THE EPIC FAILURE OF MODERNISM

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Social science has now FINALLY caught up with the Catholic Church. The latest studies show that while the world population is growing, the number of children per household is actually decreasing -- EVERYWHERE -- even in Islamic countries! The reason why the world population continues to rise is not because people are having more babies, but because people are living longer. We will hit a population plateau within the next couple decades, which will be followed by a rapid decline in overall population. The effect of this will be a prolonged and unending economic depression!!!

Causes of Depopulation...

1. Career Women - Feminism.
2. Affluence - Decadence - (fewer children - invest more in each child).
3. Artificial birth control - coupled with sexual promiscuity - sexual revolution.
4. Cohabitation = less children.
5. No fault divorce = family instability.
6. Unwarranted fears of overpopulation (not supported by modern data).

Social scientists now admit that MARRIAGE DOES MATTER. MARRIAGE DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE. THE CHURCH WAS RIGHT!!! The Church was right about marriage. The Church was right about family. The Church was right about artificial birth control.

Forward this blog post. Get the word out!!!!

Obama's War On The U.S. Catholic Church

Originally posted back on July 3, 2009. I brought it back from the archives to shed some light on Obama's recent HHS mandate....

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: It is the opinion of this blogger that alleged President Barack Obama is actively working to do everything he can to crack and split the U.S. Catholic Church in half. His appointment of exclusively pro-abortion Cafeteria Catholics to key positions in the government, coupled with the statements below demonstrate this beyond the shadow of a doubt. Allow me to elaborate....

Obama has a pro-choice Liberation Theology (i.e. "Christian" Socialism) agenda, and the only thing standing in the way is the U.S. Catholic Church, which officially opposes both. Unfortunately, the U.S. Catholic Church has been considerably weakened in recent years, plagued by sex-scandals (which only affected 5% of the clergy), and other scandals related to associations of the USCCB, coupled with a general liturgical crisis and poor catechises over the past four decades. The U.S. Catholic Church is ripe for schism, and President Barack Obama knows if such a thing were to happen, it would only help clear the way to push his agenda through. Nothing would serve the Obama administration better than a U.S. Catholic Church torn by infighting and reorganization.

There is nothing new about this strategy. It's been successfully employed in the past by Marxist regimes in Central and South America, where Liberation Theology (i.e. "Christian" Socialism) was born and has pitted the Catholic clergy and laity against each other in that region. Obama is doing the exact same thing here in the USA, except he's just a bit more subtle about it. It all starts with the appointment of dissenting Cafeteria Catholics (who agree with his pro-abortion Marxist goals) to key positions in government. Obama has made it clear that Catholics who actually believe and practice what the Church teaches on abortion and socialism are not welcome in his administration. In other words, Catholics who oppose the teachings of the Church will be rewarded with high level cabinet positions, while Catholics who adhere to Church teaching need not apply.

Okay, so what does this do?

Well, the U.S. Catholic Church is already split on social issues about 50/50. Approximately 50% of U.S. Catholics are what we call "practicing Catholics" (actually the number may be a little less than that, but about 50% rise to the occasion when the bishops call them to on key issues). The other 50% are what we call Cafeteria Catholics, and these are the dissenting group who may (or may not) regularly go to mass, and like to "pick and choose" which teachings of the Church they will follow, and which they will not. It's sort of like a "salad bar" approach to the Catholic faith. According to the Vatican, and the U.S. Catholic bishops, this Cafeteria Catholicism is unacceptable, and in some cases it causes those who practice it to put their status in the Church in jeopardy. In other words, Cafeteria Catholics aren't really good Catholics, they just say they are.

By exclusively putting Cafeteria Catholics in key government positions, Obama is pandering to the Cafeteria Catholic community, and in the United States, that's about 50% of all U.S. Catholics. Simultaneously he shields himself from any criticism of anti-Catholicism, because he has plausible deniability. As soon as the accusation is made, he can simply say that such charges are ridiculous because he's appointed more "Catholics" to government positions than any other president in recent memory. He won't bother to point out, of course, that these are only Catholics who oppose the teachings of the Catholic Church. His most recent nomination of a Cafeteria Catholic to the U.S. Supreme Court was his crowning achievement in implementing phase one of his plan to crack and split the U.S. Catholic Church in two.

Phase two is now underway. Barack Obama will embark on a media campaign, directly engaging U.S. Catholics, via press interviews and photo ops with the pope and various Catholic leaders. This is where the propaganda war goes into effect. What Obama started in appointments, he now follows through with in commentary. On July 2nd, Obama met with a Catholic press conference ahead of his July 10th meeting with Pope Benedict XVI. In that interview he had the following to say, among many other things, but the trigger lines I have bolded for clear recognition....

“When I was first becoming interested in social justice issues, the American bishops were talking about nuclear freezes and sanctuary for illegal immigrants and protesting U.S. policy in Latin America, and there was, I think, a very different set of perspectives that were represented, arising out of the Second Vatican. And then there was a decided shift that I think took place within — among Church officials. And, in some ways, that tracked changes in American society at large, or at least American politics... I think responses to my administration mirror tensions within the Church as a whole. Cardinal Bernardin was strongly pro-life, never shrank away from talking about that issue, but was very consistent in talking about a ‘seamless garment’ and a range of issues that were part and parcel of what he considered to be pro-life, that meant that he was concerned about poverty; he was concerned about how children were treated; he was concerned about the death penalty; he was concerned about foreign policy... and that part of the Catholic tradition is something that continues to inspire me. And I think that there have been times over the last decade or two where that more holistic tradition feels like it’s gotten buried under the abortion debate. Now, as a non-Catholic, it’s not up to me to try to resolve those tensions... All I can do is to affirm how that other tradition has made me, a non-Catholic, I think reflect on how I can be a better person and has had a powerful influence on my life. And that tells me that it might be a powerful way to move a broader set of values forward in American life generally.”

Okay, notice how Obama is trying to pit one side of Catholic Social teaching against another, and thereby trying to pit Cafeteria Catholics against practicing Catholics. He's lecturing the U.S. Catholic bishops (and ultimately the pope) on how Catholic emphasis on the holocaust of abortion is clouding the "larger" social teaching of the Church. In effect, he's telling the U.S. Catholic bishops (and the pope) that they ought to tone it down a bit on the abortion issue, so more Catholic Americans can "recognize" how much he supposedly agrees with the other aspects of Catholic social teaching. But does he really expect the pope and bishops to take his advice? Of course not! He may be a narcissist, but he's not stupid. Obama knows perfectly well that his supposed "advice" will fall on deaf ears with the pope and bishops, and in fact, he's counting on it. The comments are not intended for the pope and bishops. They're designed for the 50% of U.S. Cafeteria Catholics who would be more inclined to agree with him on the matter. The point here is to come across as seeming "reasonable" and "open to dialog." The idea being that he wants to paint the pope and U.S. Catholic bishops as being "unreasonable" and "stubborn." His coming photo op with the pope will be his capstone on this phase of the plan.

Notice, however, that Obama let the cat out of the bag with the second bolded comment. He said "I think responses to my administration mirror tensions within the Church as a whole." This is the wedge people. He just pointed out the very thing he hopes to exacerbate by his actions and comments. In this one comment he has revealed that he is all too aware of the catechises problem within the U.S. Catholic Church. He is mindful of the sad fact that the U.S. Catholic bishops have nearly lost control of half of their flock, and indeed some of those bishops are contributing to the problem. Then he goes on to lament how the Catholic bishops "unreasonable and stubborn" emphasis on abortion has "obscured" the "larger message" of Catholic social teaching, of which he claims to be in agreement on. We can expect a lot more comments like this in the near future, as this is the strategy folks. He's trying to paint the leaders of the Catholic Church as intolerant and unreasonable. Simultaneously, he's trying to make himself out to have a greater understanding of Catholic social teaching than the Church does. It's designed to drive the wedge deeper between Practicing Catholics and Cafeteria Catholics. It's designed to pit as many Catholics as he can against the leadership of the U.S. Catholic Church. It's designed to create a full-blown and all-out schism in the U.S. Catholic Church, and thus neutralize the influence of U.S. Catholic bishops on the 2012 election, and any major issue of his agenda that comes up between now and then.

Of course, the last thing Obama will let us know is that he really doesn't agree with the Catholic Church on ANY of it's social teaching. That's the dirty little secret. You see, Catholic social teaching on poverty and fairness is based on the principle of SUBSIDIARITY. Essentially it's an anti-Marxist principle. The idea of subsidiarity is that it's immoral for larger government functions to take over and perform the roles of smaller entities (state, city, local, neighborhood, family, parish church, private charity, etc.) when those entities are perfectly capable of performing those functions for themselves. The larger government entities should instead refrain from direct interference (i.e. micro-management) and instead attempt to coordinate efforts between them, to help things run more smoothly. In other words, the American principles of limited government and federalism are consistent with the Catholic principle of subsidiarity, while the Marxist principles of huge government and micro-management are not. Unfortunately, the kind of Liberation Theology Obama believes in is Marxist in principle, and flies in the face of subsidiarity. The Social Teaching of the Catholic Church is very clear that all social principles are based on subsidiarity, and subsidiarity is the "hinge" upon which all Catholic Social Justice turns.

