Sunday, January 31, 2010

The origin of the St. Michael prayer

Have you ever wondered where prayers come from? Here is an excerpt from explaining the origin of this Leonine prayer, one of my favourites. Credit is due to Vir Speluncae Catholicus (the Catholic Caveman) over at for this post ideassszjaz. VSC has an awesome blog that I check out daily.

On October 13th, 1884, Pope Leo XIII had a remarkable vision. When the aged Pontiff had finished celebrating Mass in his private Vatican chapel, attended by a few Cardinals and members of the Vatican staff, he suddenly stopped at the foot of the altar. He stood there for about ten minutes, as if in a trance, his face ashen white. Then, going immediately from his chapel to his office, he composed the prayer to St Michael, with instructions it be said after all Low Masses everywhere. When asked what had happened, he explained that, as he was about to leave the foot of the altar, he suddenly heard voices – two voices, one kind and gentle, the other guttural and harsh. They seemed to come from near the tabernacle. As he listened, he heard the following conversation:

The guttural voice, the voice of Satan in his pride, boasted to Our Lord: “I can destroy your Church.”

The gentle voice of the Lord: “You can? Then go ahead and do so.”

Satan: "To do so, I need more time and more power.”

Our Lord: “How much time? How much power?”

Satan: 75 to 100 years, and a greater power over those who will give themselves over to my service.”

Our Lord: “You have the time, you will have the power. Do with them what you will.”

That was Pope Leo's vision in 1884. Satan said that he needed between 75 and 100 years. 75 years onto 1884 brings us to 1959 (incidentally, the year of my ordination!) and in the January of that year Pope John XXIII called the Second Vatican Council. Just about the first thing to come from the deliberations of the Council Fathers, which began in earnest in 1963, was the abandonment in 1964 of the Leonine Prayers, the prayers at the end of Mass which called St Michael to the aid of the Church on earth.

In the years from 1959 to 1984, judge for yourselves whether Satan has kept his promise to destroy the Lord’s Church. Of course, the Lord’s Church can never be destroyed altogether. But, ask yourself, if you are old enough to remember, were parish churches fuller in 1984 (and since) than in 1959? What happened to parish societies, like the SVP and the Legion of Mary, in that time? Has the Church been more united in worship? Are we more united in doctrine than ever before, or is everyman his own Pope now?

One particular loss of belief which we have suffered is the belief in Satan and his awful army of devils who seek to destroy our spiritual life with God. I love to say the Leonine Prayers whenever I can, and I hope and pray that some day they will be re-instated at the end of every Mass which is celebrated.

Saturday, January 30, 2010

Tim Tebow

Please everyone go to Life Site news and sign the petition to support the Tim Tebow Superbowl ad.

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Who said this?

“Spending is a liberty issue. Every time Obama takes money from you for the government to use, that’s a dollar that the state decides how to spend and the citizen doesn’t.”
—Mark Steyn

Some funny ones

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Latest news on the Leafs

You all may have wondered why I have not posted much about the Leafs lately? It is because they have hit rock bottom!

Fulton Sheen on the mystery of Fatima

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

My Favourite Books!

THINGS I LOVE ABOUT MY COUNTRY by Jane Fonda & Cindy Sheehan, Illustrated by Michael Moore
THINGS WE KNOW TO BE TRUE by Al Gore & John Kerry
TO ALL THE MEN WE'VE LOVED BEFORE... by Ellen de Generes & Rosie O'Donnell
MY BOOK OF MORALS by Bill Clinton and Tiger Woods, introduction by Rev. Jesse Jackson

That's why I drink the good stuff!

Gotta be the 12 year old doublewood!

More on the Millionaries of Christ

This one from Walter Kovacs over at :

With all of the shock and scandal surrounding the rather recent discovery of Fr. Maciel’s duplicitous lifestyle floating around the news, it’s very easy to get yourself hooked on the individual details of his life. It’s almost like reading the end of a novel when the mysterious details of the main character’s personality are all laid out; his influences, his secrets, and in general those things which finally make sense of his actions. And though such news satisfies that part deep inside of us which longs to hear gossip and personal secrets, we would be doing the Legion, and more importantly, the Catholic Church, a disservice by dwelling on the details and not using them to support an understanding of the situation. And although our opinions as individuals don’t exactly matter in the long run, we owe it to our catholic culture to at least try to arrive at an idea of what justice would be in this particular situation. Especially in this interim period while the Vatican is still deliberating over the details of the order’s re-founding.

