Rick Santorum Is Hurting the Catholic Message

In a 2006 interview, Rick Santorum seems to be trying to have it both ways on birth control.  As a practicing Catholic, he knows and seems to believe that birth control is inherently evil. although he never makes this statement in this particular interview.  He is actually all over the place in this interview, seemingly trying to please all sides. 

He starts out by making a statement that goes against the plain truth of birth control: His first statement is: "I vote and have supported birth control because it is not the taking of a human life." What?????? This statement is in direct contradiction to the plain teaching of the Catholic Church and of the very nature of birth control. Most birth control is an abortifacient, which means that it does not prevent pregnancy, but simply aborts the fertilized egg, not allowing it to implant in the womb but instead dispelling it. Maybe Senator Santorum is in agreement with Speaker Gingrich who said he believed that life does not begin at conception but at implantation, although Gingrich backtracked on this one within a couple of days when the uproar began among Catholic voters. 

In the very next statement in this interview, Santorum does a Mario Cuomo (Cuomo is famous for originating the sickeningly hypocritical saying "I'm personally against abortion but I don't have a right to impose my views on others."). Senator Santorum says "I'm not a believer in birth control, at least artificial birth control." But if you combine this with his first statement, that birth control "is not the taking of human life", then what is his problem? He says birth control allows people to do what they want without taking personal responsibility. He clarifies that this is a personal point of view, and makes very clear that from a "government point of view" he has voted for contraception, although he doesn't think it works and that it is harmful to women and to our society because it promotes sex outside of marriage. Can we get any more confusing than that?

Here is the full interview:



I really have no patience for "dancing politicians"- those who try to have it both ways, especially Catholic politicians who want to appear to be supporting Church teaching and at the same time support a popular position which goes directly against Church teaching. And it usually ends up backfiring on them, as shown in this article in which Santorum is attacked by a pro-contraception author:

Posted at 12:00 PM ET, 02/15/2012

Santorum: Birth control ‘harmful to women’

By Jennifer Rubin
Yesterday I speculated on some of the reasons Rick Santorum has problems with women voters. This interview from 2006 sure isn’t going to help.For starters, does he realize that married women (men too!) use birth control? [If Santorum had stated the clear truth about birth control, that it is for the most part an abortifacient, and not tried to straddle the fence by admitting he had actually voted for it, the author of this article would have never been able to make this statement]  The impression that Santorum finds the prevalent practice of birth control “harmful to women” is, frankly, mind-numbing. If he meant to focus on teen sexual promiscuity, he surely could have, and thereby might have sounded less out of touch. [See my prior comment]

Now, he qualifies his religious views by saying he doesn’t vote against contraception “because it’s not the taking of a human life” (in other contexts he has emphasized that as a legal matter he has no problem with contraception) [this from a "good" Catholic??]. But how does that square with his professed belief that a candidate’s values are essential to understanding and predicting his behavior? [My point exactly] Perhaps that’s an abortion-only rule. (And really, where are George Stephanopoulos’s questions on this topic when you need them?)
In any event, this sort of thing undermines Santorum’s electability argument.  [I agree but for totally different reasons] (Current polling match-ups between President Obama and each of the two front runners, before the GOP has a nominee and before Santorum’s record is out there, are virtually useless.) This is how, in part, he lost Pennsylvania — by appearing extreme and schoolmarmish, too far to the right of average voters in a purple state. If he is the nominee in 2012, he might get some blue-collar fellows, but what about those women in Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc.? And what about more secularized suburban communities? Fuggedaboutit.

Santorum has done nothing to promote the truth about how harmful contraception actually is and in fact, has given ammunition to those who support it.

For a much clearer explanation of the Catholic teaching on birth control:

Rick Santorum - Big Government "Conservative"

From Redstate.com, here is a great post explaining the problems with Rick Santorum.  As Erick Erickson, the author explains:  "Rick Santorum is a pro-life statist. He is. You will have to deal with it. He is a big government conservative. Santorum is right on social issues, but has never let his love of social issues stand in the way of the creeping expansion of the welfare state. In fact, he has been complicit in the expansion of the welfare state."

Santorum is definitely a better choice than Romney or Gingrich, but nothing will change under a Santorum presidency.  We will continue right along as we have.  There will be more pro life talk, but as it has been under all Republican administrations since 1973, abortion will remain the law of the land.  Spending will continue unabated, we will continue to get involved in more and more wars.  The Federal Reserve will still be given a free reign to do whatever it wants to do.  And the Federal Government will grow and grow and grow. 

Take a look at the article:

What A Big Government Conservative Looks Like

I'm rather tired of all the people who don’t like Romney trying to claim Rick Santorum is not a big government conservative, or not a pro-life statist. I would support him before I would support Romney too, but I have no intention of giving up ideological and intellectual consistency in the name of beating Mitt Romney.

Rick Santorum is a pro-life statist. He is. You will have to deal with it. He is a big government conservative. Santorum is right on social issues, but has never let his love of social issues stand in the way of the creeping expansion of the welfare state. In fact, he has been complicit in the expansion of the welfare state.

Suddenly we’re all forgetting what a big government conservatism is. The term was coined by Fred Barnes in defense of George W. Bush’s “compassionate conservative” agenda. Bush intended to use domestic social welfare policy for conservative ends. In the process, he expanded the welfare state to do so through No Child Left Behind, the prescription drug benefit, etc. Rick Santorum was a willing participant in this.

Santorum is a conservative. He is. But his conservative is largely defined by his social positions and the ends to which government would be deployed. But he has chosen as the means to those conservative ends bigger government. We see big government conservatives most clearly when they deviate from the tireless efforts of people like Mike Pence and Jim DeMint and the others who were willing to oppose George W. Bush’s expansion of the welfare state. Rick Santorum was not among them.

I and some friends, none of us Romney fans, have set about exploring Santorum’s record since Wednesday morning. Here now is a non-exhaustive list of what we have found. It does not even include his support for No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, debt ceiling increases, funding the bridge to nowhere, refusing to redirect earmark allocations to disaster relief along the Gulf Coast post Katrina, etc. 

This is not the record of a man committed to scaling back the welfare state or the nanny state. Had he been up for re-election in 2010 instead of 2006, this is the record of a man who the tea party movement would have primaried. The only real justification for supporting him now is he is not Mitt Romney, but I still believe we can do better.

See for yourself

A Reminder of Judgment Day

There are good things coming out of this conflict between the Catholic Church and the Obama Administration.  One very good thing is that the Gospel is being preached, and the Bishops are promoting the teachings of the Catholic church and calling out those who do not follow it.  Below is an article that should be sent to every Catholic politician in this country.  God bless Bishop Daniel Jenky for saying what has needed to be said for many years.  Those in positions of power will have much to answer for.  They need to be made very much aware that there is a day of reckoning for each one of us, and it will weigh much more heavily on those "to whom much has been given."  To call them out and even excommunicate them from the Church could very well be the most loving thing we can do.  It is the only chance to wake them up and possibly save their souls and the souls of those whom they are leading astray.

