Gone for Lent

Folks, I've decided to give up blogging for Lent. I hope you all understand. May your Lenten season be one filled with blessings.

Speaker Pelosi Goes to the Vatican

Fr. Thomas J. Euteneuer

Surely we were not the only organization to let the Holy See know that one of the most influential anti-life politicians in the world was about to exploit a state visit for personal political gain.

As most of you are certainly aware, earlier this week House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had the audacity to present herself as a "faithful Catholic" on an official state visit to the Vatican.

Monsignor Ignacio Barreiro, Executive Director of HLI's Rome office, was able to compile information on her anti-life voting record and her myriad misrepresentations of her Catholic faith in a letter presented directly to the Vatican Secretary of State.

We were very pleased to see that the Holy Father took the opportunity to remind the Speaker about the truth of Catholic teaching on contraception and abortion, and that her desire for a harmless and high profile visit, complete with the usual photo-ops, was thwarted.

As we again approach the holy season of Lent, please join me in praying and fasting to end abortion, and in praying for the conversion of our political leaders who hold such great sway over the lives of the innocent.

The Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer is the President of Human Life International

Pope instructs Pelosi on the Right to Life

Folks, this according to the Catholic News Agency:

Vatican City, Feb 18, 2009 / 10:18 am (CNA).- House speaker Nancy Pelosi’s photo-op with Pope Benedict XVI turned sour when the Pontiff used the 15-minute meeting to reaffirm the teachings of the Catholic Church on the right to life and the duty to protect the unborn.

No photo of Nancy Pelosi and the Pope will be forthcoming, since the meeting was closed to reporters and photographers. The two met in a small room in the Vatican just after the Pope's weekly public audience.

Immediately after the meeting, the Holy See’s press office released a statement saying, "following the general audience the Holy Father briefly greeted Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, together with her entourage."

"His Holiness took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church's consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in co-operation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development."

A significant number of Catholic and pro-life organizations expressed concern over how Pelosi would use the meeting with Pope Benedict to further her position that it is possible to be Catholic and pro-abortion.

Last August, Pelosi was rebuked by several U.S. bishops for attempting to theologically justify her position during an interview with "Meet the Press."

On Tuesday, Jon O’Brien, president of "Catholics for Choice," a small, well-funded organization that provides theological arguments to pro-abortion Catholic politicians, told The Hill that today’s visit between the Speaker and Pope Benedict would be an opportunity to highlight that one can be pro-choice and Catholic, and that there are much bigger issues out there to discuss, such as the fate of the poor in the global economic downturn.

"That would be a real conversation about choice, instead of this micro-obsession with abortion," O’Brien said.

Nevertheless, according to the Holy See's statement, the Pope spent the whole 15 minute conversation talking with Pelosi about the right to life and the need to defend the unborn.

Read it all here.

Commentary. Hopefully this teaching moment dispelled all the "nuances" that Ms. Pelosi had previously expressed on this issue and served to remove the banal fig leaf she's placed over her pro-abortion stance in order tojustify her "fervent" Catholicism. The Pope also shut up Jon O'Brien and highlighted the betrayal of Catholic moral teaching embraced by his pseudo-Catholics for "Choice." All in all, a good day for teaching and diplomacy at the Holy See.

Let's see how Pelosi and her staff will spin the meeting.

Congressman John P. Murtha (D-PA) to Oppose FOCA

Folks, in response to an e-mail request that he sign a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi by a bi-partisan group of Members of Congress led by Republican Jim Jordan of Ohio and Democrat Heath Shuler of North Carolina, Congressman John P. Murtha (D-PA) notified me today that he will oppose the so-called “Freedom of Choice Act” (FOCA) if and when it comes up for a vote in the House.

“While this bill has not been reintroduced in this Congress, I am not a supporter of the bill” Congressman Murtha indicated in his e-mail reply.

“I've always held a strong pro-life position during my time in Congress. After voting no fewer than ten times to ban partial-birth abortion, I was pleased to see the measure finally pass both the House and the Senate and be signed by the President a few years ago” he added.

He finished his communication by saying “Please be assured that I will continue to vote against any measures that promote abortion. I appreciate your keeping in touch with me on this issue.”

