1st May: Feast of St Joseph the Worker & Honouring the Month of Mary…

Lyrics

Dear St. Joseph, pure and gentle,
Guardian of the Saviour child,
Treading with the virgin mother,
Egypt’s deserts rough and wild.

Chorus:
Hail, St. Joseph, spouse of Mary,

Blessed above all saints on high,
When the death-shades round us gather,
Teach, oh, teach us how to die.

He who rested on thy bosom
Is by countless saints adored;
Prostrate angels in His presence
Sing hosannas to their Lord.

Now to thee no gift refusing,
Jesus stoops to hear thy prayer;
Then, dear saint, from thy fair dwelling,
Give to us a father’s care.

Dear St. Joseph, kind and loving,
Stretch to us a helping hand;
Guide us through life’s toils and sorrows
Safely to the distant land.

Comment:

Happy Feast of Saint Joseph the Worker, to whom we pray for all those seeking employment or who are unhappy or suffering injustice at work. Saint Joseph The Worker, pray for them.

Comment:

We pray, too, for a glorious Month of Mary, and that Our Lady will bring great graces to our Conference, marking her Fatima Feast: Our Lady, Mother & Queen, we love you – please pray for us!

As always, this thread, whilst essentially devotional, may be used to discuss issues of interest and importance, relating, in this case, to St Joseph and/or Our Lady. Post your favourite hymns, prayers and poems; share any special answers to prayers you have received and any stories you have to tell us about the intercession of this great saint and our heavenly mother.  Education and Edification is our aim – enjoy!  

Catholics MUST Be Pro-Life – Action!

This thread is dedicated to sharing news about pro-life issues. 

Where possible, we suggest that bloggers make and respond to calls to action in defence of the unborn child – whether that entails emailing MPs or supporting various vigils etc.  

Try not to simply post a link to news – publish an extract and/or make a suggestion about possible action, that will encourage readers to click your  link. 

Among all the crimes which can be committed against life, procured abortion has characteristics making it particularly serious and deplorable. The Second Vatican Council defines abortion, together with infanticide, as an “unspeakable crime”.54

But today, in many people’s consciences, the perception of its gravity has become progressively obscured. The acceptance of abortion in the popular mind, in behaviour and even in law itself, is a telling sign of an extremely dangerous crisis of the moral sense, which is becoming more and more incapable of distinguishing between good and evil, even when the fundamental right to life is at stake. Given such a grave situation, we need now more than ever to have the courage to look the truth in the eye and to call things by their proper name, without yielding to convenient compromises or to the temptation of self-deception. In this regard the reproach of the Prophet is extremely straightforward: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness” (Is 5:20). Especially in the case of abortion there is a widespread use of ambiguous terminology, such as “interruption of pregnancy”, which tends to hide abortion’s true nature and to attenuate its seriousness in public opinion. Perhaps this linguistic phenomenon is itself a symptom of an uneasiness of conscience. But no word has the power to change the reality of things: procured abortion is the deliberate and direct killing, by whatever means it is carried out, of a human being in the initial phase of his or her existence, extending from conception to birth.

The moral gravity of procured abortion is apparent in all its truth if we recognize that we are dealing with murder... Pope John Paul II: Evangelium Vitae –  on the Value and Inviolability, of Human Life #58  [Emphasis added]
Click here to read the entire encyclical 

General Discussion (14)

animated-computermanbeing-punched-by-machineIf there’s something of interest in the news that’s not covered in one of the topic threads, or you have a question to ask, a comment you’d like to  make about anything under the sun, more or less, this is the thread for you.

However, please check first, to ensure that you haven’t missed a topic thread or another thread where it would be appropriate to post your comment, as the GD discussion threads fills up very quickly.

Readers, all too often, go straight to the General Discussion thread to post news that is already the topic of a thread or to ask a question that is already being discussed elsewhere. So, do your Sherlock Holmes – at the very least check the side-bar – before posting here, please and thank you!   Your “news” may simply be a different angle to a subject already under discussion, so do, please check before posting your comment here.         

Feel free, also, to share your favourite spiritual reading books, prayers and devotions.Whatever.   Enjoy! 

To read previous 10 General Discussion Threads, click on the links listed below.

(1) click here  (2) click here  (3) click here  (4) click here  (5) click here
(6) click here  (7) click here (8) click here  (9) click here (10) click here
(11) click here (12) click here   (13) click here

Who Is To Blame For The Failure To Consecrate Russia: You…Me…Popes?

