Real Catholic Blog

Thus read the headline of an excellent commentary from Michael Burleigh in The Telegraph. An exerpt from the must read, which encapsulates the entire sad British (and Western European) attitude toward faith:

Secularism is at the heart of Benedict’s concerns. By this the Pope does not mean the delimitation of Church and State, the sacred and profane — which is intrinsic to Christian culture as well as political society since the Reformation — but the amnesiac eradication of one of the principal roots of Western civilisation and the deliberate marginalisation of all religion to the private sphere. In its stead has come a society that thinks its existential despairs can be ameliorated by limitless consumer goods, or worse, by a state that racks up fathomless amounts of debt so as to throw money at problems that may have no material resolution.

Clink the link above and read the entir piece. Then let us know what you think.

Pope Benedict XVI’s recently concluded visit to Great Britain not only was historic, but a tremendous success. This long awaited trip was about as much as any Catholic could have dreamed. There were many aspects to it, and I will comment on them this week and beyond. Just knowing that the Bishop of Rome, after nearly 30 years, was planning an official visit to the land of villain Henry VIII was gripping.

Not only is Great Britain the country where so much damage was done to Christianity in centuries long past, its unfortunate cultural and moral decay has influenced Western and, specifically, English speaking countries. It bares it share of responsibility for the this era’s moral and cultural decline. Pope Benedict’s visit was a bucket of cold water across the faces of the purveyors of coarse culture and moral relativisim — the thousands of ignorant as well as purposeful protestors who fruitlessly demonstrated during his time there.

If he made them uncomfortable, good. Their anger, then, was less about the Pope than  against their self-installed dictatorship of relativism, an intangible tyrant that tortures their souls. It’s a pain the unfaithful find sufferable in order to experience a false sense of freedom and pleasure, despite the harm to their spiritual health.

Pope Benedict addressed this. He spoke politely, but emphatically — or, as Michael Voris puts it, he was cheeky, giving the Brits more than enough to reflect on.

Oh, Henry! The cheeky pope had a historic and successful mission in the land of Henry VIII .

Here’s a report from the Vatican on Pope Benedict’s Angelus message on the Feast of the Assumption (Catholic Encylopedia). I like to tell people who doubt the Assumption something I heard during a homily a few years ago. It seems that Chamber of Commerce types, local governments and tourism boosters during the era of the Church’s early years (yes, they had them then, too) always were eager to proclaim sights related to saints in their cities and villages. This attracted pilgrims who spent money there. It was good for the local economy.

They would, at the slightest bit of evidence, or at the best guess of evidence (or legend), market sites related to significant figures of the Church: this saint ate here, this saint preached here, that saint died over there. So, there is ample reason to suspect that if the Blessed Mother was not assumed body and soul into Heaven, there would be some landmark, somewhere, marking the spot of her death or burial. There is none. Hmmm.

Also, it is important to know that, as Catholics, we believe Mary, in her complete human body, was assumed into Heaven, because as the Mother of Christ, just as she brought Him into the earthly world with a soul uncorrupted by original sin, so, too, her body left this world uncorrupted.

Pope Benedict XVI calls believers to entrust themselves to Mary, who “assumed into heaven, has not abandoned her mission of intercession and salvation.”

Teresa Shipley at Discovery.com reports that archaeologists believe they have discovered the bones of Saint John The Baptist, who baptised our Lord Jesus Christ (see John Paul II commentary), and infamously beheaded by King Herod at the request of his wife’s daughter, Salome (Catholic-Forum.com). The discovery was made at a 5th century monastary near the Black Sea in Bulgaria.

According to the article:

Bulgarian archaeologists excavating under an ancient basilica last week unearthed a reliquary, or a container full of human relics.

Bone fragments of a human skull, hand and tooth were found inside. …

The archaeologists believe that a date inscribed on the alabaster jar, June 24, is a good sign that the reliquary houses John the Baptist’s remains.

June 24 is the day Christian’s celebrate the birth of Jesus’ contemporary.

Seems a bit too coincidental to me. Besides . . . Bulgaria? How and why would John The Baptists’ remains find there way there? Of course, anything is possible. The Vatican is taking a cautious, wait-and-see approach. Fabrizio Bisconti, superintendent of the Vatican Pontifical Commission of Sacred Archaeology, told CNN more information and research is needed before the Holy See will opine on the discovery (see CNN’s Belief Blog for more, including video).

It’s interesting to contemplate, but misidentifications, not to mention forgeries, in ancient and Biblical antiquities are common. We look forward to more information confirming or dismissing what would be a terrific find.

Saint John The Baptist’s remains may have been found. The authenticity of the find, however, impacts little on Catholic faith.

RealCatholicTV.com’s Michael Voris recently released this excellent presentation on the link between contraception, abortion and the decay of culture. He proves that time truly does reveal the truth: Though ridiculed by the emerging moral relativists at the time (and today’s secular progressives), Pope Paul VI was right in his 1968 Humanae Vitae.