Mr. Murtha’s e-mail did not indicate if he would sign or not the letter to Speaker Pelosi.

I sent the e-mail via the on-line facility provided by AUL-Action, the legislative arm of Americans United for Life (AUL). You still have time to write or e-mail your representative prior to the February 20 deadline. Access the e-mail form here to contact your representative and ask him or her to sign the letter to Speaker Pelosi opposing FOCA.

The AUL ranked Pennsylvania, my and Mr. Murtha’s home state, as the most pro-life state in the country along Louisiana and South Dakota. California, Hawaii, and Vermont ranked last.

The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) will eliminate all common-sense abortion laws nationwide. You may also send a message to President Obama that you oppose FOCA and support current abortion laws by clicking here.

Blesseds Damian of Molokai and Brother Rafael to be canonized

Folks, this according to the Catholic News Agency:

Vatican City, Feb 16, 2009 / 02:11 pm (CNA).- Today the Vatican announced that it will recognize 10 blesseds as saints on February 21 in a ceremony at the Vatican. Among the soon-to-be canonized is Bl. Damian de Veuster, a Belgian missionary who spent much of his life in Hawaii caring for lepers.

The ceremony, which is called a consistory, will take place in the Vatican’s Clementine Hall at 11:00 a.m. on February 21 and will officially recognize as saints 10 blesseds who hail from Portugal to Italy.

In addition to Bl. Damian, Bl. Rafael Arnáiz Barón, is unique because he died at the young age of 27 of a diabetic coma. He was a member of the Cistercian’s of the Strict Observance and is considered on the greatest mystics of the 20th century.

When the Catholic Church canonizes a person, it is a statement by the Church that she believes the person in question lived a saintly life worthy of imitation and that the sainted person is in Heaven.

Eight other beati will also be canonized.

Read the entire article here.

Commentary. Hallelujah! All the candidates are worthy but I have to say that the canonization of Blessed Damian and Brother Rafael are very special. Father Damian epitomizes holiness to so many people that his obvious merits are very difficult to refute whereas Brother Rafael would have been unknown to us but for his writings and aphorisms. I want to share with you a biographical sketch written by Fr. Markon of the Diocese of Tulsa and blogger of Vultus Christi of Brother Rafael, for your own edification:

A Gifted Boy

Blessed Rafael Arnáiz Barón (1911– 1938), was a Trappist Cistercian Oblate of the Abbey of San Isidoro de Dueñas in Spain. Rafael Arnáiz, — or Brother María Rafael as he was known in his monastery — was born on 9 April 1911 in the city of Burgos, Spain. He was the first of four sons born to an upper class family with profoundly Catholic values. As a boy Rafael went to Jesuit schools. As Rafael's personality emerged and affirmed itself, it became evident that he had a rich sensibility, as well as intellectual, artistic, and spiritual gifts.

Fully Alive

Rafael was not, by any means, a pious curmudgeon nor was he one of those morbidly pious adolescents without social skills. He was handsome. He loved beauty. He was open to the good things the world had to offer. Rafael was joyful. The rich feminine side of his personality was not denied, but rather harmonized with his masculinity, and perfected by grace.

The Monastic Enchantment

In September 1930, after graduating from Secondary School, Rafael spent his summer holiday with relatives near Avila. During that fateful summer he had his first exposure to monastic life at the Trappist Abbey of San Isidoro de Dueñas. The Cistercian silence called to his soul. The chant of the monks enchanted him. The solemn Salve Regina at the end of Compline took hold of his heart. Three years later, after completing studies in architecture, Rafael entered the monastery as a postulant and, shortly thereafter, was clothed in the white habit of the Cistercian novice.

The Cross

Rafael had only four more years to live. A few months after entering the monastery, he was diagnosed with a virulent form of diabetes. The illness brought with it melancholy and perplexity. Three times the novice’s superiors sent him home to rest and recover his strength. Drafted into the Nationalist Army at the very height of the Spanish Civil War, Rafael was declared unfit for active duty. Returning to the monastery for the last time, he was received as a regular oblate, that is, a man living within the cloister without vows and following a personal rule of life approved by the abbot. Regular oblates were, at that time, somewhat marginalized in monastic communities. Their peculiar status — monks living without vows and without the security that comes from having made profession — was not without its own challenges. Rafael entered fully into the vocation of the oblate, understanding that the oblate is destined for the altar, that is, for sacrifice.

