By The Hermits, Nov 28 2015 4:49PM
On The Eve of Advent
Last Sunday we celebrated the feast of Christ the King, and tomorrow we begin Advent, and we stand amidst a Church and a world that seems to be lurching towards catastrophe. Why is this? Christ in the Gospel of Luke tells us exactly why:
Watch yourselves, or your hearts will be coarsened with debauchery and drunkenness and the cares of life, and that day will come be sprung on your suddenly, like a trap.
In the West for nearly 50 years, and more so in the United States, the hearts of Christians have been hardened, more than coarsened, by debauchery and drunkenness. Debauchery covers all sexual immorality, all lust, and drunkenness is a department of gluttony. The West has had more than seven years of plenty, it has had seven times seven of plenty, and more. This coarsening of the heart and soul has caused the West to fall into a profound stupor. The only thing that will awaken the decadent West are “signs in the sun and moon and stars; on earth nations in agony, bewildered by the clamour of the ocean and its waves”. Such things are not necessarily confined to the Second Coming, but will constantly be replayed as long as we defiantly disobey God, and no more so when we Catholics disobey God. The final act of Time will indeed be terrible, but the different acts of the drama up until then, will always show forth the terrifying power of God, which in our presumption, our pride, and our supposed knowledge of things theological and spiritual we constantly miss (For the most part modern theology is utterly deplorable and will lead people astray and finally to Hell. Most people get to Heaven with no knowledge of theology, but they do know Christ and what his demands are, namely to love God, obey his commandments, and love our neighbour in that order. Nothing is more alluring and dangerous than an overemphasis on the Social Gospel, for without the demands of the Commandment to love and obey God, we can go astray on a sentimental humanism, that puts Man and his needs before God.). Modern Philosophy is no help at all, as it is taken up with Man. In these days, which mark the beginning of this Second Vatican Council, it is more obvious than ever before that the Lord's truth is indeed eternal. Human ideologies change. Successive generations give rise to varying errors, and these often vanish as quickly as they came, like mist before the sun.
Sadly we were put on this course by St. John XXIII’s hopelessly optimistic view of Man. In the excerpt below which is taken from his opening speech at the Second Vatican Council we see the seeds of the destruction that is having such a devastating effect on the Church. I highlight the really explosive statements:
In these days, which mark the beginning of this Second Vatican Council, it is more obvious than ever before that the Lord's truth is indeed eternal. Human ideologies change. Successive generations give rise to varying errors, and these often vanish as quickly as they came, like mist before the sun.
The Church has always opposed these errors, and often condemned them with the utmost severity. Today, however, Christ's Bride prefers the balm of mercy to the arm of severity. She believes that, present needs are best served by explaining more fully the purport of her doctrines, rather than by publishing condemnations.
Not that the need to repudiate and guard against erroneous teaching and dangerous ideologies is less today than formerly. But all such error is so manifestly contrary to rightness and goodness, and produces such fatal results, that our contemporaries show every inclination to condemn it of their own accord—especially that way of life which repudiates God and His law, and which places excessive confidence in technical progress and an exclusively material prosperity. It is more and more widely understood that personal dignity and true self-realization are of vital importance and worth every effort to achieve. More important still, experience has at long last taught men that physical violence, armed might, and political domination are no help at all in providing a happy solution to the serious problems which affect them.
The dear and saintly Pope had thought that the Western World pulverized by two horrible World Wars, millions of people enslaved or killed by the Nazis or the Communists in the Third Reich and Stalinist Russia, would now be the champion of truth and lap up the doctrines of the Church with the enthusiasm of the cat that got the cream. He must have been unaware of Kruschev’s appalling record when it came to the destruction of Orthodox churches which far exceeded what Stalin had done. How could the “Good Pope John” beloved by the entire World airily declaim “But all such error is so manifestly contrary to rightness and goodness, and produces such fatal results, that our contemporaries show every inclination to condemn it of their own accord.” Then why were the United Nations pushing contraception in Africa and other places, why were the Americans indulging in economic imperialism, why were the African countries transition from colonies to independent countries so often marred by appalling violence, greed and corruption, and why were the Russians still sending people to gulags? It is extraordinary that the Divine response to this tragically optimistic speech occured within days of the opening of the Council, when the Cuba Crisis could have engulfed the World in a Nuclear Holocaust.
The final unwitting remarks and far more dangerous than any error propagated by arch heretics were the seemingly innocuous 10 words that jump out at one, as being the progenitors of all the psychobabble that has invaded the Church and had such a devastating effect on priesthood and the religious life: personal dignity and true self-realization are of vital importance. I suspect that there was a guiding hand which penned these words for the benign Pontiff. Sadly these short paragraphs have laid the foundations for the strange Church that we now inhabit. It most certainly does not describe the Kingdom of God on Earth, the Church over which Christ the King reigns. I can only say with utter conviction that Christ now weeps over his Church as he wept over Jerusalem 2,000 years ago. “Come Lord Jesus, Come!”
By The Hermits, Nov 23 2015 3:25PM
An excerpt from an article on LifeSiteNews reporting on the official responses from Officials in France after the terrible attacks in Paris. And a very good response from a French priest:
"Because Muslims pray in a number of streets in Paris and elsewhere, Front National leader Marine Le Pen – whose star is on the ascendant – has said she also opposes Catholic pro-life public prayers in the streets.
France is not exactly choosing the path that will allow it to stand up to terrorism with its true values.
The main terrorist attack last Friday happened at a rock concert when the American group Eagles of Death Metal, which had attracted 1,500 spectators at the Bataclan, were just beginning to sing their hit, Kiss the Devil. The lyrics might have been written as a joke but the words are clear: “Who’ll love the devil? Who’ll sing his song?… I’ll love the devil and his song.”
A diocesan priest, Fr. Hervé Benoît, commented on the news site Riposte catholique : “Look at the photos of the spectators, moments before the tragedy… They are living dead. Their assassins, the ‘haschishin zombies’, are their Siamese twins. How can one not see this? It is so obvious! The same uprooting, the same amnesia, the same infantilism, the same lack of culture… A drama of atheist humanism, that loves the devil, death, violence, and says so – and died because of it. The sign of death and chaos does not only hover over Paris on a cursed Friday evening. 130 deaths are horrible. What about 600 deaths? That’s the amount of abortions in France on that same day.”
At the Bataclan, another song was to have been played: “Save a prayer.” “Don't say a prayer for me now /Save it 'til the morning after.” Many foreign heads of state sent their condolences to France with a prayer. The French leftwing press has rejected those prayers saying France needs everything but.
A meeting of the Association of French Mayors this week, days after the horrific events in Paris, came up with an idea: let’s ban Nativity scenes from all public places. Having a proper law to make sure that no town hall can have a “crèche” at Christmas was one of the major proposals made in a report that the Association had been working on in the wake of the Charlie-Hebdo attack in January. Their “Guide for good secularist conduct” was presented on Wednesday and their president, Republican François Baroin, explained: “It is up to us, who are elected and close to the population, to hold up secularism, which is at the same time a condition for community life and a means to emancipate human beings.”
By The Hermits, Nov 6 2015 11:49AM
With the Pope being unable to call to task the heretical cardinals, bishops and priests during the recent Synod on the Family, and for his supposedly confusing remarks to Eugenio Scalfari, founder of La Repubblica paper, a definitely secular newspaper, which would seem to indicate that the Pope wants everyone to receive communion, who was divorced and remarried, one cannot help saying “What next?”.
The Pope is indeed the Pope of Surprises; no doubt he has been unduly influenced by Fr. Gerry Hughes who wrote “God of surprises”, which was very popular in the late or 80’s or 90’s, but which I never read. Fr. Gerry was the spiritual father of the boys at Stonyhurst when I was 13 back in 1966, and he was a very fine preacher, but not much help to myself, who was a very confused adolescent. I know that he was very keen on giving non-Catholics communion, and disagreed with Humanae Vitae. Why this desire for everyone to have communion who are not entitled to it? Has the Church become like those dreadful mothers who give their children whatever they want, and as a result destroy the children that they supposedly love. Are Catholics all rushing off to have Anglican communion, Church of Scotland Communion, or Methodist communion? The whole thing is ridiculous, but no-one can see it.
However we now have a refreshing and robust defence of Christian morality from the Patriarch of All Russia, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow, who received in audience none other than Billy Graham’s son, Franklin Graham who is the head of The Billy Graham Evangelical Association. The meeting dealt with the persecution of present day Christians in the West who defend Christian morality. The Patriarch likened such Christians to the great St. Maximos the Confessor (He died in 662 AD), who had his tongue cut out and his hand cut off, by the Byzantine Emperor Constans II because he refused to accept the heresy of Monothelitism, (The heresy that says that Christ had only one will, a Divine will.) and he was also a great supporter of the Papacy , which is rather ironic given the present circumstances in which the Catholic Church finds herself. Kirill noted that today’s confessors were suffering from repressions.