Catholic politicians who attack Church
should remember God's judgment

Rome, Italy, Feb 11, 2012 / 01:46 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Politicians who consider themselves Catholic but collaborate in “the assault against their faith” should remember they will one day have to give account for their acts before God, Bishop Daniel Jenky of Peoria, Illinois said Feb 10.

“There is a last judgment. There is a particular judgment. May they change their minds and may God have mercy on them,” he told CNA during his visit to Rome.

When asked specifically about recent actions of Democratic Health and Human Services Secretary Sebelius Kathleen Sebelius and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Bishop Jenky replied “I am utterly scandalized.” [Yes!!!]

“The Lord once said ‘if you deny me at the end, I will deny you,’ this from our most merciful, good Savior. And so if it is a choice between Jesus Christ and political power or getting favorable editorials in leftist papers, well, that’s simply not a choice.”

Both Sebelius and Rep. Pelosi have been at the forefront of attempts to force Catholic institutions to cover contraception, sterilizations and abortifacients as part of their staff’s health insurance plans.

Bishop Jenky said there are too many Catholic politicians in the U.S. who “like to wear green sweaters on St. Patrick’s Day and march” or “have their pictures taken with the hierarchy” or “have conspicuous crosses on their forehead with ashes” but who then “not only do not live their faith they collaborate in the assault against their faith.”

The 64-year-old Chicago native is currently making his “ad limina” visit to Rome to discuss the state of his diocese with the Pope and the Vatican. He is part of a larger episcopal delegation from the states of Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin. Bishop Jenky said the issue of religious freedom in the United States has featured in all their meetings so far, including their audience with Pope Benedict XVI Feb. 9.

“Determined secularists see the Catholic Church as the largest institutional block to a completely secularized society and not for the first, and probably not for the last time, we’re under assault,” he said drawing parallels with the anti-Catholic “Kulturkampf” in late 19th century Germany or the anti-clerical laws in France in the early 20th century.

“I am a Holy Cross religious and my own community had six colleges in France and they turned our mother house chapel into a stable,” he said. As for the United States in 2012, “it is always difficult to predict the future but the intensity of hatred against Catholic Christianity in elements of our culture is just astounding.”

He believes the present White House administration is also motivated by a “determined secularism,” while Communist dictator Joseph Stalin would “admire the uniformity of the American press, with some exceptions.”

In 2010 the Illinois legislature voted to legalize same-sex civil unions, a move which led to the closure of Catholic foster care services. This, said the bishop, took the Church “entirely out of the work that we started when the State of Illinois could not have cared less about beggar kids running up and down the streets.”

Bishop Jenky is very conscious of this patrimony of Catholic schools, hospitals and other social services “built by the sacrifice of Catholic believers” in previous generations of Illinois Catholics. “There weren’t a lot of multi-millionaires who built the churches, opened those orphanages or built those schools,” he said.

The bishop fears that socially liberal elites ultimately want to secularize such institutions by stealth. “I assume that is the underlying goal,” he suggested, “so that is robbing Christ but it is also robbing the heritage of generations of believers. So we would try to resist this in every way possible. It would be an incredible injustice.”

In conversation, he quoted the stark 2010 prediction of Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, “I will die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square.” So is Bishop Jenky prepared for prison or worse?

“I hope I would always prefer Christ to anything so, if it came to it, yes but I would be one of the trembling martyrs.”

He recalled how in ancient Rome some Christians would run towards their martyrdom. He, on the other hand, would “probably be walking down the Forum with eyes downcast a little.”

“I think most of the bishops of our Church, though, would be faithful to Christ above anything, including our own personal freedom.”  [We can certainly pray that this is true]

The Temptations of This World

Satan tempts Jesus by offering Him the world

Whitney Houston is dead. 

Another "superstar" falls from the sky and the world is in shock and mourning.  We are told now that her death was probably a combination of alcohol and drugs.  Whitney Houston is just another sad story of what the "riches" of this world have to offer - death and destruction.  We have seen it so many, many times in our contemporary culture:  Elvis Presley, Judy Garland, Michael Jackson, Heath Ledger, Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, etc. etc. etc.  And then there are those who have achieved fame and fortune outside of entertainment, such as Gadafi and Hitler.  The god of this world offers them instant gratification, they grab the ring, and it all ends in a terrible, sad death.

We have seen those who are still alive as I write this, such as Britney Spears, Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan, who are living miserable unhappy lives despite all of their fame and fortune, and unless something drastic happens in their lives, they are headed for very sad endings.  Princess Diana - another desperately unhappy person despite the fame and fortune - died just one week before Mother Teresa.  I will always remember Mother Angelica's comment:  One who had everything died with nothing, and another who had nothing, died with everything. 

Satan's temptation of Christ as outlined in Matthew 4:1-11 is exactly how he tries to get to each one of us and how, sadly, he destroyed each one of these tragic persons.  Satan first tried to tempt Jesus by taking his mind off of the spiritual and concentrating on the physical.  Satan says: 

"If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread."

This is very cunning on Satan's part.  He first tries to attack Jesus' pride by saying if you are the Son of God, thinking that Jesus is like the rest of us who would get very defensive and self righteous at this remark:  "What do you mean if?  Of course I'm the Son of God and I can prove it!"  By doing so, we take all the glory away from God and put it on ourselves, which is exactly what self righteousness and pride is all about.  Satan then tries to put Jesus' focus on the physical by offering him food, which represents all the physical comforts of life. 

Jesus replies: 

"It is written, Not in bread alone doth man live, but in every word that proceedeth from the mouth of God." 

Like everything else Jesus said, this has many different meanings. This statement points to the written Word of God - the Bible, of course.  But he is also alluding to the Eucharist, where we receive the body, blood, soul and divinity of the Living Word of God - Jesus Christ.  Jesus doesn't deny that we need physical food to sustain us, but he says that the real food is the Word of God, because that is where we find eternal life.  Physical comforts and sensations, fame and fortune, can give us instant gratification, but if that is our goal in life, we will reap death.  If we try to sustain ourselves only on the physical, we will die right along with it.  Where our treasure is, there will our heart be also.

Satan then tries to attack Jesus through pride, taunting Jesus that if He really is God, he can easily prove it by throwing himself off the mountain and showing that legions of angels will come to his side.   Satan is also saying that if Jesus is the Son of God, and there actually is a God, then God has to abide by His own scripture and not allow any harm to come to Jesus.  And Satan bolsters his argument by quoting scripture, attempting to show that this is actually the Will of God.

"If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down, for it is written: That he hath given his angels charge over thee, and in their hands shall they bear thee up, lest perhaps thou dash thy foot against a stone." 

Jesus immediately calls Satan on what he is really trying to do: 

"It is written again: Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God."

How often have we shaken our fists at God and said if you're really God, you would or would not let this happen!  If you're God, prove yourself to me!   If there is a God, how could he let this happen?  When we do this, we are actually tempting God.  When we tempt God, we are saying we doubt him and he must prove himself to us.  We are not believing God's plain statements to us.  We are saying that what he tells us is not enough for us, we need more.

Satan had one more trick up his sleeve.  When we fall for this temptation, it will cause the greatest destruction of all.

Again the devil took him up into a very high mountain, and shewed him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them,

And said to him: All these will I give thee, if falling down thou wilt adore me.