Rather than try to put all of the pieces together ourselves, let’s begin by looking at the course of action that the Legion is itself suggesting.
According to a Catholic news site :

“Fr. Scott Reilly, LC, Territorial Director in Atlanta, Georgia, announced to all those who work in the Territorial Direction of the Legion of Christ, that Marcial Maciel had a mistress, fathered at least one child, and lived a double life. For this reason, the Legion is renouncing him as their spiritual founder.” [1]

This certainly seems a suiting course of action given the circumstances, but it leaves one wondering about the exact character of the relationship that an order has with its founder. It would appear that an order grows organically around the person and spirituality of an individual. That is, an order owes much of what makes it unique to the character of its founder. So how can the Legion “re-found” under a different person? What are they if not the spirituality of Fr. Maciel? One would of course say that taking St. Francis out of the Franciscans and calling it the same order would be ridiculous. It’s almost like failing to recognize the difference between a living person and a dead one. Although they might still look the same, their animating principle, their form, that which makes them to be what they are, has been removed. Now, I know what some of you might be thinking, the Legion will not even still technically be the same order after their re-founding, and to you I would say this: your right, it ought not be. Especially in light of what they say in their own manual, which reads:

“Since it has been ordained by God that the person and life or Our Father Founder cannot be separated from the life and spirituality of the Legion, we the Chapter Fathers recognize the necessity to carefully gather and conserve all material dealing with the person, life, work and word of Our Founder…” [2]

Fr. Marcial Maciel

First of all, this makes it very clear that the essence of the Legion is, at least in the order’s own understanding, intrinsically tied to the person of Fr. Maciel; and furthermore, this intrinsic connection has been ordained by God! The second part of the quote sheds light on what many people refer to as a part of the legion which should persist even after its re-founding, that is, its message. This message is the intention of the order, which can, according to some, safely be separated from the corruption of its founder and continue to help form people spiritually. But again, the Legion itself says that the writings of her founder and other manifestations of her message should be gathered together and safeguarded for no reason other than that they garner insight into the person of Marcial Maciel.

Given the depth of the connection between the heart of the Legionaries of Christ and the person of their founder, I would be hard-pressed to say that their persistence as an order would be just. But of course, what about all of those people who were brought to the church by the legion? What about all the people that the order helped drag from the depths of depravity and sin? Well, to those people I would respond that their questions are not driven by principles, and are unfounded. The argument essentially boils down to:

-Organization X has helped people
-Helping people is good
——Organization X is good!

It simply doesn’t work that way; good effects do not necessitate a good cause, otherwise we wouldn’t have the saying “the ends don’t justify the means.” Now, granted, the means by which the people who were helped by the legion were probably good and wholesome, but they were still helped by the Legion, an order which has identified itself time and time again as something inherently inseparable from the person of their deeply corrupt founder.

All in all, it really doesn’t seem to matter what they’ve done, they could have bought everyone on earth a happy-meal and it would all be the same. The fact of the matter is that the Legion has an essence, and that essence is Marcial Maciel.

The point is, if in its re-founding the legion is not rid of all connections with Fr. Maciel, then I would have to argue that the mission of the re-founding has not been accomplished; being that he is the sole reason for the investigation in the first place. And if it is re-established with no affiliation to him, to what extent can we continue to call it the Legion of Christ? If it is re-founded properly then it will have undergone an essential change rendering it an entirely new entity. Properly speaking, the Legion should not be undergoing a re-founding, it should be, and in effect will be, abolished and replaced with something entirely new, if it is to be replaced at all.

[2] Manual of the First General Chapter of the Legionaries of Christ. Page 19, Paragraph 469

Recent thoughts on the Legion of Christ

So here's the deal. I was in a Legionary house of formation for the priesthood for four and a half years, starting in 1996 and ending in 2000. I was a first hand witness to a lot of the crap that went on there. In my defence, I joined when I was thirteen years old and assimilated into the culture with all the ease of someone of my age, therefore I never spoke out against it and if I had I would not have been there for one year never mind four.

