Spot the Difference

Starting from 2hrs 35 mins, we have Pope Francis's incensation of the Blessed Sacrament, our Eucharistic Lord.

Starting from 8 mins 41 seconds, we have Pope Benedict XVI's incensation of the Blessed Sacrament, our Eucharistic Lord.

Kneeling before our Eucharistic Lord has always been important to Popes, as you can see.

Kneeling Catholic will be none too pleased for reasons which will be obvious. Our beloved Holy Father says so many good and wise things but one wonders if there were some behind His Holiness who were wondering when Pope Francis would use the prie-dieu set before him.

Pray that the Holy Father sets a good example to the rest of us, especially at this time when faith in the Real Presence is so weak and so fragile, to kneel before our God, as did his predecessor and, presumably, all of His Holiness's predecessors.

St. Francis of Assisi, in his "Letter to All Superiors of the Friars Minor" said:

'When the priest is offering sacrifice at the altar or the Blessed Sacrament is being carried about, everyone should kneel down and give praise, glory, and honor to our Lord and God, living and true.'

I liked the gesture that the Holy Father made in travelling humbly by foot as a pilgrim following the Lord in procession, as one of us, but would have preferred that the Holy Father had not broken with his predecessors on this occasion and had knelt before the Lord Jesus in adoration and worship. It goes without saying that kneeling before the Blessed Sacrament, in adoration, is a genuine gesture of humility before God.

Thoughts on 'Same-Sex Marriage' (Continued...)

A same-sex union can never achieve conception as a rule - ever - in every case this cannot be achieved.

The reproductive system of male and female can effect the relationship of a marriage in terms of fertility. Fertility can cause joy and pain, for example, joy with the birth or conception of a child and pain if a couple or one of the couple are found to be infertile.

Fertility is a non-issue for same-sex couples. Therefore is it 'equal marriage' if a couple of different genders can achieve something that same-sex couples cannot - reproduction? Surely it is not and therefore cannot be called marriage because we are dealing with a different category of human relationship. Indeed, the Catholic Church would say that we are dealing here with a disordered sexual relationship, but, for same-sex couples, the opposite situation arises. The reproductive system of the couple - be they male and male or female and female - are never involved in the sexual union.

So we see that 1 man + 1 woman = new life in most cases, since even if they contracept, the removal of the contraceptive option allows the possibility of new life that they had hitherto been wilfully impeding.

1 man + 1 man or 1 woman + 1 woman = no new life in every case without exception.

So how can we use the same word to describe these two unions. It makes no sense unless you want to dismantle the meaning of the original word.

A same-sex couple could indeed adopt a child, should the law allow it (which in this country, it does). A same-sex couple can also go through surrogacy, should the law allow it (which in this country, it does). Indeed, a same-sex couple could go through IVF or surrogacy, should the law allow it (which in this country, it does). However, this will always involve artificial means of obtaining a child and the child can never be the result of their sexual union. Therefore, can we call this 'marriage'?

One could object that infertile couples go down this path, so why not same-sex couples? Yet that misses the point. Unlike for same-sex couples, for infertile heterosexual couples, their infertility is not a result of their union being fruitless because they have the same reproductive organs. It is because there is, for one reason or another, an element of sterility present in one or both of the parties. Yet their union stands and can be called 'marriage' because of the fact that their unitive and reproductive organs are different - not the same. Their union is not less a union because of 'faulty mechanics'. This is what a union is - the union of two complementary but essentially different human beings - biologically, sexually and reproductively - different because and only because they are male and female.

Not only the purpose of human sexuality and of marriage is being destroyed in the 'same-sex marriage' legislation, but, too, the purpose and meaning of male and female. Because marriage is to be an institution into which men can enter with men and women with women, the implicit message of the legislation is not just that marriage has no inherent meaning and purpose, but that to be male and to be female is the same thing. This is incredibly dangerous. We are now saying that men and women are not just 'equal', but we are saying that men and women are 'the same' even though this is a categorical lie of immense proportions. Men cannot, for instance, give birth. A man has no womb. A woman does. Women can breastfeed, a man cannot.

Much rides emotionally and within a marriage for couples in terms of fertility in that from the loving union of a man and a woman, a child may or may not be the result. There are things a heterosexual couple can do that a same-sex couple cannot do. For example, as well as the obvious examples, a same-sex couple can go down different avenues in order to obtain a child, but they cannot, for example, pursue natural family planning as can a couple composed of two persons of the opposite gender.

How is it that we can be at this stage of the progress of the legislation and yet men and women in public office, in politics, in the media and in academia have failed, completely, to object to this legislation purely in intellectual terms because the legislation is riddled with glaring logical inconsistencies and indeed, logical black holes? 

Same-Sex Marriages with St Thomas Aquinas

I answer that, It was necessary for woman to be made, as the Scripture says, as a "helper" to man; not, indeed, as a helpmate in other works, as some say, since man can be more efficiently helped by another man in other works; but as a helper in the work of generation. This can be made clear if we observe the mode of generation carried out in various living things. Some living things do not possess in themselves the power of generation, but are generated by some other specific agent, such as some plants and animals by the influence of the heavenly bodies, from some fitting matter and not from seed: others possess the active and passive generative power together; as we see in plants which are generated from seed; for the noblest vital function in plants is generation.

Wherefore we observe that in these the active power of generation invariably accompanies the passive power. Among perfect animals the active power of generation belongs to the male sex, and the passive power to the female. And as among animals there is a vital operation nobler than generation, to which their life is principally directed; therefore the male sex is not found in continual union with the female in perfect animals, but only at the time of coition; so that we may consider that by this means the male and female are one, as in plants they are always united; although in some cases one of them preponderates, and in some the other. But man is yet further ordered to a still nobler vital action, and that is intellectual operation. Therefore there was greater reason for the distinction of these two forces in man; so that the female should be produced separately from the male; although they are carnally united for generation. Therefore directly after the formation of woman, it was said: "And they shall be two in one flesh" (Gn. 2:24).

~ St Thomas Aquinas

Until now, marriage had a public purpose. What is the purpose of  'same-sex unions' which are to be known as 'marriage'? What is a 'union'? Is a union of two persons to signify a purpose? If so, what is that purpose without the 'generative' potential?

Does a 'same-sex marriage' have any purpose at all save for a political purpose? This is new. Marriage, of itself, as an institution, has never had an explicitly political purpose despite what feminists would posit. Freely entered into by two parties, male and female, its purpose has been clear.

Does a union make any sense without any reference to a purpose that effects the society beneficially? In what way do same-sex marriages benefit society? Surely these benefit 'individuals inside the society' rather than society itself. In sacramental terms, a union of two persons involves the mystery of Christ's love for His Church. God is 'in' a marriage in the Church as the two become 'one flesh'. Marriage is a 'type' or 'shadow' of the eternal union with God, but is not that union. Some have achieved this union with God in this life. These we call Saints.

