An excerpt from the Council of Carthage

Having done a little bit of reading in order to refute the errant whims of a "Catholic" lover of the Eastern Orthodox Church, I stumbled (as I often stumble) on a bit of reading from the Council of Carthage (419). As with so much in our Catholic faith, if one is to seek the source of its authenticity we must look back to its beginnings. Even a cursory study of patristics, the earliest history of the Church, the compilation of the Bible, the early councils, etc. will convince even a hardened skeptic of her being the one true Church founded by Christ, outside of which there is no salvation. Any man who seeks to belong to that Church which possesses the fullness of the Christian faith must pledge fidelity to the Church of Rome, with its roots on the rock that is Peter, the first Pope.

I do intend to endeavor a deeper a study of early Church history as it is absolutely fascinating and revealing. Here is a brief excerpt from one of the Canons of the Council of Carthage, regarding schismatic or disobedient priests:

Canon 11.
If any presbyter, inflated against his bishop, makes a schism, let him be anathema .

All the bishops said: If any presbyter shall have been corrected by his superior, he should ask the neighbouring bishops that his cause be heard by them and that through them he may be reconciled to his bishop: but if he shall not have done this, but, puffed up with pride, (which may God forbid!) he shall have thought it proper to separate himself from the communion of his bishop, and separately shall have offered the sacrifice to God, and made a schism with certain accomplices, let him be anathema, and let him lose his place; and if the complaint which he brought against his bishop shall [not] have been found to be well founded, an enquiry should be instituted.

LET HIM BE ANATHEMA! SIT SEMPER HERETICIS!

Most interesting still is the final definitive declaration of the Canon of the Bible, in effect a repetition of the exact same Canons declared by the Synod of Rome and the Council of Hippo. If Protestants believe in "sola scriptura" they have nothing on this Canon of the Council of Carthage. (Bold face added for emphasis)

Canon 24. (Greek xxvii.)
That nothing be read in church besides the Canonical Scripture Item, that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the Canonical Scriptures are as follows:

• Genesis.
• Exodus.
• Leviticus.
• Numbers.
• Deuteronomy.
• Joshua the Son of Nun.
• The Judges.
• Ruth.
• The Kings, iv. books.
• The Chronicles, ij. books.
• Job.
• The Psalter.
• The Five books of Solomon.
• The Twelve Books of the Prophets.
• Isaiah.
• Jeremiah.
• Ezechiel.
• Daniel.
• Tobit.
• Judith.
• Esther.
• Ezra, ij. books.
• Macchabees, ij. books.
  • The New Testament.
    • The Gospels, iv. books.
    • The Acts of the Apostles, j. book.
    • The Epistles of Paul, xiv.
    • The Epistles of Peter, the Apostle, ij.
    • The Epistles of John the Apostle, iij.
    • The Epistles of James the Apostle, j.
    • The Epistle of Jude the Apostle, j.
    • The Revelation of John, j. book.

Let this be sent to our brother and fellow bishop, Boniface, and to the other bishops of those parts, that they may confirm this canon, for these are the things which we have received from our fathers to be read in church.

Another Ugly-as-Sin "Church"

It is a sad fact that most new Catholic churches today are a devastating affront to 2000 years of proud architectural and artistic achievement. From the smallest chapels to the most elaborate cathedrals to the majesty of St. Peter's Basilica, Catholics have always known how to construct edifices suitable to be called houses of the Lord, places where all worship and offer sacrifice in awe of God's majesty.

A fundamental belief of Catholicism is that we are both flesh and spirit, and while the spirit takes precedence in all things, the flesh manifests in an exterior way what the soul contains. Therefore, we dress modestly to reflect the sanctity of our human person and the fact that we are temples of the Lord. We stand when the Gospel is read in reverence and we kneel during the consecration at Mass in adoration. We build beautiful churches in which much time and energy has been invested so that they may be a lasting tribute to the glory of the Lord and the majesty of the Church.

God knows what went wrong in recent years. We went from beautiful and edifying to hideous and bland in the span of only 40 years. We've discarded a rich tradition of aesthetic beauty rooted in theologico-architectural synthesis in favor of an architecture, or lack thereof, that reflects the pathetically stripped-down sense of awe that we have of our Lord. Our bland, ugly, meaningless assembly halls of churches reveal quite adequately how little so many of the faithful really care about offering tribute to our God. Why? Because it is an affront to the poor? This is nonsense. For centuries churches have been sanctuaries, places of refuge for the poor. If a congregation can have both a beautiful and edifying place of worship as well as fulfill its mission to the poor, well, I see that as a wonderfully balanced Christian life. We've thrown out the aesthetic to save a few bucks. Look what we've got now:

St. Patrick's "Catholic" Church, Gainesville

This sad excuse for a church is disgusting to put it nicely. It looks like the public library in my hometown or like the community center in a retirement development. If an alien were to drop down and attempt to figure out what it is, he would say it looks little different from the other buildings he's seen.

Does this mean that we must build Notre Dames or St. John Laterans in every town and city across the world? Absolutely not. Even small and unimposing churches can be beautiful. What we see now is not beautiful. It shows little or no effort on the part of parishes or priests to disply some sort of care in the making of the house of the Lord.

