The Catechism of the Summa - SECOND SECTION - A DETAILED SURVEY OF MAN'S RETURN TO GOD - X. OF THE VICES OPPOSED TO CHARITY AND THEIR ACTS: OF HATRED; DISTASTE FOR SPIRITUAL THINGS AND LAZINESS; ENVY; DISCORD; STRIFE; SCHISM; WAR; QUARRELLING (THE DUEL); SEDITION; SCANDAL (L)

(L)  
Is there any special kind of sin which is directly opposed to charity as regards the external act which is called beneficence?

Yes, and the sin is called scandal (XLIII.).
 
What is scandal?

Scandal is that sin which through some word or deed offers to another an occasion of sinning; or the fact of taking occasion to sin because of what is said or done by another: in the first instance one gives scandal; in the second, one is scandalized (XLIII. 1).
 
Is it only weak souls that are scandalized?

Yes, that is those that are not as yet proof against evil; although many sensitive souls cannot help but be painfully affected when they see or hear something that is bad (XLIII. 5).
 
Are good and virtuous souls incapable of giving scandal?

Yes, because in the first place they never do or say anything bad that could really scandalize; if perchance scandal is ever given to others, this is due to the malice of the latter only (XLIII. 6).
 
May it not sometimes happen that virtuous souls are under an obligation to forego certain things lest weaker souls be scandalized?

Yes, provided of course it is not a question of things necessary for salvation (XLIII. 7).
 
Is one ever bound to forego some good thing in order that the wicked may not be scandalized?

No (XLIII. 7, 8).

Next - The Catechism of the Summa - SECOND SECTION - A DETAILED SURVEY OF MAN'S RETURN TO GOD - XI. OF THE PRECEPTS RELATING TO CHARITY

The First Crusade - Episode 7: Godfrey of Bouillon's Departure for the East

Real Crusades History #11
 
In part 7 of my look at the First Crusade, we look at the departure of Hugh of Vermandois for the Holy Land, as well as the departure of Godfrey of Bouillon and his army shortly after that. Their journey will bring them to Constantinople, where they will come face to face with the Byzantine Emperor Alexius Comnenus.

Baltimore Catechism #1 - LESSON SEVENTEENTH ON INDULGENCES

LESSON SEVENTEENTH ON INDULGENCES

231. Q. What is an Indulgence? A. An Indulgence is the remission in whole or in part of the temporal punishment due to sin.

233. Q. How many kinds of Indulgences are there? A. There are two kinds of Indulgences—Plenary and Partial.

234. Q. What is a Plenary Indulgence? A. A Plenary Indulgence is the full remission of the temporal punishment due to sin.

235. Q. What is a Partial Indulgence? A. A Partial Indulgence is the remission of a part of the temporal punishment due to sin.

237. Q. What must we do to gain an Indulgence? A. To gain an Indulgence we must be in the state of grace and perform the works enjoined.

Next - Baltimore Catechism #1 - LESSON EIGHTEENTH ON THE HOLY EUCHARIST

Please note that there are gaps in the numbering, and some questions are out of order, because the questions are numbered to agree with the 'Explanation of the Baltimore Catechism' (Baltimore Catechism #4)

Word of the Day: Handbook of Indulgences

HANDBOOK OF INDULGENCES. The official declaration of the Church's teaching on indulgences and collection of the most important prayers and good works to which indulgences are attached. Authorized by Pope Paul VI in 1968.

Debunking the Myth That Today’s Communion in the Hand Revives an Ancient Custom

Dr K destroys the antiquarianism behind the protestant idea of 'communion in the hand'.

From LifeSiteNews

By Dr Peter Kwasniewski

November 26, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) — Last week, on November 21, the feast of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Cardinal Müller and Cardinal Sarah were present at the abbey of Kloster Weltenburg in Bavaria for a pontifical Mass followed by the presentation of Cardinal Sarah’s latest book,  The Day Is Now Far Spent.

In his comments, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments returned to a favorite theme of many of his speeches and writings: the urgent need to recover a reverent manner of distributing and receiving Holy Communion. Like Pope Benedict XVI, Cardinal Sarah is a strong proponent of reception on the tongue by faithful who are kneeling. The consistent good example and lucid teaching on this matter from Pope Benedict XVI, Cardinal Arinze, Cardinal Cañizares, Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Sarah, and Bishop Athanasius Schneider, among others, have led countless Catholics to return to the traditional manner of receiving Our Lord.
But what about the famous passage from St. Cyril of Jerusalem’s Mystagogical Catecheses, used again and again to persuade Catholics that Communion in the hand is an ancient practice legitimately restored by the Church after the Second Vatican Council?

Coming up to receive, therefore, do not approach with your wrists extended or your fingers splayed, but making your left hand a throne for the right (for it is about to receive a King) and cupping your palm, so receive the Body of Christ; and answer: “Amen.” Carefully hallow your eyes by the touch of the sacred Body, and then partake, taking care to lose no part of It. Such a loss would be like a mutilation of your own body. Why, if you had been given gold-dust, would you not take the utmost care to hold it fast, not letting a grain slip through your fingers, lest you be by so much the poorer? How much more carefully, then, will you guard against losing so much as a crumb of that which is more precious than gold and precious stones!^[1]

We ought to note several things about this passage.

First, the extreme carefulness that St. Cyril demands of the one about to receive the Lord Himself, the King: not a speck of the consecrated bread should be lost — that would be like a mutilation of one’s body, a loss of something more precious than any created thing! It was, in fact, this very emphasis on the immense care to be taken toward the Eucharist, together with an ever deepening appreciation of the sheer magnitude of so divine a gift, that led the Church over time to abandon Communion in the hand and to prefer communion directly in the mouth. This is a primary example of organic development in the liturgy, which follows the implications of an original belief or attitude until the external expression most perfectly reflects and inculcates that belief or attitude. Conversely, the artificial return to a much earlier but long since discontinued practice — and one that now, suddenly appearing in a very different context, carries with it overtones of casualness and lack of faith in the Real Presence — is a primary example of the error of antiquarianism condemned in 1947 by Pius XII in Mediator Dei.

