Homily of Pope Benedict XVI on the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul on 60th anniversary of his priestly ordination

Homily of Pope Benedict XVI on the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul

Saint Peter’s Basilica, 29 June 2011

Dear Brothers and Sisters,
“I no longer call you servants, but friends” (cf. Jn 15:15). Sixty years on from the day of my priestly ordination, I hear once again deep within me these words of Jesus that were addressed to us new priests at the end of the ordination ceremony by the Archbishop, Cardinal Faulhaber, in his slightly frail yet firm voice. According to the liturgical practice of that time, these words conferred on the newly-ordained priests the authority to forgive sins. “No longer servants, but friends”: at that moment I knew deep down that these words were no mere formality, nor were they simply a quotation from Scripture. I knew that, at that moment, the Lord himself was speaking to me in a very personal way. In baptism and confirmation he had already drawn us close to him, he had already received us into God’s family. But what was taking place now was something greater still. He calls me his friend. He welcomes me into the circle of those he had spoken to in the Upper Room, into the circle of those whom he knows in a very special way, and who thereby come to know him in a very special way. He grants me the almost frightening faculty to do what only he, the Son of God, can legitimately say and do: I forgive you your sins. He wants me – with his authority – to be able to speak, in his name (“I” forgive), words that are not merely words, but an action, changing something at the deepest level of being. I know that behind these words lies his suffering for us and on account of us. I know that forgiveness comes at a price: in his Passion he went deep down into the sordid darkness of our sins. He went down into the night of our guilt, for only thus can it be transformed. And by giving me authority to forgive sins, he lets me look down into the abyss of man, into the immensity of his suffering for us men, and this enables me to sense the immensity of his love. He confides in me: “No longer servants, but friends”. He entrusts to me the words of consecration in the Eucharist. He trusts me to proclaim his word, to explain it aright and to bring it to the people of today. He entrusts himself to me. “You are no longer servants, but friends”: these words bring great inner joy, but at the same time, they are so awe-inspiring that one can feel daunted as the decades go by amid so many experiences of one’s own frailty and his inexhaustible goodness.
“No longer servants, but friends”: this saying contains within itself the entire programme of a priestly life. What is friendship? Idem velle, idem nolle – wanting the same things, rejecting the same things: this was how it was expressed in antiquity. Friendship is a communion of thinking and willing. The Lord says the same thing to us most insistently: “I know my own and my own know me” (Jn 10:14). The Shepherd calls his own by name (cf. Jn 10:3). He knows me by name. I am not just some nameless being in the infinity of the universe. He knows me personally. Do I know him? The friendship that he bestows upon me can only mean that I too try to know him better; that in the Scriptures, in the Sacraments, in prayer, in the communion of saints, in the people who come to me, sent by him, I try to come to know the Lord himself more and more. Friendship is not just about knowing someone, it is above all a communion of the will. It means that my will grows into ever greater conformity with his will. For his will is not something external and foreign to me, something to which I more or less willingly submit or else refuse to submit. No, in friendship, my will grows together with his will, and his will becomes mine: this is how I become truly myself. Over and above communion of thinking and willing, the Lord mentions a third, new element: he gives his life for us (cf. Jn 15:13; 10:15). Lord, help me to come to know you more and more. Help me to be ever more at one with your will. Help me to live my life not for myself, but in union with you to live it for others. Help me to become ever more your friend. Jesus’ words on friendship should be seen in the context of the discourse on the vine. The Lord associates the image of the vine with a commission to the disciples: “I appointed you that you should go out and bear fruit, and that your fruit should abide” (Jn 15:16). The first commission to the disciples – to his friends – is that of setting out, stepping outside oneself and towards others. Here we hear an echo of the words of the risen Lord to his disciples at the end of Matthew’s Gospel: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations ...” (cf. Mt 28:19f.) The Lord challenges us to move beyond the boundaries of our own world and to bring the Gospel to the world of others, so that it pervades everything and hence the world is opened up for God’s kingdom. We are reminded that even God stepped outside himself, he set his glory aside in order to seek us, in order to bring us his light and his love. We want to follow the God who sets out in this way, we want to move beyond the inertia of self-centredness, so that he himself can enter our world.
After the reference to setting out, Jesus continues: bear fruit, fruit that abides. What fruit does he expect from us? What is this fruit that abides? Now, the fruit of the vine is the grape, and it is from the grape that wine is made. Let us reflect for a moment on this image. For good grapes to ripen, sun is needed, but so too is rain, by day and by night. For noble wine to mature, the grapes need to be pressed, patience is needed while the juice ferments, watchful care is needed to assist the processes of maturation. Noble wine is marked not only by sweetness, but by rich and subtle flavours, the manifold aroma that develops during the processes of maturation and fermentation. Is this not already an image of human life, and especially of our lives as priests? We need both sun and rain, festivity and adversity, times of purification and testing, as well as times of joyful journeying with the Gospel. In hindsight we can thank God for both: for the challenges and the joys, for the dark times and the glad times. In both, we can recognize the constant presence of his love, which unfailingly supports and sustains us. Yet now we must ask: what sort of fruit does the Lord expect from us? Wine is an image of love: this is the true fruit that abides, the fruit that God wants from us. But let us not forget that in the Old Testament the wine expected from noble grapes is above all an image of justice, which arises from a life lived in accordance with God’s law. And this is not to be dismissed as an Old Testament view that has been surpassed – no, it still remains true. The true content of the Law, its summa, is love for God and for one’s neighbour. But this twofold love is not simply saccharine. It bears within itself the precious cargo of patience, humility, and growth in the conforming of our will to God’s will, to the will of Jesus Christ, our friend. Only in this way, as the whole of our being takes on the qualities of truth and righteousness, is love also true, only thus is it ripe fruit. Its inner demand – faithfulness to Christ and to his Church – seeks a fulfilment that always includes suffering. This is the way that true joy grows. At a deep level, the essence of love, the essence of genuine fruit, coincides with the idea of setting out, going towards: it means self-abandonment, self-giving, it bears within itself the sign of the cross. Gregory the Great once said in this regard: if you are striving for God, take care not to go to him by yourselves alone – a saying that we priests need to keep before us every day (H Ev 1:6:6 PL 76, 1097f.).
Dear friends, perhaps I have dwelt for too long on my inner recollections of sixty years of priestly ministry. Now it is time to turn our attention to the particular task that is to be performed today. On the feast of Saints Peter and Paul my most cordial greeting goes first of all to the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomaios I and to the Delegation he has sent, to whom I express sincere thanks for their most welcome visit on the happy occasion of this feast of the holy Apostles who are Rome’s patrons. I also greet the Cardinals, my brother bishops, the ambassadors and civil authorities as well as the priests, religious and lay faithful. I thank all of you for your presence and your prayers.
The metropolitan archbishops appointed since the feast of Saints Peter and Paul last year are now going to receive the pallium. What does this mean? It may remind us in the first instance of Christ’s easy yoke that is laid upon us (cf. Mt 11:29f.). Christ’s yoke is identical with his friendship. It is a yoke of friendship and therefore “a sweet yoke”, but as such it is also a demanding yoke, one that forms us. It is the yoke of his will, which is a will of truth and love. For us, then, it is first and foremost the yoke of leading others to friendship with Christ and being available to others, caring for them as shepherds. This brings us to a further meaning of the pallium: it is woven from the wool of lambs blessed on the feast of Saint Agnes. Thus it reminds us of the Shepherd who himself became a lamb, out of love for us. It reminds us of Christ, who set out through the mountains and the deserts, in which his lamb, humanity, had strayed. It reminds us of him who took the lamb – humanity – me – upon his shoulders, in order to carry me home. It thus reminds us that we too, as shepherds in his service, are to carry others with us, taking them as it were upon our shoulders and bringing them to Christ. It reminds us that we are called to be shepherds of his flock, which always remains his and does not become ours. Finally the pallium also means quite concretely the communion of the shepherds of the Church with Peter and with his successors – it means that we must be shepherds for unity and in unity, and that it is only in the unity represented by Peter that we truly lead people to Christ. Sixty years of priestly ministry – dear friends, perhaps I have spoken for too long about this. But I felt prompted at this moment to look back upon the things that have left their mark on the last six decades. I felt prompted to address to you, to all priests and bishops and to the faithful of the Church, a word of hope and encouragement; a word that has matured in long experience of how good the Lord is. Above all, though, it is a time of thanksgiving: thanks to the Lord for the friendship that he has bestowed upon me and that he wishes to bestow upon us all. Thanks to the people who have formed and accompanied me. And all this includes the prayer that the Lord will one day welcome us in his goodness and invite us to contemplate his joy. Amen.