We've gone from this:
...to this:

When our Lord told the rich man to divest himself of his goods and follow Him, he addressed himself to that one man, who wanted to more purely follow the Lord. He did not mean that entire groups of people should cast away all their possessions and thereby be incapable of providing for the ministry! What good is a materially and, worse, spiritually impoverished church going to do for those in need of sanctification? Obviously the notion of a place of worship was essential to our Lord. He taught frequently in the temple and promised that he would raise it up, meaning himself. The Lord himself is a temple. Should not our modern-day churches be reflective of that reverence which we owe our Lord, the temple of our souls?

Catholic Word of the Week - Orthodox

Orthodox - (from Gk, orthodoxeia, "of right opinion, belief") signifies right belief or purity of faith. Right belief is not merely subjective, as resting on personal knowledge and convictions, but is in accordance with the teaching and direction of an absolute extrinsic authority. This authority is the Church founded by Christ, and guided by the Holy Ghost. He, therefore, is orthodox, whose faith coincides with the teachings of the Catholic Church. As divine revelation forms the deposit of faith entrusted to the Church for man's salvation, it also, with the truths clearly deduced from it, forms the object and content of orthodoxy. (Catholic Encyclopedia)

There is no such thing as a liberal or conservative Catholic. There are only true Catholics who are orthodox and then heretics, who reject one or more of the Church's teachings, either tacitly or overtly.

To be an orthodox, or right-believing, Catholic is not the same as to be a member of one of the Orthodox churches, which are heretical.

Our Lord teaching in the temple.

"Spem in alium"

I have never heard anything so beautiful as "Spem in alium" by the great Thomas Tallis. As the sound sweeps around, you can imagine the gates of Heaven opening before you with choirs upon choirs of angels crying out in joy. The trumpets blare, the light dazzles before you, you approach the Lord our God in all of His divine majesty and splendor...
Words can not describe the sight.

"That eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man, what things God hath prepared for them that love him." - 1 Cor 2:9

Spem in alium numquam habui praeter in te
Deus Israel
qui irasceris
et propitius eris
et omnia peccata hominum in tribulatione dimittis
Domine Deus
Creator coeli et terrae
respice humilitatem nostram

I have never put my hope in any other but in you,
O God of Israel
who can show both anger
and graciousness,
and who absolves all the sins of suffering man
Lord God,
Creator of Heaven and Earth
be mindful of our humility.

Euthanasia Legalized in Montana

Today is Wednesday, December 10, 2006. On Friday, December 5, the state of Montana, or rather an activist judge in Montana, ruled that euthanasia is legal and protected by the state constitution. The news didn't come out in the AP until Saturday. I did not see it on the news until today. That this very troubling news has slipped under the radar is a frightening testament to our general moral anesthesia. You may not believe it but this is the beginning of what I guarantee will be a vast tide, a Satanic assault, against the dignity of life and the moral teaching of the Church as has been gay "marriage" and abortion.

Montana legalizes Euthanasia

The eugenic tide which began with birth control, has brought us abortion, and is now moving towards euthanasia is here. Whether we resist it and continue to affirm the dignity of all human life will be the moral test of our civilization, and one which will destroy us if we should say no. We can not take up the opinion that to kill a weak person who requests it is acceptable. We can not accept the lie that we should be allowed to murder those who are smaller than us, who are voiceless, who are weak, who are ill, those who most demand our love and care! For those who sympathize with this heinous crime, do not be so confident in thinking that it will not catch up to you. History is doomed to repeat itself.

"It is necessary to state firmly once more that nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult, an old person or one suffering from an incurable disease or a person who is dying. Furthermore, no one is permitted to ask for this act of killing, either for himself or herself or for another person entrusted to his or her care, nor can he or she consent to it, either explicitly or implicitly nor can any authority legitimately recommend or permit such an action. For it is a question of the violation of the divine law, an offense against the dignity of the human person, a crime against life and an attack on humanity." Vatican Declaration on Euthanasia, 1980.

"Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists of putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable. Thus an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to terminate pain constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to respect due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgement into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded." cf #2277.

"Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of 'over zealous' treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected." Ibid. #2278.

"Even if death is considered imminent, the care ordinarily owed to a sick person cannot legitimately be interrupted. The use of analgesics to alleviate the suffering of the dying, even at the risk of shortening his days, can be morally in conformity to human dignity if death is not willed, as an end to a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable. Palliative care constitutes a privileged form of disinterested charity. For this reason it must be encouraged." Ibid. #2279.

Catholic Word of the Week - Magisterium

Magisterium - the living, teaching office of the Church, whose task it is to give an authentic interpretation of the word of God, whether in its written form (Sacred Scripture) or in the form of Tradition. The Magisterium ensures the Church's fidelity to the teaching of the Apostles in matters of faith and morals. (CCC)

While Scripture may be interepreted many different ways by individuals, as proven by the multiplicity of Protestant sects, it is by the teaching authority of the Magisterium that we know which interpretation is faithful to the original teachings of Christ and his Apostles.

Through the Magisterium, the Church infallibly carries on the teaching Tradition of Christ in our day and age.


