We Should Not Dress Like Cultural Revolutionaries!

One aspect of the weakness of character which marks most people today, is that they devote all of the time that they can, not to real human activity worthy of a free man and child of God (viz., the intellectual and the spiritual life), but instead to bodily rest and bodily pleasure (which are lower things we have in common with brute beasts).

Such people have no sense of the propriety of their attire but always seek comfort – as long as that comfort is in a manner which conforms with the opinions of the “crowd”.  When they go to church (if they do go to church[1]) or when they attend a special dinner with friends, most people dress like slobs nowadays.  But, again, they dress like slobs only in a way which conforms with the approval of the “crowd”, by wearing the particular sloppy clothes that conform to what everyone else approves.

Such clothes tend to be vulgar, base, and banal in those circumstances.  Thus, many people wear ripped trousers – but those trousers must be jeans (or jean-type pants).  These people would not be “caught dead” in ripped pants which are not acceptable to their peer group!

They wear conforming casual clothes to the office too.  Only certain clothes are acceptable and they know what sloppy, casual clothes they should wear because everyone follows and imitates the same “fashion” guidelines.

Universally, from the beginning of history, clothes have shown a person’s office or station in life.  So, those persons who perform rugged manual labor dress appropriately for that hard work.  Throughout history, those who do intellectual non-physical work for a living (e.g., thinking, speaking, writing, making decisions, or managing people), dressed in a way showing their occupations.  Kings, presidents, lawyers, judges, mediators, etc. did not dress in clothes that are suitable for being a farmer, a black smith, a mechanic, etc.  They wore clothes showing their office or station in life, through wearing the fabrics and the cut of the clothes that show they are not dressed for manual labor.

Here is how this truth is explained by St. Thomas Aquinas, greatest Doctor of the Catholic Church:

Those who are placed in a position of dignity, or again the ministers of the altar, are attired in more costly apparel than others, not for the sake of their own glory, but to indicate the excellence of their office or of the Divine worship.[2]

 

Similarly, in former times, when people went to church, they wore formal clothes (their best clothes), which were not suitable for hard manual labor.  They wore their best clothes to show respect for God, as St. Thomas explains immediately above.

Down through the ages, when people attended a symphony performance or an intellectual activity like a lecture, they dressed up, showing respect for the activity (cultural or intellectual) and for the persons attending with them.  When invited to dinner at someone’s home or when a young man took a young lady to dinner, he dressed up (as did she) to look their best and show respect for each other and for the importance of the activity in which they were engaged (viz., seeking a spouse and life-long companion with whom to start a family).

In short, the reason why we should dress well is to honor the others we are meeting and show that we esteem their dignity and/or that of the occasion.  We also show that there is a hierarchy of occasions.  By contrast, when we dress like slobs, we show that the other person (who has to look at us) or the occasion is not worth our efforts or our better clothes.

As the world around us gets ever-more corrupt, we see the pronounced trend of people dressing in whatever way makes them most comfortable. That is, they dress down and thereby inherently show another person that they disregard him and that their own comfort and gratifying their passions is more important to them than the other person.  In better times, people showed proper respect by dressing well (as was the reasonable custom, etiquette, and propriety) when coming into the presence of persons of a higher station of life.

But revolutionaries and communists sought (and seek) to destroy this order in society.  So, the Chinese communists wore “Mao suits” earlier in their revolutionary times.  These suits were poorly-tailored, and in the same medium gray color, to falsely pretend that everyone is equal.  Similarly, starting in the 1960s in the U.S., the cultural revolutionaries wore blue jeans even to high cultural events because they aimed at destroying the propriety of attire that society respected (showing contempt for custom) and sought to portray a false appearance of equality.

We live in a time of deliberate destruction of those morals and good customs which were developed over the centuries of Catholic culture and civilization.  We must be counter-revolutionaries!  We should do what is in our power to stand up for virtue and reason, against the cultural revolutionaries who are destroying Western Civilization.  This culture – though much of it has been destroyed since the height of Christendom – is worth fighting for! 

We must strive to be the sort of soldiers of Christ that God and our reason show us that we must be.  In this way, we will have spent our lives doing something truly worth living for, and if God wills, also dying for!  Let us do this together! 



[1]           Catholic Candle recognizes that most faithful and informed Catholics have no access to an  uncompromising Mass and uncompromising priest.  That is true of the Catholic Candle Team members too.  We are in the same “boat” as you are!  So, we are certainly not advocating that faithful and informed Catholics go to a compromise group or priest in order to “get my Mass” or “get my sacraments”.  However, in this present article, when referring to people always seeking comfort, we refer to persons who don’t bother to go to church rather than to those persons who stay away from compromise churches out of love for Our Lord and our holy Catholic Faith.

 

We urge you not to attend compromise groups to get the Sacraments, even where they are valid Sacraments.  We at Catholic Candle sanctify the Sunday at home using this method:  https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/sanctifying-sunday-no-mass.html

 

The Sacraments of compromise groups do not please God.

https://catholiccandle.org/2020/04/02/a-compromise-groups-masses-and-sacraments-do-not-give-grace-because-the-end-does-not-justify-the-means/

 

Even if we don’t “feel” content with our feelings, nonetheless with our will and intellect (the important faculties) we should be perfectly content without the Mass and Sacraments when this is God’s will for us, that is, when they are not available without  compromise.  https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/complete-contentment-without-the-mass-when-it-is-not-available-without-compromise.html

 

This is a time of great blessings!  We hold that this is a glorious time to be Catholic and to live for Christ the King!  https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/it-is-a-blessing-to-live-during-this-great-apostasy.html

[2]           Summa, IIa IIae: Q.169, a.1, ad 2.

To Make Murder Acceptable, Give It a Different Name

 

Webster defines murder as killing a human being unlawfully and with premeditated malice.  That’s it!  That’s ABORTION.

It was understood early on that the great majority of people would find so totally abhorrent the thought of going into an (operating) room and intentionally killing a baby.  So, the answer for the Left was to muddy the linguistic waters by calling it “health care”, not murder, hoping it sounded merely like an innocent medical procedure.  (That is not the case today, however, as nearly everyone realizes that it’s the life of an innocent child that hangs in the balance.)

Yet this ploy helped to destroy the consciences of people so that not only did they begin to think of abortion as no longer relevant to moral law, but as a solution to a “problem”, or an issue to be debated, or a convenient possibility, or finally, something to be promoted.

Now, this matter of the conscience of people is of particular importance because everyone must practice and live up to his Catholic Faith based on his informed and tender conscience in preparation for his particular Judgement.  Jesus Christ is the Judge at the Particular Judgment, and we have to give an account of our whole life – every thought, word, act, and omission.  Only then will we know the exactitude with which God sees and measures these acts, words, and even intentions in our deepest thoughts.

To help us prepare for the Particular Judgment, God created us with a conscience, sometimes called the “voice of God” because it bids us to do right and avoid wrong. 

Relatively few have sufficiently studied the Catholic Faith to inform their conscience or have worked hard to keep it tender (which is the delicate opposite of a hardened conscience).  As you might expect, a hardened conscience will accept what is wrong without concern.

Thus, a person with a hardened conscience will have no problem thinking of the growing fetus (i.e., a baby) as merely a “lump of tissue.”  However, The Catholic Encyclopedia confutes this heretical nonsense:

Now it is at the very time of conception that the embryo begins to live a distinct, individual life.  For life does not result from an organism when it has been built up, but the vital principle builds up the organism of its own body.  In virtue of the one eternal act of the Will of the Creator, Who is, of course, ever-present in every portion of His creation, the soul of every new human being begins to exist when the cell which generation has provided is ready to receive it as its principle of life.  In the normal course of nature, the living embryo carries on its work of self-evolution within the maternal womb, deriving its nourishment from the placenta through the vital cord, till, on reaching maturity, it is by the uterus issued to lead its separate life.  Abortion is a fatal termination of this process.[1]

Intentional abortions are distinguished by medical writers into two classes.  When they are brought about for social reasons, physicians [in past decades] style[d] them criminal; and they rightly condemn[ed] them under any circumstances whatsoever.  They express[ed] utter contempt for the doctors and midwives concerned in them.  They usually strive[d] to prevent such crimes by all means in their power.  “Often, very often,” says Dr. Hodge, of the University of Pennsylvania, “must all the eloquence and all the authority of the practitioner be employed; often he must, as it were, grasp the conscience of his weak and erring patient, and let her know, in language not to be misunderstood, that she is responsible to the Creator for the life of the being within her.”[2] 

Ethics, then, and the Church agree in teaching that no action is lawful which directly destroys fetal life.  It is also clear that extracting the living fetus, before it is viable [i.e., able to survive on its own] is destroying its life as directly as it would be killing a grown man directly by plunging him into a medium in which he cannot live [e.g., underwater] and holding him there till he expires.[3]  

The Catholic Church has not relaxed her strict prohibition of all abortion; but she has made it more definite.  [Note: Catholic clergy and the hierarchy were outspokenly against abortion until the latter part of the 20th century.  Since then, the conciliar church has been quiet and lukewarm at best in opposing abortion.]  As to penalties she inflicts upon the guilty parties, her present legislation was fixed by the Bull of Pius IX, “Apostolicae Sedis,” (1869).  It decrees excommunication – that is, deprivation of the Sacraments and of the prayers of the Church in the case of any of her members.[4]  

Thus, it is clear to see that abortion is a mortal sin.  (A person doesn’t get excommunicated for forgetting to genuflect in church.)  It is murder and it is against the Ten Commandments and against the Natural Law.  The Natural Law is the rule of conduct which is prescribed to us by our Creator and which we know by reason without special Divine Revelation.  St. Thomas explains that Natural Law is nothing other than the rational creature’s participation in the Eternal Law, which is the Truth of Divine Wisdom Itself.

God has imprinted the substance of the Ten Commandments on the human heart and mind, and they have therefore binding force.  Even if they had never been given to us through Divine Revelation, we would still be obliged to keep them, for they are dictated by reason, and taught by Natural Law.  The revealed law on this merely repeats and amplifies the Natural Law.[5]  

The fifth commandment is Thou Shalt Not Kill.  Since we have seen that murder is the voluntary and unjust killing of a human being, it is easy to see why abortion is one of the four sins that “cry to heaven” for God’s punishment.

Though killing babies in the womb seems to have been unknown prior to the decadent morality of ancient Greece, at a later period this abominable practice proliferated but was met with severe punishments.  And it is notable that the great prevalence of abortion ceased wherever Christianity became established.[6]  

Thus, it is fair to say that in centuries past, Christians – and more specifically, the Catholic Church – were the primary defenders of innocent life against abortion and its practitioners.

Where is the Catholic Church today?  It is MIA – i.e., Missing in Action.  Who is to lead the fight against abortion, if not the Church?  I believe an uncompromised Church could have subdued abortion if the billion Catholic faithful would have strongly objected at the ballot box when electing civil representatives, and this worthy goal could have been accomplished if the human leaders of the Church – the pope,  bishops and clergy – had informed, reminded, and directed their flocks to actively oppose the evil of abortion.

“In former times, men were animated by the spirit of faith, and regarded a large family as a gift of God and a blessing from heaven, and considered God more than themselves as the Father of their children.  But now that faith has weakened and people live isolated from God ….”[7]                                                     

They no longer universally consider babies as children sent by God, made in His image and likeness.  They ignore the fact that abortion is a mortal sin, and that the killer of a baby deserves to spend eternity in the fires of hell.

Let us abhor this murder, which denies a baby any chance to see the Face of God and be happy with Him forever in heaven!  Let us pray and fight to end abortion!

 



[1]               The Catholic Encyclopedia, The Gilmary Society, New York, 1907, Vol. 1, p.47.

[2]               The Catholic Encyclopedia, The Gilmary Society, New York, 1907, Vol. 1, p.47.

[3]               The Catholic Encyclopedia, The Gilmary Society, New York, 1907, Vol. 1, p.48.

[4]               The Catholic Encyclopedia, The Gilmary Society, New York, 1907, Vol. 1, p.49.

[5]              My Catholic Faith, Bishop Morrow,  My Mission House, Kenosha, WI, ©1949, Ch. 91, p. 185.

[6]               The Catholic Encyclopedia, The Gilmary Society, New York, 1907, Vol. 1, p.48.

[7]              Trustful Surrender to Divine Providence, Fr. Jean Baptiste, S.J., and St. Claude de la Colombiere, S.J., TAN Books, 1983, Ch. 3, p.52.

