Restoration of a Pickelhaube

       For a change, I have decided to write about a recent project of mine: a project of  the restoration and preservation of an artifact. Last month, I received a 1916 German Cavalryman's (Jager zu Pferde) helmet. It was in truly terrible shape: rusted, dented, corroded...etc. Here are some pictures of it's initial condition.

          My first action was research, lots of research. I was able, thanks to some very fine websites, to determine which exact model of helmet I had. I also found that it originally had a black finish, with steel-colored fittings.

As you can tell from the pictures, it certainly did not look like that when I received it. Initially, I was too scared to do any real cleaning on it, (I collect ancient coins, so I know exactly how much damage inept cleaning can do) so I restricted myself to using warm water and a soft brush. I see no need to post of picture of what it looked like after that, since it looked exactly the same as before.

       Taking my cues from the inestimably valuable Pickelhaubes.com, I decided to try 0000 (superfine) steel wool, with a bit of oil to help it glide. After treating a small spot on the back of the helm, I rinsed it off, and was shocked at what I saw. Under all the rust was the original black finish, still gleaming in the light. Eager to continue, I removed the Wappen (Imperial eagle crest) as well the other fittings, knowing that they needed a more delicate hand. With German Imperial marches playing in the background, I happily applied myself to my work, and soon the whole helmet shone black, with the exception of a few small areas where corrosion had pitted the metal and removed the finish.

    Now, on to the fittings. Initially, I sought to clean the fittings with the same delicate and ineffectual method as I had tried on the helm. Soon however, I gave up hope of ever making any progress. Stymied, I returned to Pickelhaubes.com for some additional browsing. After reading through page after page, I finally found a discussion of restoration, which touched upon the cleaning of the fittings. The general consensus seemed to be that a product known as Evaporust was the ideal way to do it. I immediately began calling local stores, trying to locate some, but without success. I then went online and I found the new nearest distributors. I went to them both; neither one had it. Finally, on my third try, I found it.

    I followed the instructions on the label, submersing the objects in the solution and leaving them overnight. In the morning, I excitedly removed the objects and rinsed them off. The results were amazing, a century of rust and decay simply flowed off them, yet the delicate patina remained unharmed. Now that the fittings and Wappen were seen to, it was time to return to the shell.

      I had read that gun bluing could be used to touch up the damaged black finish, so I gave it a try. Admittedly, it was a long process, of applying the bluing, waiting, wiping the bluing off, polishing, and repeating. After seven or eight coats of bluing, the damaged parts reasonably approximated the originals.

    After all this was done to my satisfaction, I reattached the Wappen, and the fittings, gave the whole thing a coat of museum wax, and it is now proudly displayed in my home, a relic of the Fatherland.

The great danger of Pacifism

                A great many people, and I am sad to note many clerics and prelates among them, fall prey to the error of pacifism. In practice, if not in profession, they value temporal peace, no matter how wretched the situation of Church and state, over even the most just of wars. A poignant example will suffice to illustrate this point.

Warriors for Christ

        In Mexico, in the 1920s, the masonic socialist government embarked on a campaign not of suppression, not of restriction, but of the absolute extermination of the Catholic Church in Mexico. Swayed by neither reason nor mercy, it carried out its dark purpose with a zeal which mirrored, in an inverted satanic way, that of the most fervent missionaries of salvation.

      But there were some who rose up in defiance, for God and Christendom! Amid the wreckage of churches and monasteries, amid the mutilated corpses of martyrs, the true sons of the Church Militant girded for battle.

 After years of war, and many great successes, they were suddenly defeated. This defeat came not with the speeding bullet, nor on the end of the bloodied bayonet.  It was not the government’s military might, nor even the aid and armaments sent by the US to aid the extermination, which brought this defeat.  It came from somewhere far more ignominious: within.  In a move which even today provokes righteous anger, the Bishops of Mexico signed a crippling and disadvantageous “peace” with the government. Threatened with excommunication, the Cristeros, as they had come to be known, laid down their arms.

      And what great boon did the Bishops receive for this? Did they receive assurance of the freedom and exaltation of Holy Mother Church? A Restoration of the rights of the faithful? Recompense for the slaughter and havoc wrought by the government forces? None of the above.  They received what amounted to little more than a promise of selective implementation of the anti-Catholic laws and statutes.

       And why did they do this? For “peace”.  They compromised the rights of the Church Militant. They abandoned the flock in their hour of great need. The betrayed their charge. And what did they gain by it? In the end, nothing.

                We must always take care to avoid repeating their error and falling into pacifism. For verily, there shall never be true peace on this earth, in this vale of tears. For Our Lord said: “I come not to bring peace, but the sword”. To compromise the rights of the Church for the sake of earthly peace is fall prey to utopianism.

      We are not here for peace; we are not here for comfort. We are at war, we were born into this war, and in this war we will die.  Our three-fold enemy, the world, the flesh and the devil, will hold out empty promises of earthly happiness, of peace. But to seize it, we must first compromise ourselves and the Church. And then, when we rush forward to catch hold of the promised peace, it is snatched away from our grasp. And we find that in our blind rush, we have gone over the edge of the abyss, and are plummeting into the fires of Gehenna.

Death, Violence, and the Kingdom of God.

"To live is Christ, to die is gain." -St. Paul.