"And it came to pass, that, after three days, [Joseph and Mary] found [Jesus] in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, hearing them, and asking them questions. And all that heard him were astonished at his wisdom and his answers. And seeing him, they wondered. And his mother said to him: Son, why hast thou done so to us? behold thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing. And he said to them: How is it that you sought me? did you not know, that I must be about my father's business? And they understood not the word that he spoke unto them." (Luke 2:46-50)

Sanctification and Salvation

I often choose topics that are too big to chew but I can't resist. I'm only briefly touching the tip of an iceberg which is gloriously large.

What is the fundamental mission of the Church? The answer is simple: the sanctification and salvation of mankind.

Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world. (Matt 28:19-20)

We often hear of the great things that the Church has done in the realm of social justice- alleviating poverty, ministering to prisoners, etc- and justifiably so! She has done her task well! And yet we hear nothing about the infinitely more important work which the Church fulfills in leading the Lord's flock to salvation. No other calling is more important. 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? For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels: and then will he render to every man according to his works. (Matt 16:26-27, Mark 8:36*)

What profit do we have to be freed from poverty, to have the comforts of life, to be free from physical bondage, if our souls are still chained down by sin? All is dust but the soul is eternal. If we allow ourselves to replace the spiritual life with the charitable one, virtuous as acts of mercy and charity are, we put ourselve in grave risk of forfeiting our souls! And should we deny the priority of the spiritual life as Catholics over all other things without reservation, we effectively deny eternity and the salvation which is to come. Beware!

We have much to be thankful for and should be greatly inspired by the works of charity fulfilled by the faithful. Indeed, our Lord has commanded us to love our neighbor and to fulfill such works with zeal. And yet, the most important work that we as the faithful can possibly do is pray unceasingly. Pray for the faithfully departed. Pray to the saints that they may intercede on our behalf. Pray for the sanctification and salvation of mankind, for it is only by this that our Lord's Kingdom will come.

Remember the event in the Gospel according to Mark, chapter 2. The paralytic, gravely afflicted in the soul and flesh, is lowered down by four men through the roof before our Lord. In that moment, seeing the man ill from palsy, the Lord says to him, "Son, thy sins are forgiven thee" [italics added]. Witnessing this most grievous of physical maladies, our Lord Jesus Christ takes as priority the healing of this man's soul of its sins. This, likewise, is the mission of the Holy Mother Church.

My beloved priest once said in a sermon, "I only ever pray for one thing. You need only pray for one single thing: the sanctification and salvation of mankind." Should we pray for a lifetime and witness by that prayer the sanctification and salvation of one man, that singular act will be greater in weight than if we were to save 100 men from physical strife, only to see their souls condemned. So much so that we may come before our Lord and hear His glorious words: "Well done, good and faithful servant, because thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will place thee over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy Lord." (Matt 25:21)

Catholic Word of the Week - Host

host - the unleavened bread destined to receive Eucharistic Consecration; sometimes used to refer to the consecrated species. From the Latin, hostia "sacrifice," also "the animal sacrificed," applied in Church L. to Christ

In the unbloody sacrifice (hostia) of the altar, Christ himself becomes manifest in the host as the Paschal Victim, just as Abraham, our predecessor, offered up a spotless Lamb in place of his son.

What happens at Mass?
Unde et memores Domine, nos servi tui, sed et plebs tua sancta, ejusdem Christi Filii tui Domini nostri tam beatae passionis, nec non et ab inferis resurrectionis, sed et in coelos gloriosae ascensionis: offerimus praeclarae majestati tuae de tuis donis ac datis, hostiam † puram, hostiam † sanctam, hostiam † immaculatam, Panem † sanctum vitae aeternae, et Calicem † salutis perpetuae.

Wherefore, O Lord, we, Thy servants, as also Thy holy people, calling to mind the blessed passion of the same Christ, Thy Son, our Lord, and also His resurrection from the dead and His glorious ascension into heaven, offer to Thy supreme majesty from Thine own gifts bestowed on us, a pure † victim, a holy † victim, and unblemished † victim, the holy bread † of eternal life, and the Chalice † of everlasting salvation.

"By Grace You Have Been Saved"

I just finished reading an article so impeccably written and succint that I will not do it the injustice of paraphrasing. I will simply place a link here to a fascinating blog which I discovered called "Nicene Truth", written by a Reformed Protestant (Calvinist) convert to Catholicism.

The particular article of interest is called, "By Grace You Have Been Saved", an in-depth discussion on such oft-employed terms as "justification", "grace", "salvation", "faith", and "works". Are we saved by faith alone or by faith and works? What is the role of grace? This article aptly captures the truth of the Catholic teaching on these questions and is deeply enlightening.

Tolle et lege!

The Armies of Perversion March!

Anyone who thinks Christianity is not a persecuted religion only has to watch this video to see one of the most despicable and scandalous acts that I have ever seen- activist homosexual perverts cursing at an elderly woman, tearing away her Cross, and trampling it underfoot! Where are the police? Where is our government? Is this the mark of a civilized nation where freedom of speech is defended?

The people of California have spoken for the second time. Prior to the California Supreme Court justices telling the voters to take a walk, the voters voted to uphold the traditional definition of marriage as between one man and one woman. Responding to the .01% of the population represented by the sodomite fringe, four treacherous justices ruled that the democratic vote was worth nothing and then gave gays and lesbians the "right" to legally sodomize. Now, the people spoke again and once again the dictatorial homosexual mafia is telling them to drop dead. Where is the goverment to disperse the mobs and restore our democracy? Nowhere!