 

The Leftists’ Defense of the Vice of Gluttony

Catholic Candle note: Catholic Candle published a series of articles on gluttony as a vice and as an obstacle to spiritual progress and to salvation.  You can find these articles here:

  https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/what-is-gluttony

  https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/we-remain-at-the-beginning-of-the-spiritual-life-until-we-conquer-gluttony

  https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/gluttony-is-a-most-disgraceful-vice

 

  https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/the-wisdom-of-ecclesiasticus-against-gluttony

 

  https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/the-spiritual-benefits-of-not-consuming-sweets-and-junkfood-when-you-are-alone

The article below has a different focus.  It shows gluttony as an example of the leftists defending and justifying vice in order to weaken the moral fabric of our country and to promote their racist narrative: i.e., that everything is racist and that a negative view of obesity “victimizes” blacks, especially black women.

As the northern hemisphere begins a new academic year, we reflect on the Truth – which is the goal of real education and which is the perfection of our intellects.

It is a tremendous blessing to have the true Catholic Faith and the true philosophy.  We should value those blessings “more than kingdoms”!  When we discover some truth which is new to us, we should marvel at it and consider that the particular truth (whichever one it is at the time) is really beyond all price – that any sacrifice is worth the cost, in exchange for understanding that truth.

That is how the truth is – engrossing, perfecting, and worth any effort and sacrifice.  But the truth does come with a cost (a price).  For example, when someone understands that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, then he can no longer be religiously indifferent.  He sees the importance of trying to bring people into the Church because he wants their happiness, even if the path that leads to their eternal happiness passes through the “place” where they are offended by the truth – and don’t want to hear that they are now in a false religion and must become a Catholic.

In other words, the blessing of having the truth comes at the price of needing to act upon that truth.  We can no longer be “stupid” (or silent) like we were before we came to know that particular truth.

So, again, although the truth is an incomparable blessing, the price we must pay is to be obliged to act according to this truth that we now know.

One of countless examples of this is the understanding of virtue, as set forth in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics.  We see that we can no longer follow our passions.  We must follow our reason and act according to reason.  We see that virtue lies in the reasonable middle (i.e., “virtue lies in the mean”) and that we must strive for that mean/middle.


The Explanation of Aristotle and of St. Thomas Aquinas

The great Philosopher, Aristotle, explains this truth as follows, with regard to the virtue of temperance:

To eat or drink whatever offers itself till one has overindulged, is to exceed the natural amount, since natural appetite is the replenishment of one’s deficiency.  Hence these people are called belly-gods, this implying that they fill their belly beyond what is right.  It is people of entirely slavish character that become like this.  … 

[E]xcess, with regard to pleasures, is self-indulgence and is culpable.  …  [T]he self-indulgent man is so called because he is pained more than he ought at not getting pleasant things (even his pain being caused by pleasure), and the temperate man is so called because he is not pained at the absence of what is pleasant and at his abstinence from it.

The self-indulgent man, then, craves for all pleasant things or those that are most pleasant, and is led by his appetite to choose these at the cost of everything else.  Hence, he is pained both when he fails to get them and when he is merely craving for them (for appetite involves pain).[1]

So, we see that being fat, especially being acutely fat (obese) shows an excess that is contrary to virtue and reason.  The harm to the body is not as great as the harm to the soul.  That is, the moral harm involved – including, by not limited to, the weakening of the will – is the greatest harm that the person suffers because moral goods are more important, higher, and more valuable than any goods of the body.

Of course, obesity causes many other harms, e.g., early death, diabetes, heart problems, hip and knee problems, greater vulnerability to respiratory and other diseases, etc.

When people are obese and gluttonous, they are (or should be) ashamed of themselves, because they are manifestly not living according to virtue and reason.  They are manifestly slaves of their passions, not controlling themselves.  Their vice is obvious and the harm they do to their bodies is predictable.  The harm they do to their souls is even more predictable, but is less obvious to many of them.

Sins of gluttony (and other sins against the virtue of temperance) are most shameful because they are most opposed to the glory of man’s human nature, viz., man’s intellect.  This is for two reasons:

 

1.    Those sins concern bodily pleasures.  These pleasures are furthest removed from our intellectual nature and are pleasures we have in common with brute beasts.[2]

 

2.    More than other sins, those sins dull the intellect, which is the glory of our human nature.[3]

 

The shamefulness of gluttony (and other sins against the virtue of temperance) is something that is known even without the gift of the Catholic Faith.  Aristotle, explains the shamefulness of gluttony (and other sins against the virtue of temperance) in these words:

 

Temperance and self-indulgence, however, are concerned with the kind of pleasures that the other animals share in, which therefore appear slavish and brutish; these are touch and taste.

 

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book III, ch.10.

 

St. Thomas confirms these words of Aristotle and quotes Aristotle summarizing this truth, that “intemperance is justly more deserving of reproach than other vices.”[4]

 

Everybody knows that obesity is caused by intemperance and is shameful.  Everyone knows that if a person eats far more than he needs – especially of high-calorie foods – he will become fat.


The Leftists are no friends of Aristotle or St. Thomas!

But the leftists hate the idea of man living according to reason.  They hate human nature and also the fact that gluttony and obesity are shameful. 

The leftists promote many varieties of the vices of intemperance and encourage nearly every type of sin.  The leftists promote those perversions which exploit children, but do not promote natural marital relations under the Natural Law, which produce children.  The leftists promote not only impurity but also gluttony because these vices weaken our country’s moral fabric and aid the leftists in subverting us.

The leftists not only call vice a “right” but also condemn anyone that considers vices such as impurity and gluttony in a negative light.  Concerning obesity, they refer to any negative, correct, and reasonable expressions concerning obesity as “body shaming”. 

Thus, e.g., the (leftist) American Psychiatric Association has labeled binge-eating as a  “psychiatric disorder”.[5]  The leftists say “it is not people’s fault that they are obese”.  The reason why people are binge-eaters (they say) is not because those people don’t tell their passions “No”.  O certainly not!  That is not why they are obese!  Instead, people are obese because they are “sick”!  This means that it is not their fault (since we do not blame people because they are sick)!

So, we see how this goes!  The leftists tell people:

Go ahead and indulge in sin.  The bad consequences are not your fault!  You are a victim of a “disease”!

So, we see that the leftists declare that a person is (supposedly) free to choose his own gender but he is not free to lose weight and cease to be obese (since the leftists claim that it is a disease).  According to the leftists, a man can choose to become a woman, but cannot choose to become thin.  When a person eats so much that it makes him fat, he has become “sick” and this (supposedly) is out of his control.  How upside-down society is and how unmoored it is from reality!

The leftists don’t want virtue among the people.  Further, they strive to set one group of the people against another.  They declare that it is unfair and racist for society to recommend to black people – especially black women – to lose weight when those women are obese.  See, e.g., the article: The Racist Roots of Fighting Obesity.[6]

The leftists declare that obese black women’s increased likelihood of dying has nothing to do with being obese but rather is caused by the “social stress” of suffering racism.  Immediately below, is one way that the leftists phrase this lie to excuse gluttony:

A 2015 study in Psychological Science, among the many studies supporting this argument, found that people who reported experiencing weight discrimination had a 60 percent increased risk of dying, independent of BMI [body mass index] (and therefore regardless of body size). The underlying mechanisms explaining this relationship may reflect the direct and indirect effects of chronic social stress.[7]

So, these leftists are declaring that people who are obese enough to “experience weight discrimination” don’t die early because they are obese.  They die early because they are “victims” of the social stress of “discrimination”.  In other words, the problem is not their own intemperance and their failure to say “no” to their passions.  The problem is that other people do not accept obesity as perfectly fine and that those other people think there is something negative about vice.

So, according to the leftists, the condition of our bodies (obesity) has nothing to do with dying early.  The leftists claim that the problem is racism.  Similarly, (according to the leftists) racism is the cause and root of every other societal problem.  In other words, according to them, racism, not obesity, is lethal.

Another way that the leftists phrase this lie is that:

the predominant reason Black women get sick is not because they eat the wrong things but because their lives are often stressful and their neighborhoods are often polluted.[8]

Perhaps the leftists might agree that white people become obese when those white people eat to excess.  But according to the leftists, black women can gorge on far too much food and can binge on high fat, high sugar foods and they would not get fat like white people, if only their neighborhoods were not polluted.  Also, it would apparently follow from the leftists’ claims that black women could stop eating entirely and would never lose weight as long as they continued to have stress and lived in polluted neighborhoods.  Leftists, like Satan himself, hate man’s reason[9] and so the leftists do not tend to use reason in their arguments.  They use emotion instead.[10]

The leftists do not like people being told the truth.  Here is an example from National Public Radio (“NPR”) concerning obesity:

The main advice that people are given when they are so-called obese [sic] is to lose weight, and there are so many problems with this ….  And then in addition to that, there are the psychological effects of telling people that their bodies are wrong .[11]

In this NPR quote, notice the leftists refer to “so-called obesity” because they do not want to call obesity by its name.  Further, notice that they do not want people who eat to excess to be told they should cut back, be reasonable, and not overeat.  Then at the end of this quote, the leftists object because people are told that truth, viz., that their bodies should not be that way.


Conclusion

Our fight for Christ the King must also be a fight against His enemies, both Satan and his minions, the leftists.

It is a fight for virtue and against vice.

It is a fight for the Truth and against leftist lies!

Let us join the fight!



[1]           Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle, Book III, ch.11 (emphasis added).  As we might expect, St. Thomas Aquinas explains the same thing in his commentary on this passage of Aristotle.


[2]           Here is how St. Thomas Aquinas explains this truth:

 

Intemperance [including gluttony] is most disgraceful … because it is most repugnant to human excellence, since it is about pleasures common to us and the lower animals, as stated above (Summa, IIa IIae, Q.141, a.3).  Wherefore it is written (Psalm 48:21): “Man, when he was in honor, did not understand: he hath been compared to senseless beasts, and made like to them.”

 

Summa, IIa IIae, Q142, a.4.

 

[3]           Here is how St. Thomas explains this truth:

 

Intemperance [including gluttony] is most disgraceful … because it is most repugnant to man’s glory … inasmuch as the pleasures which are the matter of intemperance dim the light of reason from which all the glory and beauty of virtue arises: wherefore these pleasures are described as being most slavish.

 

Summa, IIa IIae, Q142, a.4.

 

[4]           Summa, IIa IIae, Q142, a.4, sed contra, quoting Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book III, ch.10.

 

[6]           The Racist Roots of Fighting Obesity: Prescribing weight loss to Black women ignores barriers to their health, found here: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-racist-roots-of-fighting-obesity2/


[7]           The Racist Roots of Fighting Obesity: Prescribing weight loss to Black women ignores barriers to their health, found here: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-racist-roots-of-fighting-obesity2/ (emphasis and bracketed words added).

[8]           The Racist Roots of Fighting Obesity: Prescribing weight loss to Black women ignores barriers to their health, found here: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-racist-roots-of-fighting-obesity2/


[9]           Read the first part of the series of articles showing that Satan, the Marxists and the feminists have the same program for corrupting the world.  Part 1 can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2022/02/24/the-feminist-program-is-the-same-as-that-of-satan-and-marx/


[10]         Read the first part of the series of articles showing that Satan, the Marxists, and the feminists have the same program for corrupting the world.  Part 1 can be found here: https://catholiccandle.org/2022/02/24/the-feminist-program-is-the-same-as-that-of-satan-and-marx/.

Fighting the Standard of Satan

When we enlist in our Lord’s army and fight under His Standard, we belong entirely to Him.  We want to avoid all the snares of the devil—the world, and the flesh.

In this present article we want to warn our readers about the many tricks of the devil in our times.  We must be aware of the evils we face day-to-day.  On one hand we develop a thick skin to withstand the world, but on the other hand, we do not want to become desensitized to these evils.

·         We must do our best to keep away from the world’s influences – TV, Internet, smart phones, and the media’s lies.

 

·         We must not immerse ourselves in the things of the world.  While we pity those with body piercings, tattoos[1], and odd-colored hair, we should do our best to not get callous to these pagan, worldly disorders.

 

·         We must become educated about the tactics of the leftists and their agenda[2]

 

·         We must loathe the wretched and satanic modern “music”, e.g., Heavy-metal Rock, Rap, and many other varieties of trash “music”.

 

·         We must not be naïve about the occult agenda which is promoting Harry Potter books and movies and similar entertainment.

 

·         We must not condone movies and the like.  Remember, the one-worlders have used the entertainment industry since its conception as a means to push their agenda.  Hollywood has never been on the side of Christ the King.

 

·         There is currently a blatant push to accept the public worship of Satan.

