Fighting Evil Like the Cure of Ars

Fighting Evil Like the Cure of Ars

A few years ago Peter Kreeft wrote an article about the culture war in which he maintained three things. First, he wrote that our civilization is in crisis and we are at war. Second, he said that our enemies are not the liberal media, anti-Catholic bigots, or even the culture of death, but fallen angels and sin. Third, he concluded that the weapons that will win the war are saints.

In other words, if you want to fight evil in the world, be holy.

At first, this may appear to be an overly simplified solution to the many problems we face today, but if you read the lives of the saints you can clearly see the impact that radical holiness has on the world. The real problem with Dr. Kreeft’s solution is not that it is naïve or simplistic, but that it is so difficult. It is not easy to be holy. It is not easy to die to oneself each day. However, with God’s grace, it is certainly possible for each and every one of us. We know this is true because we have the examples of the holy men and women who have done it—the saints. Since it is his feast day today, and since I have been listening to stories about him for as long as I can remember (he is my dad’s favorite saint), let us take St. John Vianney as an example of how holiness transforms lives and changes the world around us.

The Cure of Ars grew up during a time of severe persecution of the Church in France. Amidst this, he was sent to a parish where the people had lost their faith, and he was routinely attacked by the Devil at night for a period of thirty years. Despite the many obstacles he faced, he transformed Ars and the surrounding area through his holiness, mortification, and selfless devotion to his priestly vocation. It is said that he heard confession for eighteen hours a day, and that people would wait for a week to have him hear their confession. He is now the patron saint of parish priests.

The devil at one point said that if there were three men like St. John Vianney in the world, his kingdom would be ruined. So, what can we take from the life of the Cure of Ars that will help us to face the world we live in today? I would like to focus on three things:

We are not alone

We are not the first Christians who find ourselves living in a world that is increasingly hostile to our faith. St. John Vianney grew up in far worse circumstances. He lived during the French Revolution, a time when Mass was outlawed, Churches were closed, and priests were either killed or imprisoned. As a child he had to attend Mass in secret, at night, in a barn. During this time, despite the dangers they faced, many people, especially in the French countryside, never gave up their faith. They continued to pray, lead good lives, and received the sacraments when they could. If we one day face persecution, we are called to do the same.

Personal holiness changes the world

Just as St. John Vianney’s holiness changed the people of Ars and the hundreds of thousands of people who flocked to the town to have him hear their confessions, we need to be confident that our personal holiness changes things, and that it will bring about conversions (even if we are not aware of it in this lifetime). The choice is ours—no one is going to force us to be saints.

We can start today to grow in holiness and we have every means at our disposal. In addition to living out our vocation as best as we can (something that the Cure of Ars said is enough to do penance for all of our past sins), there are a number of ways we can strive for sanctity. First, we can start by praying every day and beginning to grow closer to God. Then, we can begin going to Mass and Confession more often. Next, we can determine what our primary fault is and commit to doing one thing every day to build up the opposite virtue. After that, we can make a long-term sacrifice, even something small, and give it up for the intentions of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and for the world.

Finally, we can serve the poor, the sick, and the lonely, in so many ways and make the spiritual and corporal works of mercy a daily part of our lives. However, as I mentioned before, sanctity is not an easy task. Even the holy Cure struggled with wanting to leave Ars to retire to a place where he could spend more time in prayer. He even tried to leave a few times, but the people of Ars would not let him go. Despite the challenges that we will undoubtedly face in living out our vocation, we must persevere and keep fighting.

We have absolutely nothing to fear

Did you know that the Cure of Ars routinely joked about the Devil’s nightly attacks? He could do this because he knew that the devil held no power over him. In fact, in the middle of the night, when he would hear his door being rattled and pounded on, when he felt the rectory shake as if there was an earthquake, or when the devil dragged his bed around the room or set it on fire, he would simply make the sign of the cross, resume his prayers, and ignore the Devil’s wild antics. After a particularly rough night, the Cure of Ars would predict that a “big fish” was coming, and invariably someone would experience a dramatic conversion in his confessional the following day.

G.K. Chesterton once said, “Each generation is converted by the saint who contradicts it most.” This was certainly true of the Cure of Ars—in a time in France when many people had lost their faith, he brought them back to the basics of Catholicism. St. John Vianney preached repentance, prayed constantly, taught through his example, lived his vocation selflessly and tirelessly, lived out poverty completely (he was a Franciscan tertiary and gave away everything he owned), and reconciled countless souls to God through the confessions he heard.

So the next time you are worried about the evil that you see in the world and you really want to change things, ask yourself, “how can I contradict this generation the most?” or, “how can I be more like the Cure of Ars today?” And then, get to work.

St. John Vianney, pray for us!

image: St Jean-Marie Vianney statue in Avignon, Eglise Saint-Didier / photo by dierk schaefer / Flickr, CC license 2.0. 

WITH APOLOGIES TO DONALD TRUMP FOR THE CRAZY ‘NATIVIST’ RANT OF CARDINAL DOLAN

This week, Cardinal Timothy Dolan took to the New York Daily Newsto write an incoherent and defamatory political hit piece against Donald Trump.

As a Catholic priest, I can only say it is embarrassing to have a Cardinal so blatantly and unfairly trying to associate Mr. Trump with the worst kinds of racism imaginable. I offer an apology on behalf of so many Catholics who are outraged by the dirty politics of Cardinal Dolan.