The reason I bring this up is because I had recent cause to view photos on facebook taken by a friend of mine and fellow ex Legionary, that were taken when we were children in attendance at Immaculate Conception Apostolic school in Center Harbour, New Hampshire. One of the photos was of Fr. Marcial Maciel waving to us adoring young boys. This got me thinking about the man we all called Nuestro Padre.

When I was at the apostolic school we all had to attend history of the Legion classes. In these classes we all had to memorize facts about the Legion. These were memorized in a question/answer format much like the one used by the Baltimore Catechism. One of the questions we had to memorize was the name of the founder. Marcial Maciel Degallado Guizar Valencia. Obviously he had a first name, Marcial. A last name, Maciel, followed by the names of mother's parents names Guizar Valencia. He was the grand nephew of St. Raphael Guizar Valencia.

It was this great-uncle whose clandestine seminary Marcial joined as a young man during the Cristero revolution. He was kicked out of this seminary not long after joining. We were told that poor Marcial was persecuted by other seminarians and priests who did not understand his piety. We now know that it was not for this reason that he was kicked out at all as has recently come to light. He was kicked out for his lack of chastity. In fact, Marcial was kicked out of seminaries all over the country until he managed to form his own order, which he called the Legionaries of Christ. (I think he had a different name for it back in the forties but I can't remember off the top of my head).

I have long since lost all contact with the Legion except for one brother of mine who is still a member. I have been contemplating sending a letter to the Archbishop of Denver, Charles J. Chaput, who has been charged by the holy father with the Apostolic visitation of the Legionary houses of formation. In this letter I would outline my experiences for his benefit. Are their any thoughts out there on this proposed letter?

Monday, January 18, 2010

American Idol: 9th Child of 12, Daughter of Pro-Life Blogger Advances to Next Round

By Patrick B. Caine
BOSTON, Massachusetts, January 15, 2009 ( – Maddy Curtis of Bluemont, Virginia, the 16-year-old daughter of an award-winning pro-life blogger, impressed American Idol judges on the show this week, who unanimously advanced her to the next round.

The opening segment featured a powerful testimony about her family of 12 children, and her brothers with Down syndrome - one biological (Jonny) and three adopted (Jesse, Daniel, and Justin).

Maddy explained that her parents, Tripp and Barbara, adopted their first, Jesse, so that Jonathan would have “more of a companion.” After their first adoption, they served as a resource to counsel couples whose babies were diagnosed with Down syndrome, which led to two more adoptions.

About her disabled brothers, Maddy said, as tears welled up in her eyes, that, “I think some people are a little sceptical of Down syndrome. Those four boys bring out the best in every person they meet. They see the world in colors, and we need to see the world that way.”

In the audition, Maddy sang a beautiful rendition of Leonard Cohen's 'Hallelujah', yielding praise even from the normally-critical Simon Cowell. "Very good,” he said. “You've got a nice voice. Bit of soul in there, Maddy."

Maddy has been training as a singer for several years, and has entered a number of competitions, as well as playing the lead role in her high school's musical and starring in local concerts.

Despite her many accomplishments, however, her parish priest told LifeSiteNews that Maddy’s role singing as cantor at Mass every week is what's most important to her.

“Even though she's very accomplished at her age, she said that it makes her more nervous to sing at Mass than everywhere else,” said Fr. Ronald Escalante, pastor at St. Frances de Sales parish in Purcellville, Virginia. “She said, 'I'm singing for God', and it overwhelms her.”

“The whole parish enjoys it when she is singing, because they see this young 16-year-old girl leading the congregation in singing for the Mass,” he added.

The Curtis family were Evangelicals for twenty years, but two years ago, Maddy, her parents, and her four brothers with Down syndrome were all received into the Catholic Church. “They rely a lot on God's divine providence,” said Fr. Escalante. “They live by faith.”

“[Maddy] is a high-standards Christian girl, which I think is a good witness to the young people,” he said. “Even though she's very gifted with her singing, she is definitely someone who does not compromise her faith. ... She is a very, very good, down-to-earth, solid, sincere Christian Catholic.”

Fr. Escalante emphasized that the Curtis' are a “very, very pro-life” family, who, he said, “don't just preach about it, [but] actually live it.” Barbara, the mother of the family, is a professional writer and pro-life speaker who runs a popular pro-life blog.