 

·         There is likewise a push for immorality in the most grotesque forms, including unnatural vice.

 

·         There is a major push to kill life – the unborn, the newly born, the sick, the elderly, etc.

 

·         There is a major push to worship the planet, e.g., save Mother Earth from “you-name-it, they’ll claim it”: global warming[3], global cooling[4], etc.

 

·         There is constant pressure to refrain from speaking the truth for fear of not fitting in with the globalists’ agenda.

In short, all of the things which foster man’s efforts to serve God well and save his soul are being attacked and undermined in our current times. 

Let us fight back against these attacks of the enemy by:

Ø  Getting informed and staying informed;

 

Ø  Uniting ourselves to the will of God;

Ø  Praying for the triumph of the Immaculate Heart;

Ø  Being resigned to the Providential Will of God;

Ø  Praying with gratitude to God for enlightening us about the evils and dangers that surround us;

 

Ø  Praying for fortitude to withstand the attacks of the enemy and to be willing to die for the sake of truth if God should so will this for us;

Ø  Offering up sacrifices and penance to make reparation for all the evils of our times;

Ø  Praying for the conversion and the fortitude of the Pope, the hierarchy, and the world; and

Ø  Praying for each other, dear fellow-readers of the Catholic Candle.

The Evil & Dangers of Yoga

Philosophy Notes

Catholic Candle note:  In order to warn our readers about the prevalent errors of our times, we have included this article to contrast true meditation with eastern false meditation.

Just as the Mystics of the Catholic Church teach us about the three stages of the spiritual life, namely, the purgative, the illuminative, and the unitive; the devil tries to mock these stages.  So he uses false religions to mimic the mystical life and perfection of the soul.

In our modern times the devil uses the same old tricks and doesn’t have to come up with new ones.  Just as in the Old Testament there were many nations with false gods and false religious practices, so even now, there is still the worship of false gods and the use of religious practices.

One false religious practice prevalent today is Yoga.  In order to understand the evil and dangers of the practice of Yoga, it is crucial to understand some of its history.

Actually Yoga is a prayer method of meditation from Hinduism or Brahminism.  It is interesting to note that Buddhism, which also uses a method of meditation, also comes from Brahminism.[1]

The Catholic Encyclopedia explains how Brahminism is also called Vedism and dates back to 1500-400 B.C. The Vedas (veda means wisdom) are four primitive books: the Riga-Veda, the Sama-Veda, the Yajur-Veda, and the Atharva-Veda.  These books contain ancient hymns to many false gods, ritualistic prayers, exorcisms, and magical incantations largely inherited from primitive Aryan days.[2]

Next the Encyclopedia tells of the Brahmanas (dating back to 1000-600 B.C.) which are a series of explanations of the contents of the Vedas. These Brahmanas were composed for the priests, the Brahmins.  In addition, there were the Upanishads, a group of treatises, (dating back to 800-400 B.C.) which gave the pantheistic speculations on the nature of deity and the end of man.   Lastly, there were books called Sutras, to accompany the Vedas, to explain the proper observance of the rites and customs. These works and two epics (the “Ramayana”, written in 400-300 B.C. and “Mahabharata”, written about 500-400 B.C.), make up the most important Brahmin literature.

In the early period of Veda, the religion was based on many deities great and small which were the personified forces of nature.  The priests were called Brahmins. There were not temples at this time and the heads of the households would perform their oblations at their homes.  The priests would assist in the more complex offerings.[3]  These circumstances remind one of the Mosaic Law, and knowing that this religion is a false one, it is easy to see how the devil inspired this cheap mimicry of the Old Testament true religion.

Among the other pagan practices, the Hindus worshipped their dead relatives with the thinking that even though the relatives were in heaven, their happiness was determined by the devotion of those left behind.  In addition to this, they worshipped nature.  For example, the cow was reverenced, as well as trees and serpents.[4]

In general, Brahminism was constantly evolving which is another key sign that it is a religion inspired by the devil.  In the period in which the Sutras and Upanishads were formed, a two-fold change came about.  The Catholic Encyclopedia states,

On its practical side there was an exuberant growth of religious rites and of social restrictions and duties, while on the theoretical side Vedic belief in the efficacy of personal deities was subordinated to a pantheistic scheme of salvation.  Thus the earlier religion developed on the one hand into popular, exoteric Brahminism, and on the other hand into priestly, esoteric Brahminism.  The former is reflected in the Brahmanas and Sutras; the latter in the Upanishads.[5]

The Brahmins imposed a strict code for the people to follow, with many rites for purifying, with complicated liturgies and practices for both the priest and the laity.  Some of these were clearly diabolical, for example, smearing themselves with cow-dung, and strange things like the sipping of water and the suppressing of breaths.

The priests were very exacting and taught that punishments would be severe if the people didn’t do the most rigorous penances.  The priests taught a doctrine of karma (action) which was connected with the idea of rebirth (reincarnation).  The lasting bliss of heaven was held out to the just; the wicked were punished with different fates.  There might be long periods in hell or there might be a more or less extensive series of rebirths in the forms of plants, animals, and men.  A man may have to pass by slow transition through the rest of the ascending scale till his rebirth as a man of honorable estate was attained.[6]

This doctrine of rebirth gave rise to absurdities like, for instance, not being allowed to kill insects.  Water had to be strained so that minute life wouldn’t be destroyed.  Carpentry, basket-making, and leather-working could not be done because it would mean killing of a plant or animal.  Ironically, on the other hand, they had strict rules for being respectful to parents and superiors, being honest, being chaste (even though allowing polygamy), being temperate, and giving alms. They had a system of castes— warriors, priests, farmers, and servants.  Only the two upper castes (classes) were allowed to learn from the ‘sacred’ Vedas books.

The priests, the Brahmins, when their sons were grown up, abandoned their homes and spent the rest of their lives in retirement apart from the villages.  These were like begging monks and ate only the simplest of foods. They subjected themselves to extraordinary fasts and mortifications.[7] They were known as Sannyasis or Yogis and their penitential life was not to make up for past sins, but as a means of acquiring abundant religious merits and superhuman powers.

Coupled with these mortifications, was the practice of Yoga.  The Catholic Encyclopedia describes this practice as follows:

They would sit motionless with legs crossed and, fixing their gaze intently on an object before them, would concentrate their thought on some abstract subject till thy lapsed into a trance.  In this state they fancied they were united with the deity, and the fruit of these contemplations was the pantheistic view of religion which found expression in the Upanishads, and left a permanent impress on the Brahmin mind.[8]

Since there was a popular trend among the people to monotheism in their Vedic hymns, the Brahmins decided to make another adaptation to the religion.  The Brahmins invented Prajapati (later they changed his name to Brahmā), who was supposed to be a personal god who was the lord of creatures, omnipotent, supreme, and masculine.  He was considered to be the creator of all things.  For this reason the other gods of their pantheon were worshipped as manifestations of Brahmā. Because their religion held that it was impossible to create something out of nothing, all things visible and invisible were considered as emanations from Brahmā.  They also believed that every form of conscious individuality, whether human or divine, implies a union of spirit and matter.  Yet the Brahmins who studied the Upanishads, taught that the ultimate source of all things was not the personal deity, Brahmā, but was the formless, impersonal, characterless, unconscious, great, all-pervading spirit known as Brahmă.  Thus, they believed that the heavens, and the earth, men and gods, even the personal deity Brahmā, were destined in time to lose their individuality and be absorbed into the great all-pervading spirit.  The conclusion of this thinking is that the manifold external world had no real existence and that only Brahmă existed.[9]

This impersonal pantheism of the Brahmin ascetics led to a new conception of the end of man and of the way of salvation. The old way they had taught was to escape rebirths and to store up merits of good deeds so that they could earn an eternal bliss of which they could really be conscious.  But now, they taught that the only way to escape from constant ‘rebirths’ was through the saving recognition of one’s identity with Brahmă.  As soon as one could say with conviction, “I am Brahmă,” then the bonds that tied him to the illusion of personal immortality, and consequently to rebirth, were broken.  The Catholic Encyclopedia phrases it as follows:

Thus, cultivating, by a mortified life, freedom from all desires, man spent his years in peaceful contemplation till death put an end to the seeming duality and he was absorbed in Brahmă like a raindrop in the ocean.

The encyclopedia explains (in 1913) that this is still the teaching of the Brahmins up until the then present day.

However, human nature being what it is, it is understandable that the impersonal Brahmă was not a favorite with the majority of the people in India. This was the case not only because the impersonal Brahmă was incapable of hearing the prayers of the people, but because the people did not like the fact that their final end was one of losing any conscious existence.  The Brahmins still were concerned chiefly with meditating on their identity with Brahmă, and practicing mortification to secure their freedom from all desires. Yet, the common people were looking for a way to secure for themselves eternal conscious bliss. The result was the popular development of special cults to two of the old gods; each was now raised to the position of supreme deity, and credited with the power to secure a lasting life of happiness in heaven.

These two cults seem to have arisen in the fifth or fourth century B.C., and these cults were rival cults.  One cult was of the ancient storm-god, Rudra, who was destructive in tempest and lightning, and renewing life in the showers of rain. This god, better known under the name of Śiva, meaning ‘the blessed’, is popular because he was associated as the destroyer, the reproducer, and was the archetype of the lonely ascetic.

The other cult was of the god Vishnu, who was originally one of the forms of the sun-god.  He was seen as a mild, beneficent deity whose genial rays brought gladness and growth to living creatures.

Then the pantheism in the mind of a Hindu saw all things as emanations of the supreme deity Śiva or Vishnu.  Each cult worshipped one of these two and each of these gods was thought to have a special heaven, where his devotees would find after death an unending life of conscious happiness.[10]

Because the Brahmins saw that these two cults were becoming more and more popular and that their teachings about Brahmā were falling out of favor with the people, they once again saw that it was expedient to invent some concept to help the people keep an allegiance to Brahmā.  They now taught that the supreme god Brahmā was associated with Vishnu and Śiva as a triad of equal and more or less interchangeable deities. Brahmā held the office of creator, or rather evolver. Vishnu was the preserver, and Śiva was the dissolver. This so-called trinity was called Trimurti (meaning tri-form).

More astonishing still was that the common people created the belief that Śiva had two sons, named Ganesa (who was the lord of troops and of mischievous imps) and Scanda (the god of battle).

In addition to this, the common people took two of the legendary heroes of the remote past, Rama and Krishna, and raised them to the rank of gods. The people started to refer to them as incarnations of Vishnu.  Each incarnation was regarded as a sort of savior.  In fact, these two incarnate saviors became so popular that the people lost sight of Vishnu.  We Catholics can see a plain parallel to the concept of Our Lord being Our Savior and it doesn’t surprise us that the devil would mock Christ in this false religion.  The Vishnaites became divided into two rival schisms — those who worshipped Rama, the Ramaites, and those who worshipped Krishna, the Krishnaites.  There were two epic stories written about each of them.  The one about Krishna was written in the seventh century A.D.  It is not surprising that the epic about Krishna has many similarities with the life of Christ, which certainly shows that they copied parts of the life of Our Lord.

The Catholic Encyclopedia explains how the successive wave of foreign conquerors of India caused a steady weakening of the Brahmin influence.  As a consequence of these foreigners in India, the population became more heterogeneous.  Both Śivaism and Vishnuism departed more and more from traditional Brahminism.  Each cult had a decided dissenting attitude toward the older religion and toward each other.  This change brought about the people accepting immoral rites and base superstitions.  Although asceticism was pushed to a fanatical extreme, the religion’s false version of charity was used as an excuse for gross impurity.[11]  

The caste-distinctions were now broken down and the people asserted that men and women were equal, at least in public worship. The Brahmin rites were replaced, for the most part, with ones peculiar to the cults of Śiva and Vishnu and the two ‘incarnations’ of Vishnu.  These rites were held to be all-sufficient for salvation.  Hence, temples, idols, and impure symbols of these gods arose up everywhere.  Each rival cult held their cult to be supreme and tried to get others to submit to their cult while at the same time holding the other’s cult in contempt.   

The Catholic Encyclopedia further explains these sectarian degradations were caused by the latest innovation of worshipping the female side of these deities. The people insisted in having each of their gods have a wife.

Today the two main cults still exist, but have split into many schismatic divisions that are tolerant of each other.  Both lay an emphasis on frequently reciting the names of their gods.  Each person wears a string of beads around his neck to help him recite the names often.  (This is the devil’s insult of the rosary.)  Each person, when young, is initiated into one of these cults and given a ‘sacred’ motto called a mantra.  The daily recital of the mantra was required to serve as a profession of faith.  Another customary practice was to brand the body of the worshipper with the symbols of the sect.