Ever so “cleverly,” Dolan makes clear that in his opinion Trump is the revival of nativism, “an organized, white, Protestant antagonism towards the Catholic immigrant,” which for Dolan is just a more recent incarnation of the KKK and other racist organizations–an absurd claim–and perhaps one of the most ignorant statements and mean-spirited remarks I have ever seen a bishop state publicly. The more than clear implication by Dolan that Trump is a white supremacist reaches levels of defamation that even the most liberal media has not dare trod.

Dolan should perhaps realize that the continued race bating in this country by President Obama and others is immoral and destructive to the social fabric of our nation. For Dolan to join the base ranks of the peddlers of hate, dividing Catholics and Protestants, blacks and white, the poor and the rich as well as Americans from immigrants is intellectually dishonest. Dolan’s words are unbecoming of a bishop and are not factual.

Dolan who is quick to claim that he is not telling people who they should not vote for, provides the usual vacuous caveat only after he has done all the damage. This is the same bishop who is silent about the recently revealed atrocities of Planned Parenthood, who did little to defend marriage and has done absolutely nothing about pro abortion politicians in his diocese receiving communion and remaining falsely in good standing in the Catholic Church.

Dolan laments that he is not still teaching in college his absurd nativist ideology. I can only say I am relieved for those who would be subjected to his indoctrination, lamentably he has free rein to attack Republicans in the public square.

Dolan is not known for his intellectual depth but his aides should consider reading over his pubic statements to spare American Catholics some embarrassment. Dolan seems jovially unaware of the social unrest that lax immigration laws are causing in France, England and other nations in Europe. It is not Catholic or Christian to advocate for irresponsible immigration. Immigration to be of any help to immigrants and the host country, requires order, knowledge and balance.

Dolan who is also not known for his humility and mercy will likely never apologize, but he should.

If Dolan were to say something sensible about politics to Catholics he should perhaps state the obvious: no Catholic in good conscience can vote for the Democratic party, a party that supports funding Planned Parenthood, opposes marriage, and is seen to be devastating the social fabric of this nation while bringing economic ruin to a once prosperous country.

Truth be told, Dolan who has been busy closing numerous Catholic parishes in New York and selling valuable Catholic real estate, could frankly use Trump’s business acumen advice.

I apologize as a Catholic priest to Mr. Trump and wish to let him know that many of us desire to publicly disassociate ourselves from any perception that what Cardinal Dolan wrote is any way consistent with Catholic doctrine or the basic decency required of all people of good will.

http://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2015/07/30/with-apologies-to-donald-trump-for-the-crazy-nativist-rant-of-cardinal-dolan/

AtonementOnline: The Portiuncula Indulgence

AtonementOnline: The Portiuncula Indulgence:

On a night in July 1216, St. Francis was at prayer in the little church of Portiuncula, devoured by love for God and a thirst to save souls. He prayed for the forgiveness of sins of mankind. Suddenly a brilliant light shone all around. In great splendor Jesus and Mary appeared in the midst of a dazzling cloud surrounded by a multitude of radiant angels. ...Then Jesus said to him: "Francis you are very zealous for the good souls. Ask me what you want for their salvation." St. Francis was rapt in ecstasy before Our Lord. When he regained his courage, he said, "Lord, I, a miserable sinner, beg you to concede an indulgence to all those who enter this church, who are truly contrite and have confessed their sins. And I beg Blessed Mary, your mother, intercessor of man, that she intercede on behalf of this grace."

The Merciful Virgin at once began to beseech her Son on behalf of Francis. Jesus answered: "It is a very great thing you ask me; but you are worthy of even greater things, Friar Francis, and greater things you will have. So I accept your request, but I want you to go to my Vicar, to whom I have given the power to bind and loose in heaven and on earth, to ask him on my behalf for this indulgence."

The Pope granted this petition, and this indulgence has been extended to all parish churches throughout the world for one day each year. The date has been set from noon on August 1 until midnight August 2, the feast of Our Lady of the Angels. It is said that St. Francis was given this day by Our Lord because of the feast of the Chains of St. Peter, celebrated on August 1, commemorating Peter's being released from prison, his chains removed. This is an extraordinary demonstration of God's mercy in removing the chains of sin from those who devoutly and faithfully seek to gain the indulgence by completing its requirements.

The conditions to obtain the Plenary Indulgence of the Forgiveness of Assisi (for oneself or for a departed soul) are as follows:

- Sacramental Confession (during eight days before or after).
- Participation in the Mass
- Recitation of the Apostle's Creed, Our Father, and a prayer for the pope's intentions.

Greed Has Always Driven the Abortion Industry - Crisis Magazine

Greed Has Always Driven the Abortion Industry  - Crisis Magazine

JULY 27, 2015

Greed Has Always Driven the Abortion Industry ANNE HENDERSHOTT

For more than a century, abortion has created tremendous wealth for providers in the United States. That continues today as yet another shocking video has been released showing a top Planned Parenthood official discussing the sale of body parts of unborn children.  And, although this news does not seem to disturb many on the pro-choice side, there was a time when most believed that ending the life of the unborn child was “so egregious an offense against nature” that it deserved the harshest penalties. It was an era when even the New York Times found the practice so abhorrent that their editorial staff responded to the 1878 death of Madame Restell, an infamous abortionist, with the statement that her passing was “a fitting end to an odious career.”

