Christian Families or Chaos
Reproduced from the December 2013 Christian Order
"Disobedience, the offspring of pride, kindles the flames of Hell. Take away self-will and Hell would cease to exist" - St Bernanrd
Direct your glance at Bethlehem, then at Nazareth, and contemplate the Holy Family. See what a splendid example of obedience the Divine Redeemer gave to all and to young people especially. Jesus was subject to them. Jesus became for us the model of respect for authority and their virtue of obedience. Obedience is order, and order must exist wherever God rules and reigns.
Obedience springs from humility, faith santifies it and love lightens its yoke. In an age when respect for divine and human authority appears to be vanishing from the earth, the example of childlike veneration for parents is a singular blessing and a victory. God did not say, honour a good father and a good mother, but honour thy father and thy mother! Be generous to them in their old age and sickness, pray daily and fervently for your parents. The respect, love and obedience you show your mother, is the characteristic virtue of a good Christian.
However, you have three mothers: your earthly mother, your heavenly Mother - the Blessed Virgin Mary, and your spiritual Mother - the Holy Catholic Church. If you have the good fortune to love and honour all three, happiness and wellbeing will perpetually encompass your path in this life, and a rich rewardwill await you in Eternity! You will be welcomed in Heaven with these words, "What you did to your parents, you did to Me. Come ye blessed of My Father; possess ye the Kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world." God has given us the truly remarkable freedom to do what is right. The freedom exercised by those who rebel against God's law - the freedom of sinners, the freedom of evil and the flesh, of passions and lust, is not freedom but bondage itself which makes us servants of sin!
The Universal Living Rosary Association
"While I am old enough to probably die in my bed, I fear there are many younger Catholics who will be called upon to give their lives for Christ."
By Graham Moorhouse
Buenos Aires, December 2nd, 2013 – the following disturbing video footage from Argentina shows a mob of pro-aborts and LGBT activists attacking and sexually molesting a group of Catholic men protecting the cathedral in the city of San Juan from vandalism by peacefully praying the Rosary. Readers should make a careful note of the fact that the police did nothing to protect the young men.
Click on the picture to view the video, but view with discression - for some of it is indeed depraved. We should also pray for these lost young women for they have surely chosen a fast track to Hell.
You will not of course find this outrage covered by the secular media. Peaceful Catholics as the victims of pro-abort, and lesbian and gay violence doesn't fit their left-wing agenda - for the secular media to cover this report would be like Nazis screening a film portraying Jews as decent human beings.
Those who are ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it. Make no mistake this sort of white hot hatred of Christians and traditional Catholics in particular comes stright from the bowels of Hell. Modern history has numerous examples of this sort hatred, with the authorities turning a blind eye, being the harbinger of something far more dreadful, the cold-blooded slaughter of Catholics on an unimaginable scale.
On the 5th October 1789 a mob of just such vile and vicious women dragged the Catholic King, Louis XVI, and his entorage from Versaille to imprisonment in Paris, an outrage accompanied by indescriminate slaughter which the authorities did nothing to obate. A mere three years later a platoon of the National Guard dragged three priests from a carriage that was taking them to jail and hacked them to death. This set in train a series of massacres in most of the prisons of Paris that lasted for forty-eight hours -1100 prisoners were massacred, with 250 priests among them, including three Bishops. In the next five years well over a quarter of a million French Catholics had been slaughtered, women and children included.
Fast forward to the 1930 when once again Hell emptied its bowels, this time on the streets of Madrid. Within a year nearly 10,000 Catholics were dead, mostly priests and bishops, but also nuns and even junior seminarians. The police again had been ordered not to interfere. It was precisely this slaughter of the innocent that lead a brilliant young army officer to eventually unsheathe his sword in defence of the innocent, that man went on to become one of the greatest statesmen of the twentieth century, I allude of course to General Franco.
