This Sunday, I was again blessed with the opportunity to attend a Traditional Latin Mass at Saint Benedict Center. Again, the sermon was wisdom-packed, and the Canon was very well said (although, silly me, I had only $1 for the collection; I'd spent my $5 on a Shania Twain CD the day before).

Afterwards, Br. Andre Marie, MICM gave an informative and amusing update on the Southern Poverty Law Center's "Intelligence Report", which labels Catholic Traditionalists (specifically the Center) as a hate group. Among the report's comical calumnies were reports that the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary

may support abolishing the government,
support violoence against Jews,
have an ideology based in hatred, and (best of all)
are trained in Tae Kwon Do and have automatic weapons.

Needless to note, all at the brunch had a fine laugh over that! If only all knew of the kind and loving nature of the Slaves, "more and more" people would not oppose them. This thinly veiled liberal hatred (from an allegedly anti-hate organization) is the fruit of an unsympathetic press, willing to buy into every bit of leftist propaganda. The Slaves are always so friendly.
After the enjoyable brunch, I was witness to one of the coolest and funniest things ever. A few of the sisters were eating doughnuts as they said goodbye to all. Now, that is something I never imagined as possible; gone are the images of heroic Carthusians from my brain, all thanks to

The Nun with a Doughnut

One Lord's Day most bright, after Holy Mass,
I saw a sister breaching God's command,
Crumbs on her lips, a donut in her hand.
A common hydrogenated trespass,
I should have said, This victual eschew!
For the symbolic spouse's fatty bite
Sent an unlight example to my sight,
And when the nun was through, I had one too.

Quite true.
My, I haven't felt so comically animated in weeks. It's somewhat of a distraction from a longer poem I've been working on. It'll tie in heaven, Hell, and Israel; the Cristeros, the Masons, and the Dust Bowl. Oh, and did I mention romance? Well, it will just be as crazy good as most of my metered mutterings.

Despite the motu propio, that great victory for Tradition, I am consistently reminded that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

I don't quite understand the movement for priestesses within the Catholic Church. If they so strongly disagree with the infallible teachings of the Church of Rome, then they should leave the Church. The only reason I can imagine such wishy-washy liberals would like to remain in communion with the Church would be if they knew Catholicism was the only true faith. But, if they were solid in their Faith, then they would know God wouldn't want them to be batty feminists. Their religion- definitely not true Catholicism, because of their invalid ordinations- is a self-contradicting entity. [Did what I just wrote make any sense?]


Then, of course, there's the bright side. While the Society of St. Pius X has 473 priests worldwide, and the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter has 194, the Roman Catholic Women Priests society in the above article have less than 50 "priests" and "deacons" worldwide. The leftists within the Catholic Church, I am quite confident, will continue to die out in the coming years, as soldiers of Christ and sons of Tradition will multiply in number in the coming years. Go SSPX!

Of late, I've discovered the wonderful work of Joe Sobran. Here are some of his most delightful words of wisdom:

"A tolerant fellow Christian just told me he thinks atheists are entitled to their opinions. I told him I think they’re entitled to my opinions; I’ve heard enough of theirs!

Don’t even get me started on the subject of that fool Darwin."

As of right now, they are added to my personal code of beliefs.

Of late, several definitive events have come to pass in my life, mostly fortunate. Two days ago, I was able to attend the Mass of the Ages at Immaculate Heart of Mary chapel again. Before Mom and I headed over to the community brunch, we happened upon Brother Andre Marie (furthest right), the prior of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, whom we had spoken with two years before. We were still fresh in his memory, and a conversation began, quickly shifting to my immediate future at Assumption College. After telling him of the liturgical abuses at the school's chapel (itself an abuse to the eye, a modern structure of 60s design), such as the Creed being inaudibly sung by a female vocalist, I spoke about my major in Political Science. Brother then asked what political news sources I use. Once I mentioned Human Events, Ann Coulter, The Remnant, and New Oxford Review, he recommended Joe Sobran to me [I've yet to check him out], and digressed into details about his support for Ron Paul. Now, I've long respected Brother Andre Marie, so I did my best to consider his opinion objectively, and have apparently succeeded.