Madame Restell’s death occurred during a time when she held sway over New York City’s abortion industry—owning a network of abortion parlors throughout the city that stretched from her primary facility in a house on Chambers Street all the way across the River to Hoboken.  She was joined in New York City’s burgeoning abortion business by dozens of other abortionists who were luridly described in New York’s National Police Gazette as “fiends who have made a business of professional murder and who have reaped the bloody harvest in quenching the immortal spark in thousands of the unborn.”

The practice of abortion has always been lucrative, and Restell was just the first to parlay the provision of abortion services into a personal fortune of more than a million dollars and a lavish Fifth Avenue brownstone described in the tabloids of the day as the “Mansion Built on Baby Skulls.” She shared the abortion profession with her husband, Charles Lohman, an ex-printer who took the name Mauriceau and advertised himself as a “doctor,” advocating early abortion with “potions and powders” as the “safest” alternative.  Lohman specialized in creating abortifacients, which he sold for exorbitant prices. In the extensively researched Abortion Rites: A Social History of Abortion in America, author Marvin Olasky writes that “Mauriceau was a brazen Barnum with an audacious sales technique.”

In addition to her husband’s “medicinals,” designed to eliminate the developing fetus, Restell specialized in late-term abortion. Advertising herself as “a female physician and professor of midwifery” in the daily newspapers, the self-taught Restell was able to corner the growing abortion market by developing what some authors have suggested were friendly relationships with the police and New York City politicians. While the delivery of abortion services was only a misdemeanor offense in the early nineteenth century, growing numbers of patient deaths moved New York legislators to add statutes in 1845 that mandated severe penalties if the procedure was performed after the quickening of the fetus. As a late-term abortion provider, Restell often found herself on the wrong side of that law—especially when her female patients died, as often happened—not surprisingly, considering the fact that she had no formal training as a physician, midwife, or medical professional. But the ever-resourceful abortionist always managed to find a way to escape without serious or lasting consequences. Even when arrested and sentenced to a one-year term on Blackwell’s Island in the East River, Restell was able to use her financial resources and political connections to purchase excellent accommodations in prison—bringing her own featherbed, carpeting, and easy chairs into the prison suite. Visiting hours were altered so that her husband was able to visit at will and remain alone with her as long as he wished.

So successful was Restell at evading the law that within a short time the National Police Gazette reported that the abortion law actually had the effect of “sweeping every rival from her path, as she remained mistress paramount in the scheme of practical destruction.”  With the competition at bay, Restell ruled New York City’s abortion empire. Even though the New York newspapers decried the practice of abortion and Madame Restell in particular, there was much money in the industry and sharing some of the profits with those who could help expand the abortion business bought the cooperation of police and politicians. To attempt to confront the culture of bribery and extortion that surrounded abortion at the time, Olasky points out that New York Times editor Louis Jennings used his newspaper to begin an anti-abortion crusade. Beginning with a Biblically referenced editorial entitled “The Least of These Little Ones,” Jennings complained that the “perpetration of infant murder … is rank and smells to heaven. Why is there no hint of its punishment?”

Jennings saw the need to mobilize the public and tried to do that by attempting to expose the corruption, and publishing stories of abortion cases gone terribly wrong. Focusing on abortions that ended with the deaths of the mothers, the Times complained about the “extreme rarity of trials” for abortion deaths in this City. Abortionists, the Times reported, “have openly carried on their infamous practice in this City to a frightful extent, and have laughed at the defeat of respectable citizens who have vainly attempted to prosecute them.” By 1878, it seemed that nothing could stop Madame Restell and her sphere of influence over the abortion industry in New York City.  Yet, Restell’s empire fell later that same year when she was yet again arrested following a confrontation with Anthony Comstock, the celebrated anti-vice crusader. Olasky reports that after a brief stint in the Tombs, she once again posted bail and returned home to her mansion on Fifth Avenue. Making her way upstairs, Madame Restell calmly settled back into a warm bath and slit her own throat.  While her death may have been, as the New York Times suggested, a “fitting end” to her abortion empire, it was just the beginning of an industry that continues today to provide great profits to those involved.

The 1960s ushered in a new era in abortion—and abortion profits. Entrepreneur Larry Lader partnered with his friend and Greenwich Village neighbor, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, a gynecologist and abortion provider in New York City, to become the true leaders of this new movement for New York and for the nation. For Lader, the abortion issue was indeed about money, and both he and Nathanson became very wealthy from the profits. But he also had a non-monetary motive. Lader, who had worked with Vito Marcantonio, the only Communist ever to be elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, was a progressive feminist and a great admirer of Margaret Sanger, the founder of the American Birth Control League, the precursor of Planned Parenthood. Writing about these early days of abortion in New York City in The Hand of God, Bernard Nathanson describes Lader as being “obsessed” with abortion.  Like Restell, Lader and Nathanson were effective lobbyists for the pre-Roe abortion industry.

