Lying to the Catholics...again.

"He that gathereth treasures by a lying tongue, is vain and foolish, and shall stumble upon the snares of death" Proverbs 21:6

*******

Get informed, take responsibility for your vote. Catholics do not have the luxury of  "sitting this one out" --you have a duty before God to make an informed and responsible vote. No excuses.

"It is necessary that all participate, according to his position and role, in promoting the common good. This is inherent in the dignity of the human person ... As far as possible citizens should take an active part in public life" (CCC nos. 1913-1915).

*******

Ten Ways Catholic Voters Will Be Misled in 2012

By Deal W. Hudson & Matt Smith

1. In spite of the new "Introduction" to "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship," the bishops’ document will be cherry-picked and repackaged into sound bites to justify voting for a candidate who supports abortion and same-sex marriage.

2. Pro-life Catholics will be labeled as "single issue voters" who don't care about the larger social teaching of the Church, especially concern for the poor and vulnerable.

3. The budget passed by the House of Representatives, led by Rep. Paul Ryan (R, WI-01), a Catholic, will be relentlessly attacked as not caring about the poor because it proposed cuts and spending freezes to reduce the growing U.S. deficit that is hurting the economy.

4. "Progressive" Catholic groups will produce polling that supposedly shows Catholics disagree with Church teaching on the sanctity of life and marriage, implying those who agree are in the minority and "behind the times."

5. Catholic politicians and leaders who support abortion and same-sex marriage will not be termed "dissenters" or "liberals" but "progressives" in order to make them sound more attractive to independent voters.

6. Catholic voters will be told the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obama-care) did not contain federal funding for abortion.

7. Catholic voters will be told the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obama-care) does not pose a threat to religious liberty, for example, the conscience of a Catholic health care worker.

8. Anyone supporting state collective bargaining reforms with public-sector unions, such as Wisconsin, is ignoring the importance of worker's rights in Catholic social teaching.

9. Those Catholics who opposed President Bush and Senator McCain over Operation Iraqi Freedom will not make the same argument against Obama who increased the U.S. military in Afghanistan and the use of drone aircraft to perform executions.

10. The issue of immigration will be elevated to a level of importance equal to abortion and marriage with the only acceptable 'Catholic' position being support for specific pieces of legislation such as the 'DREAM Act' (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors).

St. Michael the Archangel

Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our protection against the malice and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him we humbly pray; and do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly host, by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan and all evil spirits who wander through the world for the ruin of souls. Amen.

Sáncte Míchael Archángele, defénde nos in proélio, cóntra nequítiam et insídias diáboli ésto præsídium. Ímperet ílli Déus, súpplices deprecámur: tuque, prínceps milítiæ cæléstis, Sátanam aliósque spíritus malígnos, qui ad perditiónem animárum pervagántur in múndo, divína virtúte, in inférnum detrúde. Ámen

The Feast of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin (May 31st)

Sometimes less fully catechized Catholics confuse the Annunciation with the Visitation. They are two separate events. During the Annunciation the Archangel Gabriel came to Mary and announced that she would become the mother of Jesus Christ--Gabriel came to "announce". During the visitation, Mary came to help her older cousin Elizabeth during the later part of her pregnancy--Mary came to "visit"

                   *************************************

The Holy Gospel according to Luke 1: 39-55

During those days Mary set out and traveled to the hill country in haste to a town of Judah,

where she entered the house of Zechariah and greeted Elizabeth.  

When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the infant leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth, filled with the holy Spirit, cried out in a loud voice and said, "Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb.  

And how does this happen to me, that the mother of my Lord ¹⁴ should come to me?  

For at the moment the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy.  

Blessed are you who believed ¹⁵ that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled."  

And Mary said: ¹⁶ "My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord;  

my spirit rejoices in God my savior.  

For he has looked upon his handmaid's lowliness; behold, from now on will all ages call me blessed.

The Mighty One has done great things for me, and holy is his name.  

His mercy is from age to age to those who fear him.  

He has shown might with his arm, dispersed the arrogant of mind and heart.

He has thrown down the rulers from their thrones but lifted up the lowly.  

The hungry he has filled with good things; the rich he has sent away empty.

He has helped Israel his servant, remembering his mercy,  

according to his promise to our fathers, to Abraham and to his descendants forever."

****************************************

You know what is really cool? In that section of the gospel is where Catholics derive two of my very favorite Catholic prayers, the Hail Mary and the Magnificat.

Look:

"Hail Mary, full of grace the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus..." See? That is nothing more than what Elizabeth said to her younger cousin when the child within her womb leapt for joy, as John recognized his Savior, Jesus Christ. The Hail Mary is one of the prayers Catholics pray during our Rosary--it is not a spell or incantation, it is a prayer. 

Greg Erlandson says this about the Magnificat

"The Visitation is also the occasion for Mary’s great prayer, the Magnificat. This prayer is treasured by a wide variety of Catholics because it is an eloquent articulation of the Catholic belief in the dignity of all people and the Gospel injunction to help the weakest among us, uniting the pro-life and social-justice wings of our sometimes divided Church.
This May 31, pray for all women who are struggling with pregnancies. Pray that God gives them strength to protect the life they bear in their wombs. And while you are at it, make a donation to an aid organization that provides assistance to unwed mothers."