      We live in a culture which both glorifies and demonizes violence. With one hand, it murders its own children, does violence to nature in its embrace of unnatural sterility, and seeks even to eliminate those it deems to be unworthy of life-sustaining care. With the other, it suppresses natural and healthy activities involving violence, tries to destroy the very human nature of people, (Which of course, involves healthy competition, violent pastimes and the like) and anathemizes the idea that violence can ever be justified for an ideological purpose. (Excluding of course, the revolutionary egalitarian ideology which governs society)

       

      This is really the polar opposite of the true Catholic, humane position. For us, as the Church militant, death is not a great evil. We do not view death with the feigned horror of the revolutionary. For him, it is the end; it is the proof that his myth of an egalitarian utopia is just that, a myth. For him, without Christ as he is, he sees no good in death, since it is simply annihilation. Conversely, the Catholic sees death, not as the end, but as the beginning, not as annihilation, but as rebirth.

    

       Consequently, we do not see violence as an absolute enemy, but rather a necessary part of the human condition. And indeed, despite what the trite saying may be, violence can sometimes be the answer. A good example of this is the Crusades, wherein, the material and physical wellbeing of Christendom was defended with force of arms. If this was justified, (Which I will take as granted, since it has been proven by far abler scholars than I) then how can we fail to admit to the justification of the use of force in certain other fields? I speak here of the spiritual wellbeing of Christendom. For, as Our Lord said: “fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell.”  Reading into history, we can see many examples of this: the Inquisition, the Albigensian wars, incidents such as the execution of Peter of Bruis, at the hands of indignant peasants.

    

       When we consider the infinitely greater value of the soul, than either property or even our own earthly lives, it becomes clear why, in the past, such stringent measures had to be taken. And indeed, such things are not limited to the obscurity of time. Verily, we may one day be called upon to take up arms, for the material, or greater still, the spiritual welfare of Christendom, and the holy Church. I will close with a quote from Becket: "The Kingdom of God must be defended like any other Kingdom." Although not complete, since as the Church Militant, we have spiritual weapons at our disposal more powerful than any army, it serves as a fine conclusion.

Suicide lobbyist Katherine White Tudor teaches ethics at Catholic Seattle University

http://www.tfpstudentaction.org/what-we-do/news-and-updates/alert-suicide-lobbyist-katherine-white-tudor-teaches-ethics-at-catholic-seattle-university.html By William Stover

In a society that increasingly embraces the culture of death, Catholic educational institutions are not only cut out to teach the truth but bound to proclaim it loud and clear.  Sadly, however, many Catholic colleges fail to live up to their title.

The latest blow to the Catholic identity of Catholic education comes from the Jesuit Seattle University School of Law, where a professional assisted-suicide lobbyist teaches Law, Medicine, and Ethics at the End of Life.

Katherine White Tudor, adjunct professor of law at Seattle University School of Law, does more than just teach.  In fact, she works as a professional advocate for Compassion and Choices, formerly known as The Hemlock Society. The admitted mission of Compassion and Choices is to uphold the “right to seek aid in dying to avoid intolerable suffering.”

To give a platform to someone who openly opposes Church teaching flies in the face of Seattle University’s Catholic identity and duty.  In light of the recent United States Conference of Catholic Bishops document, To Live Each Day with Dignity, this failure on the part of the university is even more blatant.  The document states: “People who request death are vulnerable… To offer them lethal drugs is a victory not for freedom but for the worst form of neglect.”

Seattle University’s decision to employ a person who openly opposes and professionally undermines Catholic teaching is a disgrace that cannot go unanswered.  TFP Student Action invites its members to contact the university in peaceful protest. 

Voice your concern today:

Fr. Stephen V. Sundborg, SJ
Seattle University, President
901 12th Ave.
Seattle, WA 98122-1090
Phone: 206-296-1891
E-mail: SUNDBORG@seattleu.edu

Pro-Abortion Professor at a Catholic College.

http://www.tfpstudentaction.org/what-we-do/news-and-updates/abortion-more-safe-than-giving-birth-says-professor-at-catholic-college-of-mount-st-vincent.html


       Of all the tenets of Catholic social teaching, perhaps the clearest and easiest to grasp is the right to life, the respect and protection of all innocent human life from conception to natural death.

However, Bianca Laureano, Professor of Sociology at the Catholic College of Mount Saint Vincent, is actively promoting abortion inside the classroom.

       As the Cardinal Newman Society recently reported, Prof. Laureano introduced a course this summer, titled “Soc of Human Sexuality.”  Describing her course on a pro-abortion web site, Advocates for Youth, she boasts about her involvement in the abortion industry.  Abortion is “safe, more safe than giving birth,” she affirms.

Bianca Laureano is also a registered volunteer for The Doula Project.  The group’s web site states: “We offer our services to pregnant people having medication abortion (the abortion pill) and surgical abortion. We currently partner with Planned Parenthood Brooklyn and a Public Hospital’s Reproductive Choices Clinic.”

In addition to supporting the culture of death, Prof. Laureano also makes use of blasphemous “art” directed against the Blessed Virgin Mary in her presentations.

The question that comes to mind is this:

If the College of Mount Saint Vincent calls itself “Catholic”, why does it allow this anti-Catholic voice a platform from which to harm the faith? Let us hope that this abuse will be corrected with the swift termination of Prof. Laureano teaching assignment.

Is it too much to ask a Catholic college to act Catholic and stop allowing abortion promoters like Prof. Laureano in the classroom?

