Thank You For Your Patience

We are currently updating our new website. We have not been updating our posts as of late. We will have our new site up and running soon!

An Unhappy Anniversary

By DR. CHRISTOPHER MANION

Eighty-two years ago, Sophie Scholl and her brother Hans, both students at the University of Munich, were found guilty of sedition by a Nazi court and sent to the guillotine the same afternoon.

The Scholls were members of the White Rose, a peace movement that anonymously distributed flyers in universities throughout the country.

Nazi prosecutors reportedly offered her a reduced sentence if she would testify against her brother. She refused.

“Sie werden stehen wo ich stehe,” the 23-year-old Sophie told Judge Roland Freisler, when he announced the death sentence.

“You will be standing where I’m standing.”

That prediction was fulfilled in every detail.

After the Reichstag fire in 1933, Adolf Hitler had formed “The People’s Court” and put Freisler, state secretary of the Reich Ministry of Justice at the time, in charge. By 1943, Freisler had sent some 5,000 “enemies of the Reich” to their deaths.

Most notorious of his victims were the conspirators in the July 1944 plot against Hitler. Hitler had insisted that Freisler conduct the trial.

“You will be standing where I’m standing,” Sophie Scholl told Freisler at her trial.

Well, he didn’t have to — he was killed on Feb. 3, 1945 by American bombers. He had reportedly run back to his office to retrieve the files on trial of Fabian von Schlabrendorff, the last of the July conspirators, whom he was hoping to send to his death that very afternoon.

Freisler was found crushed to death by a fallen column while clutching the case files in the anteroom of the judicial chamber in which he had convicted the Scholls.

“It is God’s verdict,” one hospital worker reportedly said when Freisler’s body was brought in.

Fabian von Schlabrendorff was later sent to a concentration camp; after liberation, he served on the prosecution staff at the Nuremberg trials and eventually became a member of Germany’s highest constitutional court.

While Sophie and Hans Scholl were gone, their message lived on. Word of the pamphlets made its way back to Britain, and the Royal Air Force began reproducing them and dropped White Rose flyers all over Germany.

Even in death, Hans Scholl and Sophie Scholl could not be silenced.

“How can we expect righteousness to prevail when there is hardly anyone willing to give himself up individually to a righteous cause,” Sophie Scholl asked just before her sentence was carried out. “Such a fine, sunny day, and I have to go, but what does my death matter, if through us, thousands of people are awakened and stirred to action?”

And a curious historical footnote: In 2005, a documentary appeared in Germany describing the life of Traudl Junge, whose typing skills had qualified her for the job of Adolf Hitler’s stenographer in 1943. She stayed on the job until Hitler’s April 1945 death in “The Bunker.” In the movie, Junge recalls how, after the war, she passed a statue near her home in Munich erected to the memory of a young student.

That student was Sophie Scholl. Traudl realized that she and Sophie were the same age in 1943 when she began working for Hitler, and Freisler was conducting Sophie’s trial. The film depicted Junge as completely clueless for her entire life until that moment. “I really sensed it was no excuse to be young and that it might have been possible to find out what was going on,” she said.

Bishops Stand Firm Against IVF

On Feb. 18, President Trump signed an executive order authorizing a policy review which, “to support American families,” would “ensure reliable access to In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) treatment, including by easing unnecessary statutory or regulatory burdens to make IVF treatment drastically more affordable.”

In both domestic and foreign policy, Donald Trump has firmly established his position as the most pro-life president in history. In January, just six days after Trump’s inauguration, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) had broken its rule of silence, somehow imposed during the Biden years, to welcome Trump’s cancellation of all abortion funding, as well as his renewal and expansion of the Mexico City Policy restricting international funding, first proclaimed in 1984 by President Ronald Reagan.

Good for the bishops. While saluting Trump’s pro-life policies, we must bluntly condemn this executive order. It is not pro-life, and we have the duty both to oppose it and to educate the public and the Trump administration on what IVF actually does to human life. And our bishops did so formally last week.

On Feb. 20, USCCB Committee on Pro-Life Activities Chairman Bishop Daniel E. Thomas and Committee for Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth Chairman Bishop Robert E. Barron issued a statement spelling out the dangers of IVF.

“As pastors, we see the suffering of so many couples experiencing infertility and know their deep desire to have children is both good and admirable; yet the Administration’s push for IVF, which ends countless human lives and treats persons like property, cannot be the answer,” they wrote.

“The IVF industry treats human beings like products and freezes or kills millions of children who are not selected for transfer to a womb or do not survive. Tuesday’s (Feb. 18) executive order promoting IVF is thus fatally flawed and stands in regrettable contrast to the promising pro-life actions of the Administration last month.

“Every human person is a precious gift with infinite dignity and worth, no matter how that person was conceived. People born as a result of IVF have no less dignity than anyone else. It is our moral responsibility to uphold the dignity of their brothers and sisters who are never given the chance to be born.

“For the sake of couples trying to bring precious new life into the world, we look forward to working with the Administration to expand support for restorative reproductive medicine that can help ethically treat often-overlooked root causes of infertility. However, we will strongly oppose any policy that expands destruction of human life, or forces others to subsidize the cost,” they wrote.

Supporting this stance will not win any popularity contests in coming months, but it is our duty to make clear the fact that countless innocent unborn lives are allowed to die in IVF procedures.

And let’s face it: Among the medical profession and the industry that supports it, IVF is recognized as a cash cow feeding on parents longing to bear a child. The bishops recognize that desire, but they don’t mention the financial dimension that Trump’s executive order faces squarely: While sparing any condemnation of the exorbitant IVF industry, he wants to make the process “drastically more affordable.”

Our bishops want to seek moral alternatives to the procedure altogether — a goal that might well gain the attention of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the newly-confirmed secretary of Health and Human Services.

Fertility rates have dropped worldwide in the past 50 years, but the rate of infertility among those couples seeking to have another child has increased in similar proportion. Many proposals have been made — tax exemptions for large families, “Children are the Future” campaigns, and the like. Perhaps we should seek effective ways to identify the causes of infertility and encourage programs that help couples without resorting to IVF.

(Dr. Manion’s new book, Charity for Sale: Has The American Church Become “Just Another NGO”? will debut on March 7, the Feast of St. Thomas Aquinas. It is now available on pre-order from Catholics For Catholics. Order online at https://cforc.com/product/charityforsale/)

Radical Inclusion Of God

By FR. KEVIN M. CUSICK

Inclusion becomes a concern upon discovering that something or someone is being unjustly or unreasonably excluded — that is, under normal circumstances.

We do not find ourselves in normal circumstances; this is an era of one scam or grift after another.

For some reason, there are those with influence who have inverted their speech about reality and are selling the idea that people are being excluded if they are asked not to sin.

Rejecting sin is not excluding people. We are not our sins. Rejecting or excluding sin is necessary to include people in the life of the Gospel, of grace and the Kingdom of Heaven.

Perhaps we could synod about radically including God in our lives. It is God who is most excluded in our world today.