Two women, both of them endangered by the tiny lives they carried within their wombs, Elizabeth who was advanced in years and Mary, unwed in a society who stoned women for adultery. Courage. Faith. Love.

How the Catholic Church Handles Pedophila Cases

PROMOTER OF JUSTICE AT DOCTRINE OF FAITH ON PAEDOPHILIA

VATICAN CITY, 13 MAR 2010 (VIS) - Given below is the text of an interview, published today by the Italian newspaper "Avvenire", with Msgr. Charles J. Scicluna, promoter of justice of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, concerning the investigative and judicial activities of that dicastery in cases of "delicta graviora", which include the crime of paedophilia committed by members of the clergy:

Msgr. Charles J. Scicluna is the "promoter of justice" of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. He is effectively the prosecutor of the tribunal of the former Holy Office, whose job it is to investigate what are known as "delicta graviora"; i.e., the crimes which the Catholic Church considers as being the most serious of all: crimes against the Eucharist and against the sanctity of the Sacrament of Penance, and crimes against the sixth Commandment ("thou shall not commit impure acts") committed by a cleric against a person under the age of eighteen. These crimes, in a "Motu Proprio" of 2001, "Sacramentum sanctitatis tutela", come under the competency of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. In effect, it is the "promoter of justice" who deals with, among other things, the terrible question of priests accused of paedophilia, which are periodically highlighted in the mass media. Msgr. Scicluna, an affable and polite Maltese, has the reputation of scrupulously carrying out the tasks entrusted to him without deferring to anyone.

Question: Monsignor, you have the reputation of being "tough", yet the Catholic Church is systematically accused of being accommodating towards "paedophile priests".

Answer: It may be that in the past - perhaps also out of a misdirected desire to protect the good name of the institution - some bishops were, in practice, too indulgent towards this sad phenomenon. And I say in practice because, in principle, the condemnation of this kind of crime has always been firm and unequivocal. Suffice it to recall, to limit ourselves just to last century, the famous Instruction "Crimen sollicitationis" of 1922.

Q: Wasn't that from 1962?

A: No, the first edition dates back to the pontificate of Pius XI. Then, with Blessed John XXIII, the Holy Office issued a new edition for the Council Fathers, but only two thousand copies were printed, which were not enough, and so distribution was postponed sine die. In any case, these were procedural norms to be followed in cases of solicitation during confession, and of other more serious sexually-motivated crimes such as the sexual abuse of minors.

Q: Norms which, however, recommended secrecy...

A: A poor English translation of that text has led people to think that the Holy See imposed secrecy in order to hide the facts. But this was not so. Secrecy during the investigative phase served to protect the good name of all the people involved; first and foremost, the victims themselves, then the accused priests who have the right - as everyone does - to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. The Church does not like showcase justice. Norms on sexual abuse have never been understood as a ban on denouncing the crimes to the civil authorities.

Q: Nonetheless, that document is periodically cited to accuse the current Pontiff of having been - when he was prefect of the former Holy Office - objectively responsible for a Holy See policy of covering up the facts...

A: That accusation is false and calumnious. On this subject I would like to highlight a number of facts. Between 1975 and 1985 I do not believe that any cases of paedophilia committed by priests were brought to the attention of our Congregation. Moreover, following the promulgation of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, there was a period of uncertainty as to which of the "delicta graviora" were reserved to the competency of this dicastery. Only with the 2001 "Motu Proprio" did the crime of paedophilia again become our exclusive remit. From that moment Cardinal Ratzinger displayed great wisdom and firmness in handling those cases, also demonstrating great courage in facing some of the most difficult and thorny cases, "sine acceptione personarum". Therefore, to accuse the current Pontiff of a cover-up is, I repeat, false and calumnious.

Q: What happens when a priest is accused of a "delictum gravius"?

A: If the accusation is well-founded the bishop has the obligation to investigate both the soundness and the subject of the accusation. If the outcome of this initial investigation is consistent, he no longer has any power to act in the matter and must refer the case to our Congregation where it is dealt with by the disciplinary office.

Q: How is that office composed?

A: Apart from myself who, being one of the superiors of the dicastery, also concern myself with other matters, there are the bureau chief Fr. Pedro Miguel Funes Diaz, seven priests and a lay lawyer who follow these cases. Other officials of the Congregation also make their own vital contribution depending upon the language and specific requirements of each case.

Q: That office has been accused of working little and slowly...

A: Those are unjustified comments. In 2003 and 2004 a great wave of cases flooded over our desks. Many of them came from the United States and concerned the past. Over recent years, thanks to God, the phenomenon has become greatly reduced, and we now seek to deal with new cases as they arise.

Q: How many have you dealt with so far?

A: Overall in the last nine years (2001-2010) we have considered accusations concerning around three thousand cases of diocesan and religious priests, which refer to crimes committed over the last fifty years.

Q: That is, then, three thousand cases of paedophile priests?

A: No, it is not correct to say that. We can say that about sixty percent of the cases chiefly involved sexual attraction towards adolescents of the same sex, another thirty percent involved heterosexual relations, and the remaining ten percent were cases of paedophilia in the true sense of the term; that is, based on sexual attraction towards prepubescent children. The cases of priests accused of paedophilia in the true sense have been about three hundred in nine years. Please don't misunderstand me, these are of course too many, but it must be recognised that the phenomenon is not as widespread as has been believed.