The Patriarch said: “Today, Christians who uphold the intransient importance of Christian moral values had to become Confessors of the Faith, living under various kind[s] of pressure, including the mass media……This gives a sign of hope: there are people among Western Christians akin to us in ethical principles, sharing them with the Russian Orthodox Church.”
Now though you could have heretical Emperors like Constans, you could also have great Emperors like Constantine who called the First Ecumenical Council at Nicea, and Charlemagne who was always working for the good of the Church, and Sigismund the Holy Roman Emperor who kept the Council of Constance on track. Unfortunately Charlemagne forced the “filioque” into the creed, and onto the Catholic Church. Unfortunately the Pope reluctantly accepted it, which was not a good thing, and only hastened the schism between East and West. However Constantine, Charlemagne, and Charles V were able to help the Church through difficult times, and break deadlocks. This is, on one level, dangerous as it can stop the exercise or Papal rights, but on the other hand it can defend the Church. It also shows lay involvement, no more so when it is a woman who is involved. The Emperor Theodosius’ sister, Pulcheria, who on his death became Empress, married the senator Marican who, on becoming Emperor, calls the Council of Chalcedon at the request of Leo the Great. (Theodosius refused to call the council as he was supporting the heresy of Monophysitism which said that Christ had only a Divine nature.) Again we see the rather blood thirsty Empress Irene triumphing in the Iconoclastic Controversy which wracked the Eastern Church for sixty years by calling the Second Council of Nicea.
In later times, and on a smaller scale, we see how Caterina Cibo, Duchess of Camerino enabled the Capuchin Reform to start, and how Vittoria Colonna the great friend of Michelangelo prevented the reform from being suppressed. In our own time, I have read somewhere, how the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate were nearly suppressed, but for the intervention of a woman, who was a friend of the Pope. They possibly need another doughty champion after their recent sufferings at the hands of the Capuchin visitator, who then died at the height of the fairly savage visitation. Such are the ways of God.
Never has the Church been so clerical as it is now. There may be a lot of talk of the laity, and we are battered with such slogans as “This is the age of the laity” and “The Pilgrim People of God”, but this is really an elevated form of window dressing. Can you imagine the Fathers of the Church coming out with such things? They dealt with heresies in a hard headed fashion. They were not overwhelmed with sentiment, they were fired with the truth.
It was certainly not the age of the laity at the recent synod in Rome. There were wonderful advisers like Dr. Maria Cernea the Romanian doctor who really should have told the Bishops what they should be doing and weren’t doing. Quite why Popes have to call synods to write Apostolic Exhortations, I really do not know. Leo the Great wrote his great “Tome” from the well springs of his Faith. He relied on the Holy Spirit and not on a whole lot of bishops, many of whom do not now appear to know their faith, which is nonsense when you have a Catechism which can inform even bishops of what they are meant to believe.
However returning to the importance that the Laity play in the Church, I would suggest the following whimsical scenario.
Given the fact that the one great power that is showing fidelity to Christian morality, regarding homosexuality, and the whole mad LGBT nonsense, is Russia, and that President Putin is devout in a similar way to a Charlemagne, or a Constantine, then perhaps he should do something quite extraordinary and call an Ecumenical Council of the East and West to heal the crisis in the Catholic Church, and bring about the union of the Latin West and the Orthodox East. I realize that this, is on one level, pure fantasy, but perhaps it is not quite so fantastic. The Final Great Council of the Church, according to the ancient prophecies, will be the work of the Grand Monarch, and what seems to be the last Pope.
Let the bishops listen to the Faithful Laity, and not patronize them.
By The Hermits, Oct 20 2015 3:12PM
Michael Voris of “Church Militant” has rightly, in his most recent dispatch from The Synod in Rome, has reflected that Freemasonry has been the most frequently condemned theory in the history of the Church. I would imagine he is right. He also rightly tells us that it was Masonic principles that guided the American, French, and Russian Revolutions and that their principles of Liberty, Fraternity and Equality overshadow the present Synod, and to some extent the same is true of the Second Vatican Council. There was at the Council this almost obsession with, and wonder at, Man. This could be seen in some of the utterances of St. John XXIII and Blessed Paul VI. There is something wonderful about Adam and Eve, but that wonder was deeply marred by The Fall, and the greater wonder is the most magnificent happening to have ever to have taken place in Time, namely The Incarnation, Life, Passion, Death, and Resurrection of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, namely Jesus Christ Our Lord, who has redeemed us. Our lives as Christians should be dominated by this stupendous wonder. Unfortunately a very large proportion of Western Christians like pigs at the trough, are eating ravenously, or looking at their not too lovely reflections in the dirty water around them.
Michael Voris says that the principles of Liberty, Fraternity, and Equality can be seen as the guiding star of the Synod: Liberty guides the individual’s conscience to make his or her own decisions regarding sexual life style and receiving Holy Communion. Equality enables all to receive communion; presumably even serial killers or robbers as long as they feel after examining their consciences that they are free to do so. Fraternity seems to guide the rather frightening Synodal process that Pope Francis wants to implement. Someone really should remind him of The Council of Constance, where the Council Fathers wanted frequent councils. I quote;
The frequent celebration of General Councils is the best of all methods for tilling the Lord’s field, and for extirpating the weeds, and thorns of heresy, schisms and errors….. This it is that brings the Lord’s vineyard to the fullness of its fertility. The neglect to hold General Councils fosters and encourages all the disorders here spoken of; the history of former times and the events we ourselves witness to make this very evident. Therefore, by the perpetual law, we command that, from this time on, General Councils shall be held as follows: the first within five years immediately following the close of this present council; the second within seven years of the close of the council immediately following this present council; and ever afterwards thenceforward every ten years; all these councils to be held in a place which the pope is bound to announce one month before the end of the council, and with the approbation and consent of the council. Should the pope fail to do this, then the council itself is to choose the place and time. So that, in this way, by a kind of continuity, there shall always be a council in session or the expectation of a council. The term appointed for the coming council the pope may, with the consent of the cardinals, shorten, but in no case may he make it longer. (Session 39, 9th October 1417; quoted in Hughes “The Church in Crisis”)
The decree “Haec Sancta Synodus” at Constance, which put the primacy of an Ecumenical Council above the Pope was not accepted by the Papacy. The above quote from the decree “Frequens” was from later on in the Council, and though Martin V accepted this under duress it was never put into action. Though the majority of the Council was accepted by the Church, reading about it one gets the distinct impression that it was rather like a Medieval mixture of The United Nations and the World Council of Churches. Obviously the Papacy was being reduced to a sort of exalted Presidency, and this might be the line that Pope Francis is unwittingly taking. He wishes to enforce his Synodally run Church with the full force of his Petrine Office and with words redolent of Pius IX, with whom he cannot have much in common. Quite how “Pastor Aeternus”, which is the Dogma of Infallibility, works with a synodally operating Church one cannot begin to imagine.
One thing for certain is this; if the Pope has his way, he will have opened a Pandora’s box that only the Holy Spirit will be able to close. How have we reached this disastrous state of affairs? The only answer I can come up with is that we have fallen in love with Man, and we think that men and women can build Heaven on Earth. This ridiculous notion springs from the Enlightenment view of Man as being basically noble and good; the problem is the tense; Man and Woman were made in the likeness of God, were good and then fell. Those unorthodox members of the present Synod on The Family will be suffering from this illusion that man is good and can enter Heaven without baptism, and this is all too understandable if they have misunderstood Nostrae Aetate, which is quite easy to do. If all roads lead to Rome, why cannot all religions lead to Christ. Obviously these prelates have not read and inwardly digested Chapter One of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans. If there are two heresies that are abroad in this synod they are Pelagianism, a rather easy going Pelagianism at that, and Modernism. Modernism is certainly the atmosphere of the Synod, as Modernism, being utterly subjective and more about feeling than Faith, and it has a drug like effect on its followers.
How have we reached this point. I think the point has been reached by a manifesto that runs a bit like this. Man is really alright, bar a few problems here and there. He is good enough to get to Heaven by his own efforts. He really is not bad enough to go to Hell, and so he really does not have to do much to go to Heaven. So how does this work out in reality? By the lessening of discipline. It is interesting that in the 1960’s, education began to become more relaxed especially when it came to learning languages, and in Mathematics. Piaget, as far as I can remember going back 40 years now when I was studying to be a teacher (Thankfully for both myself and the students, that never materialized!), posited a child centred form of education. Once again a deification, not only of adults but of children (The more critical view is that the Illuminati or other dark forces, best described as Deist Globalists, want to detach children from their parents and control them, so that ultimately you will have a race of masters and slaves. It is a very plausible scenario, which seems to be in operation in the United States even as I write.). This means that children and adults can really do what they want to because both can form their own consciences, which of course they cannot, because they are fallen and cannot see clearly without the light of Christ, and the teachings of the Church.