It was in October 2022 that we were informed we needed to “enlarge the space of your tent” with a document calling for the “radical inclusion” of what was called “LGBT” and “remarried” people.

“The document drew from the various diocesan reports to refer to groups of people who felt ‘neglected and excluded.’ Among those who ‘feel a tension between belonging to the Church and the experience of their own affective relationships,’ the document listed: remarried divorcees; single parents; people in polygamous marriages; LGBTQ people, etc.” (LifeSiteNews, Oct. 27, 2022).

The work of the Church, because of Jesus Christ, is salvation of souls. Souls are saved one by one, not in pairs. And so, first of all, we are not being saved along with our own “affective relationships.” We are being saved, or not, ourselves alone. Now, it is true that married individuals work, pray and sacrifice for the salvation of their spouse, but they do this within a union envisioned by almighty God in creating them “male and female,” as we learn in Genesis. However, that is the only case in which the sexual capacity expresses union and this for the sake of procreation.

But, having said that, man and wife each face the Lord alone at their individual judgment, as do we all, and they alone answer for their sins or not as individuals, not as a pair.

This example makes obvious what is true for us all. Affective relationships either lift up or cast down. Affective relationships, in and of themselves, are not good simply as such. They must be judged in light of the virtues as must every aspect of our lives. And we are each judged by how we conducted ourselves in a holy manner, or not, in our relationships.

The affective nature of friendship is a gift available to all.

Friendship is one of life’s most beautiful gifts. It can confer a great sense of redemptive renewal to life. It is possible only because of virtue, however. It is the virtues that attract souls in the blessing of friendship. One is excluded from the possibility of friendship by oneself alone. How we exercise compassion, understanding, gentleness and goodness toward others determines our capacity for giving and receiving the gift of friendship.

The 1993 Catechism treats friendship under the category of “solidarity.”

“The principle of solidarity, also articulated in terms of ‘friendship’ or ‘social charity,’ is a direct demand of human and Christian brotherhood. An error, ‘today abundantly widespread, is disregard for the law of human solidarity and charity, dictated and imposed both by our common origin and by the equality in rational nature of all men, whatever nation they belong to. This law is sealed by the sacrifice of redemption offered by Jesus Christ on the altar of the Cross to his heavenly Father, on behalf of sinful humanity’” (Catechism of the Catholic Church [CCC], n. 1939).

The “human virtues,” as the Catechism describes them, are for the basis for everything in life, to include friendship.

“Human virtues are firm attitudes, stable dispositions, habitual perfections of intellect and will that govern our actions, order our passions, and guide our conduct according to reason and faith. They make possible ease, self-mastery, and joy in leading a morally good life. The virtuous man is he who freely practices the good.

“The moral virtues are acquired by human effort. They are the fruit and seed of morally good acts; they dispose all the powers of the human being for communion with divine love” (CCC, n. 1804).

Affective relationships, in order to be virtuous, must will the good of the other.

But, because friendship with God is the greatest imaginable good, exclusion of God from our “affective relationships” is the worst state of all, because it is rejection of this greatest and most wonderful friendship, which saves our souls for the sale of eternal happiness.

It turns out that, after considering the human condition and the ills that plague mankind, it becomes evident that the greatest need that all of us share is the necessity of radically including God in our lives and in our world.

But we can start with ourselves and the practice of our Catholic faith.

God is excluded when we talk with others in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament instead of praying.

God is excluded when engaged couples plan their church wedding last, after the reception, the dress, and the guest list.

God is excluded by immodest dress at Mass in the true presence of the Lord and when we go forward to receive Him unprepared spiritually or in appearance like we’re ready for the beach or the gym.

God is excluded when we desecrate the Lord’s Day by servile work or unnecessary shopping and by omitting to attend holy Mass to sanctify the day.

God is excluded when we fail to pray daily.

God is excluded from relationships which are based upon the sinful use of human gifts, to include disordered sexuality.

God is excluded by mortal sin, which can bar us forever from His friendship in Heaven if unrepented.

Yes, it is in fact God that is excluded and His absence from our lives by the sinful choices which we freely make that is the greatest injustice in the world today. The exclusion of God is the greatest sin.

The quiet “attrition” by which Catholics abandon the Faith, and individualism of indifference, can be true even among us who attend Mass and receive the sacraments. Benedict XVI addressed this phenomenon.

“First, as you know, it is becoming more and more difficult, in our Western societies, to speak in a meaningful way of ‘salvation’. Yet salvation — deliverance from the reality of evil, and the gift of new life and freedom in Christ — is at the heart of the Gospel. We need to discover, as I have suggested, new and engaging ways of proclaiming this message and awakening a thirst for the fulfillment which only Christ can bring. It is in the Church’s liturgy, and above all in the sacrament of the Eucharist, that these realities are most powerfully expressed and lived in the life of believers; perhaps we still have much to do in realizing the Council’s vision of the liturgy as the exercise of the common priesthood and the impetus for a fruitful apostolate in the world.

“Second, we need to acknowledge with concern the almost complete eclipse of an eschatological sense in many of our traditionally Christian societies. As you know, I have pointed to this problem in the Encyclical Spe Salvi. Suffice it to say that faith and hope are not limited to this world: as theological virtues, they unite us with the Lord and draw us toward the fulfillment not only of our personal destiny but also that of all creation. Faith and hope are the inspiration and basis of our efforts to prepare for the coming of the Kingdom of God. In Christianity, there can be no room for purely private religion: Christ is the Savior of the world, and, as members of his Body and sharers in his prophetic, priestly and royal munera, we cannot separate our love for him from our commitment to the building up of the Church and the extension of his Kingdom. To the extent that religion becomes a purely private affair, it loses its very soul” (Meeting with the Bishops of the United States of America, Responses of His Holiness Benedict XVI to the Questions Posed by the Bishops, National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, D.C., April 16, 2008).

Would that we convened a synod which discussed the need for the radical inclusion of God, as a cure for the ills of the world and of families today? Yes, we do indeed need to “enlarge the space of our tents,” by including the Lord and His holy plans for us and our world.

Thank you for reading and praised be Jesus Christ our King, now and forever.

apriestlife.blogspot.com

USCCB Sues Trump Administration Over NGO Funding

By DR. CHRISTOPHER MANION

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has sued the federal government to restore federal taxpayer funding of the works performed by the conference’s secular agencies that participate in the government’s refugee settlement programs.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Feb. 18, urges the government “to uphold its legal and moral obligations to refugees and to restore the necessary funding to ensure that faith-based and community organizations can continue this vital work that reflects our nation’s values of compassion, justice, and hospitality.”

Among the Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) that resettle millions of aliens crossing the border under the Obama and Biden administrations, Catholic Charities, USA receives the greatest share of federal funding. Obama’s funding was reduced by half during the first Trump administration, with a successful focus on restricting illegal immigration and securing the border. Upon assuming office in 2021, Joe Biden trebled that amount, and the funding issue has been a major bone of contention in the ongoing furor surrounding the bishops’ participation in the government’s immigration programs.