First expounding upon Paul's venerable libertarian yet pro-life record, Brother asked about my choice: Sam Brownback. He reminded me that Brownback was relatively pro-war (though not so much as most of the other Republicans, to be sure). I replied that my preference for the Kansas senator were based upon his superb pro-life credentials- after all, he's just about the most anti-abortion and truly Catholic man in the entire Senate. Taking my thoughts with a predictable grain of salt, the model monk became slightly sadder and less bright-eyed. He declared that he held the more "radical" opinion, that the United States should withdraw its forces from Iraq immediately. Recounting the war's complete incompatibility to Catholic just war theory, which I already knew, he told me one specific I'd not before realized. Of St. Thomas Aquinas' three prerequisites for a war to be just, #1 is that it must be conducted by a proper authority.
Of course, the conflict in question was authorized by Congress, but with no declaration of war. As Brother continued, I glanced nervously at the copies of Neo-Conned! and Neo-Conned! Again on the shelves of the Saint Benedict Center bookstore. He told me about several like-minded experts he had read before the war began, who had predicted the eventual, dismal course into quagmire. Throughout, I have advocated variants of "stay the course", because I really believed that we could not abandon a nation, however imperfect, whose people desired freedom fall to a jihadist minority; furthermore, I had thought that the troop surge (our only real change in strategy thusfar) would succeed, and the lives of Iraqi civilians would improve. Probably a month ago, I realized that I was wrong. Rather than burden myself with new regrets, I shall thenceforth join the withdrawal bandwagon. The surge's original time frame is almost up. The hawks have had their fair chance. Now it's time to confess this grand, G.O.P.-engineered failure for what it is.

Brother finished with his thoughts on the neoconservative motivation for the war. Here I still disagreed. While he placed the blame on Zionism and Administration connections with Big Oil, I hold that these are only secondary motivations. One of my best friends in high school was a compassionate and optimistic self-identified Dick Cheney conservative. The neocons, we must realize, may be misguided, but the vast majority have honest intentions. They are ideologues, and simply act through their adoration for democracy, which they cherish over all else. In substituting a means for an end, they are often blind to reality, and in the case of Iraq demand a still longer surge, and still more troops in their descent into dialectical madness.

Luckily, the atmosphere became again gleeful at the brunch, whence Brother Andre Marie gave a long speech on the motu propio, and then answered many questions. We went home happy.

The next day, my Ron Paul conversion was completed. A look at his platform [see his website on my sidebar, and also Wikipedia] revealed that he does believe in laissez faire, but distinguishes between free trade and "managed trade" under NAFTA and CAFTA, which are jeopardizing our sovereignty- he has found the proper, middle path. Furthermore, he has cosponsored legislation to end the federal judiciary's ability to impose abortion on the states, and is a foe of the death penalty. Oh, near as much as sin do I deteste changing my mind...but in honor of Christ, whom we call Logos, I cannot continue to support one great candidate when a still finer one is out there, even though I've already donated $75 to the Brownback campaign. Still well spent...at least it wasn't Romney!

The catchphrase seems to be "RON PAUL REVOLUTION". However, as a Catholic Traditionalist and a man well aware that Rep. Paul is merely trying to make our government into what our honorable Founders wanted it to be, RON PAUL COUNTERREVOLUTION is more fitting for this pundit's new warcry.

I will be quite brief. Anyone who, like me, has struggled against the atheistic superstars trying to ruin our Nation will certainly like to read this article from the Valley Advocate, our local leftist newsrag. The writer, Alan Bisbort (I believe he is a Protestant) spends most of his time launching attacks on President Bush [most of the time for the wrong reasons], but herein he has put partisanship aside, and has in my judgment written the most witty refutation of Hitchens style antitheism. No, I'm not making this up- this is a must read, and will agument any Catholic Traditionalist's security in the Faith.

Also, just finished Benedict XVI's Jesus of Nazareth, and it was excellent.

