There’s much to disagree with in Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan’s record, both as a onetime legal advocate specializing in opposition to same-sex marriage and as a member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, elevated to the bench in 2018 by President Donald Trump. In the latter role, he wrote a notorious opinion gratuitously trashing a transgender woman litigant’s request to be referred to as “she.” Yet even students who understandably find his views and temperament obnoxious might learn from hearing him speak, which he tried to do at Stanford Law School on March 9, pursuant to an invitation by the local chapter of the conservative Federalist Society.

Instead, student protesters disrupted his talk in a raucous exercise of the heckler’s veto, captured on viral video, that violated Stanford’s own policy on free speech at such events — and was worsened by the failure of administrators present to enforce that policy. To the contrary, one administrator appeared to take the protesters’ side, turning to Judge Duncan, telling him of the “harm” his work had caused and asking him to reconsider his talk in light of the disruption: “Is the juice worth the squeeze?”

This latest episode in the long-running controversy over free speech on campus has had a constructive ending, however, in the form of law school Dean Jenny Martinez’s measured but unequivocal defense of Judge Duncan’s right, and that of other controversial speakers, to be heard at the law school — and of Stanford students to hear them. In a 10-page open letter published Wednesday, Ms. Martinez offered an explanation of the apology she and Stanford President Marc Tessier-Lavigne offered Judge Duncan, which has also triggered protests. (In making that apology, she and Mr. Tessier-Lavigne rose above the judge’s own unbecoming reaction, which included profanity directed at the students.) Importantly, Ms. Martinez’s letter went beyond university policy and First Amendment law, to articulate values which underlie them: specifically, the relationship between reasoned discourse on the one hand and learning, civility and the “special role of lawyers in our system of justice” on the other. She argued forcefully that there is no contradiction between free expression and diversity, equity and inclusion. And she notified students that the school is planning a mandatory half-day training session to reinforce these concepts.

“There is temptation to a system in which people holding views perceived by some as harmful or offensive are not allowed to speak,” she wrote, “but history teaches us that this is a temptation to be avoided.” And there’s a chance it will be avoided on U.S. campuses where administrators emulate Dean Martinez’s leadership.

– ROD DREHER

Decadence, Left And Right

Progressive bacha bazi and MAGA valorization of 1/6: Mirror images of decline

ROD DREHERMAR 27

SAVE▷  LISTEN

Libs of TikTok @libsoftiktok

A 13-year-old drag queen performs at an event as adults cheer him on

2:04 PM ∙ Mar 24, 202345,605Likes8,879Retweets

No Lie with Brian Tyler Cohen @NoLieWithBTC

Here is footage of their pro-insurrection song, sung by the “J6 choir” and cutting out parts of the US anthem to replace with Trump’s own words. The screen is playing footage of cops being attacked. Proceeds of the song go to jailed insurrectionists.

5:02 PM ∙ Mar 26, 20231,144Likes423Retweets

You can watch the entire Trump event here.

These are mirror images of American decadence. I take it that the readership of this newsletter does not need me to explain why 13 year old American bacha bazi is a sign of deep decadence. Why do I find the Trump rally decadent?

Because he played video of the January 6 attacks at the same time that he played audio of a choir singing the National Anthem, interspersed with his own voice reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. He is obviously trying to cement the January 6 narrative as a patriotic uprising. This is shocking. Despite that fact that the media, Democrats, and liberal activists have unjustly exploited January 6 to their own advantage, the fact remains that the January 6 attack was a very bad thing. Remember the reason for the mob assault: to compel Congress to prevent Joe Biden’s election as president from being certified. That is to say, the mob assault was carried out on behalf of Donald Trump. 

So with this video and audio presentation at the Texas rally, Trump is rewriting history to sanctify an extraordinarily shameful event in American history, to serve his own interests. Worse, he is weaving standard, widely shared expressions of American patriotism — the National Anthem and the Pledge — into a political mob attack, with the obvious goal of turning the January 6 assault into a contemporary version of the Boston Tea Party. And he’s doing it in a shamefully demagogic manner. 