Our bishops had complained vigorously about Trump during his first term, but maintained an almost universal silence during Biden’s years, despite his radical support of abortion and the entire “gender agenda” at home and abroad. They had never sued the Biden administration about anything, nor did the Ordinaries of Wilmington and Washington ever apply Canon 915 regarding his scandals.

But with Trump’s inauguration, they came to life with remarkable vigor.

“For decades, the U.S. government has chosen to admit refugees and outsourced its statutory responsibility to provide those refugees with resettlement assistance to non-profit organizations like USCCB,” the lawsuit states, “[b]ut now, after refugees have arrived and been placed in USCCB’s care, the government is attempting to pull the rug out from under USCCB’s programs by halting funding.”

The USCCB complains that some $25 million taxpayer dollars are already overdue, and that “these numbers will continue to rise by millions of dollars every week that the Refugee Funding Suspension remains in effect.”

“[The USCCB] faces irreparable damage to its longstanding refugee resettlement programs and its reputation and relationship with its subrecipients and the refugee populations it serves,” the lawsuit states. “USCCB’s inability to reimburse its partner organizations, in turn, has required some of those organizations to lay off staff and may require them to stop providing aid for housing, food, and resettlement to support refugees.”

It’s Charity — Voluntary Or Not

This is not the first time that bishops have sued the federal government. After the pandemic exploded five years ago this month, the government made various funds available to some entities suffering losses due to the lockdowns. Several Catholic dioceses at the time sued the Small Business Administration (SBA) for federal funding to keep their staffs on board, even though in many cases the churches, offices, and schools where they worked were closed to the public. When the final accounting of these disbursements nationwide was completed, the Catholic Church and its entities were the single highest recipient, a curious discovery, since in many dioceses the faithful had been locked out of the Mass and other sacraments for months.

Nonetheless, the various entities of the Catholic Church received the largest total amount paid under the SBA’s programs.

The lawsuit filed on February 18 opens with this statement:

“For nearly 80 years, the Catholic Church has been caring for refugees within the United States. Refugees face significant challenges upon entering the country, including locating housing, learning English, and finding employment.”

This is a misstatement. We recall that, when Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., recounted how his great-great grandfather landed in Boston in 1848, he was welcomed by the Democrat Party, he failed to mention John Bernard Fitzpatrick, bishop of Boston at the time. The bishop not only helped Irish families as they arrived in America but also sent thousands of dollars from diocesan funds and special collections to Archbishop William Crolly in Ireland to help those still suffering under the British boot.

So, what the lawsuit refers to as “caring for refugees” is the care provided by the bishops’ taxpayer-funded agencies that have resettled migrants since the end of the Second World War. Truly charitable works — funded by voluntary donations amidst a flourishing Church bursting with new parishes, schools, and yes, charities — are a thing of the past.

Today, our bishops seldom distinguish between truly charitable works like that of Bishop Fitzpatrick, on the one hand, and the work of their government-funded agencies, which by law must be secular, with no hint of any religious character, on the other.

Their failure — indeed, their refusal — to admit this distinction is reflected in a statement on its refugee programs released by the conference shortly after President Trump took office in January. “Faithful to the teaching of Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church has a long history of serving refugees. In 1980, the bishops of the United States began partnering with the federal government to carry out this service when Congress created the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP).”

Curious, isn’t it? In the bishops’ programs funded by billions of taxpayer funding over the years, their NGOs have been prevented by law even to mention the teaching of Jesus Christ.

But in 1980, Joseph Bernardin, soon to become the Cardinal Archbishop of Chicago, took charge of the conference’s Department of Justice, Peace, and Human Development and inaugurated its programs featuring “social justice” — a theme that harmonized with the secular programs of the welfare state — and attenuated the Church’s magisterial moral teaching on family, marriage, and children that has been left by the side of the road ever since.

And they appear to be quite comfortable with that fact.

A New Bishops’ Lenten Appeal?

To prepare this 35-page legal brief, the bishops engaged Gibson and Dunn, one of Washington’s most prestigious law firms whose work, according to its webpage, features “complex litigation at all levels.” Eighteen lawyers participated in writing the brief, and the fact that Gibson-Dunn is also one of the most expensive D.C. litigation specialists is reflected in two of the six “requests” made of the court at the end of the document:

(4) “Enjoin — temporarily, preliminarily, and permanently — Defendants to reimburse USCCB for all expenses it has incurred or will incur pursuant to the terms of its cooperative agreements;

(5) Award Plaintiff’s counsel reasonable attorneys’ fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, and any other applicable statute or regulation.”

“It’s not about the money,” our beloved shepherds repeat in their familiar litany, but this case will cost them millions of dollars — and they can’t use government funds to pay it.

The same principle applies to their hundreds of payouts in lawsuits brought by thousands of plaintiffs in the endless sex-abuse and coverup scandals over the years: The amount paid to the bishops’ own lawyers and support teams run up to several billion dollars.

“Where are we going to get the money,” as Representative Robert Fleming Rich, a Pennsylvania Republican would ask whenever FDR wanted a new spending program.

Where indeed?

When Texas Representatives asked about CCUSA’s spending at the border 15 months ago, New York Cardinal Dolan called them “bigots.”

That won’t work this time. Like it or not, with this case the USCCB has opened the door to “discovery,” which will allow the Justice Department to “follow the money” whether Cardinal Dolan likes it or not.

Well, they asked for it. Stay tuned.

(Dr. Manion’s new book, Charity for Sale: Has The American Church Become ‘Just Another NGO’? is now available on pre-order from Catholics For Catholics. Order online at https://cforc.com/product/charityforsale/)

Evangelizing Virginia

By FR. KEVIN M. CUSICK

For a bit of Italy in Virginia I stopped at Monticello, Thomas Jefferson’s Palladian inspiration, following a recent visit with priest friends.

I toured the house and lawn once again, having visited when very young for the first time with my parents shortly after they transferred to Maryland from Michigan, where I was born.

After stepping with my tour group into the front hall of the house, I was interested to make note of two paintings hanging there close to the weighted clock over the door. Two copies of paintings he admired in France and elsewhere in Europe depicting Christ before Pilate and St. Jerome.

And, in the room designated for entertaining that overlooks the west lawn, he hung a depiction of Salome with the head of St. John the Baptist on a platter. His choice of paintings in part were intended to spark conversation.

Freedom of worship was one of his major undertakings. His efforts for such in Virginia later informed that for the nation as a whole. Perhaps St. John served as reminder of a need to speak convictions of truth freely without fear of reprisal.

It was startling to see a death mask of the regicidal Oliver Cromwell in the library. A grim reminder of the death and judgment that awaits us all, both the powerful and the powerless.

Was Jefferson sympathetic to the Puritan who fought against and took part in beheading Charles I, the main obstacle to a constitutional system? Jefferson treasured his role as a founding father with his contribution toward the framing of the U.S. Constitution. No doubt this was one source of strong connection with the figure of Cromwell.