St Catherine of Siena: Achieved union with God in this life

Obviously, wider society cares very little for what St Thomas Aquinas (or any Catholic) has to say on the subject of marriage, but philosophically we have entered uncharted water. No philosophers, no, not a single one - has advanced a philosophical case for 'same-sex unions', as far as I know.

There are plenty of 'natural law' arguments against 'same-sex marriage' but I think we can now concede that natural law is not respected any longer. The idea of sexual union in marriage being a 'type' or foretaste of the Heavenly union of Christ with His Bride - union with God - is not going to make sense to many people in an atheistic age, yet, I fear, we have entered into such a breach with the natural law that only the renewed discovery of the Divine law will restore it or recover it, since definitions and understanding of marriage are to be confused, blurred and destroyed.

We are always told we should question things. Will this new bill, when or if it becomes the law of the land, be questionable from a philosophical point of view? Will it be questioned in the academic sphere? Or will it now be something that is intellectually, academically, philosophically 'off-limits' simply because it is a re-definition established by Parliament itself. The consequences are huge everywhere in every sphere. Aside from the promoted desire to raise the autonomy of the individual above our responsibility to wider society, the arguments for 'same-sex marriage' have had convincing (even if you and I are not convinced) emotional power. It is emotional power and the power of emotive words and rhetorical spin alone that has gained for 'same-sex marriage' a global stage and the registers of town halls (and some churches) across the World. Without the power of the banal media age, this could never have worked. Never.

Perhaps someone can remind me of another age in which philosophers took human marriage and dismantled it, advancing the case for men to be married to men and women to be married to women. Marriage has hitherto had a fixed purpose recognised by the beggar and the philosopher alike - even philosophers who rejected much of Divine Revelation, like Kant. Kant was always talking about his 'duty' from what I remember of political philosophy. Other political philosophers talked of individual liberty, but nothing quite like this. Everything has consequences for everyone else in the minds of the philosophers. Such a thing never entered into the minds of the philosophers. 'Same-sex love', if it was mentioned, was something like a pursuit outside of marriage, even if someone was married, motivated by the pleasure principle for the explicit purpose of pleasure. Still, however, marriage was left untouched because of the esteem in which it was held for its unique purpose.

David Cameron: Just what is he up to?

So, we are in uncharted waters. 'Same-sex marriage' is deeply flawed because it is illogical. It can only be made logical if marriage has now no human purpose, no societal purpose, no natural purpose, no biological purpose, no Divine purpose or redemptive purpose. All these have been stripped away with the promotion of the desire for individual autonomy raised above the interests of all others, excluding the interests of all others.

The only political philosophers who would want to see 'same-sex marriage' are those who considered marriage itself a 'bad thing', something to be destroyed in furthering a future goal, such as the followers of Karl Marx, like Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno and the Frankfurt School. They're the only philosophers I can think of who would want to attack marriage as an institution and shape it according to a new paradigm that disregarded its purpose entirely. It is not just the meaning, or definition of marriage that is at stake. It is the purpose of marriage. Intellectually, David Cameron is being very dishonest from the very outset. He says he wishes to extend marriage to people of the same gender, yet it cannot be extended without being diluted, worse, have its original purpose and intention destroyed in the process.

You may very well disagree with my view on 'same-sex marriage', since you hold the opposite view, but I would posit you would find it hard to disagree with what I have written on it here, since these are merely observations and questions. You cannot extend marriage to people of the same-sex without destroying its meaning and its purpose. For the benefits won under new legal recognition, is it really worth it? Would you feel great about getting married to someone of the same gender if you understood that what you were doing was breaking no human law, nor the law of God that you have disregarded, but wilfully destroying the purpose of marriage by contracting a counterfeit one? Do you really believe that what you do has no impact on society? Is there anyone who really believes our actions have no impact on anybody else?

The problem is this: while different couples of opposite genders marry for some different reasons, the reasons why couples of the opposite sex will desire to marry will always be different to the reasons why couples of the same-sex desire to marry, because these two marriages are entirely different, therefore they can never be 'equal marriage'. They cannot ever, ever have the same outcome from their 'union'. Many couples today contracept, and while we know what the Church teaches on the matter, a same-sex couple can never contracept. Therefore these two relationships are entirely different in order. They are not equal. Marriage cannot be 'equalised'.

It astonishes me that I know someone in prison for walking on the wrong street in Brighton since he is barred from so many streets for being 'anti-social', but the Prime Minister can destroy the meaning and purpose of human marriage and walk about like nothing anti-social has happened.

Crackdown on Freemason Priest 'at Rome's Request'

Courtesy of BBC

'A Roman Catholic parish priest at an elite French ski resort has been stripped of his Church functions for refusing to renounce Freemasonry.

Father Pascal Vesin was ordered by his bishop to cease his work in the Alpine resort of Megeve, the parish said. Bishop Yves Boivineau had warned Fr Vesin about his "active membership" of the Grand Orient de France lodge. Freemasonry has been condemned as anti-Christian and anti-clerical by various popes through history.

Bishop Boivineau ordered the priest to cease his functions "at Rome's request", the parish said. In March, the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith - effectively the Church's watchdog - asked for the priest's departure.

Three members of the diocese of Annecy then met him but Fr Vesin said he would not leave the lodge. A statement from the diocese quoted by Le Figaro newspaper stressed that the penalty imposed on the Freemason priest was not final and could yet be lifted because "mercy goes hand in hand with truth".

Fr Vesin has been parish priest of Sainte-Anne d'Arly Montjoie in Megeve since 2004, according to another French newspaper, Le Messager. In an interview in January, he set out liberal views of the Church's role. He said he favoured allowing some priests to marry and said he had refused to endorse a demonstration against same-sex marriage in Paris. Conspiracy theories and controversy have dogged the Freemasons throughout their existence, fuelled by their secretive image, though for some they are just a gentleman's club devoted to charitable giving.'

Deo gratias. Fantastic. Now for the purge in Rome?

For those interested (yes, both of you) the annual Bilderberg Conference will this year be taking place in...wait for it...Watford, Hertfordshire. Henry Kissinger is going to be there. Peter Mandelson is going to be there. David Rockefeller is going to be there. Obviously, Alex Jones is going to be there too.

Pope Francis on Atheism

We adore You, O Christ, and we bless You, for by Your Holy Cross, You have redeemed the world.

Eveny Lent, during Stations of the Cross, we are reminded that the Lord Jesus redeemed the whole world. All of Creation has been redeemed and He is the Redeemer.

This does not mean that all of humanity will be saved, as if God takes us to Heaven against our own will. The Lord said clearly in the Holy Gospel that the road to eternal life is narrow and 'few be there that find it'.