We're witnessing not just the most essential functional unit of civilized society being torn to shreds but our very faith spit upon by radical hedonists who would stop at nothing to gain the legal right to do whatsoever they please. When will the rule of law be reestablished? When will a high-level political figure stand defiantly in defense of our most sacred beliefs and salvage our crumbling civilization? When?

Catholic Word of the Week - Heresy

heresy - a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas; the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same --> heretic, heretical. From the Gk. hairesis "a taking or choosing," from haireisthai "take, seize," middle voice of hairein "to choose," of unknown origin.*

My Presbyterian friend denies the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Eucharist, thereby committing grave heresy.

Catholics who vote for pro-abortion politicians are heretics in that they overtly reject the teaching of the Church on the sanctity of life at all stages.

A person unlearned in the Catechism and Sacred Scripture is easily susceptible to pervasively heretical ideas which so permeate our modern culture.

Heretics are really confused people.

Besieged

For some strange reason the past several days have been fraught by religious discussions in which I have grown increasingly disillusioned by the errors that are out there. In one case I could sense the presence of the deceiver launching his attacks upon the Church. I have been deeply distressed to say the least.

It began this weekend when I found myself in a two and a half hour long conversation with a Protestant friend talking primarily about Calvinism, which she adheres to in the guise of "reformed theology". Whatever you call it, I was profoundly disturbed by the claims that were put out and made it clear. What a hopeless and concocted theology! It denies the entire loving nature of God and mires otherwise self-evident teachings in a "tulip"-laced morass of erroneous babble! I very effortfully defended our cherished belief in the Eucharist as the source and summit of the Faith, on the mystery of the Incarnation and of the Sacred Tradition which compliments the Scriptures among other things. And yet against the folly of Calvinism what can one do?

In addition to another chat about Calvinism two days ago, today at lunch I was sitting on the front porch of my workplace and overheard two guys "discussing" Catholicism, or their misperception of it, rather. In reality, one person was throwing out facetious, conjectural, and ultimately baseless claims about Catholic teaching and the other simpleton simply replied, "No way! I never knew that!" My blood was boiling and I regret not speaking up as I felt I should have.

Among the insanities uttered was the "Catholic belief" that by walking through the doors of St. Peter's Basilica, we're entering into a heaven-like place and thus are saved. There was the fascinating comment about how Catholics for 2000 years have completely missed the line in Matthew 23:9 saying that we must call no man on earth our father, and yet we call our priests "father", therefore the entire faith is a hoax. There was the profoundly disturbing statement that the Eucharist is just a symbol, that we're insane to derive from the Bible the belief that we can eat Christ himself, that it is ludicrous (at least he acknowledges that it is indeed a difficult teaching). His most erroneous claim was that there is absolutely no biblical basis for the doctrine of the Eucharist, which is absolutely unfounded. The list goes on. I felt like I was being fired at with spiritual cannon fire that was withering.

Now, I was actually taking detailed notes of the conversation because it was perfectly audible from where I was seated, as such I also noted their statements of erroneous Protestant doctrine. The most irksome and oft-repeated statements revolved around that most cherished of errors: the belief in sola scriptura. Here are the choice statements which I overheard:

"The Bible was written by God"
No. It was written by divinely-inspired men from the earliest Hebrews to the early Christians who devoted their lives, however perfectly or imperfectly to seeking God. They and their writing, however much inspired, was clearly affected to some extent by the context in which they lived along with the inspiration received.

"Everything that I believe is in the Bible"
The very belief of sola scriptura is nowhere to be found in Scripture. Thus this statement is false right off the bat. Belief finds its sources not just in written word but primarily from our life experience and that which we learn orally. Most importantly, our belief is also an effort in conformity to the true teachings passed down not just scripturally, but by the Holy Mother Church. That is, much of our belief is in fact extra-scriptural, which in its more refined form is referred to by Catholics as Sacred Tradition. It is exceedingly presumptuous to assert that one believes everything that is in the Bible, because our human flaws prevent us from grasping even so simple a command as "love thy neighbor".

"Keep reading, God will reveal things to you."
Using the logic of the above two quotes, I will contend that God has revealed everything that He has intended in the Bible. This is in accordance with sola scriptura. As such, any further revelation can not be possible, even that which may be stirred in us as we read Scripture. For God to continue revealing things in a extra-scriptural way must prove the existence of a sacred tradition rooted in and emanating from written and unwritten revelation.

What a vexatious past few days these have been. Lord have mercy. Pray for the conversion of those gone astray and for the unity of Christ's Church on earth.

Our Divine Mandate

As of late I have been asking myself the same question quite frequently: why is it so difficult for us to speak absolutely about our faith? We fall so easily into the trap of relativism because we live in its framework, we are educated to think in a relativistic way, and we are expected to accept multiple options, multiple lower-case t truths, etc. Even if we utter in word what we aspire to believe as absolutely true, often our actions and our subsequent words do not back up this seemingly impossible stance. And yet…

The more I contemplate, the more I am truly convinced that Christianity- read, Catholicism, the only full and true faith revealed to the Church- is the one and only religion with a truly divine mandate, a heavenly bond, a direct call from on High. Both logic and faith confirm this.