Not all bombs are massive, obvious things. Sometimes they are very small and deceptive, but with much bigger impact. This one is quiet, but no less devastating; actually more so. No one speaks about it much, which adds to its insidiousness. That’s why it is up to The Church, especially its bishops, to reinvigorate its role in promulgating the the sanctity of life that is the basis for a truly stable and sustainable culture.

Size can be deceiving: The bomb killing the West is very small indeed.

Here’s a report from CNN on the Shroud of Turin. Even the reporter seems to be enlightened (see video below). Of course there are skeptics, but more and more are coming to believe. (It’s amazing how some people either purposely ignore the evidence or are truly ignorant of it and base their denials on old, outdated assertions.) The report was in advance of Pope Benedict’s visit last month and below that is a video of his adoration of the Shroud. We’ll have more about his visit soon. 

If a reporter can see the light . . . then hope truly is on the rise. 

Pope Benedict XVI praying before the Shroud of Turin. The Church believes the Shroud is a holy article to kindle faith. But many believe in a more definitive declaration.

In his fifth and final part on a special series about progressives and their infiltration of The Church, Michael Voris of Real CatholicTV.com explains how to achieve victory over this element that is polluting The Church. If you missed the first four parts, we highly recommend you view (or review) them. They are excellent and clearly explain the internal threat to The Church — a threat that already has marginalized many protestant denominations — and which won’t stop until it also transforms Catholicism into a secularized social justice appendage of the government. Click here for parts one and two and here for parts three and four.

Victory will come when we each take responsibility to learn more about The Faith and become more engaged in our parishes.

One of the things I have remarked to my own mother, father, and other Catholics, who are part of what I will refer to as the “Bill O’Reilly generation of Catholics,”  is how different my experiences were growing up Catholic as compared to theirs.

Growing up in Richmond, Virginia in the 1970’s, I had what I will call a somewhat  “watered down” Catholic experience as compared to the generation before – and well – frankly, it  has left me feeling somewhat “gypped…”  Let me explain.

This is certainly NOT a testament to the Catholic schools in Richmond, for which I am most thankful to have received an excellent education NOR is it some kind of condemnation of my own parents as good Catholic parents!   It is simply this:  having been born in 1969,  I was coming along after the moral and societal tsunami of the  1960’s.

What does that mean?  For me, after having read my own family history book, Bill O’Reilly’s book, and Tim Russert’s book – I became aware rather quickly of the fact that many of the really beautiful small things talked about by that generation of Catholics –  the really sacred little things were cast aside, or perhaps fell through the cracks as people were being told to “get with the times.”

What kinds of little things?    And who cares?  Well,  a lot of things, and frankly I care.  Because I think the “little things” were really reflections of the “big things” – the “BIG IDEAS” that made Catholics, Catholics.

For Instance – here’s something very small (BUT BIG) … my grandfather, Peter Belton, would write “JMJ” atop every piece of paper he touched before writing anything.    My dad remarked that EVERY piece of paper laying around the house growing up  – even down to a scrap paper torn out of a book with a phone number scribbled on it in my grandfather’s handwriting – would have JMJ above it!    Similarly, my dad said, that when he was going to Catholic school, the nuns and Benedictine monks would have them write “Ad maiorem dei gloriam” atop every school assignment they handed to them.   In other words, BEFORE YOU EVEN WRITE YOUR OWN NAME, you write “for the greater glory of God.”  So why is this small thing such a big deal?  Well, in a word, HUMILITY.

I think the subtext of such an exercise (writing JMJ or AMDG) BEFORE your own name – or before anything else —  is to admit, and to plainly glorify the fact that  THERE IS SOMETHING BIGGER THAN YOU.   This practice says by the user, “I am remembering that I am here for the blink of an eye, and that the Glory of God and Christ have been before me, and will come after me.   Whatever I am to write (either in this classroom), or as part of my busy day – I am pausing before I begin to honor God, to remind myself that HE IS BIGGER THAN I AM.”

This, to me, explains a lot about why the generation before me and their parents were so traditional and different from my generation and those coming after mine.   They had those devoted monks, nuns, and other mentors and parents who INGRAINED in them the importance of humility, using these very types of methods.    Through something as simple as the consistent practice of putting what is most important “AT THE TOP”  of your heart and your mind, at all times before beginning even the smallest task.

I was deeply moved by this sentiment, and have been so happy to have had the chance to compile and read stories of my family in this book my father and I completed.   It has enlightened me about so aspects of how the “faith of my fathers”  shaped their lives and made them who they were day to day.

I think the WORST lie of the 60’s (which prevails today politically in my opinion), is this overriding message of:  “this is not my father’s oldsmobile.” The message that basically ANYTHING OLD;  traditional religion, social issues, history, and traditional personal conduct is “so very yesterday.”   This generation of liberals has successfully passed off the idea that –  “if it’s old – it’s outdated – ‘throw it out’ –  it’s NO LONGER OF USE.”   But what if much of what is OLD is Truth?  What if much of what is OLD contains WISDOM?   “ ‘CHANGE’ is not always just intrinsically good.  Is it?”