Jesus knew that in just a few years he would have to pour his blood out on the cross in order to redeem the world from Satan.  We know that Jesus actually prayed at one point to be spared the agony of this great sacrifice.  And here was Satan saying to him that he didn't have to go through it.  Jesus could have the whole world without the sacrifice of the cross.  There is one "little" catch:  he has to worship Satan. 

Jesus doesn't try to answer Satan, he doesn't argue with him.  He says without hesitation:

Begone, Satan: for it is written, The Lord thy God shalt thou adore, and him only shalt thou serve.

This is actually the same temptation that Satan tried to use through Peter, when Peter rebuked Jesus for saying he would "suffer many things."  Jesus called out Satan through Peter in the same way as he did on the mountain (Matthew 16:21-23):

From that time Jesus began to shew to his disciples, that he must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the ancients and scribes and chief priests, and be put to death, and the third day rise again.  And Peter taking him, began to rebuke him, saying: Lord, be it far from thee, this shall not be unto thee. Who turning, said to Peter: Go behind me, Satan, thou art a scandal unto me: because thou savourest not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men.

We need to ask ourselves - are we savoring the things of men and not of God?  If so, whether we realize it or not, we are worshipping at the altar of Satan and glorifying him.  We have example after example of what happens when people accept the temptations of Satan and reject God.  As Christ said in Matthew 16:26:  "For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?"  Whitney Houston is just one more tragic example that we can point to.  There is nothing in this world, apart from God, that can give us life.  Everything in this world is going to die and fade away, and if that is where we put our heart and treasure, we will die and fade with it. 

All of the media is glorifying Whitney Houston, despite the great lessons we could be learning from her life and death.  It is true that she was gifted with a tremendous voice.  Yet, we need to look honestly at her life and reject it, realizing that she chose the wrong way.  She is not someone to be admired, but someone who desperately needed our prayers while she was alive, and we can only hope that it is not too late to pray for her now.  Whitney Houston chose the way of Satan.  She chose the physical over the spiritual, and she paid for it with her life.  

As we enter into the season of Lent, let us resolve that we will not follow the way of this world, which is the way of Satan but instead, we will live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.

Sexagesima Sunday: Preparation for Lent

Today is Sexagesima Sunday, the second Sunday before Lent.  I was very remiss last week in not pointing out Septuagesima Sunday, which is the First Sunday before Lent.  We are now in the pre-Lenten period, which is the time we prepare for Lent.  Sexagesima denotes that there are now 60 days before Easter.  In the Traditional calendar, the Gloria and the alleluia have already been removed from Feria celebrations of the Mass.  The Introit for today is:

Arise, Lord, why sleepest thou? Arise, and cast us not off for ever. Wherefore hidest thou thy face, and forgettest our trouble? For our soul cleaveth unto the ground. Arise, Lord, help us, and redeem us.

This is showing a time of mourning and repentance for our sins, which have caused to be be separated from God. 

The Gospel is most interesting, being the parable of the Sower in Luke 8:4-15:

At that time, when much people were gathered together, and were come to Jesus out of every city, he spake by a parable: A sower went out to sow his seed: and as he sowed, some fell by the way side; and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it. And some fell upon a rock; and as soon as it was sprung up, it withered away, because it lacked moisture. And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprang up with it, and choked it. And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear. And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be? And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand. Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away. And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection. But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience.

This always scares me because it shows that if we are not diligent, we can lose the salvation offered to us by our Lord.   The Traditional Breviary has an excellent reading on this parable by St. Gregory the Pope:

Dearly beloved brethren, the passage from the Holy Gospel which ye have just heard, needeth not so much that I should explain it, as that I should seek to enforce its lesson. For what the Truth himself hath explained, human weakness may not presume to comment upon. But there is, in that very explanation by the Lord, something which we ought to consider carefully. For if we had told you that the seed is meant to signify the Word, ye might have doubted our understanding. Or if we had said that the field is the world ; and the birds, devils ; and the thorns, riches ; ye would perchance have denied the truth of our explanation. Therefore the Lord himself vouchsafed to give this explanation ; and that, not for this parable only, but that ye may know in what manner to interpret others, whereof he hath not given the meaning.

Beginning his explanation, the Lord saith that he speaketh in parable, that is he sheweth his language to be figurátive. Hereby he giveth confidence to the preacher when, in spite of his incapacity, he must needs endeavour to lay open to you the hidden meaning of the Lord's words. If I spake of myself, who would believe me when I say that riches are thorns? Thorns prick, but riches lull to rest. And yet riches are indeed thorns, for the anxiety they bring is a ceaseless pricking to the minds of their owners. And, if they lead into sin, they are thorns which made us bleed with the wounds which they inflict. But we understand from the Evangelist Matthew that in this place the Lord speaketh, not of riches themselves, but of the deceitfulness of riches.

Here St. Gregory goes into a beautiful explanation of what deceitful riches are and why and how they can destroy us.  Our society puts all importance on what the Bible calls "deceitful riches" and we must be very diligent into not being drawn into this trap:

Those riches are deceitful riches, which can be ours only for a little while ; those riches are deceitful riches, which cannot relieve the poverty of our souls. They only are the true riches, which made us rich in virtues. If then, dearly beloved brethren, ye seek to be rich, earnestly desire the true riches. If ye would be truly honourable, strive after the kingdom of heaven. If ye love the bravery of titles, hasten to have your names written down at the Court of the heavenly King, where Angels are. Take to heart the Lord's words which your ear heareth. The food of the soul is the Word of God. When the stomach is sick it throweth up again the food which is put into it ; and so is the soul sick when a man heareth and digesteth not in his memory the Word of God. For if any man cannot keep his food, that man's life is in desperate case.

Lent is all about getting rid of the garbage and the spiritual poison that has come into our lives.  As St. Gregory says, if we are sick, we will not be able to digest the Word of God, and if we cannot keep our food, "that man's life is in desperate case." 

We can never let down.  We must always be aware of the spiritual dangers around us and constantly be drawing close to the True Physician who can cure us of all our spiritual ailments and give us not the death that this world offers, but True Life.  Only then will we be able to bear true fruit.

Romney On Abortion Through The Years

Here is Romney in his pro-choice days when it was convenient for him to be pro abortion.  Mitt Romney cannot be trusted.

Catholics Support Artificial Birth Control

Life Magazine Cover
of March 20, 1970

The fight continues between the White House and the Catholic Church about the healthcare law forcing Catholic employers to provide free contraception and/or sterilization for their employees.  Speaker John Boehner, himself a Catholic, has gotten into the fray and has said that "If the president does not reverse the department's attack on religious freedom, then the Congress, acting on behalf of the American people and the Constitution we are sworn to uphold and defend, must."   The White House is now talking about reaching a "compromise", although I don't know how you compromise with evil.  The Catholic Church's plain teaching is that artificial contraception and sterilization are inherently evil and constitute a mortal sin, which means complete separation from God, and if this sin is not confessed, repented of and absolved in confession, these men and women will die and remain separated from God for all eternity. 

