What America Needs to do About Gun Violence

"Our hearts are restless, until they rest in you, O Lord."

The cold blooded murders that occurred in Newton, CT last week has finally struck home to Americans.  Everybody is talking change.  America does need to change.  Changing gun laws is just barking up the wrong tree.  A band-aid over a severed artery.  None of what our politicians have been proposing since the Newton slaughter will plug the sieve of evil manifesting itself in these horrific events.  God is our only solution and we can do nothing without him.  God defines true love and only God can cultivate a loving regard for our neighbor.  Society left to its own design only creates darkness. 

Our culture of death is to blame for America's violence.  Take abortion for example.  Abortion is society's, not God's design.  We cannot expect peace as long as we, as a culture, continue to condone the murder of innocents in the mother's womb.  America needs a change of heart in how they see their fellow man.

America's youth and young adults have grown up coming to grips with and trying to comprehend, rationalize, psychologically and morally accept the barbaric act and brutal crime of abortion.   The atrocity of murdering the innocent and helpless - a repeated practice that modern American society sanctions has its consequences.  Our culture has given its benediction to the slaughter of innocence since 1973 with the State sanctioning of murdering children in the mother's womb.  As long as this barbaric act remains legal and a part of our society, our American children must grow up having to grapple with this issue in their conscience - and many of them seem to be emerging a psychological mess.  Acceptance of abortion results in the shifting from an innocent, charitable outlook towards their fellow man, to a dark, sinister outlook that can justify snuffing out the lives of their neighbor, in or out of the womb for personal motive.  By sanctioning abortion as a society, we are creating an entire populace of darkened minds the likes of serial killers. 

Humans are not perfect and we repeat past mistakes.  To change our country, our children must acknowledge that society is guilty of a brutal crime and a state-sanctioned barbarism unheard of since the 18th and 19th century when American society sanctioned the widespread crime of slavery.  One has to undergo a moral and psychological twisting of conscience to accept abortion as a legitimate justifiable crime that can be embraced just as society once embraced the crime of slavery.  Like slavery, to rationalize abortion, one has to alter the mind and conscience and their perception of their fellow man in a way that sees their neighbor as soulless animals that can be easily dispensed with  "on demand" for any reason and at any time during the human lifespan.   

What America needs is to stem the tide of its culture of death.  It can't just be removed.  It must be replaced with love for and reverence for God and our neighbor.  No amount of tearing down nativity scenes is going to bring America that peace it desires.  America must follow the lead of the very people who the massacre affected most.  

The people of Newton, CT attended church services and prayer vigils immediately after the attack.  They didn't turn to government, they turned to God.  They turned to God because they know that only God can provide the peace and comfort they cry for.  Legalizing marijuana, legalizing gay marriage, perpetuating the state sanctioned crime of abortion, enacting more gun laws, accelerating environmental restrictions, or promoting euthanasia will never bring America the utopia and peace that liberalism promises.  On the contrary, these vices are the very cause of school, shopping mall, and movie theatre slaughters by our grown young adults.  Utopianism promotes vices as virtues with the delusion that the more vices get promoted, the greater the payoff will be.  Except the payoff never arrives, except in the form of an elementary school massacre.  

The people of Newton, CT know that God alone can bring them peace and comfort.  Their first act wasn't to lobby Washington - it was to lobby heaven; to seek out God.  In the same way, the people of America knew after 9/11 that only God must be sought in times of fear and sadness.  This was evident in the packed churches with standing room only of newcomers for several weeks after the 9/11 attacks.  All mankind knows deep down that only God will suffice.  God, not government, brings us comfort, paradise, and peace.  As St. Augustine said, 

"Our hearts are restless, until they rest in you, O Lord."

4D Scan Shows Fetus Yawn in the Womb

Scientists have found that unborn babies not only hiccup, swallow and stretch in the womb, they yawn too

According to Reuters, British researchers said their study was able to clearly distinguish yawning from "non-yawn mouth opening" based on how long the mouth was open.