One final point of importance regarding the particulars of this false religion is how the odd practices of this religion are a further proof of the devil’s influence to mock truth and to degrade man into not using reason.  This is, namely, the ridiculousness of their highest form of worship.  For the Śivaites, this rite would involve the Śivaite carrying a white pebble shaped into an impure symbol and he would mutter his mantra while sprinkling it with water and then applying cooling bilva leaves to it.

The Vishnuite rite was less degrading but more childish. This involved worshipping a statue of Vishnu, Rama, or Krishna.  The image is awakened daily, undressed, bathed, decked with rich robes, decorated with jewelry and a crown, fed with choice foods, honored with flowers, lights, and incense, and then entertained with vocal and instrumental music and dancing girls.

But why study the particulars of Hinduism?  Precisely to see how perverse and ridiculous this religion is, that is, how the devil inspires this sort of thing.  Furthermore, to be able to understand why the traditional Church’s condemnation of their false meditation (Yoga) should be remembered in our times of Apostasy when so many ignorant or naïve people get involved with Yoga.  But before addressing the modern trend to practice Yoga, let us first look at two associated errors.

The Church condemns Quietism and Theosophy.

There are two errors which are connected with Brahminism and have been condemned by the Church, namely quietism and theosophy.

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia quietism is

The doctrine which declares that man’s highest perfection consists in a sort of psychical self-annihilation and a consequent absorption of the soul into the Divine Essence even during the present life.[12]

Quietism is not the same thing as (and should not be confused with) the prayer of quietude or the prayer of quiet.  The Catholic Encyclopedia makes the following distinction about “quietude”:

In the state of “quietude” the mind is wholly inactive; it no longer thinks or wills on its own account, but remains passive while God acts within it. Quietism is thus generally speaking a sort of false or exaggerated mysticism, which under the guise of the loftiest spirituality contains erroneous notions when, if consistently followed, would prove fatal to morality.[13]

Whereas the prayer of quiet is considered in Catholic mystical theology as one of the degrees of contemplation, quietism is not Catholic at all and is condemned as heretical.  In fact, in its essential features, Quietism is a characteristic of the religions of India — Brahminism and its derivative, Buddhism.  Brahminism aims at a sort of self-annihilation, and Buddhism aims at attaining a state of indifference in which the soul enjoys an imperturbable tranquility.  Other forms of quietism sprang up in history, e.g., in Spain a man named Michael de Molinos developed a strict quietism.  (He was condemned by Pope Innocent XI in 1687.)[14]

Man naturally desires to be united to God and to see the Beatific Vision.  God made us with this desire.  However, the heresy of quietism involves this union as a sort of forcing ourselves on God[15] and is a denial that God chooses His Elect.  As St. Thomas Aquinas teaches, first God chooses a soul, then He loves that soul, and then He makes that soul worthy of His Love.  Yet, the different forms of quietism perverted this order in some way, e.g., either by man somehow becoming absorbed in an impersonal “God”, or that man had as his supreme aim in life on earth, the contemplation of some kind of vague uncreated “light” whereby he was intimately united with “God”.  The means for attaining to such contemplation was prayer, complete repose of body and will, and a process of auto-suggestion.[16]

The Church condemned the errors that man in the present life can attain such a degree of perfection as to become utterly impeccable; that the “perfect” have not need to fast or pray, but can freely grant the body whatsoever it craves; that they are not subject to any human authority or bound by the precepts of the Church.  In other words, that a man can become so perfect in this life that he no longer has a need of external worship, of sacraments, or of prayer; they owe no obedience to any law, since their will is identical with God’s will; and they may indulge their carnal desires to any extent without staining the soul.[17]

The various forms of quietism insist that passivity, more or less, is the essential condition of perfection; and all of them have been condemned by the Church.  This also refutes the Protestant thinking of salvation by faith alone.  We know, as St. James tells us in his epistle, “Faith without works is dead.”  We also know, as St. Paul teaches us, “to work out our salvation in fear and trembling.” Therefore, we must be active in the work of our salvation and not have the attitude that no cooperation is expected from us.

Whereas, the error of quietism had to do with becoming one with God[18], not really out of love for God and with a true amendment of life.  An additional error of Theosophy shows confusion about what man can know about God and the manner in which he learns more about God.

The Catholic Encyclopedia clarifies this by the following:

Theosophy, knowledge of things Divine, is a term used in general to designate the knowledge of God supposed to be obtained by the direct intuition of the Divine essence.  In method it differs from theology, which is the knowledge of God obtained by revelation, and from philosophy, which is the knowledge of Divine things acquired by human reasoning.

It is often incorrectly confounded with mysticism, for the latter is properly the thirst for the Divine, the aspiration for the invisible, and hence a natural manifestation of the religious sentiment.

By intuition or illumination the initiated Theosophists are considered to be in harmony with the central principle of the universe. This knowledge of the secret forces of nature, of the true relation between the world and man, frees them from the ordinary limitations of human life, and gives them a peculiar power over the hidden forces of the macrocosm.[19]

There is a direct connection of this error with Hinduism of India as the birthplace of all theosophic speculation.  As covered above, the Hindu religion tries to get the soul to a state where it reunites with a universal soul.   Even though the Hindus teach reincarnation or rebirths, the end result is the final absorption into the universal spirit, thus the individual soul will not exist anymore.

The Catholic Encyclopedia explains this idea in a few more details about Yoga as follows:

Yoga, i.e. “one who fits himself, or exercises”, refers to exercises practiced to free the soul from the body, which to it is like a string to a bird.  Some of these exercises were: to rid one’s self of moral faults; to sit in certain painful postures, check the breath, and reduce thought to minimum by staring at the tip of the nose; to place the soul in a particular part of the body; to starve and learn to subsist on air, or even without it; to concentrate thought by meditation, i.e. to think about nothing, Thyana, the highest state of which is the cataleptic[20] trance samadyi, in which the mind is suppressed but the soul is in full activity.  In this state the person is mahatma, i.e. masterful and can enjoy a temporary release from the body which it leaves to go roaming about, performing wonderful feats on material nature and controlling other less powerful souls.  This latter was the secret of the Yoga’s real power and was supposed to be done by a transfer of soul.  When the soul re-enters the body, the Yoga wakes and is like other people.  By repeated exercises the soul can become so strong that it secures perpetual release from the body, thus, according to the older Yoga teaching, it flies to heaven where it enjoys great happiness, riding in a celestial car attended by lovely women and music; but with the latter Yogas, on breaking all bodily bonds it formed immediate absorption into the Supreme Soul.

Thus it is very clear to see just how diabolical this practice is.  One can easily see how the devil could take possession of the soul practicing such dangerous meditation. 

The Catholic Encyclopedia explains that theosophic teaching was also associated with the neo-Platonists.  In addition to this, it was associated with the Gnostic systems and that the Jewish Kabbala had a theosophy mixture of magic and occultism. This occurred especially during the Renaissance. 

In 1875, Madame Blavatsky started the foundation of the Theosophical Society in New York City.  In 1895 her frauds were exposed by St. John’s College, in Cambridge.  Despite this, the false teachings of Theosophy continued and were propagated by Blavatsky’s disciples.

The Catholic Encyclopedia explains and warns that Theosophy is not only a false religion, but also a philosophy of life.  Its basic teaching is the universal brotherhood of humanity.  Hence, it preaches toleration to all persons and to all varieties of belief.  They believe that the universal brotherhood rests on the “solidarity” of all living, of all that is, in the one life and one consciousness. For them all forces are external and there is no supernatural, except the superhuman and supersensuous, i.e. powers greater than those normally exercised by man, which, however, can be developed.  Because for them solidarity means the common life pervading all things and they use this as a basis for morality, hence a wrong done to one is done to all.[21]

We should shun Yoga, Quietism & Theosophy.

In our times it is easy to see the dangers of these false beliefs. Yoga is pushed as simply an innocuous method to relieve stress or as a relaxation technique. Unfortunately, even the Conciliar Church promotes it and so-called Catholic hospitals often offer Yoga classes.  All you need to know about the goals (and who controls) the anti-Catholic Conciliar Church is found in the fact that the Conciliar Church promotes Yoga.

Yet, one can see by the descriptions given above, that emptying oneself and letting down the guard over his mind is like giving Satan an invitation to enter.  Really, just knowing that this kind of meditation was condemned by the Church and that it is not Catholic, should be enough for sincere Catholics to avoid Yoga and shun it.  Likewise, one should warn his friends and associates about the moral dangers of practicing Yoga.

We saw above how Hinduism is the parent of quietism and that quietism has the same basic beliefs as modern day Hinduism, namely, reincarnation, trying to gain spiritual powers to control things outside oneself, and the non-immortality of the soul by the soul being absorbed into some great spirit.  Also, one can see the influence of theosophy in our modern politics, media, and academia.  With the great push for a one-world Marxist government, the worship of ecology, and the ‘political correctness’ of not condemning blatant immorality, is like the ‘solidarity’ the theosophists revere.  Plainly we can see that the dark forces of the demons are striving more than ever to influence humans away from trying to save their souls.  Let us be informed Catholics so we can recognize the perils around us and take appropriate action to avoid the dangers of false religions and warn our families, friends, and acquaintances about Yoga and these other evil practices.



[1]           This information is taken from the Catholic Encyclopedia, 1913 edition under Brahminism.  Also, the article about Buddhism in Vol. III explains how Buddha (the historical details of his life are sketchy) did not like the idea of meditating to become one with a universal spirit and thus lose one’s individual soul and have no identity anymore. Consequently, he made up a state of soul called Nirvana.  He taught that one, by getting rid of all desire, all ill-will, and delusion, could obtain an eternal rest, which he called Nirvana. The encyclopedia explained that it is not clear whether Nirvana meant annihilation or not, as the historical records are unclear on this point. It should be noted that Buddhism is a demonic mockery of Catholic monastic life.

 

[2]           Ibid.

[3]           The Catholic Encyclopedia article about Brahminism, 1913 edition, vol. II.

 

[4]           Ibid.

 

[5]           Ibid.

[6]           Ibid.


[7]           This is an interesting way for the devil to mock Catholic mendicant monks.


[8]           Ibid.

[9]           This section is a summary of the longer explanation given in the article on Brahminism in Vol. II.  Note: The letters ă and ā are bolded to make the only difference in the names noticeable.

[10]         Summarized from the Catholic Encyclopedia’s article on Brahminism. It is interesting to note that because God wrote into the heart of man a natural tendency to believe the reality that God gives eternal rewards/punishments based on man’s actions in his life, even these pagans with the false religion of Hinduism felt the need to have this truth be a public teaching in their religion.

[11]         Summary of information in the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia article on Brahminism.

[12]         See the Catholic Encyclopedia 1913 edition article about Quietism in Vol. XII.

 

[13]         Ibid.

 

[14]         Ibid.

 

[15]         It must also be noted at this point that the Hindu concept of God is not anything like the Catholic concept.

 

[16]         This information is a summary of the Catholic Encyclopedia 1913 edition, Vol. XII, the article on Quietism.

 

[17]         Ibid.  This way of thinking was condemned by the Council of Vienne in 1311-12.

 

[18]         It must be noted here too that their concept of God is not the same as the Catholic concept.

[19]         Taken from the Catholic Encyclopedia 1913 edition, Vol. XIV; the article on Theosophy.

 

[20]         [cataleptic = a condition of peculiar muscular rigidity in which the body and limbs keep any position in which they are placed.]

[21]         Summarized based on the Catholic Encyclopedia 1913 edition article on Theosophy in vol. XIV.

There is no limiting for the evil “right to choose”

 

If a mother’s (so-called) “right to choose” means she can choose to kill her baby before he is born, why can’t she choose to kill her baby after he’s born?  How about when her baby is 3 years old?  Or 8?  Where’s the cut-off?  …  Or is there one?

 

Pope Francis stands condemned by Catholic Tradition for promoting unnatural impurity


Q:        What should I say when people tell me that the Catholic Church now accepts unnatural “lifestyles” because the pope does not condemn them and he says “Who am I to judge?”

A:      Although Pope Francis is our pope, he is a bad pope.  He is our father, but is a bad father.  He is reconciling himself with modern licentious, unnatural, and debauched views.  It is true that he scandalized the world with his refusing to condemn “lifestyles” of unnatural impurity, saying: “who am I to judge?”.  But this is merely the tip of the iceberg.  He has a long history of supporting and fostering the unnatural lifestyle itself.  For example, he suggested that those engaging in the unnatural vice as a pair should be given legal status and rights: “‘What we have to create is a civil union law.  That way they are legally covered,’ Francis said in the documentary, ‘Francesco,”[1]   He has issued many other such scandalous statements.[2]

But Sacred Scripture condemns the unnatural vice in over twenty places.  Here are just a few:

·         “For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature.  And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error.”  Romans, 1:26-27.