If a person does good (objective good, rather than paying for an abortion), following conscience consistently, as others have said, he or she will find the One True Catholic Faith, in which the fullness of truth and goodness is communicated to us.

I do not believe the Holy Father has said something that is out of line with the Catholic tradition, but I would understand people saying it is open to a good interpretation or a bad one.

It sounds like the Holy Father is trying to open up a dialogue with atheists - a public 'Court of the Gentiles'. We can meet atheists in doing good and then, while doing good, bear witness to the Author of all that is good, but what we say when we meet them will, we pray, aid their eternal salvation and ours.

I cannot help but think how little Richard Dawkins speaks of the urgent need to 'do good'. All he seems to do is rubbish religious manifestations of 'good works'. I see in the Holy Father's words a rather clever way of approaching atheism, since 'doing good' seems not to be a big part of the atheistic agenda. The starting point of his homily seems to have been that 'doing good is a principle that unites all humanity'.

All this said, it is perhaps not surprising that the liberal press have leapt on the Holy Father's words.

The full homily is here.

According to the Logic of Our Foreign Policy, We Should Have Armed Woolwich Killers with Guns

Courtesy of Prison Planet

'Given his government’s policy in arming jihadist extremists in Libya and Syria, British Prime Minister David Cameron and his Foreign Secretary William Hague should immediately order the transfer of heavy weaponry and aid to the two terrorists who beheaded a soldier in Woolwich yesterday.

Cameron yesterday condemned the slaughter of the soldier by two jihadists, remarking, “We have had these sorts of attacks before in our country, and we never buckle in the face of them,” and yet his government is desperately trying to aid insurgents in Syria who carry out similar atrocities on a regular basis in pursuit of the exact same extremist ideology.

Syrian rebels have been responsible for innumerable beheadings over the course of the conflict, chanting “Allahu Akbar” as they decapitate their victims just as the two terrorists in Woolwich did during their attack yesterday.

This hasn’t stopped Cameron and Hague aggressively pushing for deadly weaponry to be sent to Syrian jihadists. Indeed, even as the attack in London was unfolding yesterday, Cameron was urging that an arms embargo be lifted.

The UK government has attempted to differentiate between “extremist” rebels in Syria linked to the Al-Qaeda group Jabhat al Nusra and so-called “moderate” Free Syrian Army militants. The kind of “moderate” freedom fighters who like to cut out people’s hearts on camera and eat them….while chanting “Allahu Akbar”.'

For full article, click here.

Toast

David Cameron

David Cameron: "Go about your life, live your life and show that terrorists can never win."

British electorate: "Great. Can we have some of your bodyguards?"

Boris Johnson: ‘One obvious point, it is completely wrong to blame this killing on Islam but also wrong to draw a link between this murder and British foreign policy.’

Killer: 'We swear by Almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you. The only reasons we have done this is because Muslims are dying every day...He is a British soldier, he killed people, he killed Muslim people, in Muslim countries.'

David Cameron: ‘People across Britain, people in every community, I believe, will utterly condemn this attack. We have had these sorts of attacks before in our country and we never buckle in the face of them. ‘The terrorists never win because they cannot defeat the values we hold dear. We have always beaten them back. We have done that through a combination of vigilance, of security, of security information, good policing.'

British electorate: "What values are you thinking of? Same-sex marriage values?"

Killer: 'You people will never be safe. Remove your government, they don't care about you. You think David Cameron is going to get caught in the street when we start busting our guns, you think politicians are going to die? No it's going to be the average guy, like you, and your children. So get rid of them. Tell them to bring our troops back so you can all live in peace'.

Aside from the horror of what took place in Woolwich yesterday, the incomprehensible evil of it, the most disturbing thing about it is that I find myself agreeing with the killer. 'Remove your government, they don't care about you.'

May God grant to the fallen soldier eternal rest and to UKIP, a richly deserved landslide.

Policy Meeting

Peter: "So, to conclude then. Massive immigration, especially from Islamic countries. We really want to rub the Tories nose in diversity. Got that Gordon?"

Gordon: "Check. You okay with that Tony?"

Tony: "Got it."

Peter: "Then open up wars against Muslim nations involving countless deaths of Muslim people to be followed by more wars later. Everyone cool with that?"

Tony: "Got it."

Gordon: "Check. Still with loads of immigration from Islamic countries, right?"

Peter: "Yes. Are you keeping records of this Alistair?"

Alistair: "No."

Peter: "Good."

Margaret: "If I may I can see there may be some future prob-"

Tony: "Oh my, is that the time? Thanks Margaret for that contribution but we're going to have to wrap it up there. Cracking. Well, see you same time next week then. Well done, Peter. Gordon, Alistair, Margaret, Peter. Good day to you."

Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus

I don't know about you, but I've found it hard to keep my head up just recently. It is hard not to be depressed about the evil that is assaulting human life and the Church, especially here in the United Kingdom - the 'epicentre of the culture of death'.

We know that it is not yet all over with the 'same-sex marriage' legislation. There is still the House of Lords who will hopefully give it the pounding it deserves, but only one Lord can save us now. The assaults on the unborn continue, the undermining of the family continues, Lord Falconer is still trying to get his wicked way with 'assisted suicide' and the culture of death continues apace. The dignity of human life is under attack from all quarters in the public sphere. Depressing? Yes. It is enough to make you weep.

There is general dis-ease with the 'same-sex marriage' legislation, because it seems wholly unnecessary. Yet, there is also, surely, a growing dis-ease with the direction in which we are headed in the name of 'progress'. Exactly where are we headed? Human cloning is now looming over humanity as the scientific age glories in its discoveries without recourse to anything we have hitherto understood as conscience.

Human life is sacred: We will rue that we stopped believing it

A Guardian piece on the cloning of human embryonic stem cells is interesting because of the comments it has received from its readers. There is a natural aversion to this kind of science. There is a wariness. Are people ready to entrust the future of humanity to scientists? Are people read to entrust humanity's future to scientists? Exactly what are we building here? What 'boundaries' are we pushing? Is there no ethical concern over this? Where are the moral boundaries? Who is the arbiter of how far we can go? What if embryos really are tiny human beings and we have been sold a myth?

When I look at the embryology and cloning discoveries, I see something far more horrifying than 'same-sex marriage' on the horizon. This is because 'same-sex marriage' is, while a disaster for the human family and for marriage, also a bit of a 'joke'. It is ridiculous. It is not funny but it is laughable. Watching MPs take it seriously was absurd. The concept is the height of absurdity. Its actuality will be even more silly. Two ladies in white dresses getting married in a town hall...'Good grief, what will they think of next?'