Catholics and Artificial Birth Control

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT:  The following is an open letter from 'The Catholic Knight' to all Catholic bishops in the United States of America.  Please forward this letter to your local bishop.  I write this as a faithful Catholic husband and father....

Your Excellencies,

During this time when we fight for religious freedom against our own government's HHS mandate, I would like to call your attention to a common problem we face in our Catholic families.

The culture of death is pervasive.  Our wives are under tremendous pressure to use artificial birth control, and this at times translates into pressure on we husbands as well.  To better foster the culture of life in our own Catholic families we require the following assistance from the Church...

1. Regular and consistent Sunday homilies (from each and every priest) against the evils of abortion, sterilisation and artificial contraception.
2. Regular and consistent Sunday homilies (from each and every priest) on the nature of marriage in God's economy, along with the Christian roles of husband and wife in the home.
3. More open and frequent discussion on natural family planning in marriage support ministries.
4. Family assistance in the form of scholarships for Catholic schools and the creation of good home-school cooperatives that are interconnected with regular Catholic schools.
5. Inner parish networking for 'work at home' jobs designed to assist career home-makers.

In other words your excellencies, what we are crying out for is HELP!  The Church has done very well instructing us on what needs to be done, but has performed very poorly on assisting us in the process.  I believe it is this very circumstance that has done much to contribute to the culture of death that has penetrated Catholic families, and thereby assisted the Obama administration in this wicked and diabolical move to curtail the religious freedom of conscience within the Church.

We are with you 100% in this fight against the federal government's HHS mandate.  Regardless of the outcome, we hope your excellencies will use this sad conflict as an opportunity to reform and save Catholic families in the United States.

Faithfully yours in our Lord Jesus Christ,

The Catholic Knight

U.S. Supreme Court Sides With Church Against Womenpriests

President Obama suffered a humiliating defeat as all nine justices
essentially threw his case out of the Supreme Court on its ear.

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: This will buy us some precious time...

(The American Catholic) - As expected, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that a church school cannot be sued in court over an employee’s discrimination complaint.

In a unanimous decision SCOTUS overturned the earlier ruling by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission et al which had allowed the lawsuit to move forward, saying the teacher’s work was more secular than religious.

The high court disagreed.

Consistent with precedent, SCOTUS ruled that the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of religion shields churches and their operations from the reach of anti-discrimination laws when dealing with employees of religious institutions. SCOTUS also extended this precedent to include complaints of discrimination under the Americans With Disabilities Act....

read full story here

The decision allows the Catholic Church, and other religious institutions, to freely practice religion in regards to clergy selection. The unanimous margin (9 to 0) by which the decision was made insures this will remain settled law (stare decisis) for some time. That's a very good thing, but we should not count on this remaining a permanent fixture of the American legal landscape. As we know, the Supreme Court does NOT write its decisions in stone. New presidents can nominate new supreme court justices, and new justices can overturn previous decisions. Therefore we should not get into the comfortable position of thinking the matter is settled. It is not.

What has been determined however is this. There are forces in this country (most recently concentrated in the Obama administration, but by no means limited to it) that are hell-bent on making sure churches are FORCED by law to hire female ministers. From a Catholic perspective this is particularly insidious, because if implemented it would mean the hand of the government is being used to interrupt authentic priestly ordinations and authentic apostolic secession. Nothing could make the devil happier!

The problem is not so much legal as it is cultural. Legal systems have existed in the Western World for centuries and we've never encountered a problem quite like this before. This kind of problem only arises when the culture itself is infected with the cancer of liberal Modernism. The only reason why the Obama administration was able to muster enough support to even put this case forward is because he was elected by a culture that tolerated what he said during the campaign and was pleased with the way he conducted himself in office. Indeed, had the culture been more 'christian' (small 'c' here) than a man like Obama would have never been elected in the first place. Then again, a man like John McCain would have never won the 2008 GOP primaries either.

In Europe the cultural problem is endemic to the whole region, save a few isolated spots here and there, with the nations of Hungary and Poland being exceptions for the time being. In the United States of America, things are a little different. For the most part, the entire Northern and Western portions of the United States have a similar problem as Europe, albeit not as severe yet, in that Christianity has been abandoned as a source of public moral guidance. In the Southern Midwest to Southeast (Old Dixieland) the problem still exists, but there is still a sizeable remnant that clings to the virtues of Christendom. Of course the biggest problem here is that most of those people are Evangelical Protestants and that makes them highly susceptible to change. The best thing that could happen to the American Southeast (Dixieland) right now would be for traditional Catholicism to move in and help crystallise the Dixieland tendency to cling to tradition. This would solidify the Old South's stand against Modernism.

I think perhaps what might have made this possible in Dixie is something really awful that may perhaps work its way out as a blessing in disguise. (God works all things together for good for those who love him.)  I'm talking about the loss of the Civil War. You see, ever since the South lost the Civil War, it has to this day found itself subject to the ridicule and oppression of Northern (Yankee) culture. Southerners (Dixians) continue to be mocked for their language, accents, manners, morals and beliefs. This has caused some Dixians to embrace Yankee Modernism, but it has also cause a lot more to dig in their heels, galvanise and defiantly hold their ground throughout the decades. It is perhaps this very form of liberal Yankee persecution that has in effect made it possible for the South to still find herself a bastion of faith and culture while the rest of America has gone to hell in a hand basket.

So why am I bringing this up, and what does it have to do with the recent Supreme Court decision? Well, as I said above, this recent decision buys the U.S. Catholic Church some precious time, but it does not settle the matter. The liberal Modernists (Yankee style) will return and this issue will be revisited sooner or later. Nothing will really change until the culture changes, and the one place in America where the culture is most likely to change in the Church's favour is in the American Southeast -- Old Dixieland. Catholics should concentrate our efforts there, to help galvanise what is left of Christendom in this region. There we can take our stand against the corruption of liberal Modernism in the rest of America. I firmly believe the Old South, of all places ironically, is the one area that is most likely to restore Christendom to the rest of North America. Of course many people say Catholic New England is the key, others say the Catholic portions of the American Southwest are the key. I say none of the above. It's Dixie or nothing. You want to change the culture in America, than help make Dixie more Catholic, or else forget about it!

Mother of the Americas

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The year is 1521 AD. The capital city of the Aztec empire falls to Spanish imperial forces, who have just conquered the Mesoamerican culture of the New World. This marks the end of the most advanced civilization ever produced by the Native American peoples. From this time forward, all Native Americans would fall under submission to European power. Conquered and humiliated, the Aztec people become second-class citizens in Spanish America. European settlers have no problem perpetuating this status quo. Millions of Aztec people are now living as strangers on their own continental soil. They've lost their sovereignty, power, homeland and in some cases even their freedom. Pride is all they have left, and daily this is subjected to the status quo of second-class citizenship. The Aztec people have every reason to hate the Spaniards, and everything they brought with them to the Americas -- especially their religion. But less than 20 years later, virtually all of them simultaneously accept Jesus Christ and convert to Catholic Christianity by their own free will. The Spanish are left speechless, astonished by what just happened.

WHY?

Why would an entire civilization of people, who had been Pagans for thousands of years, and had every right to hate everything the Spanish settlers represented, suddenly and unexplainably embrace the Spaniards' religion as their own?

The answer is in a supernatural and miraculous visitation from heaven. In 1531 a "Lady from Heaven" appeared to a poor Christian Aztec named Juan Diego at Tepeyac, a hill northwest of Mexico City; she identified herself as the "Mother of the True God," instructed him to have the local bishop build a temple on the site, and as a sign she left an image of herself imprinted miraculously on his cloak (or 'tilma'). The tilma is a poor quality cactus-cloth, which should have deteriorated in 20 years but shows no sign of decay 470 years later and still defies all scientific explanations of its origin.

The image appeared instantly and miraculously in front of many witnesses, some of them local dignitaries. The Lady instructed Juan to gather some roses from the site where she made her appearance to him. Since roses were out of season (it was December), this was to be a sign to the local bishop that the 'Lady from Heaven' had truly appeared to Juan Diego, and his story was true. He gathered the roses into his tilma and carried them to the local bishop who was meeting with some Spanish dignitaries at the time. As he dropped his garment to release the roses, the image of the Lady from Heaven miraculously and spontaneously appeared on the tilma. The bishop and his guests immediately fell to their knees in astonishment.