Contact the college with your peaceful protest:

College of Mount Saint Vincent
Dr. Charles L. Flynn, Jr., President
6301 Riverdale Avenue
Riverdale, NY 10471
Phone: (718) 405-3233
Email: president@mountsaintvincent.edu

A much maligned Sacramental

It is with sadness that I have noticed the disdain and hostility that is shown by many people to a nearly two thousand year old aspect of Christianity. This essay addresses a sacramental that has, sadly , been forgotten by many and attacked by some: Holy Relics - the bones, flesh and clothing of Saints.
   If you mention relics to many of today's Catholics you will get raised eyebrows at best, and sneers at worst. The distressing truth is that most Catholics today ( much less non-catholics) neither understand , nor value these sacred items. Many go so far as to call the veneration of relics idolatrous and medieval.

     " These Reliquiary jamborees can only inflame irrational expectations in people who are suggestible........What the starry progress of the relics of the Little Flower has done for me is to remind me that we have in this country rather too much religious tolerance. The truth is that many religions — perhaps most — have certain doctrines and beliefs that are not merely irrational but sometimes dangerous and unacceptable......But I think we should insist that the Home Office does not lend any extra official respectability to religious hocus-pocus of any kind. Superstition, like St Thérèse, has a curious immortality on earth. "              - London Times Sept, 23rd 2009

"In the hierarchy of weird pastimes, relic worship must be among the most harmless. We do best to regard it as a test, not of our power of reason but of our power of tolerance."     -The Guardian, September 17th 2009

The source of the newspapers' vehemence was a public tour of the relics of St. Therese of Lisieux. The media's ignorance of the basis of these Religious practices should, and must, be addressed.

  My goal in this essay is to provide a comprehensible explanation of why the veneration of relics is a scriptural and praiseworthy practice.
First, I will attempt to show that the veneration of relics is a scripturally supported practice. Let us first examine 4 Kings 13:20-21,
  "And Eliseus died, and they buried him. And the rovers from Moab came into the land the same year. And some that were burying a man, saw the rovers, and cast the body into the sepulchre of Eliseus. And when it had touched the bones of Eliseus, the man came to life and stood upon his feet"
Here we see a miracle worked by God through the relics of St. Elisius. Granted, this is in the Old Testament, but if God chose to convey Graces and Miracles through relics in the Old Testament, what proof have we that He has stopped ? Now, consider Acts 19:11-12
"And God wrought by the hand of Paul more than common miracles. So that even there were brought from his body to the sick, handkerchiefs and aprons: and the diseases departed from them: and the wicked spirits went out of them."
Once again, we see God working miracles through relics. God so filled St. Paul with Grace that he saw fit to allow even Paul's garments to be imbued with the Holiness and Grace of God. So, how can we say that God never again saw fit to allow the garments of Saints to be imbued with His Holiness? And, if God allowed this to happen to garments, how much more would this Holiness saturate the bodies of God's Servants?
  Some may say that this is because the early Saints had more direct contact with God, since he lived among them, and that in later years , the Holiness was no longer great enough to imbue the bodies and garments of God's servants. And yet in John 20:29, Our Lord says:                                                                                                                                                               
"Blessed are they that have not seen, and have believed"
  And so if Jesus proclaims that they who have not seen have a special Holiness, how can we say that that the Saints who did not meet the Savior on earth were not Holy enough for us to give to their relics the same treatment that was given to those of the Apostles and Prophets? Against this we can also put up the case of Polycarp , a 2nd century Bishop, whose relics were secretly taken from the site of his martyrdom and enshrined. If the veneration of relics was practiced by the Christians a century after the Death of Christ, why  would  it not still be a praiseworthy practice?
And lastly, let us address the concerns of those who simply do not understand why someone would want to keep relics. A quote from St. Augustine's The City of God will do well here.

If a father's coat or ring, or anything else of that kind, is so much more cherished by his children, as love for one's parents is greater, in no way are the bodies themselves to be despised, which are much more intimately and closely united to us than any garment; for they belong to man's very nature.     

And who can disagree with him? Would not any of us keep as treasures the the heirlooms passed down from our parents? In modern society, people will pay ridiculous amounts of money for an item that belonged to a famous personage, how much more should we treasure an item that belonged to one of God's beloved Saints? If we hold so dear the handkerchief of one of the Beatles, imbued with sweat, how much more should we hold dear the bones of St. John Vianney, imbued with God's Holiness and  Love? I shall close with a quote from St. Jerome's Ad Riparium.
We do not adore, I will not say the relics of the martyrs, but either the sun or the moon or even the angels -- that is to say, with the worship of "latria"...But we honor the martyrs' relics, so that thereby we give honor to Him Whose [witness] they are: we honor the servants, that the honor shown to them may reflect on their Master... Consequently, by honoring the martyrs' relics we do not fall into the error of the Gentiles, who gave the worship of "latria" to dead men.

Epistula Contra Stravinskum - Letter against Stravinskas

   

Fr. Stravinskas

 

      In an apparent override of Natural law, common sense, and the Magisterium of the Church, Our Sunday Visitor has published an interview with the formerly respectable and orthodox Priest, Fr. Peter Stravinskas. After reading this article however, I will never again apply the glorious label of orthodoxy to this cleric.

           

      In this interview, which includes unsupportable claims, unidentified references to "The Church Fathers", and flat-out falsehoods, Fr. Stravinskas attempts to portray parents who choose to homeschool their children as "psychologically unhealthy", "anti-clerical", and, to top it all off "a church within a church". 

"Psychologically unhealthy Elitists"?

     
        I very much wonder where Father has gotten this information. Has he actually taken the time to get to know any of these "elitist" homeschooling families, or is he just towing the line of the  (FAILED) Catholic educational system? Having spent large amounts of time among both homeschooled students, and products of Catholic education, I must insist on the exact opposite of Father's surmise. In the company of homeschooled students, I have almost invariably found an honest quest for truth, the capacity for articulate discussion, and indeed, keen insights.
 