Later, following the tour, I was questioned by two members of my group as to my “denomination.” A woman bystanding overheard the resulting comments. I proceeded to explain that, to properly answer their question, I would have to start by saying that I am not part of a denomination, but rather of the Church which preceded the idea of “denominations.” One then asked about the designation “Catholic,” and I responded that it is one of the four marks of the Church at her founding.

“Where is your church?” the woman asked, and searched for it on her phone, explaining that her parents left the practice of the Faith with abandonment of the traditional Latin Mass. I expressed sympathy and added that there were unfortunately millions of others who did the same. As we all know, the Church has not recovered but only continued to decline.

I explained that I offer the traditional Latin Mass not only out of conviction but as a remedy for those who fell away after the imposition of the new rite in English.

She explained that her two daughters were baptized and fell away, and that one has now embraced the “born again” heresy along with the fallacy of a second baptism. Interesting that some Protestants reject some of the sacraments while overusing others.

The experience proved once again that a patient and precise explanation of the Church’s founding by, and apostolic tradition from, Christ are powerful means of evangelization among the increasing numbers of those who no longer have any active relationship with the Body of Christ.

It certainly didn’t hurt that I was garbed in cassock and greca at the time.

So, signs must be offered and then others can freely inquire and express interest in the knowledge of the Faith at their own pace and capacity for reception and possible assent.

St. Paul’s letter to the Thessalonians on the feast of St. Titus reminds us we must speak so that the Lord can do His work through us as He wills.

“For yourselves know, brethren, our entrance in unto you, that it was not in vain: But having suffered many things before, and been shamefully treated (as you know) at Philippi, we had confidence in our God, to speak unto you the gospel of God in much carefulness. For our exhortation was not of error, nor of uncleanness, nor in deceit: But as we were approved by God that the gospel should be committed to us: even so we speak, not as pleasing men, but God, who proveth our hearts. For neither have we used, at any time, the speech of flattery, as you know; nor taken an occasion of covetousness, God is witness: Nor sought we glory of men, neither of you, nor of others. Whereas we might have been burdensome to you, as the apostles of Christ: but we became little ones in the midst of you, as if a nurse should cherish her children.” (1 Thess. 2:1-7)

Plainly speaking the truth in humble terms and with patience can bear much fruit. There was some interest in the Church’s ancient worship but the denizen of Charlottesville was unfortunately domiciled far from my parish.

I met another woman recently in Virginia who said she had been an adult convert but had fallen away. She cited the fact that there are so many prayers she must recite that she either felt she couldn’t learn them all or felt at sea and perhaps wasn’t taking from it what was necessary. This points positively to the less rigid approach with the traditional Mass where the laity are not so minutely instructed on every last thing they should do or say at every moment of the Mass. Mental prayer and intentional worship are given more latitude when words and actions are less scripted. Certainly, respect is demanded by proscribing the praying of the Rosary, hearing confessions or other conflicting or distracting activity during the Consecration of the Mass. But other than that, the manner of participating in the prayers of the Mass is largely left to whatever spirituality is most fruitful for the individual worshipper.

No doubt the rigidity of approach which demands all obey in lockstep has had a discouraging and unhospitable effect on more individuals than the woman with whom I spoke. All should feel welcome no matter the degree of conformity with mandated “active participation” so frequently featured as an attraction to the “new and improved” version of Mass. We don’t demand uniformity from the guests in our homes. Decorum is always necessary, particularly in the house of God as an aspect of reverence. But participation is always as individual as the one participating.

I close with the following from the exceptional James Monti:

“Over the decades since the Second Vatican Council, a lot has been said and debated concerning the concept of ‘active participation’ in the Mass and how this should properly be defined. There has been a growing recognition and consensus that active participation is not about inventing external roles for everyone to play during the Mass, but rather a disposition of the soul whereby we become first and foremost interiorly engaged in the Holy Sacrifice as an act of worship.

“A further question arises as to what this interior participation in the Mass specifically means. Is it simply a matter of following the words of the Mass, or is it something far more? That ‘something far more’ is reverence.

“Integral to truly ‘active participation’ is the conscious perception and attentive awareness of the Divine Presence in the Holy Eucharist. Reverence is our response to this conscious perception and hence constitutes ‘active participation’ in its highest form — our conscious worship of God as God. It is an intentional receptivity to what is holy, to the divine. Reverence totally engages the heart and the mind to respond to the presence of God.

“As Dietrich von Hildebrand observed, in our participation in the sacred liturgy, reverence ‘never allows us to forget the awe in which we must always make our approach to God’” (Liturgy and Personality, Steubenville, Ohio, Hildebrand Project, 2016, p. 41).

Thank you for reading and praised be Jesus Christ, our King, now and forever.

apriestlife.blogspot.com

Heresy: Grieving And Moral Injury

By FR. KEVIN M. CUSICK

Many are suffering a devastating spiritual wildfire that is leaving vast destruction in its wake. Some speak out, but many others keep their counsel, for reasons ranging on the spectrum all the way from fear to prudence, or some combination thereof.

What I describe finds an apt metaphor in California ravaged by an aggressive wildfire gone out of control, threatening many lives and the destruction of property. We grieve with those who lost their homes. News comes as I write on this winter morning that two persons have in fact died as result of the blaze. May others be spared a similar fate.

The danger of death ever threatens all of the living. But because of our faith it never need mean more than the loss merely of the body, dust to dust.

The phenomenon of a good thing gone out of control is a definition for heresy: choosing one element of the Church’s faith and life, exaggerating it out of proportion to the point of obscuring or overturning another necessary component of salvation.

Just as fire in its place can serve as a heat source or aid in creating and producing but can also run amok, causing death and destruction, so heresy. Compassion is good and necessary but denying another soul the truth is never compassionate.

When the safety and security of the weak are threatened they must sometimes flee the fire. Just as we must sometimes flee temptation as our only means of rejecting temptation, so when the powerful oppress the least among us by imposing conformity to error, escape may be the only viable recourse.

Others may not have the luxury of removal from proximity to error. They will suffer the devastation of mental and spiritual agony in witnessing and processing the results.

This is the moral injury of the good who see the truth attacked and denied.

There can arise a concomitant temptation to submit to resignation, a kind of moral defeat.

So in the Church, the phenomenon of grieving the moral injury of heresy. It is one thing when members go astray of their own volition. It is entirely another when those responsible for teaching, guiding, correcting and reproving themselves promote error.

Many members of the Church are suffering the consequences of betrayal. A devastating and overwhelming wildfire of an attack on truth has had negative consequences for the mental, moral and spiritual health of countless believers.

Some speak. Some languish silently. Some discontinue the practice of their faith. Loss of souls is the result in the ultimate damage to the mission of preaching the Gospel and the Lord’s work of redemption.

And in some cases we may witness punishment meted out to those who will not go along “for fellowship’s sake.”

Persecuting those who want to pray and live as the Church has always done and taught while preaching the necessity of “radical inclusion” is mentally stressful as well as nonsensical. And extremely damaging to the spiritual life and witness of the Church to the broader society, which requires internal coherence for growth, serenity and overall spiritual well-being.