The researchers did this by using 4D video footage to examine all the times when fetuses opened their mouths.

The study was carried out on eight female and seven male fetuses from 24 to 36 weeks gestation. The researchers found that yawning declined from 28 weeks and that there was no significant difference in how often boys and girls yawned.

Sun unleashes another monster eruption

Seeing the sun, the moon and the stars, I said to myself, ‘Who could be the Master of these beautiful things?' I felt a great desire to see him, to know him and to pay him homage.- Saint Josephine Bakhita

The sun unleashed a monster eruption of super-hot plasma Friday (Nov. 16) in back-to-back solar storms captured on camera by a NASA spacecraft.

The giant sun eruption, called a solar prominence, occurred at 1 a.m. EST (0600 GMT), with another event flaring up four hours later. The prominences was so large, it expanded beyond the camera view of NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO), which captured high-definition.

"The prominence plasma flows along a tangled and twisted structure of magnetic fields generated by the sun’s internal dynamo. An erupting prominence occurs when such a structure becomes unstable and bursts outward, releasing the plasma."

Friday's solar eruption does not appear to be aimed at Earth, so will likely have little effect on our planet. But that was not the case earlier this week when a powerful solar flare erupted on Monday (Nov. 12). That flare registered as an M6-class eruption, a moderate but still intense solar event.

The sun is currently in the middle of an active phase of its 11-year solar weather cycle. The current cycle is called Solar Cycle 24 and is expected to peak in 2013:

For perspective:

Solar Quiz: How Well Do You Know Our Sun?

Many of us take the sun for granted, giving it little thought until it scorches our skin or gets in our eyes. But our star is a fascinating and complex object, a gigantic fusion reactor that gives us life. How much do you know about the sun?

0 of 10 questions complete

Solar Flares Begin Erupting . . . Again

Seeing the sun, the moon and the stars, I said to myself, ‘Who could be the Master of these beautiful things?' I felt a great desire to see him, to know him and to pay him homage.
- Saint Josephine Bakhita

Dr Matthew Penn, of the National Solar Observatory in Arizona, said recently: 'Because the sun is becoming more active, it will have an impact on millions of people. Sunspots can cause the biggest and most damaging space storms that occur.Now we are seeing a striking increase in strongly violent solar activity.

'During the next two years, we are expecting the number of sunspots visible on the sun to reach a maximum. We know that sunspots are the source of a lot of space weather and solar storms, so we expect a larger number of solar storms here at the Earth.’

To put it into perspective:

Pelosi Assumes Position as Speaker of the Church

Nancy Pelosi Continues to Defy Church Authority

Attempts to Speak for the Roman Catholic Church by Dismissing the Apostolic Successors

(CNSNews.com) - House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) said on Thursday that the 43 Catholic institutions—including the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., the Archdiocese of St. Louis and the Archdiocese of New York--that are suing the Obama administration over its regulation mandating that all health-care plans must cover sterilizations, contraceptives and abortifacients are not speaking for the Catholic Church.

If Catholic Bishops do not speak for the Catholic Church then who does?  Nancy Pelosi?  Former Speaker of the House must be feeling left out of the limelight.  By going to the press and calling the Catholic Church reaction to the White House's attack on religious freedom "a fraud" and now this, Nancy Pelosi must be expecting Americans to believe that she is the Speaker for the Catholic Church.

CNSNews continued:

Archbishop Robert J. Carlson of St. Louis spoke at a press conference, giving a quite different impression . . . "The Catholic Church, led by the U.S.C.C.B. [U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops], has pursued every imaginable avenue to correct this problem without litigation," said the archbishop. "But in a few short months, the federal government will force Catholic institutions to choose between violating the law and violating our moral convictions. Right now, the future is unclear, and any scenario that forces us to violate our moral convictions is unacceptable."

“Ex cathedra” refers to the infallible authority that Catholics believe the pope exerts when he makes a formal and solemn declaration on matters of faith and morals. It is not a term to describe lawsuits the church files in civilian courts.