Second, if we look more carefully at what Cyril describes, and combine this passage with other hints from antiquity, we can see that even when Communion in the hand was practiced, it involved marks of reverence that (curiously?) never accompanied its re-invention in the late 1960s. In a forthcoming book, professor of Patristics Michael Fiedrowicz observes, concerning this passage:

It is significant that the Eucharist, laid on the right hand, is not then received by means of the less-valued left hand, but rather directly by the mouth. What appears at first glance to be communion in the hand reveals itself on closer examination to be communion in the mouth, with the right hand serving as a sort of paten. Bishop Cyril’s description shows that the attitude of the communicant is, then, not one of taking and capturing, but rather of reverent and humble reception, accompanied by a sign of adoration.

In his bestselling interview Christus Vincit: Christ’s Triumph over the Darkness of the Age, Bishop Athanasius Schneider — who, like Fiedrowicz, is a specialist in Patrology — goes into greater detail about the ancient ritual:

[T]he practice had a different form in ancient times than it does today: the Holy Eucharist was received on the palm of the right hand and the faithful were not allowed to touch the Holy Host with their fingers, but they had to bow down their head to the palm of the hand and take the Sacrament directly with their mouth, thus, in a position of a profound bow and not standing upright. The common practice today is to receive the Eucharist standing upright, taking it with the left hand. This is something which, symbolically, the Church Fathers would find horrific — how can the Holy of Holies be taken with the left hand? Then, today the faithful take and touch the Host directly with their fingers and then put the Host in the mouth: this gesture has never been known in the entire history of the Catholic Church but was invented by Calvin — not even by Martin Luther. The Lutherans have typically received the Eucharist kneeling and on the tongue, although of course they do not have the Real Presence because they do not have a valid priesthood. The Calvinists and other Protestant free churches, who do not believe at all in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, invented a rite which is void of almost all gestures of sacredness and of exterior adoration, i.e., receiving “Communion” standing upright, and touching the bread “host” with their fingers and putting it in their mouth in the way people treat ordinary bread. …

For them, this was just a symbol, so their exterior behavior towards Communion was similar to behavior towards a symbol. During the Second Vatican Council, Catholic Modernists — especially in the Netherlands — took this Calvinist Communion rite and wrongly attributed it to the Early Church, in order to spread it more easily throughout the Church. We have to dismantle this myth and these insidious tactics, which started in the Catholic Church more than fifty years ago, and which like an avalanche have now rolled through, crushing almost all Catholic churches in the entire world, with the exception of some Catholic countries in Eastern Europe and a few places in Asia and Africa. (223–24)

These words afford a backdrop for the disturbing admission made by one of Pope Paul VI’s closest friends, the eminent French philosopher Jean Guitton (1901–1999):

The intention of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the [New Order of] Mass was to reform the Catholic liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with the Protestant liturgy. There was with Pope Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or, at least to correct, or, at least to relax, what was too Catholic in the traditional sense in the Mass and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist Mass.

As a result, says eminent liturgist Klaus Gamber, Catholics “are now breathing the thin air of Calvinistic sterility” (Reform of the Roman Liturgy, 5).
Moreover, as Bishop Schneider goes on to mention (and as he discusses at greater length in his book Dominus Est), in the early Church, a communion cloth was, at least in some places and times, laid over the hands of recipients so that they would not directly touch the Holy Sacrament and any fragments could be easily gathered. The Byzantine rite still utilizes such a cloth, held under the chins of those who are receiving in their mouths from a spoon handled by the priest. Some traditional parishes retain the use of a “houseling cloth” that covers the communion rail. While the invention of the handy communion paten renders the houseling cloth no longer necessary, traditional Catholic churches and chapels often retain it as an additional reminder of the sacredness of this Eucharistic banquet and a symbolic link between the people’s reception of the Lord and the cloth-covered altar of sacrifice on which the divine Victim has been offered. It underlines that they, like the priest, are partaking of a mystical sacrifice.

In short: The ancient record bears witness to beliefs and attitudes that would, over time, develop into the longstanding traditional communion praxis of both the Latin West and the Byzantine East. In the West, Communion on the tongue, kneeling, is the natural and suitable result of St. Cyril’s Eucharistic piety. The attempt to turn back the clock to antiquity — an antiquity, moreover, deceptively misrepresented and fictitiously reconstructed — is, in the end, nothing but a Trojan horse for Calvinistic sacramental theology.

What is at stake, therefore, is precisely those distinctively Catholic doctrines that a recent Pew Research survey indicates are rapidly eroding, even among those who still attend Mass. Cardinal Sarah, Bishop Schneider, and many others are pleading for a restoration of a traditional practice that emerged out of and reinforces the Catholic Faith. Will other Church leaders pay heed?

At the very least, right here and right now, every layman and laywoman can make a firm commitment, for the glory of God and the sanctification of their souls, always to receive Our Lord kneeling and on the tongue, at any and every Mass they attend, anywhere, at any time.

---

^[1] Cyril of Jerusalem, Mystagogicae catecheses 5,21 (FC 7, 162 / The works of Cyril of Jerusalem, vol. 2, trans. by L.P. McCauley / A.A. Stephenson [The Fathers of the Church 64], 203).

ASK FATHER: “I Utterly Reject Bergoglio, so How Can I Remain a Catholic?” Fr. Z’s Rant and Beatdown.

Father Zed answers a reader who is thinking of leaving the Church. Father says 'Run for the hills.  Good luck with that. I will not run.' And nor will I! Francis cannot drive me out of the Church!

From Fr Z's Blog

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

Now, to the point: How can I remain a Catholic when I UTTERLY reject Jorge Bergoglio as a false prophet of the devil? I can in no way continue to acknowledge him during Mass. Going to TLM doesn’t alleviate my doubts. My conscience absolutely forbids me from ever again listening to or acknowledging that man.

This is quite a dilemma for me. I am seriously considering heading to the Orthdox Church or finding a conservative evangelical church.