This example of the old practice of writing JMJ or AMDG symbolically illustrates a worldview, a  mindset, a practice and devotion, that keeps SELF in check.   It is a symbolic recognition that,  WISDOM has come before me.  I am standing on the shoulders of something bigger than myself.   I honor and recognize that.

In my opinion, the baby has been thrown out with the bathwater.   If these sweet and simple, “old fashioned” methods and practices of remembering those truths have been poo-pooed as outdated and discarded, might we be surprised to find that sometimes the truths that came along with those practices have gotten stripped from their rightful place as well?    FROM THE TOP?

Erin Belton Lilly is a parishioner at St. Bede’s Catholic Church in Williamsburg, Virginia where she resides with her husband, Michael, and two children, Jordan and Jacob.   She attended St. Bridget’s school and parish growing up in Richmond, and was married in downtown historic St. Peter’s Church.  Her father, grandfather and uncles attended Benedictine High School, and her grandmother, mother, and aunts attended St. Gertrude’s High School.  Erin was married by Father Adrian Harmening, who evidently also quite regularly disciplined her mischievious father and uncles at Benedictine High School many years earlier.

In April, we posted the first two videos of Michael Voris’ series on progressives in the Church for RealCatholicTV. Here are parts three and four. Very informative, but very disheartening and disturbing at the same time. However, to reinvigorate the Church, we must first face the certain facts and truths. Please watch and let us know what you think. I’ll post his final installment in this series this week.

If some says he or she is a “progressive Catholic,” he or she is no Catholic at all. 

By the numbers: We, as Catholics, are not doing our job and progressives are the major roadblock.

Remember the game show To Tell The Truth? A panel of celebrity judges had to determine, by asking each certain questions, which of three contestants was the real person and which two were the impostors. When they made their determinations, they explained which answers tipped them to pick one over the other two. After that, the host would ask for the “real” person to step forward and, after several fits and starts among the three, the real person would step forward.

Thursday night, the leaders of the three major parties in Great Britain held the second of an unprecedented series of debates in advance of the country’s parliamentary elections. The prime minister is not elected directly by the people — the P.M. is the party leader of the party that captures a majority of seats in the House of Commons — so these debates are causing quite a buzz not only within the UK but internationally as well because they are, in effect, nationalizing the election around these individual men. It’s also caused a stir because the leader of the long-time third party, the Liberal Democrats (acknowledged to be further to the left than even the Labour Party), was acknowledged to have won the debate. Coupled with the quickly falling poll numbers of the front-running, and main opposition, Conservative Party, incumbent Labour is back in the hunt in a nearly three way tie.

Background as prologue done, please see the video below from the debate last Thursday. The replies are in response to a question from a voter who supports homosexual unions, abortion, and condom distribution, who wants Pope Benedict’s fall visit to Great Britain cancelled. (It is expected he will beatify 19th century English Cardinal John Henry Newman during the visit.) Then, try to identify the “Conservative Party” candidate. It’s well nigh impossible.

To Tell The Truth: Will the real conservative, if there really is one, please stand up?

If the Conservative Party is on the same plank as the two leftist parties, is there hope in the UK? No wonder it’s an island of moral irrelevence where the dictatorship of relativism rules. (Who needs an election, then?)

If you think this is amazingly sad, I wish I could find a video with the complete discussion — there was a follow up in which all three lauded Britain’s homosexual union law with the “Conservative Party” candidate even saying, “the Pope needs to get with the times,” which prototypically misunderstands the point. A man, The Pope, does not make Church doctrine. No man can. The Pope defends Church teaching which is the teaching of our Creator, our Heavenly God.

One of the three, as you heard, even said he was “not a man of faith,” which may make him the first such Western leader. All three gladly said they were in agreement on disagreeing with the Pope. 

But I guess we should be thankful that they at least will welcome His Holiness to their country. Or will he even attend now? Because, as the Brits like to say, there is a twist to the tale.

Apart from the debate, but at about the same time, a memo by a government official about the historic first-ever Papal visit to Britain became public. In it, he wrote such vile as that the Pope might, during the visit, launch Papal-branded condoms, bless homosexual marriages and open an abortion ward (see American Catholic blog).

If this insult was made about a Muslim leader, the official would have been fired immediately. Instead, this man is allowed to stay in Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s government. Or, as Gerald Warner of the Daily Telegraph wrote:

Wear a cross to work and you are sacked; insult the Pope and you are “transferred to other duties.”

The Vatican, however, showing the humility of Christ, stated the visit is still on, despite forceful letters of protest by Scottish and English Catholic bishops (The Scotsman). No doubt, this will put whoever wins the election and has the great honor of receiving Pope Benedict, in a more humble position in lieu of their adamantly arrogant ”disagreements with the Pope.” Maybe they will learn a lesson in humility from him. 

To Tell The Truth identities. Oh yeah, in case you are wondering: The man on the left, the first to answer the question, is David Cameron, the Conservative Party leader; the man who admits he is of no faith is Nick Clegg, of the third party Liberal Democrats; and the third candidate is incumbent Prime Minister Gordon Brown of the Labour Party.