Again, I think in many ways the Catholic bishops have only themselves to blame for this situation because they have allowed Catholics in their jurisdiction to disobey this law and nothing was ever said.  But now that they are actually being threatened, they have no choice but to defend Church teaching.  And as a result, the true message of God is being taught, which is a reason for rejoicing.

However, far too many Catholics don't believe this is even an issue, as they have no problem with artificial contraception and do not hesitate to make that known, as shown in this article from USA Today.

New surveys: Catholics want birth control coverage

Pundits and bishops warn President Obama he could lose the white Catholic vote over requiring a contraception option for insurance plans. But Catholic women say they want birth control covered in employee health plans.

The pivot point is how you see this. Is it a battle over birth control -- used by 98% of U.S. women at some time in their lives -- or over government intrusion into the right of religious organizations to live by their teachings? 

The Catholic bishops, backed by conservative evangelicals, say the Obama administration shouldn't include contraception coverage as part of free preventive care options in employers' health insurance plans. 

Hence the showdown: As our editorial Monday says, religious liberties fight or, as Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius says, a free choice issue. 

And here's where the Catholic women come in. According to the Public Religion Research Institute poll released today, 

A majority (55%) of Americans agree that "employers should be required to provide their employees with health care plans that cover contraception and birth control at no cost." Four-in-ten (40%) disagree with this requirement. 

Key breakdowns 

• 58% of all Catholics agree employers should be required to provide their employees with health care plans that cover contraception. That slides down to 52% for Catholic voters, 50% for white Catholics.
• 61% of religiously unaffiliated Americans say employer plans should cover contraception.
• 50% of white mainline Protestants want the coverage. However, for evangelical Protestants, that drops to 38%  

 And perhaps of greater note among election-watchers  

Women are significantly more likely than men to agree that employers should be required to provide health care plans that cover contraception (62% vs. 47% respectively).  

A second poll, also released today from Public Policy Polling, has similar findings. This poll, conducted at the request of Planned Parenthood, finds 

...a majority of voters, including a majority of Catholics, don't believe Catholic hospitals and universities should be exempted from providing the benefit.

...Independent voters support this benefit by a 55/36 margin; in fact, a majority of voters in every racial, age and religious category that we track express support. In particular, a 53 percent majority of Catholic voters, who were oversampled as part of this poll, favor the benefit, including fully 62 percent of Catholics who identify themselves as independents. 

I was listening to an interesting interview with the late Fr. Malachi Martin in which he compared the state of the Catholic Church to the brutally beaten and scourged Jesus Christ.  Just as Jesus Christ, as a result of the horrific scourging he received, was no longer recognizable even to his own mother, so the Catholic Church is so beaten and in such tatters that it is hardly recognizable as the same institution it was even 50 years ago.  Fifty years ago Catholics accepted the teachings and pronouncements of the Holy See and obeyed without question. Catholics faithfully attended Mass and received the sacraments. I remember the long lines at confession, the packed churches at each and every Sunday Mass.  If there was dissent among the laity and hierarchy, it was muted and only in pockets here and there.  Now it is widespread and common, and many millions of souls are at risk.

Fr. Martin says we can do only what Christ himself did - continue on the way carrying our cross.  It is still possible to be a good and loyal Catholic in these evil and turbulent times, but just as it took all of Christ's efforts and more to continue on the way to Calvary, it will mean giving everything inside of us to continue this fight.  When it became too much for Christ, another named Simeon came along to carry the burden.  When we have given all we can, God will supply the help we need.  But we must never back down.  We must always stay loyal to Christ's Holy Vicar and to the Church founded by our Savior.

Romney, Catholics and Abortion

Just this past weekend I was talking with a very devout and holy Catholic who told me that I absolutely must vote for Mitt Romney because we had to do whatever it takes to defeat Barack Obama, and Romney is the only one who can do it.  Yes, he agreed that Romney was far from perfect, but he completely deflected my arguments that Romney and Obama are basically the same person and nothing will change under Romney.  My good Catholic friend insisted that Romney will appoint the right judges and we have our best chance of defeating Roe v. Wade by electing Mitt Romney.

I saw this article today on townhall.com which would seem to belie my friend's faith in Romney.  My friend is convinced that Romney will repeal the Obama Healthcare law.  Well, friends, it just ain't gonna happen.  Ann Coulter tells us Romney is the most conservative candidate we have.  The truth is Romney, Gingrich, Santorum and Obama are all "workin' for the man." 

Romney Told Catholic Hospitals to Administer Abortion Pills

A defining moment in Mitt Romney's post-pro-life-conversion political career came in his third year as governor of Massachusetts, when he decided Catholic hospitals would be required under his interpretation of a new state law to give rape victims a drug that can induce abortions.

Romney announced this decision -- saying it was the "right thing for hospitals" to do -- just two days after he had taken the opposite position.  

The story begins in 1975, when Massachusetts enacted a law that said, "No privately controlled hospital .. shall be required to permit any patient to have an abortion ... or to furnish contraceptive devices or information to such patient ... when said services or referrals are contrary to the religious or moral principles of said hospital ... ."

Twenty-seven years later, when Romney was running for governor, he filled out a questionnaire for NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts. It said: "Emergency contraception does not cause abortion. Rather, it prevents pregnancy from occurring. Will you support efforts to increase access to emergency contraception?"

Romney said: "Yes."

The next year, the Massachusetts legislature considered an "emergency contraception" mandate. It would have allowed pharmacists to sell Plan B -- an abortifacient -- without a prescription and without parental consent. It also would have required all hospitals to inform rape victims of the availability of such "emergency contraceptives" and provide them to the rape victim if she wanted them even when they would cause an abortion.

Maria Parker of the Massachusetts Catholic Conference, the public policy organization of the state's Catholic bishops, explained in testimony to the state legislature why Catholic hospitals could not do this.

The normal Catholic ban on artificial contraception did not apply in a rape case, Parker said. But while contraception was acceptable in such a situation, killing an unborn child was not.

In keeping with this moral understanding, one Massachusetts Catholic hospital chain would later explain to the Boston Globe that its practice was to test a rape victim to make certain she was not pregnant and only then give her emergency contraceptives. If the test proved the woman was pregnant, the hospital would not give the woman the drugs because they could not prevent conception but they could kill her child.

Parker concluded her testimony by quoting what Cardinal Frances George of Chicago had told the Illinois legislature when it proposed a similar law: "Our hospitals cannot and will not comply with this law."

In that session, the Massachusetts Senate passed the "emergency contraception" bill, but it was blocked in the House.

As Planned Parenthood and NARAL demanded action on the bill, and the Massachusetts Catholic Conference continued to speak out against it, Gov. Mitt Romney remained mum.

"Shawn Feddeman, spokeswoman for Gov. Mitt Romney, declined to comment on the governor's position on the bill," the Boston Globe reported on July 1, 2004. "'We'll review it when it reaches the governor's desk.'"

The bill was reintroduced in the next session -- and Romney remained mum.

Romney had "no opinion on the bill," his spokesman, Eric Fehrnstorm, told The Associated Press in April 2005. "We'll take a look at the bill should it reach the governor's desk."