The Lady's only request was that a temple be erected on the hill where the apparition took place. The reason she gave for this was as follows: "I am the ever virgin Holy Mary, Mother of the True God for whom we live, of the Creator of all things, Lord of heaven and the earth. I wish that a temple be erected here quickly, so I may therein exhibit and give all my love, compassion, help, and protection, because I am your merciful mother, to you, and to all the inhabitants on this land and all the rest who love me, invoke and confide in me; listen there to their lamentations, and remedy all their miseries, afflictions and sorrows." As the bishop agreed to grant the request, he sent Juan home to his uncle who had been sick with a terminal disease. During the course of the Marian apparitions to Juan, she had promised him that his uncle would be healed, but he had not seen him for a long time. So when he returned to his village, the bishop sent escorts to go with him and record everything they saw. When they got there, they found Juan's uncle well and joyously celebrating his healing. It was then Juan learned that on the very day the Lady promised Juan that his uncle would be healed, his uncle saw a vision of the Lady exactly as Juan had described to the bishop some time earlier. The two (Juan and his uncle) had not communicated during this whole time. Yet, their description of the Lady was exactly identical. The Lady told Juan's uncle that when he would go to see the bishop, to reveal to him what he had seen and to explain the miraculous manner in which he was healed, that she would properly be named the blessed Image, the ever-virgin Holy Mary of Guadalupe.

Now why should the Virgin Mary, appearing to an Indian in 16th century Mexico, and speaking to him in his native language of Nahuatl, call herself “Guadalupe”, a Spanish name?

It is believed that the Lady used the Aztec Nahuatl word of coatlaxopeuh which is pronounced "Gwad-a-lup-eh." Coa meaning serpent, tla being the noun ending which can be interpreted as "the", while xopeuh means to crush or stamp out. So the Lady may have called herself "the one who crushes the serpent." We must remember that the Aztecs worshipped the serpent-god Quetzalcoatl, and annually offered at least 20,000 men, women and children in human sacrifice to their Pagan gods. In 1487, in a 4-day long ceremony for the dedication of a new temple in Tenochtitlan, some 80,000 captives were killed in human sacrifice. Certainly in this case, the Lady 'crushed' the serpent, beacuse within a few years after her apparition to Juan Diego, nine million of these natives were converted to Christianity.

Modern infra-red studies of the image reveal unexplainable phenomena: The image was not painted, and the color did not penetrate the fibers as would paint. Weaving with such irregular fibers also produced a rough surface which would have distorted any simple surface painting, yet the image one sees is clear and undistorted.

Most remarkable about this image is the recent scientific research done on the Lady’s eyes. Magnified studies reveal the startling image of reflections, as if they were frozen onto the image the moment it appeared to the bishop and his guests nearly five-hundred years ago. One of the first doctors to study the eyes was Dr. Javier Torroella Bueno, MDS, a prestigious ophthalmologist. In what is the first report on the eyes of the image issued by a physician, he certifies the presence of the triple reflection (Samson-Purkinje effect) characteristic of all live human eyes and states that the resulting images are located exactly where they are supposed to be according to such effect, and also that the distortion of the images agree with the curvature of the cornea. In both eyes, the largest and most obvious reflection is of a "bearded man," probably the bishop's translator who interpreted the exchange between the Spanish speaking bishop and the native speaking Juan Diego.

A new and fascinating kind of analysis of the eyes started in 1979, when Dr. Jose Aste Tonsmann, Ph D, graduated from Cornell University, while working in IBM scanned at very high resolutions a very good photograph, taken from the original, of the face on the tilma. After filtering and processing the digitized images of the eyes to eliminate "noise" and enhance them, he made some astonishing discoveries: According to Dr. Tonsmann, from left to right we can see the Indian, Bishop Zumarraga, the translator, and Juan Diego showing the tilma.

The image of the Lady of Guadalupe has great symbolism. The Lady's image is surrounded by luminous light, standing on the moon, and the stars on her mantle reflect the description found in the Book of Revelation: "A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars" (Revelation 12:1).

These are also symbols of divine victory over the pagan religion of the time. Sun rays were symbolic of the Aztec god Huitzilopochtle. Therefore, the Lady, standing before the rays, shows that she proclaims the true God who is greater than Huitzilopochtle and who eclipses his power.

She stands also on the moon. The moon represented night and darkness, and was associated with the god Tezcatlipoca. Here again, the Lady’s standing on the moon indicates divine triumph over evil.
Moreover, in Christian iconography, the crescent moon under the Lady’s feet also symbolizes perpetual virginity and is connected with the Catholic dogma of the Immaculate Conception and the Blessed Assumption.

The stars on her mantle indicate that she comes from Heaven, her dress is also modeled after that of an Aztec queen. Interestingly, some research attests that the stars on the mantle appear exactly as they would have in the sky before dawn on the Morning of December 12, 1531, when the vision appeared.

The face of the Lady, with its complexion, dark hair, and dark eyes, reflects the physiognomy of a Native American. Her eyes are also cast downward, showing humility and compassion. In Aztec iconography, a god looked straight ahead with wide open eyes; the picture here then shows that the Lady does not claim to be God, but only His messenger and loving mother. The Lady is supported by an angel, another symbol of royalty among Native American cultures.

Her clothing also has special significance. The rose color of the Lady's dress has two interpretations, either as a symbol of the dawn of a new era, or as sign of martyrdom for the faith. A red dress is also interpreted as a symbol of virginity in eastern Christian iconography. The gold brooch under her neck represents sanctity. Finally the bow around her waist is another sign of virginity. However this bow has several other meanings in Native American culture: this bow was the nahui ollin, the flower of the sun, which was a symbol of plenitude, fecundity and new life. The high placement of the bow and the apparent swelling of the abdomen of the Lady have led many to conclude that she is pregnant in this image.

This image became a symbol of unity between European and Native American cultures in Central America. Both peoples could easily identify with it. As a result, virtually the entire Aztec empire (some nine million people in total), all of them Pagan, accepted Christ and converted to Catholic Christianity within a space of just a few years.

Today she remains the patron not only of Mexico, but of all the Americas, including Canada and the United States. She is the symbol of racial unity between the children of European settlers and American natives. She speaks to us only of the Lordship of her divine Son -- Jesus Christ -- and of his victory over the powers of hell. Through this image, the message is clear. The old ways of Pagan devotion to the false gods, must give way to true worship of the one true God. In this truth, all the American peoples (regardless of race and culture) will find unity and peace.

In today's modern world, she is also honored by Catholics on both American continents as the patron of our hemisphere and the protector of all children -- especially the unborn. In particular, this image of our Blessed Mother has been closely associated with the Pro-Life movement, because of the modern similarity of surgical and chemical abortion to the human sacrifice of ancient Aztec society. The Aztecs sacrificed human beings to their gods, particularly the serpent god Quetzalcoatl, in the hope of gaining favor and prosperity. While modern Americans no longer worship Aztec idols, many do still sacrifice their unborn children to the "gods" of prosperity and convenience. Instead of counting children as a blessing from the Lord, regardless of the circumstances in which they were conceived, modern American culture views them as a burden and an obstacle to material happiness. This attitude can only be spawned by Satan -- the Biblical serpent depicted in Genesis 3 and Revelation 12. The pregnant image of Our Lady reminds us of the blessings of the unborn and identifies the sin of abortion for what it really is -- human sacrifice. The image of Our Lady is the Mother of all the Americas, and she is calling us to remember her unborn Son -- Jesus Christ -- as we work to defend the unborn here in the New World.

ALLELUIA !!! The New English Mass Is Here !!!

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The countdown is over, the new English mass is here!!! By now the last mass of the old "defective" English translation has been said in the United States, and it is permenantly suppressed -- gone forever! Tomorrow morning, we awake for mass with the new English translation, a better translation, one more faithful to the original Latin text. For the FIRST TIME in the United States, the Ordinary Form (Novus Ordo) mass will be said in English PROPERLY, according to how it was intended to be said, way back when it was first released in 1970. For the FIRST TIME EVER, Catholic Americans will hear the REAL WORDS of the mass -- properly translated. An entire generation has passed -- literally -- and for the FIRST TIME EVER the post-conciliar youth (everyone under the age of 45) will hear the English mass as it was intended to be heard. This is an historic day indeed. Enjoy it!