For some time, now,  I have queried the claim (widely spread around these days, not least in the Blogosphere) that the Consecration of Russia has not been done because not enough of us are doing our bit by carrying out the Fatima requests to make the First Saturdays, pray the daily Rosary, wear the Brown Scapular etc.  In my humble opinion, that doesn’t make sense.  It doesn’t make sense to me that Our Lady would ask the Pope and Bishops to do this Consecration, in a precise manner, with no mention of any such conditions involving the rest of the faithful, and then, some years later, find the Fatima “experts” are blaming us for the failure of the Pope/Bishops to carry out the Consecration.  At our recent Conference, Father Nicholas Mary C.SS.R mentioned this claim, and when I queried it, he promised to find the origin of it. Today, I received the following email from him providing the source.  Father wrote:

Many sound authors quote Sr Lucia’s assertion that the consecration of Russia would take place “when a sufficient number are fulfilling the requests” of Our Lady of Fatima. There are also other passages from her writings and interviews where she says something similar. Nonetheless the origin of the precise quotation you questioned me about in public recently is as follows:

In 1946 Sr Lucia told John Haffert in an interview that “the Holy Father and all the Bishops will unite to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.” He then writes:

“‘And do you think the conversion of Russia and peace will follow?’ I asked, catching my breath. ‘Yes,’ she said deliberately. ‘Yes, that is what Our Lady promised.’ ‘But when, Sister,’ I asked, ‘when will it happen?’ ‘It will happen,’ she replied. ‘There might be much more suffering (we had been talking of the awful civil war in Spain), more nations may be afflicted, but it will happen when a sufficient number are fulfilling the requests.’” [John M. Haffert – Russia will be converted, Washington, New Jersey, 1956 (2nd ed.), AMI Press, p. 246]

Although John Haffert (of Blue Army fame) later went astray, at the time of the above writing, he was regarded as a reliable Fatima source, so this quotation surprised me. Still, I noted that Sr Lucia does not claim to be quoting Our Lady; arguably, then, it is possible that she was giving her own opinion. In any case, I sent the above text to a friend in the south of England, who is something of an expert on Marian apparitions in general and Fatima in particular.  He replies:

It does seem difficult to refute [that quote]. But in 1929 at the Tuy vision, Our Lady said that the moment had come (emphasis mine) for the Pope & bishops to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart.  I wouldn’t have thought it was entirely dependent on how many were living the Fatima message, because at that time, only 12 years after the initial events occurred, the full message wasn’t widely known then.  As I understand it, the message of Fatima applies to all humanity – for the laity, religious and priests to live the Fatima message:- i.e. the daily rosary, brown scapular, consecration to the Immaculate Heart, First Saturdays etc, and for the Pope and the Bishops in union with him to do all those things as well, but in their case also to specifically consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  The Fatima Network seems to say that there must be some co-operation from the laity in the Fatima message, obviously, but it doesn’t seem to make the consecration absolutely dependent on  it.  Source

Self-evidently, it can only be a good thing if more and more Catholics make the First Saturdays, pray the Rosary, wear the Brown Scapular and make sacrifices for sinners etc.  That’s not the issue.  The issue is, IS the fulfilment of those of Our Lady’s requests which apply to the faithful at large, a condition of the Pope’s/Bishops’ fulfilment of Our Lady’s request to them to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart?  I can’t see it.  Can you?

Note: in the original post, submitted earlier today, I omitted Father Nicholas Mary’s name and mention of the Conference, but he has asked me to amend the post to make the context entirely clear: thus, I have restored that part of his email which states that I “questioned him in public”.  Those bloggers/readers who attended the Conference and witnessed the exchange will recall that it was polite and respectful. Some may consider that I, as a mere laywoman, had no right “questioning” Father “in public”, but I did so merely to correct what I believe to be a misleading opinion about where responsibility for the Consecration of Russia, lies.  If I am proven to be wrong, I will gladly apologise for questioning Father Nicholas Mary.  I am always grateful for necessary correction myself, so feel free to speak your minds, one and all.