Protests against blasphemous image at UCC

From http://irishexaminer.com/ireland/our-lady-image-protests-continue-158980.html

Mexican-born artist Alma Lopez’s digital print was among 12 of her art works displayed on the second floor of the Rahilly building as part of an academic conference on Chicano culture — US citizens of Mexican descent.

The exhibition sparked controversy earlier this week after the Bishop John Buckley of Cork and Ross described the Our Lady image as "offensive".

But it attracted a steady stream of visitors throughout the day. Most dismissed the controversy and urged those protesting outside to open their minds and visit the exhibition.

The group of some 20 or so men, women, children and priests who braved the rain to pray decades of the rosary at the university’s main gates, refused to view the image.

They held placards denouncing it as blasphemous and distributed literature to passersby.

Mary Wrenne, from Ballincollig, Co Cork, clutched a statue of the Virgin Mary and vowed to continue her protest tomorrow.

"As a woman, I am offended by this image," she said.

"This exhibition is extremely disrespectful to the Mother of God."

Fr Francis Gallagher, a member of the Society of St Pius X, travelled from Athlone to join the protest.

"This is very offensive to Catholics. I am here to protest what I would consider to be disrespect towards the Mother of God," he said.

"Having her dressed in an immodest way gives a bad example." He said UCC authorities should have cancelled the exhibition.

"We have artistic talents because God has given them to us and we should use them in some way to glorify God.

"What this lady is doing certainly doesn’t do that. It’s not art — it’s some kind of gimmick."

Joe O’Connell, from Cork, who said he was a member of the Fatima Centre Ireland, said he has asked the gardaí to investigate whether the image was blasphemous.

John O’Callaghan, from Cork, said he has written to the President of UCC asking him to resign.

"Our Lady has always been held in great esteem by the Irish," he said.

"But this exhibition is insulting and demeaning to all our histories."

A member of UCC’s Atheist Society supported their right to protest but criticised their stance, and the current blasphemy laws.

"We believe that religious and nonreligious people alike should be protected from harm, and incitement to harm, but religions, just like economics and politics, should be open to criticism," a spokesman said.

Ms Lopez said the image does not represent the Mother of God and was never intended to offend.

"I never intended to offend, desecrate, blaspheme, or disrespect anyone’s religious beliefs with this image," she said.

She has blamed the controversy surrounding the image since 2001 on the "propaganda and cyber-sensationalism" of a US-based, profit-driven, Catholic-fundamentalist organisation called America Needs Fatima.

Meanwhile, thousands are expected to take part in the annual Corpus Christi procession in Cork city tomorrow.
This appeared in the printed version of the Irish Examiner Saturday, June 25, 2011

13,000 attend Knock Eucharistic Congress

From http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0625/knock.html

Around 13,000 people are attending the National Eucharistic Congress celebration in Knock, Co Mayo.

People have come from parishes all over the country.

The church is holding the event exactly one year ahead of an International Congress in 2012.

The Archbishop of Dublin, Dr Diarmuid Martin, said today's congress is part of a process of renewal.

Earlier this afternoon, the Sacrament of the sick was administered to hundreds of pilgrims both inside and outside the Basilica.

Cardinal Sean Brady is the principle celebrant of the Congress mass with most of the Irish bishops and 160 priests concelebrating.

New York state legalises gay marriage

See http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0625/newyork.html

Top 10 Reasons Men Should Practice Custody of the Eyes

Aggie Catholics June 10, 2011:

10 - It helps teach discipline.
Men should discipline themselves to be in control of their passions and not allow passions to control them.

9 - It avoids the near occasion of sin.
To avert your eyes when you feel tempted to use a woman lustfully is a good thing.
“But I say to you, everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” -Matt 5:19.

8 - Custody of the eyes builds up chastity.
Chastity helps us to properly order our sexuality. If we do not have custody of the eyes, it means our sexuality is dis-ordered toward objectification - not love - and needs to be healed.

7 - It is what every gentleman should do.
No woman who respects herself wants to be lusted after or looked up and down. No real gentleman would dishonor a woman by doing so.

6 - It helps a man to see the whole woman, not just parts of her body.
When most men see an immodestly-dressed woman, their brains automatically start to objectify her. Thus, men need to be able to see the truth about who a woman is - not just to break her down into objects he can use for his selfish pleasure.

5 - It avoids scandal.
Think of King David. If he would have practiced custody of the eyes he might have been able to avoid much worse sins - adultery and murder. Now think of what happens when a man is caught in a lustful look toward a woman.

4 - It helps fight off temptation.
Men suffer from sexual temptation frequently. To have custody of the eyes helps a man to fight off an even stronger temptation of lusting after a woman after he ogles her.

3 - It helps our sisters not feel objectified.
If for no other reason, we should witness to the dignity of a woman by controlling our passions.

2 - It is a virtue we should chase after.
It is related to chastity, modesty, and temperance.

1 - It focuses us back on more important things.
"Seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be given you besides." - Matt 6:33 Christ should be our first priority. Honoring the height of his creation (our sisters) should be the second. We should be third.

Top 10 Reasons Women Should Dress Modestly

Aggie Catholics June 9, 2011:

10 - Modesty reflects an understanding of who a woman truly is.
Modesty starts inside a person's heart and mind. Who am I? Why do I exist? If a woman answers she is a beautiful daughter of God, then modesty will naturally follow.

9 - Modesty isn't about dressing in unattractive clothes as some think it is.
There are too many options in clothing to not give modesty a try. Yes, it might not be the first thing on the rack you go shopping for, but it is worth finding clothing that brings out a woman's beauty without revealing too much.

8 - Modesty attracts the kind of guys you ought to want to attract.
If a woman is afraid that she must turn a man's eye by dressing immodestly, then she should ask herself just what kind of guy does she want to attract?

7 - Mary dressed modestly.
Truly there is no more beautiful woman who ever lived than Mary. Why wouldn't any woman want to be more like her?

6 - It helps protect women.
A woman can still dress to be beautiful, but the mystery of a woman's body is protected from being used. Modesty provides a needed defense against usage.

5 - It sets a good example for others.
Young girls and teens need good examples of beautiful women who are modest. The attacks of immodest are Legion and we need a good counter-example.

4 - Women are worthy of respect.
Respect can be easily lost when a woman tries to promote herself by being immodest.

3 - It helps your brothers to avoid lust.
Women would be shocked if they were to enter the head of the average modern young man in a crowded room of immodest women. This isn't to blame an immodestly dressed woman for a man's sin of lust. But, men today need all the help they can get to fight lust and sin. Won't you help them?

2 - It shows true beauty.
A woman's true beauty comes from her dignity of being made in God's image. If any woman wants to truly reflect God's beauty, it starts with modesty.

1 - It is a virtue.
Modesty is a virtue that helps control behavior so we do not excite the sexuality of another. It is also a fruit of the Holy Spirit. All of us could use more virtue in our lives.