I cannot begin to stress enough the momentous occasion this is. It marks the beginning. By that I mean the beginning of the end for bland Modernist innovation. I also mean the beginning of the beginning for the restoration of tradition. Yes, it's going to be a long road to reform ahead, but from now on we will see nothing but progress toward that end, sometimes a little progress, sometimes a lot, but always progress. The Modernist experiment has failed, resulting in the loss of souls and the gutting of the Church. Those days are now beginning to die out. The new English translation of the mass is here. The U.S. Anglican ordinariate is soon coming (in just 34 days from today). The Extraordinary Form (Tridentine) mass is here to stay. The generation of the 1970s priesthood officially begins its retirement in this decade. The Vatican is to start a new commission on sacred music, art and architecture with the authority to enforce their directives. The whole Modernist house of cards is all beginning to fall. The historic Catholic Church is beginning to rise. THIS IS IT!   IT HAS BEGUN !!!   We will be the first to witness the reforms of Vatican II as they were originally intended! 

That's not to say there won't be setbacks, scandals, and delays in the future. There will be. Overall however, the movement is in the direction of progress toward the traditional Church. As I said, the progress may be slow at times, and fast at other times, but always progress, always toward tradition.

It's over my readers! It's finally over. No the fight isn't over, but the unfair advantage is. I'm speaking of the unfair advantage the Modernists had over English-speaking parishes and dioceses, up until this evening. Now it's over. They are crippled now. What gave them the flexibility to innovate was the poor English translation of the Novus Ordo mass. That flexibility is gone now. Anything they do against the new translation, or the rubrics of the mass, will be seen as a gross violation and DISOBEDIENCE to the POPE !!! That's not to say it won't happen. (It probably will.) But their cover is blown. They no longer have anything to hide behind. It's the beginning of the end for them -- unless of course they reform their ways.  If they reform, even reluctantly, than they come over to our side, and we gain new allies.  Those who won't reform would do well to retire at the earliest opportunity.

From this night forward, the only place the old English translation of the mass can be heard is in a protestant or schismatic sect.  My understanding is that some Protestants are quite fond of it.

The Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, has now given the English-speaking Church everything we need to reform ourselves. In time we will. This is inevitable. That however, doesn't mean he's finished. There is more reform coming, but I do not know when. Eventually, the Novus Ordo mass itself will be rewritten, so the second half of the liturgy will look more like the Tridentine mass, but you're guess is as good as mine as to when. For now expect big changes at your local parish unlike anything you've seen in 40 years! Slowly but surely, with relentless incrementalism, the Holy Father (Pope Benedict XVI) is turning this great ship around.  This is the day the Lord has made. Let us rejoice and be glad!!!  DEO GRATIAS.

They Shall Be Called Anglo Catholics

The Mass According to the Anglican Use of the Roman Rite
THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Here in the United States, Anglicans entering the pope's personal ordinariate for 'Groups of Anglicans' will likely have to be called 'Anglo Catholics' or 'Anglo-Catholics,' with or without the hyphen.

The reasons for this are complex. The first reason has to do with the name 'Anglican Catholic' itself. The Catholic Knight has recently learned from a fellow blogger that some small splinter-group of traditional Anglicans, not interested in the ordinariate, are claiming a legal service mark to the term 'Anglican Catholic' and may be threatening legal action against anyone else who dares to use it. While in my opinion it is unlikely that this group can really service mark such a general term, I believe it is equally unlikely that the ordinary of the U.S. ordinariate will seek a legal challenge to it. Though I think he would likely win such a legal challenge, it's probably not worth the fight. The second reason has to do with the fact that there are more than just Anglicans entering the American ordinariate. A small contingency of Lutherans, calling themselves the 'Anglo-Lutheran Catholic Church' will also be joining the ordinariate. It would be inaccurate to describe this group as 'Anglican' per se' because they are not. They are Lutheran, and while they've obviously adopted some Anglican customs, they come from a form of Protestantism that originated in Germany under completely different pretences than the English Reformation. So to imply that they are 'Anglican' under an 'Anglican Catholic ordinariate.' Is somewhat of a misnomer.

The term 'Anglo,' coming from the Latin for the British tribes of 'Angles,' simply means 'English' and in a religious sense, it refers to the form and style of Christian worship that developed in the British isles. It is the same religious form used by high-church Anglicans, Anglo-Lutherans and the 'Anglican Use Pastoral Provision' parishes in the U.S. Catholic Church. So the term has a more broad base. While the ordinariate itself may be called anything under the sun, such as the 'Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham' as in England, and may possibly include the word 'Anglican' if that is the desire of those who control it, the term 'Anglo Catholic' might better be used as a loose, quick and informal way to refer to those Catholics who become members of the ordinariate.

The term 'Anglo-Catholic,' usually with a hyphen, has a long tradition of being used to describe high-church Anglicans anyway, and these are the type of Anglicans who are most likely to find interest in the pope's ordinariate. Removing the hyphen might be an easy way to loosely distinguish between those who are in the ordinariate and those who have yet to join. Those outside the ordinariate might be hyphenated 'Anglo-Catholic' while those inside the ordinariate might dispense of the hyphen 'Anglo Catholic.'

If the term 'Anglo Catholic' seems inappropriate, than about the only other term left is 'Anglican Use Catholic' as it is the term already used in the United States by the Anglican Use Pastoral Provision parishes.

Of course if none of these seem suitable than there is yet one last suggestion. The full Latin term for Anglican could be applied creating the term 'Anglicanus Catholic.'

Reclaiming Halloween

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The word Halloween comes from an abbreviation of the phrase 'All Hallows Eve.' The word 'hallow' is the old English version of 'holy' or 'saint'. All Hallows Eve (or Halloween) is the eve before a high feast day in the Catholic Church (November 1st) called 'All Hallows Day' or more commonly known as 'All Saints Day.' It is the day on which the Church commemorates all the Saints of heaven, both canonised and uncanonised by the Church. The Catholic Church has special feast days for various individual Saints who stand out for various reasons. All Hallows (or All Saints) is the day when we remember them all -- millions of them!

It is particularly in the United States, where the commercialisation of all Christian holy days has been perfected to an exact science, the Halloween celebration has taken on a particularly non-religious and macabre character, where in the occult is more glorified than the faith of Christians. Perhaps we should not be surprised by this, for it is in America where Christmas has become more a celebration of the mythical Santa Clause than the birth of Jesus Christ. America has almost nearly succeeded in turning the celebration of Christ's resurrection, Easter, into the glorification of a rabbit who hides coloured eggs. It's an eye-opener really, as the United States seems to lead the way in the de-christianising of Christian holy days. Nowhere is this more evident than in the observance of Halloween. I find it odd really, that Americans would revel in the gross perversion of a Catholic holy day -- a holy day not shared by most of America's Protestant majority.

Americans are not alone however. The macabre Americanised version of Halloween is now being picked up in other countries around the world, as the United States exports a celebration of death and the occult on the eve of a day that is supposed to honour the holiness of those who's bodies may sleep, but who's souls are fully alive in Jesus Christ.

So what do we do now? Do we take the Protestant Fundamentalist solution, and lock ourselves in our houses on Halloween, cursing the darkness and hiding from children in costumes? Do we follow the Evangelical example of handing out gospel tracts, instead of candy, to those poor lost souls shouting 'Trick or Treat' all night? Or do we, as Catholics, TAKE BACK what is rightfully ours to begin with!?! I vote for the last option. Will you join me?

The nice thing about reclaiming Halloween is it doesn't take anymore than a family effort. There is no community organising to do, no propaganda to spread (unless of course you want to share this article), and no convincing that needs to happen. Just follow these five simple steps....

1. Decorate your home (both interior and exterior) with the theme of the Autumn season, celebrating life and abundance.  Scarecrows are fun, and even Jack-O-Lanterns, provided they are not macabre in nature.  There should be no macabre decor whatsoever.
2. Dress your kids up in the theme of the holy day.  It's ALL SAINTS DAY!  So think of angels, Saints and Bible characters.  (Please no Jesus costumes.)  The Blessed Virgin Mary might even be appropriate in some circumstances, but please be careful to be tasteful.  The theme of All Saints, is to recognize those who usually don't get much recognition, such as Old Testament and Medieval saints.  But it doesn't have to be recognised saints per se.'  It could be general Bible characters, such as shepherds and soldiers.  It could even be holy men and women from the Church as well, brothers and sisters, fathers and bishops.  Of course, dress up in harmless characters of a non-religious sort would be acceptable too, so long as it celebrates life (all life) in some way.  The possibilities are endless.  Just avoid the occult and macabre.
3. Go ahead and give out candy to the kids instead of literature.  There is no need to turn the day into an opportunity to spread propaganda.  Keep in mind, that many parents will simply throw literature away when they go through their bag, that is, if the kids haven't thrown it away already.
4. Avoid 'haunted houses' and scary attractions, attending church bizarres and festivities instead. In a comment below, reader Jonathan Prester shared a tradition in his parish wherein Catholic liturgy and prayers are given by his priest in a local cemetery on Halloween night, complete with torches (lanterns), incense and vestments. Perhaps something like this could be organised in your parish to reclaim the true meaning of All Hallows Eve.
5. Finally, stop calling it Halloween.  Start using the more proper (and ancient) term "All Hallows Eve" or just "All Hallows" for short.