Comments invited…

From Trump Tower To Papal Glower…

Vatican City: Pope Francis urged US President Donald Trump to be a peacemaker and gave him a copy of his encyclical on climate change at their first meeting on Wednesday, after the two men exchanged sharp words last year.   Click here to read rest of this report

 

 

Comment:

Pity Donald Trump didn’t hand the Pope back his “climate” encyclical and tell him what, precisely, to do with it.  But not until he’d expressed a very clear view about the cold climate in the Vatican; reading that report of the visit of Donald Trump to the Vatican,  doesn’t it seem that the Pope has insulted Trump?  Grins for Obama and  glowers for Trump?  Tells its own story.  Like, says it all when a Protestant president is more pro-life and more polite than a pope.  Does it not?  Not to mention the cheek of it, to put peacemaking onto the shoulders of the new President of the USA when he, Pope Francis, holds the key to world peace if only he would obey Our Lady of Fatima and consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart.  Some nerve, then…

Medjugorje True AND False! It’s A Joke!

“The Ruini Report”: If Only It Were a Joke
The Anti-Fatima Apparition Gains Ground

by Christopher A. Ferrara
May 18, 2017

The findings of the long-awaited “Ruini Report” of the Ruini Commission (named after its chairman, Cardinal Camillo Ruini), concerning the validity of the so-called Marian apparitions at Medjugorje that have supposedly been going on since 1981, have now been revealed. The result of the Commission’s labors, which began during the reign of Benedict XVI, is just what one would expect in the post-conciliar epoch: a refusal to state clearly that a proposition concerning the Faith is simply true or false, right or wrong.

This ridiculous report “splits the difference” between a declaration that the apparitions alleged by the six Medjugorje “seers” are not supernatural in origin and thus a fake, and a declaration — like those pertaining to Fatima — that the apparitions are of supernatural origin and thus worthy of belief. In other words: the apparitions are both true and false, depending on which ones you examine! If only it were a joke.

Catholic News Agency provides an overview of this preposterous approach: the first seven “apparitions,” allegedly occurring between June 24 and July 3, 1981, drew “13 votes in favor of recognizing the supernatural nature of the first visions. A member voted against and an expert expressed a suspensive vote….”

What about the thousands of apparitions thereafter, which allegedly continue to this day at pre-announced times even though the “visionaries” said they would end, and which are filled with repetition, banalities and statements by “the Virgin” positively contrary to the Faith?  For example, in one apparition “the Virgin” states: “Before God all the faiths are identical.  God governs them like a king in his kingdom.”

Here the Commission adopted an utterly absurd two-step analysis that allowed it to avoid declaring the whole Medjugorje event a fake:

“On this second stage, the committee voted in two steps. Firstly, taking into account the spiritual fruits of Medjugorje but leaving aside the behaviors of the seers. On this point, 3 members and 3 experts say there are positive outcomes, 4 members and 3 experts say they are mixed, with a majority of positive effects, and the remaining 3 experts claim there are mixed positive and negative effects.

“If, in addition to the spiritual fruits, the behaviors of the seers is also taken into account, eight members and four experts believe that an opinion cannot be expressed, while two other members have voted against the supernatural nature of the phenomenon.”

So, when the analysis considers the behavior of the “visionaries,” the credibility of their supposed visions diminishes and no consensus even on “good fruits” emerges, although only two commission members are willing to state outright the obvious conclusion that the apparitions are not supernatural and thus are fakes. Yet these same “visionaries” are deemed credible respecting the first seven apparitions by 13 members of this laughable commission of hair-splitters.

In essence, the Commission (except for two members) has decided that the “visionaries” were telling the truth regarding the first seven “apparitions” but that, since then, they have been conducting the longest running fraud in the history of Marian apparitions, concerning which the Commission labors to avoid expressing the truth openly. And these six fraudsters are supposedly the chosen messengers of the Mother of God.

If only it were a joke. Well, it is a joke, but the Vatican is evidently going to take this report seriously despite the objections expressed by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which will be ignored just as surely as they were respecting Amoris Laetitia. As Pope Bergoglio remarked concerning the Commission’s “split-decision” during the return flight to Rome after his visit to Fatima: “At the end of 2013 or the beginning of 2014, I received the results from Cardinal Ruini.  The commission was made up of good theologians, bishops and cardinals.  Good, good, good people.  The Ruini report is very, very good.”