No other religion so encapsulates both the fullest reality of our being and the deepest aspiration of every human soul. That we are born deeply flawed and yet yearn every waking day for something better, for a taste of the divine. That to be righteous and to obey the moral law set down by our Creator is perhaps the most difficult thing we can do, bringing with it frustration, vacillation, and persecution, and yet what bliss to follow the narrow path! No clearer sign is there than this: “Blessed shall you be when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake.”

What of the other major faiths? For the Jews, at the time of reckoning, when the Son of Man descended in the deepest humility and was then hung on the Cross for our iniquities, they rejected him, preferring to retain their worldly laws and loyalties to cling to a hope which, unbeknownst to them, had just been fulfilled. Muhammed, the Prophet of Islam, led wars and insurrections and ultimately died in peace like many a worldly king. The Buddhists promise personal nirvana through individual contemplation, and yet quo vadis for the rest? And so forth. And yet, the one true God is worshipped and adored through His Son, who alone gave himself up in the lowest humiliation, in the purest act of sacrifice, through his terrible death on the Cross and his subsequent Resurrection. Just as the soldier is the only person who has truly fought for our freedoms, so too our Lord, Jesus Christ, is the only one who has truly died for our sins.

He died in fulfillment of the Greatest Commandment: “that you love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love than this no man hath, that a man lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13, italics added). With what reluctance does humanity obey this call, with what vacillation! How difficult it is to fulfill, and yet how simple it is to fall to selfishness, self-fulfillment, impatience, and the like. Verily, this is a divine call, for such a mandate could not possibly have its origin in the selfish heart of man.

This was and is the revolution ushered forth by the Incarnation, Death, and Resurrection of our beloved Lord Jesus Christ, that not by condemnation, nor isolation, nor hatred are we to live and serve our Lord, but by the heavenly grace that is love, the unconditional yearning for the good of another. And to this end we are to dedicate all in our being to seeing that our brethren be sanctified unto their ultimate salvation in the oneness of the Spirit, through the mercy of our Lord and King, from now unto the end of the world. Amen.

Catholic Word of the Week - Erroneous

In order to arm ourselves with the vocabulary needed to fight heresy, I am going to begin posting choice lexicon from time to time with a contextual usage. Go forth into battle with edifying lingo! Enjoy!

erroneous - not true, correct, or right; containing error or errors. From the Latin, errare, to wander

The young man's erroneous perception of Catholic teaching led him to vote for a blatantly pro-choice candidate. Because of his error, he taught these false ideas to even more feeble-minded faithful, thus cementing his errancy. The most effective way for him to rectify his erroneous beliefs would be a committed study of the Catechism and pertinent Scripture passages.

The celebrant of this "Mass" has extremely erroneous ideas of what the liturgy should look like.

2008 Presidential Election: Time for Foreboding

The Lord be praised- our long national squabble will be over within hours. What is the American obsession with such a painfully long election cycle? It is often heard that our elections last months on end because we are choosing the holder of the most powerful office in the world. Or maybe it is a period in which we engage in national soul-searching?

If in the end I were to learn nothing in this election save one tidbit of wisdom, it would be this: mankind is, without the slightest doubt, broken and corrupted to the core by sin. And yet, it is because of the sting of sin that we can experience God's purest love and obtain that courage by which we make His will be done. No one is free from this sting, no less in this most pivotal election.

I have seen the most despotic and dictatorial elements of our increasingly impatient, desperate, and reactionary society work with all of their strength to crush the voice of the minority, to silence the teachings of the Church, and to muzzle and ridicule those who disagree. While both sides of the political spectrum are guilt of this, no side is more to blame than the Left.

Dare to love your country, and you are called a backwards patriot.
Dare to love your God, and you are a zealot, a fool, an unintelligent oaf.
Dare to love your family, and you are just an old-fashioned relic of an oppressive past fading away.
Dare to stand up for the innocent, the unborn, and you are cursed, your efforts mocked, your signs and literature torn down and stolen, your name smeared!
Dare to stand up for your traditions and beliefs, and you are dismissed as an uneducated conservative.
Dare to work for your living, to be independent, to try to make your way in the world, and you are selfish!

We're living in a dictatorship! We don't need to wait for the next president to be chosen! Our beautiful country is being murdered by radical elements who hate it! Mark my words: the days are on the horizon where criticizing another element of society or the government will bring fines or other punishment. Where you will be forced to fund abortions, euthanasia, and social programs that encourage slavery through dependence with your tax dollars. Achievement will be frowned upon and even discouraged. Religion and traditional symbols of our Christian roots will be removed from public spaces with a degree of radicalism unmatched even by the Europeans. Independent thinking will be branded as bigotry, discrimination, backwardness, and ignorance and will be swiftly repressed by the brainwashed elements. Defending your nation and its sovereignty from incursions and enemies will be seen as isolationist and insular, vestiges of a primitive, medieval closedness. Private and church charities will be taxed or regulated to the point that the poor will have nowhere to turn but the government, which they will be forced support for their livelihood and will therefore never dare to question.

The list goes on and on! If we do not wake up and speak out against the despots and dictators in our midst, then there is no greater proof that these things will happen than the fact that have happened and are happening as we speak. We have seen this in our very own country, our neighborhoods, abroad, and right here in this town where I live!

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

An intriguing thought experiment...