Contradictions and Uncertainties

Blessed Rafael, in spite of the brevity and discontinuity of his monastic experience, lived it fully. He remained faithful in the face of bewildering contradictions, uncertainties, and apparent failure. He found the Will of God in weakness, in illness, in war, in the inability to make monastic profession, and in the sufferings inherent in community life.

 

Maria, Spes Nostra

The Virgin Mary was the love and consolation of Rafael’s life. “It is a pity,” he wrote, “that David [the psalmist] didn’t know the Most Holy Virgin! What marvelous things he would have said about her! A heart as big as his would certainly have been full of love for Mary! Mary! If only I knew how to write!”

Humble Unto Death

Brother Rafael Maria was humble because he accepted one humiliation after another without ever despairing of the mercy of God. He died stripped of everything, without having fulfilled even the legitimate human aspirations that so appealed to him. Configured to the poor and crucified Jesus, he died in the splendour of the resurrection on 26 April 1938 at the age of 27.

A Model For Today's Youth

Pope John Paul II proclaimed Rafael a model for today’s youth and beatified him in 1992. In some ways Blessed Rafael reminds me of the Passionist Saint Gabriel of the Sorrowful Mother; in other ways he reminds me of Saint Benedict Joseph Labre, and also of Blessed Marie–Joseph Cassant. I wonder if his life did not, in some way, inspire that remarkable novel about Cistercian life, Cosmas, or the Love of God by Pierre de Calan.

The whole community is gathered in adoration
to ask the Lord for peace,
to pray for those who are dying and to make reparation for so many sins . . .
But one mustn't spread discouragement. . . .
When we ask for mercy and pardon, we are doing as David did . . .
that is, the Lord will blot out all our sins and those of the whole world,
not by any poor merits of ours,
but by the multitude and the greatness of His mercy.

Blessed Rafael Arnáiz Barón
August 2, 1936

Difficulties for Generational Dialog

Father Nicolas Schwizer

A phrase from a contemporary writer, quite cynical but not less real, says: “When I meet two men, one old and one young, who walk together without having anything to say, I know they are father and son.” Generational dialog, which is so necessary, is not easy. A proof for this is that homes are rare where this is a constant practice. What happens is that numerous obstacles come between those who should be permanent talkers.

Exterior obstacles. One is the abusive habit of television. When the members of the family are gathered in front of that apparatus, one could think they are united. Let us not fool ourselves: it is a false dialog which only appears to be dialog. Perhaps many words are said, but there is no exchange of profound ideas. Superficial dialog is an obstacle for profound dialog. In this sense, television is a terrible instrument of silence.

Another exterior obstacle is the extreme cult business. How many men allow themselves to become fascinated by this new god, and, due to serving it, they throw their entire lives off balance! Behind it all, is the religion of “having:” it is a must to have, not of being, to always have more and more without limits in sight. Therefore, it is a must to dedicate all the time possible to business, to professional concerns, and there is no time left to dedicate it to the education of the children. Time is money, and who is ready to lose money? In this way, they abandon those who basically would have the right to them and their lives: the children.

A third obstacle: social obligations. Sometimes they are numerous and they take a lot of time. What is least important takes up all of the time. What should be considered important above all else, the education of the children, becomes secondary and the parents allow others to take their place.

In addition to these exterior obstacles, there are other more serious internal problems. Many parents are not motivated to dialog with their children because they consider themselves incapable of it.

This lack of ability frequently comes from a bad conscience and from the fear of being unmasked.

To accept dialog is to take off the mask. Unavoidably, the parents come to show their soul and they expose themselves to the implacable judgment of the child and especially of the adolescent. Because the youth forgives errors with difficulty, he severely criticizes the weaknesses and looks at the failures. Many parents, overburdened by their errors and faults, when they are face to face with their child at the hour of truth, flee in order to hide their shame and – as it is often said – try to salvage their authority. In this way, what they least salvage is their authority with their children.