I am disturbed by my recent statement in this space that after the Stanford Law School attack on Judge Kyle Duncan by the woke law student mob, that I would crawl over glass to vote for Trump if he’s the GOP nominee in 2024 (which I devoutly hope he will not be; I’m a DeSantis guy). I see the Stanford debacle as a law school version of January 6: as a mob attack on one of the pillars of American democracy and constitutional order. I am actually far more worried about this kind of thing than the January 6 attack because there was zero chance that the yobs on the Capitol lawn that day were going to overthrow the government. There is a very great chance that the highly educated, privileged yobs in the classroom at Stanford that day will radically subvert the constitutional order as they march through the elite institutions of our society. 

Of course the ruling class in American society is not much bothered by what happened at Stanford (though the criticism of students by the law school dean is much appreciated). I’m writing this on a break at a conference today at the Danube Institute in Budapest, on the topic of Critical Race Theory. I heard earlier a talk by Prof. Frank Furedi, a UK academic sociologist, talking about the way critical theory has savaged universities, and is even more dangerous to the West than communism was (and he would know; he spent his childhood in Stalinist Hungary). Diderik Boomsma, a member of Amsterdam’s city council, spoke at length about how CRT and the DEI mentality in the Netherlands is destroying democratic government and cultural institutions. It has brought about, said Boomsma, “a permanent cycle of revolution.”

This is decadence. This is what it means to be decadent. What is decaying is the liberal political order, and the Western civilizational order. Liberals no longer believe in liberalism, but in this totalitarian ideology. What do conservatives believe in? Donald Trump was president for four years. He failed at effectively opposing the Great Awokening. He failed because he doesn’t have any deep convictions about it, serving himself being the only real thing he cares about; and he failed because he doesn’t have the political skills to fight these woke barbarians. It is decadent that a very large number of right-wing Americans are satisfied by the cheap emotions Trump calls forth within them, and don’t ask why Trump failed to stop the Great Awokening, or demand to know why they should support returning him to office given that failure. 

The shared decadence is this: both sides care more about feelings, about emotion, about Narrative, than they do about facts and logic. I have been very clear that I find the Left’s decadence to be far more threatening, given its institutional power, but it also depresses the hell out of me that the Right’s decadence — the weakness of the Congressional and presidential GOP, and the failure of the Right’s imagination — has meant that these totalitarians have triumphed without much effective opposition. 

(This is why I’m so excited about Ron DeSantis. He’s the first national conservative figure I’ve seen who seems to understand the problem, and the solution, and who is brave enough to take the fight to the Left.)

The unpredictable right-wing writer Richard Hanania has a good Substack essay saying that it’s wrong to say that conservatives lose all the time; in fact, they often win. They’ve won on guns, on school choice, on abortion, on taxes, and, says Hanania, other issues. So why the feeling that the Right are losers? He writes:

Mostly, the anger is about cultural and identity issues. And here, indeed, there has been a sea change. Affirmative action has been with us for decades, but only recently have major institutions become openly anti-white and anti-male. Gay propaganda in schools has exploded, as has the percentage of young people identifying as LGBT. School libraries basically now carry porn, and since it’s LGBT porn instead of heterosexual, the media considers any attempts to keep it away from minors to be fascism. There are now fat women in underwear ads. And so on.

How can conservatives “win” on these issues? Does doing so require a new kind of politics, a rethinking of traditional assumptions, or even a revolution in our governing system? I see no reason why. Take the gun and abortion issues. What conservatives have done goes beyond simply appointing their own judges and passing new laws at the state level. Rather, the entire movement, from top to bottom, prioritizes preventing the government from engaging in left-wing activism in these areas.