It is unclear why Pelosi would have pointed out that when an archbishop—such as Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York, Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington, D.C. or Archbishop Carlson of St. Louis—sues the federal government in actions designed to protect the First Amendment rights of American Catholics he is not speaking "ex cathedra."

In a 1993 audience, Pope John Paul II quoted the first Vatican Council in explaining the Catholic understanding of the “ex cathedra” authority of the pope.

“When the Roman Pontiff speaks ex cathedra, that is, when in exercising his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians he defines with his supreme apostolic authority that a doctrine on faith and morals is to be held by the whole Church, through the divine assistance promised him in the person of St. Peter, he enjoys that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer wished to endow his Church in defining a doctrine on faith and morals,” said the Vatican Council.

The Catholic teachings that sterilization, artificial contraception and abortion are morally wrong—the basis for the suits that the archdioceses, dioceses, universities, schools and charitable organizations have brought against the Obama administration--are in fact inalterable teachings that the church says are rooted in natural law.

The Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., states in its lawsuit: “The Catholic Church views abortion, sterilization, and contraception as intrinsically immoral, and prohibits Catholic organizations from condoning or facilitating those practices.”

“The Government may not interfere with or otherwise question the final decision of the Catholic Church that its religious organizations must abide by these views,” says the lawsuit. “Plaintiffs have therefore made the internal decision that the health plans they offer to their employees may not cover, subsidize, or facilitate abortion, sterilization, or contraception. The U.S. Government Mandate interferes with Plaintiffs’ internal decisions concerning their structure and mission by requiring them to facilitate practices that directly conflict with Catholic beliefs.” 

When CNSNews.com tried to ask Pelosi if she agreed with her church’s teaching on sterilization--which is one of the moral issues at the center of the church’s lawsuit against the Obamacare regulation--Pelosi cut the question off.

“You know what, I do my religion on Sunday in church, and I try to go other days of the week. I don’t do it at this press conference,” she said.

On other occasions, Pelosi has volunteered opinions about her religious faith and how it impacts her legislative agenda.

In 2010, speaking at a conference at the Capitol, Pelosi said the her favorite word was “the Word,” namely, Jesus Christ, and that she believed she had an obligation to “give voice to what the means in terms of public policy.” 

Planned Parenthood Gone Wild

Planned Parenthood admits that they will perform sex-selection abortions or abortions "for any reason."  

According to LifeNews:

The investigative pro-life group Live Action, which has released videos exposing the abuses at the Planned Parenthood abortion business across the country, has released a new video today showing a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic in Austin, Texas encouraging a woman to get a sex-selection abortion.

The video shows a Planned Parenthood staffer encouraging the woman to obtain a late-term abortion because she was purportedly carrying a girl and wanted to have a boy. The video is the first in a new series titled “Gendercide: Sex-Selection in America,” that Live Action tells LifeNews will be exposing the practice of sex-selective abortion in the United States and how Planned Parenthood and the rest of the abortion industry facilitate the selective elimination of baby girls in the womb.

“I see that you’re saying that you want to terminate if it’s a girl, so are you just wanting to continue the pregnancy in the meantime?” a Planned Parenthood counselor offers the woman, who is purportedly still in her first trimester and cannot be certain about the gender.

“The abortion covers you up until 23 weeks, and usually at 5 months is usually (sic) when they detect, you know, whether or not it’s a boy or a girl.”

The woman asks, “Do you think I should go and just ask for an ultrasound and just not tell [the doctor] that I’m gonna terminate if it’s a girl, or…I just feel like there’s been some judgment for my…”

“To be honest with you, um, I would probably think so,” the Planned Parenthood staffer responds.

“But do you think I still just shouldn’t worry about telling them that I would be terminating if it’s a girl?” the pregnant patient repeats later.

“Right,” Planned Parenthood says. “I would.”

Live Action says the late-term abortion is offered for gender selection even though doctors agree that the later in term a doctor performs an abortion, the greater the risk of complications.

