Fasting During Lent: Are you doing enough?

Have you ever gone through Lent and ended up in Easter and thought to yourself, "Man that wasn't hard. In fact, it wasn't hard enough."?

It has happened to me many times. I give up some very minor things during Lent and when it's all over, I barely even notice. Examples of not giving up much include:

• No chocolate between 7pm and 8pm on Wednesdays and Fridays
• Having one less Coffee on the first day of the month.
• Going to Mass on Ash Wednesday instead of staying home

These are somewhat exaggerated to make a point. In reality, I once heard of a person who had given up one particular type of chocolate bar during Lent. That's it. Remember, they didn't give up snacking, or sweets, or even chocolate in general, they had given up one particular chocolate bar. They permitted themselves to eat ANY OTHER type of chocolate bar, but not this one particular kind. And I'm not saying milk chocolate, e.g. I mean something like Kit-Kat bars or Mars bars.

Now, once Lent is all said and done do you think this person can better relate to Jesus Christ and feel as though they accompanied him in the desert for 40 days? I somehow doubt it.

On the other hand, this person may have already been holy and sanctified that they didn't really need to give anything up and perhaps they were focusing more on doing more almsgiving or acts of charity, as opposed to "giving things up".

One thing that can get us through Lent is the prospect and thought of Easter. The hardships we are going through will be turned to joy and glory at Easter. Isn't that the point? Imagine doing something much greater this Lent than usual. Maybe not eating until after 3pm every day, maybe eating just one meal a day, maybe forgoing all snacks, or not eating meat on most days, etc.

Although I sometimes personally focus on the fasting aspect of Lent, there is also almsgiving and prayer which are equally important. And in all three it's important to know the reason we are doing these things. They are all meant to be done for love of Christ. If they are done primarily for reasons other than love of God, they are being done for the wrong reasons.

Once your trial is over and the glories of Easter are upon us, you will feel like a new creation!
Please provide your comments and feedback!

Sensus Fidelium: A Treasure Trove of Information

If you are a serious Catholic, you have no choice but to check out the Sensus Fidelium Youtube Channel.

The channel contains thousands of top quality audio from various Catholic priests and others. They are very faithful to tradition and teach true Catholic Doctrine. I must say that I really learned a lot by listening to some of these talks particularly those by Fr. Chad Ripperger. He really clarifies things in a fantastic way. For example, he doesn't lightly use words randomly. He uses the precise word that he is looking for as he has memorized their definitions.

This priest has given some excellent talks concerning the various levels of prayer and the necessity of mental prayer. This is something that I hadn't her talked about very often in homilies. As mentioned, he very clearly explains the various levels of prayers and will quote various saints when giving his talks. We need clear teaching and teachings of substance, which is something that is highly lacking in the live of most Catholics.

Check it out at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3x3gDTqUYy_bFZWS-U_mZQ

Stupid Abortion Argument #25918: If you don't pay all expenses of a child, then you aren't pro-life

A popular new argument being brought by pro-choice advocates is that you aren't really pro-life unless you pay for some or all expenses related to raising a child. The specific argument can vary.  For example, when advocating that children not be killed in the womb some pro-choice people will ask "How many children have you adopted?" Others might rhetorically asked if you are willing to pay all of the expenses associated with having this child.

On a purely logical basis this line of reasoning is easily answered. Pro-life people believe that human life begins at conception and that purposely ending the life of an innocent human being after conception is murder. It is a very basic an easy concept to understand.   Any deliberate killing of a human being is gravely morally wrong. Stating this fact and telling others about it is a morally good thing to do. This is a very basic concept.

In order to advocate that a particular group of people not be killed, one has no moral obligation to first agree to provide for any or all of their material needs. This is an illogical belief. This would make no more sense than saying in order for one to say that innocent people should not be killed one must first agree to provide for all of the material needs of the people they say should not be killed. If I advocate for the idea that homeless people should not be arbitrarily murdered in the streets it does not make sense to say I must bring all homeless people into my home in order to advocate this position.

In fact, I doubt in reality that anybody truly believes that in order to advocate on behalf of the right to life of an individual we must agree to bring that individual into our home or to pay for their material needs. Even answering this objection is difficult only in the sense that it is so obvious that there's not really any logical argumentation required in order to make that point.  But then again advocacy of abortion is not based on logic but on convenience.