These have been active days for a summer vacation. Yesterday, during a break from a six mile walk across Northampton, I was able to attend Holy Mass. Although I am the only attendee without graying hair, Mass on Tuesday is usually better than the sacrifice on the Lord's Day. On Tuesday, we say a novena to Our Lady of the Miraculous Medal, (this is actually the cover of the prayer booklet), and Father Hamilton also is able to consecrate the Hosts with greater devotion and solemnity. Afterwards, I stay for Blue Army hour, which is quite productive, and conducive to true devotion. The only problem occured to me yesterday.
We say a prayer to Pope John Paul II. While he is almost certainly in Heaven, the prayer
I. States that the Third Secret of Fatima predicted the late Pontiff's attempted assassination. Despite what Cardinal Bertone has told us, this is an obvious lie. We also
II. Praised John Paul the Great for "giving" us his unnecessary Luminous Mysteries of the Rosary, which clearly break with the traditional connection of the Rosary to the psalms, as there are as many Hail Marys in a full, 15-mystery Rosary as psalms in the Book of Psalms.
After Blue Army hour, I asked the opinions of the four others there on the motu propio. Two of them, saintly and prayerful Christians who grew up with the Traditional Roman Rite of the Mass, seemed indifferent. Although they are both conservative, and at times attended a Latin novus ordo said once a month at a local parish [I haven't been, but will see what it's like next Thursday if possible], they held the view that "A Mass is a Mass".

Maybe, but tradition and common sense tell us Holy Masses do more honor to God if they are said with more reverence (and the graces we receive depend even more on our personal devotion). In my humble yet informed opinion, only the very best New Mass will surpass the very worst Traditional Mass, due to the very different nature of the priest's prayers and actions, and also to the extra trouble we Trads usually go to to make the altar truly beautiful and worthy of Christ's renewed, nonviolent sacrifice. To be fair, St. Mary of the Assumption has retained its original, gorgeous altar of white marble (I'll get a picture sometime), but [and Father is quite fanatical about this] the Tabernacle has been pushed over to a nook on the left, and is encased in a relatively less beautiful wooden structure.

We pray that the "outrages and sacrileges" against Our Lord and Our Lady [the latter here being dishonored, along with all women, by the removal of the veil over the Tabernacle. The Remnant wrote a good article on this, but I can't locate it on the internet] will cease. I say we begin at our home parishes!

...testing 123...

...testing 123...

Yesterday, I left a comment on another Catholic Traditionalist blog, and stated that good news is coming in too quickly. Luckily, I was right. It seems 15 former sisters in the Religious Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen, a sedevacantist order, have decided to come into communion with the Church, and are now being reconciled. It's not often we hear news of 15 new nuns. Just imagine all the hours of prayer, contemplation, evangelization, and teaching they can contribute to the Church's work!

I could not find the picture of the sisters which I wanted, so this Mary Immaculate Queen image seems suitable.

Now that I've returned, I can finally blog! At any rate, the vacation was more Catholic than most. Reading done included Pat Buchanan's State of Emergency, truly a necessary book, the first four chapters of Pope Benedict XVI's scholarly Jesus of Nazareth, and several articles in the Hoover Institution's Policy Review. More importantly, I was able to go to a Tridentine Mass.

Unfortunately, Fr. Novak of St. Anthony of Padua Church (near Charlotte) was too preoccupied to say a High Mass, or even give a homily. An influential local priest, as part of his response to the MP, warned his flock not to attend SSPX masses, and alleged that they were in schism. In a spirit reminiscent of fiery, righteous Protestant ministers from our Nation's past, and also of minutemen from the War of Independence, he hastily organized plans for the entire congregation to drive an hour and a half to the calumniating priest's church, and distribute literature telling the truth about the SSPX. That is one involved flock!

Although I dearly desired to join this new crusade, which brought to mind the desperate, glorious assault on the Death Star in Star Wars: Episode IV and St. Bernard's grandstanding for the Second Crusade, my mother and grandmother [a visiting Lutheran schismatic] already had plans to go to a "classy" (and faceless) city restaurant. With barely a blessing for the child-stuffed parishioners leaving for the [admittedly friendly] grand clash with the Modernists, we departed.