I entered into a cognitive reverie yesterday and the most delightfully revealing thought experiment entered into my head. It has to do with drawing moral lines. By using the liberal arguments for amorality against a hypothetical proponent of gay "marriage", our proponent ends up hitting a wall.

So here's the thought experiment: a pro-gay "marriage" lad, who happens to be called Bob in my reverie, is taking a walk through a park where he runs into a most intriguing personage named Fred. Their discourse went as follows:

BOB: Hey, Fred!
FRED: Hey Bob, what's up?
BOB: Not much. Hey, are you voting for that gay marriage amendment on Election Day, you know, the one defining marriage as between both heterosexual and homosexual couples? It will finally let people who love each other get 'married' and give them the 'rights' they've so longed for!
FRED: Heck yea, man. Freedom from bigotry. True equality! But I don't think the amendment goes far enough. What if, like, a buncha' people love each other? Like, a buncha' dudes? Why shouldn't they get married? That's not fair.
BOB: Oh, well...Yeah. I guess so. Yeah, maybe they should be allowed to.
FRED: Yeah. You know what used to be 'in' and should come back? That thing where one guy has a bunch of wives. Yeah, polygamy!
BOB: Uh, well... That's a little weird.
FRED: Why's that weird? If they love each other, why not? I mean, why should only gays get to marry? Are you saying polygamists don't have rights? Are you imposing your morality on me?
BOB: Well no, dude. That's just a little weird, don't you think? I mean, gays should get rights but the polygamy thing is weird.
FRED: Why's it so weird? One man, many women! Why limit people? We're a nation of liberty! Stop pushing your morals on me, dude! I mean, if I love my mom that much, well, dude, why not?
BOB: You're joking, right? You're talking about in-...
FRED: Yeah man! Nothing is greater than love! We should be more open and inclusive, and less divisive. Why should your definition of love be pushed on me?
BOB: Well...No...It shouldn't. But, that's disgusting.
FRED: If I think it's ok, it's ok! Don't tell me it's disgusting you bigot! It's just different!

As we can see, the Pandora's box that Bob initially opened ultimately swallows him whole, as he finds himself in a moral no-man's-land where he can't say why incest is taboo and polygamy is disgusting, etc. He finds that his initial moral judgment has opened a can of worms and that it comes back to haunt him. He learns that his moral judgment is arbitrary and that he can consequently make no real moral judgments.

It seems that the only moral judgment that is not arbitrary with regard to marriage is that most natural one: that marriage is between one man and one woman in a union of love which alone is capable of bearing new life.

Case closed!

The Perverted Eternal Perspective

Lately a great many things have been profoundly disturbing me. Granted, I live in a perpetual state of being disturbed by much that I see around me in the world, and yet, by the grace of God, I have much hope that such lunacy will not persist forever.

Perhaps the most troubling thing that I have heard recently came from reading a message written by someone who I don't even know, but who I do know is a "pro-life but pro-Obama 'Catholic'". Now, the expression "pro-life, pro-Obama, Catholic" is a rare case of a triple oxymoron, where it just doesn't make sense. It's about as sickening as a so-called "pro-choice Christian". Anyways, with regard to the preborn, our "pro-choice Catholic" began with the usual qualifier "while I am personally pro-life..." and then continued by saying: considering that the murdered preborn will go straight ahead to heaven and be with God anyways, we should focus our resources on alleviating the suffering of the post-born since, from an eternal perspective, this does the most good. It's a frighteningly twisted pragmatic argument that has a most perverted moral basis. It completely skirts every possible logical argument and defies all reason.

Why? Point-blank, you murder the baby to satisfy an end that is not remotely "eternal" but entirely mundane and sinister. It is inherently secular. Where does the word "secular" come from? It comes from the Latin word, saecula, "age" or "epoch", such that secularization means the elimination of the "eternal perspective" in favor of a now-obsessive preoccupation with the here and now. "Having this baby will ruin my career which I am planning for now." "I am not ready to have this baby now". The laundry list of excuses goes on. So, our "pro-choice Catholic" essentially negates her own belief system to begin with. More gravely, still, the logic can be applied in many troubling cases that we are already witnessing.

"We should put the old man out of his misery [through euthanasia] so he'll be with God now".
"I don't have the financial resources right now for this baby so leave it out to die [through infanticide] once it is born. Fortunately, he'll be with God."

This is a diabolical sugar-coating of the worst sort. The fact of the matter is that it is indeed virtuous to work for the alleviation of the living through works of mercy and charity. However, to sap the life of those who we believe may lead a difficult life, or who are leading difficult and/or pained lives, is the ultimate denial of hope, the most blatant expression of a eugenic desire to purify the world of all plight, and the most despicable perversion of Christian charity that I can think of.

"And the word of the Lord came to me, saying:
Before I formed thee in the bowels of thy mother, I knew thee: and before thou camest forth out of the womb, I sanctified thee, and made thee a prophet unto the nations.
And I said: Ah, ah, ah, Lord God: behold, I cannot speak, for I am a child.
And the Lord said to me: Say not: I am a child: for thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee: and whatsoever I shall command thee, thou shalt speak.
Be not afraid at their presence: for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith the Lord.
And the Lord put forth his hand, and touched my mouth: and the Lord said to me: Behold I have given my words in thy mouth:
Lo, I have set thee this day over the nations, and over kingdoms, to root up, and to pull down, and to waste, and to destroy, and to build, and to plant. (Jeremiah 1:4-10)

Traditional Hymns in the Post-Vatican II Era

This is a brief commentary that I just submitted for a music class which I am taking. I am not particularly proud of the prose but I believe that it succinctly captures the meaning which I intended to convey.