Once again, the true point of argumentation when it comes to abortion is whether the pre-born child is a human being or not. Pro-choicers will call an unborn child anything but a child. They say it's a clump of cells, a potential life, etc. All of these are emotive and non-scientific stances. By definition, there is a human being upon the fertilization of an egg by a sperm to form a zygote. This zygote grows quickly. After around 5-9 days there are hundreds of cells and after 2 weeks most organs have begun to form. This child has unique DNA and the heart, lungs, etc. have begun development. To say this is not a human person is absurd.

This is just the most recent "argument" presented by pro-choicers. It should be summarily dismissed.

Chit-chatters at Mass

Sunday at Mass, there were two men who were chatting. I’ve seen this before and attempted to sit fairly far away from them. Due to other circumstances, I couldn’t get too far away. Throughout the entire Mass, they chit chatted. During prayers, even during the consecration, it didn’t matter to them. Just blabbering on. It may have been one more than the other.

Sadly, this isn’t uncommon. Most people don’t talk non-stop, but randomly whispering is very common. Not one or two words, but a few minutes. Sometimes if you are unlucky enough to overhear what they are discussing, it’s not something earth-shattering. Usually it’s the most mundane topics. What are we having for supper? Did you call Jim about that hockey stick after? When do you want to go up to the cabin next weekend?

My question is, why are these people coming to Mass in the first place? Do they have absolutely no idea what it is? Pope Benedict wrote a great article addressing this problem overall. He said it comes down to a lack of understanding of what the Eucharist and the sacraments in general are. If you are unaware of the significance of what is going on, you may not have an issue with talking throughout.

Basically Benedict attributes the problem to seeing the Mass primarily in terms of its side effects rather than the main purpose. People have come to believe the primary purpose of Mass is a social gathering, where people greet each other, hug, catch up, etc. There is a vague sense of Christian community. But there is a lack of knowledge or understanding of the divine, or the sacramental, of the supernatural. It’s seen entirely as natural.

As a corollary to this, people place inordinate attention on the homily. But even that they are misjudging. The homily is meant to educate and illuminate. But in the incorrect understanding of its purpose, people see the homily as intended to “bring people together” or create a sense of community. Therefore, if the priest ventures into an area of controversy, people are quick to react. Even priests who dare bring up challenging topics often spend much time preparing the hearers about what he is about to say and offering many nice and loving thoughts beforehand lest the congregation feel attacked.

The congregation generally dislikes being challenged and is looking to be praised or congratulated in various ways. Again, this is contrary to the purpose of the homily.

I see these attitudes very often in Newfoundland. The sacramental nature of the Mass is ignored. People see their attendance as a social gathering primarily. The supernatural and sacramental are largely unknown. People just do what they are “supposed” to do because that’s what they were shown as children.

Liturgy can be an important aspect to changing the behavior of the congregation. If the priest is very nonchalant about everything and shows no reverence, then can the congregation be expected to act differently? But it’s not the whole solution. Catechesis is very important. People need informative, thought-provoking, and challenging sermons. If a priest is talking in a very monotone way about vague ideas, how will people learn things or be motivated about the faith?

Fulfilling your Sunday obligation is more than being physically in a church. It’s about being aware of what is happening. No one is off the hook for this, including the parishioners and the priest.

Disturbing Trend of Ad Hoc Morality

I have a lot of friends who claim to be Christian but whose views are at direct odds with their stated religion. I am not for a minute saying that I am somehow perfect or something or that I don’t sometimes break the rules or whatever. What I’m talking about is people who hold views totally contrary to their belief system, yet they have absolutely no problem with this.

 

Christians all view abortion as wrong, for example. Yet many people I know are fine with IVF which almost always involves abortion. For Catholics, IVF, even if somehow abortion isn’t involved, is morally illicit and strictly forbidden. I find it shocking these people are fine with it. They don’t even attempt to reconcile their clear violation of morality with their so-called belief systems.

 

My contention is that these people should just stop calling themselves Christian. They can instead say something like “I tried to be Christian but it’s too hard and it conflicts with all of my viewpoints. Therefore for now I am not a Christian.”

 

Besides this, many so-called Christians and Catholics specifically will proclaim support for transgender operations, even for children, transvestitism, and homosexual activity. All of these are clear and obvious violations of Christian principles.