And, as in the Restell era, lawmakers prefer the public remained ignorant of the possible crimes that take place in abortion clinics. In New York City, tanning salons are inspected more regularly than abortion facilities.  The New York Post reported that “eight of the city’s 25 abortion providing clinics were never inspected over the 2000-12 span, five were inspected just once, and eight were inspected only twice or three times—meaning once every four or six years. A total of just 45 inspections were conducted at all 25 facilities during the 12-year period.”  Restaurants in the City are inspected every year and graded, and tanning salons undergo inspections at least once every other year.

Earlier this year, Illinois Right To Life issued a report pointing out that 63 percent of licensed Illinois women’s clinics have not received a health and sanitary inspection for up to three and a half years.  The report also reveals that “40 percent of the clinics licensed between 2000 and 2014 went without health inspections for 14 to 17 years. It adds that the state’s five Planned Parenthood clinics that perform abortions are not licensed and consequently did not receive any health and sanitary inspections between 2000 and 2014.

Kermit Gosnell, the Philadelphia abortionist who was finally found guilty of the murder of three newborn children and the negligent death of one patient—had never been discovered by the Pennsylvania Department of Health because his clinic had been inspected only “sporadically” from 1978 to 1993, and never again until complaints motivated an inspection in 2010. Gosnell had been charged with eight counts of murder including seven babies who were born alive and then killed with scissors. Prosecutors said that he made millions of dollars over 20 years, performing as many illegal, late term abortions as he could. According to the Susan B. Anthony website, the reason for this is that “officials concluded that inspections would be ‘putting a barrier up’ to women seeking abortions.” This is a typical response from the abortion industry but the continued exposure of the horrific practices of this industry through the release of these undercover videos will make it impossible for lawmakers to continue to look the other way—no matter how much they are paid to do so.

By Anne Hendershott

Anne Hendershott is Professor of Sociology and Director of the Veritas Center at Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio. She is the author of Status Envy: The Politics of Catholic Higher Education; The Politics of Abortion; and The Politics of Deviance (Encounter Books). She is also the co-author of Renewal: How a New Generation of Priests and Bishops are Revitalizing the Catholic Church (2013).

MODERN LEPROSY: PORNOGRAPHY by SR. EMMANUEL MALLARD

THE NATURAL LIFE AND THE SUPERNATURAL LIFE OF THE SOUL

ARTICLE I - THE NATURAL LIFE AND THE SUPERNATURAL LIFE OF THE SOUL

We must distinguish clearly in our soul what belongs to its very nature and what is an entirely gratuitous gift of God. The same distinction must be made for the angels who also have a nature which, though entirely spiritual, is very inferior to the gift of grace.

If we carefully consider the human soul in its nature, we see two quite different regions in it: one belongs to the sensible order, the other to the suprasensible or intellectual order. The sensitive part of the soul is that which is common to men and animals; it includes the external senses and the internal senses, comprising the imagination, the sensible memory, and also sensibility, or the sensitive appetite, whence spring the yarious passions or emotions, which we call sensible love and hatred, desire and aversion, sensible joy and sadness, hope and despair, audacity and fear, and anger. All this sensitive life exists in the animal, whether its passions are mild like those of the dove or lamb, or whether they are strong like those of the wolf and the lion.

Above this sensitive part common to men and animals, our nature likewise possesses an intellectual part, which is common to men and angels, although it is far more vigorous and beautiful in the angel. By this intellectual part our soul towers above our body; this is why we say that the soul is spiritual, that it does not intrinsically depend on the body and will thus be able to survive the body after death.

From the essence of the soul in this elevated region spring our two higher faculties, the intellect and the will.(1) The intellect knows not only sensible qualities, colors, and sounds, but also being, the intelligible reality, of necessary and universal truths, such as the following: "Nothing happens without a cause, and, in the last analysis, without a supreme cause. We must do good and avoid evil. Do what you ought to, come what may." An animal will never attain to the knowledge of these principles; even if its imagination were continually growing in perfection, it would never attain to the intellectual order of necessary and universal truths. Its imagination does not pass beyond the order of sensible qualities, known here or there in their contingent singularity.

Since the intellect knows the good in a universal manner, and not only the delectable or useful good but the upright and reasonable good (for example: Die rather than become a traitor), it follows that the will can love this good, will it, and accomplish it. Thereby the intellect immensely dominates the sensitive part or the emotions common to men and animals. By his intellect and his will, man resembles the angel; although his intellect, in contrast to the angelic intellect, depends in this present life on the senses, which propose to it the first objects that it knows.

The two higher faculties, the intellect and the will, can develop greatly as we see in men of genius and superior men of action. These faculties could, however, develop forever without ever knowing and loving the intimate life of God, which is of another order, entirely supernatural, and supernatural alike for angels and men. Man and the angel can indeed know God naturally from without, by the reflection of His perfections in creatures; but no created and creatable intellect can by its natural powers attain, even confusedly and obscurely, the essential and formal object of the divine intellect.(2) To hold that it could be done would be to maintain that this created intellect is of the same nature as God, since it would be specified by the same formal object.(3) As St. Paul says: "For what man knoweth the things of a man, but the spirit of a man that is in him? So the things also that are of God no man knoweth, but the Spirit of God." (4) This order is essentially supernatural.