Given that militant homosexuals were hugely and pro-actively involved in the the Holocaust, one of the more ironic features of the screaming hate-filled women and LGBT activists in Argentina is their painting of swasticas and "Hitler" moustaches on the men. The idea for disposing of the Jews originated with Lanz von Leibenfels, a homosexual. The first years of terrorism against the Jews were carried out by the Storm Trooper whose leaders were almost without exception homosexuals. The first concentration camp, as well as the system for training its brutal guards, was established by Ernst Röhm, a notorious homosexual. Kristallnacht, the first large scale violent mob attacks on the Jews were orchestrated in 1938 by the homosexual Reinhard Heydrich. And it was the transvestite Goering, who, with an order to the homosexual Heydrich dated the 24th January 1939, opened up the Pandora’s Box of the “Final Solution” to the Jewish question. Further, the testimony of surviors suggest that some twenty per cent of the sadistic guards in the death camps where homosexuals.
While I am old enough to probably die in my bed, I fear there are many young Catholics who will be called upon to give their lives for Christ - and if history is any guide, in the not too distant future. The coming slaughter could be far worst than anything we have seen in the past, for Satan now operates from an international platform, and, since Vatican II, has even succeeded in planting his minions within the citadel of the Church.
A clarion call to all Traditionalists to unite and descend on Portsmouth for the Saint Agatha's Feast celebration in 2014 - It is crucial that traditionalists support the traditional wing of the Ordinariate
Saint Agatha's Church, Portsmouth
Saturday 8th February 2014
Solemn High Mass
(Traditional Rite - ad orientum)
Setting: Mozart - Credo Mass, Newman Consort with Orchestra
Homily: The Rt.Rev. Dom. Cuthbert Brogan. OSB, Abbott of Farnborough
Luncheon refreshments afterwards.
The Church, dedicated solely to the Traditional Rite, is only a few minutes walk
from Portsmouth and Southsea rail station, plus there is easy parking adjacent the Church.
Do come and join us and feel at home with reverent ceremonial that will sound familiar to all accustomed to the Usus Antiquior
Newham College and Pavlov's Dogs
"The media would do well to remember that dishonesty and cowardice come at a price ..."
By Graham Moorhouse
The concept for which Pavlov is famous is the "conditioned reflex". He proved his theory of conditioned reflex by studying salivations in dogs. Pavlov demonstrated that when food was presented to a dog shortly after a buzzer had been sounded, whilst the dog initially wouldn't salivate until the food was presented, later it would come to associate the buzzer with the presentation of the food and would salivate immediately upon hearing the buzzer.
We witnessed a wonderful demonstration of this principle recently when the story of Mark Walcott of Newham College erupted. The media immediately started to salivate, with expletives like "Homophobic rant" exploding around twice in every sentence like incoming shells from a Marine Mortar Platoon.
Mark Walcott's "homophobic rant", as far as one could judge from the snippet played by the media (and one can safely assume the media would have aired what they, from their left-wing perspective, would judge to be the most incriminating bit) consisted of the suggestion that one should exercise prudence when employing homosexual teachers because of their tendency for predatory behaviour around young boys. Mr Walcott also made a parallel accusation regarding Freemasons, i.e. that there was a danger that they will exploit their teaching post to recruit fellow Masons. Oddly, the media never once screamed "Masonophobic rant".
The reason for this double standard is easily understood if one refers back to the Pavlov dog experiments. You see the dogs were conditioned to salivate if they heard a buzzer, they did not salivate on hearing church bells or a piano concerto. Modern man has been conditioned by the left-wing ideologues (who run academia, the media and much of government) to go into dribble overdrive on hearing any criticism of homosexuals or Muslims; they have not been conditioned to salivate on hearing criticism of Masons or Catholics, for just two obvious example. Note: whether what Mark Walcott said was true or not was never an issue; once the buzzer had sounded, salivation must take place even in the complete absence of food, for we are witnessing here a conditioned reflex not a rational thought process.