The trip was also literarilly provokative, especially as I gazed over the farmland of Pennsylvania and Virginia. Of the three poems I completed, I plan only on posting the below

Sonnet LVI

I met her in that giddy day when the
Guilty, clumsy rockets adorn the skies:
Audacious caravels, like fireflies
Inflamed the clouds in blue-edged Modena.

Before the vague watch of the Appenines
And every tall, transcendental spire
My lucid voice held her heart afire;
An easy task, for circles cherish sines.
As when the tricolor is respected
Her figure, fairer than a ruby ring
On conifer green, makes copper churchbells sing
To a soul which is by Christ perfected.
But hers, which is doused in Mary's roses,
Holds few contemplations Christ opposes.

Just a few hours ago, I finally finished my last shift at Big Lots. Nope, no more conversing with confused (sometimes cute) customers, and no more arranging everything just so. The check out aisles at store #1493 will never look so nice again. Also, no more blogging...until about a fortnight from now. Ahh yes, it is indeed time for a vacation!

The family and I are going to visit my grandmother in North Carolina. But no one likes hearing vacation plans, so only one more detail. We will likely have a chance to visit St. Anthony of Padua, an SSPX church in Mount Holly. Finally; I've not been to a Tridentine Mass in nearly a year, and never to one said by an SSPX priest. Wish me luck, and check up on the ol' blog in a few weeks.

God be with you. And happy Independence Day.

Well, Inquisitor Generalis will sure be happy about the Motu Propio.

***

Yesterday, I was again, yes yet again troubled by the opinions which secularists like Ali Sina are throwing about, in haughty and pseudo-intellectual attempts to disprove the Western understanding of God. I suppose Sina has an excuse, as he was once Muslim, and thus his understanding of religion is not so based in logic and as our Roman Catholic conception of Faith and Reason. Now, others have answered their blather at other times, but I feel the only way to make the unbelievers leave us alone (and to secure our own faith) is to record why we believe what we do, and to clear up all misconceptions about Catholicism.

One of the easiest ways to criticize faith in general is to lump all religions together, ignoring the differing doctrines, and to go after all belief in God at once [the cause is usually a combination of 1. utter cluelessness about the thing they're criticizing, and 2. they believe in effect (whether or not they say so) that all religions are more or less the same, and have shared guilt for their crimes, even if some faiths are beneficial to humanity when examined alone]. This oversimplification is clearly an attempt to bend the truth. Anyone who does the math and the reading will realize that Catholicism is not remotely as violent as Islam, and that the bad done by "God" (even generalized) is far outweighed by the good. Even in unreligious Massachusetts, the disappearance of religious charities and hospitals would cause a medical emergency of unfathomable proportions. Ali Sina said the below about the revelation of religion, and the supposed unfairness of having to find the correct faith:

His messengers tell us that he has sent them to teach us to be righteous. Apart from the fact that for this mighty task he often chooses men who do not walk their own talk and themselves live less than honorable lives, which in the case of his favorite Prophet [Mohammed] was scandalous, he has made it clear that living righteously is not enough. We have to recognize him also through his messengers. Without that recognition, none of our good deeds would count. But the problem does not end there. Despite the fact that each time he sends a messenger he makes it clear, in one way or another, that this messenger is the only and exclusive way to him or that he is the last one, he surprises us by sending new massagers at the least expected moments and in the most unlikely places, often choosing the less educated and the most ignorant among the men. Then he expects us to find these new messengers with the purity of our own heart but without the use of our brain. If we fail to do so, even if we already praise him, all of our worships become null and when we die we are given a one-way ticket to hell.

To know god is a very serious business. If you make a mistake you know where you end up. So you are left on your own to find your way through this maze.