Another origin of silence is intellectual weakness. It is not uncommon for the youth of today to be more open than the adult, more informed. In this way, dialog between generations becomes more difficult. It is then easier to flee dialog and to isolate oneself even more in one’s own narrow world and thus not have to discover one’s limitations.

Another notorious obstacle is discouragement. It can exist when facing the aggressive attitude of the adolescent. Aggressiveness proper to this age is in itself healthy, desirable and – I would say – indispensable for the growth of the personality.

On the contrary, passive submission or surrender when facing adverse forces would be negative. Nevertheless, this aggressiveness in the adolescent awakens very little sympathy in those around him. He contradicts everyone, demands without ceasing and with special satisfaction provokes his parents who are the embodiment of authority. Nothing the parents do or say matters to the children. They are always mistaken. With this attitude, the parents are tempted to give up the battle and to let the child work things out for himself. They will flee from dialog, judging it useless and superfluous. A wall of silence is raised between them…..

Questions for reflection

1. Do I feel mirrored in one of the points?

2. How do I rate the dialog with my children?

3. What experience do I have in dialog with adolescents?

Ask Your Member of Congress to Sign Letter to Pelosi

Pro-abortion groups have made it a top priority to eliminate the current bans on federal funding of abortion as their first step to passing FOCA.  A bi-partisan group of Members of Congress led by Republican Jim Jordan of Ohio and Democrat Heath Shuler of North Carolina have written a letter to Nancy Pelosi asking her to keep the current pro-life laws in place or allow for amendments to restore them when a bill is debated. Call or send a message to your Member of Congress and ask them to sign onto the Jordan/Shuler letter today.  Deadline is Friday, February 20!

Go to this link to write your letter to your congressman.

St. Thomas Aquinas' biblical commentaries on five Pauline letters now online

The Aquinas Center for Theological Renewal of Ave María University has made available the following unpublished translations, done years ago by Fr. Fabian Larcher, of St. Thomas Aquinas's biblical commentaries on Hebrews, Colossians, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, and Ephesians. Until a couple years ago, these unpublished translations - good but left unpublished because they are not critical editions (i.e. with footnotes, using the most critically up-to-date Latin text etc.) - existed only in typescripts kept in a box by Fr. Pierre Conway OP of the Dominican House in Washington D.C. He gave the typescripts to the Aquinas Center on the promise that they would be converted into digital format and worked toward publication. Enjoy them!

• Hebrews - Section 1 (845kb)
• Hebrews - Section 2 (1.06mb)
• 1 Corinthians (1.82mb)
• 2 Corinthians (1.36 mb)
• Colossians (454kb)
• Ephesians - entire group (1.84mb)
  • Introduction (210kb)
  • Prologue (79kb)
  • Chapter 1 (227kb)
  • Chapter 2 (188kb)
  • Chapter 3 (190kb)
  • Chapter 4 (240kb)
  • Chapter 5 (212kb)
  • Chapter 6 (158kb)
• Romans (1.4mb)

P.S.

Deus lo vult!

Video – Life of St. Bruno, Founder of the Carthusians

Lenten Prayer for Life

 

Father of all mercy,  We thank you for this season of grace and light. We know that sin has blinded us. Draw us ever closer to you, in prayer and penance. Since you, O God, are light itself, Give all your people a clearer understanding Of what is sin, and what is virtue. Grant in particular that we may see, as never before, The profound dignity of every human life, Including the vulnerable unborn children. Give us grace to defend Our brothers and sisters in the womb By our prayers, our words, And our self-sacrificing actions. We pray through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Source: Priests for Life.

An Eloquent Pro-Life Argument

Folks, look at this picture:

The big hand is mine. The little one is my grandson’s. He’s almost two months old.

Ponder this:

There’s no difference between a 9-month “fetus” – which means “child” in Latin – and a one-minute old newborn baby.

There’s no difference between this little hand and that of a fetus in the first trimester of gestations.

This embryo is the same being who once was a zygote only a few cells in extent.

Abortion is murder. Those who perform it are murderers morally, if not legally. Those who facilitate abortion are aiding and abetting the murder of a human life. Those who defend abortion as a “right” are lying and the women (and men) who believe their lies are being victimized all over again.