Father also laments the "dearth of vocations from home-school families". Once again, I am at a loss for the source of this wild generalization. Perhaps this "dearth" is due rather to the fact that homeschoolers make up only a minuscule portion of the Catholic population. Consequentially, they can hardly be expected to supply a similar volume of Priests as do other educational systems. I must ask though: If the Catholic school system is such an incubator for Vocations, why are we in the depths of the greatest vocational shortage in modern times?

Another aspect mentioned is that it is "academically nearly impossible" for homeschooling to succeed. This is perhaps the most unjustified and untenable claim of all. One needs only to look at various independent evaluations (Strengths of Their Own: Home Schoolers Across America - 1997.) to ascertain the truth. In fact, far from what some would like us to believe, homeschooling students routinely outperform their non-homeschooled counterparts in every subject. According to the 1997 study, homeschooled students, on average, score 37 percentile points higher on standardized testing, than do their counterparts in the public school system.
   
Father Stravinskas concludes with a condemnation of parents who "don’t want their children exposed to others whose families might not have the same values as theirs." Oh the humanity! Just imagine it, parents wanting to protect and safeguard their children's innocence, against the pervasive immorality and gross violations of moral propriety which engulf both the Catholic and public educational system. Why on earth would they not want their children exposed to heresy taught as catechism, chastity mocked, licentiousness excused, and other such indefensible failures of the system?
   
       In his reading of the Vatican document Gravissimum Educationis, which does indeed emphasize the importance of Catholic schools, Father seems to have missed the statements: "Since parents have given children their life, they are bound by the most serious obligation to educate their offspring and therefore must be recognized as the primary and principal educators", and "Parents who have the primary and inalienable right and duty to educate their children must enjoy true liberty in their choice of schools."
   
        Furthermore, the document states that: "The Church reminds parents of the duty that is theirs to arrange and even demand that their children be able to enjoy these aids and advance in their Christian formation to a degree that is abreast of their development in secular subjects"
     
       When confronted with the abject failure of religious education in the Catholic school system, does this not affirm and verify the right (and in some cases even the duty) of parents, to secure a better educational environment for their children?

Marching for Traditional Marriage

TFP Student Action





By the time the sun rose on the morning of May 15th, members of the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property (TFP) were already at work, preparing for the day’s activities. Our vehicles were soon rolling to their destination: The heart of New York City – the Bronx. Our purpose: to join a march for traditional marriage organized by State Sen. Ruben Diaz (D-Bronx) and other pro-family leaders.


Under a light drizzle, we disembarked at 149th St and 3rd Ave and assembled the Holy Choirs of Angels Corps marching band. Invited to lead off the march, we positioned ourselves accordingly. Soon, thousands of traditional marriage supporters surged forward to the sound of God Bless America, holding signs that read: “Adam & Eve = Family,” and “Don’t Change Marriage.”

As the TFP band played stirring marches and patriotic music, people lined the streets and leaned out of windows to see the parade. Although a few passers-by were quite vocal in their opposition, the overall response was positive.


After marching the twelve blocks to the Bronx County Courthouse located on the Grand Concourse, a line-up of speakers addressed thousands of people from the court house steps, voicing their commitment to the cause of marriage. The national anthem was sung followed by a rendition of God Bless America by the TFP band. In his speech, Sen. Diaz mentioned how he had received death threats from pro-homosexual advocates for simply defending the institution of God-ordained marriage. Other speakers included Fr. Peter West, Associate Director of Priests for Life, and Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage.

Our banner, visible to the assembled thousands, boldly proclaimed: “God’s Marriage = One Man + One Woman.” Our flyer, 10 Reasons Why Homosexual “Marriage” is Harmful and Must Be Opposed, was very well received in both English and Spanish.

For the good of the family, let us continue to pray that more and more souls will stand up and peacefully oppose the homosexual agenda, especially in its latest effort to impose same-sex “marriage” on the state of New York.

Repulsive Drag Show at Jesuit Seattle University

TFP Student Action


After promoting Planned Parenthood internships on its web site, Seattle University has fallen even lower in its abandonment of St. Ignatius of Loyola.  According to the university’s student newspaper, The Spectator, a packed audience attended the 5th annual drag show in the Campion Ballroom on April 27.

The event was promoted by the pro-homosexual Triangle Club.  Promotional material told students that “It would be amazing if you showed up in drag” for the event, which featured “professional drag queens” (men dressed as women) and “student performers.”

Drag shows are a notorious symbol of moral depravity, part of the sexual revolution apparatus.  In these times, one might expect to find such things on the infamous stages of Broadway or the godless sets of Hollywood. But at a Catholic university?

What does “Catholic” signify to the administrators of Seattle University?  An empty title devoid of moral principles rather than a way of life instituted by Our Lord Himself?  What other conclusion can one draw in the face of this Jesuit university’s latest transgression against it’s Catholic identity?

Seattle University’s web site states: “The Jesuits are well-known and respected as educators.” Quite right, and justly so. But did they gain that reputation by the defiance of their Catholic identity, and the flaunting of immorality?  A resounding “No!” is the only answer! That reputation was gained through faithfulness and integrity, qualities quite lacking if current events are any sign.

One of the university’s aspirations for its student body is their “learning about making ethical choices in their lives.” One must wonder what sort of ethics it wishes its students to learn. Clearly not Catholic ones, since it has neatly swept them away, to clear the way for the “celebration of diversity.” 