In the video, the Planned Parenthood staffer suggests that the woman get on Medicaid in order to pay for an ultrasound to determine the gender of her baby, even though she plans to use the knowledge for an elective abortion. The abortion facility staffer also tells the woman to “just continue and try again” for the desired gender after aborting a girl, and adds, “Good luck, and I hope that you do get your boy.”

Lila Rose, the president of Live Action, condemned Planned Parenthood for its willingness to facilitate sex-selection abortions.

“The search-and-destroy targeting of baby girls through prenatal testing and abortion is a pandemic that is spreading across the globe,” she said. “Research proves that sex-selective abortion has now come to America. The abortion industry, led by Planned Parenthood, is a willing participant.”

UPDATE: Planned Parenthood has responded to the video by essentially saying it will do abortions for any reason and adding that the staffer in the video violated unnamed policies and has since been fired from her position.

Meanwhile, LifeNews reports that Democrats in Congress peddled a curious reason for opposing a ban on sex-selection abortions that target girl babies with abortion because they are not the boy that parents may prefer. They said the ban was anti-woman and part of the so-called “War on Women” Republicans are allegedly waging.  During today’s debate on the Congressional bill to ban sex-selection abortions, Michigan Democrat John Conyers said the ban on sex-selection abortions “tramples the rights of women.”  “It limits a woman’s right to choose and jeopardizes her access to safe, legal medical care,” he claimed.

That is indeed quite upside down of the Democrats.  The problem with sex-selection abortions, both here and in China is that the FEMALE gender is being mass exterminated.  Yet, the Democrats are contorting themselves into all kinds of knots to peddle the lie that the issue is about helping the female gender.  Then again, has any position the Democrats taken in the arena of ethics and morality helped anybody or even make any sense?

The Democrats want to perpetuate the errors of Communist China and countries that discriminate against women.  LifeNews continues:

In the findings of the bill to ban sex-selection abortions, members of Congress make the case that the United States, technically, does less to stop sex-selection abortions than nations like China and India, where the reprehensible practice is common.

Sex-selection abortions are not expressly prohibited by United States law or the laws of 47 States. Sex-selection abortions are performed in the United States. In a March 2008 report published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Columbia University economists Douglas Almond and Lena Edlund examined the sex ratio of United States-born children and found ‘‘evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage’’.

The data revealed obvious ‘‘son preference’’ in the form of unnatural sex-ratio imbalances within certain segments of the United States population, primarily those segments tracing their ethnic or cultural origins to countries where sex-selection abortion is prevalent. The evidence strongly suggests that some Americans are exercising sex-selection abortion practices within the United States consistent with discriminatory practices common to their country of origin, or the country to which they trace their ancestry.

While sex-selection abortions are more common outside the United States, the evidence reveals that female feticide is also occurring in the United States.

Despite the failure of the United States to proscribe sex-selection abortion, the United States Congress has expressed repeatedly, through Congressional resolution, strong condemnation of policies promoting sex-selection abortion in the ‘‘Communist Government of China’’. Likewise, at the 2007 United Nation’s Annual Meeting of the Commission on the Status of Women, 51st Session, the United States delegation spearheaded a resolution calling on countries to condemn sex-selective abortion, a policy directly contradictory to the permissiveness of current United States law, which places no restriction on the practice of sex-selection abortion. The United Nations Commission on the Status of Women has urged governments of all nations ‘‘to take necessary measures to prevent . . . prenatal sex selection’’.

Countries with longstanding experience with sex-selection abortion—such as the Republic of India, the United Kingdom, and the People’s Republic of China—have enacted restrictions on sex-selection, and have steadily continued to strengthen prohibitions and penalties. The United States, by contrast, has no law in place to restrict sex-selection abortion, establishing the United States as affording less protection from sex-based feticide than the Republic of India or the People’s Republic of China, whose recent practices of sex-selection abortion were vehemently and repeatedly condemned by United States congressional resolutions and by the United States Ambassador to the Commission on the Status of Women.