This collapse of discipline and the cossetting of the members of the Church began firstly I suspect with the changes to the Liturgy, which were begun rather surprisingly with St. Pius X, who took the Laudate psalms out of Lauds in the Roman Breviary. On the illegal level priests such as Romano Guardini, who should have known better, were celebrating Mass facing the people and experimenting with the Liturgy. Then after the Second World War in the 1950’s, Pope Pius XII relaxed the Eucharistic Fast from midnight and said that the Faithful only had to fast 3 hours before receiving Holy Communion. He also did away with the Lenten Fast except for Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. Then Paul VI reduced the 3 hours fast to 1 hour before Communion. In the wake of Vatican II, the Breviary was drastically shortened and all the nasty bits in the psalms were taken out. As the psalms were recited by Christ who is God, how in Heaven’s name can we better him? It is a sort of heresy, perhaps there is no “sort of” about it. The Mass was shortened and translated into the vernacular. The special vesting prayers for priests were dropped, and very few priests prepare for the celebration of Mass properly, and most people rush out of the Church without saying their thanksgiving. I remember a Capuchin Lay brother years ago saying the reason for this is because of the Dismissal at the end of Mass makes it redundant. Why “Go the Mass is ended” in the old English Missal would absolve one from thanksgiving after Mass I do not know. The New Mass was also much easier to celebrate because it was in the vernacular, and all the signs of the Cross bar one that the priest made in the Old Mass were dropped. That easiness encouraged laziness. And that is what has entered the Church; Laziness. Laziness in worship, laziness in fasting, and now laziness in morals. When Michael Voris talks about “The Church of Nice” I fear he is underestimating the problem. It is a Church riven with indiscipline and dying because of SLOTH!!
I suspect that in the coming weeks, and months, and over the next year the poor Holy Father will be weeping and groaning and saying to himself and perhaps to others “What have I done, what have I done?” I have no doubt that the Pope has the best intentions, but are they the right ones? Has he, because of his formation as a Jesuit in the late 50’s and early 60’s, become muddled as so many priests and religious were muddled during those ultimately chaotic years when indiscipline reigned supreme? I suspect he has, and here is a great tragedy, and it is so true of so many priests and bishops and cardinals. They have been taken in by the spirit of the Age, and the spirit of the Age is one of continuous revolution and change. Liberty Fraternity and Equality now rule, and this rule, as before, in the French and Russian Revolutions, will lead to terror. I pray that this does terror does not now invade the Church and cause the ruin of millions of souls.
I will finish this article with Christ answering the Pharisees about who casts out demons from the possessed man, and with Ezekiel’s terrifying vision of the cleansing of Jerusalem and her temple.
Now when the Pharisees heard it they said, “This fellow does not cast out demons except by Beelzebub, the ruler of demons.” But Jesus knew their thoughts, and said to them: “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand. If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand? (Matthew 12 vv. 24-26)
Then He cried out in my ears with a loud voice, saying, “The punishment of the city is near, and each had instruments of destruction in his hand.” Behold, six men were coming from the way of the high gate that looks toward the north, and each one’s axe was in his hand. One man among them was clothed with a full-length robe, with a belt of sapphire about his waist. They entered and stood near the bronze altar.
Then the glory of the God of Israel went up from the Cherubim, and the glory which was over them went into the inner court of the house. He called to the man clothed with the long robe with the belt on his waist, and He said to him, “Go through the midst of Jerusalem and put a mark on the foreheads of the men who sigh and groan over all the lawless deeds taking place within her.” To the others He said in my hearing, “Go after him through the city and kill. Let not your eyes spare, and have no mercy. Utterly destroy old men and youth, and virgins, infants, and women, but not come near anyone on whom is the mark. Begin at My sanctuary.” So they began with the elders who were inside the house. Then He said to them, “Defile the house, and go out and fill the roads with the dead and smite.”
So it was, as they were smiting, I fell on my face and cried out, and said, “Alas, O Lord, are You wiping out all the remnant of Israel in pouring out Your anger on Jerusalem?” Then he said to me, “The wrongdoing of the house of Israel and Judah has become exceedingly great, for the land is full of many peoples, and the city is full of wrongdoings and uncleanness. For they said, ‘The Lord forsook the land, and the Lord does not look upon it.’ My eye will not spare, nor will I have mercy, but I will recompense their deeds on their own heads.” Then behold, the man clothed with the long robe and girded with the belt on his waist reported back and said, “I have done as you commanded me.”
(Ezekiel Chapter 9)
The great tragedy is that the Church is divided against itself now, or to put it more correctly there is much dead wood in it. The axe has been laid to the branches. They will be cut off. The teaching of Christ does not change. It remains forever. The Word of God does not change whatever heretical scripture scholars would have you believe. There is little time left before catastrophe will come and with it God’s punishment. He will not allow is Bride the Church, now a haggard crone to die. His winnowing fan is in his hand, and he will divide the chaff from the wheat.
By The Hermits, Oct 8 2015 10:07PM
The reason that I felt inspired to write “The Catmoot” back in 2013 was to try and allay the fears of some of the clergy with regard to His Holiness Pope Francis. I was trying in a whimsical, but nevertheless very serious way, to warn and console. Even now with the Pope’s extremely strange reaction to things theological, things political and things moral, I suspect that I have caught some of his personality.
We know from his sister that when he wants do something, nothing will stop him. We know he is courageous. We know he is very kind to the poor and the marginalized. We know him to be something of loose cannon, and we believe that he is the Pope that God has, in his Providence, placed as his vicar on Earth. Popes are human. Some have been great men like all the popes who bear the title great. They have been giants like Innocent III who was almost all powerful in his time; something of a mixed blessing. They have been men of great asceticism and somewhat forbidding like Paul IV, who was ferocious, or Pius V who was a saint. They may have been wonderfully erudite and genial as well as holy like Benedict XIV. They have been holy and great like John Paul II, and wonderfully warm and witty and saintly like John XXIII, and they have been great theologians like Benedict XVI. They have been like St. Pius X, luminously holy, or completely underestimated and underappreciated like Benedict XV whose charitable works would have had him canonized in a saner age than ours. They have been lauded in their lifetimes like Pius XII, and scandalously vilified in death. There have been popes who found it very difficult to make up their minds like Paul VI, and there have been wicked popes Like Alexander VI, who had the great Savonarola burnt at the stake for heresy, which he was not guilty of. It is interesting to know that both St. Philip Neri, most lovable of saints, and St. Catherine dei Ricci, most extraordinary of mystics venerated Savonarola as a saint, whereas St. Ignatius Loyola forbad his picture being in any of the Jesuit houses. This brings us to the recurring problem of the Jesuits in the history of the Church.
Many years ago, a former Jesuit teacher of mine at my old school, Stonyhurst College, said to me “The problem with us Jesuits is that we have too much power.” This is an admission that most would agree with. The Church since the Counter Reformation has been dominated by the Jesuits. This has been both a blessing and a curse. Who cannot be moved when one reads about that greatest of missionaries, after St. Paul, namely St. Francis Xavier? Who is not moved at the great simplicity and humility of the first Jesuit priest St. Peter Favre, whom St. Francis de Sales called “The great Peter Favre. Who is not bewildered at the multifaceted and rich personality of St. Robert Bellarmine, theologian, Bishop, Cardinal, and must humble of scholars? Then what do we say of that dogged spiritual giant St Peter Canasius, whose personality though stolid, almost boring, bore such wonderful fruit in the re-Catholicising of Germany, and the saving of Poland from Calvinism. This man who is, I believe, called the second apostle of Germany, encourages us by his massive plodding quality; one that many of us can relate to; namely slow and steady wins the race, a man who was a sort of catechetical tortoise one might say. What do we say of Matteo de Ricci who tried to incluturate the Gospel in Chinese philosophy and ancestor worship? And there is the problem; in their noble and praiseworthy desire to save as many souls as possible, they try to find easy ways of getting to Heaven. There is that hint of Machiavelli, that the ends justifies the means. Even the Little Way of St. Thérèse requires great heroism, and unflinching determination. It is certainly not easy, and I, who have been trying to follow it for 51 years since the age of 11, have singularly failed to live up to its heroic demands. The Jesuits have always moved among the powerful, and sadly some of the worst despots of the 20th century have been educated by them, or found inspiration from them. We need only to think of Himmler, who greatly admired the Jesuits, and Pol Pot, who I think was educated by them.
However when we look at the Jesuits today we are dumbstruck, not by their former grandeur and greatness, but by a quality that shocks. The Pope’s storm troopers seem to have turned informant. They seem to have become ecclesiastical double agents. They seem to be demolishing their Church, and their great inspiration was, it would appear, that most peculiar of men, Theilhard de Chardin who was the first Catholic thinker to talk so much esoteric nonsense and worse still to take in men like de Lubac. Who can read Karl Rahner and not be overwhelmed by the dense style that is utterly indigestible, and really what does it mean? Von Balthasar can write beautifully but is it all a song and dance about nothing, especially when his natural bent is to hope that no-one goes to Hell. He may have not wanted people to go to Hell, but go to Hell they do, because they reject God, and Hell will be worse than Heaven where God lives for the soul who hates God. They are rather like Gollum in Lord of the Rings; they hate the light, be it Moon of Sun. This is the view of St. Gertrude the Great, and I would trust a sound Benedictine rather than a modern day Jesuit.