Cohabitation: A New Concubinage?

Salvo December 12, 2010:

In ancient times, there was an option for a man who desired a regular sex partner but did not wish to marry her. He could take a low-status woman as a concubine. He could enjoy her company as long as it pleased him, and he could dismiss her at any time. The man made no promises and signed no contract; consequently, the concubine had few legal protections. Any children that she bore would have an inferior legal status.

The early Church fought long and hard against concubinage. It insisted that such a sexual relationship, without the permanent and total commitment expressed in marriage vows, was immoral and unjust. Over the course of a thousand years, concubinage retreated into the shadows of social disapproval.

In the past 40 years, it seems, concubinage has come to light again under a different name. Like ancient concubinage, contemporary cohabitation is a deliberately ambiguous relationship. The partners make no promises and have no legal obligations to one another. The arrangement has no specified duration and can be terminated at a moment's notice. Those who cohabit tend to be of lower social status. Their children, on average, do not fare as well as children born to married couples.

Defenders of cohabitation portray it as just a more flexible form of marriage. The love is the same as in marriage, they say; all that is missing is "a piece of paper," the marriage certificate. Some see cohabitation as a "trial marriage." They assume that living together will confirm a couple's compatibility and reduce the odds that a subsequent marriage might end in divorce.

Contrasting Relationships

Social science does not support any of these assertions. By every measure, cohabitation is a very different relationship from marriage. Marriages are formed by a series of decisive, publicly announced events: A proposal is made, it is accepted, an engagement is announced, friends and family gather for a wedding, vows and rings are exchanged, and two formerly single persons are declared to be married. By contrast, many couples quietly drift into cohabitation. They gradually spend more time together, one moves his or her possessions piece by piece into the other's residence, one allows his or her lease to expire, and eventually they realize that they are living together full-time.

The two relationships differ dramatically in durability. The average marriage lasts several decades; the average cohabitation, only 15 months. Because their time horizons are longer, married people are much more likely to invest in one another. Husbands and wives almost always pool their assets. They have a single household budget that does not separate "his" and "her" money. They take responsibility for each other's debts and inherit each other's estates.

Cohabitors, by contrast, typically split expenses down the middle. Perhaps as a result of this financial separatism, cohabitors do not tend to save money or accumulate assets at the rate that married people do. Cohabiting men boost their earnings by only half the amount that married men do. There are few mutual legal protections in most cohabitating relationships. A survey showed that only 13 percent of cohabitors have a will, only 10 percent hold property jointly, and only 7 percent have given each other durable powers of attorney for health care decisions.

Cohabitors do not appear to take responsibility for one another's health. Couples who move in together without marrying do not exhibit the same reductions in unhealthy behaviors that married couples do. Cohabitors report levels of physical and mental health in the same range as persons living alone—well below the higher levels of health and happiness reported by married persons.

Sex & Commitment

Cohabitors are particularly vulnerable to one health risk: violence at the hands of their partners. They are three times more likely than married people to report that an argument had become violent during the past year (13 percent versus 4 percent).

Cohabitors are more likely to keep their friends, families, and leisure activities separate. The one thing they do together is have sex. Indeed, cohabitors have sex somewhat more frequently than married couples. But they report less sexual satisfaction. Apparently, the secure commitment of marriage enriches lovemaking, while the provisional nature of cohabitation may induce some "performance anxiety."

Married couples are more sexually faithful. According to the National Sex Survey, cohabiting men are four times more likely than married men to admit having been unfaithful during the past year. The difference for women is even greater: cohabiting women are eight times more likely than married women to have cheated on their partner. (Overall, however, women are less likely to cheat on their partners than men are.)

One reason for these discrepancies may be that the ambiguity of cohabitation leaves wide room for differing interpretations about how exclusive the relationship is. In marriage both spouses know that they have equally vowed to "forsake all others." But in cohabitation there can be a great inequality in the levels of commitment that the two partners bring to the relationship.

Most often, it is the woman who displays the higher level of commitment. Cohabiting women are more likely to believe that the relationship is sexually exclusive and that it is headed toward marriage. Meanwhile, the cohabiting man may have no intention of marrying anytime soon. He may see the woman as a convenient partner for the time being. He is keeping his options open.

Not Conducive to Marriage

There is one category of cohabitation in which the partners more nearly resemble married people in their positive attitudes and behaviors. These are cohabitors with definite plans to marry. But even these couples have not avoided all of the pitfalls of cohabitation. Research shows that the experience of living together raises the risk of divorce by 50 percent.

How do we account for this striking fact? Various explanations have been offered. First, there are "selection effects." That is, cohabitors as a group start out with various characteristics—they are poorer, less educated, less religious, and have a lower view of marriage—that make them less likely to succeed in marriage.

Second, it appears that living together may foster behaviors that are not conducive to a good marriage. Cohabitors, especially serial cohabitors, become accustomed to relationships with limited commitment, limited trust, and limited duration. When disagreements surface, their habit is to dissolve the relationship and move on to the next. It is not so easy to set aside these old patterns of behavior. Living out the total and permanent commitment of marriage may take more work for those who have previously cohabited.

On the other hand, the sexual bond established during cohabitation may render it more difficult for cohabiting couples to make a wise decision about whether they should marry. Having already become "one flesh," first-time cohabiting couples in particular may find it harder to consider the possibility of tearing themselves apart. As opposed to couples that are merely dating, cohabiting couples may be more inclined to ignore the "red flags" warning against an ill-matched marriage.

Cohabitation, it turns out, is not at all a good preparation for marriage. •

This column is adapted from "Cohabitation: Marriage Lite or the New Concubinage?", a sidebar to "Is Marriage Worth Defending?", by Alan Wisdom, Mount Nebo Papers, No. 2, Summer 2009, published by the Institute on Religion & Democracy.

Sources Consulted
• Mike McManus and Harriet McManus, Living Together: Myths, Risks, and Answers(Howard Books, 2008).
• Linda J. Waite and Maggie Gallagher, The Case for Marriage: Why Married People Are Happier, Healthier, and Better Off Financially (Broadway Books, 2000.

Fr. Corapi resigns from priesthood

From http://www.ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/US.php?id=3437

The popular speaker announces plans to leave the priesthood amid an investigation into allegations of misconduct, and his religious superior breaks his silence on the investigation. A Register news analysis.

Father John Corapi, the popular Catholic evangelist, announced on June 17 that he would leave the priesthood and begin a new endeavor outside Church control — called “Black Sheep Dog” — focused on a “broader” message and a global audience.

Three months have passed since Father Corapi, a priest of the Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity, was removed from public ministry by his order while it investigated allegations of misconduct leveled by one of his former employees.

Posted on YouTube and on the website of Santa Cruz Media, the company led by Father Corapi that distributes his bestselling catechetical materials, the announcement shocked his many supporters, some of whom had vented their anger at the priest’s religious superiors and at EWTN and other media outlets, which suspended his programs after the allegations against him became public.

Raising more questions than it answered, the message did not state the precise reason why Father Corapi chose to resign from the priesthood, rather than waiting for the outcome of SOLT’s investigation of the alleged misconduct.

However, Father Gerard Sheehan, regional priest-servant of SOLT and Father Corapi’s religious superior in the U.S., confirmed June 19 that the order’s investigation faced complications created by a civil suit filed by Father Corapi against the former employee who had accused him of sexual misconduct.

“When she left the company, she signed a contract that she would not reveal anything that happened to her while she was at Santa Cruz Media. Father Corapi paid her for this. Father was suing her for a breach of contract,” said Father Sheehan, though he did not specify why Father Corapi had initiated the non-disclosure agreement.

The civil suit against the former employee created a problem for SOLT investigators.