Fr. Escalante believes the Curtis’ witness on American Idol was “just a grace of God.” “Every time I watch, I tell you, I get teary-eyed, because [Maddy] really got a lot more out of it than just being an audition,” he said. “She was able to showcase how good it is to be growing up with Down syndrome brothers. ... I thought this was a good exposure to plug in on a well-watched national and international setting – a chance for people to see these kids are beautiful kids.”

“My personal opinion is, anybody who would have been contemplating to get an abortion because they were diagnosed [with a Down syndrome baby],” he observed, “would probably think on that, because they really presented her story so well.”

See Barbara Curtis' blog: Mommy Life

Mehmet Ali Ağca

Today news of the release of Mehmet Ali Agca is all over the news media. Apparently he will discuss his assassination attempt on the late Pontiff John Paul II. I am curious to hear what he has to say though I must confess skepticism in regards to his motives.

Man who tried to kill Pope John Paul II released

By Hamdi Istanbullu, REUTERS ANKARA, Turkey

The man who tried to kill Pope John Paul II, Mehmet Ali Agca, was released from prison in the Turkish capital Ankara on Monday, nearly 30 years after the assassination attempt in St. Peter's Square. Agca served 19 years in an Italian prison for the attack, before being pardoned on the pope's initiative in 2000 and extradited to serve asentence in Turkey for other crimes including the 1979 murder of a newspaper editor. Agca, 52, left the prison compound in a four-car convoy, obscured behind tinted glass windows, although he was seen waving as he got into one of the vehicles inside the compound. One of his lawyers said Agca was being taken to a military installation for medical tests to determine whether he should do military service. Questions have been raised about his mental health in the past. "I am expecting him to be released after the military hospital check-up," lawyer Gokay Gultekin told Reuters. Agca's motives for shooting and wounding the pope at the Vatican in 1981 remain shrouded in mystery. Some believe he was working for Soviet-era East European security services alarmed by the Polish-born pontiff's fierce opposition to communism. Pope John Paul II died in 2005. In a statement issued last week, Agca said he would answer questions on the attack in the coming weeks, including whether the Soviet and Bulgarian governments were involved.

Sunday, January 17, 2010

Scourging at the Pillar

Next time you pray the second sorrowful mystery, play this clip in your head as you recite the angelic salutation. Grace upon grace.

Wedding at Cana

Perhaps I am reading into these things! I love this story because as far as I can see our Lord gives us the go ahead to indulge in a glass of wine every now and again. That's great, I am so glad I wasn't born into one of those puritanical protestant faiths that disallow drinking. Tonight my in-laws are coming for dinner. My mother-in-law makes her own wine and I am looking forward to a couple of glasses of the good stuff. Enjoy your Sunday everyone and God bless!
GOSPEL: John 2:1-12. There was a marriage at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there; Jesus also was invited to the marriage, with his disciples. When the wine failed, the mother of Jesus said to him, "They have no wine." And Jesus said to her, "O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come." His mother said to the servants, "Do whatever he tells you." Now six stone jars were standing there, for the Jewish rites of purification, each holding twenty or thirty gallons. Jesus said to them, "Fill the jars with water." And they filled them up to the brim. He said to them, "Now draw some out, and take it to the steward of the feast." So they took it. When the steward of the feast tasted the water now become wine, and did not know where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), the steward of the feast called the bridegroom and said to him, "Every man serves the good wine first; and when men have drunk freely, then the poor wine; but you have kept the good wine until now." This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee, and manifested his glory; and his disciples believed in him.

Saturday, January 16, 2010

Saint David Suzuki

Anyone remember when Mr. Suzuki advocated throwing politicians in prison who wouldn't agree with him on the issue of climate change? Here is an excellent article by the always clever Rex Murphy enjoy ...

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

A Good Spanking

Here's an interesting article by Barbara Kay from today's National Post. A heated debate tactfully rehashed by this classy lady. Any chance you get you should read Barbara Kay articles, she has the bite of Ann Coulter with none of the vitriol.

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

TRADITION and the SSPX: you decide

You may recall from previous posts that I used to be undecided on the matter of the SSPX. I think this video just made my mind up for me. You can know a tree by its fruit as they say!