Public statements from within the medical community reveal that citizens of other countries come to the United States for sex-selection procedures that would be criminal in their country of origin. Because the United States permits abortion on the basis of sex, the United States may effectively function as a ‘‘safe haven’’ for those who seek to have American physicians do what would otherwise be criminal in their home countries—a sex-selection abortion, most likely late-term.

Despite the fact that sex-selection abortions are likely happening in the United states, one leading pro-abortion group opposes efforts to ban them.

In Memoriam: The Fighting 69th

Honoring The Fighting Irish

In Memoriam: The Fallen Veteran

Today let us remember all faithfully departed veterans to rest with God in eternal peace. Many have lost close family and subsequent generations have lost their faith. Many veterans have no one left to pray for them except outsiders who can remember them.

Mansions of the Lord

"To fallen soldiers let us sing,

Where no rockets fly nor bullets wing,

Our broken brothers let us bring

To the Mansions of the Lord

No more weeping,

No more fight,

No friends bleeding through the night,

Just Devine embrace,

Eternal light,

In the Mansions of the Lord

Where no mothers cry

And no children weep,

We shall stand and guard

Though the angels sleep,

Oh, through the ages let us keep

The Mansions of the Lord"

Cristiada Movie (For Greater Glory) Exposes Secularism's Objective

1926 Mexico: Historically Accurate Movie Finally Reveals Early 20th Century Plot by Atheists, Agnostics, and Freemasons to Commit War Crimes, Ethnic Cleansing of Catholics,  Mass Extermination, Genocide, and Crimes Against Humanity - all for Humanistic Secularism

"Anti-clerical elements were included in 1917 Mexican Constitution. Five elements in the Constitution were aimed at reducing the Catholic Church’s influence in Mexican domestic affairs.

Article 3 enforced secular education in Mexican schools. Monastic vows and institutes were outlawed in Article 5.

Article 24 prevented public worship outside the confines of the Church buildings.

According to article 27, "religious institutions were denied the right to acquire, hold, or administer real property."

Furthermore, all real estate held by religious institutions through third parties like hospitals, schools, was declared national property. Finally, in article 130, it declared all basic civil responsibilities like voting or commenting on public affairs was taken away from Church officials.

The Mexican government was extremely harsh in their attempt to eliminate the Catholic Church’s legal existence in Mexico. The stern premises of the 1917 Constitution contributed to the rise of resentment between the church and state."

" . . . Article 3 of the constitution required that education, in both public and private schools be completely secular and free of any religious instruction and prohibited religions from participating in education - essentially outlawing Catholic schools or even religious education in private schools.  Article 3 likewise prohibited ministers or religious groups from aiding the poor, engaging in scientific research, and spreading their teachings.  The constitution prohibited churches to own property and transferred all church property to the state - thus making all houses of worship state property.

"Article 130 of the constitution denied churches any kind of legal status and allowed local legislators to limit the number of ministers, (essentially giving the state the ability to ban religion) and banned any ministers not born in Mexico.  It denied ministers freedom of association, the right to vote and freedom of speech, prohibiting them and religious publications from criticizing the law or government.  The constitution prohibited any worship outside of a church building"

Read more here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_Mexico

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calles_Law

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_Constitution_of_1917#Anticlerical_articles_and_the_1934.2C_1946_and_1992_Amendments

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Roman_Catholicism_in_Mexico#Early_Stages:

Author of "The Exorcist" will Sue Georgetown U. in Vatican Court

The author of "The Exorcist", William Peter Blatty called Sebelius invitation to speak in Georgetown "the last straw":

The author, William Peter Blatty, says the Jesuit-founded university in Washington has for the past two decades invited speakers who support abortion rights and has refused to comply with orders by the late Pope John Paul II for church-affiliated colleges and universities.The “last straw” was the university allowing students to invite Sebelius to speak May 18, considering she was instrumental in helping President Obama draft health care reform that includes a mandate for some religious institutions to offer insurance to cover employees’ birth-control costs, said Blatty, who attended Georgetown on a scholarship and graduated in 1950.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/25/exorcist-author-to-sue-georgetown-after-sebelius-visit/#ixzz1vw7HQSVn

Gallup Poll Released Today 5/23/12 Show Percentage of Pro-Choice at Record Low

According to a Gallup poll released today:

“The 41% of Americans who now identify themselves as “pro-choice” is down from 47% last July and is one percentage point below the previous record low in Gallup trends, recorded in May 2009,”

As a result, pro-lifers now outnumber pro-choicers among this important swing political group for only the second time since 2001, with the first occurring in 2009.