Q: The accused, then, are three thousand. How many have been tried and condemned?

A: Currently we can say that a full trial, penal or administrative, has taken place in twenty percent of cases, normally celebrated in the diocese of origin - always under our supervision - and only very rarely here in Rome. We do this also in order to speed up the process. In sixty percent of cases there has been no trial, above all because of the advanced age of the accused, but administrative and disciplinary provisions have been issued against them, such as the obligation not to celebrate Mass with the faithful, not to hear confession, and to live a retired life of prayer. It must be made absolutely clear that in these cases, some of which are particularly sensational and have caught the attention of the media, no absolution has taken place. It's true that there has been no formal condemnation, but if a person is obliged to a life of silence and prayer, then there must be a reason...

Q: That still leaves twenty percent of cases...

A: We can say that in ten percent of cases, the particularly serious ones in which the proof is overwhelming, the Holy Father has assumed the painful responsibility of authorising a decree of dismissal from the clerical state. This is a very serious but inevitable provision, taken though administrative channels. In the remaining ten percent of cases, it was the accused priests themselves who requested dispensation from the obligations deriving from the priesthood, requests which were promptly accepted. Those involved in these latter cases were priests found in possession of paedophile pornographic material and, for this reason, condemned by the civil authorities.

Q: Where do these three thousand cases come from?

A: Mostly from the United States which, in the years 2003-2004, represented around eighty percent of total cases. In 2009 the United States "share" had dropped to around twenty-five percent of the 223 cases reported from all over the world. Over recent years (2007-2009), the annual average of cases reported to the Congregation from around the world has been two hundred and fifty. Many countries report only one or two cases. There is, then, a growing diversity and number of countries of origin of cases, but the phenomenon itself is much reduced. It must, in fact, be borne in mind that the overall number of diocesan and religious priests in the world is four hundred thousand, although this statistic does not correspond to the perception that is created when these sad cases occupy the front pages of the newspapers.

Q: And in Italy?

A: Thus far the phenomenon does not seem to have dramatic proportions, although what worries me is a certain culture of silence which I feel is still too widespread in the country. The Italian Episcopal Conference (CEI) offers an excellent technical-juridical consultancy service for bishops who have to deal with these cases. And I am very pleased to observe the ever greater commitment being shown by Italian bishops to throw light on the cases reported to them.

Q: You said that a full trial has taken place in around twenty percent of the three thousand cases you have examined over the last nine years. Did they all end with the condemnation of the accused?

A: Many of the past trials did end with the condemnation of the accused. But there have also been cases in which the priest was declared innocent, or where the accusations were not considered to have sufficient proof. In all cases, however, not only is there an examination of the guilt or innocence of the accused priest, but also a discernment as to his fitness for public ministry.

Q: A recurring accusation made against the ecclesiastical hierarchy is that of not reporting to the civil authorities when crimes of paedophilia come to their attention.

A: In some English-speaking countries, but also in France, if bishops become aware of crimes committed by their priests outside the sacramental seal of Confession, they are obliged to report them to the judicial authorities. This is an onerous duty because the bishops are forced to make a gesture comparable to that of a father denouncing his own son. Nonetheless, our guidance in these cases is to respect the law.

Q: And what about countries where bishops do not have this legal obligation?

A: In these cases we do not force bishops to denounce their own priests, but encourage them to contact the victims and invite them to denounce the priests by whom they have been abused. Furthermore, we invite the bishops to give all spiritual - and not only spiritual - assistance to those victims. In a recent case concerning a priest condemned by a civil tribunal in Italy, it was precisely this Congregation that suggested to the plaintiffs, who had turned to us for a canonical trial, that they involve the civil authorities in the interests of victims and to avoid other crimes.

Q: A final question: is there any statue of limitation for "delicta graviora"?

A: Here you touch upon what, in my view, is a sensitive point. In the past, that is before 1889, the statue of limitations was something unknown in canon law. For the most serious crimes, it was only with the 2001 "Motu Proprio" that a statute of limitations of ten years was introduced. In accordance with these norms in cases of sexual abuse, the ten years begin from the day on which the minor reaches the age of eighteen.

Q: Is that enough?

A: Practice has shown that the limit of ten years is not enough in this kind of case, in which it would be better to return to the earlier system of "delicta graviora" not being subject to the statue of limitations. On 7 November 2002, Venerable Servant of God John Paul II granted this dicastery the power to revoke that statue of limitations, case by case following a reasoned request from individual bishops. And this revocation is normally granted.
CDF/DELICTA GRAVIORA/SCICLUNAVIS 100313 (2070)

Some Moral Clarity on Pro Abortion Politicians

Finally, we are seeing some moral clarity from our leaders in the Church. I pray this won't be the last leader to boldly speak the truth.
h/t Catholic Knight

------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Inside Catholic) - Throughout his 50-minute address, the archbishop returned again and again to the scandal of Catholic politicians who support abortion or same-sex marriage. He did not mince his words:

"It is not possible to be a practicing Catholic and to conduct oneself in this manner.""Neither Holy Communion nor funeral rites should be administered to such politicians," said Archbishop Burke. "To deny these is not a judgment of the soul, but a recognition of the scandal and its effects."With obvious reference to the Kennedy funeral, he argued that when a politician is associated "with greatly sinful acts about fundamental questions like abortion and marriage, his repentance must also be public." He added, "Anyone who grasps the gravity of what he has done will understand the need to make it public."It's not uncharitable to point out the scandal caused by these Catholic politicians. "The Church's unity is founded on speaking the truth in love. This does not destroy unity but helps to repair a breach in the life of the Church."read full story here

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, Archbishop Raymond Burke, does not mince words. You cannot be Catholic and "pro-choice" or support so-called "homosexual rights." The highest judicial authority in the Catholic Church is laying the law down with American clergy, particularly Cardinal Seán P. O'Malley of the Archdiocese of Boston, after having permitted a "Catholic" funeral for the pro-abortion, pro-gay-rights Senator Ted Kennedy.