 However, the truth is that they have already thought of it - what is next, that is. We are now well and truly in the air in the 'great leap forward'. We have already leapt, so where will we land? Dan Hodges, yesterday, told Conservative MPs who rebelled against the SSM proposal that they need to accept that they live in the 21st century. The implication of Dan's argument was that anyone who didn't go along with 'same-sex marriage' refused to live in the 21st century - refused to be modern - refused to accept 'progress', does not even 'belong' in this century, forgetting that many a totalitarian regime has perpetrated crimes against humanity in the name of 'progress'. It is a terribly flawed argument, but we should face that it is going to be employed regularly and most especially at us. The programme is set and ready and we are going to be asked to 'get with it'.

Progressives see themselves as those who bring betterment and who illuminate humanity towards a bright and glorious future. They have something in mind. They will rarely say what that future looks like, but in order to create it, we are going to need new laws and a new vision and understanding. Two ideas from the Evil One have allowed the high priests of science and 'progress' to get to where they now are and both are gravely evil. Both have been swallowed hook, line and sinker by the British.

Abortion did for the unborn child what Hitler's laws did for the Jews. The unborn child, or fetus, or embryo, now has no humanity as recognised by the State. In the mind of the average Brit an unborn child has no rights, an embryo in early stages even less so. Let's be clear, we are now dealing with 'non-persons' even though they are person enough for scientists to harvest rich human pickings from them from out of their developing humanity. The other idea is the severing from sexual union the idea of procreation. This divorce enables such evils as 'same-sex marriage', but it also enables scientists to usurp God in the scientific laboratory and to create while they also destroy as they play around with human life in the name of 'progress'.

'Same-sex marriage' is the final nail in the coffin that links sexual union in marriage with children or even sex and marriage entirely. Recall that there is no duty upon homosexuals and lesbians to 'consummate the relationship'. Now there is talk of civil partnership status for 'heterosexual equality'. How long before civil partnerships supplant marriage in a secular atheist age? Marriage and its meaning will be changed unalterably in the popular consciousness. The idea of procreation and the natural bringing forth of new life through sexual union in marriage is under concerted attack. Could there be a good, or rather, evil reason? Is it too early to suggest that the end goal of the 'progressives' is that of bringing human reproduction under the control of science? Possibly. I wouldn't put it past them.Would it be so surprising if human reproduction became something bound up with the State and its power over the citizen? If you objected to this eugenics, would you belong in the 22nd century or even the 21st. Perhaps we have learned nothing, Mr Hodges, from the 20th century. Every century is littered with useful idiots championing ideologies that led to human slaughter and enslavement. Nothing new about it, Dan. Nothing new at all.

Human life is sacred. Those pushing for a brave new world do not want you to believe that and we will rue the day we stopped believing it. The Author of all human life is God. We will rue the day that we stopped believing it.

Uproar Over Ginger School Invite

This child was subjected to over five years of bullying over his hair colour

The National Association of Safeguarding for Ginger Haired Pupils (NASGH) have been invited by a Catholic school in the Archdiocese of Southwalk to teach pupils about the evils of bullying others on their ginger identity and the colour of their hair.

The move has sent shockwaves through the education world, with many wondering why the issue of bullying should be reduced to one single issue such as bullying related to ginger hair.

The charitable arm of Domino's Pizza, the National Association for the Cessation of Name-calling of 'Pizzaface' in Schools (NACNPS) has issued a statement suggesting that there are many other forms of bullying other than that directed at pupils by other pupils over the colour of their hair.

"For years,' said the Head of NACNPS, Mr Jack Pepperoni, "school-pupils, especially in early teenage years have been subjected to the bullying directed at their acne, and it is not right that one single issue which is the commonplace object of bullying in schools should be emphasised. There are many other points at which children find things to bully other children about when they are noticing difference in each other and forming tribal groups with peers in schools. It is unjust that such emphasis should be placed on one single issue."

Pepperoni added, "In school years, children are bullied over such issues as the kind of trainers they wear, whether they are the latest trends, children are bullied over poverty and parents, being too studious, too 'holy', wearing too much black clothing, ethnicity, physical abilities, music taste, fashion taste, whether they wear glasses or not and a range of different issues. Oh yes, and some children are also subjected to bullying over issues related to their early developing sexuality. We would like to take this opportunity to tell all school children to stop calling each other "pizzaface", especially in secondary schools and would be delighted if this Catholic school would invite us in so that we can teach their children about this acne issue in an informative and entertaining way. It strikes me that children are being used and exploited to advance the ginger cause and to make ginger-hair a stridently political issue in our schools."

A spokesman for the aggressive homosexual lobbying group, corrupters of children's innocence merchants and marriage definition destroyers, Stonewall, said, "Look, if you are going to make bullying something less general than 'bullying' and classify the forms of bullying into 'ginger-phobic' bullying and 'acne-phobic-bullying' and the rest, the vast range of issues for which children are often made the objects of bullying then we will start campaigning for 'homophobic bullying' to be taught in schools as well." 

Lord Falconer's Personal Diary Found on the Train?

 

The personal diary said to be that belonging Lord Charles Falconer has been discovered by a member of the public on a train to Huntingdon. It makes for controversial reading, as the personal thoughts and reflections of the Labour peer, now tabling an 'assisted suicide' bill to Parliament. Lord Falconer denied any knowledge of the diary but took the opportunity to once again recommend 'assisted suicide' to the people of Great Britain, saying, 'This diary has nothing to do with me, but in these times of austerity, I can see how the NHS could finally come into its own.'

In a Sane World...

Well done to The Guardian for finally putting Kermit Gosnell where he belongs: as front page news.

If only...Whatever happened to the Manchester Guardian? Any thoughts, Polly Toynbee? Still, The Guardian are true to form and have done a hit-job on the Gosnell case, suggesting that Mr Gosnell is evidence that the murder case proves 'why safe abortions are needed'. It's very clever what The Guardian have done here, you see, because in a case about the killing of lots of children, they've turned it all around to make the Gosnell case about why we need abortionists and spent, oh, about a sentence or two recalling the deaths of the actual victims and their mothers.

Apparently, Gosnell was getting away with murder and he was able to do so because (you're going to love this...)

'Gosnell, taking full advantage of the free market, was able to make money in part because Planned Parenthood does not receive enough funding.'

Remember readers, that Gosnell is a wicked, evil late-abortionist, but Planned Parenthood are the kind of guys you could leave your kids with in the creche while you go out for the day somewhere nice. When you think of Planned Parenthood, think of fluffy rabbits, sunny days and a walk by a river. The breeze is gently blowing in your face and little lambs skip around as...

'Planned Parenthood prides itself on putting the safety and needs of its patients first, and treats everyone equally, regardless of their income. It works with state and federal governments to maintain proper standards at every one of its clinics.'

 

Hmm..its almost like this writer is being paid to make Planned Parenthood look good. Not only that, but she obviously knows nothing of what has in fact been revealed about Planned Parenthood by LiveAction. She goes on...