Counter Terrorism Israeli Style

While I was overseas in Afghanistan I read a book by Aaron Cohen entitled, Brotherhood of Warriors: Behind Enemy Lines with a Commando in one of the World’s Most Elite Counter terrorism Units. I didn't find it all that interesting and had I been in Canada I would have given up on it. However, things being what they were, namely bored paratrooper in Afghanistan, I read the thing from cover to cover. The only part I liked was the last chapter on counter terrorism techniques used in Israel. Israelis seem to have an ingrained sense of their own security and they are really quite successful in detecting and thwarting would-be jihadists. I have attached a couple of good articles from yesterday's National Post.

Airport security: Theatre of the absurd
Daniel Pipes, National Post Published: Monday, January 11, 2010
As hands are wrung in the aftermath of the near-tragedy on a Northwest Airlines flight approaching Detroit, a conversation from London's Heathrow airport in 1986 comes to mind.It consisted of an El Al security agent quizzing one Ann-Marie Doreen Murphy, a 32-year-old recent arrival in London from Sallynoggin, Ireland. While working as a chambermaid at the Hilton Hotel on Park Lane Murphy met Nizar al-Hindawi, a far-leftist Palestinian who impregnated her. After instructing her to "get rid of the thing," he abruptly changed his tune and insisted on immediate marriage in "the Holy Land." He also insisted on their traveling separately.Murphy, later described by the prosecutor as a "simple, unsophisticated Irish lass and a Catholic," accepted unquestioningly Hindawi's arrangements for her to fly to Israel on El Al on April 17. She also accepted a wheeled suitcase with a false bottom containing nearly two kilograms of Semtex, a powerful plastic explosive, and she agreed to be coached by him to answer questions posed by airport security.Murphy successfully passed through the standard Heathrow security inspection and reached the gate with her bag, where an El Al agent questioned her. As reconstructed by Neil C. Livingstone and David Halevy in Washingtonian magazine, he started by asking whether she had packed her bags herself. She replied in the negative. Then:"What is the purpose of your trip to Israel?" Recalling Hindawi's instructions, Murphy answered, "For a vacation.""Are you married, Miss Murphy?" "No.""Traveling alone?" "Yes.""Is this your first trip abroad?" "Yes.""Do you have relatives in Israel?" "No.""Are you going to meet someone in Israel?" "No."Has your vacation been planned for a long time?" "No.""Where will you stay while you're in Israel?" "The Tel Aviv Hilton.""How much money do you have with you?""Fifty pounds." The Hilton at that timecosting at least £70 a night, heasked:"Do you have a credit card?" "Oh, yes," she replied, showing him an i.d. for cashing cheques.That did it, and the agent sent her bag for additional inspection, where the bombing apparatus was discovered.Had El Al followed the usual Western security procedures, 375 ives would surely have been lost somewhere over Austria. The bombing plot came to light, in other words, through a non-technical intervention, relying on conversation, perception, common sense and (yes) profiling. The agent focused on the passenger, not the weaponry. Israeli counterterrorism takes passengers' identities into account; accordingly, Arabs endure an especially tough inspection. "In Israel, security comes first," David Harris of the American Jewish Committee explains.Obvious as this sounds, overconfidence, political correctness and legal liability render such an approach impossible anywhere else in the West. In the United States, for example, one month after 9/11, the Department of Transportation issued guidelines forbidding its personnel from generalizing "about the propensity of members of any racial, ethnic, religious, or national origin group to engage in unlawful activity." (Wear a hijab, I semi-jokingly advise women wanting to avoid secondary screening at airport security.)Worse yet, consider the panicky Mickey Mouse, and embarrassing steps the U.S. Transportation Security Administration implemented hours after the Detroit bombing attempt: no crew announcements "concerning flight path or position over cities or landmarks," and disabling all passenger communications services. During a flight's final hour, passengers may not stand up, access carry-on baggage or "have any blankets, pillows or personal belongings on the lap." Some crews went yet further, keeping cabin lights on throughout the night while turning off the in-flight entertainment, prohibiting all electronic devices and, during the final hour, requiring passengers to keep hands visible and neither eat nor drink. Things got so bad, the Associated Press reports, "A demand by one attendant that no one could read anything ... elicited gasps of disbelief and howls of laughter."Widely criticized for these Clouseau-like measures, TSA eventually decided to add "enhanced screening" for travellers passing through or originating from 14 "countries of interest" -- as though one's choice of departure airport indicates a propensity for suicide bombing.The TSA engages in "security theatre" --bumbling pretend-steps that treat all passengers equally rather than risk offending anyone by focusing, say, on religion. The alternative approach is Israelification, defined by a Canadian newspaper as "a system that protects life and limb without annoying you to death."Which do we want -- theatrics or safety?