Sanctifying grace, the seed of glory, introduces us into this higher order of truth and life. It is an essentially supernatural life, a participation in the intimate life of God, in the divine nature, since it even now prepares us to see God some day as He sees Himself and to love Him as He loves Himself. St. Paul has declared to us: "That eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man, what things God hath prepared for them that love Him. But to us God hath revealed them by His Spirit. For the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God." (5)

Sanctifying grace, which makes us begin to live in this higher, supra-angelic order of the intimate life of God, is like a divine graft received in the very essence of the soul to elevate its vitality and to make it bear no longer merely natural fruits but supernatural ones, meritorious acts that merit eternal life for us.

This divine graft of sanctifying grace is, therefore, in us an essentially supernatural life, immensely superior to a sensible miracle and above the natural life of our spiritual and immortal sou1.(6)

Even now this life of grace develops in us under the form of the infused virtues and of the seven gifts of the Holy Ghost. As in the natural order, our intellectual and sensitive faculties spring from the very essence of our soul, so in the supernatural order, from sanctifying grace, received in the essence of the soul, spring, in our superior and inferior faculties, the infused virtues and the gifts which constitute, with the root from which they proceed, our spiritual or supernatural organism.(7) It was given to us in baptism, and is restored to us by absolution if we have the misfortune to lose it.

The spiritual organism may be expressed in the following table of the virtues and the gifts.

V I R T U E S		Theological		Charity -->  Faith -->  Hope -->	Gift of Wisdom Gift of Understanding Gift of Knowledge Gift of Counsel Gift of Piety Gift of Fortitude Gift of Fear		G I F T S
		Moral		Prudence -->  Justice  - Religion -->  - Penance  - Obedience  Fortitude -->  - Patience  Temperance-->  - Humility  - Meekness  - Chasity

In connection with this table it would be well to consult St.
Thomas' treatise on each of the virtues, where he speaks of the corresponding gift.(8) The gift of fear corresponds both to temperance and to hope,(9) but this latter virtue is also aided by the gift of knowledge, which shows us the emptiness of created things and thereby makes us desire God and depend on Him.(10)

Ravi Zacharias on the Christian View of Homosexuality #Apologetics

Donald Trump Full Speech in South Carolina 7/21/2015 - 2016 Presidential...

Donald Trump: No apology to McCain, vows to stay the course

Getty

Donald Trump doesn’t care about mounting Republican outrage either.

Trump, who has stood by past statements questioning President Barack Obama’s birthplace and asserting many Mexican undocumented immigrants were “rapists,” is doing the same with his comments disparaging Ariz. Sen. John McCain’s military service because McCain was shot down and captured during the Vietnam War.

“No, not at all,” Trump said during a phone interview Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” when asked if he owed the Arizona Republican an apology.

Trump, who made his remark — “He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured” — at a gathering of Republican presidential at the Family Leadership Summit Saturday in Ames, Iowa, also insisted the crowd was delighted by his attack on McCain.

“I got a standing ovation, the biggest ovation they had all weekend, by far,” Trump said. “When I left the room, it was a total standing ovation. It was wonderful to see. Nobody was insulted.”

He said the the GOP presidential candidates who were quick to condemn his remarks were motivated by jealousy.

“Later on, the Republican candidates, some of whom are registering 1 percent and zero, and they’re very upset that I’m leading the polls by actually a nice margin, they’re extremely upset,” Trump said Sunday, adding: “They started attacking me.”

He also said he wouldn’t drop out of the race, as Texas Gov. Rick Perry called for him to do.

“Of course, they’d love to have me do that because I’m leading the pack,” naming Nevada and North Carolina as two states where polls show him in the lead. “I’m certainly not pulling out; I’m leading, and I’m leading in many states.”

Trump said it was actually McCain, who still cannot lift his arms above his head due to torture he experienced while a prisoner of war in Vietnam, who needed to apologize — to the citizens who showed up at a Trump rally in Phoenix last weekend. McCain said Trump “fired up the crazies” at the rally, sparking their now week-long feud.

The people in Phoenix were “devastated by illegal immigration, something I’m very proud to have brought to the forefront,” Trump said. “We had thousands of people, and he said they’re all crazies. He called them crazies. And frankly, I think he owes them an apology.”

Trump also continued to attack McCain for not doing enough to help veterans.

“I’m very disappointed in John McCain because the vets are horribly treated in this country,” Trump said. “I’m going to fight for the vets. I’ve done a lot for the vets. And the vets — I’ve been going around to the campaign trail. They’re treated like third-class citizens. He’s done nothing to help the vets. And I will tell you, they are living in hell.”

The billionaire real estate developer and entertainer said his experience helping to build the Vietnam Memorial in downtown Manhattan showed he could help veterans more than McCain could.

“He’s on television all the time, talking, talking,” Trump said of McCain. “Nothing gets done. You look at what’s happening to our veterans — they’re being decimated, OK. So, I will do far more for veterans than anybody. I’ll be able to build them new hospitals, I’ll be able to build them care centers. I’ll be able to help the veterans.”

And Trump vowed to keep a key part of his persona — responding to critics by calling people “dummy,” among other things, and insulting the physical appearance of others — even if he were elected president.