But the bill had veto-proof support in both chambers of the Democrat-controlled legislature in 2005. In July, the House and Senate reached a compromise on it that would protect Catholic hospitals from being forced to act against their faith.

At that time, the Massachusetts Catholic Conference published a bulletin explaining what happened. The House had included language to "expressly apply" the 1975 conscience law protections to the new emergency contraception law. The Senate had included language saying the new law should apply "notwithstanding" any existing law.

"In the end, neither amendment was included in the bill," said the Massachusetts Catholic Conference. "House Majority Leader John Rogers, who worked tirelessly behind the scenes to defend the hospitals' right of conscience, made it clear during floor debate on July 21 that the House blocked the Senate amendment so that the 1975 conscience statute would continue to have full effect."

The conference provided me with a copy of this bulletin, and Rogers assured me its account was "accurate and true."

The Catholic Church still opposed the bill because it would facilitate abortions. But at least the religious liberty of Catholic hospitals had been preserved -- or so it seemed.

On July 25, 2005, Romney vetoed the bill -- even though it was clear his veto would be overridden.

He published an op-ed in the Boston Globe the next day explaining his decision. "The bill does not involve only the prevention of conception," he wrote. "The drug it authorizes would also terminate life after conception." Romney said the veto kept his pledge not to change the state's abortion laws.

Romney made no mention of the religious liberty issue in his op-ed. But then, the bill, as the Massachusetts Catholic Conference and the House majority leader understood it, did not allow coercion of Catholic hospitals.

On Dec. 7, 2005, a week before the law was to take effect, the Boston Globe ran a piece headlined: "Private Hospitals Exempt on Pill Law." The article said the state Department of Public Health had determined that the emergency contraception law "does not nullify a statute passed years ago that says privately run hospitals cannot be forced to provide abortions or contraception."

Public Health Commissioner Paul Cote Jr. told the Globe: "We felt very clearly that the two laws don't cancel each other out and basically work in harmony with each other."

Romney spokesman Fehrnstrom told the Globe that Romney agreed with the Department of Public Health on the issue. The governor, he said, "respects the views of health care facilities that are guided by moral principles on this issue."

"The staff of DPH did their own objective and unbiased legal analysis," Romney's spokesman told the Globe. "The brought it to us, and we concur in it."

The Globe itself ruefully bowed to this legal analysis. It ran an editorial headlined: "A Plan B Mistake." "The legislators failed, however," the Globe said, "to include wording in the bill explicitly repealing a clause in an older statute that gives hospitals the right, for reasons of conscience, not to offer birth control services."

Liberals joined in attacking Romney's defense of Catholic hospitals. But that defense did not last long.

The same day the Globe ran its editorial, Romney held a press conference. Now he said his legal counsel had advised him the new emergency contraception law did trump the 1975 conscience law.


"On that basis, I have instructed the Department of Public Health to follow the conclusion of my own legal counsel and to adopt that sounder view," Romney said. "In my personal view, it's the right thing for hospitals to provide information and access to emergency contraception to anyone who is a victim of rape."

A true leader would have said: I will defend the First Amendment right of Catholics to freely exercise their religion -- against those who would force them to participate in abortions -- all the way to the Supreme Court.

Romney cannot be trusted.  He is a globalist and committed to the New World Order.  When asked about the National Defense Authorization Act, he said without hesitation that he supports it.



From thepoliticalguide.com

Governor Romney is a strong supporter of the PATRIOT Act, and the expanded powers given to the government for homeland security purposes. He supports the use of Guantanamo Bay for holding detainees, supports military tribunals, and opposes habeas corpus rights for detainees and civilian trials for terrorists. He has also expressed support for extraordinary rendition.

At a campaign event in 2007, Governor Romney stated that he supported enhanced interrogation techniques in a "ticking time bomb" scenario, but that he was opposed to torture. He praised President Bush for the passage of the PATRIOT Act, for the pursuit of wiretapping calls made by possible terrorists, and for interrogating prisoners.

During the New Hampshire Debate, Governor Romney was asked about previous statements that he believed mosques should be wiretapped if a credible threat existed. He reiterated this stance, but noted a judge's approval would be required. He stated that while he hears people worry about encroachment on civil liberties, he believes that the most important civil liberty that government can provide is to keep it's citizens alive.

At a 2009 policy speech, Governor Romney lamented the possibility that CIA interrogators would be investigated over possible violations. He stated that there were times when other countries helped us out by allowing us to have prisoners interrogated there. Investigations into those actions only weakens trust in the US and may lead to nations refusing these extraordinary renditions in the future.

As part of his 2012 campaign, Governor Romney issued a white paper on foreign policy. In that document, he outlined a vision of the world that had the US under constant assault from all sides, and noted that the military and other tools of the government needed to be adjust to accomodate those threats. He advocated for restructuring the DHS, for focusing on domestic radicalization, and for updating the authorization for the use of force to include new terrorist entities and new countries.

In 2012, Governor Romney stated in a debate that he would have signed the 2012 National Defese Authorization Act. That legislation gave the President the authorization to arrest and indefinitely detain US citizens who are suspected on being allied with al-Qaeda.

Yes we have a choice between Romney and Obama, just as we have a choice between Lucifer and Satan.

Meditation on the Carrying of the Cross

Today is the First Saturday of the Month.  Our Lady of Fatima requested that we observe First Saturdays as follows:

It consists in going to Confession, receiving Communion, reciting five decades of the Rosary and meditating for a quarter of an hour on the mysteries of the Rosary on the first Saturday of five consecutive months. The Confession may be made during the eight days preceding or following the first Saturday of each month, provided that Holy Communion be received in the state of grace. Should one forget to form the intention of making reparation to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, it may be formed at the next Confession, occasion to go to confession being taken at the first opportunity.

I have decided this month to meditate on the fourth Sorrowful Mystery:  Jesus Carries His Cross.  I love the meditation from St. Francis from the Stations of the Cross:

When our divine Savior beheld the cross, He most willingly stretched out His bleeding arms, lovingly embraced it, and tenderly kissed it, and placing it on His bruised shoulders, He, although almost exhausted, joyfully carried it.

And the prayer is:

O my Jesus, I cannot be Thy friend and follower, if I refuse to carry the cross. O dearly beloved cross! I embrace thee, I kiss thee, I joyfully accept thee from the hands of my God. Far be it from me to glory in anything, save in the cross of my Lord and Redeemer. By it the world shall be crucified to me and I to the world, that I may be Thine forever.

The Cross is an ugly object of execution consisting of two rough wooden logs nailed to each other, one horizontal and the other vertical.  It caused the extreme torture and long, excruciatingly painful death of those crucified on it.  Yet, our Lord reached out and embraced and even kissed this instrument of torture because it was the instrument through which salvation came to the world.  Christ commands us to follow his lead:  "Then Jesus said to his disciples: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me."  (Matthew 16:24). 

The cross that Jesus carried was the salvation of the world, and we as Catholics display it in our homes, our Churches, wear it around our neck, and trace it across our bodies when we pray.  The priest makes the sign of the cross when he blesses us.  To carry our cross is to take whatever suffering is offered us and joyfully accept it because it is the road to our own personal salvation. 