If we want to take the security of our citizens safety we will have to stop worshiping at the altar of political correctness, as Israel seems to have done with great success.

Monday, January 11, 2010

What Afghans really think ... good read.

A super article from the National Post about why we really should not withdraw from Afghanistan. Asides from retreat in Afghanistan being morally repugnant, real Afghans want us there ... at least until the security situation gets under control again.

Refreshing outlook from the MMM

I recently read what I thought to be a fair article on the abuse scandal in the Catholic church, in Maclean's magazine. That is not to see that it was completely 100% accurate but it is the most accurate take I have ever seen from a secular news source. I have posted a link to it here, check it out!

Friday, January 8, 2010

Guess who said the following?

"Kindness is for fools! They want them to be treated with oil, soap, and caresses but they ought to be beaten with fists! In a duel you don't count or measure the blows, you strike as you can! War is not made with charity, it is a struggle a duel. If Our Lord were not terrible he would not have given an example in this too. See how he treated the Philistines, the sowers of error, the wolves in sheep's clothing, the traitors in the temple. He scourged them with whips!"

Pope St. Pius X

I am a strong believer in the maxim, "Bees are better attracted to honey than vinegar", but I also believe that there are times that call for the overturning of tables, the cracking of whips and the casting out of the money lenders of our post modern society. I have been asking our Lord everyday recently for the wisdom to know the difference and the strength to follow through. I have also been asking for the virtue which this wisdom should be built on ... the wisdom of Solomon.

Thursday, January 7, 2010

The World will hate you...

A great article by Ann Coulter! I was reluctant to use her name as so many hate her, but give it a read, I think you may find that you agree with her ...

If You Can Find a Better Deal, Take It!

Someone mentioned Christianity on television recently and liberals reacted with their usual howls of rage and blinking incomprehension.

On a Fox News panel discussing Tiger Woods, Brit Hume said, perfectly accurately:

“The extent to which he can recover, it seems to me, depends on his faith. He is said to be a Buddhist. I don’t think that faith offers the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith. So, my message to Tiger would be, ‘Tiger, turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world.” v

Hume’s words, being 100 percent factually correct, sent liberals into a tizzy of sputtering rage, once again illustrating liberals’ copious ignorance of Christianity. (Also illustrating the words of the Bible: “How is it you do not understand me when I speak? It is because you cannot bear to listen to my words.” John 8:43.)

In The Washington Post, Tom Shales demanded that Hume apologize, saying he had “dissed about half a billion Buddhists on the planet.”

Is Buddhism about forgiveness? Because, if so, Buddhists had better start demanding corrections from every book, magazine article and blog posting ever written on the subject, which claims Buddhists don’t believe in God, but try to become their own gods.

I can’t imagine that anyone thinks Tiger’s problem was that he didn’t sufficiently think of himself as a god, especially after that final putt in the Arnold Palmer Invitational last year.

In light of Shales’ warning Hume about “what people are saying” about him, I hope Hume’s a Christian, but that’s not apparent from his inarguable description of Christianity. Of course, given the reaction to his remarks, apparently one has to be a regular New Testament scholar to have so much as a passing familiarity with the basic concept of Christianity.

On MSNBC, David Shuster invoked the “separation of church and television” (a phrase that also doesn’t appear in the Constitution), bitterly complaining that Hume had brought up Christianity “out-of-the-blue” on “a political talk show.”

Why on earth would Hume mention religion while discussing a public figure who had fallen from grace and was in need of redemption and forgiveness? Boy, talk about coming out of left field!

What religion—what topic—induces this sort of babbling idiocy? (If liberals really want to keep people from hearing about God, they should give Him his own show on MSNBC.)

Most perplexing was columnist Dan Savage’s indignant accusation that Hume was claiming that Christianity “offers the best deal—it gives you the get-out-of-adultery-free card that other religions just can’t.”

In fact, that’s exactly what Christianity does. It’s the best deal in the universe. (I know it seems strange that a self-described atheist and “radical sex advice columnist f*****” like Savage would miss the central point of Christianity, but there it is.)