Even Democrats, who support abortion, are trending in the pro-life direction, according to the survey.“Democrats’ views on abortion have changed the least over the past 12 years, with roughly 60% calling themselves pro-choice and about a third pro-life.

The polling firm also found just 20 percent of Americans believe all abortions should be legal — the position of President Barack Obama and Planned Parenthood.

See article HERE.

Benedictine Monks of Clear Creek - Living the Faith

Nancy Pelosi Believes Catholicism Supports Gay Marriage

According to CNS News,

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday that her Catholic faith "compels" her to "be against discrimination of any kind" and thus for same-sex marriage.

"It’s a matter of time. It's all about time. And on these issues, what is inevitable to some of us is inconceivable to others," she said. "And what we want to do is shorten the difference between the inevitable and the inconceivable," she continued. "And I think the president went a long way in doing that yesterday."

While opposing "unjust discrimination" against homosexuals, the Catechism of the Catholic Church says that homosexual acts are "contrary to the natural law" and can never be approved and that marriage is the sacramental union of a man and a woman."Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that 'homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered,'" says the Catechism. "  They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved."  

The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible," says the Catechism. "  This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition."

Homosexual persons are called to chastity," says the Catechism. "Sexuality is ordered to the conjugal love of man and woman."

Pelosi: "it's all about time . . . "  And with each generation morality is dissolved further until it becomes indiscernible to its former relatively moral self.  "It's all about time" because Pelosi, aligned with the devil, together know that they must ruin the very thing that God created before He takes it back with the world's end.  It's like hating somebody so much that when you break up with that person you give them back their possessions in shambles out of pure spite, hatred, and vengeance.  Nancy Pelosi is either so psychotically defiant that she'll justify anything to support her twisted conscience or she knows exactly what she's doing and trying to bring the world down with her before God draws all time back to himself.

The Hypocrisy of the Intolerant Left Revealed Yet Again

Dan Savage who was speaking about bullying goes into a rant against Christians and how intolerant of them we must all be.  Yeah that makes sense.  What in the world is an anti-bullying speaker doing taking stage to do the very thing he is there to decry?  Answer, he doesn't believe in peace, he believes in intolerance while simultaneously preaching against intolerance.  The classic wolf in sheep's clothing.  Christ came to abolish slavery and institute a new covenant that did away with all those things that you chose to cherry pick out of the Old Testament and use as a cudgel against all Christians.  He also warned us to watch for wolves in sheep's clothing.  For video: here.

Catholic News Service Article: "New generation, old rite: the enduring appeal of Catholic tradition"

The article and video bring out these major points:

• Classical liturgical music has an "uplifting, energizing effect, it really moves people to prayer," he says. "Both Gregorian chant and polyphony highlight the texts of the liturgy. When you're listening to them, you meditate on the words and internalize their meaning."

• A large segment of Father Kramer's flock is people born decades after the Tridentine Mass ceased to be the norm. He says they are frequently drawn by the older liturgy's emphasis on the sacrificial dimension, which makes it "more obvious that Christ is pouring out his blood for the forgiveness of sins."

• Younger people also are "more sophisticated than they used to be, and they're looking for something at a higher level," Father Kramer says. "And I think that is connected with finding the great tradition and richness of the last 2,000 years."

• The Tridentine Mass is a link to the church's vast treasures of art, architecture, literature and music. "These are all things that we need to rediscover," Father Kramer says. "No other institution has anything like it."