If Seattle University wishes to live up to both its Jesuit tradition, and its Catholic identity, this is the time for them to show it by publically condemning the drag show event, apologizing for having allowed the scandal multiple times, and banishing it forever. 

Oh, yes, the promotion of Planned Parenthood internships must cease as well.

Voice your concern:

Fr. Stephen V. Sundborg, SJ
Seattle University, President
901 12th Ave.
Seattle, WA 98122-1090
Phone: 206-296-1891
E-mail: SUNDBORG@seattleu.edu

Tantum ergo Sacramentum

                                                                                                                                                                                

Pax Vobiscum.
   In any discourse or verbal engagement with Protestants, two issues always seem to take precedence in the conversation. Indeed these same two issues are the major targets of derision and ridicule by the perfidious. These two matters are the Holy Eucharist, and Sacramental confession.   It's quite easy to see why those two issues are at the forefront. For verily, they are the foundation upon which the Spiritual life is built. Before one can build steps of sanctity, to ascend to the realm of holiness, one must have a firm foundation to build on. For us Catholics, the Blessed Sacrament and the Confessional are the sand and gravel, which, when mixed with the cement of Devotion and surmounted by the flagstone of the Papacy, provide the only sure foundation for the ascension of the spirit. Why it is that Our Lord willed it thus, we shall never fully know, but a few reflections can be garnered from the Scriptures.

Why Christ came to earth the redeem us, we shall not know, this side of the Judgment. But the fact is that he did. Rather than, in His Omnipotence, saying the word, and restoring human nature, which was corrupted by the sin of Adam, He chose a different, and much more beautiful way. He chose, rather than simply cleansing our humanity, to make us partakers in his Divinity. In the words of Athanasius,  God became man, so that men might become God . He willed to unite Himself to the whole human race, not just in a spiritual sense, but in a physical, real sense. He wished for us, as the Body of Christ, to truly be that, both in our Christian way of living, but also in our very substance. That is why He said  He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life . How true this is, because by eating of the flesh of God, we bring His divinity into us. With normal food, when we eat it, it becomes like us, we digest it, and it becomes part of our matter. With the Flesh of Christ, it is the opposite, by eating it, we become like it, instead of it becoming like us. When we eat the Flesh, we are indeed part of the Body of Christ, and as a result, our Salvation shall be given unto us. We become the Son of God, and how could the Son of God come up lacking in the Judgment?
I am no Theologian, but that is my own reflection as to the "Why"  of it. The factual nature of it requires little explanation, as it was so clearly enunciated by Our Lord, who said:  This is my Body, This is my Blood ... Those are powerful words, and not ones which are open to various interpretations. He said this *Is* my body. If the Lutherans were right, He might have said  This contains my body . If the Methodists were right, He might have said:  This represents my body . But He said neither. He said,  This is my Body...Take ye, and eat...and I will raise you up on the last day

    Regarding Confession, I think that the “Why” is a bit more understandable. For as God willed the ultimate redemption and absolution, the Crucifixion, to happen to a man, Our Lord Jesus Christ, so also he willed that the individual redemption of each one of us should be accomplished through a man. And indeed, it is the same man both times, for when the Priest is exercising his office, he is the Altar Christus, another Christ. As St. Paul says,  And I live, now not I; but Christ liveth in me . St. Paul, as a Priest, very well understood this, that it was not he who worked the sacraments, and administered Grace, but rather Christ through him.
We all require forgiveness for our Sins and Iniquities. It is true, God could have chosen against the institution of Sacramental Absolution. But he did not. He gave the strict imperative:  Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.  We have all sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God, but through all this, God has given us an easy recourse. We must simply confess, and show ourselves humble and contrite before Our Lord in His representative , the Priest and all of our Sin is forgiven. My friend, what a marvelous gift this is, to have our iniquities wiped away in the sight of the most high. Each and every confession is , in a way, a continuation of Our Lord's Passion, for the Passion paid the penalty for all of our Sins, for all time. But at the time of His passion, many sins were yet to be committed. The redemption that Our Lord bought for us , with his blood, is still going on. When we commit a sin, we must go to the Priest and confess so that Our Lord may take that sin from our soul and extinguish it with the redemptive grace of his Passion and Death. We must not expect Our Lord to reach into our souls and remove our sin, instead we must have the humility to prostrate ourselves before the Lord and show him our sins. Then, He will stretch out His Hand, filled with the redemptive grace, and erase them.
    What a sublime mystery, what an ineffable boon to humanity. Since these truly comprise the cornerstone of our faith, it is no wonder that enemies of our faith mock and attack them unceasingly. But rather than simply weathering the storm, we must take the initiative, and go forth among the unbelievers, and by Gods grace, bring them the truth. For really they want the truth. They long for the fulfillment that is the Catholic Faith, but they know not how to identify their need. So we must be forthright, and go bring the word of salvation to all nations. We cannot wait for them to come to us. We must be the new Apostles, and go forth, bringing word of Christ’s saving sacraments.