ITV wheeled out the young techno-savvy creep, sorry, young man, who had recorded Mark Walcott behind his back and thus kick-started the media feeding frenzy. One could hardly wish to meet a more perfect specimen of the product of the sausage factory we call modern academia; his eyes gleamed with apostolic zeal like freshly polished snooker balls, as he enthusiastically strung together liberal buzzwords in what on the left passes for rational thought: homophobia, openness, inclusive, diversity, tolerance, hate - around this point, I stopped counting LWBWs (Left-wing buzzwords) and sought refuge in a self-induced hypnotic coma.
In a saner age, Mark Walcott's suggestion that we should exercise prudence in appointing homosexual teachers because of their often predatory nature round young boys would have been regarded as nothing more than a statement from the MBO (Ministry of the Bleeding Obvious). But as I say, in the secular asylum truth is no longer the issue; the buzzer has sounded, we must salivate. The fact that over seventy percent of incarcerated paedophiles self-identify as gay or bi-sexual is of course neither here nor there. The fact that victims of the recent explosion of child abuse scandals in the Catholic Church are overwhelmingly adolescent boys (around ninety percent) is presumably just an issue of unfortunate chance as far as our homophile bishops and the media are concerned. The fact that homosexual activists themselves make no secret of their paedophilic predilection is presumably a mere red herring: for example, Peter Tatchell, the Teflon coated poster boy for the gay-rights movement in the UK, famously wrote:
"Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages of nine to thirteen. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy. While it may be [my emphasis] impossible to condone paedophilia, it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful."
Dutch militant gays have taken it a step further, with the chant, "If you've not had it by eight, it's too late." Ironically, shortly after the above media lynching of Mark Walcott, the same ITV news reported the story of two men who had been jailed for life for abusing young boys, while studiously avoiding mentioning that they were obviously both homosexuals.
Assuming "Homophobic" means fear of homosexuals, if that indeed be the case, then far from being homophobic, Mark Walcott, by daring to speak the truth in today's oppressive left-wing zoo, proved himself to be one of the least homophobic men on the planet - but he must now expect to be crucified for his independent thinking and personal courage by the disciples of - you guessed it ... tolerance.
However, to quote Christian Order, the media would do well to remember that dishonesty and cowardice come at a price. They delude themselves who believe that for years on end that they can be boot-licking propagandist for the "gay lobby," or any other lobby, and then suddenly return to honesty and reason. Once a whore, always a whore.
"Judas, sit down and shut your proto-Marxist piehole. THWAP!" John 12:7-8
The Gospel of Judas Iscariot
Patrick Lawler (abridged and addapted by Graham Moorhouse)
Welcome to the next instalment of “Tales of CCRS” [CCRS stands for Catholic Catechism Rigidly Suppressed - I jest - it's supposed to stand for Catholic Certificate of Religious Studies - it is a course designed by our bishops to destroy Catholic education, and it has been very effective in so doing - Ed].
One of the main ‘teachers’ on the Westminster CCRS course is a certain Deacon; let’s call him Deacon ‘Nice’. Now, Deacon ‘Nice’ is a your archetype post-Conciliar Modernist, the living, breathing embodiment of absolutely everything you would associate with the egregious “Spirit of Vatican II”; he is your liberal’s liberal, your progressive’s progressive, your left-wing's left-winger, and like all his type, he is a man reeking with sanctimonious concern for “The Poor”, “The Disenfranchised” and “The Marginalised” (Yea, verily, twill be capitalised in thought, word and deed!). Also typical of his genre, Deacon 'Nice' sermonizes endlessly about tolerance, whilst intolerance oozes out of every pore.