Jesus was actually too physically weak to carry his cross, and because the Romans did not want him to die until they could nail him to that cross, they forced Simon the Cyrenian to help our Lord carry his cross.  I find it ironic that those who hated our Lord are the ones who helped to make it possible for Jesus to die on that Cross which would save the world.  So often those who are our enemies are actually helping us on the road to salvation because without realizing it, by persecuting us they are giving us more strength to carry our cross.  And of course, Our Lord, along with his Blessed Mother, is always walking with us lifting our burden and filling us with strength.  We are never alone. 

Life consists in carrying a cross of one kind or another.  It is our choice to either take the cross of this world which will lead to death, or the blessed cross of our Lord, which he so joyfully and willingly accepted, and which will lead to our salvation and life eternal.

Feast of The Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary

Today is the Feast of The Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary, or Candlemas.  To those who say the Rosary on a regular basis, they know this as the Fourth Joyful Mystery, the Presentation of Our Lord at the Temple.  In fact, the Novus Ordo calendar now calls this day Presentation of the Lord.  It is also called Candlemas because of Christ our Lord, who is the " light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel" (Luke 2:32).  Christ is the light of the nations, hence the blessing and procession of candles on this day. The reason it is called The Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary is because this was traditionally the time when Israelite women went through a purification process after giving birth.  Leviticus 12:1-8:

And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.  And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised [this is what the Church traditionally celebrated on January 1, but is now only celebrated in the Traditional Calendar].  And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.  But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.

And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest: who shall offer it before the Lord, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This is the law for her that hath born a male or a female.  And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean.

Joseph and Mary were very poor, so they offered two young turtle doves to redeem the child, the Creator of the universe.  In actual fact, Christ, the Lamb of God, was the perfect offering.

The account of the purification of Mary can be found in Luke 2:22-32:

[22] And after the days of her purification, according to the law of Moses, were accomplished, they carried him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord: [23] As it is written in the law of the Lord: Every male opening the womb shall be called holy to the Lord: [24] And to offer a sacrifice, according as it is written in the law of the Lord, a pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons: [25] And behold there was a man in Jerusalem named Simeon, and this man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel; and the Holy Ghost was in him.

[26] And he had received an answer from the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Christ of the Lord. [27] And he came by the Spirit into the temple. And when his parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him according to the custom of the law, [28] He also took him into his arms, and blessed God, and said: [29] Now thou dost dismiss thy servant, O Lord, according to thy word in peace; [30] Because my eyes have seen thy salvation, [31] Which thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples: [32] A light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.

The Lesson is taken from a Sermon by St. Augustine the Bishop:

Concerning that time it was written : And of Sion it shall be reported that he was born in her, and the Most High shall stablish her.  O how blessed is the omnipotence of him that was born!  Yea, how blessed is the glory of him that came down from heaven to earth!  Whilst he was yet in his Mother's womb, he was saluted by St. John the Baptist.  And when he was presented in the temple, he was recognized by the old man Simeon, a worthy who was full of years, proved and crowned.  This ancient one, as soon as he knew him, worshipped and said : Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen thy salvation. 

He had lingered in the world to see the birth of him who made the world.  The old man knew the Child, and in that Child became a child himself, for in the love wherewith he regarded the Father of all, he felt his own years to be but as yesterday.  The ancient Simeon bare in his arms the new-born Christ, and all the while, Christ ruled and upheld the old man.  Simeon had been told by the Lord that he should not taste of death before he had seen the birth of the Lord's Christ.  Now that Christ was born , all the old man's wishes on earth were fulfilled. He that was come into a decrepit world now also came to an old man.

Simeon wished not to remain long in the world, but with great desire he had desired to see Christ in the world, for he had sung with the Prophet : Shew us thy mercy, O Lord, and grant us thy salvation.  And now at last, that ye might know how that, to his joy, his prayer was granted, he said : Now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen thy salvation.  The Prophets have sung that the Maker of heaven and earth would converse on earth with men.  An Angel hath declared that the Creator of flesh and spirit would come in the flesh.  The unborn John, yet in the womb, hath saluted the unborn Saviour yet in the womb.  The old man Simeon hath seen God as little Child.

This account leaves out the following verses from Luke 2:34-35, which are prophecies made by Simeon:

And Simeon blessed them, and said to Mary his mother: Behold this child is set for the fall, and for the resurrection of many in Israel, and for a sign which shall be contradicted; And thy own soul a sword shall pierce, that, out of many hearts, thoughts may be revealed. 

The Douay Rheims verison defines "for the fall":  "Christ came for the salvation of all men; but here Simeon prophesies what would come to pass, that many through their own wilful blindness and obstinacy would not believe in Christ, nor receive his doctrine, which therefore would be ruin to them: but to others a resurrection, by their believing in him, and obeying his commandments." With Christ's appearance in the world as a man, we no longer have an excuse.  If we refuse to believe in Him, we condemn ourselves.  Belief in Christ will lead to the resurrection and life.  It is now our choice.

Simeon also prophesied to Mary that "thy own soul a sword shall pierce, that, out of many hearts, thoughts may be revealed." Go here for an excellent explanation of what this means.  Here are a few excerpts:

Commenting on this, St Bernard says: The time will come when Jesus will not be offered in the temple nor in the arms of Simeon, but outside the city walls on the arms of a cross. The time will come when he will not be ransomed with money but will himself redeem others with his own blood, for God the Father has sent him as a ransom for his people. The suffering of his Mother, the sword that will pierce her soul, will have as their only cause the agony of her Son, his persecution and death, the uncertainty about when these things will happen, and the resistance to the grace of the Redemption, which will be the ruin of many. Mary’s destiny is bound up with that of Jesus, in its operation, and without any other possible reason.

The joy of the Redemption and the pain of the Cross are inseparable in the lives of Jesus and Mary, as if God, through his most beloved creatures in the world, wished to show us that happiness is to be found close to the Cross.

Right from the start then, the lives of Our Lord and of his Mother are stamped with the sign of the Cross. To the joy of the first Christmas is soon added privation and anxiety. From these first moments Mary already knows the pain that awaits her. And when her hour comes she will contemplate the Passion and Death of her Son with neither reproach nor complaint. Suffering as no mother could ever suffer, Mary will accept her pain in peace of mind, for she knows its redemptive significance.

Thus the Blessed Virgin advanced in her pilgrimage of faith, and faithfully persevered in her union with her Son unto the Cross, where she stood, in keeping with the divine plan, endured with her only-begotten Son the intensity of his suffering, associated herself with his sacrifice in her mother’s heart, and lovingly consented to the immolation of this victim which was born of her.

Mary’s suffering has an especially suitable meaning and is related to the sins of mankind. It is a co­redemptive suffering and that is why the Church gives to the Blessed Virgin the title of Co-redemptrix.

We ourselves learn the value and meaning of the sufferings and troubles which are part of every human life, when we meditate on Mary. With her we learn to sanctify pain, uniting it to that of her Son and offering it to the Father. The Holy Mass is the most suitable moment for offering all that is most painful in our lives. And there we will encounter Our Lady.

Luke 2:19: But Mary kept all these words, pondering them in her heart.