The cruel edicts of Rome expelled traditional Catholic families from parishes, gutting the affected communities financially, and increasing the fragility of those already experiencing borderline non-viability in small churches across the country. 

To promote error is in fact attacking the Church herself, in a mistaken attempt to show understandable compassion for individuals, an always necessary good.

Defining, or in some cases, redefining, compassion means inverting the faith and practice of the Church. It has always glowed with some heat at various levels within the organization, but when bishops themselves began to light a match and then use their authority to require others to do so, the low level fever of error in ember form explodes into a raging inferno. Now it swallows up entire dioceses.

The Eucharist is, of course, “medicine for the weak” as we have heard from a prominent voice in Rome. We all share in the weakness that is simply human nature. There is no problem at all with, and certainly much help in, urging the faithful to call upon Christ for divine strength through the infinite graces of the holy Eucharist.

But when it comes to mortal sin, we’re not talking about the mere weakness that all of us share simply as human beings; we’re talking instead about the free act of the intellect and will to choose evil. Not to ask a human person to take responsibility for that is in fact to do injury to the dignity of that person. 

One of the errors commonly encountered is the flipping of what is good into something mislabeled as “bad” and therefore better discarded as burdensome or even injurious.

For one example, to accuse the Church of placing “barriers” between souls and salvation is a calumny when, in fact, it is the moral truth which the Church teaches that helps individuals to overcome the barriers to accessing grace, which their own freely chosen actions have frustrated.

The sacrament of Confession is both the witness box of truth and the tribunal of infinite mercy. Misrepresenting the sacrament instituted by Christ to free souls from the ultimate bondage to sin is a tremendous calumny. Against God Himself.

The methodology of deconstructing Church teaching on faith and morals then quickly follows upon this artificial catalyst of change.

The so-called “wise” among us are no longer exercising the sobriety of faith unto salvation. They have become in their own minds “wiser,” puffed-up by pride in “conformity to this world.”

“I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercy of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, pleasing unto God, your reasonable service.

“And be not conformed to this world; but be reformed in the newness of your mind, that you may prove what is the good, and the acceptable, and the perfect will of God.

“For I say, by the grace that is given me, to all that are among you, not to be more wise than it behoveth to be wise, but to be wise unto sobriety, and according as God hath divided to every one the measure of faith” (Rom. 12:1-3).

Holiness is found also in chastity, living the new life of grace by presenting body and soul as a “living sacrifice” to God. The attempt to approve and even bless sexual sin is an anti-Gospel that inverts and overturns chastity, necessary for everyone who would be saved.

Those who reject this truth compound confusion and encourage sin. What is the answer?

We have all we need for salvation in our sacred tradition handed down in the Church. Let us embrace and teach it all the more. Each has his or her own role as the Scriptures teach:

“For as in one body we have many members, but all the members have not the same office:

“So we being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

“And having different gifts, according to the grace that is given us, either prophecy, to be used according to the rule of faith;

“Or ministry, in ministering; or he that teacheth, in doctrine;

“He that exhorteth, in exhorting; he that giveth, with simplicity; he that ruleth, with carefulness; he that sheweth mercy, with cheerfulness” (Rom. 12:4-8).

Our Lord Jesus is King of love and Shepherd. There is never any internal incoherence or distress for those who wholly embrace His way of salvation in the Church.

As we have done so we shall do. Against the destructive fires of heresy we shall fight with the fire of love: love for our Lord and the freeing truths of salvation, bringing release for all who are imprisoned by error and sin.

“Let love be without dissimulation. Hating that which is evil, cleaving to that which is good. Loving one another with the charity of brotherhood, with honour preventing one another. In carefulness not slothful. In spirit fervent. Serving the Lord. Rejoicing in hope. Patient in tribulation. Instant in prayer.

“Communicating to the necessities of the saints. Pursuing hospitality. Bless them that persecute you: bless, and curse not.

“Rejoice with them that rejoice; weep with them that weep. Being of one mind one towards another. Not minding high things, but consenting to the humble. Be not wise in your own conceits” (Rom. 12:9-16).

Thank you for reading and praised be Jesus Christ, our King, now and forever.

The Shepherds At The Birth Of Christ: Their Significance And Lessons For Our Faith Journey

By FR. RICHARD D. BRETON

Each year we gather around the Christmas Creche as we contemplate the gift of our Incarnate Lord. We see Mary and Joseph, the child Jesus, the Magi pagans from the east, and the shepherds. These individuals participated in the first moments of the incarnate life of the newborn Savior, and yet do we really understand the significance they participated in the plan of our salvation history? Today, as we celebrate the newborn child of Bethlehem, let us reflect on the role the shepherds played in God’s unfolding plan. 

The story of the shepherds at the birth of Christ is a poignant narrative in the Nativity account that often draws admiration for its simplicity and depth. Found in the Gospel of Luke, these humble individuals were among the first to receive the glorious news of Christ’s birth, making their role essential in the broader understanding of God’s redemptive plan. Exploring the theological and spiritual importance of the shepherds can assist us in understanding how their experience serves as a guide for living out our faith today.

The shepherds were ordinary, working-class individuals, often marginalized in their society. The shepherds’ work required long hours in the fields, keeping watch over their flocks, far removed from the political and religious elite of their time. Despite their lowly status, they became part of the most profound moments in salvation history. When the angel of the Lord appeared to them, bringing the good news of great joy, it emphasized a vital truth: God’s message is for all people, regardless of status or position. This intentional selection of shepherds underscores the inclusive nature of God’s kingdom. Jesus later taught that, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:3). By revealing Christ’s birth to the shepherds, God demonstrated His preference for the humble and lowly, aligning with His promise to uplift the meek and bring salvation to all. This teaches us that no matter our social standing, we are all equally precious in God’s sight and invited to partake in His divine plan of salvation.

The angel’s proclamation to the shepherds was nothing short of extraordinary. The infancy narrative of Luke’s Gospel recounts this extraordinary moment: “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news that will cause great joy for all the people. Today in the town of David, a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord. This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger”  (Luke 2:10-12).

The angel’s message was profound for several reasons. First, it directly addressed the shepherds’ fear, reflecting God’s consistent call to cast aside fear, calling humanity to trust in Him. Second, it announced the arrival of the Savior, fulfilling centuries of Messianic prophecies and bringing hope to a weary world, hope that is still needed today.  The description of the Messiah as a baby wrapped in “swaddling clothes” and lying in a manger was a stark contrast to the earthly kings and rulers of the time. This imagery highlighted Christ’s humility and the accessibility that was afforded to all who sought to seek out Christ. Today, this angelic announcement reminds us of the transformative power of the Gospel. Just as the shepherds heard and responded to the good news, we, too, are called to receive God’s message with joy and share it with others.