Deacon 'Nice'. Like the rest of his kind, has a profound devotion to the seven Golden Calves of post-Conciliar modernism: tolerance, dialogue, encounter, acceptance, inter-faith outreach, multiculturalism and that Golden Calf of Golden Calves … white liberal guilt. As for genuine Catholic concerns - the salvation of souls; individual responsibility; faithful observance of the Magisterium; the Four Last Things; absolute truth; objective morality; evangelisation and conversion to the One True Faith – well not so much that you would notice.
Quite early on in the course (the second teaching day, in fact), Deacon ‘Nice’ - dismissively indicating to a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church - announced: “Being a Christian is not about following every single thing in there.” Now, the instant he said it, I thought, “Oh, really! And which parts of the Catechism should we feel free to ignore or disregard, pray tell?” I am ashamed to say, I did not speak up. In fact, I felt like such a lousy coward for the rest of that day and afterwards that I resolved not to remain silent the next time any of the course teachers made some smart aleck comment disparaging the Catholic faith.
I did not have to wait long for Deacon ‘Nice’ was always especially accommodating in his modernist, progressive, Spirit-of-Vatican II worshipping, apostasy-friendly outlook.
One such (totally in character) gem was when he announced: “Taking care of the poor is the heart of Christianity.” Please note, there is no “at” in that sentence; he did not say, “Taking care of the poor is at the heart of Christianity.” Indeed, I was most insistent at the time that I did not misquote him, neither adding nor subtracting from what he had said. “Taking care of the poor is the heart of Christianity” is exactly what he said. I raised my hand and the following exchange ensued:
ME: “Did you just say, “Taking care of the poor is the heart of Christianity?”
ME: “Well, it isn’t”
HIM: “What do you mean?”
ME: “I mean taking care of the poor isn’t the heart of Christianity.”
HIM: “Yes it is!”
ME: “No, it isn’t. Taking care of those experiencing poverty and hardship is certainly important and can justifiably be described as one’s Christian duty but it isn’t THE heart of Christianity.
HIM: “Of course it is”
ME: “No, it really isn’t! The heart of Christianity is the reality of Our Blessed Lord’s sacrifice on the cross and the salvific grace made available to those who faithfully receive the blessed sacraments of the One, True, Holy and Apostolic Roman Catholic Church. It’s about saving the souls of individual sinners like me and trying to make sure we spend eternity with God in Heaven rather than with Satan in Hell! Our Lord didn’t come to Earth to live as one of us and die an agonising death on the cross just so we could open a soup kitchen!”
There was a bit more liberal spluttering from Deacon ‘Nice’ but, before too long, he did (with exceptionally bad grace) have to admit that, “Well, if you’re going to be rigidly theologically accurate….” then alright, that sacrifice-on-the-cross-and-saving-souls-stuff is, I suppose, sort of, the heart of Christianity.
This is a clear example of what I call “The Gospel of Judas Iscariot”; I didn’t come up with that title myself and it certainly doesn’t refer to the dodgy Gnostic text of the same name that had a certain amount of notoriety a few years ago [Why the media at the time insisted on calling it the Gospel of Judas was always something of a mystery, as it wasn't written by Judas and it wasn't a Gospel - Ed].
Judas was a liar, a thief and a traitor and he was so, primarily, because he did not believe in the Truth, Our Blessed Lord. His ‘concern’ was purely for the things of this world; fame, worldly regard, wealth and comfort and we see his ‘concerns’ writ large in the post-Conciliar Church on all sides. The “social justice” crowd are following in his footsteps and taking many well-meaning but woefully un-catechised souls with them to their final destination and judgement, while, along the way, propagating an emasculated, feminised, communistic and de-sacralised fake theology, elevating “The Poor” to saintly victimhood simply by ‘virtue’ of being poor (whether in relative or absolute terms).
I simply cannot say it in a clearer and more engaging way than the formidable Ann Barnhardt in her excellent essay, “Jesus Christ: Economist”, enjoy!