'Rather than invigorating the right, the Gosnell case should invigorate, and encourage, supporters of family planning and abortion rights.' 

And who created Gosnell? It certainly couldn't be the opportunistic serial killer himself - nor a culture that deems human life to be as sacred a snotty handkerchief in a Central Park litter bin. No, you nasty pro-lifers. You created Gosnell with your evil pro-life ways!

'The anti-choice crowd wants us to be ashamed of Gosnell. But it's their shame, because they are the ones who made him possible.' 

Have an abortion and feel fantastic! It's just like going to the gym...

The answer to Gosnell, then, in the eyes of a Guardian writer, Sarah Jane Stratford...

'If you really want to preempt the Gosnells, provide sex education in schools. Provide access to a wide range of affordable birth control, covered by health insurance. Crack down on pharmacists who refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control.' 

Just as in the 200,000 unborn deaths a year abortion industry in the United Kingdom, I would imagine that it is not too hard to come by condoms, other forms of artificial birth control and sex education in the US, but, more than this, there appears to be a reluctance of the Guardian writer to examine the morality of abortion and what it really means for the unborn child and for the state of motherhood wherever it is provided. Abortion kills children and scars women. It has been even known to kill them. Well, what's the point in getting upset about it, I suppose...this is The Guardian: The Guardian of the abortion industry, that is. In conclusion:

'Gosnell committed ghastly crimes and will be punished. It's time to stop punishing the women who need proper reproductive health care and have committed no crime, except being too poor to afford it.'

Read: Let the mass culling of poor babies begin, or rather, continue at 'break-neck speed'!

Sadly, Gosnell, as far as I know, couldn''t make the print edition of The Telegraph either. I guess he was busy that day standing in the dock as the man the liberal mainstream media would rather you didn't know about because he doesn't fit the 'abortion is a fun day out for the whole family' narrative. If you wanted to know about this story past few weeks, you more or less had to solely rely on Catholic journalists like Tim Stanley of The Telegraph and, as he describes the group hated by the liberals, 'crazy right wing bloggers'.

The BBC just about managed to cough up a little story at the very bottom of their website today. Their coverage of the story has not been particularly vast. Why should it be, though? It's just a local story in the US like the Boston bombing was. The headline of Gosnell's conviction has disappeared on the same day it appeared, unlike the news of Angelina Jolie's double mastectomy which is obviously far more important. 

It's ironic, really, because the mainstream media, who propagandise really rather effectively for the abortion industry (especially Auntie) saw a very important story and wanted to 'terminate' it. 'Is this a story?' they asked, and took a great deal of time debating within themselves as whether this serial baby killing villain making millions of pounds from his butchery scandal was alive as news or not. 'Does this story have a life?' they asked? Truth came into the World and the press tried to bury it, flush it down the toilet and snip its spinal column, but those who care enough about truth, justice, the unborn and the born alive kept the story burning in the not-so-mainstream media and of course, Twitter.

Hero of the day: Telegraph writer, historian and blogger Tim Stanley

Otherwise, you'd probably never know who this man is. May God bless Tim Stanley and Damian Thompson for doing what they can to keep people informed about the horrors of Gosnell's abortion clinic, but it is really quite sad that a newspaper with such a prestigious history cannot put this story where it belongs - at least, somewhere in its pages in the print edition.

Keep fighting the good fight, Tim.

The Best Vocation Video for the Dominicans Yet

Wow! This video is the 1964 Vocation video of the Dominican Order of Preachers of the Province of St Joseph, New York, USA.

My...this is a much better video than the other two I put up. You'll see why. If you have some time, why not also watch this excellent educational video on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Sublime. Yes, even in black and white.

Pope Francis Calls for the Defence of the Unborn

'I greet all the participants on “The March for Life” which took place this morning in Rome and invite everyone to maintain keen attention on this theme of such importance with respect to human life from the moment of conception. With regard to this, I would mention also the gathering of signatures that today took place in many Italian parishes with the aim of sustaining the European initiative “Uno di noi” (One of Us) to guarantee juridical protection of the embryo, safeguarding every human being from the first instant of existence.' ~ Pope Francis

H/T Rorate Caeli

Thank you to a reader for sending me The Tablet image. How did he get a copy of the front cover of next week's edition before it was already published, eh? As it turns out, the Holy Father feels so strongly about the pro-life cause that His Holiness surprised everyone, including the Tablet editorial team, by joining in the Marcia per la Vita (March for Life) Internazionale in Rome this morning.

May God bless our wonderful Holy Father and grant His Holiness long life and a happy and joyful reign. Just there His Holiness looks not entirely dissimilar to Blessed Pope John Paul II.

The Survival of the Fittest

Papal Digest: Maid in Heaven

Two Interesting Videos on the Dominicans

I found it interesting comparing these two vocations videos, comparing and contrasting the content and message of the Order of Friars Preachers in the US and in the UK. One thing that struck me was the age of those attracted to the Dominicans in the US.

The Dominican Order is interesting to me. It seems to be one Order that is still attracting new recruits despite the secular age and the problems encountered by the Catholic Church in the 21st century. The New York Times noted in this piece that even in Ireland, which is undergoing what we are led to believe is a collapse in the Faith, the Dominicans are growing. According to the article, the Friars in Ireland:

'...deliberately went on wearing the robes and promoting the spiritual benefits of shared prayer and a communal lifestyle — with a little help, too, from a chatty blog.

“We made a conscious decision a few years ago to wear the habit because we had no vocations and we were in a bad way,” said Father Dunne, 46, who estimates that he has traveled nearly a half-million miles along Ireland’s country lanes and highways in search of recruits. "If we didn’t present ourselves in an authentic manner, who would join us? And that meant going back to the fundamentals.” 

The NY Times article continues, 'Those fundamentals — which include the signature white tunic and black capuce of the Dominican friars, fashioned almost 800 years ago — have helped lead to an improbable revival of the Dominican order of preachers. Even as other orders close houses and parish priests in Ireland are vanishing at a time of clerical sexual abuse scandals, the Dominican order is growing, and not just in Ireland.'

The search for truth in a world of lies and half-truths seems to be what is attracting men to the Dominicans. One comment on the YouTube of the US video is particularly heartening, the commenter saying:

'Beautiful, I am seriously considering entering the Order , as soon as I finish high school.'

The truth of Jesus Christ - the call to conversion, love for Blessed Mary, Ever Virgin, love for the Blessed Sacrament and the mission for the salvation of souls seems to be what is attracting young men in the US, in particular.