I challenge you to do this experiment. If you have been blessed with children, look them in the eye and tell them that their mother had a sovereign right to kill them at any stage of her pregnancy with them; hold the tiny hand of your baby and repeat to yourself that abortion makes sense legally and morally.

If you do, you have no heart.

Peter Kreeft: A Philosophical Refutation of Reductionism

Folks, the Catholic Education Resource Center has printed a very convincing article by Dr. Peter Kreeft refuting reductionism, the belief, in his words, “that the world-view, or implicit metaphysics, of most people, or ordinary people, especially people of previous eras and cultures, errs by believing too much; that Hamlet's Shakespeare was exactly wrong when he said to Horatio that "there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of in your philosophy." The prevailing view among modern Western intellectuals is that there are in fact fewer things, or fewer kinds of things, or fewer dimensions of things, in heaven and earth, that is, in objective reality, than in most people's philosophies or beliefs. Thus most modern philosophers see the role of philosophical education primarily as a disillusioning, a debunking of myth, superstition, and naiveté.” It is a thoughtful, logical argument built by one of the foremost Catholic apologists of our times. These are the core paragraphs, which he arrived at after discussing the existence of Santa Clause:

…Now let us substitute God for Santa Claus. (According to atheism, that is exactly what we do when we grow up.) God is not the only example of transcendence, but He is clearly the one most important, most interesting, and most argued about. So let us analyze what we are saying when we say "there is no God."

Let us define or describe God as most people do, as "the being that created the universe." Thus God by definition transcends the universe. So when we say that there is no God we are saying that there is in all reality no being that transcends the universe, that there is nothing more in reality than there is in the universe.

Now in order for us to know that there is nothing more in all reality than there is in the universe, we have to know something about all reality -- in fact, we have to know enough about it to be sure that it excludes God. And if the idea of God is neither logically self-contradictory nor refuted by any empirical fact, then in order to justify the assertion that there is no God, we must know that there is no corner of reality, no kind of reality, and no dimension of reality, in which God can possibly exist. And that means that we have to know every corner, every kind, and every dimension of reality. The word for that kind of knowledge is "omniscience." It is an attribute of God. If there is an omniscient being, that being is God. So the claim that we can know that there is no God logically implies that the person who makes that claim has omniscience, that is, is God. So to claim to know that there is no God is to imply that there is a God, and that he is now speaking.

Merely refuting reductionism does not yet give us any positive evidence for transcendentalism, however, just as merely refuting atheism does not give you positive evidence for theism. We might well be stuck in agnosticism, unable to prove either of the two contradictory propositions, that there is or that there is not a God, or a Santa Claus, or any S that is more than P. So I offer three proofs for transcendentalism, in three different areas of human experience: thinking, choosing, and loving, which are our attempts to get at, or know, or attain, or deal with, the three ideals that we usually believe raise us above the animals, the three ideals everyone wants, and wants without limit: truth, goodness, and beauty. The three commonest forms of reductionism in these three areas are metaphysical materialism, moral relativism, and aesthetic subjectivism…

For Santa Claus you may substitute unicorns, fire-breathing dragons, the Tooth Fairy, elves, pagan deities, and other sundry imaginary beings atheists often equate with God.

Great piece. Read it all here.

FBI cuts off CAIR

Folks, the website of the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) reports that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has cut off contacts with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) amid mounting concern about the Muslim advocacy group's roots in a Hamas-support network. The decision to end contacts with CAIR was made quietly last summer as federal prosecutors prepared for a second trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), an Islamic charity accused of providing money and political support to the terrorist group Hamas, according to people with knowledge of the matter. CAIR and its chairman emeritus, Omar Ahmad, were named un-indicted co-conspirators in the HLF case. Both Ahmad and CAIR's current national executive director, Nihad Awad, were revealed on government wiretaps as having been active participants in early Hamas-related organizational meetings in the United States. During testimony, FBI agent Lara Burns described CAIR as a front organization. Hamas is a US-designated foreign terrorist organization, and it's been illegal since 1995 to provide support to it within the United States. The decision to end contacts with CAIR is a significant policy change for the FBI. For years, the FBI worked with the national organization and its state chapters to address Muslim community concerns about the potential for hate crimes and other civil liberty violations in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. (Read it all here)

There is no current reporting online regarding this issue at the FBI’s website.