"These tin pot secular dictators need to be sent packing with a good arse kicking"
By: Don McGovern
The Left, notwithstanding that intolerance oozes from their every pore like an obnoxious slime, never tires of sanctimoniously banging on about tolerance. The Newham College story provides a perfect illustration of this humbug.
Let's for the sake of argument, assume that I, or someone like me, a traditional Catholic "right-wing nut", was in charge of Newham College, and the head of the drama department was a secular Left homophile who embraced gay "marriage" and the rest of the plethora of militant gay causes. Put simply, he held views around this subject that I did not only reject but found ridiculous and even offensive. Would his job be on the line? Would I attempt to blight his career? Not even close. So long as his views did not interfere with him carrying out his job and carrying it out adequately, I would regard it as a non-issue. I may have heated discussions with him in the staff room, but the idea that I should sack him for holding a different view to mine would not even cross my mind.
But now change roles: place in charge of the college some secular Left trendy and place in charge of the drama department a man who believes that we should be prudent when appointing homosexual teachers. Must he be sacked? Of course! - for he has committed a thought crime. Note: he would not even need to express himself openly as did Mark Walcott, he could have said something on Facebook, or even privately over a pint with a friend; Big Brother can not allow thought crimes to go unpunished. He will need to be brain-washed, re-educated, medicated, perhaps electric shock treatment is called for. No trail is necessary, the fact that he has not conformed his mind to that of the Zeitgeist is evidence of the most horrible guilt. Just like the French Revolution, if he cannot prove he is for the Revolution before a kangaroo court, off with his head.
So why, one may legitimately wonder, is a Catholic who, as the recipient of a divine revelation, is logically bound to be intolerant of error, yet in practice is tolerant, while a secularist, who believes there is no such thing as revealed or absolute truth, and therefore logically is bound to tolerance, yet in practice is intolerant? The answer is that the Catholic is also bound to love, the secularist is not so bound and does not love.
Indeed, it goes deeper, for the word "tolerance" no longer even enjoys the same meaning in the secular lexicon as it does in the Catholic. For the Catholic "tolerance" means that I should love and respect all men, regardless of what they do, say or believe. For the secularist "tolerance" means embracing his world view or face compulsory re-education; and those who resist his brain washing, must accept punishment for a thought crime as defined by his hate laws.
The Australian scholar, Rabbi Dr Shimon Cowen put his finger on it - and will undoubtedly be made to pay for doing by numerous little factotums from Big Brother. The good Rabbi pointed out that to impose homosexual behaviour as a norm under the guise of "tolerance" is a con, nothing more than a trick. He added, "Tolerance, as Victor Frankl said, has to do with love and respect for people, not for their views or behaviour. It does not extend to moral relativism which makes the unethical ethical."
He further pointed out that there is nothing ethical in making a school anti-bullying campaign predicated upon insisting that a school teach every child to accept homosexual practices as co-normative with heterosexual practices. Attempts to do so are a slight of hand, a cultural manoeuvre designed to impose a minority world view on an entire generation of children, and in the process outlawing even the holding, let alone the expression, of deeply held ethical beliefs.
This, Rabbi Cowen pointed out, is a violation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (Article 14) dealing with freedom of thought, conscience and religion of the child and parents - the homosexual agenda violates every one of these UN articles.
In England recently, Sir Paul Coleridge, a High Court Judge, has announced that he is stepping down after being disciplined by Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas and Justice Secretary Grayling for campaigning in favour of marriage ... in his own time!
The big lie underscoring all this secular Left bullying is that we have a private agenda, a sectarian world view, that we are not entitled to "impose" on others. But the truth is: so do they. And who voted them the right to impose their sectarian world view on us and our children! No one! - what we are witnessing is a piece of outrageous chutzpah, that must be exposed and challenged at every opportunity. These tin pot secular dictators need to be sent packing with a good arse kicking.