 

When pressed, they will ultimately make up some reasoning like “I don’t have to believe everything in Christiainty, plus different people have different opinions.” Ah yes, choose your own religion. So convenient. As St. Augustine said “If you accept things from the gospel that you like and reject what you don’t, it’s not the gospel you’re listening to but yourself.” These people are listening to themselves. It’s the religion of self. Self-worship. You are the ultimate God in this religion. Sounds attractive.

 

It’s also a result of Protestant theology which posits that there are no authorities within religion but that it’s up to each individual to decide what’s right. To be fair, they will claim the Holy Spirit has to make all the decisions. Sounds good right? God himself making your decisions. What could be better? Well, because of this belief we have 30,000 Protestant denominations. That’s why we need a structure. Otherwise people float around rudderless. As evidenced by many of my friends, their own faulty beliefs often take precedence over God’s laws. It’s all too easy to fall into this trap when it’s a “Me and God alone” proposition.

Interesting Stat about Catholics Vs. Anglicans in England

I came across a very interesting statistic while doing some research. And basically what it said was that more Catholics attend Mass on a weekly basis then Anglicans attend church even though in England there are approximately 25 million Anglicans and only four million Catholics.

One of the interesting things that I've come across is that people of other denominations will say they are not required to attend mass or church but that it is strongly encouraged and that they attend as often as possible and that they are good people and they do what they can. But it definitely seems to me that unless you are required to go then there's a strong incentive not to go. The other thing about attending weekly religious services that you really have to make it an obligatory part of your day every week. So there's no point in saying I think probably maybe I should go and I will try to go. If you do that then you won't go. You have to say that it is absolutely required that you going you have no other choice.

But what also happens is that it just becomes part of your day. For me for example it would feel very odd and out of place for me to miss Mass on any particular Sunday. However I know for other people who never go that it would seem like the opposite. It would actually seem weird if they did go.

One thing I also noticed is that people will think it is very strange for me to attend Mass while I am traveling. However unless there is some extreme reason why I cannot go I will usually attend Mass while I'm on vacation. For one thing I find it very interesting because I get to see a new church that I've never seen before and experience their particular religious devotions and perhaps even see things such as relics or religious paraphernalia and things of that sort. So I find it personally interesting to do this. On top of that it only takes about an hour or two to attend Mass in a particular location. So if you're on vacation for a week then you will be doing a variety of things such as eating out, doing shopping and so on. So to me it's not a big deal to spend one or two hours in church and thanking God for the opportunity to travel.

Pope Francis says something good

After asking "Who am I to judge" in relation to homosexuality, using Muslim convicts to represent the apostles during the washing of the feet on Holy Thursday, condemning air conditioners and modern life, Pope Francis has released something that makes sense.
He said you cannot just claim to be a good person, you have to go to Mass, because Jesus commanded us to. He also said not to just go out of a sense of obligation, but to go because you are spiritually nourished.
Let's hope for more statements like this from this pope. Also, I'm pretty sure this won't get any airtime in the media. They've already decided who they want Pope Francis to be, and something like this doesn't fit.
More here: http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2017/12/14/pope-francis-its-not-enough-just-to-be-good-you-must-go-to-mass/

A terrorist attack in Edmonton

Canada's leader Justin Trudeau is truly pathetic. After first flooding Canada with unvetted migrants from Islamic terrorist hotbeds, we had a terrorist attack in Edmonton, Alberta. It's truly horrendous. But what does Trudeau and his ilk do? Do they try to protect Canadian citizens? No, of course not.

Instead, they are giving money to Islamic centres for security! Seriously. After the increased threat from Islamic terrorism to citizens of Canada, the Canadian government sent out funding to Islamic centres and mosques to "increase security"!

Even my home city's small mosque received almost $50,000 for "increased security". REALLY? We are living in a truly upside-down world! Muslims commit terrorism, and THEY get extra money for security?? I imagine after this terrorist attack in Edmonton, the same thing will happen. Muslims will get more money for security.

I don't really know why these politicians are so committed to their crazy theory. Islamic terrorist attacks are happening all over the world, in every country. The more Muslims, the more attacks. It's happening all across Europe, it's happening in the US and Canada, it's happening in India, and it's happening all across Asia. We need to wake up!

In the past, we had to call Crusades to push back the Islamic invasion, Muslims trying to take over Europe. But now we are not only not pushing them back, we are welcoming them in. Do we really hate ourselves that much? This isn't about racism, it's about an ideology that hates us and everything we stand for.