What is “very, very good” according to Pope Bergoglio is the Commission’s bogus distinction between “the first apparitions, “when [the ‘seers’] were young” and “the alleged current apparitions” in which the Virgin is depicted as “a telegraph operator who sends out a message every day at a certain time… this is not the mother of Jesus.” Indeed, it is not. Nor could it have been in 1981, for the Mother of God does not appear to people whom She would certainly foresee would perpetrate a decades-long fraud on the Church and the world in Her name.

Curiously, the same Pope Bergoglio who belittles what he views as the hairsplitting of theologians on matters as fundamental as the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, suddenly finds merit in the hairsplitting of this absurd theological commission respecting the manifest fakery of the Medjugorje apparitions. But then Pope Bergoglio has never failed to be consistent in his inconsistency.

And so, the anti-Fatima apparition gains ground, while the Message of Fatima is reduced by the Pope himself to a prescription for social justice and peace among people of all religions or no religion at all. What an insult to the Virgin Mother of God, Whose warning to the Church and all of humanity at Fatima continues to be spurned by the blind guides of the upper hierarchy, who march triumphantly toward the edge of the abyss into which they would lead the rest of us.   Source – fatima.org

Comments invited…

Catholic Truth Conference Huge Success!

Our Conference, held to mark the 100th anniversary of the Fatima Apparitions, and to note, too, the 100th edition of the Catholic Truth Newsletter, was, by any standards, hugely successful. 

The event began with the Glorious Mysteries of the Rosary, Hymn Bring Flowers of the rarest and crowning of Our Lady’s beautiful statue – that privilege was given to the little 4 year old daughter of one of our readers, who was thrilled at having been chosen to do this. We had other young people helping out at the various stalls and being general dogsbodies. To each of them our heartfelt gratitude. Our thanks, too, to Chairman Paul who took us through the day calmly and efficiently.

The four speakers were all well received and feedback has been largely positive. Here’s a sample:

Very good speakers. I really enjoyed it. Look forward to another. Motherwell Diocese.
(Ed: there isn’t going to be another – that was our Grand Finale, but it’s great that it has been such a success, and we leave the world of conferences on a high!)

Fr Nicholas Mary – most interesting talk. Learned so much! Ellen Ward – very strong speaker. Loved her account of Legion work and the priority of saving souls.  Fr Mann, very informative and thought-provoking…  Northampton Diocese (England)

The day was very interesting and learned a lot. I felt there was a strong message to take away with us and share with others; my only negative would be a lot of the talk would have been so off putting for people searching for Jesus (my own family being first). Surely God is love and wold bring people to his love and then they would learn the truth and turn away from sin. Ended up being very disturbed.  Galloway Diocese

All in all, however, the day was a great success, with the Fatima and piety stalls doing great “business” and the new initiative, Crusaders of Mary, drawing much interest.  Thanks to Joe and John who brought the Fatima Statue and beautiful banners over from County Cork for our use and for helping to make our Conference such a success.  Thanks, too, to John Blyth from Edinburgh, whose piety stall was very busy – as is usual at our Conferences.

Our American blogger, Wurdesmythe, has given the thumbs up to the Conference, and is set to enjoy the rest of his stay with us, before returning home on Thursday.  Chairman, Paul, called him up to the front of the hall at the start of the day to return his cheque/check in payment of his ticket, because, he said, we wanted to put to rest, once and for all,  the myth of the “mean Scot” !

One last word…

Note: one of a group of women from the Diocese of Galloway, expressed concern in the Q & A sessions, because she (and I believe others in her group) act as Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (EMHC) and she had been offended at remarks made by me about the “poisonous” effect of the novus ordo Mass and the diminution of belief in the Real Presence (or words to that effect).  She said they had to act as EMHC because they had no priests. For your information and interest, visit the  website of the Diocese of Galloway.

Perhaps we could use this thread to offer comments to help the Galloway group of EMHCs to come to a deeper realisation of how seriously wrong it is for lay people to handle the Blessed Sacrament: key question: is a shortage of priests really a good enough reason to allow this practice? And, perhaps  some of those who attended might respond to the lady from Galloway who remarked that the “a lot of the talk would have been so off putting for people searching for Jesus…[because] God is love…”

Comments invited…

Fatima, the Left, and the Coming Terror

Latest Fatima Center E-Newsletter

“Terror is nothing more than speedy, severe and inflexible justice; it is thus an emanation of virtue; it is less a principle in itself, than a consequence of the general principle of democracy, applied to the most pressing needs of the patrie.”
– Maximilien Robespierre, 1794


The Rage of the Left and the Coming Terror

In 1989, France marked the 200th anniversary of the French Revolution. It was a strained celebration, for even its most ardent apologists were compelled to admit the bloody and sordid nature of much that the Revolution encompassed. The guillotine remains its most enduring symbol.