He goes on to talk about legislative things that Congressional Republicans have done to protect gun rights and fight abortion. Then:

Contrast this to race and gender issues. Wokeness can clearly be tracedto left-wing government policy that the right has provided virtually no pushback against. Much of it could have been undone through the executive branch alone had the last few Republican presidents not been asleep at the wheel. Every part of our government discriminates against whites and men, and the private sector is forced to do the same. Even the LGBT explosion is likely more related to policy than one would think. Leo Sapir has written about how the obsession with minority sexual preferences and identities in public schools to a large extent has its roots in “anti-bullying” and Title IX initiatives. Republicans in Congress don’t like this stuff, but they’re not putting a lot of political capital towards fighting it either.

A federal agency that started advocating against the conservative position on abortion or guns would quickly see its funding threatened. But diversity trainings, affirmative action, anti-harassment policies, and other hallmarks of wokeness only inspire collective shrugs from lawmakers, and even Republican presidents.

Predictably, this has led to everything becoming woke. But that doesn’t mean that this was a natural consequence of liberals inherently knowing how to use power, the system being rigged in favor of the left, or any such nonsense. It’s just what happens when only one side prioritizes a policy area, and the other rolls over.

It’s just not true, says Hanania, that GOP lawmakers are afraid of The New York Times. That’s out of date. More:

Conservative elites are today much more responsive to the concerns of right-wing media and their own activists and voters. The problem is there simply isn’t an anti-woke equivalent to Grover Norquist or the NRA. Right-wing resistance to the left on identity issues tends to be dominated by talk show hosts and online “influencers” rather than people who think seriously about policy and how to change it.

Well, Chris Rufo is not like this. 

He’s over here in Budapest this month, and I heard him open today’s conference with a clear, powerful explanation of what CRT is. As many Americans know, Gov. DeSantis called on Rufo to help turn his research findings and opinions into policy. This is really good news! DeSantis has been savaged by the Left, by the media, by activists, and by normie Republicans. Nevertheless, he persists. My great fear is that Republican voters will prefer the vivid gasbaggery of Donald Trump to the meat-and-potatoes effectiveness of Ron DeSantis.

Following Hanania’s analysis, it is clear that there has not been a sufficient effort on the Right to force our own elected representatives to defend our own values. It is bizarre that so many conservatives have been unwilling to defend basic things like children from the attacks of left-wing radicals who want to poison their minds with gender ideology, and stock school libraries with pro-gay porn. In his talk today, Rufo pointed out how CRT educators deny that they’re teaching CRT, and that they ought to be left alone to teach it. This is a paradox related to my Law of Merited Impossibility, which says, “It will never happen, and when it does, you bigots will deserve it.” Woke educators say, “We aren’t teaching CRT, and the children of you bigots are benefiting from our efforts to free their minds.”

Back to decadence: the unwillingness of the Right to defend our own beliefs is why we keep losing. The Left has dominance in the media, no question, and that’s why they used January 6 to build a strong anti-Right narrative around that event. We don’t have anything like that kind of power over the means of narrative production, but we should at least be using what networks we have to keep the Stanford Law School atrocity front to mind, at least among conservatives. Because it really does matter! 

Similarly, did you see what the lunatic trans activist did at the Texas state legislature, which was debating a bill to criminalize drag shows for children? These radicals have no respect for any forms, any hierarchies, any rules or customs that they dislike. Did you see what they did in New Zealand to the women’s rights anti-trans activist Posie Parker (Kellie-Jay Keen)? She was violently assaulted by a woke mob, and prevented from speaking. 

spiked @spikedonline

Kellie-Jay Keen’s tour of Australia and New Zealand has exposed the violent misogyny of trans activism, says @jo_bartosch spiked-online.comThe Sheilas will not be silencedKellie-Jay Keen’s tour of Australia and New Zealand has exposed the violent misogyny of trans activism….5:00 AM ∙ Mar 27, 20231,120Likes248Retweets

In Kentucky, the Democratic governor just vetoed a GOP-sponsored bill(which passed by veto-proof majorities) reining in the triumph of transgenderism in schools with commonsense measures, such as forbidding hormones and sex change surgeries for minors. What did he say? 