At what point will these crazy politicians get real? What would have to happen for them to wake up? Maybe there is no hope for them. That's my current theory. The worse the terrorist attack, the more crazy they become. Ever since George W. Bush called Islam a religion of peace, libtards have been outdoing themselves trying to compliment this religion.

But let's face it. Islam has nothing to do with peace. It has everything to do with domination. The only time they would advocate peace is if it somehow benefited Islam. Everything is done for the spread of Islam. The end justifies the means in their twisted philosophy. At best it is a human religion, it is not a divine religion. It teaches that if you kill and destroy in the name of their religion, you will be rewarded with sexual gratification, gluttony, and a whole host of other sins of the flesh. Their founder was a horrible human being.

We know our leaders will never protect us, we have to protect ourselves. But the light of humanity shines in everybody's heart. Therefore, we must maintain hope for Muslims, pray for them, pray they leave their religion and find the true religion of Christianity.

Pope Francis and the new corporal work of mercy?!

I was at Mass on Sunday and one of the prayer intentions was to join in with Pope Francis who wants us to add a new work of mercy. I forget if it’s classified under corporal or spiritual. But he wants to add a couple. One has to do with sharing resources with the less fortunate or something and the other is about protecting mother earth. All I could do was sigh. Pope Francis is such an activist pope. He can’t just leave anything alone. People aren’t coming into the Church because of all the new stuff that’s happening. They want the original and undiluted. Why is he so intent on changing everything?

 

BUT Phil! What’s wrong with sharing and protecting the earth???? Nothing in principle. But the corporal and spiritual works of mercy have been around for like 1000 years. And now he will just change them?? They are already complete in my opinion. Jesus was never focused on saving mother earth and earth-worship. He cared more about our disposition towards God and man. And those are thoroughly addressed by the existing works of mercy. In fact, they are taken from the words of Christ himself. Feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the prisoner, etc. What we do with plastic bottles is something each person must decide. Nobody wants to destroy the planet for no purpose. Pope Francis, in his encyclical seems to think the earth is becoming a giant trash heap. He even says this. Like really? The main source of “trash” is the trash morality we have. But he rarely seems to address that. He is more interested in climate change or whatever.

 

While Pope Francis is trying to come across as hip and “with it”, he’s not bringing any new people into the Church. That’s statistically verified. Why not stick to what Catholicism is about? Spiritual growth and becoming holier, it’s not about reducing our carbon footprint.

Modern society turns morality on its head.

One interesting and disturbing thing I have noticed about people in the society around me is that rather than lacking morals altogether, they have flipped them on their heads. Things which should matter do not and vice versa.

One example is in the area of reproductive technology. Ab○rtion and I.V.F. involve the destruction of embryos and fetuses yet this doesn't seem to faze many people, including Catholics. I know many so-called Catholics who wouldn't flinch at using these life-killing technologies to achieve their goals. I know one couple right now in that situation. It seems absolutely irrelevant to them. I brought up naprotechnology, which is a Catholic re-productive technology which has a higher success rate than the standard methods. Yet they wouldn't even consider it. "The doctor at the hospital didn't mention it so I won't do it." They are like moral jellyfish – they just ebb and flow with the prevailing moral attitudes of their environment. We are supposed to be more like salmon, swimming against the tide of popular opinion and moving towards the truth.

But the irony of it is that these same people aren't amoral. They do not have a "nothing matters" attitude. On many subjects, they are zealous. I like to use the example that if we were on a nature walk and I just threw an empty water bottle into the forest or a stream and they saw me do it, they would be outraged. They would look on in shock and become very angry at me. If possible, they would do everything possible to collect the water bottle so it didn't harm the environment. Yet when it comes to human life, they wouldn't even be bothered to find out if something is morally acceptable and why. They would rather remain ignorant. Upon learning the truth, they are unaffected and couldn't care less. How perverse.

Off the top of my head, here is a list of things "modern" people care about vs. what they don't.

Things modern-day people care about:

Animal shelters and animal welfare

Recycling

Global Warming

"Gender expression"

Multiculturalism – regardless of the values of the cultures

 

Things modern-day people don't care about:

Human life

se×ual morality

Intact families

God

Their own culture and values

 

Now more than ever we need a revival of these morals.