• More specifically, he says, the liturgy offers an education in the faith itself.  "The Latin of the old Mass helps the priest and the laity understand a lot more about the theology of the church right back to the third century, because a lot of the terminology is in Latin," Father Kramer says. "These are terms that are coming from the ancient world and that in the intervening centuries have accrued other (meanings) and have been enriched as they've gone along."

• Familiarity with the traditional liturgy can thus help the vast majority of Catholics who attend the ordinary form understand it better, Father Kramer says; and such exposure might also help priests who celebrate the newer liturgy to focus on its essential meaning.

• "In the old Mass the idea was that the personality of the priest should disappear and that the Mass would have an objective value," he says. "The new Mass could learn something from that principle ... that it's not about the priest, it's about Christ the priest and the priest acting in his stead."

• "The church can't have a council that contradicts previous councils. That just can't happen in Catholicism. One mustn't come to the documents with a hostility but rather with a mind that wants to see them as they relate to the general tradition."

Obama's HHS "Compromise" Just Adds Insult to Injury

Obama's "diffusing" of the contraception issue is no compromise at all.

First he arrogantly mandated that Catholic hospitals provide their employees birth control and abortion pills. The only acknowledgement to Catholics was that they had "one year to comply with the mandate." How generous of them.

Now, since only because it's an election year, Obama felt the heat from groups seeing his bald faced attack on the First Amendment which guarantees the "free exercise of religion" and used his unwavering guile to craft a cynical "compromise." The compromise is this: that Catholic institutions, instead of directly giving their employees contraceptives and abortion pills themselves, must now instead purchase the plan - that the Catholic institutions must buy - that deliver the contraceptives for free. How clever. However it's a backdoor trick to get the Church to pay for the contraceptives without a paper trail. It's pure legalese - from the lawyer Obama. The only reason Obama is doing this is to avoid a legal paper trail leading back to the Catholic Church which would in turn "free him" from being accused of violating the First Amendment.

However Obama is just adding insult to injury. It’s like telling a religious organization in 1850 that everybody, including them, must provide your employees with a slave because “everybody is entitled to free labor.” Then the religious organization says, “no, not us” only to have the government retort that “okay, then you must pay for the slave trading costs, but not directly provide the slaves yourselves.”

Is that just? No.

About 100 years ago the Mexican Government began writing into law provisions that suppressed the practice of Catholicism. It began with one Constitutional inclusion. We can now see it beginning to unfurl today in America with Obama's latest legal provision forcing Catholic institutions to embrace his secular ideas and reject Catholic Church Teachings. The chronology of events leading to the open cold blooded murder of Catholics by the Mexican Government is captured hereand summarized below:

Calling themselves the 'Constitutionalists', the secular party that won election claimed "that they were not persecuting the Catholic religion but wanted to reduce the Church’s political influence. The Constitutionalists did not at first take any formal action."

But as their power grew and so their arrogance, they began to take more bold measures to suppress Catholicism:

"Anti-clerical elements were included in 1917 Mexican Constitution. Five elements in the Constitution were aimed at reducing the Catholic Church’s influence in Mexican domestic affairs. Article 3 enforced secular education in Mexican schools. Monastic vows and institutes were outlawed in Article 5. Article 24 prevented public worship outside the confines of the Church buildings. According to article 27, "religious institutions were denied the right to acquire, hold, or administer real property." Furthermore, all real estate held by religious institutions through third parties like hospitals, schools, was declared national property. Finally, in article 130, it declared all basic civil responsibilities like voting or commenting on public affairs was taken away from Church officials. The Mexican government was extremely harsh in their attempt to eliminate the Catholic Church’s legal existence in Mexico. The stern premises of the 1917 Constitution contributed to the rise of resentment between the church and state."

To repeat:

"all real estate held by religious institutions through third parties like hospitals, schools, was declared national property."