The Kingdom is given to the childlike, and it is good to know that Karl Rahner shocked some of his more avant-garde theological associates by dropping to his knees at the end of a talk and devoutly say his rosary. It is up to the children and the childlike to save the world. No-one else is going to, certainly not the likes of Cardinal Marx et al.
Though “The Catmoot” may not be very accurate, but when is a fairy tale ever accurate in its details, and more so when it is a spiritual fairy tale? It, nevertheless, was trying to make a very necessary point. The Catholic Church must look to her Orthodox Sister in the East, who by and large has been more faithful to the ancient tradition than her Western Sister has in the disastrous 20th century.
The cats were meant to signify the good and honest faithful, who in the main come from the ranks of the laity, but who also include humble religious, who have no airs and graces, who have not gone on this or that stupefying course in this or that spirituality, have not gone to University and got a degree in some very questionable theology, or have not become counsellors, psychotherapists, or psychologists sorting people out not for Heaven, but for Hell. Most of this stuff is some perverted form of Pelagianism, which is what we do not need. What we need is humility, joy, laughter, and good deal of charitable poking fun. I felt that the Cardinals and bishops and the career clerics needed to be gently sent up, to have their balloons of pride and self-satisfaction pricked, and made to see how silly they are. They need a St. Philip Neri, or a Brother Juniper to make them see how ridiculous heresy is, especially in regard to sexual morality, and that all that matters is that we love God in great simplicity, with true Faith, and with vast amounts of Hope. We must get these poor benighted prelates and the Pope to see that possibly the most important of the Beatitudes is “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.” Nothing impure can look on the face of God. In their own ways, I suspect animals can, because, despite being part of Fallen Creation, they are innocent, despite doing what they do, which is eating somebody or some animal, when they are hungry. In the First Created World as the Fathers tell us, they would not have done so, neither would Man and Woman for that matter.
So perhaps one of the saints in “The Catmoot” might help us here. St. Hildegard said that with the Fall, Man could no longer understand the animals, but they can still understand us.
In Chapter 3 of the Catmoot called “The Watchtower of Heaven” I have St. Hildegard say “The Pope has turned the tide…but the evil is still immense.” Well I fear that the Pope has not turned the tide and the evil is still immense. He was sent a copy of the Catmoot, as was Pope Benedict, and Patriarch Kyrill, and President Putin. I never got round to sending one to Binyamin Netanyahu, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, and President Obama. The first of the three has a sense of humour I am sure, and no doubt the King would have a very oriental sense of humour, but Obama does not, for he has no sense of proportion. The Holy Father is both good humoured and I suspect quite fiery, but he does not strike me as a man who has a great sense of humour. He seems to take everything very seriously and one gets the impression, no doubt a partial one, that getting jobs for the young and getting welfare for the elderly, and sorting out Climate Change, another modern myth along with Evolution, are in the same category as saving souls. There appears to be an imbalance, and this is a very contemporary problem. With a loss of a sense of sin, comes a loss of the sense of not only God, but who one is, and what one is meant to do, and how one is to live. If there is no Hell then what? The Holy Father is well aware of evil and Hell, but then one gets the impression that he might one day go on about Indulgences with the same enthusiasm as The Trinity. Obviously I exaggerate to make a point. I hope that he did read The Catmoot, not that it is particularly good, but because it does try to bring a perspective on the lunacy let loose on our times?
As the great song of praise ended and there was a pause, which might have been a few minutes, years or centuries, for the time of Heaven, if one can use such a term, is completely different, Catherine spoke in her lilting lovely voice, “The Pope is good, very good, but his determination to reform the Church reminds me of Urban VI, without his faults.”
“It does seem so, and I am brought to think of Pedro de Luna who we, in France, thought was the true Pope, and he too was determined to reform the Church.” said St. Colette.
“Men must learn to make haste slowly, a most difficult thing for them to do.” remarked Hildegard.
Unfortunately men so often only learn from their mistakes, and very often don’t learn at all.” And with these words Bridget of Sweden we take our leave of these gracious saints and go to meet our courageous and irrepressible cats.
Let us pray that the Pope, the Cardinals, the Bishops, the religious and priests will not have to learn by their mistakes, as a result of the decisions made at this Synod, for if they do, the mistakes may be so great that God will have to punish the Church in the same way that He punished the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, and Israel and Judah in the days of the Assyrian conquerors, and in the days of Nebuchadnezzar. May Mary the Mother of The Church and Saint Joseph protector of the Church pray for us.
By The Hermits, Oct 5 2015 8:53PM
Quite whether the Holy Father intended that the Synod would start on the feast of St. Francis or not, I do not know, but hopefully he did, and hopefully it would make him reflect on what is happening to himself, the Papacy, the Church and the World. Pope Francis, who has a charming and attractive character (It is extraordinary that he was known in Argentina the Bishop who never smiled) which manifests itself in the compassionate gesture, which at times is in stark contrast to the intended symbolism, such as washing the feet of women prisoners on Maundy Thursday. The washing of the feet was done by Christ to his chosen apostles and was intended to remind them of the humility of God to which they were to aspire. It was after all two women who washed Christ’s feet, the first the woman, who was a sinner, and the second, Mary of Bethany. However muddled thinking is the norm these days, it would seem. Having done away with much that was symbolic in the Mass and the sacraments, we are now having to invent rather trite symbols, which neither attract, persuade, of have any beauty about them.
St. Francis was a man simply overwhelmed with the symbolic. If he saw a lamb he thought of Christ, if he saw a stone he thought of God. He saw the larks as his sisters, and the most important sister was of course Sister Moon. The Sun was his brother and death was another sister, a somewhat doom laden on,e if one was not in a state of grace; almost even a bit like Kali. He saw his friars as a new form of knight, but also like Arthur’s Knights of the Round Table. He also saw himself as a mother who had born all the brothers, and his attachment to the Courtly Love code meant that one should keep one’s eyes downcast when talking to a lady. I think St. Clare found it all a bit difficult, and Francis had to be almost forced to go and visit her. He allowed the Lady Jacoba da Settesoli, a noble Roman widow, to break the enclosure because she was a sort of honorary man.
Now on one level there is almost a contemporary feel to all this. Peoples’ sexes are muddled up, same sex marriages, cloning and goodness knows what. But all this muddling of the important things in life is dark, deadly and destructive, because it is inward looking. Francis was always outward looking, and everything had to reflect Christ or remind him of Christ.
It is not surprising that Carmelite spirituality is (whatever that is. The early Carmelites were hermits living on Mount Carmel, and then when they came to Europe and saw the massively successful Franciscans and Dominicans, they wanted to be like them. It seems dangerously close to a sort of spiritual envy!) wordless and imageless to some extent, or at least John of the Cross is. Ignatian spirituality is highly analytical, and the exercises are too much for me, whereas Francis is always contemplating the Cross, and wanting to imitate Christ in his life. Francis being a literalist, some times did things in a very literal way. He also, though he did not disapprove of the Crusades, felt that he must convert the Moslems, and so sallied forth to meet the Sultan, who was charmed, and did not kill the Poor little Man of Assisi.
The 20th and 21st centuries have sentimentalized Francis, and no-one did it better than Zefferell, in Brother Sun Sister Moon, who made poverty look Chic according to the New York Times critic of the film when it was reviewed in 1973. It was certainly influenced by the whole Hippy Movement. Francis, like his master Jesus, has been forced into so many different roles that one despairs of getting close to the real man. Though Communists have tried to make Jesus into a South American freedom fighter, and have used Che’s face to illuminate Christ’s, they have never managed to do that with Francis.
Francis’s genius was to make everyone and everything a brother and sister of Christ. This was not the ideology of The American Declaration of Independence , namely that:
. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"
Quite why Pope Francis had to use this disastrous quote in his speech to Congress one cannot think. Whatever St. Francis had in mind it was nothing so utterly smacking of Enlightenment Philosophy as this. Christ did not come to bring us human happiness, he came to call us to Eternal Bliss, far more wonderful than any human happiness, and St. Francis knew that this could only be done by following Christ totally, by imitating him. His love of poverty was not what a lot of people thing it is. It is not rushing around getting involved in Liberation Theology, or going on about living with the poor; nothing could have been further from his mind. He saw in the lepers and the poor, more brothers and sisters to love, and the best way to do this was by being utterly poor and relying on Divine Providence, allowing God the Father to provide for all our needs.