·         “Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate … shall possess the kingdom of God.”   1 Corinthians, 6:9-10

·         Genesis narrates the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrha and the cities around these, and shows clearly that it was in punishment for the unnatural vice, which God says is “very grave”.  Genesis 18:20-21, 19:1-15.

Catholic catechisms take note of such exceptionally strong condemnations of certain sins in Scripture, including this one, and label these as the sins “crying to heaven for vengeance”.

Besides Sacred Scripture, however, countless writings from early Church Fathers, popes, saints, and Church Doctors are in unanimous agreement in condemning this vice.  The quotes would be too numerous to list, but they share the strength of quotes like these:

·         “No sin in the world grips the soul as the accursed sodomy; this sin has always been detested by all those who live according to God ….  Deviant passion is close to madness; this vice disturbs the intellect, destroys elevation and generosity of soul, brings the mind down from great thoughts to the lowliest ….  They become blind and, when their thoughts should soar to high and great things, they are broken down and reduced to vile and useless and putrid things, which could never make them happy ….  Just as people participate in the glory of God in different degrees, so also in hell some suffer more than others ….  for this is the greatest sin.  St. Bernardine of Siena, Sermon XXXIX in Prediche volgari, pp. 896-897, 915.

·         "If all the sins of the flesh are worthy of condemnation because by them man allows himself to be dominated by that which he has of the animal nature, much more deserving of condemnation are the sins against nature by which man degrades his own animal nature….”  St. Thomas Aquinas, Super Epistolam B. Pauli ad Romanos, Cap. 1, Lec. 8.

Pope Francis appears to think all the above “was then, but this is now”.  But truth does not change, and he is condemned by the infallible condemnation in Pope Pius IX’s Syllabus of Errors:

Condemned statement #80:

The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.

Pope Francis appears to consider the above-quoted condemnations to be changeable and “subject to progress”, but this is condemned by Pope Pius IX’s Syllabus of Errors:

Condemned statement #5:

Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to a continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the advancement of human reason.



[2]           For example:

·         Pope Francis told a man who openly lived an unnaturally impure “lifestyle” in Chile, “You know Juan Carlos, that does not matter.  God made you like this.  God loves you like this. The Pope loves you like this and you should love yourself and not worry about what people say.”    https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/21/europe/pope-francis-gay-comments-intl/index.html
Appallingly, in March 2021, Pope Francis appointed this man to a commission which is supposedly charged with protecting minors. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/247035/pope-francis-appoints-juan-carlos-cruz-to-pontifical-commission-for-protecting-minors

·         Through an interpreter, he told another man who openly lived an unnaturally impure “lifestyle”, “Giving more importance to the adjective rather than the noun, this is not good.  We are all human beings and have dignity.  It does not matter who you are or how you live your life, you do not lose your dignity.  There are people that prefer to select or discard people because of the adjective – these people don’t have a human heart.”  https://cruxnow.com/church-in-uk-and-ireland/2019/04/pope-francis-tells-gay-man-you-do-not-lose-your-dignity-on-bbc-show/   

 

The pope’s claim that one cannot lose his dignity no matter what a person does, is a conciliar error in direct opposition to Traditional Catholic teaching – which states that man retains his dignity only by obeying God’s laws and the natural law, but loses his dignity through sin. 

 

St. Thomas Aquinas lucidly explains how man loses his dignity through sin:

By sinning, man departs from the order of reason, and consequently falls away from the dignity of his manhood, insofar as he is naturally free, and exists for himself, and he falls into the slavish state of the beasts ….  Hence, although it is evil in itself to kill a man so long as he preserves his dignity, yet it may be good to kill a man who has sinned, even as it is to kill a beast.  For a bad man is worse than a beast, and is more harmful, as the Philosopher states (Polit. i, 1 and Ethic. vii, 6).

 

Summa, IIa IIae, Q.64, a.2, ad 3 (emphasis added).

 

For a further treatment of this Catholic principle, read the explanation in Lumen Gentium Annotated, by the editors of Quanta Cura Press, © 2013, p.73, footnote 48.  This book is available:

  for free at: https://catholiccandle.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Lumen-Gentium-Annotated.pdf


and

  sold at cost on Amazon.com at this link: https://www.amazon.com/Lumen-Gentium-Annotated-examination-revolution/dp/1492107476/ref=sr_1_1

Our Duty not to “Donate” or Accept Donated Vital Bodily Organs

Catholic Candle note: Recently, Catholic Candle examined the permission the Church traditionally gives to a person who is in danger of death, to confess to a priest whom an uncompromising Catholic could not otherwise support (or confess to) because that priest is a compromiser, an apostate, or someone whom it is otherwise impermissible to support.  Find the article here: https://catholiccandle.org/2020/01/01/using-a-compromised-priest-when-dying/

Catholic Candle also addressed how uncompromising laymen can bury their dead in these times of great apostasy when an uncompromising priest is not available.  Find the article here: https://catholiccandle.org/2020/04/02/a-traditional-catholic-funeral-and-burial-when-there-is-no-uncompromising-priest-available/

Between this last confession (discussed in the first of those articles) and the burial (discussed in the second article), is the crucial moment of death.  We gave recommendations how to assist at a person’s death, based on the experience of some of the Catholic Candle Team, who recently assisted at the deaths of two uncompromising Traditional Catholics.  Find the article here: https://catholiccandle.org/2020/06/01/how-to-assist-a-person-in-dying-a-holy-death/

Also, in our last days of life, we must continue to give sufficient care to sustain our life – even as it is waning – and must not yield to the culture of death, which promotes euthanasia.  Therefore, we examined the minimum care we are obliged to provide to sustain our life even when we are dying.  Find the article here: https://catholiccandle.org/2020/07/01/use-of-ordinary-care-even-as-we-are-dying/

Again, because we live in a culture of death, part of our using sufficient care to sustain our life – even as it is waning – we must never acquiesce in being murdered by having our vital organs removed to be “donated” to another person.  Further, we must never accept the “donation” of a vital organ from someone else, as we would then become complicit in his murder.  Below, we examine the evil of such murder by the “donation” of a vital organ.

We recommend that you save these articles for future reference and use.

 

 

What is death?

Death is the separation of body and soul.[1]  Death occurs at an instant.  In other words, death is not something that occurs gradually over a period of time, although the subsequent corruption of the body does occur gradually. 

A dying person is a person who is still alive.  A deeply comatose person is still alive; (a corpse cannot be comatose).

Although we know that death is the separation of body and soul, we usually do not know exactly when this separation (viz., death) occurs.  We usually can only know with certitude afterwards, that a person has already died.

 

Corruption of the body – gangrene contrasted to a person’s death

Our soul is what makes our body to be what it is, viz., a human body.  Without our soul, our body becomes merely a decaying lump of organic matter which is on its way to becoming dirt, dust or ashes.[2] 

It can happen that the soul ceases to be present in a bodily part of a person who is still alive.  In other words, that part of a person’s body is no longer vivified by his soul.  This can happen, e.g., in the limb of a diabetic person who is still very much alive.  When the soul ceases to vivify part of the body, that part of the body dies and rots.  This is called “gangrene”.[3] 

If some parts, e.g., the person’s feet, are dead and begin rotting (i.e., have gangrene), but other parts, e.g., his heart and other internal organs, remain uncorrupted, this lack of corruption is a sign that the person is not yet dead – because those internal organs do not yet exhibit the corruption which would tell us that his soul is no longer vivifying any parts of his body (i.e., preserving them from corruption). 

Just as gangrene shows a part of a body is no longer vivified by the soul, likewise general corruption throughout the whole body shows the entire body is no longer vivified by the soul.  This tells us that the person is certainly dead.[4]

Although the Catholic Church uses the safer and more reasonable standard requiring general corruption of the body as a condition for certainty that a person is really dead, people sometimes use the “cold, blue, and stiff” standard to determine death.

This “cold, blue, and stiff” standard for determining death could leave room for different interpretations in some circumstances, e.g., how cold is the body and for how long?  Where, and in how many places, is the body’s temperature measured?  Moreover, particular circumstances can add uncertainty of whether a person is really dead, e.g., when a cold, non-responsive swimmer is pulled out of cold water.

 

What are “vital organs”?

A “vital organ” is an organ (i.e., a part of the body) the loss of which results in death.  If a person consents to the removal of one of his vital organs while he is alive, he would be consenting to his own death.

Even if a person were unavoidably near to death, he still must not consent to having his life shortened by having a bodily organ removed which brings about his death.  This is like the fact that a person’s nearness to death does not permit him to jump off of a cliff or do anything else which would cause his death to come sooner.

Therefore, because a person must not consent to his own murder, a person cannot agree to “donate” one of his vital organs (such as his heart) until his body (including his heart) has begun corrupting (showing us that he has truly, already died).  Once he has truly died and his body has begun a general corruption, then his body can be donated to help others, e.g., in medical research.

 

The multi-billion-dollar industry of transplanting vital human organs

In 1967, a cardiac surgeon, Christiaan Bernard, performed the first human-to-human heart surgery.[5]  This landmark surgery opened up whole new possibilities for patients, but such organ transplant surgeries obviously require a supply of “donated” hearts and/or other vital organs.

Today, the transplantation of vital organs is a many-billion-dollar industry.[6]

 

The organ transplant industry gets vital organs by murdering living people who are labeled as dead.

Although the organ “donor” and his family cannot receive any payment, there are many billions of dollars made collectively, by many persons and organizations involved in this industry, e.g., the hospitals, the pharmaceutical companies, and the surgeons.[7]

The organ transplant industry’s problem is a shortage of high-quality human organs.[8]  If the “donor’s” organs are not cut out of his body until after he is really dead and has begun corrupting, then his organs are worthless for transplantation into another person.  Even under the alternate standard for determining death – the “cold, blue, and stiff” standard – all vital organs are useless for transplanting into another human.[9]

Thus, the organ transplant industry saw that it needed to remove the “donor’s” vital organs while he was still alive.  But the transplant industry needed to label him as dead and pretend he was dead so that surgeons would be legally permitted to extract the organs and also in order that the public would accept this practice.[10]

The result was a legal and medical fiction[11] beginning with a Harvard Medical School proposal in 1968.  Under this proposal a person who is in a so-called “irreversible coma” would be relabeled as “brain dead” and then the medical establishment would pretend this so-called “brain death” was the person’s real death.[12] 

Obviously, when a person is in a supposed “irreversible coma”, he is still alive.  No cadaver could ever be in an “irreversible coma”.

Those “brain dead” persons are often euphemistically called “beating heart cadavers”, tacitly showing that everyone knows those “brain dead” persons are really alive.[13] 

The authors of the New England Journal of Medicine article quoted and cited above, promotes organ “donations” from so-called “brain dead” persons.  The authors do not dispute that “brain death” is not real death.  However, they advocate that the medical profession should stop pretending that the “brain dead” person who is “donating” his organs is not being killed by having his vital organs “harvested”.[14]

 

The evidence shows conclusively that “brain death” is not real death

Whereas a body’s general corruption tells us that the person has died, likewise while a body’s vital functions continue, they tell us that the person is alive.  This is true even if the person receives assistance from medical machines, such as a respirator.  Here is how Pope Pius XII taught this truth:

Human life continues for as long as its vital functions – distinguished from the simple life of organs – manifest themselves spontaneously or even with the help of artificial processes.[15]

So-called “brain dead” persons are really helpless living persons whose vital organs are “harvested” by murdering them.  These persons are often warm and pink, with a normal pulse and blood pressure.[16]

The bodies of so-called “brain dead” persons are able to heal wounds, fight infections, respond to stimuli, and retain their spinal reflexes.[17]  A “brain dead” person can survive for months on life support equipment.[18]

When a “brain dead” person is cut open to extract one of his vital organs, he moves in reaction to the pain, unless he is paralyzed by drugs”.[19]  Obviously, such a “donor” is not really dead because a corpse does not need anesthesia or react to pain.  When a “brain dead” person is cut open, his pulse rate and blood pressure rise[20] just as any other person during surgery.[21]

A so-called “brain dead” expectant mother can be kept alive for months, for the sake of her baby.[22]

 

There have been many examples of so-called “irreversible comas” being reversed

Because of advancements in medical treatments since 1968, there have been very many persons whose supposedly “irreversible coma” was reversed and the person made a full or substantial recovery to an independent life.