The NY Times article goes on:

'In the United States, the largest northeastern branch is expecting 18 novices to enter its theology school in Washington, which was expanded three years ago. In the smaller southern region based in New Orleans, the Dominicans are scrambling to finance an influx of novices — six this year — with annual expenses of $30,000 for lodging and theology education over seven years. People see the habit in a much more positive light then clerical clothing, the black shirt, white collar and suit,” said Martin Ganeri, who is a Dominican vocations promoter for England, where five people entered the order this year. “The habit doesn’t have the negative image of the clergy, the child abuse issue.” 

While much of the Church appears to be 'falling down', it is so promising that the Dominicans are still bringing forth a healthy harvest of young men willing to lay down their lives for Jesus Christ and to follow Him in the Order of the Preachers.

May God bless the Dominicans still holding fast to the truth of the Gospel, to fidelity to the Magisterium in union with the Chief Shepherd and Successor of St Peter, to the traditions of the Order established by St Dominic for the salvation of souls.

LMS Family Retreat

At this time when the family is under great attack, the LMS have produced this video of their St Catherine's Trust Family Retreat.

Abortion: Don't Follow Britain's Failures

Special Investigation Report: How the Bishops Moved the Feast of the Ascension

Undercover:  Shot of the Feast of the Ascension being moved to Sunday

While controversy over the 'moveable feasts' continues, a special investigation into the moves by the Bishops of England and Wales has revealed some details about just how these feasts were moved.

Bishop's Moves, the removal firm used by the Bishops Conference, were employed to move the Feast of the Ascension, once again, from the Thursday - the day as traditionally understood as being 40 days after Easter Sunday - parking it on Sunday instead.

It can also be exclusively revealed that the Bishop's Moves company were employed in the 1970s in the vast programme of creating 'moveable Altars', including the taking away of traditional signs, motifs and symbols of parish Churches, such as statues of Saints, in the urgent drive of reformers to introduce modern Altars and other Church features essential to the 'renovation' of the liturgy.

With 'moveable Altars' and 'moveable Feasts' already being part of the lucrative deal between Bishop's Moves and the Bishop Conference of England and Wales, some within the company suggest that 'moveable Doctrine' could be part of the plan for the future in England and Wales.

One driver employee, who did not want to be named, admitted that the Bishop's Moves firm is expecting the removal of some Catholic doctrine unpopular with the 'modern-thinking Catholic man and woman' such as the Church's position on artificial contraception, same-sex unions and marriage, abortion, IVF, clerical celibacy and the exclusively male-nature of the clergy. "Basically," he said, "anything that could bring the Church in England and Wales into any form of confrontation with the Government, as well as anything that could offend modern sensibilities is already being boxed up and wrapped in bubble wrap." Asked where the Catholic doctrine was being moved to, the driver responded, "There's a disused coal mine in the North of England. That's all I'm prepared to say."

Neither an official spokesperson from the Bishops Move company, nor the Bishops Conference, were available for comment.

Happy Ascension Day!

Inspired by Eccles and Bosco.

The Truth is Out: The Fathers of British Socialism Were Eugenicists

“Under Socialism, you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live, you would have to live well.”

“The moment we face it frankly we are driven to the conclusion that the community has a right to put a price on the right to live in it … If people are fit to live, let them live under decent human conditions. If they are not fit to live, kill them in a decent human way. Is it any wonder that some of us are driven to prescribe the lethal chamber as the solution for the hard cases which are at present made the excuse for dragging all the other cases down to their level, and the only solution that will create a sense of full social responsibility in modern populations?”

~ George Bernard Shaw

Last year, Johnathan Freedland of The Guardian had the intellectual honesty to admit, publicly, that the political Left of the United Kingdom has an ugly and guilty secret. What is this secret? The secret is that many who are deemed to be the founding fathers of British Socialism were members of the British Eugenics Society and supported the 'weeding' out, mostly through discouragement in breeding, of the 'feckless' or 'unfit'.

If you read the comments that flowed from The Guardian's loyal readers, you'll see the sense of horror that one of their own told the truth - namely - that the moral underpinnings of socialism in Great Britain are discredited because the (mostly) Fabian Society members who developed socialism in the country were out and out eugenicists. They were utopian-thinkers, true, but their utopia really did involve the crushing of individual human liberty down even into planning who could breed (let's call it 'reproductive health') - who was 'fit' for 'purpose' - and who could not breed - who was 'unfit'. It was the age of science, it was the age of progress, it was the age of eugenics - but - it appears, it is something that was particularly strident in Fabian socialist thought. Remember, lest we forget, we are still in that age.

John Maynard Keyes (right)

The similarities between the views of the Fabian Society and British Eugenics Society (and Royal Society) members and Hitler's Nazi ideology are striking and Johnathan Freedland should be applauded for having the guts to say so.

Freedland was even honest enough to take on the British Queen of Eugenics - that'll be Marie Stopes - not Elizabeth II (as far as we know) - and call her out over the appalling things she wrote about the removal of the 'defectives'. Basically, she dedicated her life to the 'weeding out' from society of people she deemed, like the psychopath she was, were not fit for breeding or even existence. A woman we assume to be a natural creature of the Left, Stopes adored Hitler and praised his eugenic policies, but then, George Bernard Shaw seems to have also praised the same tyrannical, evil leaders of the 20th century.

The Left loves to chide the Catholic Church on its record with regimes throughout history and took great delight in pointing out that Pope Benedict XVI was, as a child, a member of Hitler Youth, but the Left do not like being reminded that most of its heroes advocated social policies that are, objectively, genuinely evil - even in their own eyes. These are the policies that bring down the moral credibility that these men (and they were mostly men) once had - or, at least - they should. The political Left defends abortion and artificial contraception, because its about 'choice' but if you remind them of what Marie Stopes and Margaret Sanger actually wanted to achieve in her lifetime and beyond in terms of eugenics, they change the topic of conversation or consider her a 'product of her time'. Marie Stopes, George Bernard Shaw, John Maynard Keynes, William Beveridge - these people never recanted their fundamental views that through eugenics you could create a more 'perfect' society.

Today, Brendan O'Neill, who is not a natural creature of the Left, has done humanity a service by reminding his readers on his Telegraph blog that John Maynard Keynes was a supporter of eugenics - so it is not just his economic policies that are now discredited, but his social policies as well. The Left, of course, hates this and will cry out that 'we've changed', but those who align themselves with the political Left, in this country, must sooner or later let their idols fall and see the truth about the men and women who lead the vision for the transformation of society by the Establishment for the 'good of the people'. The Fabian Society, whose motto is still, 'When I strike, I strike hard' (they are not talking about industrial action) are still working hard to build that vision of a society steeped in 'social planning' and Ed Miliband still seeks their approval, just as Blair did.