The revolutionary leaders called for freedom, equality and brotherhood, and then proceeded to kill anyone deemed to stand in the way of these noble ideals, eventually murdering one another in the paroxysm of a brutal power struggle. (See:  “The 14 Bloodiest, Most Brutally Horrific Moments of the French Revolution”.)

In 1989, Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev went to Paris to participate in the bicentennial celebration and said, “The spirit of the French Revolution has always been present in the social life of our country.” As columnist Charles Krauthammer then observed: “Few attempts at ingratiation have been more true or more damning.” 

The bloodbath and horrors of communism have much in common with the bloodbath and horrors of what is now called “The Terror.” The Bolsheviks and the French Revolutionaries both relied on political assassination, domestic spying, denunciations and imprisonments, show trials and the criminalization of all dissent. Both terrorized the populace while committing their crimes in the name of “the People.” Tyrants always claim a democratic mandate.

 

The French Revolution’s Committee for Public Safety condemned to death almost 17,000 people in one year. (See:  “Reign of Terror”.)  This is a negligible body count when laid against the tens of millions that have been sacrificed on the altar of communism. We prefer to think that men such as Robespierre and Stalin are creatures of bygone eras and that conditions no longer allow for such horrors to be perpetrated. Perhaps, we should think again.

The Pope and the Antifa

Pope Francis has been called the new leader of the global Left. He has not demurred from the acclimation. He has been flatteringly featured in publications that can hardly be considered supportive of Catholic teaching, such as Rolling Stone. He has been praised by leaders of the pro-abortion movement, such as Hillary Clinton. Those who favor unrestricted Muslim immigration in the West and open borders feel they have a friend in Francis, and they are seldom disappointed.

But those who favor traditional Church teaching, including the indissolubility of marriage and the norms for receiving the sacraments, have felt the sting of the Pope’s rebuke and been subjected to personal insult. He does not answer dubia — questions concerning his positions; he denigrates the questioners. The ad hominem attack is his default mode. (See:  “Now Francis Targets ‘Rigid’ Youth: But what does “rigid” mean? And why does Francis never tell us?”.)

 Pope Francis acts more like a politician courting a constituency than the Vicar of Christ propagating a timeless teaching (See:  “An Interview with George Neumayr, Author of The Political Pope). His tactics are those of a candidate trying to undermine his opponent by character assassination. Missing from the voluminous homilies, speeches, interviews and press conferences of this pontiff is reasoned argument for his positions. (See:  “The Laity Roar While the Cardinals Meow: The Catastrophe that is Amoris Laetitia.) He relies on caricature, invective and vague “gospel” imperatives, which have an elasticity that can be adapted to most any circumstance.

Francis denounces “populism” as dangerous and fascistic whenever he disagrees with the “people.” Otherwise, he defends popular fashions in morals and ideology, often opposing the “living” reality of the times to the outmoded intransigence of traditional doctrine. He is with you so long as you are with him. We have never had a Pope who is so divorced from the normal exercise of his office and so eager for the approbation of the ruling classes, that is, the globalist Left. (See:  “For 2017 More of the Same: Leftist Politics Wrapped in the Language of Catholic Piety”.)

Meanwhile, the Left with which the Pope has aligned himself has suffered some setbacks, and it is not taking them well. Donald Trump has won the presidency of the United States; a “conservative” has been appointed to the Supreme Court. The unholy alliance of the “deep state” with its political masters is being exposed. The intelligence community is now known to be corrupt and untrustworthy. Democrats still control the media, but are hemorrhaging popular support. They appear more and more like generals without an army.

In Europe, the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. French nationalism is rising. Poland and Hungary are resisting Muslim immigration. And the narrative of current events is no longer tightly controlled by the propaganda arm of globalism — that is, the major news outlets — but is coming into public view, in factual and unedited form, from a growing number of information sites via the Web.

The Left has not, until recently, been called upon to defend itself. The ruling elites were protected from hard questioning by a supportive media that vilified anyone who subjected their positions to scrutiny. The media, like the Pope, resorts to the ad hominem attack as a matter of course. But their credibility is greatly diminished and the media’s fairness and accuracy are now being subjected to a scrutiny they have never before had to face. The control of the Left, which appeared so formidable for so long, is now unravelling.