“In canon law, there can’t be any pressure on witnesses; they have to be completely free to speak. The investigation was compromised because of the pressure on the witnesses. There were other witnesses that also had signed non-disclosure agreements,” said Father Sheehan.

“The canon lawyers were in a difficult situation, and Father does have his civil rights and he decided to follow his legal counsel, which he had a right to do,” he said. “We tried to continue the investigation without speaking to the principal witnesses.”

The investigation was halted after Father Corapi “sent us a letter resigning from active ministry and religious life. I have written him a letter asking him to confirm that decision. If so, we will help him with this process of leaving religious life,” said Father Sheehan.

He expressed disappointment that Father Corapi chose not to remain in SOLT and to refuse the order’s invitation for him to live in community, leaving his Montana home. Father Sheehan said he had tried to arrange a meeting with Father Corapi before any final decision was announced, but had not heard back from him. Father Sheehan said that SOLT would issue a statement shortly.

“We wanted him to come back to the community, and that would have meant leaving everything he has. It would have been a drastic change for him,” Father Sheehan said. “We will continue to move pastorally and charitably, taking steps to protect his good name.”

Father Corapi’s YouTube message did not address his relationship with SOLT religious authorities. Though his statement reads “I love the Catholic Church and accept what has transpired,” it offered a conflicted message on the respect due the Catholic hierarchy.

On the one hand, Father Corapi affirmed the right of the bishops to implement new guidelines for addressing clerical misconduct. Yet, he persistently attacked the logic and integrity of those guidelines, and sharply criticized Bishop William Mulvey of Corpus Christi, Texas, for taking action to forcibly remove him from active ministry.

The YouTube announcement and a text version of his statement began with an acknowledgement that the upcoming Trinity Sunday, June 19, 2011, marked his “20th anniversary of my ordination to the priesthood in the Catholic Church. For 20 years I was called ‘father.’”

Expressing his gratitude for ongoing expressions of support, the priest then stated: “All things change, only God stays the same, so I have to tell you about a major change in my life. I am not going to be involved in public ministry as a priest any longer. There are certain persons in authority in the Church that want me gone, and I shall be gone.”

Echoing themes repeated in recent Santa Cruz Media posts that asserted his innocence, questioned the motives of his accuser, and criticized recent Church policies that suspended priests from active ministry following allegations of misconduct, he presented himself as one of many priests victimized by disciplinary practices established after the 2002 clergy abuse crisis.

“For 20 years I did my best to guard and feed the sheep. Now, based on a totally unsubstantiated, undocumented allegation from a demonstrably troubled person I was thrown out like yesterday’s garbage,” he stated.

He provided few substantive details regarding his new Black Sheep Dog initiative, but sketched out an ambitious mission: “I shall continue, black sheep that I am, to speak; and sheep dog that I am, to guard the sheep — this time around not just in the Church, but also in the entire world,” he stated.

He confirmed plans to produce radio programs and publish books, including an autobiography Black Sheep Dog. His mention of the book’s imminent release suggested that his bombshell announcement had been planned for some time.

The announcement will likely prompt scrutiny of Father Corapi’s ties to the Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity (SOLT), the apostolic religious order he joined twenty years ago, and raise questions about whether SOLT superiors should have allowed him to live and work apart from his religious community.

In a previous interview with the Register, published after Father Corapi’s suspension, Father Sheehan implicitly acknowledged that the accused priest was not living in conformity with SOLT’s constitution, approved in 1994.

“The founder’s arrangement with Father Corapi was established before that time, when Father Flanagan believed that every mission should take care of its own needs,” noted Father Sheehan at that time. “Now, according to our constitution, a different way of life has been established for members. All the money we make is turned over to the society, which gives us an allowance.”

During that interview, Father Sheehan confirmed that SOLT had “begun to address the issues of members who joined the society before the new constitution. The society is moving to a more organized structural phase of its existence, with all the Church discipline that entails.” The implication of his remarks was that Father Corapi had not accommodated the discipline imposed by the new constitution.

Father Corapi’s status in the Diocese of Helena, the location of his home, also raised questions about his legal ability to exercise his ministerial priesthood. In the wake of his suspension, the chancellor of the Diocese of Helena, Father John Robertson, stated that “Father Corapi has a personal residence in Kalispell, Mont. He does not hold priestly faculties in the Diocese of Helena.”

Father Corapi’s YouTube statement did not address questions raised by these recent public disclosures. In the message, his ire was reserved for the Bishop of Corpus Christi.

“I did not start this process, the Bishop of Corpus Christi, Texas ordered my superiors, against their will and better judgment, to do it. He in fact threatened to release a reprehensible and libelous letter to all of the bishops if they did not suspend me. He has a perfect right to do so, and I defend that right. Bishops aren’t bound by civil laws and procedures in internal Church matters.”

His remarks raised questions about the role of the bishop of Corpus Christi in the decision to place him on administrative leave. The motherhouse of SOLT is based in that diocese. In the wake of his suspension, Marty Wind, a diocesan spokesman said that his case was outside the jurisdiction of the diocese and that SOLT authorities had initiated the action to temporarily remove him from active ministry.

In his YouTube post, Father Corapi characterized the process that led to his suspension as “inherently and fatally flawed.” He added that “The case may be on hold indefinitely, but my life cannot be,” he said, implying that his decision to leave the priesthood and establish “Black Sheep Dog” was essentially forced on him.

The painful decision was guided by legal counsel, he said: “My canon lawyer and my civil lawyers have concluded that I cannot receive a fair and just hearing under the Church’s present process. The Church will conclude that I am not cooperating with the process because I refuse to give up all of my civil and human rights in order to hold harmless anyone who chooses to say defamatory and actionable things against me with no downside to them.”

Attempts to reach Father Corapi for comment were unsuccessful.

He used his statement of resignation as a forum for airing a range of objections regarding the U.S. bishops’ “zero tolerance” policy — though not all the concerns he outlined seemed directly applicable to his particular case.

But his statement did not explain why his case could not be resolved with the outcome of an investigation initiated by his religious superiors, andsuggested there may be other issues complicating a timely conclusion.

As with most of the recent posts regarding the allegations and suspension on his site and by Santa Cruz Media, this statement included a marketing pitch for his fans, who were encouraged to visit the Black Sheep Dog website: “I hope you stay with us and follow us into our new domain and name of ‘The Black Sheep Dog.’ Through writing and broadcasting we hope to continue to dispense truth and hope to a world so much in need of it.”

In his closing statement — where he signed off as “John Corapi (once called “father,” now ‘The Black Sheep Dog’),” he acknowledged that some supporters might turn their backs on him. But given the strong encouragement he received after his initial suspension, it is difficult to predict whether he will hold on to his many supporters — and even make new ones in his forthcoming “global” ministry outside Church supervision, Black Sheep Dog.

Register senior editor Joan Frawley Desmond writes from Chevy Chase, Maryland.

Published with permission from the National Catholic Register.

Read more: http://www.ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/US.php?id=3437#ixzz1Pumjr7yb

Burning and Bleeding Host: A Eucharistic Miracle caught on camera

For video see: http://www.dsanford.com/miraclehost/hostvideo.wmv

THE BURNING, BLEEDING, BEATING HEART HOST
NOVEMBER 13, 1998
AUGUSTINIAN NUNS CHAPEL - LOS TEQUES, VENEZUELA

Filmed on RCA Camcorder by pilgrim Dan Sanford of N. J.