Meanwhile, a caveat should be added. Eugenics appeals to the political Left and also to creatures of the Right. The ideology and pseudo-science behind it is that pernicious. It is like a cancer in the political Establishment and in society as well. George Osborne still take time to pander to the Royal Society, an institution whose hall of fame in terms of membership includes many of the creatures of the Left who supported eugenics in their own time and we can be sure includes many who still support it. It is said to be Osborne who is particularly driving the 'same-sex marriage' population-control and social transformation package - the package to which nearly all political parties bar one have now signed up.

The only - let us remind ourselves - the only major organisation - the only Body - that has consistently fought eugenics and loathed this evil ideology is the Catholic Church. Few writers took on the eugenicists of his time, but G.K Chesterton did. From top to bottom, the Catholic Church fought it and still fights it today.

She has always condemned its reasoning, logic and hideous mantras, so often parading themselves as noble when behind their deceits lays a cold, brutal, hatred of humanity. At the end of the Second World War the reality of this monstrous ideology was laid bare in Dachau and Auschwitz. So called 'soft' eugenics supporters now like to distance themselves from that terrible regime, but the cold reality is that Hitler was only putting into stark and terrible practice those policies that were communicated through the social darwinism and its attendant eugenic mentality that washed over Europe's political scene, bringing chaos and destruction to all. Were it not for social darwinism, eugenics and its attending evils, Europe would not have had the evils perpetuated by Hitler.

The same people who don't less people born are, perhaps not surprisingly, the people who want more people dead. Those who align themselves with today's political Left need to wake up. What on earth makes them believe that the today's politicians and the members of such societies and institutes that advocate a more subtle form of eugenics through abortion, artificial contraception and 'same-sex marriage' and euthanasia have changed? Of course our political Establishment has not changed! The political leaders of today continue to advance the agenda of those who came before them, across Europe and of course in the USA. The fight against the evil of eugenics continues and will continue as long, I dare say, as we breathe. Yet, how sad it is that the Bishops of England and Wales, whose response to the horror of abortion is largely indifference, whose response to 'same-sex marriage' is largely woeful, have decided to look away again, when considering the evil that is the Liverpool Care Pathway. May God forgive them, embolden them to fight evil and injustice and may God have mercy on us all!

Note to The Tablet: For the Disobedient, It Remains Winter

The excellent Protect the Pope blog today has two stories that are eye-catching. We have The Tablet suggesting that the pontificates of Blessed Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI constituted a deep winter in the life of the Catholic Church. Springtime, happily, has arrived for the Church now that the new nice Pope Francis has assumed the Throne of St Peter.

Except...except...for the disobedient, it still appears to be winter. Today, Pope Francis has publicly made it clear that the religious, like the LCWR, who think and behave outside of the Church - that is - who do not think 'with the Church' are not behaving or thinking as religious ought.

This just in from Fr Z:

'Finally, the ecclesial aspect (ecclesialità) as one of the constitutive dimensions of the consecrated life, a dimension which must be constantly recovered and deepened in life. Your vocation is a fundamental charism through the journey of the Church, and it is not possible that a consecrated woman or man do not “think” with the Church, which gave birth to us in Baptism; a “thinking” with the Church which finds its filial expression in fidelity to the Magisterium, in communion with the Shepherds and the Successor of Peter, Bishop of Rome, visible sign of unity.'

Note to The Tablet's editorial team: Perhaps it is time to ask yourselves the question: When was the last time we published an edition of The Tablet which was, from its beginning to its end manifestly 'thinking with the Church which finds its filial expression in fidelity to the Magisterium, in communion with the Shepherds and the Successor of St Peter, Bishop of Rome, visible sing of unity'?

Funny, isn't it, that some Catholics can see the work and fruits of the Holy Spirit in the pontificates of all three Popes, yet others can only see this in the current Pontiff, but only when they wear special glasses that distort reality in order to see things that are not actually there? Pope Francis asked religious today, and, by implication, all Catholics, to think 'with the Church' and to be obedient to the Magisterium. The Tablet are going to need to hire Mandelson himself to spin this one into a piece that reflects 'their way of thinking'. May I make the tentative suggestion that while you perhaps thought you had 'your man' on the Throne of St Peter, that Pope Francis is, in fact, more and more becoming discernibly continuous with the teaching of his beloved and esteemed predecessors. Let's send a crate of tissues to The Tablet's HQ. One of these days, they're going to realise the Pope is still the Pope.

Sadly, however, while the Pope is still Catholic, Bishops will be Bishops, with notorious bad boy and perennial dissenter, Terence Weldon, claiming that the Archbishop of Westminster and the Bishop of Arundel and Brighton are both backing his initiative to spread his homosexual liberation front from Westminster to Sodom-by-Sea. Much as I hope and pray that His Grace and His Lordship will tell Terence politely where to go, recent history suggests that while in Rome, for the disobedient it remains winter, here in England and Wales, the birds are singing, the flowers are blossoming and green leaves adorn the once bare trees. Yes, here in England and Wales, for the disobedient and for the heretics, we are experiencing a near perpetual Spring. Pray for our Bishops and write to the Papal Nuncio. The last person a homosexual needs for pastoral advice or spiritual guidance is an audience with Terence Weldon.

The Man In Prison for Walking on the 'Wrong Road'

A friend of mine is back in the slammer. His crime? Well, he was discovered walking on a street from which he is banned. This is one of the 47 streets in Brighton and Hove from which he is banned. He got six months for walking on the wrong road, but he will be let out after three months if he is good in prison.

I saw him today, he seems well but obviously is depressed and while he looks forward to his release, he knows that, as usual, upon his release he will be given £47 and a ticket back to Brighton where he will once again be homeless. A pound for every street he cannot walk on.

Whenever he is released from prison there is no 'plan' in place for him to be housed. It is bizarre - surreal even - going to visit someone imprisoned for walking on the wrong street in Brighton. I mean that with the best will in the world, with abortion 'doctors' walking free and easy, even financially rewarded, that someone who will be forever tagged as a 'social menace' can be banged up in prison for walking on the wrong street - or, even - the wrong 'side' of the street.

"I could understand it," he said, "if when I was spotted on the wrong street, I was harassing someone or asking someone for money or something, but I wasn't. I was just trying to find a quicker way of getting to where I needed to go."

For the grievous crime of finding a quicker way of getting to where he needed to go, he is now inside. Tolerance is a word banded around everywhere nowadays, but really, it is only tolerance for some in certain 'communities'. There is no tolerance for poor men who have nothing to do, nowhere to go (nowhere they can go), who have had ASBOs slapped on them which are then extended into perpetuity beyond reason or justice - only through expediency. My friend keeps saying how much he wants to be baptised - he certainly desires Baptism and desires Salvation. If God takes mercy on me and I one day after purgation enter into Heaven, I really hope and pray my friend will be there since it is very likely that only in Heaven will this man be objectively free in any sense of the word.

He looked around at the other prisoners who had social visits.