Is this much different under Obama? No. It is exactly the Obama Doctrine. We all recall hearing the media ask about and discuss "the Bush doctrine". Even Charlie Gibson belittled Sarah Palin for not immediately knowing "the Bush doctrine". But while the media never asks anybody, anybody at all, the question, "what is the Obama doctrine?", then Obama feels he has free space to implement his radical doctrines and agendas that systematically strip America of its freedoms.

Pelosi and Obama Ushering in the Persecution of Catholics

Like corrupt governments of old and banana republics of today, the Obama administration is starting to push around religion. And surprisingly, Roman Catholics are the ones both behind it and backing it. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, a Roman Catholic, announced the provision as part of Obamacare. Then, Nancy Pelosi, the self-acclaimed queen of Catholic political culture, decided to join the suppression of the free practice of the faith and morals that Catholics are guaranteed in the First Amendment. According to a CNS article:

"House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) vowed today that she will join with the Obama administration in standing up against the Catholic Church in defending a new regulation that will require Catholic individuals to buy, and Catholic institutions to provide, health insurance plans that cover sterilizations and artificial contraceptives, including those that induce abortions."

About 100 years ago the Mexican Government began writing into law provisions that suppressed the practice of Catholicism. It began with one Constitutional inclusion. We can now see it beginning to unfurl today in America with Obama's latest legal provision forcing Catholic institutions to embrace his secular ideas and reject Catholic Church Teachings. The chronology of events leading to the open cold blooded murder of Catholics by the Mexican Government is captured here and summarized below:

Calling themselves the 'Constitutionalists', the secular party that won election claimed "that they were not persecuting the Catholic religion but wanted to reduce the Church’s political influence. The Constitutionalists did not at first take any formal action."

But as their power grew and so their arrogance, they began to take more bold measures to suppress Catholicism:

"Anti-clerical elements were included in 1917 Mexican Constitution. Five elements in the Constitution were aimed at reducing the Catholic Church’s influence in Mexican domestic affairs. Article 3 enforced secular education in Mexican schools. Monastic vows and institutes were outlawed in Article 5. Article 24 prevented public worship outside the confines of the Church buildings. According to article 27, "religious institutions were denied the right to acquire, hold, or administer real property." Furthermore, all real estate held by religious institutions through third parties like hospitals, schools, was declared national property. Finally, in article 130, it declared all basic civil responsibilities like voting or commenting on public affairs was taken away from Church officials. The Mexican government was extremely harsh in their attempt to eliminate the Catholic Church’s legal existence in Mexico. The stern premises of the 1917 Constitution contributed to the rise of resentment between the church and state."

To repeat:

" . . . Article 3 prohibited the Church from engaging in primary education; Article 5 outlawed monastic orders; Article 24 forbade public worship outside the confines of churches; and Article 27 placed restrictions on the right of religious organizations to hold property. Most obnoxious to Catholics was Article 130, which deprived clergy members of basic political rights."

One more time:

"all real estate held by religious institutions through third parties like hospitals, schools, was declared national property."

The early 20th century president of Mexico Madera lured support by making grand promises of reform and prosperity - none of which ever came. According to Wikipedia: "Madero's vague promises of agrarian reforms attracted many of the peasants throughout Mexico."

The Mexican Government became even more corrupt when in Plutarco Calles took power:

"For eight years after these provisions were instituted, they were not rigorously enforced by the Mexican government. This changed in 1926 when Plutarco Elías Calles reinforced laws to decrease clerical power. In June 1926, Calles recognized a decree often referred to as “Calles Law.” Under this provision, Article 130 of the 1917 Mexican Constitution was re-established. Church officials were upset by the suddenness of Calles’ decision. The regulation, which annoyed the Catholic Church, was Article 19, which decreed the compulsory registration of the clergy, for it allowed the Government to hand over churches."

So do we ask ourselves, are we repeating history here in the United States of America, the land of the free that formed its First Amendment of the national constitution, part of the United States' Bill of Rights which guarantees that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

or we remain steadfast that our Bill of Rights applies to all American citizens in their religious practice? Does America really want to look like early 20th century Mexico, or like the land of the free that it was framed to become and remain?