Hmmm. That seems like a “No” vote for Bergoglio.

I am not going to get into the arguments for or against Francis as pope or antipope. For what I have to say to the idea of leaving the Church because of him, one way or another, I don’t have to get into that controversy.

Why? Holy Catholic Church is indefectible. This is one of the three attributes of the Church, along with authority and infallibility.

Your question holds two possible implications. First, “I don’t like Bergoglio, so I’m going somewhere else.” That’s just whining, like a kid who doesn’t like broccoli and goes hungry.

Otherwise, your implication is that if Francis isn’t really the pope, the Vicar of Christ, then somehow the Church is now defective and you might as well go some place else.

No. And NO! And HELL NO!

If we believe Christ’s promises – and I sure do – then we hold that the Church will not fail even to the end of the world when He returns to take all things to Himself and submit them to the Father.

The Petrine Ministry is part of the fabric of the Church as the Lord designed. Somehow, until the ending of the world, the Church – and hence the papacy – cannot fail, even though we don’t know how.

As necessary as the papacy is, a pope is Christ’s VICAR, not Christ himself. As the sardonic Latin acrostic puts it, a VICARIUS is Vir Inutilis Carens Auctoritate Rare Intelligentiae Umbra Superioris, that is, “A useless man, lacking authority, rarely of intelligence, the shadow of his superior.” That’s every pope, compared to Christ.

It is dangerous to place too much emphasis on any pope.

Look, friend, popes come and popes go. There have been long periods of time between popes. There have been long periods of time when there was terrible confusion about who was the real pope. Even saints got it wrong and backed the wrong guy. For centuries people had no idea who the pope was, even his name, and they lived good Catholic lives, minding their own business and trying to be holy in their vocations.

Popes can be good. Popes can be bad. Popes can have short or long pontificates. Popes can be talented or doddering. Popes can be charming or jerks. Popes can be holy of sinful. Popes can be important or insignificant.

Only one this is clear about popes, and the Romans get this right: Muore un papa se ne fa un altro… A pope dies, you make another. We make another until Christ returns. Somehow that’s the way our Church will always be even if we don’t like the choice.

As for your chicken-livered notion about going outside the Church, I’ll offer what Lumen gentium 14 teaches:

14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.

Refuse to enter or refuse to remain in the Church knowing that the Catholic Church is necessary? Bad odds.

These are hard times. Confusing. Fearful. Dangerous. But these are the times into which God called us to live. That means he offers us the graces we will need to live our vocations well. It could be that you have to completely tune out of the larger churchy news and put your nose to your personal grindstone and live your vocation well.

God didn’t call us into existence at random, but rather with a plan and a purpose for every one of us. He called YOU, friend, into this life HERE and NOW, not at some other time and place. These are the circumstances of our lives. We are the soldiers of the Church Militant God wants NOW. Are you suffering? Embrace it. Offer it in reparation. Are you afraid? Throw yourself at the feet of the Mother of God and beg her protective mantle. Clasp onto St. Joseph, Defender of the Church.

Fast. Give alms. Pray. But don’t be a coward.

Either pick up your Cross and your sword and get your ass back to the lines or go crawling off somewhere. We’ll do your duty along with our own. Run for the hills. Good luck with that.

I will not run.

Monarch Profile: Emperor Pedro II of Brazil

The Mad Monarchist takes a look at the second, and last, Emperor of Brazil.

From The Mad Monarchist (25 July 2009)

Dom Pedro II of Brazil may hold the record for being the most popular "last monarch" in the world. He was an intelligent, likeable and widely beloved and respected man and yet somehow he had the fate to become the second and last Emperor of Brazil. He was only five years old when his father, Emperor Pedro I of Brazil and King Pedro IV of Portugal, abdicated in his favor on April 7, 1831. His elder sister would go on to be Queen of Portugal but as Pedro II had been born in Brazil after the declaration of independence he was a foreigner in Portuguese law and was considered the first "home grown" Brazilian monarch. As the son of a Braganza father and a Hapsburg father he had many royal family relations. Emperor Napoleon of France was his uncle and he was a first cousin to the nominal Emperor Napleon II of France, Emperor Francis Joseph of Austria and Emperor Maximilian of Mexico.

For the first nine years of his reign he was acted for by a regency during which time the country was plagued with instability and so, in 1840, he was declared of legal age early in order to fully assume the throne. He was crowned on July 18, 1841 and immediately had to deal with the regional conflicts that had brought about his early accession to the throne. At first these rebellions had the stated aim of restoring his father to power but after his death were carried on over contested elections as different groups struggled for power. Pedro II had a great deal of intellectual curiosity and genuine concern for his people and viewed his role as Emperor to act as an impartial umpire amidst the struggling factions. With his imperial authority, winning personality and the military support of the Duke of Caxias he felt able to deal with any crisis.

As Brazil was still a young country Pedro II was quick to ensure that Brazilian national sovereignty would be respected and did not back down whether dealing with smaller local nations or greater powers like the United Kingdom and the United States. In 1864 he led Brazil into the War of the Triple Alliance against Paraguay and by the end of the war in 1870 he had enlarged the national territory and effectively made the Brazilian Empire the dominant power in South America. It was no coincidence that during these war years his cousin in Mexico, Emperor Maximilian, envisioned a New World that would be overseen by the United States in the north, the Brazilian Empire in the south and the Mexican Empire in Central America. Pedro II, a calm and serious man, was a tower of strength in a time of crisis and became a comforting figure for Brazil. His interest in innovation meant that during his reign coffee supplanted sugar as the primary cash crop, railroad construction was rapidly expanded and more and more cities across the country were linked by telegraph. The economy stabilized and prospered, growth and expansion was everywhere and the country enjoyed a high reputation among the Latin American powers. Things seemed to be going great and Pedro II was extremely popular.