God sent his only son to get the crap beaten out of him, die for our sins and rise from the dead. If you believe that, you’re in. Your sins are washed away from you—sins even worse than adultery!—because of the cross.

“He canceled the record of the charges against us and took it away by nailing it to the cross.” Colossians 2:14.

Surely you remember the cross, liberals—the symbol banned by ACLU lawsuits from public property throughout the land?

Christianity is simultaneously the easiest religion in the world and the hardest religion in the world.

In the no-frills, economy-class version, you don’t need a church, a teacher, candles, incense, special food or clothing; you don’t need to pass a test or prove yourself in any way. All you’ll need is a Bible (in order to grasp the amazing deal you’re getting) and probably a water baptism, though even that’s disputed.

You can be washing the dishes or walking your dog or just sitting there minding your business hating Susan Sarandon and accept that God sent his only son to die for your sins and rise from the dead ... and you’re in!

“Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” Romans 10:9.

If you do that, every rotten, sinful thing you’ve ever done is gone from you. You’re every bit as much a Christian as the pope or Billy Graham.

No fine print, no “your mileage may vary,” no blackout dates. God ought to do a TV spot: “I’m God Almighty, and if you can find a better deal than the one I’m offering, take it.”

The Gospel makes this point approximately 1,000 times. Here are a few examples at random:

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” John 3:16.

“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God.” Ephesians 2:8.

“For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Romans 6:23.

In a boiling rage, liberals constantly accuse Christians of being “judgmental.” No, we’re relieved.

Christianity is also the hardest religion in the world because, if you believe Christ died for your sins and rose from the dead, you have no choice but to give your life entirely over to Him. No more sexual promiscuity, no lying, no cheating, no stealing, no killing inconvenient old people or unborn babies—no doing what all the other kids do.

And no more caring what the world thinks of you—because, as Jesus warned in a prophecy constantly fulfilled by liberals: The world will hate you.

With Christianity, your sins are forgiven, the slate is wiped clean and your eternal life is guaranteed through nothing you did yourself, even though you don’t deserve it. It’s the best deal in the universe.


©2004-09 Ann Coulter. Distributed by Universal Press Syndicate.

Tuesday, January 5, 2010

Are high taxes immoral?

I think Michael Voris would be floored to see our situation in regard to taxes here in Canada; check this out...

Sunday, January 3, 2010

Reverential Reception of Our Lord

"Because Christ our redeemer said that it was truly his body that he was offering under the species of bread, it has always been the conviction of the church of God, and His holy council now declares again, that by the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ Our Lord and of the whole substance of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation".
The council of Trent (1551)

The holy council declares for all Catholics an article of faith. Namely, that Jesus is truly present in the sacrament of the Eucharist under the appearance of bread and wine. It is for this reason that the church recommends that all the faithful receive Our Lord in a reverential manner. The current recommendation is that the faithful receive Our Lord on the tongue while kneeling and not in the hand while chewing gum and talking on a cell phone.

Stories of abuses are legion and draw the conclusion from a great many of the faithful that there is a crisis of faith in the church, specifically doubts as to the real presence. If the faithful truly believed that they were in the presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, the king of heaven and earth ,they would not show up dressed in torn jeans with gum in their mouths. They would not talk loudly in church and look all around. They would receive Jesus in a manner befitting his status.

It is for this reason that I receive Jesus directly on my tongue and not in my hands. After all, I have the hands of a soldier! My hands have not been consecrated and anointed with the chrism oil as the hands of a priest have. It is for this reason that I will not volunteer to be an extra-ordinary minister of communion nor do I think anyone else should.

Saturday, January 2, 2010

Venerable John Paul II

This video of the late pontiff's last visit to Mexico is a true testament to his star appeal and his ability to draw a crowd. Keep in mind John Paul drew the largest crowd ever assembled while on his visit to the Philipines. Crowds were estimated at 2.5 million people. This video was shot in Azteca stadium in Mexico city, if you have ever been to a real soccer stadium you know how big they are and this one is packed to the rafters.

Friday, January 1, 2010

Fr. Norman Weslin, real man, real saint!

In a previous post I mentioned my love for the song, "Immaculate Mary". Watch this courageous and holy priest sing this beautiful Marian hymn while being persecuted for defending the unborn. How I wish for more priests holy and courageous like this Father! God Bless him!