When God reveals Himself to us, it is an invitation to participate in the salvific action of redemption.  Likewise, at the moment of the Incarnation, the shepherds were invited to be the first to see “The Word made Flesh.”The shepherds’ response to the angelic message was immediate and wholehearted: “When the angels had left them and gone into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, ‘Let’s go to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has told us about.’ So they hurried off and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby, who was lying in the manger” (Luke 2:15-16)

Their actions exemplify several key aspects of faith. First, the shepherds did not hesitate to act on the divine message. Their willingness to leave their flocks in search of the Savior demonstrates an obedience of spiritual proportions over material concerns. The shepherds were obedient to the Divine Revelation that God had manifested before their eyes. Second, the importance of the different people gathered at the Nativity shows the communicable aspect of our faith. The shepherds acted together, encouraging one another in their journey. This illustrates the importance of fellowship and our shared faith in seeking God. Third, in all the direct moments of divine revelation there exists an urgency to act. The shepherds’ decision to “hurry off” to Bethlehem reflects the zeal and passion with which we should pursue God’s presence in our lives. This response to Christ serves as a model for us to follow. Like the shepherds, we are called to respond promptly to God’s call, to seek Him earnestly, and to do so in the company of our brothers and sisters in Christ. 

After encountering the Christ child, the shepherds became the first evangelists of the Gospel: “When they had seen him, they spread the word concerning what had been told them about this child, and all who heard it were amazed at what the shepherds said to them” (Luke 2:17-18).Their transformation from ordinary shepherds to heralds of the Messiah is significant. Despite their humble status, they boldly proclaimed the good news, becoming instruments of God’s revelation to others. This highlights the universality of the call to evangelize. Sharing the Gospel is not reserved for the learned or the clergy, but is a privilege and responsibility for all who have experienced the love of Christ. The shepherds remind us that we don’t need extensive theological training or high social standing to share our faith.

The story of the shepherds offers profound lessons that can guide us in our walk of faith and enable us to share with others.   

Humility and openness to God is important. Just as the shepherds were open to receiving the angelic message, we must cultivate humility and openness to hear God’s voice in our lives and listen to where He is calling us to follow. 

Trusting in God’s promise of a share in everlasting life is essential. The shepherds believed the angelic message without hesitation, teaching us to trust in God’s promises even when they challenge our understanding. 

Our faith calls us to act. In fact, at the end of each Mass we are instructed to go out into the world and live what we have experienced through our encounter with Christ in the Eucharist. Immediately the shepherds respond in seeking Jesus by just going. This illustrates that faith requires action. It’s not enough to hear or believe; we must actively pursue God’s will in our lives.

Being joyful witnesses of our encounters with Christ is necessary to lead others to the child of Bethlehem.  We can become grinches in how we share the example of our faith. The shepherds, however, shared their experience as the first witnesses of the Incarnation joyfully, reminding us that our faith is not meant to be private but shared with those around us. 

One of the most beautiful aspects of the shepherds’ story is that they encountered Christ in the most ordinary of settings — a stable. This mirrors the reality that God often reveals Himself in the everyday moments of our lives. We don’t need grand signs or miraculous events to experience His presence. By cultivating awareness and gratitude, we can recognize God’s hand in the seemingly mundane aspects of life. The shepherds’ journey — from tending their flocks to witnessing the Savior’s birth and sharing the good news — illustrates the transformative power of faith. Their lives were forever changed by their encounter with Christ, and they became part of the unfolding story of salvation. Similarly, living our faith should not be static but dynamic, leading toward a transformation in how we live, think, and interact with others. Like the shepherds, we are invited to leave behind our old familiar manner of life, and step into the extraordinary moments God reveals for us each day.

The shepherds’ presence at the birth of Christ represents the beauty of God’s love for all and the power that our faith plays in the joy of sharing the Gospel. Their humble beginnings and profound response to God’s revelation offer timeless lessons for believers. As we reflect on their story, we are reminded that the journey of faith is one of humility, trust, and conversion. 

Like the shepherds, may we always be ready to respond to God’s call, seek His presence with urgency, and share the good news with those around us. By doing so, we honor the profound meaning the shepherds played in the plan of our salvation. 

As we gaze upon the nativity this Christmas and see the shepherds, may we continue the timeless work they began in proclaiming Christ’s love to the world.

May all of our readers have a blessed and holy Christmas. Know that each of you will have a special place in my heart as I celebrate my Christmas Masses. Merry Christmas!

A Blessed Thanksgiving To All

By CHRISTOPHER MANION

We’ll all be celebrating Thanksgiving come Thursday, and clearly there’s a lot to be thankful for. The country certainly celebrated. For more than a fortnight, America has been peaceful. The transition to the second Trump Administration is going smoothly, with the usual suspects supplying the necessary chatter.

Yes, America has a lot to be thankful for, and so do our shepherds. Their border state “charities” alone have received over half a billion taxpayer dollars a year under Joe Biden. They also received some $3.5 billion in 2020-2021 in COVID Relief Funds due to an “unprecedented exemption,” the AP reports.

Our bishops know all this, of course, but they don’t like to be asked about it. Perhaps that’s why, at their annual meeting a couple of weeks ago, they didn’t bother to thank the voters for sending “Catholic Joe” Biden and his “abortion czar” Kamala Harris to the dustbin.

Instead, they expressed fear that Donald Trump could cut their border funding. Of course, they didn’t put it that way. When addressing the USCCB’s immigration programs, bishops don’t mention the government money. Instead, they routinely insist that their position is Magisterial — “the Catholic Church teaches”; that claim apparently gives them grounds to insult their critics with the usual epithets. 

And they’re pretty nervous about it. When members of Congress inquired into the spending of taxpayer dollars by the border operations of Catholic Charities last fall, New York Timothy Cardinal Dolan simply branded them as “bigots.” 

Apparently, requesting the possible misappropriation of taxpayer funds constitutes a violation of “religious freedom.”

Does that mean that putting the “Catholic” label on a federal grant might be construed as a “license to steal?”

Of course not. But as Catholic Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM) once told me, the bishops might well brand any inquiry into that spending as an “attack [on] the Catholic Church.”

But let’s look at the bright side.

What Ever Happened To Gratitude?

“In all circumstances give thanks, for this is the will of God for you in Christ Jesus” (1 Thes. 5:18).

“St. Augustine taught: Gratitude is the beginning of faith. When we’re grateful to God, we’re people of faith and generosity. Happy Thanksgiving!” — Timothy Cardinal Dolan, Archbishop of New York, Thanksgiving 2013

Some 50 years ago, Dr. Karl Menninger penned a tome with an intriguing title: “What Ever Became of Sin?” Sin was something everyone knew about, of course, but suddenly no one was talking about it. And Menniger wondered why.

Today, it’s fair to ask: whatever happened to gratitude?

Bishop Michael Sis of San Angelo wrote last year about the ongoing habit of gratitude: “Gratitude is more than a one-time response to a one-time gift, it is a virtue that is learned, strengthened and perfected over the course of a lifetime.