Commentary. I’ve been keeping an eye on CAIR-related reporting for a while now. There seem to be many unanswered questions regarding the ties CAIR members have with known terrorists organizations, enough to wonder if CAIR is an agent of influence for these organizations under the cover of legitimate political and community actions. The issue is very important because CAIR continuously reaches out to Catholic individuals and organizations for their own ends. I’ll keep watching CAIR-related reporting and developments in order to formulate a final judgment on the organization. Despite some rumblings, I will reserve judgment until the evidence against CAIR surfaces in full.

Back home!

Folks! I'm back home from my latest military training and I'm very happy to be back. Blogging will resume as soon as I'm rested and my duties permit. Deo gratias!

Archbishop Burke: Bishops Must Deny Communion to Pro-Abort Politicians

Folks, read this interesting interview of Archbishop Raymond Burke, the head of the Church's highest court, the Apostolic Signatura, published last January 30 on LifeSiteNews.com:

"I don't understand the continual debate that goes on about it. There's not a question that a Catholic who publicly, and after admonition, supports pro-abortion legislation is not to receive Holy Communion and is not to be given Holy Communion."

"The Church's law is very clear. The person who persists publicly in grave sin is to be denied Holy Communion, and it [Canon Law] doesn't say that the bishop shall decide this. It's an absolute."

Archbishop Burke called "nonsense" the accusation, regularly made by some bishops, that refusing Holy Communion "makes the Communion rail a [political] battle ground". In fact, he said, the precise opposite is true. The politician who insists on being seen receiving Holy Communion, despite his opposition to the Church's central teachings, is using that reception for political leverage.

Read it all here.

Commentary. Those U.S. bishops who have shown weakness when defending the Eucharist before blatantly unworthy communicants in order to appear "pastoral" will ignore Archbishop Burke's words. I hope not, I pray not, but watch and see.

In the meantime, pro-abort Catholic politicians will continue to use the Eucharist for their political purposes with the tacit approval of these bishops. Let us pray for all of them, for those bishops to show courage in confronting evil and for those politicians' repentance, conversion, and healing.

Pope Benedict to Bishop Williamson: "Stop denying the Shoah"

Folks, this according to the BBC:

The Vatican has ordered an ultra-traditionalist bishop to publicly recant his views denying the Holocaust.

A statement said British Bishop Richard Williamson must "unequivocally" distance himself from his statements to serve in the Roman Catholic Church.

The Vatican also said that the Pope had not been aware of the bishop's views when he lifted excommunications on him and three other bishops last month.

Earlier, a senior cardinal acknowledged the Vatican had mishandled the issue.

The Pope's decision, ending Bishop Williamson's excommunication on an unrelated matter, has caused a bitter row, as the bishop does not believe that Jews were gassed by the Nazis in World War II.

Read it all here.

Commentary. I always suspected that bringing back the SSPX's schismastic bishops into the fold was going to be a complicated affair, particularly regarding Bishop Williamson who, in my estimation, fits the description of an antisemitic kook.

What gets me is the statement from the Holy See that "the Pope had not been aware of the bishop's views when he lifted excommunications on him." Who's minding the kitchen over there? No one vets these things? The Internet is filled with primary source material on Williamson's wicked views. It is also common knowledge that these views are tolerated by many of the adherents of the SSPX.

The Internet may be dripping with misinformation but some truths may be found there. Vetters in Rome and dioceses around should do well to look it up every now and then to avoid giving scandal.

Someone in the Holy See dropped the ball here, causing unnecessary damage to the moral standing of Pope Benedict XVI who clearly depends on others to tell him these things. Pope Benedict XVI didn't need to be berated in public by Germany's Chancellor in order to put the Church's house in order.

As for Bishop Williamson, the man should accept the hand of friendship extended to him and to the SSPX without his usual diatribes and rants. He should recant and apologize to all Jews and to the Pope as soon as possible. Let this bishop do something good for a change, something for the good name of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and of the Church that proclaims it.