The late John Vennari once memorably said that logic and liberalism cannot co-exist in the same head. Traced to its principle, a liberal position tends to fall apart from lack of coherence, internal contradiction or a collision with obvious facts. That Islam is a “Religion of Peace” is an example of a patently absurd liberal position; yet, every globalist, from George Bush to Angela Merkel to Pope Francis, has repeated this absurdity with the apparent expectation that it will be believed — or that people will fear to contradict the claim because the media will discredit and destroy anyone who dissents. (See:  “America Magazine Frets over Catholics’ Lack of Love for Islam”.) Facts, for the Left, are irrelevant. It is the narrative that is important, and the narrative can be shaped to suit the needs of the moment.

The Left is demonic in that its position is that of Lucifer: it wants to usurp the prerogatives of the Creator and refashion the world according to its likes and dislikes. It reverses Our Lord’s prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane and says, “Not Thy will, but mine be done.”  And it uses whatever tool is at hand to smash the natural order that stands in its way. Muslim immigration is just a tool for smashing what remains of European Christian culture. Transgenderism is a tool for smashing what remains of traditional sexual morality. Entitlement programs are a tool for smashing what remains of personal self-reliance. And all of this destruction is done in the name of compassion, of mercy. To oppose globalism is to be mean, bigoted, un-Christian. (See:  “Pope Francis Suggests Donald Trump Is ‘Not Christian’”.) It is to build walls instead of bridges. It is to invite finger wagging and invective from the Pope.

And while the Pope is vilifying the Left’s opponents daily at the Casa Santa Marta, mobs of masked “protesters” are appearing in cities across America and Europe. They are called the Antifa – for anti-fascists. It is a bit of Orwellian Newspeak from the Left’s Ministry of Truth. The Antifa disguise their faces, shout obscenities, beat people up, hurl trash cans through windows, set cars on fire, block traffic and shout down anyone who would say anything with which they disagree. They oppose free speech, freedom of assembly for any group they dislike, and are prepared to use violence if they don’t get what they want. The Antifa are, in short, fascists. (See:  “What is ‘Antifa’? And why is the media so reluctant to expose it?”.)

In Berkeley, they enjoy the protection of the University administration, the mayor and the police. (See:  “WOW! BERKELEY MAYOR Who Allegedly Told Police To ‘Stand Down’ Is Part Of Antifa Terrorist Facebook Group”.) We are asked to believe that the police force is no match for this rabble and therefore cannot guarantee the physical safety of conservative speakers, such as Ann Coulter. How stupid does the Left think the public is? There is collusion on a growing scale between the Left, the street mobs they incite and direct and the parts of the government they still control. That the Left is turning to orchestrated violence is a sign of things to come. If they cannot succeed through electoral politics, they will try to assert their will through social disruption, through fear, and then blame the chaos and bloodshed on the victims, the so-called fascists who had to be opposed for the sake of freedom and justice.

Just how far will the Left go to regain the power they have temporarily lost? This remains to be seen. One thing is apparent, however: civil discourse is no longer on the table. This is a struggle for raw power in which every outrage against decency is being justified in the name of “saving our democracy.” Network television programs now feature obscene rants against Trump and Republicans as a matter of course. The foulest language and fiercest hatred is countenanced as “entertainment.” It appears probable that the situation will only grow worse, for recent history shows that once the bar of decency has been lowered, it is never raised again. We can only descend at this point to ever more repulsive and brutish behavior on the part of the media in support of the Left.

 

The Long View and What We Can Expect

There is a professor in Berkeley named George Lakoff. He specializes in something called “cognitive linguistics.” Lakoff has long aspired to a role in politics, having offered his services to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. He is now counseling the Left on how it should regroup in light of the Trump victory. What he urges is what he calls “framing” the debate through the use of metaphors — that is, inventing appealing names for repellent things. (See:  “Moral Politics (book)”.)

His premise is that of the elite class: most people are too stupid to know what is in their best interest. The direction of their lives is best left in the hands of their intellectual and moral superiors, i.e. Lakoff and the Left. Hobbled by a nominal democracy, however, the smart people are compelled to manipulate the obtuse proletariat. Lakoff says this can best be done by using words that bypass reason and reach the unconscious, for reason is wasted on the masses. (See:  “The Framing Wars”.)