It's about time! I'm afraid however, it's going to take a lot more then speeches. The Holy Father is going to have to start implementing disciplinary action, reassignments, and early retirements for many bishops in the United States. Cardinal O'Malley is just the tip of the iceberg.

The Catholic Knight did not mince words on this matter either. In a previous entry (see here) I railed against the Kennedy funeral scandal, pointing out why it was wrong, in a manner similar to the recent argument used by Archbishop Burke. I love it when my positions are vindicated by Prefects within the Vatican!
http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/2009/09/vatican-official-kennedy-funeral.html

True Catholic Social Teaching

From American Thinker

September 06, 2009
ObamaCare and Catholic social teachingBy Mark Wauk

The 9/2/09 issue of the Wall Street Journal, in its Notable and Quotable feature, calls attention to an important article that Roman Catholic Bishop R. Walker Nickless of Sioux City, Iowa, published in his diocesan newspaper on the subject of health care and health care reform. The article is important for two reasons: first, because there has been and continues to be a certain amount of confusion regarding Catholic social teaching as it affects health care; second, because Bishop Nickless goes to great lengths to base his discussion on principles, and not merely on tactical considerations.

Bishop Nickless begins by noting the importance of the ongoing debate over proposed reforms of our health care system:
"There is much at stake in this political struggle, and also much confusion and inaccurate information being thrown around. My brother bishops have described some clear "goal-posts" to mark out what is acceptable reform, and what must be rejected. First and most important, the Church will not accept any legislation that mandates coverage, public or private, for abortion, euthanasia, or embryonic stem-cell research."

After further noting particular concerncs for Catholic hospitals and health care professionals -- the possibility that the Government would attempt to force them to act in violation of Catholic teaching as well as in violation of their consciences--Bishop Nickless concludes:
"A so-called reform that imposes these evils on us would be far worse than keeping the health care system we now have."

However, Bishop Nickless doesn't stop here. He goes on to enunciate several additional considerations of great importance. The bishop's second point gets to the heart of the role that government should play in health care:
"Second, the Catholic Church does not teach that "health care" as such, without distinction, is a natural right. The "natural right" of health care is the divine bounty of food, water, and air without which all of us quickly die. This bounty comes from God directly. None of us own it, and none of us can morally withhold it from others. The remainder of health care is a political, not a natural, right, because it comes from our human efforts, creativity, and compassion. As a political right, health care should be apportioned according to need, not ability to pay or to benefit from the care. We reject the rationing of care. Those who are sickest should get the most care, regardless of age, status, or wealth. But how to do this is not self-evident. The decisions that we must collectively make about how to administer health care therefore fall under "prudential judgment."

In other words, provision of health care must ultimately rest on prudential considerations that affect an entire society. Broad assertions of generalized "rights" without reference to underlying prudential considerations are not helpful. The relevant considerations include need, but also cost. Another important prudential consideration, however, is this: who should be the main provider of health care, government or the private sector? Bishop Nickless insists that health care provision is not only not a central concern of government as such, it is also likely to introduce harmful economic and policy distortions:

"Third, in that category of prudential judgment, the Catholic Church does not teach that government should directly provide health care. Unlike a prudential concern like national defense, for which government monopolization is objectively good - it both limits violence overall and prevents the obvious abuses to which private armies are susceptible - health care should not be subject to federal monopolization.

Preserving patient choice (through a flourishing private sector) is the only way to prevent a health care monopoly from denying care arbitrarily, as we learned from HMOs in the recent past. While a government monopoly would not be motivated by profit, it would be motivated by such bureaucratic standards as quotas and defined "best procedures," which are equally beyond the influence of most citizens. The proper role of the government is to regulate the private sector, in order to foster healthy competition and to curtail abuses. Therefore any legislation that undermines the viability of the private sector is suspect."

Clearly, there is much that could be said on this score. Nevertheless, Bishop Nickless' reflections are an excellent starting point for any constructive discussion of these important issues. Bishop Nickless places his own considerations in the context of demographic considerations:

"The best way in practice to approach this balance of public and private roles is to spread the risks and costs of health care over the largest number of people. This is the principle underlying Medicaid and Medicare taxes, for example. But this principle assumes that the pool of taxable workers is sufficiently large, compared to those who draw the benefits, to be reasonably inexpensive and just. ... Without a growing population of youth, our growing population of retirees is outstripping our distribution systems. In a culture of death such as we have now, taxation to redistribute costs of medical care becomes both unjust and unsustainable."