---

“Sacred music, being a complementary part of the solemn liturgy, participates in the general scope of the liturgy, which is the glory of God and the sanctification and edification of the faithful.” – Tra le sollecitudini, Pope St. Pius X[1]

Among the various styles of music that have gained prominence in the post-Vatican II era, the traditional style, which is least vulnerable to the great innovations of this period and shows the greatest continuity with past musical tradition, has shown the strongest adherence to the general instructions of the Vatican throughout the past century. Traditional hymns such as Lift High the Cross, Ye Watchers and Ye Holy Ones, and Holy God We Praise Thy Name, drawn from repertoires decades old, are relatively immune to the folk and populist influences so common in newer church music and can be justifiably qualified as sacred and edifying. However, the music which should have “pride of place”- Gregorian chant- is relatively rare in Catholic churches.

As suggested by Pope Pius X’s seminal motu proprio Tra le sollecitudini, Gregorian chant must be used as the standard against which all sacred music is compared. Insofar as most traditional hymns are not overtly anthropocentric- perhaps one of the greatest flaws of post-Vatican II music- and are lyrically directed to divine worship, these compositions are praiseworthy. Being composed in older, more classically-oriented styles, traditional hymns preclude the congregation from excessive participation and innovation.

However, the implementation of Gregorian chant in the traditional sphere, with the exception of its use during solemn seasons, has been at best condescending in that it is widely considered as an exceptional embellishment of Masses where newer music otherwise predominates. In the May 1998 edition of the New Oxford Review, author William J Abbott described the new trends of the Catholic Church as follows: “The Church seems to be choosing to represent herself to the world - and to her worried children like me - as in decline not just artistically, but liturgically and inspirationally. The Catholic Church - for the first time in history - seems to have gone tone-deaf.”[2] While Gregorian chant is very much rooted in Scripture, even traditional hymns are mainly traditional poems or the acclamatory praises of individuals set to music. As such, they may not be as effective in edifying the faithful through scriptural exposure than would be chant.

Objections aside, compared to the widespread folk and ethnically-oriented music typical of the post-Vatican II era, the hymns and chants of decades past are perhaps the last remaining anchors to the greater tradition of sacred music that can be found, with the major exception of Gregorian chant.

---

[1] http://www.adoremus.org/TraLeSollecitudini.html#anchor40142047

[2] Abbott, William J. "Post Vatican II "La La La" Music: Unworthy of the Catholic Church." New Oxford Review May 1998.

Catholic Voters: The Moral Basis of Our Vote - PART ONE

The 2008 Presidential Election is fast upon us and I am choosing to take some time to address a very contentious topic that has been circulating, that of supposed single-issue politics on the part of pro-lifers, particularly many of my Catholic pro-life friends (which is a redundancy; all real Catholics are pro-life). We can take as axiomatic that nobody should vote for a pro-abortion/”right-to-choose”/pro-choice politician at all, least of all a CATHOLIC. I am actually not arguing for that point- it is crystal clear already. I am going to argue that there are many other issues, not as grave as the abortion one, that nonetheless must command a Catholic’s attention. While issues pertinent to life must be the primary reason motivating our vote, our moral framework does not exclude other important areas. I’ll address them by the catchwords by which we often hear about them in the news.

I’ll be referring heavily to Canon Francis Ripley’s definitive book, This is the Faith. This will be written in installments.

1) PRIVATE PROPERTY AND SOCIALISM

The Church has held, since time immemorial, the right to private property as essential for the good-functioning of society. As Moses states in Deuteronomy 19:14:

Thou shalt not take nor remove thy neighbour's landmark, which thy predecessors have set in thy possession, which the Lord thy God will give thee in the land that thou shalt receive to possess.

Because we are endowed with an intellect and free will, by our nature we must have private property by which to manifest these capacities and to achieve the work for which God has created us. We cannot work land unless we have a plot that is ours. And if it is not ours and we work on it, we are expected to receive a wage which is in itself a form of private property which can be converted into other things like food, land, an investment, etc. This too is a natural right, viz., to be able to convert our labor for a wage and vice versa.

So, enter socialism, which by its pure definition denies the right to private ownership of productive goods. Socialism to some minor degree exists everywhere. It could be argued that the tax system in its most fundamental form is a form of socialism in that the resources of the many (taxes) are pooled into a common, social depository which is the federal government. It then uses that money as it sees fit for the social good, as outlined in the US Constitution, primarily through national defense and the regulation of commerce. We must agree that, fundamentally, the system of taxation is a form of theft from the populace, but that a majority of people would agree that it is morally imperative for all to see after the means of their defense and the safeguarding of the conditions necessary for the economic welfare, i.e., unfettered commerce. These are necessities which we most certainly agree upon as vital and common to all.