St. Ignatius of Antioch

The saint for today is St. Ignatius of Antioch, our second Pope who was martyred between 98 and 117 A.D.  He was thrown to the lions in the Roman Colosseum.  The most unusal aspect of this martyrdom is that St. Ignatius begged the people to allow it to happen and prayed that the lions would not be stopped from attacking him as happened to other great saints when the lions refused to attack.  The Traditional Breviary has a great reading from St. Jerome the Priest:

Ignatius was the third Bishop of Antioch after the Apostle Peter. When Trajan stirred up his persecution, he was condemned to be devoured by wild beasts, and sent to Rome in chains. When on his journey thither he arrived at Smyrna, where Polycarp, the disciple of John, was Bishop, he wrote an Epistle to the Ephesians, another to the Magnesians, a third to the Trallians, and a fourth to the Roman : and after leaving Smyrna, he addressed a further Epistle to the Philadelphians, and another to the Smyrnians, along with a private Epistle to Polycarp, to whose care he commended the Church of Antioch. In this last he quoteth a passage regarding the Person of Christ from the Gospel, which I have recently translated.

It is fitting that, as we have made mention of a man of so much importance, we should also note briefly the Epistle which he addressed to the Romans. I am on my way, saith he, from Syria to Rome, and am already fighting with beasts on sea and on land all the way. I may say I am chained day and night to ten leopards, for indeed the soldiers, who have charge of me, are no better. The more courteous I am to them, the worse they use me. But still their wickedness is good schooling for me, though I know that my mere sufferings cannot in themselves gain me justification. I earnestly wish for the beasts which are to devour me ; at any rate, I pray they may put me out of pain quickly, and fly on me willingly, that I be not like some other Martyrs, whose bodies the animals have refused to touch. If I find that they will not come on, I will run at them as quick as I can, to make them devour me. Let me be, my little children : I know what is good for me.

I feel now that I am beginning to be Christ's disciple ; I desire none of those things which are seen, if so be I may find Christ Jesus. I care not that there come upon me fire, or cross, or wild beasts, or breaking of my bones, or sundering of my members, or destruction of my whole body, yea, or all the torments of the devil, if only so be I may win Christ. When he was brought condemned to the theatre, and heard the roaring of the beasts which were to devour him, he felt so strong an eagerness to suffer, that he cried out : I am Christ's wheat, and so let the beasts' teeth be my mill, that I may be ground, and be found to make good bread. He suffered in the eleventh year of Trajan. What was left of his body lieth at Antioch, in the graveyard outside the gate which leadeth toward Daphne.

Again, I can only marvel that the saints have such a great love for Christ that they actually welcome suffering for him.   I pray that I will one day get to that point.  I have a hard time just accepting a headache.  I don't know how I could actually bring myself to welcome being thrown to the lions.  Truly that is the grace of God.
The Breviary also included a reading from St. Augustine:

The Lord Jesus was himself a corn of wheat that was to die and bring forth much fruit ; to die by the unbelief of the Jews, and to bring forth much fruit in the faith of the Gentiles. He, exhorting men to follow his steps, saith : He that loveth his life shall lose it. Now, these words may be understood in two ways. First : he that loveth his life shall lose it, that is, If thou love life, thou wilt lose it ; if thou wilt live for ever in Christ, refuse not to die for Christ. Or secondly : he that loveth his life shall lose it ; love not then that which thou shalt lose ; love not this present life, so that thou be thereby in jeopardy of losing life eternal. 

That this second interpretation is the meaning of the Gospel, appeareth most probably from the words which follow : And he that hateth his life in this world, shall keep it unto life eternal. From which we may suppose the sense of the first words to be : He that loveth his life in this world shall lose it unto life eternal. This is a great and marvellous saying, shewing how a man may so love life as to lose life, and so hate life as to keep life. If thou love it too well, then dost thou hate it : if thou hate it with an holy hatred, then dost thou love it. Blessed are they that, lest they should so love it as to lose it, so hate it as to keep it.

Beware lest thou take these words, He that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal, as some do, for an approval of suicide. Some evil and perverse men, bloody and guilty murderers of themselves, do indeed throw themselves into the fire, drown themselves in water, and cast themselves down precipices, and so perish. This is not the teaching of Christ, who, when the devil would have him cast himself down from an high place, answered : Get thee behind me, Satan. It is written, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. Who also said to Peter, signifying by what death he should glorify God : When thou wast young thou girdedst thyself and walkedst whither thou wouldest ; but when thou shalt be old, another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. From which it is evident that he that would follow Christ's footsteps, must be slain, not by himself, but by another.

This is one of the greatest lessons that the saints teach us.  We must learn to actually hate our life in this world, to be able to walk away from everything and everyone we love.  Christ told us that if our eye causes us to offend, we should pluck it out.  He did not mince words when he said:  "If any man come to me, and hate not his father and mother and wife and children and brethren and sisters, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple."  Luke 14:26.

St. Martina

Today in the Traditional Roman Calendar is the Feast Day of St. Martina, Virgin and Martyr, who died around 226 A.D.  Martyrdom is a strange phenomena, something very alien to our culture, which prizes comfort and pleasant physical sensations and avoids any kind of pain at all costs.  St. Martina came from a rich family and had all the comforts life could offer in the 3rd Century.  But she gave it all up for her love of her Creator, and underwent extreme torture.  Because she was so willing to do this, she helped bring many people to repentance and saved many souls. 

According to the Breviary, here is her biography:

Martina was a maiden of a most illustrious Roman family, daughter of a Consul. She lost her parents while still very young, and, being inflamed with Christian zeal, she distributed her wealth, whereof she had abundance, with great profusion among the poor. Under the Emperor Alexander, she was commanded to sacrifice to the imaginary gods, and refused with much boldness to commit this great wickedness. Upon this she was again and again scourged, and mangled with iron prongs and hooks, and pieces of broken pottery. Her limbs were cut piece by piece with sharp swords, and boiling tallow poured upon the living trunk. Lastly she was sent to be eaten publicly by the wild beasts in the amphitheatre, but by the will of God they would not touch her, and she was then thrown upon a burning pile, but still remained alive.

Some of her tormentors were so moved by the spectacle, that they repented, and, by the grace of God confessing the faith of Christ, through which she remained constant, were themselves tortured and beheaded. Martina herself lay praying, with a brightness on her face, while a matter like milk oozed from her body along with the blood, emitting a soft, sweet smell. She was as it were unconscious of an earthquake and most violent thunderstorm which arose and was raging, and while the lightning struck temples, and melted statues, she seemed in spirit rather to be seated above on a queenly throne, praising God in heaven among the Blessed.

The judge being infuriated at what had taken place, and chiefly at her unbending firmness, ordered the head of the martyr to be cut off. At the moment this was done, a peal which shook the city was heard, like a voice calling her home, and so great was the consternation, that it was made the means of conversion to many idolaters. The holy body of Martina wherein she had suffered in the Pontificate of Urban I, was discovered in the time of Urban VIII, in the very old Church called after her, situated at the foot of the Capitoline Hill, near the Mamertine Prison, along with the bodies of the holy martyrs Concordius, Epiphanius, and others. The Church was then altered and restored and handsomely decorated, and then the body was replaced in it, amid public rejoicings, with a solemn ceremony and procession.