Now, it all starts simple enough with just your family.  In time, that will grow to dozens of families, then hundreds, thousands to tens and hundreds of thousands.  Eventually, we will be driving the market for Halloween, and sooner or latter, the Halloween market will have to start catering to us.  I know some of you reading this may think it's all a rather dreamy 'pie-in-the-sky' ideal that will likely never work, but honestly, can you think of something better?  Enough said.

Communiqué from the General House of the Society of St. Pius X

October 6, 2010

During this month of the Rosary and, in particular, on the occasion of the feast of Our Lady of the Rosary, on October 7th when the superiors of the Society of St. Pius X will meet to study the recent proposals from Rome, Bishop Bernard Fellay asks all priests and faithful to intensify their generous participation in the Rosary Crusade that began on Easter of 2011 and ends on Pentecost of 2012.

On September 29th, in an interview given in Stuttgart, Germany, Fr. Niklaus Pfluger, First Assistant of the Society, recalled, “We are not that concerned about any advantage of our own. We want to make the treasure that Archbishop Lefebvre entrusted to our safekeeping available again for the whole Church.. . . We are concerned [instead] about the Catholic Church. Together with the Archbishop we too would like to say [the words of St. Paul; cf. I Corinthians 11:23], “Tradidi quod et accepi”―We hand on what we ourselves have received.”

During the conference he gave on October 1st at Villepreux, France, Bishop Fellay stated, “Sr. Lucy confided to Fr. Fuentes that the Blessed Virgin has put in this prayer [the Rosary] a particular efficacy, such that it is able to solve all problems. Sr. Lucy said it at Fatima—all problems. Listen well: All! You must believe it. . . .”

“Our Lord said : ‘if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you shall say to this mountain, Remove from hence hither, and it shall remove (Matt. 17:19).’ Ask for this faith, the faith of a grain of mustard seed.”

“In addition, we are counting on you to escalate this Rosary Crusade. There should be absolutely no doubt that the prayer of any part of the Church that comes together to ask for great graces, is pleasing to the Good Lord, honors Him and honors the Blessed Virgin.”

“So, let us go forth ! Let us carry on this Crusade with faith and confidence in the Good Lord.”

Menzingen, October 6, 2011

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Let us join our Catholic brethren in the SSPX in this Rosary crusade on Friday, October 7th, by praying all 15 decades of the Rosary. Feel free to throw in the extra 5 Luminous decades of Blessed John Paul II if you are so inclined, for a grand total of 20 decades. It is vitally important that relations between the Vatican and the SSPX be normalised, and that the SSPX be given a proper canonical structure within the Church, lest we end up with another schism comparable to that of AD 1054.

Modernist Schism In Austria Continues...

Cardinal Schönborn presides over 'youth mass.'

(Vatican Insider) - It is still causing conflict between Cardinal Christoph Schönborn and dissidents. This wekend, the Archbishop of Vienna spoke out about the risk of a schism in the Austrian Catholic Church.The Episcopate’s leader reinforced his view with regard to the clashes among the clergy, that violation of ecclesiastical celibacy and admission of divorced individuals that have subsequently re-married, back to communion, places dissident priests outside the Church.

The Cardinal warned that those who are promoting the reform manifesto with its slogan “A call to disobedience”, will not succeed in putting the Archdiocese of Vienna on a collision course with the Holy See. “Everything is possible and I am counting on dialogue and cooperation,” the Archbishop said, extending a metaphorical hand but at the same time excluding any possibility of a break with Rome...

read full story here

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT:  Well, I hate to say it, but where discipline is lax, schism is just around the corner.  I'll give Cardinal Schönborn this much.  He didn't start the problems in Austria.  He is not responsible for their genesis.  They did however, grow under his watch, and he did little (if anything) to correct them.  Spiritually speaking, Austria is in shambles now.  The schism has already occurred.  The only thing that remains now are the formalities.

Is Vatican II Optional?

The Second Vatican Council

(Rorate Caeli) - The great novelty comes from the Roman side. Le Figaro has learned that the Holy See could, for the first time, admit that these aspects fought by the "Integrists" are not considered as "essential" to the Catholic faith to the point of keeping outside the Church those who do not admit them. And that what has been foundational to the Catholic faith for twenty centuries is the sole [aspect] considered fundamental for communion with the Holy See, and not the interpretation from the last Council to this day.

Great autonomy of action

Another consequence: the Holy See, after it is verified tomorrow that Bishop Fellay and his faithful share the essence of the Catholic faith - which remains a demand and a sine qua non condition for Rome -, would propose to them a juridical solution so that the Fraternity of Saint Pius X is from this point forward considered a Catholic entity and not foreign to the ecclesial body anymore....

read full story here

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: If the report is accurate, (and we must always question that when it comes to inside Vatican information), than in actuality this would not surprise me. Both Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Paul VI specifically said the Second Vatican Council was "pastoral" in nature, and by extension, it "remain[s] on a [more] modest level" than previous Church councils (read more here). Both popes openly stated the Council defined no dogma at all.

So if what we have in Vatican II are purely "pastoral" documents, which should of course be taken seriously, and nothing new was dogmatically defined by Vatican II, than by extension, any group of Catholics who choose to ignore the council, but instead cling to the pre-conciliar teaching of the Church, cannot be held liable for heresy. If they're not heretics, and they subscribe to all the pre-conciliar teachings of the Church, than by definition, they are Catholic, whether they chose to accept Vatican II or not.

I'm sorry but that's just how it has to be. If the Second Vatican Council bishops chose to attach a note of infallibility to any one of the documents produced, than we would have a whole different story. That would change everything. But in fact, they did not do this, and as Pope Paul VI pointed out, that was intentional. So if Vatican II taught nothing new, than technically speaking, Catholics don't have to accept it, or so it would seem. Or they can accept part of it. Or they can accept all of it. It seems almost arbitrary. Sorry, but that's the nature of pastoral teaching when it has no infallibility attached to it. Based on what Pope Paul VI said, echoed by Cardinal Ratzinger, who later became Pope Benedict XVI, it was as if Vatican II was more of a "Super Synod" than an actual "Church Council." As far as I know, no previous Church Council neglected to include an infallible document of some sort.

So what are we to make of Vatican II? I've read the documents and I personally see no problem with any of them, because you see it all depends on the context in which you read them. As Pope Benedict XVI pointed out, it's the difference between the "hermeneutic of continuity" verses the "hermeneutic of rupture." If the Vatican II documents are interpreted within the context and continuity of previous Church teaching, than they make fairly good sense. If however, one were to interject one's own fanciful context, or if one were to jettison all previous Church teaching, so as to interpret the Council in a vacuum, as a stand-alone catechism that is super-dogmatic, than we run into all kinds of problems. This is what Pope Benedict XVI has warned us against, and indeed it is this very "hermeneutic of rupture" that has caused so many problems in recent decades, in effect causing Archbishop Lefebvre (founder of the SSPX) to reject the Council outright. For Lefebvre, and the bishops he illicitly consecrated (including Fellay), the Second Vatican Council was to be judged on the fruit it produced, not necessarily by the intent of the Council fathers. They saw the dogmatic ambiguity of Vatican II documents as an open door to all the filth in the world, and so they challenged these documents on their face value, calling into question their very authority. Unfortunately, it looks like while their solution was extreme, and reckless, the premise of their basic argument may have been sound. If the SSPX takes up this offer, it will send shockwaves through the entire Catholic Church, because it will codify in action what Pope Benedict XVI has been saying all along, in continuity with what Pope Paul VI said. Namely that the Second Vatican Council is just pastoral, and that it cannot be interpreted authoritatively unless it is done so in context with all previous Church teaching, changing absolutely not one iota of it. In other words, if the SSPX accepts this offer, it will codify in action a joint Vatican-SSPX refutation of every Modernist heresy and innovation ever created over the last four decades! I guarantee, this will not go over well in the most liberal dioceses in Europe, and could cause some not-so-minor problems here in North America. It is for this reason I welcome it.

Novus Ordo Mass Set For Extinction

Elevation during the (Tridentine) "Extraordinary Form" of the Roman Rite

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The Novus Ordo mass, as we know it today, has been selected for extinction. That's the word from one high-ranking official in the Vatican...

(Catholic Culture) - The Instruction issued this week, underlining Pope Benedict’s desire for wider use of the “extraordinary form” of the Mass, is part of the Pontiff’s overall plan for a liturgical “reform of the reform,” according to one top Vatican official.