I, personally, would suggest that further consideration needs to be given to the entire notion of taxation to redistribute costs. Obviously, this occurs in many areas of our politics: national defense, public works, etc. Just as obviously, when joined to false notions of "natural rights," and a failure to consider the human dignity that and emphasis on individual responsibility fosters, the redistributive use of taxation has led to many controversial and even "unjust" abuses of the government power to tax (my quotes refer to Bishop Nickless' words, above). The power to tax is, after all, the power to destroy, and that destruction can have not only economic consequences but moral consequences as well.

Bishop Nickless appears to assume that Medicaid and Medicare were, initially in any event, established on a sound principle. Without getting into the the particulars, which are far beyond my expertise, I think that is an area that would needs to be closely reexamined before moving on to adoption of any new reforms.That Bishop Nickless is open to such discussions, and that the considerations involved are central to Catholic social teaching, becomes apparent from the bishop's final point. That point addresses the whole issue of preventive care which, as several recent studies have shown, can actually greatly increase health care costs.

Bishop Nickless places the primary responsibility squarely on the individual:
"Fourth, preventative care is a moral obligation of the individual to God and to his or her family and loved ones, not a right to be demanded from society. The gift of life comes only from God; to spurn that gift by seriously mistreating our own health is morally wrong. The most effective preventative care for most people is essentially free - good diet, moderate exercise, and sufficient sleep. But pre-natal and neo-natal care are examples of preventative care requiring medical expertise, and therefore cost; and this sort of care should be made available to all as far as possible."

The caveat "as far as possible" is a strong indication that Bishop Nickless, in the context of Catholic social teaching, does indeed recognize that cost is an important part of the entire health care equation. No society can morally devote an endlessly increasingly portion of its resources to a poorly structured health care system, while ignoring the long term financial health of its future generations.Having enunciated these four principles and their related goals, Bishop Nickless asks the all-important question: "Will the current health care reform proposals achieve these goals?" His answer is a firm: No. Not only would all current House and Senate proposals introduce government subsidized abortion (and likely several other morally objectionable features), but these proposals would strike at the heart of private sector health care provision.

The House proposal "provides a "public insurance option" without adequate limits, so that smaller employers especially will have a financial incentive to push all their employees into this public insurance. This will effectively prevent those employees from choosing any private insurance plans. This will saddle the working classes with additional taxes for inefficient and immoral entitlements."

And the Senate proposal would also "impinge on the vitality of the private sector" through various provisions.Bishop Nickless' resounding conclusion:
"I encourage all of you to make you voice heard to our representatives in Congress. Tell them what they need to hear from us: no health care reform is better than the wrong sort of health care reform. Insist that they not permit themselves to be railroaded into the current too-costly and pro-abortion health care proposals. Insist on their support for proposals that respect the life and dignity of every human person, especially the unborn. And above all, pray for them, and for our country.

Bishop Nickless' article begins at http://www.scdiocese.org/ and continues at http://www.scdiocese.org/Stewardship/healthcare/tabid/416/Default.aspx

Anima Christi

Soul of Christ, sanctify me
Body of Christ, save me
Blood of Christ, inebriate me
Water from Christ's side, wash me
Passion of Christ, strengthen me
O good Jesus, hear me
Within Thy wounds hide me
Suffer me not to be separated from Thee
From the malicious enemy defend me
In the hour of my death call me
And bid me come unto Thee
That I may praise Thee with Thy saints
and with Thy angels
Forever and ever
Amen

I love to pray this prayer after communion. Before I kneel, I pull my veil closer around my face as though I am drawing a curtain between the outside world and my spiritual world and I begin:

"Soul of Christ sanctify me" Make me pure, make me worthy

"Body of Christ save me" I mentally reach for the hand of my Beloved, many times feeling as scared as Peter did as he began to sink beneath the waves

"Blood of Christ inebriate me" Make me drunk with your love and grace, intoxicate me, fill me with your love, Oh Lord.

"Water from Christ's side, wash me" Oh Lord, they cruelly pierced your ripped and bruised flesh. Help me to remember each time I am tempted to sin, your great sacrifice of love for me and wash away my temptations and weaknesses.

"Passion of Christ, strengthen me" Your courage and steadfastness as you struggled through the streets, carrying your own cross is an inspiration to me. I doubt I will ever be publicly scourged and crucified, so when I am tempted to complain of the trials of my life let me remember your demonstration of strength.

"O good Jesus hear me" oh my Lord, you know that I often fail you. Never turn away from my struggles, but always heed my prayers to you.

"Within Thy wounds hide me" Pull me into your bloodied wounds, hide me from my weaknesses

"Suffer me not to be separated from Thee" Please, Lord, do not loosen your grasp on me, even when I flirt with the temptations of pride, anger, lust, and hatred. Please help me to over come those weaknesses so that I will not slide away from you forever.

"From the malicious enemy defend me" Defend me from my enemies Oh Lord, I do not fear the worldly ones for they can only destroy my body. The evil one, whom our Father cast from Heaven hungrily waits for my soul and takes great delight in my failings. Defend me oh God!

"In the hour of my death call me" When my time on this earth is over, grant me a merciful death, be at my side and lead me to my eternal rest.

"And bid me come unto Thee" Take me into you, O Lord that I may be with you for all eternity.

"that I may praise Thee with Thy saints and with Thy angels" I will lift my voice in song to the greatness of the Lord. I will sing of the goodness and compassion of my God

"for ever and ever" For ever and ever I will praise you, O God.

"Amen" Amen.