For example:

  Trenton McKinley, a 13-year old Alabama boy, was declared brain dead after suffering skull fractures and a traumatic brain injury in March 2018.  All the usual tests showed he was “brain dead”.  His mother signed papers to donate his organs.  Fortunately, he regained consciousness before his vital organs were removed.  Trenton was taken off the ventilator and eventually went home.  He is now conscious, walking and talking.[23]

  In 2007, Zach Dunlap, a 21-year-old Oklahoma man, flipped over on his 4-wheeler and suffered catastrophic brain injuries.  A day and a half after his accident, doctors at United Regional Healthcare System in Wichita Falls, Texas determined he was "brain dead.”  They had subjected Zach to a battery of tests including a scan that showed a complete absence of blood flow to the brain.  Preparations to harvest his organs were underway when a relative scraped the bottom of his foot with a pocket knife and he jerked his foot away.  Just months later, Zack was walking and talking.  He recalled hearing a doctor say he was dead and being “mad inside” but unable to move.[24]

  Kate Allat suffered a stroke at the age of 39 and spent the next ten days in a coma.  Allat later revealed that she heard everything going on around her in her hospital room and she was fearful her life support would be turned off.  Her mind was functioning normally during her coma but everyone around her thought she was “brain dead” as she laid in her hospital bed paralyzed and unable to speak or breathe on her own.  She listened in fright as medical staff discussed switching off her life support with her family.  …  “They thought I was in a vegetative state.  I couldn’t move a muscle.  There was no signal I was in there,” she said.  “I was on life support and they might have turned it off.”  “I couldn’t breathe for myself but I could hear conversations that I didn’t want to hear.”  Kate made a full recovery.[25]

  Steven Thorpe suffered devastating injuries in a car crash.  His parents were told there was no chance of their son surviving.  But they refused to give up hope – despite four specialists declaring that the 17-year-old was “brain dead”.  Steven’s parents were convinced they saw a “flicker” of life as Steven lay in a coma.  They refused to allow the hospital to switch off his life support machine.  Two weeks later, Steven woke from his coma. Within seven weeks, he had left the hospital.  And four years later, Steven was working as a trainee accounts clerk.[26]

It might surprise readers that so-called “brain death” does not even require confirmation that the person has no measurable brain activity.  Some co-called “brain dead” persons can continue to have brain activity[27] (as well as many other bodily functions which prove they are still alive). 

Furthermore, a “brain dead” person’s brain can “fall silent” in response to a decreased blood flow, even if his brain remains uninjured.  This is called “ischemic penumbra”.[28]

 

Summary of “brain death” and deep coma

It is obvious that a “brain dead” or comatose person is alive.  Would anyone ever bury a person showing so many signs of life?  No!  Because he is alive!  Yet, he is labeled as “brain dead” and so he can be considered fit to be murdered by “harvesting” his vital organs.

 

Some countries have “laws”[29] which automatically designate everyone in the public as a “donor” of his vital organs unless he opts out.

In the transplant industry’s tireless pursuit of vital organs, some countries take advantage of most people’s inattention and inaction by passing “laws” which declare everyone as a consenting “donor” of his vital organs unless he opts-out of the country’s organ harvesting program.

For example, in 2020, England passed a “law” presuming people consent to “donate” their vital organs when they become “brain dead”, unless they register on a government website to opt out of being thus murdered.[30]

Other countries which have opt out “laws” are Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Spain, Austria, and Belgium.[31]  The state of California now has an opt out “law” too.[32]

Obviously, the Catholic Faith, the Natural Law, and sound thinking require a person to opt out of this type of murderous organ “donation” program.

 

Pressure and false compassion

Vital organ transplantation should be recognized for what it is – murder – and should be a felony.  But today, it is common for people to be pressured into agreeing ahead of time to “donate” their vital organs, often in the name of “charity” and “compassion”.  This pressure often occurs when they renew their driver’s license.

People are told that “donating” their vital organs is unselfish.  They are told that “your heart will continue living in someone else”, etc.  Ironically, people are told that donating their heart – which murders them – is “lifesaving and lifegiving”.[33]

Even if many people act in ignorance or with misplaced “charity” when they agree to “donate” their vital organs, they are nonetheless agreeing to be murdered.  But such organ “donation” is not real charity any more than it is charitable to commit suicide for ecological reasons such as to “reduce greenhouse gases” to “save the planet”.

Therefore, it is plain we must not agree to the “donation” of our vital organs.  But even if a person does not explicitly consent ahead of time, a person could still be murdered for his organs in the future, as he lies helpless and defenseless in a coma.

Therefore, no one should remain silent on this issue.  Everyone should explicitly reject the “donation” of his vital organs and reject receiving another person’s vital organs, using a declaration such as this:

I reject any treatment that uses an organ or tissue of another person obtained in a manner that causes, contributes to, or hastens that person’s death.  I reject any treatment that uses a vital organ “donated” by any other person who is declared “dead” (usually this declaration of “death” is made shortly before the organ is removed).  I also reject any treatments that use an organ or tissue of an unborn or newborn child who has been subject to an induced abortion.  I do not want any of my organs to be donated.[34]

 

Donating non-vital organs

Although it is a mortal sin to consent to murder by “donation” of a vital organ, it is a good and generous work for us to donate even an important bodily organ which does not cause our death.  For example, we can donate one of our two kidneys, a lobe of our liver, or a lobe of a lung, part of our pancreas, a cornea, or bone marrow, none of which impede our continued life.  These donations are a charitable work for those in need.

 

Beware of cooperating in any way in murder to “harvest” vital organs!

Not only must we never consent to murder by “donating” or receiving a vital organ, we must also never cooperate in any other way, when people commit this evil.  A person can be responsible for another person’s murder through organ “donation” in nine separate ways,[35] including by remaining silent (when we should object), by expressing approval, or by advising a person to “donate” his vital organ (or to receive the transplant of a vital organ). 

 

Society has sunk into the murderous practices of the pagan Aztecs

We see that, in a way, our society has sunk back to the evils of pagan times, murdering people to obtain their beating hearts (or hearts still able to beat).  Here is what the Spanish encountered when they first went to Aztec Mexico:

In 1519, at the time when Spanish Captain Hernán Cortez, came to Mexico, the barbaric, pagan Aztec Indians offered human sacrifices almost daily.  The Aztecs, who ruled from Mexico City, offered about 20,000 human sacrifices every year to their pagan (false) gods.  That is an average of more than 50 each day!  These victims usually had their hearts cut out while still beating; then their bodies were dismembered.  The Aztecs sometimes ate body parts.  At the Aztecs’ inauguration of their pagan temple at Mexico City, they massacred about 20,000 victims in four days.  That averages about one such gruesome murder every 17 seconds, all day and night![36]

Whereas the Aztecs offered their human sacrifices to their false gods, modern man offers similar human sacrifices to a creature lower than a “god”, viz., to a fellow man.  The modern “harvesting” of vital organs is, as it were, merely Aztec human sacrifices committed under surgical draping and using sterile technique.

 

Conclusion

“Harvesting” a person’s vital organs is premeditated murder.  Your organ donor card might be your death warrant. 

Catholics should never give permission to “donate” their vital organs and should not allow this authorization to be indicated on their driver’s license.  Such permission would be to consent to their own murder. 

Likewise, Catholics should be careful to opt out of organ “donation” in those countries such as England, where permission to “donate” organs is assumed unless a person opts out.



[1]           Here is how Fr. Spirago explains this truth, in The Catechism Explained:

 

At death, the soul is separated from the body ….  The body, deprived of the soul, is no longer alive, because it has no longer the principle of life ….

 

The Catechism Explained, Rev. Francis Spirago, Benziger Bros., New York, 1921, Eleventh and Twelfth Articles of the Creed, The Last Things, §1, p.254.

 

[2]           We owe respect to the human body as a temple of the Holy Ghost.  This means that it is a mortal sin to cremate the body (except in very unusual circumstance, such as where this is necessary in order to protect the living from a deadly, widespread plague).  For a further analysis of the evils of cremation, read these articles:

 

v  https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/cremation-is-barbaric.html

 

v  https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/may-poor-people-choose-cremation-instead-of-burial-because-they-cannot-afford-burial.html

 

Although the human body deserves a respectful burial, this does not mean that, in itself, a dead body is other than organic matter returning to dust.  On Ash Wednesday, the Church reminds us what happens to a person’s body when his soul departs: “Remember Man, that thou art dust and to dust thou shalt return.”

 

[3]           Here is how the Mayo Clinic explains this truth:

 

Gangrene refers to the death of body tissue due to either a lack of blood flow or a serious bacterial infection. Gangrene commonly affects the extremities, including your toes, fingers and limbs, but it can also occur in your muscles and internal organs. 

 

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/gangrene/symptoms-causes/syc-20352567

[4]           Here is how Fr. Henry Davis explains this truth, in Moral and Pastoral Theology:

 

Now we know as a fact that life often persists after apparent death; advanced decomposition is the only certain sign of death especially after drowning, paralysis and death from sickness.

 

Moral and Pastoral Theology, Henry Davis, S.J., Sheed and Ward, New York, ©1959, Vol 2, Ch. 6, Section: The Fifth Commandment, Appendix 2, Point 16, Embalming, p.168 (emphasis added).

[9]           Here is how this truth is stated in one article published in the New England Journal of Medicine:

 

[It used to be that] the diagnosis of death was relatively straightforward: patients were dead when they were cold, blue, and stiff.  Unfortunately, organs from these traditional cadavers cannot be used for transplantation.

 

The Dead Donor Rule and Organ Transplantation, Robert D. Truog, M.D., and Franklin G. Miller, Ph.D., published August 14, 2008, at: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0804474 (emphasis added).

 

Similarly, whistleblower Doctor Cicero G. Coimbra, MD PhD, a neurologist and professor of neuroscience at the Federal University of São Paulo, Brazil, who warns about the murder involved in “harvesting” a person’s vital organs, states plainly how crucial a person’s beating heart is for “harvesting” his vital organs:

 

if it’s not beating you cannot use vital organsIf there is an arrest in circulation, you have damaged organs that you’re trying to transplant to other people. 

 

Read the June 5, 2019 interview of Dr. Coimbra here: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/neurologist-exposes-brain-death-myth-behind-multi-billion-dollar-organ-transplant-industry (emphasis added).

[11]         Two advocates for vital organ transplantation candidly admitted that “brain death” as real death is considered a fiction which is expedient in order to obtain vital organs.  In an article published in Intensive Care Medicine, they state:

 

Brain death is, since the first definitions in the scientific literature in 1968, closely related to organ donation.  This is why, some scholars consider equating brain death to death as a moral and legal fiction.  […] Without the needs of transplantation medicine, ‘brain death as death’ would not exist at all ….

 

Erwin J.O. Kompanje and Yorik J. de Groot, Sounding board: is mandatory recovery of organs for transplantation acceptable? Published in Intensive Care Medicine (2015) 41:1836–1837.  This is quoted and cited in ‘Brain death’ is a medical fiction invented to harvest organs from living people: expert, an article found here: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/brain-death-is-a-medical-fiction-invented-to-harvest-organs-from-living-people-expert

 

[12]         A definition of irreversible coma: report of the ad hoc committee of the Harvard Medical School to examine the definition of brain death. JAMA 1968;205:337340

 

[14]         The Dead Donor Rule and Organ Transplantation, Robert D. Truog, M.D., and Franklin G. Miller, Ph.D., published August 14, 2008, at: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0804474 (emphasis added).

 

[15]         November 24, 1957, Address to an International Congress of Anesthesiologists, Pope Pius XII (emphasis added).

[16]         Here is how this truth is stated in one article published in the New England Journal of Medicine:

 

[Brain dead] patients look very much alive: they are warm and pink; they digest and metabolize food, excrete waste, undergo [physical] maturation, …. To a casual observer, they look just like patients who are receiving long-term artificial ventilation and are asleep.

 

The Dead Donor Rule and Organ Transplantation, Robert D. Truog, M.D., and Franklin G. Miller, Ph.D., published August 14, 2008, at: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0804474

 

[21]         Is “Brain Death” True Death? by Randy Engel, citing Brain Death – A U.K. Anesthetist’s View, by David J. Hill, published in Finis Vitae, edited by Paul A. Byrne, M.D., p.172, and found here: http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/engel/120117


[22]         See, e.g., a “brain dead” mother was kept alive for three months for the sake of her healthy child.  http://www.lifenews.com/2013/11/13/baby-boy-born-after-brain-dead-mother-kept-alive-three-months/

 

[24]         Quoted from IS THERE MORAL CERTAINTY THAT "BRAIN DEAD" ORGAN DONORS ARE DEAD?  This article is found here: http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/abbott/190423  summarizing an account given by Natalie Morales, in “‘Dead’ Man Recovering after ATV Accident," Dateline transcript, NBC News, March 23, 2008.