“When people attack me, I let them have it back,” Trump said. “You say physical appearance, you know, it’s my hair but people are constantly attacking my hair. I don’t see you coming to my defense.”
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/trump-no-apology-to-mccain-vows-to-stay-the-course-120329.html

comments:Jack spring says:Trump's right: McCain graduated last in his class at Annapolis ... He is a dummy ... Trump did well at Wharton ... McCain then went on to lose a very expensive fighter jet because he was a lousy pilot, then went on to lose a very expensive Presidential race because he was a lousy political candidate. War hero? Why? Because he was captured and survived? He's a Keating Five cheat and was on the wrong side of comprehensive campaign finance reform and immigration reform (amnesty) ... McCain is jealous because Trump drew a crowd much larger and more enthusiastic than he ever did in Phoenix and insulted the effort saying Trump attracts crazies. McCain deserves a knockout punch from Trump to shut him up so he fades into oblivion. RINOS your days are over ... McCain and Romney, you lost the last two elections for us, gave us Obama, and lost our country. You call us crazy? We just want our country back.

VIDEO: Fiery Donald Trump Reveals How He’ll Stop Mass Military Shootings as President

America is again reeling from another mass shooting that happened in a so-called “gun free zone,” this time at the hands of a gunman named Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeez. The military locations where the attacks took place have been under gun control rules that have been in effect since the Clinton years.

Of all of the Republican candidates, none have made gun-free zones on military installations a major issue, save one: Donald Trump.

In an interview with blog Ammoland several weeks ago, Trump talked about gun-free zones on military bases and stated unequivocally that he would end them.

“As commander in chief, I would mandate that soldiers remain armed and on alert at our military bases,” Trump told interviewers. “President Clinton never should have passed a ban on soldiers being able to protect themselves on bases. America’s Armed Forces will be armed.”

In an appearance on Fox News last night, Trump again stood up for removing gun free zones on military property.

“These are four great Marines … and that they’re not allowed to carry guns is absolutely ridiculous,” Trump said.

According to the Washington Examiner, Trump — who himself is licensed to carry a concealed weapon — said that our troops “will be able to defend themselves against terrorists” if he were elected.

“Our brave soldiers should not be at risk because of policy created by civilian leadership,” he said. “Political correctness has no place in this debate.”

He also said that Americans should be on guard for attacks against the Second Amendment.

“The Second Amendment is right, not a privilege,” he said. “The small minority of anti-everything activists may be vocal, but we have facts, and the Constitution, on our side.

“Gun control does not reduce crime. It has consistently failed to stop violence. Americans are entitled to protect their families, their property and themselves,” Trump added. “In fact, in right-to-carry states the violent crime rate is 24 percent lower than the rest of the United States and the murder rate is 28 percent lower. This should not be up for debate.”

We agree wholeheartedly. Sadly, the Marines in Chattanooga never had a chance. Let’s hope that in the future, our soldiers will be able to exercise their full constitutional right to self-defense.

Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter if you agree the tragedy in Chattanooga could have been prevented by allowing concealed or open carry.

Friday, July 17th, 2015

http://conservativetribune.com/fiery-trump-mass-military/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=RightWingNews&utm_content=2015-07-18

Supreme Court -Re-Defining Marriage-Fr. Rutler-NYC

July 5, 2015-Fr. George Rutler-NYC

The Supreme Court’s abuse of its authority in the decision redefining marriage as an institution based on feelings rather than fact and sanctioning deviancy as a civil right was expected, but the surprise was its sentimental substitution of nihilistic narcissism for jurisprudence, expressed in an amorphous substitute for English diction. This passed a death sentence on Christian culture, just as Roe v. Wade sanctioned the deaths of millions of infants.

As Christ rose from the dead, so can our nation, but only the cynic and the naïf will deny that the next steps will be attacks on Christ himself in his Church, schools and charitable institutions. It can’t happen here? That is what the English said before 1534 and the French before 1789 and the Russians before 1917 and the Germans before 1923. Now is the time of trial predicted by Christ. Not all will be brave enough to endure the persecutions predicted by Christ, though great will be the reward for those who bring their white robes of Christian dignity “unstained into the everlasting life of Heaven.”

Pope Francis has said, “Same-sex marriage is not simply a political struggle, but it is an attempt to destroy God’s plan. It is a move of the ‘father of lies’ who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.” The President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops declared that the narrow vote of the Supreme Court “is a tragic error that harms the common good and most vulnerable among us.” Chesterton wrote in 1926: “The next great heresy is going to be simply an attack on morality, and especially on sexual morality.” In 2008, Sister Lucia, who believed that she saw the Mother of Christ at Fatima, told Cardinal Caffarra: “The final confrontation between the Lord and Satan will be over family and marriage.” Injustice takes a harsh toll, but it cannot last, whereas “justice is eternal” (Wisdom 1:15).

I yield my column to some lines from the dissenting opinion of Justice Scalia, who is Catholic in practice as well as in name:

A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy. . . . Four of the nine are natives of New York City. . . . The five Justices who compose today’s majority are entirely comfortable concluding that every State violated the Constitution for all of the 135 years between the Fourteenth Amendment’s ratification and Massachusetts’ permitting of same-sex marriages in 2003. They have discovered in the Fourteenth Amendment a “fundamental right” overlooked by every person alive at the time of ratification, and almost everyone else in the time since. . . . The opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentious as its content is egotistic. . . . The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie. . . . With each decision of ours that takes from the People a question properly left to them—with each decision that is unabashedly based not on law, but on the “reasoned judgment” of a bare majority of this Court—we move one step closer to being reminded of our impotence. 

http://www.stmichaelnyc.com/pastors-corner/from-the-pastor-1

Love Unclouded by a Rainbow Filter - Aleteia

It’s been a few weeks since the Supreme Court issued its vote that made same-sex “marriage” legal in all fifty states. Since that decision, social media has been taken over by a rainbow filter, especially on Facebook as millions of people have adjusted their profile picture to be shown under an assembly of horizontally-striped colors in support of the Supreme Court’s decision.