“Gratitude is not just a spontaneous feeling that comes over us,” he writes. “Gratitude is a choice we make, an act of the will. We choose to be grateful. We’re not born grateful. We have to learn it. This is why parents have to teach their children, constantly reminding them to say ‘thank you.’

“St. Paul expresses this beautifully in Colossians 3:15-17,” Bishop Sis continues: “Be thankful. Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, … singing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God. And whatever you do, in word or in deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.”

In Through the Eye of a Needle, Peter Brown describes “euergetism — the practice of the wealthy to distribute part of their wealth to the community.” Its purpose “was to gain glory, honor, and gratitude — pompous and prideful.

“…[G]iving to the poor tended to be presented as an act of altruism in its purest and most challenging form. We should not underestimate the imaginative impact of such altruism. Late Roman society (like any other ancient society) was a world held together at every level by intense networks of reciprocal gifts. These ranged from the friendly exchange of services in neighborhood associations to the euphoric dialogue between civic benefactors and their “people,” by which the gift of civic pleasures was instantly repaid by the countergift of honor and acclaim. It was a world that appeared to be ruled by iron laws of reciprocity,” Brown writes.

In his Summa Theologica, St. Thomas Aquinas asks, “Whether thankfulness is a virtue, distinct from the other virtues?”

Dr. Michael Austin explains: “For him, the answer is yes, because thankfulness is ‘a special part of justice.’ Giving thanks to our benefactors, those who have given us a particular and personal favor, is an issue of obligation, or justice. We owe gratitude to them, and this is different from the related virtues of religion (owed to God), piety (owed to parents), and observance (owed to those who excel in dignity). We are left with thankfulness as a virtue distinct from these related excellences of character. Thankfulness, or gratitude, is a matter of justice.”

Aquinas continues: “Accordingly, since what we owe God, or our father, or a person excelling in dignity, is not the same as what we owe a benefactor from whom we have received some particular favor, it follows that after religion, whereby we pay God due worship, and piety, whereby we worship our parents, and observance, whereby we worship persons excelling in dignity, there is thankfulness or gratitude, whereby we give thanks to our benefactors” [ST II-II, Q. 106, (1)].

We must give thanks, then, to our benefactors. But how?

“Now it is evident that a benefactor, as such, is cause of the beneficiary. Hence the natural order requires that he who has received a favor should, by repaying the favor, turn to his benefactor according to the mode of each. And, as stated above with regard to a father, a man owes his benefactor, as such, honor and reverence, since the latter stands to him in the relation of principle; but accidentally he owes him assistance or support, if he need it” [ST II-II, 106 (3)].

Whom Do We Thank? And How?

Nobles in fifth-century Rome practiced generosity “to gain glory, honor, and gratitude — pompous and prideful.”

Could that be possible today? Of course, back then, at least it was their money. But today?

Could our politicians today be handing out billions of someone else’s money to gain glory, honor, and gratitude? Are they, too, pompous and prideful?

And what about our bishops? It’s not their money, either.

Do the politicians ever thank the taxpayers for our money that they use?

And whom should the bishops be grateful to when they spend it? The politicians, of course; they’re certainly pompous and prideful.

Imagine José, an illegal immigrant who just succeeded to cross the border into Texas. He’s so fortunate — the local Catholic bishop is there to greet him!

“Thank you, thank you, Your Excellency,” says the ebullient traveler.

How should the bishop respond?

“You’re welcome?”

Or, “Oh my goodness, don’t thank me, it’s not my money we’re spending on you, it’s the government’s.”

So he should thank Joe Biden?

Maybe somewhere José will meet a bishop who tells him, “No, José, thank the American taxpayer. It’s not our money, and it’s not Joe Biden’s money either. It belongs to the American taxpayer.”

Maybe some day our bishops will even muster the gratitude to thank us themselves.

Just maybe.

Trump Victory: Catholics Once Again Welcome In White House

By FR. KEVIN M. CUSICK

This country has dodged a bullet with the least qualified and most radically pro-abortion and infanticide candidates in history now, we may hope and pray, both permanently sidelined from the country’s highest offices and any possible future political life.

And the most anti-Catholic as well. Harris snubbed the Al Smith dinner in a much-publicized political and religious blunder, which may have inevitably served to draw further attention on the part of less aware voters to her long-simmering hostility toward the Church.

A new and more intense religious persecution on the horizon was predictable with Harris’ public avowal to forbid any religious carve-outs to her sweeping anti-family, anti-life, anti-God agenda.

So, many Catholics voted faith this time around, and Trump was indeed the “lesser evil,” by a long shot.

What will be different? There will be problems, as there always are, this being politics and not perfection.

The parade of White House heretic Catholic stand-ins will no longer be welcome. The real Catholics surrounding the Trump team will make sure of that. And the publicity surrounding the longstanding Biden scandal of a sitting president radically promoting abortion while receiving Communion is now over. The most damaging factor in American Catholic life will now, we can hope, be largely out of the public eye.

Nothing is more toxic to Catholic belief in both the non-negotiability of the pro-life teachings and the real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist than constant exposure to the images of the most prominent American who is both aggressively pro-abortion and LGBTQ regularly receiving the Eucharist.

Without a peep from our bishops.

Weak bishops, who falsely believe they have the option of remaining silent in the face of public scandal by a member of the flock, have enabled the pastoral disaster all along. God has removed the embarrassment of the lack of leadership and vigorous defense of the Kingship of Christ. Vox populi, vox Dei.

This is yet another blot on the Church that traces back to McCarrick, who concealed and lied about a letter from Benedict XVI which demanded that bishops do their job by denying reception of the Eucharist to politicians and other public officials who support and enable abortion in their roles in public life.

Catholics and our authentic message of faith and morals will now once again be welcome in the White House. The Catholic vice president-elect publicly proclaims Jesus Christ is King. It remains to be seen how he will negotiate the balance between following his faith honestly and wholeheartedly and the official Republican Reaganesque compromise of the pro-life platform.

Removing restrictions on abortion for “rape, incest and the life of the mother,” although appearing on the surface to be compassionate toward women who are, in some cases, undoubtedly in distress after extreme trauma, yet approves all the same of the premeditated taking of the innocent life of a preborn boy or girl.

Good news came out of Florida also this election day as the current abortion restrictions remain in place. In many other locations the lives of preborn children are still unjustly treated, irrationally and unscientifically, as simply another disposable organ in the mother’s body.

We saw with this election cycle that the prolife vote remains a force also in Nebraska and South Dakota where amendments to remove restriction or place abortion in the state constitutions failed. In places like Maryland, alas, the slide into greater evil seems bottomless. That state, named for Our Lady no less, voted to enshrine a “right” to legally execute unborn children in the state constitution. May the Lord have mercy on what is increasingly becoming a mid-Atlantic killing mecca.

This election, as many observers have already noted, was a rebuke to the globalists in the Church as well to those with their hands on the levers of political power. It was a pro-life, pro-family, pro-God red wave that drew in voters from across the spectrum. It may also have been a return to more honest voting procedures, with network commentators claiming that the disappearance of millions of urban Democratic voters was simply a result of Harris “underperforming” in comparison with Biden four years ago. It actually might be that less people who are dead or never existed aren’t voting this time.