Cardinal Kurt Koch, the new president of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, said that the Pope hopes for the eventual development of a newly reformed liturgy, combining elements of both the traditional Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo liturgy...

read full story here

This "newly formed liturgy" does not necessarily imply an extinction of the Tridentine mass as we know it. Rumors have been circulating in Rome for years now that an entirely new Roman Missal is in the works, and some claim to have seen a prototype of it. If indeed such a prototype does exist, it is more likely a working model for development, and not anything that will be released anytime in the near future. The existence of "two forms" of the Roman Rite, both ordinary and extraordinary, is an odd development in the history of the Catholic Church. It is the result of what Pope Benedict XVI referred to as the "hermeneutic of rupture" following the misinterpretations and misapplications of the Second Vatican Council. By bringing the Tridentine liturgy back to the forefront of the Church as the "extraordinary form" of the Roman right, the pope hopes to reintroduce a "hermeneutic of continuity" back into the mainstream Church. By allowing the "ordinary form" and "extraordinary form" to exist side-by-side for a set period of time, the Holy Father hopes to allow a natural and organic development of tradition to unfold, drawing the two forms closer together in practice, as priests learn to celebrate the ordinary form with more extraordinary reverence. This coupled with better vernacular translations and liturgical guidance from the Vatican, will in a relatively short time revive the historical tradition of the Roman Catholic ethos.

The idea here is that a time will come, someday in the not-too-distant future (perhaps in another 8 to 16 years) when the separation of the two forms will no longer be necessary. A new missal will be released, which will essentially be Tridentine in nature, but with an expanded lectionary, tightening the rubrics for the Liturgy of the Eucharist in comparison to today's Novus Ordo, and loosening the rubrics for the Liturgy of the Word in comparison to today's Tridentine mass. Thus the Liturgy of the Eucharist would be set in stone, thoroughly Tridentine in nature, while the Liturgy of the Word would have some flexibility. Priests who want to make their celebration as traditional as possible will be able to do so easily, and exclusively in Latin if they prefer. While priests who want to make their celebration a bit more contemporary will also do so easily, likely using the vernacular translations. The Liturgy of the Eucharist would remain constant for all priests, regardless of their persuasion, and the canon of the mass (the consecration itself) will likely be said exclusively in Latin, regardless of the vernacular translation being used for the rest of the liturgy. This is what the 'Knight' has heard will be the framework of a future Missal for the Roman Rite.

Meanwhile the pope has made it clear that the Anglican ordinariates are to develop their own exclusive liturgy which will be based loosely on 'Rite One' from the Book of Divine Worship. This new liturgy will be used throughout ALL the Anglican ordinariates, without exception, not excluding the two forms of the Roman Rite which may be celebrated as well. Elements from the Sarum Use will likely be introduced to this Anglican ordinariate liturgy as well as some very "Tridentine-like" rubrics. In time, it is possible this will become a very popular liturgy for the English-speaking people throughout the world.

The Novus Ordo mass, as we know it today, has been slated for extinction. The horrid English translation of the Novus Ordo mass will expire later this year. The liturgical abuses and innovations that followed it, will likewise be dealt with one by one in the coming years. The clergy that gave us the Novus Ordo culture and the "hermeneutic of rupture" are likewise slated for retirement in the years ahead. The new seminarians coming out now are far more traditional and orthodox in nature. A fundamental paradigm shift has just occurred with the release of Summorum Pontificum (2007), Universae Ecclesiae (2011) and Anglicanorum Coetibus (2009). It's a paradigm shift that is unstoppable now, but won't be realized in it's fullness for at least a decade. By then the Catholic Church will have been so radically transformed from what it is today that it will be barely recognizable to the modern Catholic, but strikingly familiar to the ancient Catholic.

What becomes of the Novus Ordo mass, and poor vernacular translations, we are all so painfully familiar with today? They will live on of course, just no longer in the Catholic Church. They will become the designated liturgy for wannabe-catholic Protestant denominations and schismatic-liberal Catholic sects that left full-communion with the Church in rebellion over women's ordination and other heretical notions.

Exorcism In America

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: I'm actually a little surprised CNN did this story, but at the same time, I guess I shouldn't be surprised with the popularity surrounding the recent Hollywood release. Of course, the reporter was careful to use such phrases a "some believe" making sure to distance CNN from confirmation of any religious teachings. (We can't have that now can we.) Nevertheless, I was pleased to see the story and if it raises public awareness to the reality of the devil and the dangers of occult practices, than it's probably a good thing.

Working in the field I do, I have encountered people whom I believe were likely possessed by demonic spirits. In all counts these were people with a history of drug abuse and the occult.

The rite of exorcism is gaining popularity among young (more traditional) priests and seminarians. Perhaps within a decade we will see at least one exorcist in every diocese.

Revolutions In Muslim World Open Door For Severe Persecution of Christians

(AINA) -- For the second time in as many days, Egyptian armed force stormed the 5th century old St. Bishoy monastery in Wadi el-Natroun, 110 kilometers from Cairo. Live ammunition was fired, wounding two monks and six Coptic monastery workers. Several sources confirmed the army's use of RPG ammunition. Four people have been arrested including three monks and a Coptic lawyer who was at the monastery investigating yesterday's army attack.

Monk Aksios Ava Bishoy told activist Nader Shoukry of Freecopts the armed forces stormed the main entrance gate to the monastery in the morning using five tanks, armored vehicles and a bulldozer to demolish the fence built by the monastery last month to protect themselves and the monastery from the lawlessness which prevailed in Egypt during the January 25 Uprising.

"When we tried to address them, the army fired live bullets, wounding Father Feltaows in the leg and Father Barnabas in the abdomen," said Monk Ava Bishoy. "Six Coptic workers in the monastery were also injured, some with serious injuries to the chest....

read full story here

Religious Makeup of Lebanon

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: History will not smile on Christianity in the modern Western world when it records the genocide that is about to unfold in the Middle East. The greatest failure of Western Christianity, particularly among the Evangelical Protestants in the United States, is a fixation on the Secular nation of Israel, to the neglect of their own Christian brethren in the same region. Few Western Christians in America know that nearly half of Lebanon's population is Christian. The United States government sends untold millions of dollars to Israel, but not a dime to the Christians in Lebanon.  Since when has the United States government, or any Western government for that matter, done anything to help Christians in the Middle East and North Africa?  What of the people of the United States and Europe?  What of the churches?  In how many television specials have the so-called "Christian televangelists" championed the plight of our suffering brethren in that part of the world?  Sunday after Sunday we are inundated with Christian television chronicling the cause of Secular Israel but not a word about their own suffering brethren over there.  For the last forty years the United States could have been working with the indigenous Christians of North Africa and the Middle East, championing their rights and calling for greater religious freedom.  No, instead we championed the cause of Zionism and simultaneously propped up North African and Middle Eastern dictators who keep the Arabs in check so we can maintain a steady stream of oil supply. 

This Cross Was Seen At A Recent Anti-Mubarak Protest in Egypt

It is time for a change, but don't expect that to come from Washington D.C. or any other Western government.  The change must come from each one of us...

Do you call yourself a Christian?  Do you support the Biblical mandate to care for Christians in the Middle East, particularly those in Jerusalem?  (1 Corinthians 16:1-4)  If indeed you call yourself a Christian, and if you are worried about the events unfolding in the Muslim world today, than there is ONLY ONE thing to do.  Start making regular donations to CNEWA (Catholic Near East Welfare Association), which is dedicated to helping Christians in this part of the world and providing general humanitarian aid as well.  It's a force for good in the Arab world, that supports Christians living among a Muslim majority.

This is not about politics folks.  It's not about Arab vs. Israeli or Muslim vs. Jew.  This is about Christians!  And if you won't do your part to help them, than what does that say about your own Christian faith?  Click Here NOW To Help and share this article with your Christian friends and family (especially Evangelicals) today!

Here's the link to this article. Simply cut and paste into your email or use the "Share" icons below..
http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/2011/02/revolutions-in-muslim-world-open-door.html

The Catholic Knight would also like to call upon ALL his fellow Catholic bloggers to take up this crusade immediately to help raise awareness of this issue on the Internet. The time to act is NOW!!!

BREAKING: Modernist Schism Now Imminent !!!

An example of liturgical and doctrinal abuse in the Catholic Church
Masses like this are forbidden by Rome.

(Sydney Morning Herald) - The Catholic Church is facing open defiance over its new Mass, with at least a dozen Australian priests indicating they will refuse to use it when it comes into force later this year.

Hundreds more are angry about the lack of consultation for the new, more literal translation of the 400-year-old Latin text, which was heavily influenced by a Vatican advisory committee headed by the Sydney Archbishop, Cardinal George Pell.