Conservatives supposedly believe in what Lakoff calls the “Strict Father” model of the family, which he describes as authoritarian and cruel; it is opposed to the goodness and light of what he calls the “nurturant parent” model, favored by the benevolent Left. Lakoff wants the Left to use language to move people from the authoritarian model of the family to the nurturant parent model. But Lakoff’s strategy requires patience. It is also seen by some on the Left as academic theorizing that may or may not hold good in the real world. Meanwhile, the Left is opting for the fascism of the Antifa. It is trying to shut down the opposition through suppressing free speech.  But Lakoff’s approach may also be tried.

Lakoff wants Democrats to stop using terms such as “federal regulations” and to talk instead about “protections.” He suggests the word “taxes” be replaced by the word “investments.” The media is always amenable to offering what help it can to “progressives,” for whom Lakoff is a self-appointed strategist, so we are likely to hear more linguistic legerdemain in the near future. The Associated Press Style Book has long used its power to push the Left’s agenda. The AP forbids the use of “pro-life” and “pro-abortion,” allowing only the term “pro-choice.” Most every newspaper and news outlet uses the AP as its usage guide. The media are likely to become the linguistic arm of the Antifa.

We should be alert to the fact that the Left is regrouping and a new language is being invented for presenting its agenda. Meanwhile, we can expect the street violence and the media assault against Trump to continue unabated. The public may tire of the turmoil and decide that Trump is too divisive a figure, a claim which the media will amplify in every way as the next election cycle approaches. If and when the Left manages to defeat its opposition, it will exercise power with an unprecedented ruthlessness. It has already discarded civil discourse and adopted the position that anyone who opposes them does not deserve a hearing, as their opponents are presumed to be motivated by racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, religious bigotry and consummate evil and stupidity of every description.

Their opponents are deemed hateful, and why should hateful people be given any quarter? Why should such deplorables be allowed to speak, or even exist? The brigades of the Antifa will be let loose, aided by all the apparatus of the government and media. The spirit of Robespierre, the patron saint of the Left, will be triumphant. How bloody will it get? It is beyond present imagination, for we find it difficult to accept possibilities that are deeply repugnant to us. But we have history as a guide.

All of the above takes into account only the human factors that shape events. There is the overarching power of Providence that can intervene at any time in unforeseen ways. We have a Pope who has sided with the Left and is trying to convince, even compel, Catholics to support the globalist agenda. The doctrinal patrimony of the Catholic Church is endangered by Francis’ alliances. No human power can effectively oppose his politicization of the Faith. Where do we turn?

Our Lady of Fatima said, “Only I can help you.” Perhaps the time is coming when the whole world will realize the truth of Her words.

Comments invited…

Is Home-Schooling The Only Meaningful Option For Catholic Parents Today?

“Parents are the first and the most important educators of their own children, and they also possess a fundamental competence in this area; they are educators because they are parents.”       Pope John Paul II 

… Seton Home Study School [is] here to assist parents with their educational duties. We help by providing counseling by phone, message boards, fax, and e-mail. We also provide daily lesson plans, testing services, books, software, videos, online testing, online audio lectures, and other educational materials for Catholic homeschooling. 
Seton serves an enrollment of approximately 10,000 students, and several thousand more families through book sales and by furnishing materials to small Catholic schools. Click here to find out more about the Seton Home School Programme.
 
Comment:
Seton is an American programme but by far the best out there, according to the several parents in Scotland with whom I’ve discussed the subject – my own great-nephews love it – and if you click here, you will read some glowing testimonials from both parents and students.  Parents who fear that they are not equipped to home-school, should have their fears allayed after perusing the Seton website, with its wealth of materials and online support from professional teachers.  You will even note the “chat” facility at the right hand side of the screen…  
Feel free, however, to recommend other programmes, and share your thoughts about the concept of home-schooling but before you do, it would be worth watching the video below – towards the end, after his devastating critique of the American school system [which mirrors what is happening in the UK] Michael Matt reveals that his own children were successfully home-educated.  After you see the film (takes around 30 minutes), tell us whether or not you think that  home-schooling is the only real option open to parents who wish to ensure that their offspring are taught the Faith right across the curriculum,  in order to cultivate a Catholic world-view, something which  was once integral to any true Catholic school but which, now, is never mentioned. Share your thoughts…