It was when St. Francis was preaching to the birds that the people asked to follow him, and so he came up with the idea of the Third Order, which has given so many wonderful saints to the Church, including St. Louis of France, St. Elizabeth of Hungary, St. Margaret of Cortona, the repentant mistress of a nobleman, the virginal husband and wife St. Elzear and Blessed Delphina of Sabran, St. Benedict Joseph Larbre, and a multitude of others. What were they meant to do, dress simply in woollen garments, pray, do good works, and not take up arms? Of course none other than that greatest of kings. St. Louis, wrecked the whole thing by asking if he could take up arms against the Moslem. What Pope Francis could do is re-instate that prohibition; now that would be wonderful!
Everything today in the West is scene in terms of sex. Every relationship, poisoned by Freud’s obsession with sex, has been deemed sexual. Innocence has fled because of this dark deed of the father of modern psychology. However St. Francis offers the remedy. If we start seeing everyone as a brother and sister, then a joyful reverence, and a wondering intimacy, and a holy courtesy becomes the order of the day.
Pope Francis would do well to ponder the childlike wonder and innocence of God so well described by Chesterton, a true brother of the Poverello, in his peerless life of the great Saint.
The transition from the good man to the saint is a sort of revolution, by which one for whom all things illustrate and illuminate God becomes one for whom God illustrates and illuminates all things. It is rather like the reversal whereby a lover might say at first sight that a lady looked like a flower, and say afterwards that all flowers reminded him of his lady.
Until our evilly sexualised men and women of the West tumble to this truth, the sexual depravity of the age will get worse, and worse, and more and more violent. Men and women must again become like children and like Brother Juniper, one of the most wonderful of St. Francis’ early companions, go off and seesaw with the children, not as an adult but as one of them. We must learn again to play.
God willing the Fathers of the synod might just think along those lines, because if they don’, we are all in for a very rough ride indeed, and I dread to think how many souls might be lost by those sophisticated Fathers, who like the World to much and want to imitate it rather than imitate Christ.
By The Hermits, Oct 2 2015 8:22PM
It is unfortunate that style so often triumphs over content at present. Recently Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary commenting on Pope Francis’ address to Congress last Thursday had this to say as recorded by Lifesite News:
“Even though there has been no fundamental change in the actual teachings of the Roman Catholic Church….it’s clear that in its pastoral processes and application this Pope is not only steering in a more liberal direction, but now he has sent signals of his priorities and those priorities are those that will take the church in a further more liberal direction.”
In Francis, Mohler sees exactly the type of religious leadership the secular media and the theological left are longing for. “An example of leadership that does not define issues, and example of leadership that moves from theology to piety, an example of leadership that doesn’t bring up the awkward questions and doesn’t lean into the hard issues where the truth has to be defined and defended.”
However this is precisely the leadership that the Sankt-Gallen club wanted according to Cardinal Danneels and his co-conspirators. Before one picks oneself up off the floor in bemusement and shock, this is precisely what the Cardinal assertsin his authorized biography! The biographers are Jürgen Mettepenningen and Karim Schelkens. In an interview last week Schelkens said “The election of Bergoglio was prepared in Sankt-Gallen, without doubt. And the main lines of the program the Pope is carrying out are those that Danneels and Co were starting to discuss more than 10 years ago.” Interestingly the founder of it was Mgr. Ivo Fürer, the Bishop of Sankt-Gallen,not a prominent European prelate, considering the notoriety of some of its named members who were many, among whom there were Cardinals Carlo Maria Martini of Milan, Achille Silvestrini, onetime Prefect of the Congregation for Oriental Churches, from Italy, the now very important Cardinal Kasper and sadly Cardinal Basil Hume (As Cardinal Hume’s father was Scots – no doubt a Presbyterian, and his mother French; there appeared to be a very Gallican quality about him!) who should have known better, given the utterly tragic English Reformation which was founded on adultery. Cardinal Daneels, however, was not a founder member he joined later.
What was the purpose of this group of prelates who described themselves as the Mafia? Goodness me we have had Cardinal Suenens describing Vatican II as the Church’s French Revolution, Hans Kung and Yves Congar describing themselves as French Revolutionaries, and now we have another Belgian Primate describing himself as a member of “The Mafia”. Do any of these men think spiritually? Do they not see themselves as disciples of Christ? Do they not see themselves as being like little children, for that is the only way to get into the Kingdom of Heaven? What a puerile descripiton of this group by one of its members. The purpose was to counter the influence of Cardinal Ratzinger, that most sane, brilliant, humble an holy man, who intellectually beat all these men into a cocked hat and that includes the ambivalent Cardinal Archbishop of Milan, who happened to be that dreary type that the present Church exalts to the skies; “The Scripture Scholar”.
Cardinal Daneels described these meetings a “spiritual holidays” and a “form of mutual support and comfort in dark times,”. I cannot think how you can have a spiritual holiday, when your whole purpose is to subvert the papacy of a saint. Such behaviour is sorry and silly, and not worthy of a Prince of the Church. What was dark about St. John Paul’s pontificate, who many hail as John Paul the Great, and whose funeral was the largest funeral in all history with 3 million people descending on Rome? Once again it is amazing that Cardinals can come out with such balderdash, but that is the problem. They do not understand the Gospel, and they do not want to embrace the Cross. All they want is the Spirit of the Enlightenment, because that is what the supposed “The Spirit of Vatican” is all about. As Romano Amerio said the spirit of Vatican II is a philosophically untenable statement. Now Vatican II in its dogmatic constitutions was utterly linked to the past, but it was the un-Dogmatic consitutions that let the Devil in the back door. Oh the vanity and the duplicity and the crass stupidity of these men who should know better. Perhaps they are all involved in Freemasonry, perhaps they are all doing dreadful things in their Episcopal palaces, such as having Illuminati meetings, orgies or amazingly, Black Masses, but that is over dramatizing things somewhat. It does appear however, that Cardinal Daneels seems to be implicated in a cover up over a child abuse case in Belgium by a bishop!
What is so depressing about all this, is what might be called an acute snobbery that these bishops and cardinals display. Like Stalin and his fellow Bolsheviks they, in their wisdom are the only ones who know what is good for the people, in this case what is good for the laity. If they cared to reflect, they would realize that it is the laity that kept faithful in the Arian crisis, and the Iconoclastic crisis. This of course may be nearer the truth than we imagine. After all, the ex-Communist Bella Dodd, told the House Un-American activities enquiry in the 1950’s that Stalin infiltrated the Catholic Church with 1,100 agents who became Catholic priests. She also told Alice von Hilderbrand that four of these plants were now Cardinals in the Church, and this very worryingly before Vatican II. One wonders then how many invalidly ordained priests and bishops there might be? Just because so many people are getting divorced and remarried does not mean that you can change the Law of God. God is God. He is omnipotent and, because he loves us, he knows what is for our eternal benefit, and adultery is not, neither is fornication, nor homosexual activity, and the blasphemous notion of sex change.
When will the so called intelligent princes of the Churches learn that the Enlightenment and the French Revolution said that Man is good, and God said that Man is fallen and needed to be redeemed, otherwise we would never get to Heaven. We are not here to idolize Man, Woman, Sex, or whatever. We are created to love God with all our hearts and souls.
Quite why all these prelates should be so obsessed with sex I do not know? Is it that they see sex as the primordial pleasure in life? Have they forgotten that our primordial joy is to “know him (God), love him and serve him in this world” and then “to be happy with him forever in the next.” Marriage is for the propagation of children, and to restrain our lustful urges which are the result of the Fall. It is not a sexual romp. However such simple reasoning is beyond these prelates. They are blind guides who could not stand the authority of St. John Paul, and Cardinal Ratzinger, and in conspiring to get Pope Francis elected they flagrantly disobeyed St. John Paul’s Apostolic Constitution Universi Domini Gregis which states the following:
No. 81. The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons. If this were in fact done, even under oath, I decree that such a commitment shall be null and void and that no one shall be bound to observe it; and I hereby impose the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae upon those who violate this prohibition. It is not my intention however to forbid, during the period in which the See is vacant, the exchange of views concerning the election.
How then will we rebuild the now crumbling Church? By rediscovering what the Christian Family is all about. It is about the Holy Family as the pattern of all families. Yes Mary and Joseph did not have sexual relations. However Venerable Fulton Sheen pointed out in his book on Our Lady that her marriage to Joseph begins where everyone else’s finish i.e. an elderly couple are left with pure love, all passion is spent. The Fathers of the Church, with the exception of Augustine, fundamentally hold that Adam and Eve would not have had children in the way we now have them. This of course is laughable to the modern mind who thinks that creation was the same before the Fall and after the Fall; if they believe in the Fall at all. Science is God. Science is Omnipotent. Is a science a being? If it was, surely it would have contacted us now, and made known to us what it is about? Did Science say “Let there be Light.” How can science create? When we talk about science, presumably we are talking about a huge range of connected workings in our world and in the Universe. These systems dove tale with each other, but they cannot be random. Once you take God out of the picture what you end up with is something meaningless. Yes everything looks wonderful, but is devoid of true meaning if you do not believe in a creator. The beautiful sunset is not another sign of God’s ineffable beauty, the loving marriage of atheists or agnostics does not resemble the love of the Trinity. Surgery and medicine are not inspired by the Divine Healer, and music does not mirror the songs of the angels.