What supporters say is a suitably elevated and poetic text more faithful to the original Latin is seen by detractors as an outdated, contrived and less inclusive version that ignores modern English and could further alienate Catholics from the church. It has become the latest battleground in the culture wars between progressive Catholics and traditionalists over the direction of reforms stemming from the 1960s Vatican Council, which allowed the faithful to celebrate the liturgy in their own language for the first time...

read full story here

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: A direct confrontation between the Vatican and the Modernists in the Church is about to come down - this year! That is unless the Vatican blinks and postpones the implementation of the new English translation of the Roman Missal. The question that arises is who's in charge here? Is this a Church still governed by the pope? Or has the Catholic Church become a mere collective, with nobody really in charge, sort of like the Anglican Communion. The message the Vatican sends over the next ten months will be crucial.

If the Vatican blinks, postponing the implementation of the new translation (which has already been postponed for years), it will send a clear message that the Modernists are still in charge of the Catholic Church, and the leadership in Rome fears threats of schism more than orthopraxy. Is Pope Benedict still our fearless German Shepherd? We will know for sure on November 27th, 2011 - the date the new English translation of the Roman Missal is set to go into effect.

Simultaneously, in the United States, a group of potential schismatics and heretics are meeting in Detroit on June 10th through the 12th in what has been compared to an alternate Church authority opposed to the Vatican and the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). The American Catholic Council is a potentially schismatic and heretical group that has already been condemned by the Archbishop of Detroit - His Excellency Allen Henry Vigneron. The intention of this group is to celebrate the post-conciliar liturgical abuses and doctrinal innovations, as well as promote them for future development. The group is also calling for a complete restructuring of Church governance, setting itself up as a potential alternative to the USCCB.

What we have here are the makings of a whole new schism in the Catholic Church, comparable to the Protestant Reformation some 500 years ago. Any attempt to reason with these people will result in failure and give them the credibility they need to spread their errors. We can only hope the Vatican, and the bishops in Australia and the United States, take a strong stand against this type of open rebellion.

The Lutherans Are Coming!

Shield of the Anglo-Lutherans

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT:  A quick look at the Anglican Ordinariate Google Map reveals an interesting trend.  It looks like some Lutherans are availing themselves of the opportunity to join the pope's emerging Anglican Catholic Ordinariate here in the United States.  The trend can be verified on The Anglo-Catholic blog. The development signifies something startling. The Anglican Ordinariates are beginning to cross denominational lines - specifically Protestant denominational lines. No longer are traditional Anglican congregations the only one's interested in entering the Catholic Church through the pope's personal ordinariate. Now we see traditional Lutherans following through as well. This is not a separate ordinariate mind you, it's the SAME ordinariate! It would appear the Traditional Anglicans and Traditional Lutherans are patching things up between them as they head toward Rome...



View Emerging Anglican Catholic Ordinariates in a larger map
What was an unexpected development for 'The Catholic Knight' was apparently anticipated by the Holy Father. At the end of his historic visit to England last year, the pope referred to the Apostolic Constitution and the creation of the first ordinariates as a "prophetic gesture." In this phrase one can only wonder if the Holy Father had an inkling of what might occur. That inkling is starting to unfold before our very eyes now. Many Protestants in the original denominations, after 500 years of experimentation, are beginning to realize the futility of it all. It has been half a millennium of one epic failure after another, resulting in schism after schism, culminating in the virtual apostasy of modern denominations that accept abortion, contraception, homosexual priests and sodomite marriages. Though the failures of modern Protestantism have been broadcast loudly on the television, radio and Internet, a quiet phenomenon has been going on behind the scenes.

Small factions of conservative and traditional Protestants (mainly Anglicans and Lutherans so far) have realized the futility of endless schism to preserve the moral teachings of the gospel. They've come to understand that the only way to beat the 'tyranny of relativism' is to get back to their ancient Christian roots, and that can't happen without an honest evaluation of Catholic Christianity. Drawing upon the Catholic remnants in their own traditions, they began to move back toward Rome, and now we are beginning to see the results. Indeed, the Apostolic Constitution creating the Anglican Ordinariates is a "prophetic gesture," an open embrace, for all Protestants willing to accept historic doctrinal orthodoxy and come home to Rome.

U.S. Anglican Ordinariate Surpasses The Episcopal Church USA

View Emerging Anglican Catholic Ordinariates in a larger map

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Br. Stephen Treat has made an interesting observation over at "The Anglo-Catholic" blog. According to his calculation, even in a worst case scenario, assuming that there would be no further interest in the Anglican Ordinariate in the United States other than what already exists (an assumption that runs against all observations and expectations so far), the average Sunday attendance (ASA) of the emerging Anglican ordinariate already surpasses that of The Episcopal Church U.S.A. ever so slightly. Now let me be perfectly clear. Br. Treat is not claiming the emerging U.S. Ordinariate will be larger than The Episcopal Church, not yet anyway, he's just saying that the estimated ASA is larger. The average national ASA of the emerging U.S. Anglican ordinariate currently ranks at about 69. While the average national ASA of The Episcopal Church U.S.A. currently ranks at about 66. This of course assumes zero growth of the emerging U.S. Anglican ordinariate, and zero interest in ordinariate parishes by Catholics of the general Roman Rite.

Of course the last thirty years of observation of the Anglican Use in the United States tells a different story. Anglican Use parishes have grown, some gradually, some rapidly and one explosively! (The presence of a parochial school helps explain the explosive growth in that one case.) Regardless of the cause, virtually all of the Anglican Use parishes have grown somewhat, and that is in spite of virtual obscurity.

What does this mean? It means that regardless of the rate of growth of the U.S. Anglican Ordinariate, it's size in average Sunday attendance (ASA) will surpass that of The Episcopal Church U.S.A. within a very short period of time, if indeed it hasn't already surpassed it!

The Episcopal Church U.S.A. is the official U.S. branch of the worldwide Protestant Anglican Communion.

The Origin of Christmas

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Each year we deck out our homes in evergreen and lights. A Christmas tree is often displayed with beautiful ornaments. Gifts are exchanged and carols are sung, but do we really know the true origin of Christmas? Most people don't think about it, and among those who do, even fewer actually know the answer to the question. I used to be one of those who thought I knew, that is, until I did a little deeper study on it. Like many people today, I once subscribed to the notion that Christmas was originally a Pagan celebration in pre-Christian Europe. I was under the impression that Christianity commandeered a Pagan celebration and used it to redirect European focus away from Pagan beliefs, and toward the Christian gospel. I couldn't have been more mistaken.



Today, a small but growing number of Evangelical Christians object to the celebration of Christmas. This is because of Christmas' alleged Pagan roots. They'll have nothing to do with Paganism, and so Christmas is out! I wish them the best of luck in this endeavor, because they're gonna need it. Around the world, the Christmas celebration is the most beloved holiday time of the year. Christmas-banning Evangelicals are going to have an uphill fight with their families and children around the holidays. It's easy to say you're gonna ban Christmas in your home, but it's quite another thing when it comes to actually doing it. Sadly, this notion is misplaced, and it's one based on ignorance of the facts.



If I had a nickel for every time I heard somebody say Christmas came from Paganism... well, let's just say I'd have a lot of nickels. There is a partial truth to this, but it is only partial. Indeed, some ancient Pagans did make a practice out of worshiping the sun. This is how the year came to be divided into four seasons: Fall, Winter, Spring and Summer. The time when the earth is closest and farthest from the sun is called a "solstice." The time when the earth is about midway from the sun is called an "equinox." The seasons of summer and winter are marked by a solstice. The seasons of fall and spring are marked by an equinox. Knowing and understanding how these seasons worked was essential to farmers in ancient times, so virtually every culture developed an elaborate method of predicting the start of spring, which was optimal for planting crops. These elaborate systems usually involved study of the stars, and especially the careful observance of the sun's movement across the sky. During the winter months, the sun moves across the sky at a much lower latitude than it does throughout the rest of the year. This lowering of the sun's path was viewed negatively by ancient Pagans, who worshiped the sun, simply because it seemed to be a sign of the sun's weakening or dying power. The fact that most vegetation goes dormant during the cold weather of winter only served to strengthen this notion. The point where the sun moves across the sky at the lowest latitude falls on December 20th through the 23rd, depending on the year. The day when the sun began moving upward in latitude again was marked as the winter solstice, and ancient sun-worshipers commenced a celebration called the "Feast of the Unconquered Sun." This feast usually fell between December 23rd through the 27th, depending on the year, according to the Roman calendar.

Caesar Aurelian (270 to 275 AD) did manage to combine the assortment of Pagan worship practices into one, and marked December 25th for their celebration. The exact reason for his specification of this date is not known. It is peculiar because although it was marked as the "Feast of the Unconquered Sun," it was not observed during the winter solstice (Dec. 20-23), and only landed on the actual day of the feast once every four years (Dec. 25). So why would a Pagan emperor do that? Why celebrate a solstice days after it had passed, and a feast that was only accurate to a fixed date once every four years?