                

To strive for something Higher

      The phrase "vocations crisis" is one which is often heard. In Catholic circles, it is taken to mean the dearth of Priests which has left no sector of the Church's life untouched. This is certainly a crisis, and a pernicious one at that. Unlike some crises, the effects of this one continue to compound. The longer the problem goes unaddressed, the worse our situation becomes. As an old seminary professor used to say: "Priests raise Priests". And how true that is! More than anything, it is the holy example provided by a fervent priest, that inspired young men to take up the priestly cross. And so, the fewer holy priests out there, the fewer young men who will follow the call. And yet, despite the dangerous degree to which the crisis has escalated, there has been no efficacious response to it. Only in the last few years have we seen the beginnings of a true renaissance, that is, a re-birth.  
      When the precipitous decline in clergy began to be noticed, the first response was the try to "bring the priesthood to the people", and make it more accessible to them. This was done by shifting the focus from the priest's divinity, as altar Christus, to his humanity, as Fr. Bob. They attempted to make priests into a sort of social worker, someone who was really just "one of the guys". Analogously, the same is true of the Religious life, both male and female. A startling (At least for me) example of this is this Vocations video  produced by a group of Benedictine "Nuns" (It is hard to call them that, since there is not a single veil or rosary to be seen).
  

  If you went through the regrettable experience of watching that video, you will have readily grasped that to which I was referring. No mention of their Charisma of prayer and sacrifice for the salvation of souls, no sight of the sisters singing the Office, no description of the beautiful Benedictine spirituality of Ora et Labora. In their place, we had an illicit Mass, protection of the environment, and, to complete the picture... some sort of Yoga. I can't speak for you, but I would not be too keen on devoting my entire life, body and soul, to such trifling things.

Drastically at variance with the above vocations video is this one,  produced by the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate.



Oh my, that's a bit different isn't it?
It seems to have a rather different focus, doesn't it? Let's see: "Holy Sacrifice of the Mass", "Holy Rosary", "Silence and recollection", "The exclusion of the noise and dissipation of the World". Yes... decidedly different. After watching that video, one cannot help but think: "Wow. This is something special, something higher".
And how right you would be! The Priesthood/Religious life is something special, supernatural, and superhuman.
       
   So, which one leads to vocations?
I think that the answer is, must be, and can only be the latter.
   What attracts young people? What makes them want to lay down their bodies and souls on the altar of religious life?
Is it being told that Brother/Sister/Father so-and-so, is pretty much like everyone else? I think not. Young people are not drawn towards mediocrity, they will not strive towards mediocrity. They want to strive for something greater than themselves; they want to strive to a higher calling; they want to be something. How can we possible expect to attract them into religious life by insinuating into their minds the idea that religious life is really not that special? Will people flock to the banner of lapel-pin celibate social workers? Or rather, will they flock to the banner of Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam, of something sublime, something higher? If one looks at the relative success of the Vocations offices of the lapel-pin Orders, versus the authentic sacrificial religious life, the answer will be clear.

Perfectio Odio Oderam

St. Francis could well be said to have had a Perfect Hatred of the World

"Have I not hated them, O Lord, that hated thee: and pine away because of thy enemies? I have hated them with a perfect hatred: and they are become enemies to me."
        The preceding passage, taken from Psalm 138, may, perhaps, seem out of place in modern Christianity. In this age, the emphasis is placed on love, peace, and harmony, brotherhood among mankind. Admirable as these ideas may be, and as worthy of a Christian as they may be, they are are not the only facet of the true Christian soul. As the Psalmist says, perfect hatred also has a place in the Christian soul. What the Psalmist means by "perfect hatred" could use a bit of clarification. It would be well if we had a different word to use in this language, since "hatred" has decidedly negative connotation. In the contemporary lexicon, "hate" means something akin to "to wish evil". This is not, however, a proper sense of what the Psalmist was saying. Rather, the Psalmist means rejection, and condemnation. And truly this hatred, rather than being at odds with love, compliments and completes it.
   What is the essence of love, but the ideal relationship between God and Man? And if man truly loves God, who is "essere", that is, being itself, will he not, with equal vehemence despise that which is not of God..i.e. evil, which is nothingness. Indeed, in this way, perfect love of God and perfect hatred are mutually inclusive. For if we truly love God, will we not hate the Absence of God, which is evil. And if we claim to truly love God, and yet we do not hate his absence (evil) are we not hypocrites? That is what is meant by "perfect hatred". Indeed perfect love is perfect hatred. For if we have a hatred of all that is opposed to God; sin, evil, vice, and the like, truly by hating them we are loving God. And likewise, if we love virtue, and the things of God, are we not by doing so hating sin and wickedness? It is of this that the Psalmist spoke, when he wrote those words: "I have hated them with a perfect hatred". This hatred is Love, they are but the two sides of the one coin.

The Tolerance of the Left

They ask for tolerance, and yet they give none. I urge you all to watch this video, which throws into sharp relief the utter hypocrisy of the "Tolerance and Love" crowd.