This film is actually a Miracle within a Miracle. The first miracle occurred in Betania, Venezuela, on December 8, 1991 -- Feast of the Immaculate Conception during the celebration of the Holy Mass at midnight. The celebrant, Father Otty Ossa Arstiza'bal, Betania Chaplain had just finished the Consecration, had broken the large Host into four pieces and took one piece of the Host for his consumption and placed the remaining portions on the plate on the altar. When he looked down at the remaining Host, to his amazement he saw a red substance coming out of the Host which he described as if it was spurting from a wound. He placed the Host in a Chalice and put it in the Tabernacle until 6 A. M. the next morning. When he looked at it again it was still bleeding so he placed it in a Monstrance and took it to show the people at Mass. Eyewitnesses saw the Host bleeding and blood accumulating on the bottom of the Monstrance and some filmed it on their camcorders. Bishop Ricardo of Los Teques was advised and he had the Host tested in Caracus and was told that the red substance was in fact Human Blood. Subsequently, the Miracle Host was taken to the convent of the Augustinian Nuns in Los Teques for safekeeping, adoration and visitation by pilgrims. This was the reason, Dan Sanford went to Los Teques on November 13, 1998, to see the Miraculous Bleeding Host and was when he filmed this second miraculous event concerning this Host.

Why visit Betania in the first place? Betania is the apparition site where mystic Maria Esperanza Bianchini experiences apparitions of the Blessed Mother. It is only the fourth site in the twentieth century approved by the Roman Catholic Church as a place worthy of pilgrimage and celebration of the sacraments of Mass and Reconciliation. Betania is also the only apparition site known in the world where others besides the visionary have seen the Blessed Mother. In March, 1984, 108 people experienced seeing the Blessed Mother at that site, beginning first with a group of children who excitedly reported to the adults that the Blessed Mother was in the trees near the jungle edge. The adults ran to the scene and also experienced seeing her. Their descriptions varied because they saw her under different titles. Some reported seeing her as Our Lady of Lourdes, others as the image of the Miraculous Medal and others as Our Lady of Mt. Carmel. Many cried and didn't know why they we! re crying. None were in a state of ecstasy or trance but were fully aware of their of their senses and surroundings. Our Lady appeared seven times that day for 10-15 minutes at a time to those present. Thereafter, the Bishop investigated the site and sent a letter to Rome on March 21, 1987 announcing his approval of Betania as a valid apparition site.

Who is Maria Esperanza Bianchini? Maria is a wife, mother of 7 children and a grandmother. Since she was a child she has experienced supernatural visitations from The Blessed Mother, Jesus and Saints. At age 5, she saw St. Theresa, The Little Flower; at age 12 the first visit from Blessed Mother and at age 14 The Blessed Mother told her about Betania. Being very religious, in 1954 she entered a convent but shortly later, on October 3, 1954, St. Theresa came to her and told her that her vocation in life was to become a wife and mother not a religious. She met her future husband in Rome and on December 8, 1956 they were married in Rome.

Maria had her first apparition of the Blessed Mother in Betania on March 25, 1976 and these were private apparitions. In 1978, Rome was advised of her situation. But on March 25, 1984, the Feast of the Annunciation, her apparitions changed from private to public when the 108 people also saw the Blessed Mother in Betania. Our Lady comes to Maria under the title of "Reconciler of People and Nations" and per Her request, a new church has been built by the Bishop and given this title. Her message is the same worldwide. She begs for all of Her children, regardless of faith, race, nationality, to Return to Her Son, Pray the 15 Decades of the Rosary as a weapon to overcome man's evil material ways and determination to destroy the world with armaments. She says only the Rosary will bring peace.

Betania is blessed with supernatural events such as mysterious fogs, intensive light, appearance of abundant flowers, especially roses - sounds of choirs singing hymns, mysterious rose petals falling from the sky, photographic phenomena and miraculous water, sometimes smelling like roses with many miraculous cures associated with the site.

This film is one more miracle given to us by the grace of God to help us recognize the true presence of His beloved Son in the Holy Eucharist.

(This video may be obtained by writing to:
Daniel Sanford
329 Cypress Ave.
Woodlynne, NJ 08107

The video is offered 'free of charge' but any donations to defray costs and to assist in furthe distribution of this wondrous video are gratefully appreciated.)

It also had a Letter of Approval from the Bishop of Los Teques, + Pio Bello, S. J., Bishop Emeritus of Los Teques, dated January 25, 1999, -- here are (sic) excerpts:

"After seeing the tape I became impressed.

As you should know, the experts in Spiritual Theology interpret the authentic visions as a mental phenomenon, that is, as an hallucination produced by God. They admit the possibility of optical visions, that is visions in which an object exterior to the seer is perceived by his eyes. Of this kind are the apparitions of Christ to the Apostles after his resurrection.

That a concrete vision is optical or only a mental one can be concluded by its characteristics. In your case your vision could be interpreted as a mental phenomenon since it was seen only by you and not by the other witnesses that were present.

But if we presume that hypothesis, it becomes outstanding that your filming camera could perceive and record your mental phenomenon against the laws of the Physic, since a camera, as the eye, can perceive only real objects that reflect the light.

So, in any hypothesis or in any case, the filming of your vision points out the hand of God.

Continue evangelizing about the real presence of Christ in the Eucharistic with the help of this impressive tape."

JFK speech on secret societies that most likely got him killed

The Cost of False Abuse Allegations on Priests

See: http://articles.boston.com/2011-06-15/news/29661744_1_priest-mitchell-garabedian-father-murphy

Hungary’s new constitution protects life from conception

From http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=10672&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CatholicWorldNewsFeatureStories+%28Catholic+World+News+%28on+CatholicCulture.org%29%29

The revised Hungarian constitution, which will take effect on January 1, declares that human life will be protected from the moment of conception.

“Human dignity is inviolable,” the constitution states. “Everyone has the right to life and human dignity; the life of a fetus will be protected from conception.”

“Eugenic practices aimed at selection of persons, making the human body and its parts a source of profit and the reproductive cloning of human beings are prohibited,” the document adds.

The new constitution also states that “Hungary protects the institution of marriage between man and woman, a matrimonial relationship voluntarily established, as well as the family as the basis for the survival of the nation. Hungary supports child-bearing.”

These provisions have earned the condemnation of Amnesty International.

“Amnesty International is deeply concerned that the new Constitution of the Republic of Hungary, adopted by the Hungarian National Assembly on 18 April 2011, violates international and European human rights standards,” the group stated in a press release.

“The introduction of the protection of life from conception (Article II), the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman (Article L), the provision allowing for life imprisonment without the possibility of parole (Article IV) and the exclusion of sexual orientation from the protected grounds of discrimination (Article XV.2) are particularly problematic.

Turning to religion, the constitution declares that

everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right includes freedom to choose and to change religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or in private, to manifest or choose not to manifest religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance. In Hungary the churches and the State operate separately. Churches are independent in Hungary. The State will cooperate with churches in the pursuit of community objectives. Detailed regulations pertaining to churches will be set forth in a super majority law.

The nation of 10.0 million is 59% Catholic, according to Vatican statistics.

Hammer of Heretics

CNA STAFF, Jun 12, 2011 (CNA/EWTN News).

On June 13, Catholics will honor the memory of the Franciscan priest St. Anthony of Padua. Although he is popularly invoked today by those who have trouble finding lost objects, he was known in his own day as the “Hammer of Heretics” due to the powerful witness of his life and preaching.

The saint known to the Church as Anthony of Padua was not born in the Italian city of Padua, nor was he originally named Anthony. He was born in Lisbon, Portugal during 1195, the son of an army officer named Martin and a virtuous woman named Mary. They had Ferdinand educated by a group of priests, and the young man made his own decision to enter religious life at age 15.

Ferdinand initially lived in a monastery of the Augustinian order outside of Lisbon. But he disliked the distraction of constant visits from his friends, and moved to a more remote house of the same order. There, he concentrated on reading the Bible and the Church Fathers, while living a life of asceticism and heartfelt devotion to God.