For the Church to resurrect from the present rubble there must be good and Godly marriages, where love is at the heart of it, and not simply sex. The reason why the Church is in such a mess is that it seems that from Vatican II onwards many in the Church have been trying to have their cake and eat it; that is to say that people and clergy have been looking at sex in marriage and wondering how one can have as much sex as possible without too many dire consequences, and even Humanae Vitae gives them a loop hole. One can have sex in the safe period but surely that is looking down the wrong end of the telescope. What matters for the married couple is how they can best love God in their marriage, which is so much greater than sex. Perhaps it is best way to finish this essay is with the great Russian Staretz St.Seraphim of Sarov’s advice to married couples:
“Remain in the world, get married. Don’t forget conjugal intercourse….observe chastity. Remain continent on Wednesdays and Fridays, as well as on Sundays and holidays. For not practising chastity on Wednesdays and Fridays children are born dead, and for not observing holidays on and Sundays wives die in childbirth.”
This is rather startling stuff but it does show another side of marriage which is largely unknown in the Latin West. It is time that we looked at the love of God before all else if we are to rebuild the tottering Church. The true renewal of the Church will come only after terrible suffering, persecutions, and terrible disasters. We are now so disobedient that God must give us a terrible hiding if we are to be saved.
Sadly Brother Damon Jonah is having to leave us. He feels that he must continue to preach against the evils of Gay Marriage and the whole LGBT propaganda. He feels that he cannot do this as a member of an eremitical community. His going leaves us profoundly sad, but we know that God will guide him and protect him.
Sister Colette and myself are looking for a small piece of land on the Isles of Lewis and Harris on which to build hermitages and cultivate healing herbs. Lewis and Harris are the most northern part of the Hebrides. We are trying to buy land there, but we have little money to do so. If any of who read our website and can help us in any way then you can contact us by email. Our email is firstname.lastname@example.org. However what is far more important is that you pray for us and pray especially for Brother Damon, who will be sentenced for his supposed harassment of two “married” lesbian witches last year, and will definitely be sent to prison. His witness is a great encouragement to people all across the World, which needs such a light in such dark and terrible times.
By The Hermits, Sep 20 2015 4:23PM
It does seem that evil, and wrong-headed thinking, which in itself is an evil, is sending many people in the Church quite mad. What is interesting is that no-one is there to send a lot of this nonsense up. Where are the Dr. Johnsons, the W.S. Gilberts, the Chestertons, the Lewises, the Muggeridges to poke fun at all this crazy liberalism. In the media comedians are terrified of sending things up, because of political correctness and the possibility of them being sacked by the equivalent of some Bolshevik commissar in the BBC, or any of the other TV channels, but surely real humour is one of the most sane things in the world, because it shows up the stupidities and follies of human behaviour. The situation in the Church is terrible and terrifying at the moment, and on one level needs to be seen for what it is, the attempt by Satan to take over the Church. However to win over people from damning themselves, it is very important to use whatever means to do so, and humour sometimes illuminates truth more than the most well argued apologia, or brilliant preaching.
Katholisch.de. which is the German Bishops website, published an article this week, by a Theology student, Simon Linder that ran to six pages. Sadly Lifesite news has not published the whole thing, and one hopes that with their usual professionalism they have translated the excerpts faithfully, and given the flavour of the young man’s essay. Suffice it to say, it is a most peculiar article and would only confirm one in the stereotype of the mad German professor. I fear this man might well grow into one. Linder’s argument for supporting Gay Marriage falls into four sections.
1. The “societal climate” has changed so we don’t have to justify marriage for all. It is up to the opponents of marriage for all to justify their opposition to it.
2. “Where does the Church have the idea……that homosexuality is a burden for male and female homosexuals.” and “Who gives the Church the right to declare homosexuals as people to be pitied.
3. Opposition to homosexual unions collapses, because these unions are infertile, is no longer an argument as in the past people had children to look after them in old age. Now the state looks after people who have had no children.
4. This section is so badly argued or badly edited, I don’t know which, as to sound like complete nonsense. Linder says that “The Bible did not condemn love between homosexuals ---- one did not even yet know those at the time ---- but the act itself for the sake of the interest of society. Anyone who wants to interpret the Bible, has to know and consider the circumstances under which the text was written. Anyone who does not do this, does not do justice to Holy Scripture.
In section 1 Linder seems to think that because society has changed so marriage has to change, and thus now marriage is for all, but he does not state how marriage is for all. Does he mean that apart from Gay marriage there may be other forms of marriage? I think not. Will people be rushing to the Evangelical (Lutheran) churches in Germany asking the pastor to bless their marriages to their pets. Will the pastor sense real danger when a young woman goes up the aisle with the love of her life, who happens to be a rather hungry looking crocodile? How would the Pastor feel if he had to go to Hamburg and bless the wedding of a young man to his latest pet a Blue Whale. How will the liberal Catholic priest, who seems to be the very essence of priesthood in the German speaking world, manage an eccentric pilot who wishes to marry his Jumbo Jet which he has just managed somehow to land outside the door of the Church? Is there anything to stop the silly middleaged lady from marrying Mount Etna. God laid down that Man must marry Woman, no other. The Societal climate may within a few tumultuous years criminalize all homosexual marriages. If there is a societal change which reduces the population of the world drastically, so that there will be few men left on the face of the Earth which will have suffered a terrible catastrophe what will Mr. Linder say? If as St. Hildegard tells us, ably backed up by other visionary seers and saints, a comet will hit the Earth and cause either havoc to Britain of North America then will Mr. Linder be encouraging the near despairing and starving remnants of mankind as to the inestimable benefits of Gay Marriage? Since the dawn of history even the most homosexual nations like Sparta never thought of proposing homosexual marriage.
Section 2. has an air or unreality about it. The idea of male homosexual marriage is intriguing, as male homosexuality is, more often than not, about having as much sex with other men as possible, so marriage is neither here nor there. Also added to this the sexual addiction like all addictions it requires more and more sex in as many different ways as possible. It is not about love. After all we would not say that the rake or the nymphomaniac are interested in love; they are interested in only one thing, sex. Anyone knows that such people are not happy any more than an alcoholic is happy. Does Mr. Linder have eyes in his head? The idea of homosexual marriage in a secular/humanist permissive society, and nothing can be more permissive than the ideal world of the LGBT, is both ridiculous and terrifying as well as being utterly sterile. This mockery of marriage is a union where the rules are always changing. Nothing can be stable. There are very few stable gay unions, and calling them marriage is not going to make them anymore stable. Admidst all this supposedly ecstatic pleasure there is always the ever present spectre of death. One doctor in the states got fed up with dealing with all the terrible health problems that are result of promiscuous homosexual sex. One does not need to state all these diseases are caused by the most frenzied forms of sexual deviancy. But then sex for the homosexual population is a drug. And this, let it be noted, is much the same for heterosexual sex, which is all about having fun. The slogan “A Healthy Sex Life” is bizarre in the extreme. What the reality is behind that confusing slogan is completely the opposite. How can a healthy sex life be one where one has a string of partners, and a string of broken relationships? It is medically and psychologically utterly destructive. It is as silly as saying prostitutes have a healthy sex life, which they most decidedly do not. The euphemism of prostitutes being “sex workers” apparently is a way of trying to make prostitution respectable and so you have a name which contains three almost counterproductive ideas, the silly, the sordid, and the dull. Only the grey and monotonous modern Western Society obsessed with utilitarianism and productivity could come up with such meaningless jargon. The homosexual lives in a world where nothing is stable, where the lifestyle is dangerous, where homosexual behaviour is linked with excessive drinking, and drug taking, and where in the higher echelons of society and among the media and entertainment world includes Satanic worship and rituals, and ultimately blood sacrifices, who in their right minds would want that? What could be more dangerous than that? The Church does not pity homosexuals; it is trying to save them from damnation. Mr. Linder might be pitied for his stupidity, which is certainly less than the German hierarchy’s stupidity, which is mind boggling.
Mr. Linder asks “Who gives the Church the right to declare that homosexuals as people to be pitied?”, and having established that pity is not the right word, condemnation of sin is, then one can simply say God has the right to condemn. Surely if Mr. Linder has read Dei Verbum, he will know that the Holy Spirit is the ultimate author of the Bible, who uses human scribes. He will find that homosexuality is condemned in chapter 19 of Genesis, where we see the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. In Leviticus 18:22 we read “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” Later on in Leviticus the condemnation is repeated but now with the added penalty for such behaviour. “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them” (Leviticus 20: v.13). Deuteronomy forbids cult prostitution for both men and women in chapter 23: verse 17. Then of course we have the famous passage in St. Paul in the first chapter of Romans:
For this reason God gave them up to dishonourable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men in their own persons the due penalty for their error (Romans 1: vv. 26-7). In 1 Corinthians 6: vv.9-10 Paul throws the net wide to include others, who are not homosexuals who will be damned for failing to obey God.
“Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral (fornicators), nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.”
You can hardly say that Paul is nothing if not comprehensive in his list of those who will go to Hell if they persist in their sinning, but note, the list starts with sexual sins, and ends with revilers.
Section 3 has the ominous ring of the social services and the welfare state. One might add that really this should come as no surprise that Germany before the First World War was really the first modern nation to found the welfare state, in fact it was begun by Frederick the Great in Prussia. However Mr. Linder seems to think that marriage is purely for the procreation of children to look after their elderly parents. For him it would appear that the state is now the one to look after the elderly married couples. He presumably supports the idea of the nanny state. He also has a dim view of marriage. If St. Paul uses Marriage in Ephesians as an analogy for Christ’s relationship with the Church who is his Bride, and if we look at the Old Testament Bridal imagery, we see it describing the whole relationship of God with Israel, then we see Israel as God’s bride and usually an unfaithful one at that. Marriage then is of the greatest importance, especially when Christ raises it to being a sacrament in the New Testament.
Most of the Fathers of the Church would see that marriage is something that comes about after the Fall. It is God’s way of helping man with concupiscence, a way of controlling his sexual urges which were not there prior to the Fall. Once again the Fathers of the Church saw procreation before the Fall as being something very different from what we know it to be. Even Aquinas, hardly someone that the Orthodox East would care for, said that prior to the Fall Adam and Eve would have had passionless sexual intercourse, not something that the Gay Community would care much for.
Section 4 is so odd as to leave me in a state of stupefaction. Having asked earlier “Who gives the Church the right to declare that homosexuals as people to be pitied?” Mr. Linder says the Bible did not condemn love between homosexuals. What does he mean by love? Is this a non-sexual love, because we can see from the above quotes that the Bible condemns homosexuals to death. Then Mr Linder goes on about how we should interpret the Bible, but surely as a Catholic he should realize that it is up to the Magisterium to interpret the Bible. And so one is left somewhat confused by the young man’s reasoning. The question I have to ask is “What are German bishops playing at, by allowing such a badly argued piece to be on their official website.” Also is there anyone reading this who is a fluent German speaker who can translate Mr. Linder’s argument as I do not wish to do him an injustice? Sadly madness seems to be the mainstay of too many intellectuals in the Church these days, and tragically holiness is almost absent from most of them. Let us pray to Our Lady Seat of Wisdom to give the bishops wisdom and the theologians also.
By The Hermits, Sep 15 2015 8:08PM
Today we celebrate the feast of Our Lady of Sorrows, and how Our Lady of Sorrows must be weeping over the human race and especially over the follies, the foibles and the sins of priests and religious. I have only today finished a remarkable and very simple biography of Melanie Calvat the seer, along with Maximin Giraud, whom she had never met before of the apparitions of Our Lady at La Salette. It was on the 19th September 1846 that the startling vision of Our Lady took place, whose strangeness and beauty puts it in a class of its own, and seems to be in stark contrast with its terrifying message. The original conversation centred on Our Lady’s great sorrow at two things, working on Sundays, and taking the Lord’s name in vain. Both children were given secrets. Melanie’s was made public in 1858, but it provoked real antipathy from the clergy. Melanie said that this reaction paved the way for the increasing secularizing of French Society. It is truly extraordinary that in a century that gave to the France, The Appartions at the Rue de Bac, La Salette, Lourdes, and Pontmain, and saints such as the Curé d’Ars, St. St. Bernadette, St. Thérèse of Lisieux, St. Eugène de Mazenod, and so many others, including the wonderful French martyrs in Vietnam, Korea, and China, that you also have the opposing culture of rampant secularism, Free Masonry, and anti-clericalism. What a tragic country France is. Until she foreswears her dreadful revolution there will be no peace in the once Christian West. There will be no reconversion of the West until France yet again becomes “The Eldest Daughter of the Church.”
What does Our Lady see as she gazes upon the world through her diamond-like tears that make her sorrow so poignant. She certainly sees blasphemy, that blasphemy that tore at her heart when she heard the crowds on the first Good Friday baying for her Son’s blood, which added to the really terrible blasphemy of those hardened Pharisees and Sadducees who engineered Jesus’s death. She must look on horror at the once Christian West going shopping on Sunday, and making shopping their Golden Calf, and their God. The fashions must add another sword thrust into her heart. For the fashions today are truly a perverse sacrament of sexual sin.
She must look with motherly care at all the refugees who are flooding into America from Mexico, and from Syria into Western Europe, but because she is the Mother of God and the Seat of Wisdom, She will know the cynicism of politicians, bankers, and the industrial military complex that have brought about this tragic situation. These new Herods do not care for the people. These millions of poor people are simply pawns in the game of power politics and the Satanic lust for power. She sees these innocent millions of people walking the way of Cross, some of them martyrs, others terrified, cold, hungry, and nearing despair. She sees at the root of all this enormous suffering Pride, pure and simple.
As she turns to the Church she sees in high places new Caiaphases, who in collusion with the new Herods and new Pilates want a New World Order. Bedazzled by such immoral organizations as the United Nations, the Bilderberg Group and the supposed experts on population control and Climate Change, these men and women who should be devoted to the Cross of Christ turn to the World for comfort and advice. The World in the Johannine sense has nothing to offer; it is the devil’s domain. The World as God’s Creation is wonderful, even though cursed by the Fall, and for that we should rejoice and give thanks, but for its leaders in the main, we should feel pity and pray for their eternal souls.
Our Lady may soon be weeping over the graves of millions slain; offered up to the god of war, namely the wicked arms manufacturers, who are the reason for wars along with the power obsessed politicians. The main culprits in this killing of Christ in our time are the American, British, and French Governments, which does not mean that such countries of Russia, and China do not share in the blame as well, but Russia seems to have a better idea of Christian morality than most countries, and so she must try and live up to her title of Holy Russia.
Let us return to Our Lady’s words to Melanie and Maximin:
“Come, my children, fear not, I am here to PROCLAIM GREAT NEWS TO YOU.”
These soft and sweet words made me fly to her, and my heart desired to attach itself to her forever.
When I was up close to the Beautiful Lady, in front of her to her right, she began to speak and from her beautiful eyes tears also started to flow.
“If my people do not wish to submit themselves, I am forced to let go of the hand of my Son. It is so heavy and weighs me down so much I can no longer keep hold of it.
“I have suffered all of the time for the rest of you! If I do not wish my Son to abandon you, I must take it upon myself to pray for this continually. And the rest of you think little of this. In vain you will pray, in vain you will act, and you will never be able to make up for the trouble I have taken over for the rest of you.
“I gave you six days to work; I kept the seventh for myself, and no one wishes to grant it to me. This is what weighs down the arm of my Son so much.
“Those who drive carts cannot speak without putting the name of my Son in the middle.
“These are the two things which weigh down the arm of my Son so much. If the harvest is spoiled, it is only because of the rest of you. I made you see this last year with the potatoes; you took little account of this. It was quite the opposite when you found bad potatoes, you swore oaths, and you included the name of my Son. They will continue to go bad, at Christmas there will be none left.”
Let us take heed of Our Lady’s words, and pray to her under her title of Our Lady of The Seven Sorrows for a world drowning in sorrow because it has abandoned God, and nowhere has this betrayal been greater than in the West. If we do not repent the most terrible punishment will come upon us in the very, very near future.
By The Hermits, Sep 14 2015 9:01AM
Things appear to be very bad in the Church and the World. For the first time in over one thousand six hundred, years if not more, the Papacy seems to speaking with an uncertain voice. Pope Francis, who is so forthright an individual, seems to think that the best way to show the truth regarding marriage is for there to be a battle between orthodox Cardinals and Bishops and their opponents, the heterodox ones, and out of the scuffle will emerge the truth. This is rather odd as he is, as people have pointed out, one of the most authoritarian popes in recent years. Now the orthodox group are led by Cardinals Burke, Sarah, and Muller, and Archbishop Jan Pawel Lenga and Bishop Athanasius Schneider. The heterodox group are led by Cardinals Kasper, Marx, Baldisseri and it would seem, by the highly eccentric Cardinal Schonborn of Vienna. Clustering around this group, who have that air of depressing professionalism, good manners, and no doubt good taste, which would make them part of the “great and the good” in English society, are what might be called, somewhat loosely, Utopians. Along with that fantastic theological evolutionist of the early part of the 20th century, Theilhard de Chardin, they seem to want what he wanted, a world or plenty and peace. The following excerpt is from his work Building the Earth which seems to be type of spirituality of the United Nations. It is quoted in the great Seraphim Rose’s Creation, Genesis, and Early Man:
The only truly natural and real human Unity is the Spirit of the Earth…..A conquering passion begins to show itself, which will sweep away or transform what has hitherto been the immaturity of the Earth….The call towards great Union [i.e. the universal unity of mankind] whose realization is the only business now afoot in Nature…..--- On this hypothesis, under which (in conformity with the findings of psychoanalysis) Love is the primitive and universal psychic energy, does not everything around us become clear?......The Sense of Earth is irresistible pressure which will come at the right moment to unite them [all humanity] in a common passion…..