Rejection or Acquiescence

   In today's world, surrounded as we are, by the manifestations of ungodliness and revolutionary secularism, it is not possible for us to simply turn away from society. Whether we like it or not, for good or ill, we are a part of society, and it will have it's effects on us. It is how we face society and it's deleterious effects, that will determine who and what we are. If we simply allow ourselves to live in society, not countenancing it, but simply coexisting with it, we shall, with or without our consent, be drawn into society.
   We cannot control what our perceptions take in; everything around us, our surroundings, the people we meet, the places we frequent, will have an effect upon us, either beneficial, or detrimental. It is in our power, however, to shape our perceptions, according to our principles.
       Our perceptions can be very dangerous things, for they play a great role in the shaping of our ideas. When we allow the evils of society to pass unchallenged, we allow them a foothold in our mind. Whenever we encounter something revolutionary, whether it be a modernist building, a pink-haired punk, or an unprincipled piece of legislation, our mind begins to analyze it and form perceptions based upon both the object itself, as well as upon our response to it. If we allow the revolutionary manifestation to pass through our minds time and again and be formed in our perceptions, they will begin to seems alright, or at least less outrageous. After a while, they will take on an air of normality. This is why resistance is imperative! Whenever we see a demonstration of the revolution, we must make a conscious choice to reject it. Even as our mind takes it in and forms perceptions, we must let our soul ring with a resounding repudiation. If we make this internal rejection, then far from being weakened,  our principled resolutions shall wax, and grow stronger. If, on the contrary, we allow it to pass through without being confronted, it will create an opening in our mental and spiritual defenses. These little acquiescences may seem inconsequential at first, but their significance will grow as their habits harden our hearts, and make them increasingly deaf to the summons of Grace working on our intellects, and calling our better selves to right action   
     If we wish to ever attain to true integrity, such acts of rejection are absolutely essential. Without them, no matter how sincere or spirited our original principles and resolutions were, we shall find them slowly eroded, by the incessant and corrosive stream of modernity. Our perceptions are a fragile and precarious asset, which must be guarded closely. Just as a spot of moisture will discolour and deface the lucent face of a newly minted coin, if left to it's ends and not dried, thus also will unchallenged displays of revolutionary modernism slowly deface and corrode our lofty ideals, if not immediately reviled out and rejected.

Radical Marxist Priest Ernesto Cardenal to Speak at Xavier U: Catholic Students Ask Why

From TFP Student Action

By William Stover

April 14, 2011

     On April 16th, Xavier University in Cincinnati will welcome Father Ernesto Cardenal, a noted Liberation Theologian, Marxist politician and rebel against Papal authority. Father Cardenal will be reading poetry of his own composition, included a poem inspired by Darwin titled “The Origin of Species,” in the campus Bellarmine Chapel.

      Besides his dissident theological opinions, Father Cardenal also worked closely with the avowedly Marxist and patently anti-Catholic Sandinista revolutionary movement in Nicaragua. His exploits, including the founding of a revolutionary commune, which was later converted into a communist guerilla force,¹ garnered the attention of the Sandinista leadership. After the successful revolution, he was appointed to the position of Minister of Culture in the newly-formed Sandinista regime.

The question remains: Why is this man being invited to a Catholic university?  What possible reason could there be?

Both Socialist & Catholic?
Impossible.

According to Xavier University, “his (Father Cardenal’s) involvement with the Sandinista movement in his home country have informed his writing and political activism.” Perhaps this is so, but the question arises: of what have they informed him? Clearly not of sound Catholic doctrine, since he has remained a staunch advocate of Socialism, which, according to Pope Pius XI, can never be reconciled with true Catholicism.²  Furthermore, Liberation Theology, which Fr. Cardenal embraces, has been repeatedly censured both by the Holy See,³ and also by then-Cardinal Ratzinger,⁴now Pope Benedict XVI.

Why then is this Socialist poet being heralded at a Catholic university? Xavier University would do well to recall the words of Pope Leo XIII: “The harvest of misery is before our eyes, and the dreadful projects of the most disastrous national upheavals are threatening us from the growing power of the socialistic movement.”⁵  Xavier University must decide between Catholicism or Socialism, for “no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.”⁶

Register your peaceful protest today.  Contact:

Xavier University
Fr. Michael J. Graham, S.J., President
3800 Victory Parkway
Mail Location: 4511
Cincinnati, OH 45207
Phone: (513) 745-3502
Email:  graham@xavier.edu

1. Manzar Foroohar - The Catholic Church and social change in Nicaragua (1989) p. 170
2. Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, May 15, 1931, n. 120
3. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Instruction on certain aspects of the 'Theology of Liberation'",(September 13, 1984) and "Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation" (April 17, 1986)
4. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, "Liberation Theology: Preliminary Notes"
5. Encyclical Graves de Communi Re, January 18, 1901, n. 21
6. Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, May 15, 1931, n. 120

Integrity or Failure

          Integrity. It is a word which, in modern connotation, seems to be associated mainly with banks and savings firms. Although they know that it bears a decidedly positive air, most people would be at a loss if asked to explain integrity.  Some might posit such definitions as “honest”, “good” or “law-abiding”. The truest and purest definition however, is something more. The word “Integrity” comes from the Latin “Integer” meaning whole, or complete. It is from this definition whence arises the true meaning of the word Integrity.
     To have integrity, to be integral, is to embrace, in it’s completeness a single and all encompassing Weltanschauung. That is, a complete and comprehensive world-view. To truly be an integral anything, one must have a unified world-view. In the realm of ideologies, there can be no half-way. Either one has integrity in one’s ideas, or one has nothing. Think of modern ideologies, such as “Conservatism”. Look how is it constantly fractured and divided against itself.  That is because it does not have a unified Weltanschauung. Whenever an ideology allows for points of contention within itself, it is doomed to failure.
     Look at the most successful and powerful movements in history, the movements that inspired the most devotion and willingness to sacrifice everything. Look at the Apostles and the Early Christian Church, On the other end of the spectrum of Good and Evil, look at the radical Bolsheviks of Russia, or the Schutzstaffel of the Third Reich. In the latter two cases, their Weltanschauung was exceedingly evil, but nevertheless, it had a sort of integrity about it.
What I mean to say by this is that their world-view was sufficient unto itself. It offered a unified view on all aspects of human experience. When one embraced the Nazi party, one did not need to look farther, since an answer for all questions was contained in the ideology. The same is true of the communist ideology of the Bolsheviks. Their ideology incorporated all the ideas and opinions that a party member might ever need to have. In this way, the unity of the political or social body is safeguarded. By supplying for every ideological need, the splits which so commonly plague less integral groups are often precluded.   Back to the other end of the Spectrum, we find the Early Church, which,  under the unified and singular  Weltanschauung on the Councils and the Magisterium, spread over all of the known world.
     This is why integrity is so essential to any successful endeavor. When one does not have a belief which embraces all aspects of life, one can easily fall prey to the verbal tricks and mental machinations of one’s opponents. They will manipulate the gaps in our belief system. If they are allowed to carry this process to fruition, they will bring the whole edifice crashing down around us. It is then, surrounded by the smoking wreckage of our half-maturated religious musings, and internet-assembled philosophies, that we shall see where we went wrong. Without an integral Weltanschauung, this will always be our final end.             
      