The Emperor was able to maintain a balancing act between the liberals and conservatives quite effectively. Whereas other countries in the region were torn by constant civil wars between these two factions, under the Emperor's guidance Brazil had peaceful and orderly transitions of power though that power continued to be largely concentrated in the hands of the land-owning planter class. Ultimately, the thurst for power among these elites would lead to the downfall of the monarch who seemed a permanent and popular fixture of Brazilian life. He was too progressive for the likes of the oligarchs and they began to hunger for total power rather than simply a large share of it. The final straw came when Pedro II began to slowly phase out the institution of slavery. For a country with a plantation-based economy like Brazil the Emperor knew this would be difficult and tried to lead by example (he freed all of his own slaves as early as 1840) and to enact changes little by little over time. Republicanism had begun to creep in amongst the urban liberals and some in the middle class and in time the republican idea would be seen by numerous factions as their path to power.

Pedro II did not help his cause by trying to be so tolerant and modern-minded. His rolling back of slavery cost him a great deal of support amongst the elites, his liberal ideas turned off many in the military and he lost crucial support from the Catholic Church by opposing their anti-Mason regulations after 1872. His political tolerance also meant that known republicans were allowed to gain and hold high positions both in the government and in the military. Pedro II also spoke at various times as though it mattered little to him whether the country was a monarchy or a republic, which gave little confidence to those inclined to uphold the Crown. In 1888, while his daughter Isabel was acting as regent, slavery was officially abolished and some 700,000 slaves were freed without their owners being given compensation. For many of the landed elites this was the last straw. Pedro II was still supported by a large majority of his people but on November 15, 1889 a military coup forced him to abdicate. He and the Imperial Family went into exile in Europe and died in France in 1891. In 1920 his remains and those of his wife were finally returned to Brazil and buried with full honors.

And from Kings and Things

29 November, Antonio Cardinal Bacci: Meditations For Each Day

The Blessedness of the Merciful

1. Let us meditate now on the mercy of God, which is infinite even as His justice is infinite. "His mercy," says St. Thomas, "does not subtract from His justice, but is the fullness and the perfection of that justice." (S. Th., 1, q. 21, a. 3 ad 2) All the merits which we can acquire in the sight of God derive from His gratuitous gift of grace. God's mercy and justice, therefore, are fused together in a wonderful harmony which claims our gratitude and fidelity.

References to the mercy of God are numerous in Sacred Scripture. “You, Lord, are good and forgiving,” says the Psalmist, “abounding in kindness to all who call upon you.” (Ps. 85:5) “Blessed he the Lord,” we read elsewhere, “my rock, … my refuge and my fortress, my stronghold, my deliverer…” (Ps. 143:2) “Goodness and kindness follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the house of the Lord for years to come.” (Ps. 22:6)

When we leave the Old Testament and open the Gospel, we discover that it is a record of the goodness and mercy of God. We have only to recall Christ's forgiveness of the Magdalen when she wept at His feet for her faults; the merciful judgment which He passed on the poor adulteress; His loving glance in the direction of St. Peter, who had denied Him; the grace so miraculously granted to St. Paul on the road to Damascus; and the parables of the good Samaritan, the prodigal son, and the good shepherd who went to search for the lost sheep. Finally, there are the consoling words to the repentant thief: "This day thou shalt be with me in paradise." When we read this chronicle of infinite goodness and mercy, we should experience a boundless hope and confidence. It does not matter how great our sins or our ingratitude may have been. Once we have repented, God is ready to forgive us and to receive us with open arms.

2. Since God is so merciful to us, however, He requires us to be good and merciful to our neighbour. “Blessed are the merciful,” Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, “for they shall obtain mercy.” (Mt. 5:7) St. James adds a stern warning. “Judgment,” he says, “is without mercy to him who has not shown mercy; but mercy triumphs over judgment.” (James 2:12) If we hope to receive God's mercy, we must show compassion to those who are poor or unfortunate in any way, even to the greatest sinners. In the presence of so much need and misfortune in the world, avarice, miserliness, selfishness or indifference cry out to God for retribution. If we are not prepared to give, nothing will be given to us. If we refuse to forgive, neither shall we be forgiven. If we do not love, neither shall we be loved.

3. Let us remember that we have often made ourselves God's enemies by our sins. We were often in need when we were deprived of divine grace. On these occasions God was merciful to us, for He granted us His forgiveness and His friendship. These gifts of God place an obligation on us to behave in the same way to those who are in need by assisting them willingly and generously, and to those who are unhappy by consoling them as far as possible.

Let us remember the great principle which Jesus Christ has given us. “Even as you wish men to do to you, so also do you to them… Do good to those who hate you… Do not judge, and you shall not be judged; do not condemn and you shall not be condemned. Forgive, and you shall be forgiven, give, and it shall be given to you…” (Cf. Luke 6:30-38) “With what judgment you judge, you shall be judged; and with what measure you measure, it shall be measured to you.” (Mt. 7:1) So it will be on the day of death when we shall have to appear before the Supreme Judge.

Let us be generous throughout life in giving help and consolation to others. It is more blessed to give than to receive, as the Gospel says. By giving we shall find a little happiness even in this world, and shall be certain that one day the most merciful Judge will pardon and embrace us.

IN LUMINE FIDEI: 29 NOVEMBER – SAINT SATURNIUS (Martyr)

IN LUMINE FIDEI: 29 NOVEMBER – SAINT SATURNIUS (Martyr): Dom Prosper Guéranger: Christmas begins to glimmer on the horizon. The last Sunday after Pentecost has given us the closing instruc...

29 November, A Chesterton Calendar

NOVEMBER 29th

There is a noble instinct for giving the right touch of beauty to common and necessary things, but the things that are so touched are the ancient things, the things that always, to some extent, commended themselves to the lover of beauty. The spirit of William Morris has not seized hold of the century and made its humblest necessities beautiful. And this was because, with all his healthiness and energy, he had not the supreme courage to face the ugliness of things; Beauty shrank from the Beast and the fairy tale had a different ending.

'Twelve Types.'