Eight years later, in 1220, Ferdinand learned the news about five Franciscan friars who had recently died for their faith in Morocco. When their bodies were brought to Portugal for veneration, Ferdinand developed a passionate desire to imitate their commitment to the Gospel. When a group of Franciscans visited his monastery, Ferdinand told them he wanted to adopt their poor and humble way of life.

Some of the Augustinian monks criticized and mocked Ferdinand's interest in the Franciscans, which had been established only recently, in 1209. But prayer confirmed his desire to follow the example of St. Francis, who was still living at the time.

He eventually obtained permission to leave the Augustinians and join a small Franciscan monastery in 1221. At that time he took the name Anthony, after the fourth-century desert monk St. Anthony of Egypt.

Anthony wanted to imitate the Franciscan martyrs who had died trying to convert the Muslims of Morocco. He traveled on a ship to Africa for this purpose, but became seriously ill and could not carry out his intention. The ship that was supposed to take him to Spain for treatment was blown off course, and ended up in Italy.

Through this series of mishaps, Anthony ended up near Assisi, where St. Francis was holding a major meeting for the members of his order. Despite his poor health, Anthony resolved to stay in Italy in order to be closer to St. Francis himself. He deliberately concealed his deep knowledge of theology and Scripture, and offered to serve in the kitchen among the brothers.

At the time, no one realized that the future “Hammer of Heretics” was anything other than a kitchen assistant and obedient Franciscan priest. Around 1224, however, Anthony was forced to deliver an improvised speech before an assembly of Dominicans and Franciscans, none of whom had prepared any remarks.

His eloquence stunned the crowd, and St. Francis himself soon learned what kind of man the dishwashing priest really was. In 1224 he gave Anthony permission to teach theology in the Franciscan order – “provided, however, that as the Rule prescribes, the spirit of prayer and devotion may not be extinguished.”

Anthony taught theology in several French and Italian cities, while strictly following his Franciscan vows and preaching regularly to the people. Later, he dedicated himself entirely to the work of preaching as a missionary in France, Italy and Spain, teaching an authentic love for God to many people – whether peasants or princes – who had fallen away from Catholic faith and morality.

Known for his bold preaching and austere lifestyle, Anthony also had a reputation as a worker of miracles, which often came about in the course of his disputes with heretics.

His biographers mention a horse, which refused to eat for three days, and accepted food only after it had placed itself in adoration before the Eucharist that Anthony brought in his hands. Another miracle involved a poisoned meal, which Anthony ate without any harm after making the sign of the Cross over it. And a final often recounted miracle of St. Anthony’s involved a group of fish, who rose out of the sea to hear his preaching when heretical residents of a city refused to listen.

After Lent in 1231, Anthony's health was in decline. Following the example of his patron – the earlier St. Anthony, who had lived as a hermit – he retreated to a remote location, taking two companions to help him. When his worsening health forced him to be carried back to the Franciscan monastery in Padua, crowds of people converged on the group in hopes of paying their homage to the holy priest.

The commotion surrounding his transport forced his attendants to stop short of their destination. After receiving the last rites, Anthony prayed the Church's seven traditional penitential psalms, sung a hymn to the Virgin Mary, and died on June 13 at the age of 36.

St. Anthony's well-established holiness, combined with the many miracles he had worked during his lifetime, moved Pope Gregory IX – who knew the saint personally – to canonize him one year after his death.

“St. Anthony, residing now in heaven, is honored on earth by many miracles daily seen at his tomb, of which we are certified by authentic writings,” proclaimed the 13th-century Pope.

Five Myths About Worship in the Early Church

From http://www.crisismagazine.com/2011/five-myths-about-worship-in-the-early-church

As the forthcoming new translation of the Roman Missal debunks the myth that liturgical language must be so banal that even the muppets on Sesame Street can understand it, it’s a good time to examine five other untruths that have been wreaking havoc on the Church’s worship in recent decades.

1. Mass facing the people. After studying free-standing altars in early churches, liturgists in the 1930s concluded that priests once celebrated Mass “facing the people,” and that it was only under the influence of decadent medieval clericalism that they “turned their backs” to them. This myth was much in the drinking water at the time of Vatican II (1962-1965). Later, some scholars began to reexamine the evidence and found that it did not support their thesis at all, and that in fact there had been an unbroken tradition — both East and West — of priest and congregation celebrating the Eucharist in the same direction: eastward.

Pope Benedict XVI, who endorsed the most recent book refuting the versus populum error, has been trying to make the facts of the case better known. But in the past generation, millions of dollars have been spent destroying exquisite high altars and replacing them with altar-tables, all in conformity to “the practice of the early Church.” Would that this myth were busted earlier.

2. Communion in the hand and under both kinds. Myths about Holy Communion follow a similar pattern. Fifty years ago, the claim that “Communion in the hand” was the universal practice of the early Church was believed by everyone, even by those who didn’t wish to see the practice resuscitated. Now we’re not so sure. What we can say is that some early Christian communities practiced Communion in the hand, but Communion on the tongue may be just as ancient. And when Communion in the hand was practiced, the communicant received from a priest (and only a priest), most likely by putting It in his mouth without his other hand touching it. And in some places, a woman’s hand had to be covered with a white cloth!

We are more certain that the Roman Church once administered Holy Communion under both species (just as the Eastern churches have always done), but we don’t know exactly how. One interesting practice, which was in use by the seventh century, had the deacon distributing the Precious Blood with the use of a golden straw. Some think he dipped the straw in the chalice (which only he or a priest or bishop could touch), closed one end with his finger, put it over the communicant’s open mouth, and then lifted his finger to release the contents.

In other words, Holy Communion was probably not administered in the fast-food manner we have today, with a “grab-and-go” system of multiple efficient lines that move from one station to the other, and the communicant touching the Host or Precious Cup with his own hands. Our current arrangement may have more in common with the Protestant than the patristic. Significantly, Benedict XVI, a careful student of the Church Fathers, no longer administers Communion in the hand.

3. The vernacular. Another widespread myth is that the early Church had Mass “in the vernacular.” But when Jesus worshipped in the synagogue, the language used was Hebrew, which had already been dead for 300 years. And for the first three centuries in Rome, the Mass was mostly celebrated in Greek, not Latin, which was only understood by a minority of the congregation.

When the Mass was eventually translated into Latin, it retained foreign elements such as the Hebrew amen and alleluia, and even added some, such as the Greek Kyrie eleison. Moreover, the Latin used in translating was deliberately different from what was being spoken at the time: It had curious grammatical usages and was peppered with archaisms. In other words, even when the Mass was celebrated in a language people could understand, it was never celebrated in the “vernacular” — if by that term we mean the common street language of the day.

The reason for this is simple: Every apostolic Church — to say nothing of every major world religion — has always had a sacred or hieratic language, a linguistic toolbox different from daily speech specially designed to communicate the transcendence and distinctiveness of the gospel.

4. Lay ministry. Another perduring myth is the idea that the laity were “more involved” in the Mass than they were in later ages. In our own day, this has spawned a multiplication of liturgical ministries for lay folk, such as lector, etc. The reality is that in the early Church, all of these roles were administered by the clergy. In fact, the early Church had more ordained clerical offices (the former minor orders) than it does today. The Council of Nicea in 325, for instance, talked about fine-tuning the office of “subdeacon.” This tells us one thing: that subdeacons were already a fixture in the landscape before the council was convoked. Lay Eucharistic ministers were not.

5. The pre- vs. post-Constantinian Church. Lurking behind all of these myths is a powerful “meta-myth,” the claim that there was a rupture in the life of the Church after the Emperor Constantine legalized Christianity in the fourth century. The Church before Constantine, the meta-myth goes, was simple and pristine, a Church “of the people.” After Constantine, however, the Church became clericalist, hierarchical, and corrupted by the desire for grand buildings and highfalutin’ ceremonies.