 

[27]         What You Lose When You Sign That Donor Card, By Dick Teresi, Wall Street Journal, March 10, 2012, page C3.

 

[28]         Neurologist exposes ‘brain death’ myth behind multi-billion-dollar organ transplant industry,  interview of Doctor Cicero G. Coimbra, MD PhD, a neurologist and professor of neuroscience at the Federal University of São Paulo, Brazil, June 6, 2019 from https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/neurologist-exposes-brain-death-myth-behind-multi-billion-dollar-organ-transplant-industry

[29]         A real law must be reasonable and for the Common Good.  Summa, Ia IIae, Q.90, a.4.  A government’s evil decrees (such as this one) are not real laws.  

 

[34]         This formula (rejecting vital organ donation is part of a draft living will contained here: https://catholiccandle.org/2020/07/01/use-of-ordinary-care-even-as-we-are-dying/

 

[35]            Here is summary of this basic truth about the various ways we can be responsible for another’s sin:

 

328. When are we answerable for the sins of others? 

We are answerable for the sins of others whenever we either cause them, or share in them, through our own fault. 

329. In how many ways may we either cause or share the guilt of another’s sin? 

We may either cause or share the guilt of another’s sin in nine ways:

 

1.    By counsel.

 

2.    By command.

3.    By consent.

4.    By provocation.

5.    By praise or flattery.

6.    By concealment.

7.    By being a partner in the sin.

8.    By silence.

9.    By defending the ill done.

 

Quoted from The Penny Catechism, Nihil Obstat, Joannes M.T. Barton, S.T.D., L.S.S., Censor deputatus, Imprimatur, Georgius L. Craven, Epus Sebastopolis, Vicarius Generalis, Westmonasterii, die 20a Junii, 1958, p.57 (emphasis added).

 

[36]         Quoted from: Latin America: A Sketch of its Glorious Catholic Roots and a Snapshot of its Present, by the Editors of Quanta Cura Press, ©2016, Section 2 – (Latin) North America – Mexico, p.38.

The Evil of Vaccines made from Murdered Babies

 

We live in a godless society and there are countless evils around us.  For example, in some places, for some diseases (like chickenpox), one can only obtain vaccines whose manufacturers used cell lines from murdered babies, as disease cultures for manufacturing the vaccine.[1]

 

The conciliar church is lax and liberal and approves receiving vaccines which come from the cell lines of murdered babies, unless there is an alternative vaccine which does not use murder.  But there are three reasons it is wrong to accept these vaccines manufactured using the cell lines of murdered babies:

 

1.    Using those vaccines promotes future murders.

 

2.    Using those vaccines rewards persons connected with the murders.

 

3.    We incur guilt for those murders, by our consent.

 

Below, we discuss each of these reasons.

 

 

1.   Using those vaccines promotes future murders.

 

Using the cell lines from murdered babies encourages future murders whenever pharmaceutical companies deem it to be convenient and profitable to commit more murders for use in vaccine research or production. 

 

Because people did not refuse vaccines coming from the 1960s-era cell lines taken from murdered babies, drug companies, labs, and researchers felt “free” to commit more murders to create new cell lines.  For example, a new cell line from a new murdered baby, was announced in 2015.[2] 

 

Accepting those vaccines manufactured through murdered babies, promotes future murders (and every murder of an innocent human is a murder too many)!  Thus, when you use a vaccine produced through murder, the drug companies are encouraged to commit additional murders to keep vaccine production high.

 

 

2.   Using those vaccines rewards persons connected with the murders.

 

It is wrong to use vaccines produced from murdered babies because using these vaccines enables manufactures to profit through the murders.  We should not help drug companies make wickedness profitable!

 

 

3.   We incur guilt for the babies’ murders, by our consent.

 

We become culpable for someone else’s sin by consenting to it.[3]  When St. Paul teaches us this truth about sharing someone else’s sin by consent, he mentions murder in particular.  Here are his words:

 

Being filled with … murder, …  they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.

 

Romans, 1:29-32 (emphasis added).[4]

 

A person is guilty of a murder by consent when he acquiesces[5], even passively[6], or accedes, even reluctantly,[7] to the murder.  When we use vaccines which come from murder, we are (at least) passively accepting – i.e., giving in[8] to – the murders that make those vaccines available. 

 

 

A person can incur guilt by consenting even after the murder.

 

Some types of sharing in someone else’s sin can only occur before the sin is committed, e.g., commanding or advising that the sin should be committed.  See, the above list (from The Penny Catechism) of ways to share someone else’s sin. 

 

However, consent to the sin is different.  A person can consent to (i.e., acquiesce in) a murder either before or after it is committed, and so can incur guilt either way.

 

St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that a person can incur guilt by consenting to a murder which has already been committed.  He applies this principle (of guilt through post-murder consent) to a person who joins the Jewish religion after Christ’s murder.  Here are St. Thomas’ words:

 

When a person becomes a Jew, he becomes a participant in the killing of Christ. 

 

St. Thomas Aquinas, Lectures on St. Matthew, ch.23, #1861.

 

By using those vaccines manufactured through the murders of babies, a person thus incurs guilt by consenting to (i.e., acquiescing in) the murders of those babies even though murders were already committed.

 

 

The passage of time does not erase the guilt of consenting to those murders.

 

A superficial objection could be raised that the vaccines were made from murdered babies more than five decades ago and surely that is “so long ago” that we should disregard the murders because they are too distant in time.

 

That is wrong.  God does not cease to treat a murder as murder merely because of the passage of time.[9]  Those who commit murder and those that consent to it, remain culpable.  The mere passage of time does not remove the need to repent.  The punishments of hell are forever because the passage of time does not erase guilt.

 

Just as God does not overlook culpability for murder simply because of the passage of time, man does not do so either.  In the civil law, there is typically no statute of limitations for murder.[10]  In other words, no murder is ever so remote in time that we “don’t worry about it”.

 

The murdering of the babies committed to “harvest” their cell lines, was premeditated and is first degree murder.  The passage of time does not change the guilt of the murders and does not eliminate the guilt of a person who consents to the murders.

 

No matter how much time passes, faithful and informed Catholics will never buy the vaccines manufactured through these murders!

 

 

The end does not justify the means

 

Another superficial objection could be raised that vaccines do much good and that they save so many lives that this “outweighs” the murders through which the vaccines are produced.  However, faithful and informed Catholics must never be complicit in evil because of “good” that can come from it.  The end does not justify the means!

 

 

Discerning God’s Will through standing up for principle.

 

A similar, superficial objection is that without receiving these sinful vaccines, I will

lose some opportunity, for example, the chance to enter (or send my dependents to) a particular school.  Again, the end does not justify the means!

 

If, despite your best efforts, you cannot receive a “conscience waiver” or “religious exemption” to attend (or send your dependents to) the school without receiving a sinful vaccine, that merely shows you that God does not want you to attend that particular school, etc

 

 

We are not justified in consenting to even the smallest of sins, much less, consenting to murder.

 

The evil at issue here is murder.  That is a very grave evil.  But even if a person were to suppose that receiving vaccines derived from the cell lines of murdered babies were “only” a venial sin, even the very smallest sin is an infinite evil in three ways.[11]  We should be ready to die rather than commit any sin. 

 

Here is how St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Doctor of the Church, warns against committing even the smallest sin:

 

A single venial sin is more displeasing to God than all the good works we can perform.

 

St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Uniformity with God’s Will, §6.

 

Here is how St. John of the Cross, Doctor of the Church, warns us that the road to hell begins with a small sin:

 

Our Lord said in the Gospel: “He that is unfaithful in little will be unfaithful also in much.”  For he that avoids the small sin will not fall into the great sin; but great evil is inherent in the small sin, since it has already penetrated within the fence and wall of the heart; and as the proverb says: Once begun, half done.

 

Ascent of Mount Carmel, Book III, ch.20, section 1.

 

Here is how John Henry Cardinal Newman declares that the smallest sin is worse than all the physical suffering in the world:

 

The Catholic Church holds it better for the sun and moon to drop from heaven, for the earth to fail, and for all the many millions on it to die of starvation in extremest agony, as far as temporal affliction goes, than that one soul, I will not say, should be lost, but should commit one single venial sin, should tell one willful untruth, or should steal one poor farthing without excuse.

 

Apologia Vita Sua, by John Henry Cardinal Newman, Image Books, Doubleday, Garden City, New York, © 1956, p.324.

 

 

Information about which vaccines to refuse.

 

We must be informed Catholics.  This sometimes means doing our own research, if we cannot obtain reliable information from our doctor.  Here is a list of sinful vaccines the use of which connects a person to the murders of those babies.  https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/vaccineListOrigFormat.pdf  The list also identifies ethically permissible alternative vaccines where they are available. 

 

If your doctor does not cooperate in your decision to refuse sinful vaccines, get a different doctor!

 

 

Conclusion

 

Some vaccines are produced through cell lines obtained from murdered babies.  There are three reasons getting these vaccines is a sin:

 

1.    Using these vaccines promotes future murders.

 

2.    Using these vaccines rewards those connected with the murders.

 

3.    We become culpable for the murders, by our consent.

 

We should stand up for Christ and reject these sinful vaccines.  We should also urge others to stand against these vaccines which break God’s Law (including the Natural Law).  At our Judgment we would want to have done so!



[1]           Here is a list of vaccines connected with murder and ethical alternatives, if they exist: https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/vaccineListOrigFormat.pdf

 

[3]              Here is summary of this basic truth from a common catechism:

 

328. When are we answerable for the sins of others? 

We are answerable for the sins of others whenever we either cause them, or share in them, through our own fault. 

329. In how many ways may we either cause or share the guilt of another’s sin? 

We may either cause or share the guilt of another’s sin in nine ways:

 

1.    By counsel.

 

2.    By command.

3.    By consent.

4.    By provocation.

5.    By praise or flattery.

6.    By concealment.

7.    By being a partner in the sin.

8.    By silence.

9.    By defending the ill done.

 

Quoted from The Penny Catechism, Nihil Obstat, Joannes M.T. Barton, S.T.D., L.S.S., Censor deputatus, Imprimatur, Georgius L. Craven, Epus Sebastopolis, Vicarius Generalis, Westmonasterii, die 20a Junii, 1958, p.57 (emphasis added).

 

[4]           Here is the longer quote from St. Paul:

 

Being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness, full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity, whisperers, detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy.  Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.

 

Romans, 1:29-32

 

[5]           One of the definitions of consent is: “acquiescence to or acceptance of something done or planned by another”.  https://www.thefreedictionary.com/consent

[6]           One of the definitions of acquiescence is: “passive assent or agreement without protest”.  https://www.thefreedictionary.com/acquiescence

 

[7]           Two of the definitions of accede are: “to consent” and “to give in”.  https://www.thefreedictionary.com/accede

[8]           Two of the definitions of accede are: “to consent” and “to give in”.  https://www.thefreedictionary.com/accede

[9]           St. Thomas Aquinas teaches the principle that a person is culpable for consenting to a murder even when that murder had been committed many centuries earlier.  St. Thomas applies this principle to a person who joins the Jewish religion long after Christ’s murder.  Here are St. Thomas’ words:

 

When a person becomes a Jew, he becomes a participant in the killing of Christ. 

 

St. Thomas Aquinas, Lectures on St. Matthew, ch.23, #1861.

 

Thus, St. Thomas teaches that even the passage of a long, long time (1200 years, in St. Thomas’ time) after the murder, does not remove the culpability for consenting to it.  In other words, there is no “end date” for culpability by consenting to murder after it was committed. 

 

Note also regarding St. Thomas’ own example, that he places culpability upon consent to the murder of Christ (through conversion to Judaism), not upon ethnic lineage of a person.  Thus, this culpability does not touch the Apostles or any other ethnically Jewish persons who did not (do not) consent to the murder of Christ.

 

[10]            Here is how one legal commentary summarized the state of the law:

 

               Some crimes have no statutes of limitations.  As an example, murder typically has

               none.