30 November, The Roman Martyrology

Prídie Kaléndas Decémbris Luna quarta Anno Domini 2019

At Patrae, in the Peloponnesus, the holy Apostle Andrew. He preached the Gospel of Christ in Thrace and Scythia. He was arrested by the Proconsul Aegeas, and first imprisoned, then heavily flogged, and, lastly, crucified. He remained alive upon the cross through the second day, and taught the people. He besought the Lord not to suffer him to be taken down from the cross, and then a great light from heaven shone round about him, and when it faded away he gave up the ghost.
At Rome, the holy martyrs Castulus and Euprepis.
At Constantinople, the holy Virgin and martyr Maura.
Likewise, the holy Virgin and martyr Justina.
At Saintes, (in the sixth century,) holy Trojan, Bishop (of that see,) a man of great holiness, who, albeit he be buried in the earth, yet showeth by many works of power that he is alive in heaven.
At Rome, (in the fifth century,) the holy Confessor Constantius, who manfully withstood the Pelagians, and bore much at their hands, the which contendings have gained him a place among the holy Confessors.
In Palestine, (in the sixth century,) the holy Confessor Zosimus, who was eminent for holiness and miracles in the time of the Emperor Justin.
V. And elsewhere many other holy martyrs, confessors, and holy virgins.
R. Thanks be to God.

Memes of the Day

Today would have been C.S. Lewis's 119th birthday. Memory Eternal!

Hungary's Right-Wing Government Withdraws Country From 'Too Gay' Eurovision Song Contest Branding the Annual Event 'a Homosexual Flotilla' That Damages Mental Health

Good on Orbán Viktor! Hungary (and Poland) seem to be the last outposts of sanity and civilisation in Europe. (I've not shared the disgusting pictures fro the DM.)

From the Daily Mail

• Pro-government television in Hungary said Eurovision was 'a homosexual flotilla'
• Right-wing regime pulled out of Eurovision song contest because it is 'too gay'
• Source in Hungarian public broadcaster said LGBTQ+ culture was behind move

 

Hungary has pulled out of the Eurovision song contest because it is 'too gay' for the country's right-wing leadership, it was claimed last night.

No official reason was forthcoming from prime minister Viktor Orban but a pro-government television channel said Eurovision was 'a homosexual flotilla' and that Hungary's mental health would be better off if it was out of the competition.

A source inside the Hungarian public broadcaster, MTVA, told the Guardian that employees believed the long association with LGBTQ+ culture was behind the move. 

Eurovision has long been a celebration of camp fun, with Austrian drag queen Conchita Wurst winning in 2014.

 
'I was not surprised. It comes from the organisational culture of MTVA,' said the source.  

Positive coverage of LGBT rights was discouraged, the source said, except for annual coverage of Budapest Pride. 

Hungarian website index.hu quoted unnamed sources in public office that saw Eurovision as 'too gay'.

In a statement, MTVA said: 'Instead of taking part in the Eurovision Song Contest in 2020, we will support the valuable productions created by the talents of Hungarian pop music directly.'

It would not elaborate on the reason behind the withdrawal.

Since Orban started a second stint as prime minister in 2010, free speech and democracy in Hungary have been slowly eroded.

Members of his ruling party have openly compared homosexuality to paedophilia and called for a boycott of Coca-Cola after an advert featured a gay couple.

András Bencsik, the editor of a pro-government magazine, said: 'I welcome the decision, including from a mental health perspective, that Hungary will not take part in the homosexual flotilla that this international song competition has been reduced to.

'Many young people thought that this is something for people under 18, but at this event the destruction of public taste takes place with screaming transvestites and bearded women.'

Russia, which has struggled with rampant homophobia, nearly left Eurovision in 2014 after a similar call by its MPs six years after it won the competition.

Who is She to Judge?

OMM blasts the lesbian 'married' judge and praises the brave Priest, Fr Nolan, who denied her Holy Communion.

From One Mad Mom

Still just trying to do the mom thing but some things pop up that are worth addressing and this is one of them.

EGR priest denies Communion to gay judge

GRAND RAPIDS

by: Barton Deiters

EAST GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (WOOD) — Judge Sara Smolenski, chief judge of the Kent County District Court, has been denied Communion at the church where she has been a parishioner for more than six decades because she is married to a woman.

Well, duh.

It is a move that for many was the final straw in a pattern of behavior that has them calling for the removal of a priest — a priest who came to St. Stephen Catholic Church about three years ago.

Many or buddies of Judge Smoleski? Sounds like here family has ruled the parish for a little too long. I’m sure there’s likely a little “reign of terror” going on at this parish of the “established” families. Not like we haven’t seen this before.

In 1966, under the leadership of Rev. Msgr. Edward N. Alt, St. Stephen Catholic School became the first integrated Catholic school in Metro Grand Rapids and had a student body that was nearly 40 percent non-Catholic.

And I’m sure this had some thinking they could just make it the school they wanted verses a Catholic school. Wrong.

This tradition of inclusion and acceptance would be the essence of the school and the church for 50 years.

Oh for goodness sake. The inclusion and acceptance my foot. Anyone can attend a Catholic school but it doesn’t mean it should become Catholic light to appease them. It’s a CATHOLIC school. You don’t like, move on.

But now, some here say that is changing.

Thank goodness!

“I’ve been a member of St. Stephen’s Catholic Parish for 62 years, basically,” Smolenski said.

Smolenski who has been on the bench for nearly 30 years, comes from a family of prominent community members, including her father who was also a district court judge, and her brother, a state appeals court judge.

“I was baptized there, my parents were married there, every one of my nine siblings went to school (from) first through eighth grade. We buried my parents out of that school,” Smolenski said. “This is a church that is a part of who I am. This is a church who helped form my faith.”

Uh, clearly not. You’re “married” to a women. That church, apparently, did nada for your faith until Fr. Nolan but maybe, under his leadership, it will. Just because you’ve spent your life there doesn’t mean you own in, honey. God does. It is merciful that you get to attend and receive the sacraments when you, like everyone else, is in the state to do so. How about you try with confession?

News 8 featured Smolenski in March of 2016, when she became the first Kent County elected official to marry someone of the same sex.

But it was just last Saturday that Smolenski got a call from the parish priest, Father Scott Nolan.