The shenanigans in the Church, violating prohibitions on promotion of a candidate by name, were gross on the Democratic side. Extraordinary ministers at a D.C. Catholic parish wore Harris t-shirts while distributing the Eucharist at Mass, with the pastor proudly looking on as seen in a widely posted photo. No consequences. We all know the swift “justice” and leftist vengeance that would be visited upon any priest caught with a MAGA hat. Priests in cassocks and clerics have already been widely pilloried for their presence at Trump rallies.

Vatican II abuses, like EMHCs, have hugely succeeded in planting heretics in positions of permanent prominence in parishes all over America. Just one more reason to return to the sanity of removing lay people from the sanctuary with vested ministers only serving the sacred liturgy.

I gladly attended the second Butler rally in my cassock. Priests should always be present with their people in all the circumstances of life. This is one of the signs in the Church of the Kingship of Christ.

This is a historic political comeback of a man who was persecuted in almost every imaginable way, to include two assassination attempts as well as gratuitous lawfare, to be only the second in history after Grover Cleveland elected to a second term four years later.

Trump will be president during our 250^th anniversary on July 4, 2026, of the 250^th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Let us pray it will mean a renewed independence also for the Church to freely preach and teach the truth so that Christ will reign in all hearts and minds.

Christ’s reign is denied while the bishops cower behind staff or the USCCB instead of speaking out whenever necessary to defend the faith and save souls as the divinely appointed shepherds of their flocks. They are gelded as long as they cushion the financial shock of declining Mass attendance and offertory amounts by seeking government funding that muzzles them in matters of faith and morals. They must choose whom they will follow: God or Mammon.

The kingship of Christ is denied and blasphemed wherever and whenever His sacred image and likeness in any human person is violated by the great crime and injustice of abortion. Abortion is murder. When all Catholics proclaim and live this non-negotiable truth we might begin to turn this nation around to God.

Pray that President-elect Trump will be open to the whole pro-life message and the truth that it is barbaric to execute an unborn boy or girl because he or she, through no fault of his or her own, has a rapist or other criminal for a parent.

One of our US cardinals released a post-election message recognizing that some reacted to the results by breathing a sigh of relief. Count me among them. I’m puzzled, though as to whom he refers when also mentioning there are others who are experiencing “anxiety” as a result. Who are these anxious citizens who will now experience greater economic prosperity and national security?

Or are they in fact the heretics in our midst who have undermined God and souls for many years under the guise of mere political liberalism? If so, a little anxiety might do them some good. Perhaps they will now examine their consciences and come out a little more Catholic on the other side.

Thank you for reading and praised be Jesus Christ our King, now and forever.

apriestlife.blogspot.com

Is It A Virtue To Have An Open Mind?

By DR. DONALD DEMARCO

A writer does not need to look very far to find grist for the mill. If he has an open mind he will find abundant opportunities to ply his trade. But if his mind remains open and never closes on anything worth communicating, he betrays his vocation. If one is open for business, he does want to close a sale or two.

I was in a drug store waiting for a prescription to be filled. This gave me time to roam the aisles to see if anything else tempted my pocketbook. I came upon an elaborate Halloween display. A row of ghoulish-looking talking heads caught my attention. I activated the voice box of one of them and listened to its eerie warning: “Don’t let your mind be so open that your brains fall out.” This grim annunciation was punctuated by several seconds of sardonic laughter.

Here was wisdom from a dummy that had something important to say to my students who, in general, were proud of being open-minded. But their affection for keeping their minds open was accompanied by their fear of ever closing it. I have always taught that the first lesson in philosophy is that the human brain should be activated.

The Halloween message is a paraphrase of something that Arthur Hays Sulzberger, publisher of The New York Times from 1935-61, once said: “I believe in an open mind, but not so open that your brains fall out.” Sulzberger would be amused to learn that his esteemed vehicle of communication has now shifted from the print medium to talking Halloween heads. His point is perennial. The purpose of looking is finding. The fulfillment of being open is to discover something worth having.

Allan Bloom wrote his best-seller, The Closing of the American Mind, to explain how having a perpetually open mind is equivalent to having no mind at all. There is no education without truth, which is something that the persistently open mind never attains. Being told in the classroom that the mind works only halfway is to immobilize the brain or, simply, to “close” it. Someone once said, “a diplomat is a man who says you have an open mind, instead of telling you that you have a hole in your head.” The classroom, however, should not be an arena for diplomacy. Truth may make a person uncomfortable, but there can be no education without it.

 “Keep an open mind” has become a mantra for those of a liberal persuasion. It is an attitude, however, that yields no fruit. Truth, accordingly, becomes undiscoverable, and the very point of being open is meaningless. It is one thing to be independent, but one should not be independent of what he needs. Phyllis McGinley was not impressed by the person who boasted of an open mind:

“So open was his mind, so wide

To welcome winds from every side

That public weather took dominion,

Sweeping him bare of all opinion.”

The human mind has not completed its natural function while remaining in the state of openness. It is only when it closes itself on something true or good or right that it has completed the activity for which it was created.

A door should open to let one in, and close to keep others out. The mouth must open and close in order for eating to take place. The hand opens to grasp, closes to release. Eyelids open so that one can see, close so that one can sleep. Life is dyadic, a system of opening and closing. So too, the mind should close on what is worth keeping. 

Sir Thomas Beecham once defined great music as, “That which penetrates the ear with facility and leaves the memory with difficulty.” “Magical music,” he added, “never leaves the memory.” We are open to good music, and when we come upon it, we want to keep it. Good music finds its home in the listener. 

We want to close on what we find to be beautiful. And if the word “close’ is problematic, it can be replaced by welcome, accept, enjoy, or treasure. Good music ultimately belongs in the mind and heart of the listener, just as truth belongs in the mind.

There is an unfounded fear of knowing the truth of anything. The fear is to appear proud or presumptuous.  This fear is unwarranted because a person who claims to know any truth must, in humility, recognize that the acquisition of truth does not make him superior but gives him the responsibility to profess it. The Catholic Church is both the teacher and guardian of truth. But it is equally zealous in promoting the virtues of humility and gratitude.  No one likes a show-off. But to deny that truth can be known is to lapse into cowardice. Truth can be known, humility and gratitude can be realized.

Ray Bradbury wrote his 1953 novella, Fahrenheit 451, to show how foolish it is to avoid knowing anything for fear of appearing superior or inferior. In the story, Fireman Guy Montag holds up a copy of Aristotle’s Ethics and explains that anyone who reads this book must feel superior for having read it. Therefore, he explains, all books must be burned so that equality among people can be preserved. An egalitarian world, however, is a dystopian world.

Having an open mind is half a virtue. And the half virtues can do more damage than a vice that has no claim to virtue. The other half of the virtue is closing the mind on what is honestly perceived to be true. One can make mistakes, but the pursuit of truth is an adventure that none of us should ever shun.