In Christianity, this was not the case. In God's plan for the salvation of man, the essential truths which had been known from Adam to Noe, which had been forgotten in time, were unmistakably presented to Abraham, a virtuous man who was told to start a religion not via conversions, but by passing it down to his descendents, who eventually numbered in the millions. And when God established the Catholic Church, it did not arrive unannounced, as Islam did, but was foretold with numerous and clear signs in the Old Testament, which our Savior Jesus Christ, later went out of his way to fulfill. In fact, these preparations produced a very large number of early believers, making imminent and far reaching efforts of conversion among the Gentiles possible.

Another clever (and expectable) infidel's trick, somewhat of a corollary to generalizations, is to equate God with man, and judge Him as an equal to us. This is done so that they may say

Religionists say that God is all loving. But it is clear that the foundation of this world is not based on love. Every day billions of creatures die for other creatures to feed on them and live. Is this how a loving god would design the universe? Every day thousands of innocent human lives are destroyed in God-made and man-made disasters. Why God does not intervene? Religionists for lack of answer to this question say: he is testing us! What an outrageous thing!

and, for comic effect,

Why he is so oblivious of the cries of the wronged ones in this world? In my country if one sees someone in danger and is able but does not intervene to help, that person could be prosecuted. If God sets foot to Canada, I will take him to the court for crime against humanity.

They must realize that, according to a "religionist's" view (they must prove that our view is illogical, not that our theology is nonsensical when God is our equal), man was created by God, and owes a heavy debt to Him for making our sustenance possible in the first place. That is why we pray before meals. Our very existence is a privelige as from God, which other men are not to take away. And God would never have made our expiration possible had we not followed his simple command, and not eaten the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
The reductionists often find fault in the belief that man's fall happened when Adam and Eve stole and devoured the fruits of that tree. They fail to realize that this was a repeat of the devil's fall- he belived the creation was greater than the Creator. Eve ate the fruits of that tree because she believed she would become as great as God if she did. Certainly our Creator was right to punish our entire race for that pride, through Original Sin. We, after all, abused God's gift of free will.

We brought death upon ourselves. As Ali Sina was quick to note, Deus Caritas est, but he forgot our other belief. God is Just. And so His designs for our end are truly merciful. We will all lose our temporary, unimportant earthly lives, but through the example we set in this life, and how greatly we love neighbor and truth, we can easily merit unfathomable happiness in Heaven. [The whole concept is sort of like 'double or nothing'- if we abuse God's second bundle of gifts, His instruction and means of salvation, we will merit Hell, and unfathomable punishment].

Sina found fault with God's "moodiness" and "pride", which he obviously misunderstands. All God ever does is state the truth about himself- he is all just and all loving. He created the entire world and all in it: whatever Ali Sina or Leslie Higgins does for the good of man, He not only created us, but continually presses virtue and grace into our hearts, allowing us to do good works (come to think of it, He should be in the credits of every movie). OF COURSE God has a right to righteous anger when we strut around as if we were the progenitors of the public welfare. The proper model of action is the Virgin Mary, who committed no sins, and continually thanked God whenever she committed acts of faith or charity.

Sina's more silly misunderstandings (no, we believe God cannot do something which is intrinsically impossible [a rock too heavy]; sometimes he will answer prayers because we care enough to ask; God knows the future, but can alter it [in more than one appropriate ways] by Divine Intervention; he also tries to disprove that God can be a being) are not worth such lengthy refutations. He has just one more problem in store for us theists, which I'm sure we've all heard before,

It is... absurd to believe that over one billion Muslims who preferred Muhammad to Christ will go to hell.

Absurd? That is an emotion-driven conclusion in the middle of a supposedly rational argument. It is too "painful" to be true? Too "bigoted"? As he himself says on the homepage of his new website,

We endeavor to be factually correct, not politically correct.

In his righteous endeavor to eradicate Islam, he feels justified in ignoring the popular sentiment, and speaking the truth, even if he will be called a bigot. Yet he will not grant us that same freedom, and calls our view "absurd" without a theological counterargument. This is hypocrisy and elitism, which we must all expsoe for the glory of God and as a needed admonition to fellow man.