The Age of Nations is past. The task before us now, if we would not perish, is to shake off our ancient prejudices, and to build the Earth…..
This great conflict from which we shall have emerged will merely have consolidated in the World the need to believe. Having reached a higher degree of self-mastery, the Spirit of Earth will experience an increasingly vital need to adore; out of the universal evolution God emerges in our consciousness as greater and more necessary than ever……..
At what moment in the Noosphere has there been a more urgent need to find a Faith, a Hope to give meaning and soul to the immense organism we are building (quoted in Genesis Creation etc. pp 592-593)
Other vignettes of this remarkable nonsensical line of thinking are the following, the first being about the worker priest movement of the late 1940’s early 1950’s, and the second being about Marxists.
Priest-workers find in the face of humane Marxism not only justice but hope and a feeling for the Earth which is stronger than ‘evangelical humanity’
Marxists believe in the future of mankind while present-day Christians do not.
Rather amusingly the priest-workers quote was from Malachi Martin’s ‘The Jesuits’, which is not very encouraging, because Malachi Martin was a sort of double agent during the Second Vatican Council when he was trying to promote a secular Jewish agenda whose goal was for a whole hearted apology from the Church for supposed antisemitism throughout her history. Thankfully this ruse failed, when a furious Paul VI found out what was going on, and was side lined by the disastrously ambiguous Nostrae Aetate. In his later years Malachi Martin became a very traditional Catholic, but according to one newspaper obituary, died leaving behind a mistres! He was certainly a very unstable maverick, which does not mean that he wasn’t right in the later years of life. He was certainly very keen on promoting Fatima.
Teilhard’s writing is simply heretical nonsense, but he, more than any other Catholic thinker of the last 100 years, has most probably influenced many of the liberal Cardinals and Bishops who are not stupid men. So why is there this drive for comfortable Christianity, which includes active homosexuals, divorced and remarried, and couples living in sin all being whisked up to the altar to receive communion? I can only think that it is because the Western agenda is about making people happy. The only counter to all this madness and Utopian sentimentality is the Cross, and the followers of the Cross, namely the saints.
Our Lady said to St. Bernadette (Would that she was around today.) that she could not offer the young girl happiness in this world, but she could in Heaven. When will Western Christians, be they Catholic or Protestant, be they Pope or pauper, presidents or the proletariat realize that you cannot have Heaven on Earth? Do they not even know that the World before the Fall, which would be far more wonderful than Utopia, was only the testing ground the exam for Heaven? I have to say I found More’s Utopia rather dull. He, I am sure, never knew that his curious tale would have such a disastrous on Western European thinking. Though he was a saint, his Achilles heel was that he was both a humanist and a lawyer, and a somewhat ambiguous man; a dangerous combination! Adam and Eve were meant to pass the test and ascend by humility and obedience to the attainment of Heaven. This is the teaching of the Fathers and sadly rather forgotten in the Latin West.
Do any of these proponents for a soft comfortable Christianity realize that we must walk in Christ’s footsteps? Has it ever occurred to them what Christ’s life was like? It is very evident that Pope Francis lived an exemplary life of simplicity and frugality as Archbishop of Buenos Aires. However those who are espousing a mitigated Liberation Theology are, I fear, still too much espoused to a Marxist solution to the World’s problems with poverty and inequality. It does seem that a kind of class struggle is being introduced into the Church, and this is in stark contrast to Christ’s teachings and to his great Apostle, St. Paul. Christianity binds its members together in the love of God, and in imitation of Christ, and then men begin to change. To try and bring about a social Gospel that is left wing will end up doing, ironically, more harm than the Ancien Regime, which certainly had its faults. Utopianism is a straight path to Hell. We see Utopianism during the French Revolution, and we see it again in the Soviet Era. While the people were starved to death, Stalin and his dreadful entourage, could not have been more bourgeois if they had tried, and Stalin’s dinners, and incessant viewing of films for his elite (A large part of the collection originally belonged to Goebbels) were gluttonous and drunken in the extreme, with his ministers behaving like silly school boys indulging in ridiculous horseplay, all the while killing, torturing and destroying their political rivals, often their former good friends, or engineering famines that killed millions of people. No we cannot have Heaven on Earth.
I think that the upcoming Synod on the Family might do well to look at the Jansenist view of receiving communion. Although the Jansenists were wrong, it was understandable for they had such an awe of what Holy Communion is; the problem was that they did not understand the mercy of God. In our day frequent Communion, and infrequent Confession has led to millions upon millions of sacrilegious communions, and I fear in the West, at least, possibly millions of sacrilegious Masses.
What the synod needs to address, is not relaxing the rules regarding the reception of Communion. It should be seeking ways of getting the divorced and remarried, couples living in sin, and practicing homosexuals to repent and lead them back to holiness. Before communion is even thought of, repentance must be done, and by us all. We have all gone astray. And it is not surprising that Africa is being Faithful, because they are poor. It is the wealthy, the middle classes, and the now comfortable working classes who are forgetting God. When the unemployed can go on holidays we know that something is wrong. The question we must ask is this: did the Holy Family go on holiday? No, but then people did not go on holidays in those days, but they went on pilgrimage to Jerusalem, and they kept their feast days with fasting and feasting. All was done in a cycle of prayer, and public worship. This would have been the case in Medieval Europe, but today pleasure and leisure is about escaping from the reality of the world and its terrible sinfulness and entering a world that is equally terrible because it gives an illusion of Heaven, where in actual fact it is a gateway to Hell.
At its apogee, you have the world of celebrities, which includes the super- rich, the bankers, the glamorous or not so glamorous politicians, and the stars, namely film stars, stars of the music industry, and sports stars. It does appear that Hollywood is indeed the playground of the Devil, and that a very large proportion of these unfortunate people, have like Faust sold their souls to the Devil, and pay such a terrible and terrifying price, that one’s heart goes out to them on one level. What do all these people want, they want fame. They want to be worshipped. They are experiencing the third temptation that Satan brings before Christ at the end of his forty days in the desert.
Again the devil took him to a very high mountain, and showed him the all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them; and he said to him, “All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.” Then Jesus said to him, “Begone, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.’” (Matthew 4, vv.8-10)
So when you see such famous stars as Bob Dylan admitting that he, a modern musical Faust, has sold his soul to the devil, then you realize that things are very bad. Performers are in the greatest danger of giving into this temptation, and Vainglory, the glamorous side of Pride, is epidemic these days.
The Cardinals, and bishops of the Catholic Church have been easy prey, for the Media have had the most devastating effect on priests, from the parish priest performing at Sunday Mass, like some mediocre comedian, or talentless games show host, to the Media friendly and suave Archbishop oozing charm while dispensing politically correct diagnoses for poverty, population problems etc. and encouraging us all to dialogue with the world. I suspect one would have a more fruitful dialogue with the Devil, by simply telling him to go away.
The Synod on the Family should look first and foremost at the Holy Family, and align all families to this, the most perfect of families. I would think that should actually take a very short time indeed. Encouraged to live like Jesus, Mary and Joseph, doing the Father’s adorable will should bring about the redemption of the foundering Western Christian family now torn by divorce, infidelity, homosexual members, children living in sin, and various permutations of that. Repentance is what we need; we do not need comfort, we need the Cross, because without the Cross we cannot be saved, and we cannot help save anyone else.
And he called to him the multitude with his disciples, and said to them, “If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his life for my sake and gospel’s will save it. For what does it profit a man, to gain the whole world and forfeit his life? For what can a man give in return for his life? For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of man also be ashamed, when he comes in the glory of his Father with his angels.” (Mark 8: vv.34-38)
Those Cardinals and bishops who are pushing for divorced and remarried Catholics to receive holy communion along with active homosexuals and others living in a state of sin are ashamed of the Gospel and are part of “this adulterous and sinful generation”. On this feast day of the Holy Cross lte us pray never to be ashamed of Christ’s Gospel or his Cross. Let us remove ourselves from this appallingly adulterous and sinful generation, and let us gather under the banner of the Cross and ride in the army of Christ at whose head he rides along with his mother, Our Lady, and her husband St. Joseph. It is the Holy Family who is leading us into battle against the world, the flesh and the devil.
You are viewing the text version of this site.
Need help? check the requirements page.