The truth is that although the Church did indeed change — in some ways for the better and some for the worse — there was far more continuity than rupture. The Church before Constantine already had firm distinctions between clergy and laity, and she already recognized the importance of beautiful art, architecture, symbolism, and solemnity. After all, the Last Supper took place during the Passover, which was itself highly ritualized, and every Mass is a consummation of the ornate liturgies of synagogue and Temple. Indeed, a Eucharistic liturgy in the second or third century was longer, more hierarchical, and more symbolically brocaded than a Sunday Mass today. And since pews are a Protestant invention to accommodate long sermons, you either stood or knelt on the floor the entire time.

Like a bad virus, the myth of a utopian, pre-Constantinian, kumbaya-singing Church continues to impair. A typical example is the 2001 video A History of the Mass, produced by Liturgy Training Publications, one of the more influential purveyors of information about Catholic worship in the United States. After describing an idyllic, egalitarian community in which bishops gave up their seats for poor widows at the Eucharistic table, the narration shifts with the ominous words: “But then… the Emperor Constantine became a Christian.” You can imagine what follows (see here and here).

Moreover, even if every one of these myths were shown to be true, it would still not justify returning to the patristic era. In 1947, Pope Pius XII prophetically warned against archeologism, an “exaggerated and senseless antiquarianism” which presumes that the older is better than that which has developed organically over time and with the approval of the Church (Mediator Dei 64). The pope was worried about liturgical innovators who would leapfrog over 1,900 years of sacred tradition and divine inspiration. He was right to worry, but not even he foresaw the extent to which that targeted Golden Past would be a reconstruction of dubious accuracy.

Pentecost shows universality of the Church

Vatican City, Jun 12, 2011 (CNA/EWTN News).

Pentecost shows the Holy Spirit created the Catholic Church for all people, Pope Benedict said in his homily to mark Pentecost Sunday June 12.

“From the first moment, in fact, the Holy Spirit created (the Church) as the Church of all people. It embraces the entire world, transcending the boundaries of race, class, nation - it breaks down all barriers and unites people in the profession of the Triune God. From the beginning, the Church is one, catholic and apostolic,” said the Pope to a packed congregation within St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.

Pentecost is the one of the most prominent feast days in the Christian calendar. It is often referred to as the “birthday of the Church.”

It marks the day, nearly 2,000 years ago, when the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles who had been living in fear for 50 days following the resurrection of Jesus Christ on Easter Sunday. The Holy Spirit emboldened them and the same disciples then set forth to tell all people in Jerusalem of the Resurrection. All nationalities present could understand them in their own mother tongue.

“With this we are told something very important: that from the outset the universality of the Catholic Church is not the result of the inclusion of subsequent communities,” explained the Pope.

He added that the Catholic Church refers to itself as holy “not because of the merits of its members, but because God himself, with his Spirit, is always creating and sanctifying.”

The Pope explained it is the same Holy Spirit – as the third person of the Holy Trinity – who also reveals God to humanity firstly through creation, then through the incarnation of Christ and then through the founding of the Church.

“The Church does not derive from human will, from reflection, from man’s ability and organizational capacity, and if that were so it would have become extinct a long time ago, like all human things,” he said.

Pope Benedict also used his homily to reflect on the nature of creation and revelation.

“For us Christians, the world is the result of an act of love of God, who made all things and who is pleased with all things because it is ‘good,’ ‘very good,’ as we remember the story of creation.

“God therefore is not totally ‘Other,’ unnamed and obscured. God reveals himself, has a face, God is right, God is will, God is love, God is beauty.

“Faith in the Creator Spirit and faith in the Spirit that the Risen Christ gave to the Apostles and gives to each of us, then, is inseparably joined.”

The Pope finished his Pentecost Sunday liturgy by singing the Regina Coeli – or Queen of Heaven – the traditional Eastertide anthem to the Blessed Virgin Mary, mother of Jesus, who was also present amidst the disciples on the day of Pentecost.

In his address to accompany the Regina Coeli he drew upon the words of the 19th century Italian priest, Blessed Antonio Rosmini, who explained “in the day of Pentecost, the Christian God ... promulgated his law of love, writing with the Holy Spirit not on tablets of stone but in the hearts of the Apostles, and through the apostles, then communicating it to the whole Church.”

The Pope concluded by entrusting the Church to “the Virgin Mary, temple of the Holy Spirit” and then he imparted his apostolic blessing to the departing pilgrims.

Marian Devotion Essential to Catholic Faith

Catholic Culture May 30, 2011:

“Catholicisim could not exist without a Marian character,” Pope Benedict XVI told a visiting German delegation on May 28. The Pope added that he had realized at an early age that “being Catholic meant belonging to Mary.”

The Holy Father was speaking to members of the Maria Verkündigung, the Marian Congregation of Men, from Regensburg. They were visiting the Vatican to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the date when the Pontiff, as a young man, had been inducted into that congregation.

At the time Europe was in “a dark age,” under Nazi rule, the Pope recalled. “It seemed that the continent was in the hands of this power that…put the future of Christianity in doubt.” Shortly after he entered the congregation, the war began and the group was scattered.

Today, the Pope observed with pleasure, there are 40,000 members of the Maria Verkündigung in Bavaria. “Thank you all for continuing to hold this witness high,” he said, adding that their witness helps to prove that the Catholic faith is not a matter of the past but a living institution that will be powerful in the future as well.

Europe doomed if conscience isn’t rediscovered, Pope says

Zagreb, Croatia, Jun 4, 2011 (CNA/EWTN News).

Europe is doomed if it doesn’t rediscover the true meaning of conscience, warned Pope Benedict XVI on the first day of his visit to Croatia.

“If, in keeping with the prevailing modern idea, conscience is reduced to the subjective field to which religion and morality have been banished, then the crisis of the West has no remedy and Europe is destined to collapse in on itself,” the Pope told a gathering of members from Croatia’s civil society in the capital of Zagreb on June 4.

“If, on the other hand, conscience is rediscovered as the place in which to listen to truth and good, the place of responsibility before God and before fellow human beings – in other words, the bulwark against all forms of tyranny – then there is hope for the future.”

Several hundred key figures from the world of Croatian politics, academia, culture, arts and sport gathered at the country’s national theatre to hear the Pope. His speech echoed his prior warnings against the “dictatorship of relativism.”

He told the assembled dignitaries that many of the “great achievements of the modern age” such as “the recognition and guarantee of freedom of conscience, of human rights, of the freedom of science and hence of a free society” would be undone unless “reason and freedom” were kept rooted in “their transcendent foundation” of God.

To make his point, the Pope drew upon the life and work of Father Ruder Josip Boskovic, an early 18th century Croatian Jesuit, who was a great theologian, physicist, astronomer, mathematician, philosopher and poet.

Boskovic, said the Pope, was a clear example of “the happy symbiosis of faith and scholarship” in which “there is study of multiple branches of knowledge, but there is also a passion for unity,” and where learning is both “diversified and capable of synthesis.”

This forming of consciences rooted in faith and reason is where “the Church makes her most specific and valuable contribution to society,” said the Pope, stressing that this formation should begin in the home, the parish and the school.

In this way children “learn what it means for a community to be built upon gift, not upon economic interests or ideology, but upon love,” and so society is transformed for the better.

Pope Benedict explained that the impact of living in this selfless way, when “learnt in infancy and adolescence, is then lived out in every area of life, in games, in sport, in interpersonal relations, in art, in voluntary service to the poor and the suffering.”

And once this way of life has taken root, "it can be applied to the most complex areas of political and economic life so as to build up a polis that is welcoming and hospitable, but at the same time not empty, not falsely neutral, but rich in humanity, with a strongly ethical dimension.”