Feast of the Circumcision of Our Lord

As Christ wished to fulfil the law and to show His descent according to the flesh from Abraham. He, though not bound by the law, was circumcised on the eighth day (Luke 2:21), and received the sublime name expressive of His office, Jesus, i.e. Saviour. He was, as St. Paul says, "made under the law", i.e. He submitted to the Mosaic Dispensation, "that he might redeem them who were under the law: that we might receive the adoption of sons" (Galatians 4:4, 5). "The Christ, in order to fulfil all justice, was required to endure this humiliation, and bear in His body the stigma of the sins which He had taken upon Himself" (Fouard, A Life of Jesus, tr., I, 54). The circumcision took place, not in the Temple, though painters sometimes so represent it, but in some private house, where the Holy Family had found a rather late hospitality. The public ceremony in the synagogue, which is now the usage, was introduced later. Christmas was celebrated on 25 December, even in the early centuries, at least by the Western Church, whence the date was soon adopted in the East also. (See CHRISTMAS). Saint Chrysostom credits the West with the tradition, and St. Augustine speaks of it as well and long established. Consequently the Circumcision fell on the first of January. In the ages of paganism, however, the solemnization of the feast was almost impossible, on account of the orgies connected with the Saturnalian festivities, which were celebrated at the same time. Even in our own day the secular features of the opening of the New Year interfere with the religious observance of the Circumcision, and tend to make a mere holiday of that which should have the sacred character of a Holy Day. St. Augustine points out the difference between the pagan and the Christian manner of celebrating the day: pagan feasting and excesses were to be expiated by Christian fasting and prayer (P.L., XXXVIII, 1024 sqq.; Serm. cxcvii, cxcviii). The Feast of the Circumcision was kept at an early date in the Gallican Rite, as is clearly indicated in a Council of Tours (567), in which he Mass of the Circumcision is prescribed (Con. Tur., II., can. xvii in Labbe, V, 857). The feast celebrated at Rome in the seventh century was not the Circumcision as such, but the octave of Christmas. The Gelasian Sacramentary gives the title "In Octabas Domini", and prohibits the faithful from idolatry and the profanities of the season (P.L., LXXIV, 1061). The earliest Byzantine calendars (eighth and ninth centuries) give for the first of January both the Circumcision and the anniversary of St. Basil. The Feast of the Circumcision was observed in Spain before the death of St. Isidore (636), for the "Regula Monachorum", X, reads: "For it hath pleased the Fathers to appoint a holy season from the day of the Lord's birth to the day of His Circumcision" (P.L., LXXXIII, 880). It seems, therefore, that the octave was more prominent in the early centuries, and the Circumcision later.

It is to be noted also that the Blessed Virgin Mary was not forgotten in the festivities of the holy season, and the Mass in her honour was sometimes said on this day. Today, also, while in both Missal and Breviary the feast bears the title "In Circumcisione Domini et Octav Nativitatis", the prayers have special reference to the Blessed Virgin, and in the Office, the responses and antiphons set forth her privileges and extol her wonderful prerogatives. The psalms for Vespers are those appointed for her feasts, and the antiphons and hymn of Lauds keep her constantly in view. As paganism passed away the religious festivities of the Circumcision became more conspicuous and solemn; yet, even in the tenth century, Atto, Bishop of Vercelli, rebuked those who profaned the holy season by pagan dances, songs, and the lighting of lamps (P.L. CXXXIV, 43).

post taken from

Real Catholics only!

I love going to church on New Years day! How much do I like it? I like it more than going on Christmas for instance and I will tell you why right now. On Christmas day the church is packed with folks who only come to church twice a year leaving those of us who attend regularly stuck in the very back of the church, if we are lucky to get a seat at all. However those twice a year Catholics aren't usually their on this feast day.This is not one of those days that makes them feel all warm and fuzzy inside, not to mention the inconvenience of going to mass in the morning with a hangover. Today is the solemnity of Mary Mother of God, or Feast of the circumcision for all you lovers of Traditionalism. Today my wife, my brother and I attended a most beautiful and respectful mass. Preceeding the mass, Fr. Richard Whalen lead the congregation in some Marian hymns and I am proud to say that I sang with all my might, especially Immaculate Mary!