CBC continues to be pathetic

CBC is so pathetic and worthless they can’t even report objective news facts. There is a current March for Life in Ottawa with tens of thousands of people. It barely appears on the CBC website and the article isn’t about the March, it’s about the effects the march will have on traffic. That’s it. “traffic may be snarled due to march”. No indication of numbers or reason. Anyway, they are beyond pathetic. If this was a leftist progressive cause that had 0.001% the number of people involved, it would be the number one article on the CBC website for a week. So pathetic.

Pope Francis - Defender of Catholicism or Social Justice Warrior?

Pope Francis is once again on a mission to prove his bona fides as a modern, rock-star pope. Unlike Pope John Paul II who was sometimes referred to as a rock star because of his charisma and ability to explain Catholic doctrine in a compelling and attractive way, Pope Francis wants to be much more like an actual rock star. Rather than focusing on core Catholic issues, he prefers to stick to the uncontroversial territory of Social Justice Warrior in order to appeal to hip lefties. He’s often proclaimed as a “super duper popular pope that everyone loves”, but this is largely because he makes no moral demands except maybe to recycle and kind of be nice to people. Who would argue with that? Certainly not the hip social leftists of Hollywood and elsewhere.

Most recently, and the inspiration for the writing of this article, he appeared on a TED talk. Was it to talk about a closer relationship to God, or how to live a better life through the teaching of Jesus Christ? Or that Jesus gives his body and blood in the Eucharist to those who want eternal life? Nope. It was about not wasting stuff. You know, because having 4 sweaters instead of 3 is pretty serious stuff. Yeah yeah, salvation, schmalvation, the main issue in our world at the moment is not letting power get to your head as the pope describes as drinking gin on an empty stomach. He referred several times in his talk to taking care of others. But it’s always very vague. “don’t leave people on the side of the road”. Essentially his main message is socialism 101. Some people make too much money, people care too much about “stuff”. One person’s wealth = another person’s poverty. He has never advocated more economic freedom which has been proven to be the driver of success and prosperity. He views the world as a zero-sum game.

200 years ago, 80% of the world was extremely poor. Now it’s like 12%, the lowest rate in human history. This isn’t simply because the 20% gave all their wealth away to the other 80%. Unfortunately the pope doesn’t understand that economic prosperity, rather than simply “being nice to poor people”, is the real solution. In fact, he has denounced capitalism as the “dung of the devil”. He, as a social justice warrior, has advocated the same things that have made Venezuela one of the worst places on Earth. Because of his stances, he has become very popular in pop culture. He is very trendy. No more pesky talk about universal morals or calls to holiness. How passé!

But don’t think this means anything positive for Catholicism in general. Mass attendance has not increased, nor has the number of people converting to Catholicism. In fact, within faithful Catholic circles, people at best try to view Pope Francis as meaning well but making media blunders and at worse view him as purely a social justice warrior who wants to appear popular, relevant and “cool”.

With this current pope, you are much more likely to get an earful about not throwing out rotten bananas or the need to smile more than you will about sexµal ethics, the seven deadly sins, sacrifice, the Eucharist, the necessity of the Church, or traditional devotionals such as the rosary or the stations of the cross. He will not address the personal moral problems facing people around the world today.

As I was thinking about this yesterday, I realized that Pope Francis’s message is only geared toward the top 1% or top 10% people in the world. They are the exploiters and wasters and people destroying the Earth and other people. It seems the other 90% or 99% are entities without agency. They are simply victims who are not moral actors, they are simply acted upon. As my friend noted, his message seems more political and in line with leftist political thought than a message designed to help every individual morally and spiritually.

Despite his attempts to create an image of being a kindly old man who is not interested in dogma but rather in being kind, gentle and “tender”, he actually treats people who question him with harshness, calling them Pharisees and saying they are too strict. He has banished many people who simply seek humble clarification on issues. He has demoted people who merely ask questions.

I think the pope needs to return to true Catholic principles and spend less time being a modern-day social justice warrior. The Church will not attract new followers by attempting to appear to be the same as the rest of the world. As anyone in marketing will know, to create a strong brand, an organization must stick to what makes it unique and promote that. No marketer would suggest an image that says you are the same as everyone else. Trying to be more like the world will not bring in converts. I believe what will bring in converts is showing how the Catholic Church can improve your life and the world substantially by following Jesus Christ.