Talking of kicking the arses of tin pot dictators, click on the following picture and enjoy watching a very brave Canadian Jew, Ezrla Levant, doing just that to some puny human rights lawyer. If you enjoy this - and you will - research other videos of Ezral Levant's epic battles with Canada's Human Rights Gastapo.
REASONS FOR ATTENDING THE TRADITIONAL RITE
From: The Heresy of Formlessness - Martin Mosebach
“In the earliest Christian times Basil the Great, one of the Eastern Church Fathers, taught that the liturgy was revelation, like Holy Scripture itself, and should never be interfered with. And so it was, until the pontificate of Paul VI. Naturally this attitude did not prevent essential modifications, but such changes as occurred took place organically, unconsciously, unintentionally, and without a theological plan. They grew out of the practice of liturgy, just as a landscape is altered over centuries by wind and water. In the ancient world, if a ruler broke a tradition he was regarded as having committed an act of tyrannis.”
Analysis: UN “Day of Charity” Honoring Mother Teresa Contrasts with Abortion Politics
By Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D. and Rebecca Oas, Ph.D.
NEW YORK, December 27 (C-FAM) Mother Teresa is the epitome of charity. So says the United Nations when it declared the first Day of Charity in her honor in 2013, urging national leaders to educate and raise awareness about charity among their citizens.
By encouraging charity like Mother Teresa, the UN General Assembly threw down a challenge for those who argue abortion and sexual progressiveness are solutions to poverty and inequality.
Mother Teresa's work relieving the suffering of the poorest of the poor jibes with the UN's purpose promoting peace and human development. But her understanding of charity stands in stark contrast to popular notions of charity, and particularly the aims sometimes promoted in UN social policy.
Charity is the very purpose of man's existence. "To love and be loved," Mother Teresa told UN delegates. Real love, real charity, means "giving until it hurts," she told them.
Among the sources of violence and conflict, Mother Teresa singled out laws allowing abortion. In a 1985 address to the UN General Assembly she said, "If we are really sincere in our hearts that we really want peace today, let us make that strong resolution that in our countries, in our cities, we will not allow a single child to feel unwanted, to feel unloved, to throw away a society . . . that in our countries that terrible law of killing the innocents, of destroying life, destroying the presence of God, be removed from our country, our nations, from our people, from our families."
"I have said often and I am sure of it, that the greatest destroyer of peace in the world today is abortion," she wrote to delegates to the 1994 Cairo international conference on population and development. "If a mother can kill her own child, what is there to stop you and me from killing each other? The only one who has the right to take life is the One who has created it. Nobody else has that right, not a conference, no government."
Going further, she said those who promote population control destroy charity itself. "It frightens me to think of all the people who kill their conscience so that they can perform an abortion …. God has created a world big enough for all the lives He wishes to be born. It is only our hearts that are not big enough to want them and accept them."
No government can provide charity, Mother Teresa reminded leaders, because money cannot provide "tender love and care." It was in wealthy societies that she saw a great poverty of loneliness. Removing the suffering of the elderly and unwanted in a "throwaway society," as she called it, was "very difficult" and could only be done with much prayer.
Mother Teresa sharply critiqued those who denied the "beautiful differences" between men and women. In a letter to delegates to the 1995 UN Beijing women’s conference she said, "They will only bring division, unhappiness, and destruction of peace to the world," and that "those who want to make women and men the same are all in favor of abortion."
She linked radical feminism to the suffering of women, their lack of charity for themselves and for their children. "No job, no plans, no possessions, no idea of 'freedom' can take the place of love. So anything that destroys God's gift of motherhood destroys his most precious gift to women – the ability to love as a woman,” she wrote.
Pointing out the way abortion has led to a decline in the status of women and motherhood, witnessed today in the 33 to 100 million girls killed before and after birth in China and India, Mother Teresa said, "God told us, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' So first I am to love myself rightly, and then to love my neighbor like that. But how can I love myself unless I accept myself as God has made me?"
On the Lighter Side
How many men does it take to dig a hole in the road?