Dear Mr. President

This is a snippet of a very gracious letter sent today to President Obama from Rev. Hugh W. Cleary, C.S.C.Superior of the Congregation of Holy Cross, which oversees Notre Dame, if you are a Catholic who feels abandoned by our Catholic political leaders, I encourage you to read the entire letter.

===========================================
...President Obama, you are superbly versed in the issues of our day. I have no doubt that your policy convictions are grounded in rigorous study and that all your important decisions are supported by your conscience. Therefore, through this open letter, I would like to take advantage of the occasion of your receiving an honorary degree from Notre Dame, to ask you to rethink, through prayerful wrestling with your own conscience, your stated positions on the vital "life issues" of our day, particularly in regard to abortion, embryonic forms of stem cell research and your position on the Freedom of Choice Act before Congress.

Perhaps such an impertinent request rings with insolence. I mean you neither rudeness nor disrespect. I ask you this directly because as a Catholic, in this critical area of life and death issues, I hold and promote contrary views to your own as to what is right and just for the common good of our nation. ..

...President Obama, your presence at Notre Dame, a premier Catholic institution, is regarded by many good Catholics as scandalous because of your support of abortion rights, regarded by us as an intrinsic evil. In awarding you this degree, they experience Notre Dame as undermining essential, intrinsic Catholic dogma which upholds the dignity of human life. They believe that in honoring you or in giving you a platform to speak, the University of Notre Dame is selling her soul for who knows what: perhaps, at best, for the prestige and glory of having the President of the United States on campus during his first year in office or perhaps at worst, giving an endorsement to your "anti-life policies."

I do not believe this outrage is simply a demonstration of partisan politics. I sincerely want to rejoice in your presence at Notre Dame as President of the United States. But really, can I? In all sincerity, President Obama, how are we Catholics to deal with you, or any other government leader, who upholds what we believe to be the intrinsic evil of abortion and who is willing to sign the FOCA legislation? How are we to confront Catholic leaders in your own Administration by whom we feel so abandoned? Are we to use tactics of shunning you and dismissing you as we feel shunned and dismissed? This is a far from frivolous question. Shunning seems to be the growing trend among many Catholic leaders and institutions today. It seems to be the only recourse left open. It is, of course, a tactic many politicians have used on occasion, including yourself...

...Faithful Catholics believe that the fetus, the embryo, growing in the womb is a distinct human being. We believe that the new child's mother is the guardian of her baby's life within her womb. She is offering this new creation precious hospitality, just as a Christian might give a journeying pilgrim the respite of hospitality within one's own home.

This much we know, Mr. President, in our culture, dictated by the law of the land, a newly conceived embryo is not offered the dignity and rights of an independent, innocent human being. "There is no God who condones taking the life an innocent human being." As Catholics, this much we know, abortion is taking the life of an innocent human being. Nothing will ever change that.

President Obama, would you really sign into law a bill like FOCA which would force faith-based hospitals and healthcare facilities to perform abortions? Would you deny doctors and health care professionals their most precious human freedom in choosing life?

The issue of choice in American law looms large before us: in your logic it will be lawful to choose abortion but it will be a crime to choose life. In Catholic logic one cannot choose to murder in any circumstance, even in punishment for crime. One can choose life but not death. I am not so naïve as to believe that passing such ill-advised, contemptible legislation such as FOCA will "end the culture wars" as you have stated. On the contrary it will be considered by many of us as a persecution of the Catholic Church...

...Mr. President, may I be so audacious as to suggest that you have made a mistake in your position supporting abortion rights as the law of the land. May I suggest, with all humility for I am far from perfect, that you give your conscience a fresh opportunity to be formed anew in a holy awe and reverence before human life in every form at every stage - from conception to natural death. For we are all the Children of God.

"You have a Marvelous Virgin"

Can we get a reset button now please? This administration is just one long blooper reel. Now, don't get me wrong, I don't expect someone not raised in the faith to have a complete understanding of all of the ins and outs of Catholics and their beliefs. HOWEVER, I do expect the staff around the woman to do their FREAKING homework at the very least GOOGLE the places you are going to visit. It is their job to make this woman NOT look stupid...for crying out loud, is it too much to ask that the staff of the Secretary of State be able to use a search engine...ok...this is turning into another rant. Enough said.

[CNA] During her recent visit to Mexico, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made an unexpected stop at the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe and left a bouquet of white flowers “on behalf of the American people,” after asking who painted the famous image.

The image of Our Lady of Guadalupe was miraculously imprinted by Mary on the tilma, or cloak, of St. Juan Diego in 1531. The image has numerous unexplainable phenomena, such as the appearance on Mary’s eyes of those present in the room when the tilma was opened and the image’s lack of decay.Mrs. Clinton was received on Thursday at 8:15 a.m. by the rector of the Basilica, Msgr. Diego Monroy.

Msgr. Monroy took Mrs. Clinton to the famous image of Our Lady of Guadalupe, which had been previously lowered from its usual altar for the occasion.After observing it for a while, Mrs. Clinton asked “who painted it?” to which Msgr. Monroy responded “God!”

Clinton then told Msgr. Monroy that she had previously visited the old Basilica in 1979, when the new one was still under construction. After placing a bouquet of white flowers by the image, Mrs. Clinton went to the quemador –the open air area at the Basilica where the faithful light candles- and lit a green candle.