I am personally troubled by how many of my Christian friends—especially my Christian friends who believe marriage was created by God to be between one man and one woman for life—have adopted this rainbow filter. I’ve seen several reasons tossed around: support for equal rights, support for equal recognition under the law, etc. But every rationalization ultimately can be grouped under the catch-all umbrella phrase: “Separation of Church and State.”

The reasoning, for these Christian friends of mine, is this: There is a separation between Church and State in this great country, so it’s totally acceptable to support same-sex couples being afforded the privilege of legally recognized marriages.

What troubles me about this is that it comes off as celebration. They don’t just appear to be “supporting” something political—they appear to be celebrating something culturally, well, destructive, and objectively sinful.

I would like to suggest this as food for thought: We pride ourselves, as Americans, for the separation of church and state. It is in place for good reason, and the protections it guarantees are important. However, there is another important separation I would like to remind us all of.

When Jesus was praying in the garden before his passion and death, he prayed that we might be “in the world, and not of it.” Jesus was a perfect example of this. He met people where they were, brought them a message of hope and peace, healed their diseases and forgave their sins. He supported all people in every sense of the word, and showed a profound respect for their dignity.

But one thing Jesus never, ever did . . . was celebrate sin.
As a same-sex attracted person (who is not ashamed of my attractions), I would like to offer a challenge to those Christians who think they are loving me by filtering their profile picture through a rainbow flag:

Love those who experience same-sex attraction. Not this hands-off, “you-do-you,” don’t-hurt-feelings inspired false love, but real love.

The love of Jesus wasn’t afraid to get dirty, to get bloody, to die to self. It wasn’t afraid to offend, though offense was never its goal. The love of Jesus is authentic, appreciating persons for who they are (and who we are is not defined by who we are attracted to), and supporting them in a journey of developing an ever-deeper relationship with God, others, and the self.

Jesus would not have had a rainbow-filtered profile picture. That kind of “love” is too cheap and easy for Him. He didn’t avoid hard questions or hard circumstances. He gave hope, joy, peace, healing, and ultimately His life, to show us our worth.

I beg of you, brothers and sisters, to be in the world and not of it. Love more authentically than through a rainbow filter. Let love really win. Bring the Gospel to a dying and hurting world rather than celebrating its spiral into sin. Forget the politics and buzzwords for a few moments, and consider the impact of celebrating persons made in the image of God, and refusing to ever celebrate their stepping aside from that image.

Please don’t celebrate sin. Celebrate love, namely, by showing it, really, for what it really is.

"Emily" is the penname of a 23-year-old Theology student who spends her free time reading, writing, hanging out with friends, and dyeing her hair ridiculous colors. When she isn’t doing homework, she’s assisting with the youth ministry program at her parish.

This article first appeared at The Chastity Project.  It is reprinted here with kind permission.
http://www.aleteia.org/en/lifestyle/article/love-unclouded-by-a-rainbow-filter-5885331765198848

Understanding What it Means to be Devout

Understanding What it Means to be Devout

The word devotion, which is derived from the Latin, answers to that of devotedness — a vowing of ourselves, a consecration of ourselves. A devout person is, then, a person devoted to God, consecrated to God. There is no stronger expression than that of devotion to mark that disposition of the soul of a person who is ready to do everything and to suffer everything for Him to whom he is devoted.

The devotion to creatures (I mean, of course, that which is lawful and allowed by God) has necessarily its limits. The de­votion to God has none, and can have none. As soon as the least reserve, the least exception, intrudes there, it is no longer devotion. True and solid devotion is, then, that disposition of the heart by which we are ready to do and to suffer, without exception or reserve, everything that comes from God’s good pleasure, everything that is the will of God. And this disposi­tion is the most excellent of all the gifts of the Holy Spirit. We cannot ask for it too often or too earnestly; and we must never flatter ourselves that we have it in its perfection, because it can always go on increasing, either in itself or in its effects.

Devotion is interior and lasting

We see, by this definition, that devotion is something most interior, which has to do with the inmost life of the soul, for it affects that within us which is most spiritual — that is to say, our understanding and our will. Devotion consists, then, nei­ther in reasoning, nor in imagination, nor in anything that is sensible. We are not devout just because we are able to reason well about the things of God, nor because we have grand ideas or fine imaginations about spiritual matters, nor because we are sometimes affected to tears.

Again, devotion is not a thing that passes, that comes and goes, as it were, but it is something habitual, fixed, permanent, which extends over every instant of life and regulates all our conduct.

The principle of devotion is that, with God being the one Source and the one Author of holiness, the reasonable crea­ture ought to depend on Him in everything and be absolutely governed by the Spirit of God. He must be always attached to God in the depths of his soul, always attentive to His voice within him, always faithful to accomplish what He asks of him each moment.

It is, then, impossible to be truly devout unless we are inte­rior, given to recollection, accustomed to retire within ourselves, or rather never to go out of ourselves, to possess our soul in peace.