And so arrive at our contemporary period where we often hear about such ideas as socialized medicine, welfare, affirmative action, government bailouts, and the like. Of recent interest is the government bailout of Wall Street which, perhaps surprisingly, warranted the ire of the American people. What was this bailout? Once we lift the political baggage, it is clear that the government took money that was given to it by the people for their good and given to corporations the owners of which abused their rights to private property with excessive risk-taking and ultimately menaced the whole economy. So who is to pay? By the simple premise of personal accountability they, along with their companies, must bear the responsibility for their actions. However, the government saw it more fit to take taxpayer money entrusted to it and to give it over to save these private property-owners. This is, by definition, socialism- more specifically, the privatization of profit and the socialization of losses. This goes against the personal accountability which forms the entire backbone for our moral fabric as Catholics. We must account for our own sins and nothing that anyone else save the Lord does can absolve us of this culpability.

Do you therefore take courage, and let not your hands be weakened: for there shall be a reward for your work. (2 Chronicles 15:7)

Logically, if we do not work, we will not be rewarded. Now, even if we work hard and reap fewer benefits than may be desired due to the misfortunes that are inevitably a part of life, the government can not be called upon to alleviate the difficult conditions which are a natural part of life. Firstly, these can be minimized to a degree but to eliminate them altogether is impossible. Such attempts have led to the utopian social projects which have been historically to blame for great suffering. Secondly, the belief that government can alleviate the difficult conditions of life imbues government with those qualities which can only be ascribed to God and to our Faith, and thus lead to the sort of atheistic and socialist ideologies which have so ravaged Europe’s moral fabric along with more extreme cases like North Korea, Cuba, and the Soviet Union. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states in paragraph 2425: “The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modern times with ‘communism’ or ‘socialism’”.

History, particularly the history of the 20^th century, has shown that government promises to alleviate those vicissitudes which have always been a natural part of our existence have always transpired as: 1) a bold promise for change, 2) an attempt at a sweeping change with occasional success virtually always ending in, 3) great expectations (often met with disappointment) among the people vis-a-vis the government due to their desire for further change. The government may either be toppled, capitulate, or blame their failures or inadequacies on certain elements of the population or even other political parties as a pretext to continue its social projects. Often we hear of the "need" to press on towards the future. A fitting example from recent history is the Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union. In its attempt to unify the nations of Europe economically, the EU has sought to focus its energy on agricultural policy through a system of intensive subsidization. While ambitious and promising in the beginning, this socialist system has led to an exacerbation of the inequalities which were the original target. While the wealthier countries of the EU such as France, Germany, and Belgium enjoy considerable prosperity and cheaper food prices, less well-off countries like Italy and Greece suffer from stagnated development, artificially high food prices, and even major environmental problems. Subsidization has killed production.

Thus, as Catholics determined to work for a greater justice in the world, we must ask if it is better to allow our resources to be taken from us for the “common good” or if perhaps we ourselves are better stewards of these resources. As rightly-guided faithful, we would know better where our resources will be deposited in a moral sense than the government, which most often does not share our cherished beliefs. It is upon private property in the expanded sense of our controlling these resources personally that the Church has always placed its moral weight and confident approbation.

Pope Leo XIII's Encyclical Quod Apostolici Muneris: On Socialism

On the mystery of faith

The Spirit moved vigorously tonight as a group of my friends and I travelled down to Ocala once again to assist at the traditional Latin Mass. Today it was a sung Mass so we had the schola, of which I form part, perform the chants; it was mesmerizingly beautiful. Singing the Mass is a marvellous medium for prayer. But I would say that today's sermon was particularly exceptional.

The main theme of our priest's, Fr. Fryar's, sermon was actually a central epistemological question of our age: what is it know? Is faith knowledge? In today's Gospel, taken from St John, 4: 4-53, Our Lord states, "Unless you see signs and wonders, you believe not." What is the meaning of faith? Faith is pure trust in the Lord, and hope is the fervent desire to be with God. The last remaining theological virtue is charity. Trust necessarily demands an a priori condition of ignorance, or of surrendering oneself to someone or something about which we are uncertain. To have faith in God is to trust in Him without prior conditions, such as having seen signs, or needing proof, or having understanding. It thus, in a way, demands that we relinquish our reason, our deduction,and our knowledge. To believe does not require that we understand. Indeed, to understand, or to seek to understand, eliminates the need for faith. If we have our science and our reason, we give up our faith, but it is by faith that we are bound to God. In today's Gospel, when Jesus tells the ruler whose son is sick in Capharnaum that his son is healed, and before even seeing that this is true, by faith the man believes it to be true, and it is so. Had he seen proof before the Lord had said so, he would not have needed faith because his understanding would have satisfied him. And yet right there he would have severed the necessary link between his son's welfare and the grace and divine charity of our Lord.

The question made me contemplate significantly. I often try to understand everything, to try to encapsulate everything in my mind, even sometimes when it comes to my faith. And yet Fr Fryar spoke verily in saying that if we seek to understand we satisfy ourselves with that understanding, which can only ever be faulty and incomplete, rather than submitting ourselves to the knowledge that can be had only by faith, which is that bond with the divine. The temptation to want to understand, to proof, to be able to argue is tempting, particularly in our day and age. And yet we can not enter the Kingdom unless we rid ourselves of this vice, which is what it really is in the end.

There are no easy answers and no complete explanations. It is only by the blind eye of faith that we can truly see and know. What a winding and mysterious path towards God!