Leaving the basilica half an hour later, Mrs. Clinton told some of the Mexicans gathered outside to greet her, “you have a marvelous virgin!”

This evening Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is set to receive the highest award given by Planned Parenthood Federation of America -- the Margaret Sanger Award, named for the organization's founder, a noted eugenicist. The award will be presented at a gala event in Houston, Texas.

My Response to Disappointed Catholics

"He garnered the majority of Catholic votes in the 2008 election, but a number of Catholic groups now say President Obama is showing a complete lack of regard for their beliefs."

Oh Reaaally? You stupid, STUPID, selfish Catholics who thought you could vote for a man who demonstrated a complete lack of regard for YOUR beliefs when he blatantly refused to help babies who survive abortion attempts are NOW surprised that he ...what somehow hasn't magically changed into the One of your dreams? Ohhh get thee behind me O foolish ones!! And now, he has signed off on embryonic stem cell research, erased conscience protection for healthcare workers, and is going to push through FOCA and you are just NOW disappointed? When Catholic hospitals close across the nation, you disappointed Catholics who voted for this man will bear that responsibility.




I have no patience at all for your handwringing and bellybutton gazing. How many of your fellow Catholic brothers and sisters begged and pleaded with you to pay attention to the facts and stop "feeling" that he would make a difference? How many times did our POPE remind you--vote for life. "America--Choose LIFE!" Pope Benedict said to us when he visited and you didn't listen, because you were so wrapped up in your self importance that you were unable to realize that the evil one was whipering into your ear..."pay no attention to that old man, you know better than he does."

"President Obama has already reached out and won the Catholic vote," Jon O'Brien, president of Catholics for Choice, said.
"That's what happened in the last election in spite of the very loud voices of some extreme uber-Catholics who really want to paint this black and white picture -- to engage us in this endless culture war," he said."

Jon O'Brien, why do you still call yourself a Catholic? Obama did not win my vote, but I guess according to you, you pathetic sycophant of evil, that I am an extreme uber-Catholic. Well, guess what...you are either Catholic or you aren't, there is NO middle ground. You either stand against the intrinsic evil of murdering innocent children or you enable the evil to continue. There is NO middle ground.

I really pray for all of my Catholic brothers and sisters--and I personally know quite a few and I pray for the person who drives that damned car with the OBAMA bumper sicker on it that I pass every Sunday in the parking lot.

I pray that you will come to realize what a grave injustice you helped bring about through your votes last fall and then step up to your responsibility to work as hard to correct the injustice as you did to create it.

The blood of thousands of slaughtered innocents demands it.

So Speaks our dear leader

“Far too often, we have seen faith wielded as a tool to divide us from one another—as an excuse for prejudice and intolerance,” President Obama says. You mean like Rev Wright does when he gives a sermon? YOU should know, you listened to them for years.

“Wars have been waged. Innocents have been slaughtered. For centuries, entire religions have been persecuted, all in the name of perceived righteousness." Really dear leader, which religion might that be? Could you mean the JEWISH people? Could you mean CATHOLICS? You do? Guess which "religion" is persecuting them TODAY? Try MUSLIM.

“There is no doubt that the very nature of faith means that some of our beliefs will never be the same. We read from different texts. We follow different edicts. We subscribe to different accounts of how we came to be here and where we are going next—and some subscribe to no faith at all." Perhaps for now, dear leader. But, we won't have that OPTION if radical jihadis succeed. Remember dear leader, they are the ones who say they will either kill or convert the non-believers?

“But no matter what we choose to believe, let us remember that there is no religion whose central tenet is hate." Are you kidding me, dear leader? Please tell me you are seriously not that naive. Please?? dear leader???

"There is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being. This much we know.”Ahhh dear leader, we can agree on this one. There is NO God who condones taking an innocent human life. Tell me dear leader, who do the jihadis give praise to, just before they send a young woman with bombs strapped to her body into a crowded market? Allah? Is that their idea of God? Sooo...if there is no God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being...and jihadis TAKE the lives of many innocent human beings, that would seem the OPPOSITE of your position about God. Soooooo..hmmm...stay with me here dear leader...I wonder who they could be praying to, really?

Second question dear leader, just which God did you pray to before you voted FOUR times to allow victims of botched abortions to suffer and die alone? FOUR times you had the chance to stop murder of the innocents and you chose to stand with the abortionists...just like the crazy jihadis who had the chance to stop the murder of innocents in a marketplace...this much we know...

An Email from the Catholic League

I am stunned and appalled...no, nevermind, not really.


CATHOLIC DEMOCRATS CHIDE POPE

On January 29, nearly 50 Catholic Democratic congressmen sent a letter to Pope Benedict XVI stating their concerns over Bishop Richard Williamson’s comments questioning the historical record on the Holocaust. The bishop belongs to the St. Pius X Society, a group which recently had its excommunication lifted by the pope. The congressmen implored the pope to denounce the bishop’s views.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue spoke to this issue today:

“The congressmen’s letter to the pope smacks of posturing and hypocrisy, and is factually wrong. They begin by saying ‘we are writing to express our deep concerns with your decision to reinstate Bishop Richard Williamson to communion with the Catholic Church….’ The fact is that the pope did not reinstate the bishop to communion with the Church—he merely lifted the excommunication of the group to which he belongs. In order for the group to be fully reinstated, it would have to express its fidelity to the teachings of the Church, as well as the norms of Vatican II. In other words, the letter is based on a false predicate.