“The way he said it was ‘because you’re married to Linda in the state of Michigan, you cannot accept communion,’ that’s how he said it,” Smolenski explained.

Booyah, Fr. Nolan! Well done. You called her and informed her (probably not to her recollection) that her soul was in danger and it was scandalous for her, a PUBLIC, OBSTINATE sinner to receive Our Lord. Sorry, Sara, none of gets to receive Our Lord in the Eucharist in a state of mortal sin. Deal. It’s the same for you and for me and anyone else. As for you, you’re now in the realm of PUBLIC, OBSTINATE SINNER so now you must publicly repent of said sin. The rest of us? Most of us try to keep our sins to ourselves and God. You’ve, apparently, been flaunting yours as if it’s not a sin.

“I try to be a good and faithful servant to our Lord Jesus Christ. My faith is a huge part of who I am, but it is the church that made that faith, the very church where he is taking a stance and saying ho-ho, not you.”

Sorry, again, Sara. If you truly wanted to try and be a good and faithful servant, you might not want to have very publicly entered into an invalid marriage. Like the rest of us, you may not simply marry who you want. Like the rest of us, you may not receive Communion in a state of mortal sin. I’m sorry if you think you deserve exemption but you don’t.

It was a devastating revelation for the lifelong Catholic who months earlier gave $7,000 to the parish building fund.

If this was a “revelation” to you, then someone failed you but it wasn’t Fr. Nolan. You can’t buy your way out of mortal sin. Seriously, the line about giving $7,000 cracked me up. Is she somehow an elitist who can buy her way out of hell? Good luck with that line of thinking.

“Oh my gosh, I’m not going to get Jesus at the church I have devoted my life to,” Smolenski said, fighting back tears. “I thought of my mom and dad who devoted their whole life to raising us Catholic, spending all that money at the Catholic education.”

Again, you can’t buy salvation. Maybe try devoting your life to Christ and not the institution of a parish church you think you can buy.

Smolenski was not the first person to be denied, according to a dozen people News 8 talked to Tuesday, including one same-sex couple who was denied the Eucharist during their child’s communion service.

Oh, yeah. You all so need to send this parish a big fat check to offset the horrified people who thought they could buy their happiness there.

“The public shunning — everything about it was offensive,” Smolenski said of the denial months before her own.

What public shunning? You’re the one who is making this public. So this was a shock to you, Sara? Sounds like now. You’re going for the 15 minutes of martyrdom and you’re perfectly happy to drag a good priest and fellow parishioners with you. Nobody should be clueless. The Catechism and Canon Law of the church they’ve claimed to dedicate their lives to is online. Read people. Everyone knows the same kinds of stories around the country. Feigning shock and awe is getting a little bit ridiculous, don’t you think?

It is part of a pattern, according to Micki Benz, a 40-year member of the parish who is a part of a group of members who have decided to speak out.

A pattern?! You mean the Catholic faith? Lots of dissenters have spoken out over the centuries. Guess what? The Church still stands.

They point to the words of Pope Francis who wrote in his Apostolic Exhortation.

Evangelii Gaudium, translates as “joy of the Gospel,” that the Eucharist is not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for the weak and the church is not a toll house but a place for everyone.

Right. And denying Communion to those who are not free from mortal sin is a remedy for their souls. It’s not a prize they get to claim just because they want it.

“(Nolan) has eliminated teachers who are gay. He has made it clear that gay people are not welcome,” Benz said.

It’s a Catholic school, Micki. The pastor is responsible for making sure the students are not scandalized, led astray or error is taught in word or deed?

For a period of time, Nolan forbade non-Catholics from participating in church services, including choir and reading before the congregation, members say.

Wait, now we’re going to complain about “non-Catholics” being in public Mass positions???? It’s not a social club, people.

Parishioners met with Nolan and were hopeful that he was changing his ways, until last Saturday when the beloved judge was denied Communion.

Nolan talked to News 8 briefly Tuesday, promising he would speak on the issue but then did not call back or return messages.

Sounds like the hysterical pitchfork mob to me.

There are those who believe Nolan is in the right, but they would not go on camera. Others with kids attending school would not go on camera due to fear of reprisal, but all say they love the church and want healing.

This is the same story we see all over the country. Those that simply want adore God according to the Creed they profess every Sunday and who want to get their kids a Catholic education don’t want to be hassled by the pitchfork crowd. I hope more will publicly stand up for Fr. Nolan. We are called to defend our faithful priests. The sacrifice they have made is worth our discomfort. And, sadly, my guess is some of the kids will be bullied to. It’s the cross we are called to bear.

“I love the St. Stephen’s I knew. I don’t love the St. Stephen’s of now,” Smolenski said.

You love the personal playground you’ve had where the parish rubber stamped your sin. I’m actually quite sad you have been let down so badly.

Some members say it would be better overall for the church to change pastors.

“We don’t see Father Scott changing; therefore we’ve come to the conclusion that it’d be better for him and us if there were a change in our pastors,” Benz said.

“Some.” I think some more would be every so grateful to have those who browbeat everyone into falling in line gone but that’s just me.

Some parishioners have drafted a letter to Bishop David Walkowiak, bishop of the Diocese of Grand Rapids, explaining their position and asking for a meeting — a request he has not responded to in the past.

Oooh! The dreaded letter where they whine that they’re not allowed to run roughshod over the parish anymore and, oh, by the way, they are very prestigious people who will pull their money out. Again, people, this is why you must back this pastor to the hilt.

“We really, really want a meeting with him. Everybody is prepared to be very respectful. We just want him to know what this is doing to one of his parishes,” Benz said.

Oh sure, everyone is so respectful they’re going to call in the press to publicly shame their priest (and probably their bishop.)

News 8 reached out to the Diocese of Grand Rapids who would not address the issue of whether Nolan’s actions are supported by the bishop.

A spokesperson did issue this terse statement presumably about what happened with Judge Smolenski: “This is a spiritual matter between her and her pastor.”

Well, at least, someone gets it. It’s definitely not a matter for the press.

Smolenski says it is time to bring this into the light.

