounding phrase is that some sins, by their very nature go against nature itself.
Abortion, for example, is worse than stealing a pencil because, although stealing a pencil is wrong, you went on to use a pencil for what a pencil was made for: to write a note. Abortion is worse because a mother and father kill their own child–which goes against nature. Furthermore, you could return the pencil. You can not bring the aborted child back to life.
These distinctions are not complicated or difficult to understand. Any eighth grade confirmation candidate could master them. I’m surprised therefore that a Jesuit priest cannot.
The second aspect to this objection, is that all sins are not the same because some are formal and public while others are private and informal. Formal, public actions can be judged objectively because they are public and can be seen, and they are formal because there is actual paperwork that is signed saying this particular thing happened.
Someone’s use of artificial contraception or a couple fornicating or a person masturbating or a couple living together for a time is not right, but these sins are informal and private.
When a couple marry, however, they are making a formal, public statement about their lives. When they adopt a child or sign a mortgage together to buy a house where they are cohabiting, they are also, in a lesser way, making a formal, public statement about their sexual choice.
Furthermore, when they marry they are making a formal, public statement that is binding for life because that is what marriage is. It is a formal, public, lifelong commitment. Therefore, from a Catholic point of view, if the marriage is in any way illicit, they are saying, “We know what we are doing. We know it is wrong. We are making this formal and public, and we intend to stay in this sinful condition for the rest of our lives.”
In that respect their action is formal, public and irreformable unless they repudiate their decision and change their life. This second aspect of the objection therefore applies to both heterosexual couples who remarry after divorce as well as to homosexual persons who attempt to marry.
Connected with this formal, public and irreformable action is the fact that an illicit marriage (whether it is between two people of the same sex or two people who are already married) is a violation not only of the marriage rules of the Catholic Church, but of the very sacrament of marriage itself. A Catholic would not take the sacred host, throw it on the floor and urinate on it, but when they marry illicitly they are blaspheming a sacrament of the church. Shall we turn a blind eye and treat this lightly?
The third objection is that the person who is fired from a Catholic institution for breaking the morality clause of their contract  has errrm…broken their contract. They knew what they were getting themselves in for when they signed the contract. If they could not keep those rules or found out later that they were burdensome, they should either not have signed up in the first place or resigned when they realized they could no longer fulfill their duties.
The fourth objection is to note that Fr Martin is, no doubt correct, when observing that there are heterosexual Catholic employees who are not fired despite the fact that they are living in violation of their Catholic faith and their contracts. This objection opens up a whole new can of worms.
Does Fr Martin object because there are morality clauses in Catholic contracts or simply because such contracts forbid same sex marriage? If the latter, then he should stop being coy about his support for same sex marriage. So far he has held back from full fledged support of gay marriage, but this is clearly disingenuous. If he supports same sex marriage he should say so. If he does not, then he should not object to people being dismissed from their jobs for breaking their contract in this way.
Fr Martin’s stance is therefore extremely confusing. Is he suggesting that all morality clauses be removed from Catholic employment contracts, or is he suggesting that only clauses involving sexual morality be removed? If only sexual morality, then why exempt other forms of morality? Is sexual immorality acceptable but embezzlement is not?
This fourth objection is the tip of an iceberg because when we push this question further we must ask, “If there is to be no clause in Catholic employment contracts for sexual immorality does this mean all sexual behaviors are permissible by Catholic employees?” If a twenty one year old coach has a consensual affair with a seventeen year old student will that be wrong? If so why?
The fifth and final objection is to observe that while some heterosexual Catholics who are in violation of the church’s rule are not fired, it is also true that in various places homosexuals who are in violation also continue in their employment. Fr Martin’s real difficulty therefore, would seem not to be homosexuality or heterosexuality, but the inconsistency of Catholic employers to enforce their rules. In which case, does Fr Martin want them to be stricter with everyone?
That would not be very merciful!
The fact of the matter is, Fr Martin is a Jesuit. Jesuits are smart. However, his tweet is sentimental and shallow. We must therefore conclude that Fr Martin is either not smart or that he is intentionally deceitful, disingenuous and manipulative.