 The answer may be surprising. Aurelian was known for his fairness toward Christians. He was by no means sympathetic to Christianity, but he did not persecute the faith either. Instead he held Christians under the law equally with Pagans. Aurelian came to power during a troubling time in ancient Rome's history. He was attempting to unify an empire that was falling apart. One of his methods for doing this was to streamline and organize the pantheon of Pagan religions. A practice that most Pagan religions had in common was sun worship. Because of this, Aurelian tried on many occasions to have sun worship declared the official religion of the empire. His attempts failed, but his dating of the "Feast of the Unconquered Sun" on December 25th did manage to stick, and his choice of date was extremely interesting. While most Pagan religions observed December 23rd through 27th as the celebration of this feast, a rapidly growing eastern religion (Christianity) was observing a different feast at about the same time. Was Aurelian trying to trump this growing Christian celebration by fixing the date of the Pagan feast on the same day Christians were using? Or was Aurelian simply trying to reconcile Christians and Pagans by making them celebrate their feasts together. Nobody can say for sure exactly what was going on in Aurelian's mind. The only thing we know is that he tried to standardize a Pagan celebration, that depends on a moving date for meaning and accuracy, to a particular fixed date (Dec. 25) already being used by Christians for some eastern celebration.

So what was it Christians were celebrating back then? In all probability, it was a Christian modified version of Hanukkah. You see, many of the early Christians were Jews, and it's perfectly reasonable to assume that some Jewish celebrations were carried over into Gentile Christian homes. Hanukkah commemorates the great victory of the Jews, under the leadership of Judah Maccabees, over the forces of Antiochus Epiphanes who tried to destroy the Jewish faith back in 168 BC. After years of fierce fighting, Judah Maccabees was finally able to lead his troops into Jerusalem for victory. There, the Jews began the work of purifying and rededicating the Temple, which had been defiled by the occupation of Antiochus. It is told that when Judah’s men were cleaning out the temple, they found just a single jar of holy oil. It was only enough to keep the menorah before the Holy of Holies burning for one day. There wasn't enough time to make more holy oil, so what they had would have to do. Miraculously, this one jar burned for eight days and nights, the exact time needed for re-dedication of the Temple.

 As a remembrance of this joyous occasion, every year in Jewish homes a special menorah (or candelabra) is lit, consisting of eight candles instead of the traditional seven (together with an additional ‘servant candle’ used to light the rest for a total of nine candles). A new candle is lit on each night of the festival, one candle being lit on the first night, two on the second, and so on. The dead giveaway to the origin of Christmas is found in the liturgical celebration of the Christmas feast in the Catholic Church – the most ancient Christian calendar available. According to the Roman Catholic calendar, the feast of Christmas is exactly eight days long, starting on December 25th and ending on January 1st. It is officially called the "Octave of Christmas." Octave, of course, means "eight days." The end of the octave marks the beginning of the civil new year, according to the Catholic calendar, which is observed by the entire Western world. The Biblical precedence for the early Christian observance of this Jewish feast is found in John 10:22-23 where Jesus observed the "Feast of Dedication" (or Hanukkah), by visiting the Temple in Jerusalem. There he was confronted by the Pharisees who demanded that he reveal his identity as they contended with him over his claim to be the Son of God. The feast of Hanukkah is a time marked by the light of a menorah filling the Temple. From a Christian perspective, this feast could just as easily be observed as a time marked by the Light of God (Jesus Christ) coming into the world. Such was the most ancient celebration of Christmas, (or the "mass of Christ"), an eight day feast, probably marked in the early Church by the lighting of lamps, songs and prayers.

 Yet the question still remains about December 25th. Why would a Roman caesar try to use it to trump a Jewish-Christian celebration that couldn't have existed on December 25, since Hanukkah only rarely falls on that date? To answer that, we must first look at calendars. The ancient Romans used the Julian calendar, similar to what we use today. The ancient Jews used their own Jewish calendar, still used by Jewish rabbis today. Since the Roman calendar is based on the solar year, and the Jewish calendar is based on the cycles of the moon, the months between them almost never match up perfectly. In fact, they frequently overlap with variation. This is why the date marking the start of Hanukkah always seems to change annually. Though it tends to fluctuate on the Roman calendar from year to year; on the Jewish calendar, the date for Hanukkah is fixed, always falling on the 25th day of the Jewish month of Kislev. The evening of the 24th day marks the beginning of the celebration because on the Jewish calendar, a day always begins at sundown the previous day, as opposed to midnight on the Roman calendar. Thus Kislev 24 is the "eve" of Hanukkah -- a very special night for Jews. How interesting that Christians also mark the "eve" of Christmas as an especially holy night. During this particular period of time (late third-century) the early Church would have been made up of a growing number of Gentiles and a shrinking number of Jews. The traditions of the Jewish Christians remained, but they would have been slowly taken over by Gentile Christians. These Gentile Christians probably would not have continued to use the Jewish calendar, and so the Roman month that most closely corresponds with the Jewish month of Kislev is December. Thus, the eight-day Christian celebration of Hanukkah would have switched from Kislev 25th to December 25th, and that would explain the growing number of Christian Gentiles adopting a “foreign” feast around the same time as the winter solstice. This may explain Caesar Aurelian's attempt to fix the celebration of the winter solstice, and the 'Feast of the Unconquered Sun," to a specific date. It was a date which just happened to be the exact same date used by Christians in their celebration of the Christian Hanukkah.

 This was intentional, because Caesar Aurelian was attempting to unify the empire by getting everybody celebrating their various feasts on the same day. The point here is that Christians were using the fixed day of December 25th, as their Christian Hanukkah, long before that date was set for a Pagan feast by a Roman caesar. The fixing of the winter solstice, and the 'Feast of the Unconquered Sun,' to an artificial date (Dec. 25), was an attempt to unify the empire and preserve the dying Pagan religions. December 25th was selected as the day because Aurelian knew Christians would not change their own celebration to accommodate an order for some other date (like Dec. 22nd or Dec. 23rd for example). The only people who would obey his decree were Pagans, and so Aurelian ordered that Pagans change the dates of their Pagan celebrations to accommodate the Christians, not vice versa. December 25th was a fixed date for Christian celebration long before the Pagans adopted it, and it remained a Christian celebration long ager the Pagan religions died out.

In the centuries to follow, the Christian Hanukkah came to be known simply as the "Christ Mass" (or Christmas) for the birth of the Christ child, with the first day of the Octave marked by the "Feast of the Nativity" announcing the Light of God (Jesus Christ) entering the world. Some relatively harmless Pagan practices, (such as mistletoe, evergreens and yule logs), did eventually find their way into the Christian celebration. Surprisingly, the Christmas tree wasn't one of them. That actually came from Martin Luther during the Protestant Reformation.

 Legend has it that Martin Luther admired the custom of Eastern Orthodox Christians, in which they displayed a fruit tree in the early part of December to commemorate the “Feast of Adam and Eve.” He wanted to do something similar in the Protestant Church of Germany. So he brought a fir tree into the chapel and decorated it with candles, placing a nativity beneath it. The candles were designed to represent the star of Bethlehem and the choir of angles that sang “Glory to God in the highest...” Eventually the Eastern Orthodox custom, and the Protestant Lutheran custom, merged together resulting in the decoration of the tree with round ornaments to represent the Orthodox fruit tree, stars and angels to represent the Lutheran concept.

The modern tradition of Santa Claus is a commercialized version of the original Christian observance of the Feast of Saint Nicholas, which usually falls on December 6th. The original Saint Nicholas was a Catholic bishop who lived in the middle 4th century. He is the patron saint of children, and was widely known for his charitable giving. There are several legends associated with that. The merging of this tradition with the myths of elves, reindeer and the north pole came about as the result of commercial marketers in the middle to late 19th century. The image of Santa Clause as a fat old man was part of a marketing campaign by the Coca Cola company in the early 20th century, and was accompanied by department store “Santas” as a gimmick to bring Christmas shoppers into their stores.

Today, Christians can get in touch with the spiritual roots of the Christmas celebration simply by extending their own observances of Christmas out to the full eight days from December 25th through January 1st.

Rather than trying to cram it all into one day, (as the commercialized celebration has taught us over the last 100 years), we can spread things out a little, giving ourselves some breathing room to actually enjoy the season a little bit more. We could light a candle for each day of the octave, similar to the Jewish practice, which is probably where the Christian celebration came from anyway.  The reason for the whole celebration is remembering that Christmas marks the coming of the Light (Christ) into the world.  That's what the feast is about.  I don't know anybody who believes Jesus was really born on December 25th, and that's not the official teaching of the Church either.  Regular church attendance should be central to the observance of this Christmas Octave, and the continuation of Christmas songs and prayers throughout the week will also help. Of course the end of the Octave is already well marked for us with the celebration of the new year, and isn't it fitting that an eight-day feast marking the coming of Christ into the world should end with a really big party.