 

https://resources.lawinfo.com/criminal-defense/criminal-statute-limitations-time-limits.html

 

Here is how the New York courts explain that murder does not become a non-prosecutable crime because of the passage of time:

 

Statutes of limitations are laws which say how long, after certain events, a case may be started based on those events. If the statute of limitations has run out, a case should not be started in court. If a case is started after the statute of limitations has run out, it is called time barred. A defendant or respondent can ask the court to dismiss the case if it is time barred by the statute of limitations.

 

Statute of limitations laws are based on fairness. Over time, memories fade, evidence is lost, and witnesses disappear.  People get on with their lives and don’t expect court cases from events in the past – unless a really horrible crime has been committed.

 

The amount of time by when a person or agency can start a case is different depending on the claim. For example, cases about real property have a long time period, while slander and libel have short time periods.  Some crimes, like murder, are so terrible that they often have no limitations period.

 

Except for when a government agency is sued, there is almost always at least one year from the date of an event to start a case no matter what type of claim it is. You should have no statute of limitations worries if you file your case within this one-year period.

 

https://nycourts.gov/CourtHelp/GoingToCourt/statuteLimitations.shtml

[11]         For a full explanation of this truth that all sin is an infinite evil in three ways and mortal sin is an infinite evil in a fourth way too, read this article: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/the-infinite-evil-of-sin.html

 

The Direct Road from Apostasy to Gender Confusion

Our Lord Jesus Christ is the Truth:

Jesus saith to him:  I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life.  No man cometh to the Father, but by Me.[1] 

Truth is the mind’s conformity to reality.[2]

Therefore, when a man (or society) rejects Christ and His teaching Church, he is rejecting reality.

But man is a creature of habit.  He is often inconsistent and takes a while to come to see the full consequences of positions he has already accepted (or already rejected).  In other words, when a man rejects reality concerning one truth, he might continue to hold other truths which are inconsistent with his new opinion and it might take him a while to reject the reality of those further, related truths.

Thus, for example, when man rejects the Catholic Church’s authority, he might continue to believe in the Bible’s authority, although the Bible’s authority comes from the Catholic Church.

Similarly, Protestants who rejected the authority of the Catholic Church, did not immediately reject a man’s authority over his wife.  For a time, those Protestants only took rebellion from authority “so far”, and only gradually did their rebellion spread further, to other authority given by God and willed by Him. 

But when a man rejects part of reality, he embarks on a reckless path leading to rejection of other parts of reality.  That is, rejecting a part of reality inevitably leads to rejecting more of reality – the only uncertainty is how long it will take to reject additional, particular parts of reality. 

Thus, the Protestants reject the reality of the Catholic Church’s authority and this leads them down the road to feminism (which is rejecting the reality of a husband’s authority) and also to rejecting the different and unique roles of the sexes.[3] 

Perhaps the Protestants who had first denied the authority of the Catholic Church, had thought it absurd to deny that man is the head of (and authority over) his wife.  This is because, while denying the Church’s authority, the difference between the roles of the sexes is a natural and supernatural truth which remained obvious for a time, even to Protestants.

But when man begins denying reality, the denials continue and become more unhinged from reality.  Man becomes more blinded to what had previously been obvious to him.  Man progressively denies even those things which are according to Nature and to common sense.  For example, man comes to accept that a male can become a female simply by deciding he is a female.

Without God’s help, man does not stop and he cannot stop descending down this destructive road.  Man accepts more and more false ideas he would have previously thought were absurd and impossible to accept.  Just like early apostates from Catholicism would have thought feminism to be absurd, likewise people would have thought it absurd, a few decades ago, that a male would become a female simply by deciding that he is one.

This delusion is not merely a few deranged individuals fooling themselves with this crazy fantasy – like believing they are Napoléon.  Society now accepts this absurdity in public[4] and now viciously attacks those who publicly deny such an obvious delusion.[5]

Similarly, society now accepts that a person can be neither male nor female if he simply decides he is neither.[6]  Society calls this person “non-binary”.  This delusion is a direct attack on Nature and on Sacred Scripture, because:

God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.[7]

People accept these delusions because the rejection of Christ does not end by simply rejecting Him.  He is the Truth and the Author of Truth.  By rejecting Him, man is led to progressively reject more and more aspects of reality.  Nor does he stop with these gender delusions. 

Until man goes back to God and to His Catholic Church – which will happen only through the consecration of Russia to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart – the steady descent of (blind) society will continue. 

There are many additional delusions – even more extreme and more irrational – which are ahead for blind and unrepentant mankind.  What are those future delusions?  Perhaps one of them is society publicly accepting the absurdity that people are cats[8], dogs[9], hippopotamuses[10] and dragons[11] when people decide that they are.  Society has not yet publicly accepted these delusions but they already exist on society’s fringes – like the gender delusions existed only on the fringes until a few decades ago.

Perhaps also, society will publicly accept the delusions of people claiming that they are whatever age they choose for themselves.[12]

We might think society could never be so blind as to accept these delusions.  However, who could ever have predicted a few decades ago, that society would publicly accept and tyrannically insist (as it does now) that you are whatever sex you say you are, and that you can “change” your gender whenever you choose to do so, by changing your mind.

We can glimpse the future in a survey by the Family Policy Institute in Washington which showed that many college students are ready to accept that a person is whatever gender, race or age he claims to be, no matter how absurd the claim is.[13]

This acceptance of delusion in place of reality, is part of God’s punishment for apostate man rejecting Our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is the Truth. 

Truly:

When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing; they then become capable of believing in anything![14]

Conclusion

The truth is priceless!  Compromising the truth leads to blindness, delusion, and destruction! 

No “advantage” – including being at peace with those around us – is worth the infinite “cost” of compromising.

Pray for the consecration of Russia to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart!

Let us thank God every day for the Traditional Catholic Faith and pray hard to keep it in all its purity! 

Let us profess the Faith, whole and inviolate, until our dying breath!

 



[1]           St. John’s Gospel, 14:6 emphasis added.


[2]           Here is how St. Thomas Aquinas, the greatest Doctor of the Church, teaches this truth:

 

I answer that, As stated before, truth resides, in its primary aspect, in the intellect. Now since everything is true according as it has the form proper to its nature, the intellect, in so far as it is knowing, must be true, so far as it has the likeness of the thing known, this being its form, as knowing.  For this reason, truth is defined by the conformity of intellect and thing; and hence to know this conformity is to know truth. 

 

Summa, Ia, Q.16, a.2, respondeo, emphasis added.

[5]           See, e.g., these news reports:

 

  Construction workers arrested, fined, fired for laughing at men dressed as women, reported here: https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/construction-workers-arrested-fined-fired-for-laughing-at-men-dressed-as-women

 

  Protest at public library shows LGBT movement won’t stop until it dominates everything, reported here: https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/feminist-argues-at-public-library-males-cant-become-female-lgbt-movement-rampages

 

Whatever doubts people have about such delusions are whispered behind closed doors because the public levers of society are against them.  Such doubts always occur when swallowing the devil’s delusions because man has an intellect and retains a nagging doubt whenever he accepts “black as white”, i.e., any lie of the devil.  This gender delusion is like many other lies accepted by society, such as the acceptance of divorce even though people understand that it breaks the couple’s vows on their wedding day that they will be faithful to each other until death.

 

The longer society accepts a particular lie – whether concerning divorce, changing genders or anything else, the more people will be accustomed to taking the lie for granted.

 

[6]           Marriam-Webster Dictionary has designated the word “they” as its word of the year for 2019, in part because this word is “established in the English language” as a word now “used to refer to one person whose gender identity is nonbinary” (i.e., neither male nor female).  https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/word-of-the-year/quid-pro-quo

 

[7]           Genesis, 1:27 (emphasis added).

[13]         https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/watch-college-students-answers-on-gender-and-age-identity-show-just-how-los

 

Interestingly, the only idea these students had much difficulty accepting was the suggestion that the 5’9” tall interviewer was really 6’5” tall, as he told them he was.  Id.

 

[14]         Emphasis added.  This quote is commonly attributed to G.K. Chesterton although we don’t know specifically where it is found in his writings.  https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/44015-when-men-choose-not-to-believe-in-god-they-do

 

Reasons Not to Celebrate Halloween

 

Halloween is un-Catholic, which is why so many traditional Catholic priests have taught over the years, that Catholics should not observe this holiday.

 

Halloween, which the pagans call Samhein, is an ancient pagan feast still celebrated on October 31st, by witches and other pagans, and which pagans usually describe as being the most important feast of their (false) religions.  See, e.g., http://www.bustle.com/articles/7929-im-wiccan-and-this-is-what-halloween-means-to-me & http://www.witchway.net/halloween.html 

 

Besides the opposition “on its face”, between Catholicism and paganism, there are many other ways that Halloween is the opposite of Catholic:

 

  The vigil of All Saints Day is a day of penance: a traditional fast day.  Halloween is the opposite: it is portrayed as a day of gorging, of candy and of eating in between meals (mortally sinful on a fast day).

 

  The Catholic Church takes witches, spells and demons very seriously and requires Her children to stay far away from them.  Halloween is the opposite: it makes witches, spells and demons seem approachable, fun, familiar and harmless.

 

  The days which Catholics celebrate are about life and salvation.  For example, Christmas is about our Lord’s birth in His humanity.  Even Good Friday is about our Lord’s life-giving sacrifice on the Cross, out of love for us, to open the gates of heaven.  (This life-giving sacrifice of love, which makes salvation possible, is why the Church calls this day Good Friday.)  In complete contrast to Catholic celebrations, Halloween is largely about death and destruction.

 

  Catholicism takes death very seriously.  The Church urges us to solemnly meditate on death and prepare for it.  Many saints kept a skull in their bedrooms, to ever remind them they were on earth to prepare for death.  Halloween is the opposite: it is a time of smiling skeletons, tombstones with funny epitaphs, and a light-hearted treatment of death without any of its eternal consequences.

 

  Catholicism takes sin very seriously.  The Church admonishes us to have a horror for sin and to consider it as the only true evil and unmitigated disaster.  Halloween is the opposite: it is a light-hearted treatment of sin, e.g., with costumed attackers randomly committing unprovoked mayhem, with lots of blood and gore, all without the consequences of reality.

 

  Catholicism values beauty and order.  Halloween is the opposite.  Halloween glorifies ugliness and disorder, e.g., grotesque, painted-on scars “decorating” ugly and horrifying monsters.

 

  Catholicism values peace.  Halloween is the opposite, exalting sudden and unprovoked violence, all without the consequences of reality. 

 

  The Catholic Church forbids séances and all attempts to conjure the dead.  Witches and other pagans believe that the feast of Samhein is when the boundary between the worlds of the living and dead is blurred, and when the ghosts of the dead can return to earth.  Id.  This pagan belief is honored by Halloween’s ubiquitous ghost decorations and costumes.

 

  The customary greeting of children seeking candy, is “trick or treat”.  Think about this.  However unthinkingly this phrase is uttered, it is in the form of a threat, viz., if you don’t give me candy, I will do something you won’t like!

 

  Spiders are among the most common Halloween decorations.  Spiders are prominent pagan symbols and are considered as guides in the occult.  See, e.g., http://www.druidry.org/library/animals/spiders-spiritual-guides & http://www.whats-your-sign.com/spider-symbol-meaning.html

 

All of the above considerations leave entirely aside Halloween’s worldliness, consumerism, immodest costumes, etc.

 

Because Halloween is in many ways the opposite of Catholic, it is no surprise that Halloween is ever-more popular, as society sinks ever-further from true Catholicism.  http://source.southuniversity.edu/halloween-is-big-business-27678.aspx & http://betweenthenumbers.net/2012/10/ghoulishly-good-news-for-the-halloween-economy/

 

Someone could reply that Halloween is “all just in fun” and is not meant to be serious.  We reply: if a Catholic is willing to participate in un-Catholic things which are “all in fun”, where will he draw the line?  If the practice of getting candy involved stamping on a crucifix “in fun”, would that be OK?  How can we ever re-conquer society for Christ the King, if we take part in anti-Catholicism “in fun”?

 

So, what should a Catholic do?  Do not take part in Halloween!  Instead, celebrate All Saints Day even more than before!  If there are “trick or treaters” where you live, we suggest you hang a sign on your door on Halloween, which says:

 

 

Dear Neighborhood Children:

 

Our family is Roman Catholic and so does not observe the pagan festival of Halloween.  Therefore, we do not give out candy today.

 

However, tomorrow (November 1st) is the great Feast of All Saints and we would be very glad to see you then and give you candy, if you wish to come.  Please come between 1pm and 8pm.

 

No costume is necessary.  However, if you decide to dress up as a saint, we will gladly be even more generous with candy, to reward your efforts.

 

Wishing you all the best!

 

Your neighbors,

[your name here]