“I want to help somebody out there who’s never even been born to make their life a little bit easier — by standing up and speaking the truth,” she said.

How about their everlasting life, Sara? Are you going to make that easier on them too? Pathetic!

So people, I know it’s Thanksgiving week but please support Fr. Nolan and write Bishop David Walkowiak.

Fr. Scott Nolan
723 Rosewood Ave. SE
East Grand Rapids, MI 49506

frnolan@ststephenparish.com

Bishop David Walkowiak
360 Division Ave. S.
Grand Rapids, MI 49503

Phone 616 243 049

Chick-fil-A Funded Anti-Christian Group Tied to Attack on Family Research Council

For those who still don't believe Chi-fil-A bent its neck to receive the Yoke of Satan.

From The Stream

By Todd Starnes

In 2012 domestic terrorist Floyd Corkins stormed the headquarters of Family Research Council armed with a semi-automatic pistol, 100 rounds of ammunition and 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches.

“I wanted to kill the people in the building and then smear a Chick-fil-A sandwich in their face,” the gunman told the FBI.

Corkins had been enraged by the nationwide Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day. He selected Family Research Council as a target based on a “hate” map created by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

The massacre was averted when Leo Johnson, the building’s manager, tackled the rampaging gunman. Johnson’s arm was shattered by a bullet and he suffered serious injuries in the attack.

Corkins later pled guilty to three charges including committing an act of domestic terrorism while armed.
 
Chick-fil-A Donated to the Anti-Christian SPLC

Now comes word that in 2017 Chick-fil-A donated money to the Southern Poverty Law Center — the same organization that created a map that nearly led to the slaughter of innocent Christians at the Family Research Council headquarters in Washington, D.C.

TownHall published an IRS 990 form that shows the Chick-fil-A Foundation contributed $2,500 to the SPLC in 2017.

Why would Chick-fil-A donate money to an anti-Christian group like the Southern Poverty Law Center? Company officials did not return my calls seeking a comment.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins told the Todd Starnes Radio Show he was stunned by the news.

“It’s time for Christians to find a fast food alternative to Chick-fil-A,” he said.

“Tax reports have now exposed Chick-fil-A for funding the anti-Christian Southern Poverty Law Center; an organization linked in federal court to domestic terrorism after their smear campaign of Christian organizations resulted in a shooting in which the gunman planned to smear Chick-fil-A sandwiches in the faces of his victims,” Perkins said. 

Failed to Reach Out

Perkins then revealed a shocking revelation about what happened in the aftermath of the 2012 attack.

“Dan Cathy, nor anyone with Chick-fil-A inquired about the well-being of Mr. Johnson or any of the FRC team members. But they made a donation to the SPLC which was linked in federal court to this act of domestic terrorism,” Perkins said. “Chick-fil-A has seriously lost their way.”

Chick-fil-A recently made national headlines by ending its charitable giving to the Fellowship of Christian Athletes and the Salvation Army. Both organizations had been labeled as hate groups because of their positions on traditional marriage.

“Not only has Chick-fil-A abandoned donations to Christian groups including the Salvation Army, it has donated to one of the most extreme anti-Christian groups in America,” Perkins told me. “Anyone who opposes the SPLC, including many Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, and traditional conservatives, is slandered and slapped with the ‘extremist’ label or even worse, their ‘hate group’ designation.”

You can imagine the FRC’s surprise when they discovered the company they been fighting for all these years had been quietly giving money to an anti-Christian group that wanted to destroy FRC.

Over the years millions of Christians mobilized to fight for Chick-fil-A. They defended the company from a militant mob of LGBT activists and their supporters in the Mainstream Media and the Democrat Party.

The Family Research Council was one of Chick-fil-A’s most vocal defenders. So you can imagine their surprise when they discovered the company they been fighting for all these years had been quietly giving money to an anti-Christian group that wanted to destroy FRC.
 
Come Forward, Mr. Cathy

Mr. Cathy has an obligation to come forward. He needs to set the record straight for the millions of people who supported his family’s company.

And while he’s at it, perhaps he could pick up a telephone and call Mr. Johnson — a man who nearly lost his life in the culture war. It’s a decent thing to do.

But until that happens, I just cannot in good conscience spend a single penny at a fast food restaurant that supports anti-Christian organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Farewell, Chick-fil-A.

Todd Starnes is a columnist, commentator, author and radio talk show host. His latest book is Culture Jihad: How to Stop the Left From Killing a Nation.

UN to Downplay Crime of Child Pornography

One more move by the Satanic UN to destroy morality!
 
From C-Fam
 
By Stefano Gennarini, J.D.

NEW YORK, November 29 (C-Fam) The UN General Assembly will replace the term “child pornography” with “child sexual abuse material” even though experts have warned in the past that the move could make it harder to prosecute some child pornography cases.

The General Assembly is scheduled to adopt a resolution on the sexual exploitation of children online that endorses replacing the term “child pornography” with “child sexual abuse material” as part of the fight against child pornography. Advocates of this approach say that this will help law enforcement distinguish between lawful adult pornography and criminal sexual images of children. Experts from U.S. law enforcement have cautioned against this approach in the past, warning that it may hamper efforts to prosecute child pornography cases.

European countries have been promoting the new language for several years, and the resolution about to be adopted could have far reaching implications for how the UN system and countries around the world fight child pornography. Because child pornography is a global internet phenomenon, the fight against child pornography requires a globalized approach.

The resolution of the General Assembly notes that “the term ‘child pornography’ is being increasingly referred to, within some Member States, as child sexual exploitation or child sexual abuse material to better reflect the nature of such material and the seriousness of the harm suffered by the child in this context.”

The complication is that it is unclear if the resolution’s use of the term “child sexual abuse material” refers only to images produced as a result of or in the process of sexual abuse of child or to any sexually explicit depiction of children.

The confusion was a reason why longtime Federal Bureau of investigation expert Kenneth V. Lanning opposed the use of new terminology to fight child pornography.

“Federal law does not now require the children in child pornography to be sexually abused… If it did, this could require further proof and evidence to prosecute a case,” Lanning wrote in a manual on sex offenders used by the Department of Justice until recently.