Bill Schutt COMPLETELY WRONG about Catholic Church

Bill Schutt is a professor of Biology Professor at Long Island University. He wrote a book about cannibalism where he says it's perfectly natural. But he doesn't seem to have the first clue what he's talking about when it comes to the Catholic Church.

He was being interviewed tonight, March 13, 2017 on The Current by Anna Maria Tremonti of CBC News. The anti-Catholic bigotry was overt.

He makes one gaffe after another and is completely wrong. I would seriously question anything this man says. If we are to judge the validity of his claims based on how bad he represents historical Catholicism, then his works are worth the paper they're written on.

Let's go claim by claim from the radio interview:

Schutt: Well, mainly because for nearly 400 years, starting in the 13th century, once Pope Innocent the Third proclaimed that the host was the actual body of Jesus Christ that was being consumed.

??? So he pinpointed Pope Innocent III as the originator of the idea of Transubstantiation??

Ok, let's look at references:
St. Iraenus of Lyon said the following a few decades after Jesus Christ:
"[Christ] has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own Blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own Body, from which he gives increase to our bodies."

For dozens more references which date to the first and second century, visit this link.

Jesus himself said the bread and wine are true flesh and true blood. This is a constant teaching of the Church from the very beginning. At best what Bill Schutt is doing here is an amateur move where they see an official pronouncement (done because the doctrine is being denied by heretics) from the pope as the beginning of that belief. This is complete nonsense. The belief existed, and was dogma. It had to be officially defined in a particular way in response to heresies. You'd have to be a first year student to make that mistake.

Even Wikipedia points out that belief in the Real Presence, i.e. that Jesus Christ is present body, blood, soul, and divinity in the Eucharist, dates back to the earliest days of Christianity.

The interviewer, Anna Maria Tremonti, who is equally uninformed then pipes up and says "I mean it is true in the Catholic doctrine. It's the body and blood of Christ. The wine is supposed to be the blood. Yeah."

To which Bill Schutt replies: "Absolutely."

No Bill and Anna, ABSOLUTELY WRONG. The bread AND the wine BOTH become the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ. The wine doesn't only become the blood and the bread only become the body. Anyone with the most cursory understanding of Catholicism would know this. It's the most basic information.

Bill also mentions that many of his so-called good Catholic friends don't "really" believe in the Real Presence, but rather they do a sort of "wink wink nudge nudge" about it and really believe that it's just a symbol. Sorry BILL, those aren't good Catholics, they are bad, informed, uncatechised friends. They ought to know better. If you do not believe in the Real Presence, you should not partake in communion. Real Catholics believe in the Eucharist and that it is the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ.

I find it pathetic that CBC would interview people on a subject which they know nothing about. In fact, Catholicism is the only area where this is deemed acceptable. You wouldn't have someone who knows nothing about baseball doing the color commentary for baseball games. Yet, no one bats an eye when someone whose understanding of Catholicism is less than that of a 5 year old presumes to speak for all Catholics. It's truly pathetic. I can GUARANTEE you, CBC would never have anyone misrepresenting or mocking Islam. They would only hire Islamic experts and apologists.

Our tax dollars are once again being completely wasted on these programs which are spouting countless lies to attack the faith of millions. CBC should be ashamed of themselves.

SHOCKING: woman reads gospel and gives homily in st. John's Newfoundland

Although I wasn't present at this Mass my friend who was informed me that this morning at 9:30 a.m. at st. Theresa's Church on Mundy Pond Road in St. John's Newfoundland a woman read the gospel from memory in the center of the Altar and then proceeded to give a homily. This is while two ordained priests looked on as she was doing this.

This practice is fully and explicitly forbidden in the general instruction of the Roman missal as well as in the code of canon law. These are two of the guides which govern all the activities that occur within the church.

If you would like the details of what is contained within these Church documents please go to this exclamation given by Father John trigilio when something similar happened to someone else:

http://www.ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage.asp?number=346259&Pg=&Pgnu=&recnu=

I am not sure but I fear this could be part of a new program initiated in Newfoundland to deal with the shortage of priests in certain areas. In the case where there is no priest present in a particular area on a Sunday it is permissible for parishioners to have a form of service. However this service would not include Eucharist or anything that is specifically assigned to a priest. Also it requires that there be no priest available at the time. However this was clearly not the case here because there were two priests actually in the church sitting there doing everything else for Mass.

What is happening is that priests are being given an inch and they are taking a mile. This is pretty much what happens every time there is any form of slight change that occurs in the church. There are radicals within the church that will take it to an extreme that was never intended.