I feel completely inadequate when I read biographies such as these.  It is hard to imagine accepting all of this suffering and then, on top of it all, being joyful and thankful.  The reason these great saints were able to do this is first, of course, the Grace of God.  But also, the great saints realized the futility of this life.  They knew that the only thing of any importance is to obey God, because that is all that will last.

I know it in my head.  I'm still struggling to convince my heart.  The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. 

Silence in the Mass

Prayers said at foot of the altar
at beginning of Traditional Latin Mass

I recently did a post on a talk by Pope Benedict XVI on the importance of silence in communication.  I feel that silence during Mass is also very important, and I don't mean just from the people in the pews, but silence in the Mass itself.  Mass is the highest form of prayer for a Catholic because it is when we go to Calvary for the re-presentation of Christ's sacrifice to the Father.  Recognition of this fact demands reverential silence, and so it was until 1969 when the Novus Ordo Mass was first introduced.    Until the creation of the Novus Ordo Mass, the celebration of Mass included large amounts of silence.  Apart from the homily, amplification is never used during the Traditional Latin Mass.  Everything in the Traditional Mass lends itself to silent, prayerful contemplation.  It is never an intrusion into the prayers of the faithful, but an assistance in their prayers.  The priest prays with and in the same direction as the congregation.

In the TLM, the priest starts the Mass at the foot of the altar, asking forgiveness for his and the congregation's sins while the congregation kneels and prays silently with him.  In the Novus Ordo Mass, the priest comes out, stands at the side of the altar or behind it facing the congregation, and he prays at the people, almost always amplified, even if there is just a handful of people at the Mass.  The people stand, not kneel, facing the priest and instead of praying to God, they are basically answering the priest. 

Communal prayer and holding hands
during Novus Ordo Mass

It continues this way throughout the entire Novus Ordo Mass.  The priest is never quiet, not even during the Consecration. There is never a moment when the people can pray silently in personal communication with God.  Even when receiving Communion, instead of being able to kneel quietly in prayer and preparation at the altar rail while waiting for the priest to come to you, we now have to pick a line to stand in and then slowly walk up to the priest or Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist (who are no longer extraordinary but an expected part of the Mass) surrounded by the distraction of people walking all around us. Instead of being in silent, contemplative prayer, we have to wait to hear "Body of Christ" and then answer "Amen" to whomever (priest or EMHC) is giving us communion, again interrupting our internal communion with our Lord.  Most people receive in the hand, so after taking the Body and Blood of Jesus into their unpurified, unconsecrated hands, they walk away many times still holding the Host and consume it while walking, dropping the fragments of the consecrated host and, not even realizing it, desecrate our Lord, all hardly in an attitude of prayer.  The result of all of this is to lessen even more the reverence and awe due the Blessed Sacrament. 

Receiving Communion in the hand at
Novus Ordo Mass contrasted with
prayerful reception at TLM
using a paten to catch any fragments

For too many Catholics, receiving communion has become nothing more than a shared meal, not the reception of the Body and Blood of our Savior.  People don't even stop to consider whether they are in a state of grace and worthy to receive Communion.  They have basically the same attitude as Protestants do.  However, Protestants don't believe they are actually receiving the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.  And they're right - they are only receiving a symbol.  But with Catholics, we believe that we are literally receiving the same Jesus Christ who gave Himself for us on Calvary.  You sure wouldn't know this at the typical Novus Ordo Masses.  Everyone just marches up in line and, most giving no sign of reverence whatsoever such as a bow of the head or (Heaven forbid!) genuflecting or (gasp!) kneeling, they hold out their hands, barely aware of what is happening.  And it's hard to blame people since almost everything in the Novus Ordo Mass promotes that view.  In contrast, at the TLM, the people receive in a kneeling position on the tongue, all the while (hopefully) deep in prayer and communion with our Lord, and, if they wish, the people can stay kneeling at the altar rail for a moment or two in thanksgiving.   There is a reason why those at the TLM almost always walk to and from the communion rail with their hands folded in prayer, while you rarely see that at a Novus Ordo Mass.  The physical posture and gestures of the people reveal what is going on in their minds. 

The music in the Traditional Latin Mass is also never intrusive but instead, is always conducive to contemplation.  The singers and organist are up in the loft behind the congregation and basically out of view.  Music in the Novus Ordo Mass has come to include guitars, drums and other instrusive instruments. The choir is no longer unobtrusively in the choir loft but front and center, taking the focus off the Sacrifice of the Mass.  Again, this leaves no silence in which the congregation can worship. 

The lack of silence and opportunity for contemplation, meditation and personal prayer on the part of the people has directly led to lack of belief and proper respect for the Real Presence. Mass has become a matter of the priest entertaining the people, trying to find new and innovative ways to keep the attention of the congregation.  It has led to a tremendous falloff in weekly Mass attendance (down from 75% in the 1950's to about 20% in the US and single digits in Europe), and people complaining more and more that they are bored with the Mass.  Is it just coincidence, just an accident?  Is there really any wonder why people do not show reverence at Mass and feel free to talk before, after and even during Mass?  As the Holy Father told us, silence is an important part of communication with each other, and it is just as vital in our relationship with our Creator.  The corrections recently made to the Novus Ordo Mass are very welcome, but I think it still has a long way to go.

A Catholic View of Rick Santorum and Ron Paul

I saw this posted over at Catholicknight.blogspot.com.  It is a talk by Tom Woods, a Traditional Catholic speaker, on the difference between Rick Santorum and Ron Paul, and I was amazed as I listened to this to realize that I am not alone in the Catholic world in my assessment of the Republican presidential candidates.  When I read popular Catholic blogs like Father Z's wdptrs.com, who goes along with the conventional political wisdom of the mainstream media, I tend to feel very alone.  Are there any sound, traditional Catholics who reject mainstream political thought and see basically no difference between the two political parties?  I have discovered to my great delight that yes, there are others who have come to the same conclusions I have, as the video below shows.

It has been a difficult road in realizing the truth about our government.  I have certainly been aware for many years that our country is in decline.  That is obvious to anyone who pays the least attention to what is happening in our country.  But it is only recently that I have come to accept the very difficult truth that it is the United States government, be it Republican or Democrat, that is a force for evil, promoting abortion, war, class warfare, secularization, and which has now openly declared war on the Catholic church by saying that in one year, all employers including the Catholic Church must provide free artificial birth control, including sterilization, to their employees in their health plans.  As I heard one man say in a speech, in trying to decide whether to vote Republican or Democrat, we are basically deciding whether to vote for Satan or Lucifer.

Fortunately, there are people who are very much aware of the evil in our land and are speaking out against it. Tom Woods seems to be one of them.  The truth can be found, but we have to look behind the curtain. 

Please watch the video below and then question everything you see.  Pray to our Blessed Mother who will guide you on the right path.  Realize that you are completely surrounded by evil, and far too much of the world is allowing itself to be led by the devil to their own destruction.  QUESTION EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE.  Test the spirits.

I have now added Tom Woods' website to my blog.