"More or less everyone else is here for shoplifting and stuff," he said. "They're all here because they're poor and have a drug habit or alcohol habit so they've nicked something from a shop to 'get well'. That's it. That's why they are here - because they broke the law in order to feed a drug addiction. It's insane, isn't it?"

It is quite insane, I agreed, but it isn't quite as insane as talking to a man in prison for walking on the wrong street in a world in which politicians launch attacks, legally, against little human beings in the womb and soverign nations with total impunity. Obviously it costs the 'great British taxpayer' money everytime my friend is brought before a judge for walking on the wrong street and it costs the same taxpayer money to put him in the slammer and keep him there for a few months to 'teach him a lesson', but hey, its all worth it to keep the social menance of 'intolerable' poor people off the streets, isn't it? 

Say a prayer for him, poor man. If you would like to send him anything, like well wishes, something devotional (he cannot read well), a ten pound postal order for tobacco or some new trainers (he tells me he is size eight) contact me and I'll give you his address and details.

Tricky Quiz

Tough isn't it?

The answers then.

Incredibly, some bright spark at a Jesuit University has decided to give a Catholic politician in Ireland who has moved beyond Jesus only to find himself signing papers for the execution of babies an honorary degree. It is beyond parody. You literally couldn't make this up and unfortunately nobody has. It's 100% true, as true as abortion is the deliberate killing of the unborn child - a killing routinely ordered in the United Kingdom for reasons of sheer expediency.

David Cameron has moved beyond the electorate and into a nearby pub to order a pint. Unfortunately, David doesn't look happy because he has just realised that not only is his beer flat, but those who could be bothered to turn out to vote in the local elections turned out only for one reason and one reason only - to make plain their great dislike of him. If you think that beer tastes bad, console yourself, Mr Cameron, that it is not half as bitter or disappointing as your staggeringly catastrophic Premiership. Your 'modernisation' of the Conservative Party has ensured that there is only one party in Great Britain that is not, in truth, New Labour. That's why people want to vote UKIP, David. They're the only party that do not behave as the horrifying brainchild of Peter Mandelson. If I didn't know any better (which I don't), I would think that you are a secret socialist who has been sent to the Conservative Party to destroy it in the same way in which Tony Blair was a secret wet Tory sent to Labour to destroy it.

That just leaves the LCWR. Enough said.

The Enda the Road for Ireland?

Pray for Ireland. Pray for the Unborn.

Good Counsel’s Annual Wandsworth to Wapping Sponsored Walk

The Good Counsel Network are in urgent need of raising funds. Yet again this year they have broken all previous records for the number of pregnant women, planning to have an abortion, that they have counselled. This number has been rapidly increasing every year for a few years now.

This means that they have been graced with the opportunity to counsel more Mothers than ever before and with the help of God save a greatly increased number of innocent unborn lives. This is very happy news, but means that their finances are stretched further than ever before.

When the Good Counsel Network are counselling women in order to help them to choose life for their child they offer them all the emotional, practical and moral support which is necessary for them to have the confidence to continue with their pregnancy. The emotional and moral support can take up hours of their time but in general does not cost very much. The practical support is much harder, and can include accommodation/help with rent, direct financial help to provide essentials such as food and clothes, legal advice, travel assistance to get to doctors/midwives appointment and more.

This is a huge burden upon them but it is vital that they are able to continue to offer this to all of the pregnant Mothers they see. This year, then, sees the Annual WANDSWORTH TO WAPPING SPONSORED WALK which is approximately 13 Miles long and is on Saturday July 20th (starting with Mass at 10am and finishing at approximately 4pm with drinks and refreshments) and we want to get as many people as possible to join them and raise sponsorship for their lifesaving work.

For more details please see their website.

Good Porn, Bad Porn

"Hello, Mrs Jones, I'm new to the area. I've just knocked on your door to ask whether I can borrow your child for the day. Oh don't worry, its okay, I've got an enhanced CRB check.Yes, I'm just in the area and wonder whether you'd mind me showing your child some pornography. No, no, don't worry, its nothing 'dodgy'. I just think it would be good to be able to show your child some pornography so that your child is able to distinguish between good porn and bad porn - you know - good porn between loving people of either the same or the opposite sex - and bad porn - which involves more people and an element of violence. Mrs Jones, I can see you are feeling quite negative about this idea. You are looking quite inflamed all of a sudden. I'll come back again another day. But here, take my card and take some time to think about it because a group of experts agree with me that this is a really good idea. It's all in your child's best interests, you know that, don't you, Mrs Jones? Yes, yes, see, Barnados and the NSPCC recommended me. Don't worry, I have been accredited by the experts. Still not interested? Okay, well I'll come back later. You're calling the police? Oh no, Mrs Jones, this is all legal and above board...well...kind of...It really depends what law you look at..."

In order to see the insanity into which this country has descended, read here. Soon, if things go in the direction they are going already, a school-teacher will be able to teach children or show children more or less anything - a-n-y-t-h-i-ng - just as long as it isn't Christianity. Porn? Yes, why not? We need to guide children to the good porn - the non-addictive, loving kind of porn that doesn't objectify men and women, doesn't give viewers a distorted vision of human sexuality and love - a kind of good porn that doesn't. Actually. Even. Exist. The kids want heroin? Okay, okay well let's give them really 'good heroin'! This stuff will sort you right out kids!

"You a teacher with a problem with that? You must be some kind of prejudiced 'bigot' or something! We're only asking you show your class porn as an 'educational experience'! Get over it, bigot!"

Then, after the 'same-sex marriage' bill becomes law, its 'gay porn showtime' ('because two men committing sodomy are two persons in a 'loving marital relationship') in your local school classroom. See, there is 'good' gay porn and 'bad' gay porn and its important the gay kids who need to be 'affirmed' in their 'gay identity' and so know and understand the difference.

"You a parent with a problem with that? You must be some kind of prejudiced 'bigot' or something! We're only showing your kids gay porn! Get over it, hater!"

So, after all this time, Peter Tatchell, Harriet Harman and the 'paedophile rights' crowd get what he and they always wanted - the minds, at the very least, of your children. Astonishing how easily evil can slip under the radar isn't it? Vote UKIP and pray the Rosary. They can be no worse than the bunch of clowns (and Fabian fifth columnists) in Parliament and its time the 'experts' were shown the door as well.

'Is the Pope Still Catholic?' Weekly Digest

Again, today, it appears we have a resounding 'Yes!'

Sorry to disappoint, yet again, Tablet readers...

Interesting that the Holy Father is today talking about good motherhood and good discipleship, by talking about Mary and the life of the Christian.

Mind you, I have to say that what the Holy Father says is equally true about the world of internet, Twitter and blogdom: how many of us find ourselves swept along by our passions as we follow, without discernment the 'trends' of the moment?