The Pope is visiting Croatia to celebrate the local church’s annual family day on June 5. Over 300,000 are expected to attend the Mass at a local Zagreb racetrack. The visit will last only two days, concluding tomorrow.

Overpopulation is a Myth

LifeNews May 29, 2011:

Proclamations of overpopulation have circulated for decades. Are they true? First off, what is meant by the word “overpopulation”? It has nothing to do with the amount of people but rather to the resources and the capacity of the environment to sustain human activities.

To be overpopulated, a nation must have insufficient food, resources and living space.

With the world population at around 6.8 billion last year, food and living space are hardly a concern. In 1990, it was estimated that the world could feed up to 35 billion people. Most sources estimate that the global population will level out at around 9.2 billion in 2050, and then start to decline.

Indian economist Raj Krishna estimates that India alone is capable of increasing crop yields to the point of providing the entire world’s food supply.

Lack of food is not the problem but rather the need for more efficient distribution.

Another supposed problem is living space.

In 2003, the entire population of the world could fit inside the state of Arkansas. The world may seem crowded, but it’s because humans cluster together for trade and companionship, not for lack of room. Even so, there are those who insist that we will continue to breed exponentially, causing a population explosion.

Paul Ehrlich first introduced this idea in 1968 with his book, “The Population Bomb.” It succeeded in scaring the masses, just as Thomas Malthus did, but these theories suffer under the impression that humans are the only thing fluctuating.

“Population rose six-fold in the next 200 years. But this is an increase, not an explosion, because it has been accompanied, and in large part made possible, by a productivity explosion, a resource explosion, a food explosion, an information explosion, a communications explosion, a science explosion, and a medical explosion,” wrote community development specialist Abid Ullah Jan in an article earlier this year called “Overpopulation: Myths, Facts, and Politics.”

Poverty, too, is not the effect of overpopulation, but rather the aftermath of poor leadership. In Ethiopia, government officials are blamed for causing poverty by confiscating food and exporting it to buy arms.

In Africa, economic problems are seen as a result of excessive government spending, taxes on farmers, inflation, trade restrictions and too much government ownership.

Depopulation is more likely to cause economic distress than these other factors.

Consumers are the largest component of GDP. If you drop that, it drags down the whole economy. Schools close for lack of students, neighborhoods are void of children, labor shortages cramp productivity and the list goes on.

With fewer children we would be faced with an aging population causing generational warfare on government spending. Social Security and Medicare are unsustainable unless each generation of taxpaying workers is larger than the one before it. Fertility should be encouraged, not seen as a crime.

The myth of overpopulation has been exposed as fertility rates continue to fall drastically, in many cases below replacing rate. The lowest replacement rate is 2.1 children per woman, yet many countries like Italy and Russia are closer to 1.69.

Even without so-called “population control,” fertility rates have dropped as women put off marriage and children to pursue higher education.

Population control, often mislabeled as “reproductive rights,” today consists of sterilization, contraception, abortion and open discouragement of fertility.

China’s notorious one-child policy which includes forced abortions and sterilizations will lead to a collapsing culture as the population plummets.

The sad reality of sterilization is if a woman has a child, and gets sterilized afterwards, and her child tragically dies young, she can never have another.

Not only are forced abortions a waste of human potential (which developing child could have been the next Mozart or Einstein?), abortion drugs administered to women in foreign countries also often cause serious complications. Medical posts in Africa or Peru are filled with contraceptives and other population control related items, but they often lack basics needed for overall health.

These options are wrong, not just morally, but logically and medically speaking. If the money spent on population control were moved to child survival programs, imagine the positive results.

Instead of pushing so-called “safe sex” we should promote the Catholic Church’s teachings on responsible parenthood. In this modern world, sex has become solely a source of pleasure, with children as a side effect. Sex should be recognized for what it is — an act of life.

Natural family planning, in which couples are open to the miracle of new life, is the only form of spacing of children acceptable to the church because it does not separate the two components of the sexual act — union and procreation. Catholicism stresses heavily the importance of both components being present.

Our faith calls us to be generous in welcoming children into this world.

Yes, our lifestyles need to change, but not in the way population control advocates prescribe. The world’s problems cannot be defined by one false theory.

The myth of overpopulation needs to be dispelled. The proof is before our eyes.

Christian Girls Kidnapped by Moslems

Jihad Watch May 20, 2011:

Again, what better subterfuge is there than to accuse your enemy of what you yourself have engaged in for years? And the fabricated stories of Muslim women (or alleged converts to Islam) being abducted by Christians in Egypt have indeed provided a handy cover for a new string of disappearances. Abductions of Christian girls are nothing new, as Coptic Pope Shenouda III observed even in 1976 that "there is a practice to convert Coptic girls to embrace Islam and marry them under terror to Muslim husbands." And our own archives are full of over seven years of such reports. Meanwhile, the world looks the other way, or now pleads, "but, but... Tahrir Square!" Wishful thinking in Western think tanks and governments won't un-abduct these girls and women. As Islamic groups -- "Salafis" and others -- are emboldened by the lack of challenges they have encountered in the wake of the revolution, there will only be more stories like this. "No Going Back for Egypt's Converted Copts," by Angela Shanahan for The Australian, May 20: Amid the upheavals in Egypt since January, reports have begun to emerge of a surge in disappearances of Coptic girls. One priest in Cairo estimates that at least 21 young girls, many as young as 14, have disappeared from his parish alone.

In most cases, when a Christian girl who disappears is found by her family, she has been converted to Islam and married. The Coptic authorities, have even set up a series of refuges in monasteries to handle the growing numbers of girls who wish to return to their families, many of whom are not accepted by their family of origin. But a worse problem for these women is that their conversion to Islam is irreversible. It is worth noting that this is a refreshingly frank report. Religion is stated on Egyptian ID documents and even though secular law provides for reversions, under the growth of sharia they are very difficult, except for those affording legal advocacy. This situation is not unique to Egypt. There have been consistent reports of girls being coerced into Islamic conversion and marriage in India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. That many of these girls are initially runaways is not in doubt. However, there is also evidence that a huge number are converted and married against their will. The situation was documented in a controversial report published in 2009 on conversion and forced marriage of Coptic women by Washington DC-based Christian Solidarity International. The authors are Washington academic Michele Clark and Egyptian Coptic broadcast journalist Nadia Ghaly, based in Melbourne.

Between 2005 and 2008 they interviewed and documented 50 Egyptian women, mostly aged between 14 and 25, who had decided to return to their families. All claim to have been tricked, coerced or raped, converted to Islam and married. Most of the interviewees were trying to reconvert to their Christian identity, with limited or no success. The report's conclusions were printed in several major publications, including Forbes magazine. Since the so-called Arab Spring, and the ensuing riots at Christian churches, the authors are trying to bring the subject of forced conversion and marriage to greater prominence. Riots by Muslims. Christians aren't being sent out into the street enraged by Sunday's homily. Both groups live extremely closed, highly traditional separate lives and the norms surrounding marriage and sex are almost medieval, says Ghaly. So, for example, it is not unheard of for a young Christian girl from a poor family to run away from an arranged marriage. Yet a high proportion of these women claim coercion, even rape, despite the shame that such a claim will cause if the girl wishes to return.

Many claim they were kept as virtual slaves. Others who were able to leave could not bring their children. Ghaly claims this is more than overt religious oppression, and amounts to "a form of cultural genocide". She cites a document published by Human Rights Watch in November 2007, which says that even if Coptic women can obtain a divorce from their Muslim husband, those who wish to return to Christianity "meet with refusal and harassment from the Civil Status Department of the Ministry of Interior". Under sharia law, reconversion is considered apostasy punishable by death. Cultural baggage? The innovation of modern "extremists?" No. That comes from Muhammad's own orders.