Celebrating this mass or father Tony bidgood and another priest who has not been identified. Either one of these priests should have stepped in to stop what was happening here. But it is most likely that father Tony not only didn't try to stop it but had actually set it up.

This is an outrageous disaster. My friend was so distraught and put off by this that he simply walked out of the church. He felt he had no other option. In fact what I told him was that Catholics are forbidden from spending their Sunday celebration at a non-catholic place of worship. If a Catholic Church is not respecting specific and explicit Catholic laws I have to wonder if it would even fulfill one's Sunday obligation. My friend did the right thing by walking out of the church. When something so manifestly wrong is occurring it is our moral duty to stand up and do something about it. I'm not talking about tiny little peccadilloes which can sometimes occur. I'm talking about massive violations of canon law.

He will be contacting the bishop for something to be done about this. Hopefully the bishop will follow his duty invocation and explicitly forbid this action and tell the priest this is unacceptable. My fear in all of this is that the bishop does nothing and ignores canon law.

I will keep you posted on any updates.

Temptation

Does anyone here have struggle with sin? It’s such a huge battle at all times. Various things I find a daily thing. It can be anger, lust, gluttony, sloth, etc. I really do envy people who have been able to transcend these. I know we remain human with temptations until death, so no one really fully “overcomes” these sins, I don’t think. But I think you can get to the point where you are not internally tempted to do certain things. You can recognize they are wrong and you use your will to avoid them. But this also applies to positive things, such as almsgiving or attending religious events.

Ultimately I think a lot of it is habit and being at peace with your life. With habit, we can create a lifestyle where we do not face such temptation all the time. Like eating healthy. At first, because we are still fully addicted, it can be difficult. But once we develop a habit of eating a proper breakfast and having good quality nutrition, the longer we do this, the less we are internally tempted to partake. We may still have, in the back of our minds, the idea that partaking in a particular sin might seem like it would be pleasurable but we aren’t holding on to the door frame to prevent ourselves from doing it.

Anyway like I said many saints have come to this point where they are no longer pulled internally toward a sin. They see it, but they are not really “tempted” by it.

Why do I keep saying “internal”? Well, there are two types of temptation. One is you are being tempted. The other is you are internally tempted, you are struggling to not give in, etc.

For example, if you were offered drugs, if you had no desire for them, someone could still be “tempting you” with them. An internal temptation is one where you are a drug addict and it takes all your will power to decline the offer. In the first example, you are not internally tempted. I feel like after much discipline and habit you can eventually reach that level. I guess that’s our spiritual goal!

How is Everyone’s Lent Going?

Hi everyone, just checking in to see how your Lent is progressing. We are still in the initial stages of it. I gave up soft drinks, but I should do more I think. That's not much of a penance really, even though I partake frequently. I'm in awe of some people. I knew one girl who gave up meat FOR ALL OF LENT! Crazy. She is Indian so maybe they know more recipes. My fiancée is Indian and vegetarian all her life. But still that's a lot. Others will give up drinking all together, chocolate, etc. some are tall orders.

 

But it all depends. If you never eat chocolate, then giving it up is pretty meaningless. Also some people, including myself in past Lents, give up so little it hardly seems like a penance. Like giving up one flavour of ice cream or maybe not drinking one type of alcohol. Pretty low-end. You should really be looking for something that will bring you closer to God. Look for things that take you away from union with the Almighty, and those are good places to start.

 

I do wonder about people who live an entire life of penance, do they give up something else? Some people have already given a lot. Btw, you can also take up something, like being more helpful or saying more prayers. Not all about stopping everything. What do you do for Lent, write it down below!

Google Search #1 "Why do Catholics...Pray to Mary?"

This is the ninth in a series of articles which are based on the top 9 google searches which come after "Why do Catholics..." in the search suggestions. I start at the ninth and will work my way to #1. If you have follow-up questions or comments, please post them below.

The topic of today's blog is "Why do Catholics Pray to Mary?"

Google Search #2 "Why do Catholics...Pray to Saints?"

This is the eighth in a series of articles which are based on the top 9 google searches which come after "Why do Catholics..." in the search suggestions. I start at the ninth and will work my way to #1. If you have follow-up questions or comments, please post them below.

The topic of today's blog is "Why do Catholics Pray to Saints?"