       

Solvet Saeclum in Favilla - On the Morality of the Dresden Bombings.

 "The Nazi Holocaust was among the most evil genocides in history. But the Allies’ firebombing of Dresden and nuclear destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were also war crimes..."    - Dr. Gregory H. Stanton, president of Genocide Watch.

       As technology and "progress" in the field of military technology continue to increase, one is constantly confronted with moral questions and dilemmas. In light of the recent Air-Strikes against Libya, I think that a brief discussion of the morality of certain means of aerial combat would be auspicious.
       The particular method which I would like to discuss is the so-called "Terror-Bombings", of which was made extensive use during the Second World War.
In the bombing of Dresden, for instance, the RAF and USAF utilized over 10 1/2 Million pounds of high-explosives, as well as almost 4 million pounds of incendiary bombs. These attacks killed anywhere from twenty-five thousand to two hundred and fifty thousand civilians. Although the military expediency of the attacks is still debated today, the issue which I would like to address is the moral ramifications of the actions.
   Many people seem to justify the bombings, on the basis of a point-for-point theory of wartime retribution. Though it is certainly true that the atrocities of the Nazi Party were unparalleled on the Allied side, I think that any attempt at justification based on this fact is odious. If we try to justify our own actions based off of the actions of our opponents, where do we stop? It is a slippery slope that no civilized nation will allow itself to set foot on. For verily, if we base our view of morality and justice on the conduct of our antagonists, we have the potential to become as bad, if not worse than the evil we are fighting.
   And so, if a perverted idea of justice is an insufficient pretext for such act, then where do we turn next?
 The other oft-repeated line is that military expediency outweighs the moral consideration of such bombings.
    I would once again deny the validity of this argument. Indeed it is an unavoidable fact of war that civilian lives will be lost, but that makes it no less reprehensible. There is a great gulf of difference between civilian deaths as an accidental aspect of warfare, and civilian deaths as an essential part of warfare. An example of the first case would be the bombing of a munitions factory, where civilians might be killed as collateral. This is a most regrettable happenstance, but is not sufficient to anathemize the use of explosive weapons. An example of the second case would be the previously mentioned Dresden, where the actual target of the attack a civilian city-center (Indeed, fifteen square miles, over ninety percent of the city-center was totally destroyed)
    In the former case, the death of civilians is an accidental (in the philosophical sense, i.e. something which goes with, but is not necessary or innate to the act) aspect, whereas in the latter the civilian casualties are an essential (i.e. premeditated and intrinsic) part of the operation. In this line, between cases one and two, we see also the line between justice and barbarity, between lamentable necessity and malign gratuitous slaughter. Here we find the difference between War and Genocide.

Who are the real Clericalists?

       Clericalism is something of which I am quite often accused. Apparently, all one must do is merit this distinction is show a healthy reverence for the Sacral nature of the Priesthood. Furthermore, words such as backwards,  medieval and close-minded and even Crusader are also applies liberally, and with some frequency. Such "insults" as Medieval and Crusader, have no need for discussion, since I take them as compliments  I would, however, like to know what is it that makes me a "Clericalist" in the pejorative sense, i.e. an ecclesiolater.

      As far as my poor powers of reason can discern,the most common circumstance leading to my branding as a Clericalist is my insistence on on the observance of the Liturgical and Sacramental norms of Holy Mother Church. This hardly seems to merit a title of Clericalist, assuming the definition " One who attributes excessive power to the Clergy" is valid. For indeed, by insisting that the Clergy follow the forms and conditions set down by Holy Mother Church, am I not indeed acknowledging the limited power of the clergy? By affirming a higher power than the individual cleric, am I not opposing clericalism? In fact, I view Clericalism, or rather it's present manifestation, as one of the greatest evils infecting the Church today. This present manifestation, which I would term Neo-clericalism, emphasizes the paramountcy of each individual cleric's views and manners, in the confection of Sacraments, and all other priestly functions.

( For a cogent example of this, The Glorification of Humanism )
      This is indeed Clericalism. Going back to our definition of "One who attributes excessive power to the Clergy", we can easily see the correlation. By allowing, and encourage clerics to "make the liturgy their own" and insert their own prayers, own styles, own preferences, into the Sacred Liturgy, the Neo-Clericalists truly are attributing excessive power to the Clergy. Conversely, we, who insist on adherence to rubrics, norms, and traditions, are the very antithesis of clericalists. Where they give, into the hands of clergy, the unwarranted power over the Sacred Liturgy itself, we, on the contrary, demand fidelity and obedience to something greater. Where they give free license to the innovations and vicissitudes of the cleric, we expect and require rigid compliance.
       How is it then, that we are Clericalists and they are not?