Whoever gives himself up to his senses, to his imagination, to his passions, I do not say in criminal things, but even in those which are not bad in themselves, will never be devout; for the first effect of devotion is to bring into captivity the senses, the imagination, and the passions, and to prevent the will from ever being led away by them.

He who is curious, impulsive, delighting to interest him­self in exterior things, and to mix himself up with the affairs of others; he who is never willingly alone; he who is critical, speaking ill of his neighbor, sarcastic, irritable, contemptu­ous, haughty, ready to take offense at anything that wounds his self-love; he who is obstinate, believing only in his own opinions, or he who is a slave to human respect and to public opinion to such an extent that he is in consequence weak, in­constant, and always changing his principles and his conduct will never be devout in the sense I mean.

The devout person seeks God, not himself

The truly devout man is a man of prayer, whose sole delight is to be with God, and to speak with Him, and who scarcely ever loses his sense of the presence of God. Not that he is al­ways thinking of God — for that is impossible here below — but because he is always united to God in his heart and is guided in everything by His Spirit. To pray, he has no need of a book, or of a method, or of great efforts of the head or even of the will. He has only to retire quietly into himself. There he finds God; there he finds peace — sometimes a peace full of joy, sometimes a peace in spite of dryness, but always a deep and real peace. He prefers the prayer in which he gives much to God, and in which he suffers — the prayer in which self-love is undermined gradually, until it can find nothing to feed upon; in short, a simple prayer, denuded of all images or of perceptible feelings and of all those things which the soul can experience in other kinds of prayer.

The truly devout man seeks not himself or his own gratifi­cation in the service of God, and he endeavors to practice this maxim of the Imitation of Christ: Wherever you find self, re­nounce self.

The truly devout man studies to fulfill perfectly all the du­ties of his state and all his really necessary duties of kindness and courtesy to society. He is faithful to his devotional exer­cises, but he is not a slave to them; he interrupts them, he sus­pends them, he even gives them up altogether for a time when any reason of necessity or of simple charity requires it. Pro­vided he does not do his own will, he is always certain of doing the will of God.

Devotion calls for simplicity, confidence, and generosity

The truly devout man does not run about seeking for good works, but he waits until the occasion of doing good presents itself to him. He does what in him lies to ensure success; but he leaves the care of the success to God. He prefers those good works which are obscure and done in secret to those which are brilliant and gain general admiration; but he does not shrink from these latter ones when they are for the glory of God and the edification of his neighbor. The truly devout man does not burden himself with a great quantity of vocal prayers and practices that do not leave him time to breathe. He always pre­serves his liberty of spirit; he is neither scrupulous nor uneasy about himself; he goes on with simplicity and confidence.

He has made a determination, once and for all, to refuse nothing to God, to grant nothing to self-love, and never to commit a voluntary fault; but he does not perplex himself. He goes on courageously; he is not too particular. If he falls into a fault, he does not agitate himself; he humbles himself at the sight of his own weakness; he raises himself up and thinks no more about it.

He is not astonished at his weaknesses, at his falls or his im­perfections; he is never discouraged. He knows that he can do nothing, but that God can do everything. He does not rely on his own good thoughts and resolutions, but simply on the grace and the goodness of God. If he were to fall a hundred times a day, he would not despair, but he would stretch out his hands lovingly to God and beg of Him to lift him up and to take pity on him.

The truly devout man has a horror of evil, but he has a still greater love of good. He thinks more about practicing virtue than about avoiding vice. He is generous, large-hearted, and courageous; and when there is a question of exposing himself to danger for God’s sake, he does not fear wounds. In a word, he loves better to do what is good, even at the risk of falling into some imperfection, than to omit it through fear of the danger of sinning.

No one is so amiable in the ordinary course of life as a really devout man. He is simple, straightforward, open as the day, unpretentious, gentle, solid, and true; his conversation is pleas­ing and interesting; he can enter into all innocent amuse­ments; and he carries his condescending kindness and charity as far as possible, short of what is wrong. Whatever some per­sons may say, true devotion is never a melancholy thing, either for itself or for others. How could the man who continually enjoys the truest happiness — the only happiness — ever be sad? It is the inordinate passions of human nature that are sad — avarice, ambition, love that is not sanctified by God and has not God for its chief end. And it is to divert themselves from the trouble and uneasiness that these passions cause the heart that men plunge themselves recklessly into pleasures and excesses, which they vary continually, but which weary the soul, without ever satisfying it.

Whoever really and in sincerity gives himself up to the ser­vice of God will experience the truth of that sentence “To serve God is to reign,” even if it be in poverty, in humilia­tions, and in suffering. All those who in this world seek their happiness in something that is not God — all, without excep­tion — will verify the saying of St. Augustine: The heart of man is made for God alone and is never at peace until it rests in God. “Thou hast made us for Thyself, and our heart findeth no rest until it reposeth in Thee.”

Editor’s note: This article is adapted from a chapter in Fr. Grou’s The Spiritual Life, which is available from Sophia Institute Press. 

Fr. Jean Nicolas Grou (1731–1803) lived through times of tremendous turmoil, first as a Jesuit novice when Jesuits were surpressed, and later during the French Revolution. In his book, The Spiritual Life, are the fruits of his sufferings and prayers.