“Because some people think ’pornography’ is not an important issue does not justify changing from a term (child pornography) with 30 years of case law to a term (child-abuse images) with no legal history and requiring an added burden of proof. Why start using a new term of unclear meaning that will further confuse people?” Lanning said.

Proponents of the new language respond that any sexually explicit image of a child is inherently abusive and therefore this is a moot question.

“If an image depicts a child engaged in sexually explicit conduct, then the image is child pornography or a sexually abusive image of a child. The image themselves are harmful,” former federal prosecutor and Catholic University of America law professor Mary Graw Leary, wrote in a book more recently.

But the European countries who promote the new language are signatories of the Lanzarote Convention, which is known to leave latitude to countries on what should be considered sexual abuse of children. The Lanzarote Convention is considerably less protective than the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, to which the U.S. is a party.

The Optional Protocol considers any sexually explicit image of a child under the age of 18 child pornography, and requires states to prohibit production, distribution, and possession of such images. The Lanzarote convention, on the other hand, does not require the prosecution of virtual child pornography or the criminalization of child pornography produced or distributed consensually by minors above the age of consent.

Word Play Shop Names - The Rise of Amazon- Foil Arms and Hog

A bit of humour for Black Friday, a curse that's creeping worldwide! There are Black Friday sales tomorrow in Canada, where Thanksgiving was last month, and in the UK, where the holiday doesn't even exist!

Abp Vigano: Pope Is Subjecting Church to ‘Powerful Forces’ That Want World Government

Abp Viganò on Francis's dedication to the anti-Catholic ideals of one world government and one world religion.
 
From LifeSiteNews

By His Excellency Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò

November 21, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – For twenty centuries, the Catholic Church has professed faith in Jesus Christ, the only Savior, which has come down to us intact, as she received it from the Apostles and Fathers of the Church at the price of the blood of the Martyrs, and by the witness of the Confessors of the faith and of innumerable Saints of every people and language. This faith has been handed down by parents to their children, by priests and religious; it has been spread by zealous missionaries to every continent in the world, under the guidance of the successors of the Apostle Peter who have guaranteed the unity of Christ’s Bride by confirming the brethren in the faith.

For almost seven years now, the successor of the Prince of the Apostles, who was entrusted with the mandate Christ conferred on Peter after his profession of faith — “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:18) — has abdicated his ministry to confirm the brethren in the faith. Pope Francis has never confirmed anyone. We painfully acknowledge how divisive and destructive his ministry has been.

With the declaration he signed in Abu Dhabi, in which he states that “The pluralism and the diversity of religions, color, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom,” and by his constant deviant condemnations of so-called “proselytism,” Francis has not only mortified every missionary impulse but has indeed rejected the mandate given by Christ to all the Apostles: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” (Mt 28:18-20).

The strategy of the current pontiff is camouflaged by deceit and lies, it is concealed by silence; when he is discovered in these, his deviant intentions, what great confusion they cause among the faithful, while they are astutely praised by the enemies of the Church.

The Synod on the Amazon is also part of a much larger and hidden design. It is nothing but an element, albeit a disruptive one, of a vast project, developed under the aegis of the United Nations and supported by the great financial and Masonic powers. How can we explain that the Pachamama idol is already present, through a UN initiative, in texts designed for the ideological indoctrination of children?

Everything stands and fits together: a false science founded on an alleged catastrophic warming of the earth which is chiefly caused by man; an integral ecology which places at the center of creation not man created in the image and likeness of God, and called to share divine life in a blessed eternity with his Creator, but the Mother Earth “divinity,” i.e. the Pachamama, from which man is drawn and to which he must return. From this standpoint, therefore, even idolatry is willed by God, and Pope Francis celebrates it before the world, profaning the most sacred place in Christian Rome — the basilica built on the tomb of the Apostle Peter.

During the recent Synod, a grave sacrilegious act was consummated through the inaugural celebration held in the Vatican Gardens and the appearance of the Pachamama in San Peter’s and Santa Maria in Traspontina. The worship of the living and true God, revealed and manifested in Jesus Christ, whom the Catholic Church adores and professes, has been contaminated by clearly idolatrous and syncretistic elements.

Idolatry, or its simulation, represents the most serious attack perpetrated against the Divine Majesty. The martyrs shed their blood and paid for their resistance of idolatry with the supreme gift of their lives. Those same martyrs who have drenched and consecrated the earth of ancient pagan Rome, have seen their glorious memory profaned by the celebrations of the Pachamama.

The Scriptures of the Old Testament teach us that idolatry is shamelessness and prostitution, it is the profanation of the nuptial covenant that God has entered into with his people.

St. Paul, for his part, warns the first Christians of Corinth: “What do I imply then … that an idol is anything? No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?” (1 Cor 10:19-22).

The Catholic Church, instead of being vigilant and denouncing the threats which menace her and darken the horizon of the entire human family, is lending itself to serve as a sounding board for a utopian and anti-Christic ideology, in a frightening subjection to the powerful forces that dominate the world scene and are actively promoting vast processes aimed at the establishment of a World Government.

Faced with such a scenario, in which the very survival of the Catholic Church is seriously threatened; in the face of so many reprehensible actions and statements by the Supreme Pontiff, one hundred scholars have drafted a Declaration asking “respectfully for Pope Francis to publicly and without ambiguity to repent and to repair these outrages.” I felt it was my duty to unite my own voice to theirs. In similar fashion, all bishops and cardinals of the Catholic Church should feel obliged to “address a fraternal correction to Pope Francis for these scandals.”

“O God, who in the grace of adoption has called us to become children of light, let us no longer be enveloped by the darkness of error but grant us to remain always in your truth, so as to illumine the night of the world” (From today’s Ambrosian liturgy).

Come, Lord Jesus! Manifest your sovereign royalty over your Church and the world! Reject not the plea of ​​your Bride, and do not disappoint her expectation. And when you do not grant what we ask of you, let us wait for it with faithful perseverance and penitent love.