“Facts aside, this kind of posturing is a disgrace: for American congressmen to lecture the pope about an event in which he was personally victimized, and about which he has long condemned, is nothing short of arrogant.

“The hypocrisy is mind-boggling. They beg the pope to ‘publicly state your unequivocal position on this matter so that it is clear where the Church stands….’ How ironic that most of these very same Catholics fail to speak with clarity about what the Church teaches on abortion. Of the 47 signatories, the majority have a 100 percent NARAL score (meaning they vote with the radical pro-abortion group on every issue). The leader of this group, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, never agrees with the Catholic Church on abortion—her NARAL score is 100 percent.

“One more thing: they addressed the pope not as a head of state but as a ‘spiritual leader.’ Didn’t they ever hear of respecting separation of church and state?”

Catholics who voted for Obama take note

Thank you Bishop Hermann for being so outspoken about this issue. I was appalled to see the numbers of Catholics who voted for Obama and his culture of death cronies. I am still appalled to see that Pelosi and Biden and Kerry are still receiving communion...but, they will have to answer for that one day.

"Obama is not the enemy. He needs and deserves our prayers, not our condemnation. As Catholics, we are not guiltless. It seems to me that when President Kennedy compromised Catholic teachings and accommodated political pressures in order to be elected to the highest office in the land, he set the tone for many Catholic leaders to follow and to compromise their Catholic principles to get ahead. In our Supreme Court and in our Congress, we have a plethora of so-called Catholics who are failing to live their Catholic identity. Over 50 percent of our electorate voted for a president who is one of the most pro-culture-of-death candidates from a major party to run for the highest office of the land. Yes, we can thank one-half of our Catholics for bailing out on their faith!”

I'm trying hard not to view Obama as my enemy. It makes me feel very uncomfortable to think of my president as my enemy. But, the reality is: most of his political and social views and most of his world views are completely opposite to my views. Surely, one of us is wrong? If I perceive danger from someone then shouldn't I view them as an enemy? I surely don't think of them as a friend. Perhaps that is the trouble with viewing the world in black and white...I can't see the shades of grey. But, in the fight against evil, can there be shades of grey?

“President Obama, pro-choice legislators and Planned Parenthood are not our enemies. Our enemies are the invisible forces masked behind these people … They are used by our common enemy, Satan, and his evil forces, to get us to hate so that we, too, will end up in a culture of death … We owe all of them prayers and fasting for their conversion. At one point, Gov. Reagan was California's very pro-abortion governor. Yet he became a very pro-life president. He repented and regretted the evil he supported. We must bravely witness against supporting pro-choice and pro-abortion candidates in political elections, but pray daily for their conversion.”

The point about Gov Reagan still gives me hope. But, that hope is fading fast in light of the news that congress is poised to vote for for a disgusting bill "Prevention First Act" among some of the jewels offered in this act is forcing insurance companies to fund abortifacent contraceptives. http://www.all.org/article.php?id=11701

I think for me the rest of the arguement can be summed up with this quote from the good Bishop " Until we are willing to be politically incorrect in order to be biblically correct, we will never convince anyone that our religion is worth living." Amen.

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=1780

Catholic voters guide---bump

I'm bumping this previous post up a notch or two...just in case one of your catholic relatives hasn't already sent it to you :)
Pray.Often.

Catholic voters Guide.

I don't know if any of my two or three daily readers (heh) are Catholic. But I found this video that is a basic refreshers course in how to determine which candidate is the one...pun intended. ;)

I am a Catholic...

"Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. There may be legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not... with regard to abortion and euthanasia."
- Pope Benedict XVI



*****************************************
...and for me no issue is as clear or as important as voting for life. Yep, that means I am anti-abortion. That means I am not going to be swayed by the other issues that in my opinion only serve to deflect the true debate that should be happening in this country, respect for and support for life.

If we have a culture that supports all life, then we would have no need of the fluff n stuff arguments for health care and the plethora of social programs that already exist in this country to help care for the ones among us who for whatever reason live in less than desirable circumstances.

In any case, abortion is not the answer. Abortion must not be the answer. Abortion is murder and murder is evil. What I cannot understand are all the headlines I see that state Catholics are supporting Obama in numbers higher than for Kerry. How in the hell do you get there? Or maybe hell and hell's VIP is the reason. Is this the end result of years of cafeteria Catholicism? Do you understand the difference between intrinsic evil and misguided social programs? If a candidate has ALL the right answers for healthcare, poverty, medicare but is still a supporter of abortion, then he or she is the WRONG candidate for a Catholic. If you vote for an abortionist, then you excommunicate yourself.

Did you pay attention to Obama in the video? The first thing he says he is going to do is sign into law the Freedom of Choice Act--which will immediately erase 35 years of attempts to protect the least among us, the tiny helpless unborn children. This law will strike down ALL laws that are supposed to protect the unborn, including the monstrous practice known as partial birth abortion.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/obamas_culture_of_death_and_th.html

Catholics Fight back

For Catholics, the election isn't just a vote between black and white, red state or blue state,liberal or conservative. The election is about life or death. Do we vote to protect the lives of the unborn or do we vote to elect a man who knowingly conspires to murder them? Watch the video. It's a good one. Catholic or not :)