Gov. Andy Beshear said in a written veto message that the bill allows “too much government interference in personal healthcare issues and rips away the freedom of parents to make medical decisions for their children.”

In his one-page message, he warned that the bill’s repercussions would include an increase in youth suicides. The governor said, “My faith teaches me that all children are children of God and Senate Bill 150 will endanger the children of Kentucky.”

Beshear told reporters later Friday that transgender children and their parents were among the Kentuckians who contacted his office as he reviewed the legislation.

“I heard from children that believe this bill is picking on them, and asking — in many ways — why?” the governor said. “I told them that I was going to show them that there is at least one person in Frankfort that cares for all of our children in the commonwealth, no matter what.”

Danger. Bullying. Care. Increase in youth suicides. If you love God, you must permit children to consent to have their breasts surgically removed. You see how this works. These are accusations intended to prevent debate. If you disagree with what the Left demands, then you don’t care if trans kids kill themselves. To be fair, Beshear uses standard right-wing tropes about “individual freedom” and “parental rights” — as if having a democratically elected legislature assert its power to protect children from irreversible surgical or chemical changes are illiberal tyrants. 

All credit to Republicans in the Kentucky legislature for not being intimidated by these stuff — and to Republicans in other state legislatures. Things really are changing for the better at the state level. But the fight is going to be long, and much uglier. The Left’s decadence is militant; the Right’s decadence manifests either as weakness, or in relishing the cheap thrills of MAGA while disdaining the hard political work required to turn back the Cultural Revolution. 

Pierre Valentin, the French Catholic writer who studies le wokisme in his own country, gave a terrific presentation of how the phenomenon manifests in France. I thought France was doing pretty well resisting this phenomenon, but Valentin says it’s not so. He made an incisive observation about the advance of wokeness in his own country. He said the soixante-huitards(“sixty-eighters,” or Boomer leaders of the 1968 student movements), came to power riding the claim that Youth Are Always Right. They find themselves now unable to resist the anti-liberal claims of the young woke. Surely this is the case in the US, where youth culture became the culture. 

“Yes, wokism will probably kill the Left,” said Valentin. “But will it also kill the country?” He went on to say that if we who oppose wokism don’t offer those drawn to wokeness a better narrative, a narrative that gives diverse peoples something positive to rally around, then they will rally around the destruction of countries and their political orders. The narrative Donald Trump offers in that video is anti-woke — good! — but also contains clearly within it the destruction of the American order and its rebuilding to serve a demagogue and his pseudo-patriotism. Again, I reject the Left’s construal of January 6, but the idea that Trump is resurrecting and redefining that shameful mob action as something worth commemorating and praising as patriotic is no better. It’s the valorization of mob action, the same that the Left does at Stanford Law, at trans attacks on women trying to make speeches, and so forth.

It is a sign of decadence. 

Leave a comment

Upgrade to paid

Give a gift subscription

LIKECOMMENTSHARE

Read Rod Dreher’s Diary in the app

Listen to posts, join subscriber chats, and never miss an update from Rod Dreher.

© 2023 Rod Dreher
548 Market Street PMB 72296, San Francisco, CA 94104 
Unsubscribe

CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITHDECLARATION “DOMINUS IESUS” ON THE UNICITY AND SALVIFIC UNIVERSALITY  OF JESUS CHRIST AND THE CHURCHINTRODUCTION   1.  The Lord Jesus, before ascending into heaven, commanded his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to the whole world and to baptize all nations: “Go into the whole world and proclaim the Gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; he who does not believe will be condemned”‌ (Mk 16:15-16); “All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the world”‌ (Mt 28:18-20; cf. Lk 24:46-48; Jn 17:18,20,21; Acts 1:8). The Church’s universal mission is born from the command of Jesus Christ and is fulfilled in the course of the centuries in the proclamation of the mystery of God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and the mystery of the incarnation of the Son, as saving event for all humanity. The fundamental contents of the profession of the Christian faith are expressed thus: “I believe in one God, the Father, Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation, he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate of the Virgin Mary, and became man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father. With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the prophets. I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come”‌.12.  In the course of the centuries, the Church has proclaimed and witnessed with fidelity to the Gospel of Jesus. At the close of the second millennium, however, this mission is still far from complete.2 For that reason, Saint Paul’s words are now more relevant than ever: “Preaching the Gospel is not a reason for me to boast; it is a necessity laid on me: woe to me if I do not preach the Gospel!”‌ (1 Cor 9:16). This explains the Magisterium’s particular attention to giving reasons for and supporting the evangelizing mission of the Church, above all in connection with the religious traditions of the world.3In considering the values which these religions witness to and offer humanity, with an open and positive approach, the Second Vatican Council’s Declaration on the relation of the Church to non-Christian religions states: “The Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in these religions. She has a high regard for the manner of life and conduct, the precepts and teachings, which, although differing in many ways from her own teaching, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men”‌.4 Continuing in this line of thought, the Church’s proclamation of Jesus Christ, “the way, the truth, and the life”‌ (Jn 14:6), today also makes use of the practice of inter-religious dialogue. Such dialogue certainly does not replace, but rather accompanies the missio ad gentes, directed toward that “mystery of unity”‌, from which “it follows that all men and women who are saved share, though differently, in the same mystery of salvation in Jesus Christ through his Spirit”‌.5Inter-religious dialogue, which is part of the Church’s evangelizing mission,6 requires an attitude of understanding and a relationship of mutual knowledge and reciprocal enrichment, in obedience to the truth and with respect for freedom.73.  In the practice of dialogue between the Christian faith and other religious traditions, as well as in seeking to understand its theoretical basis more deeply, new questions arise that need to be addressed through pursuing new paths of research, advancing proposals, and suggesting ways of acting that call for attentive discernment. In this task, the present Declaration seeks to recall to Bishops, theologians, and all the Catholic faithful, certain indispensable elements of Christian doctrine, which may help theological reflection in developing solutions consistent with the contents of the faith and responsive to the pressing needs of contemporary culture. The expository language of the Declaration corresponds to its purpose, which is not to treat in a systematic manner the question of the unicity and salvific universality of the mystery of Jesus Christ and the Church, nor to propose solutions to questions that are matters of free theological debate, but rather to set forth again the doctrine of the Catholic faith in these areas, pointing out some fundamental questions that remain open to further development, and refuting specific positions that are erroneous or ambiguous. For this reason, the Declaration takes up what has been taught in previous Magisterial documents, in order to reiterate certain truths that are part of the Church’s faith. 4.  The Church’s constant missionary proclamation is endangered today by relativistic theories which seek to justify religious pluralism, not only de facto but also de iure (or in principle). As a consequence, it is held that certain truths have been superseded; for example, the definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ, the nature of Christian faith as compared with that of belief in other religions, the inspired nature of the books of Sacred Scripture, the personal unity between the Eternal Word and Jesus of Nazareth, the unity of the economy of the Incarnate Word and the Holy Spirit, the unicity and salvific universality of the mystery of Jesus Christ, the universal salvific mediation of the Church, the inseparability – while recognizing the distinction – of the kingdom of God, the kingdom of Christ, and the Church, and the subsistence of the one Church of Christ in the Catholic Church. The roots of these problems are to be found in certain presuppositions of both a philosophical and theological nature, which hinder the understanding and acceptance of the revealed truth. Some of these can be mentioned: the conviction of the elusiveness and inexpressibility of divine truth, even by Christian revelation; relativistic attitudes toward truth itself, according to which what is true for some would not be true for others; the radical opposition posited between the logical mentality of the West and the symbolic mentality of the East; the subjectivism which, by regarding reason as the only source of knowledge, becomes incapable of raising its “gaze to the heights, not daring to rise to the truth of being”‌;8 the difficulty in understanding and accepting the presence of definitive and eschatological events in history; the metaphysical emptying of the historical incarnation of the Eternal Logos, reduced to a mere appearing of God in history; the eclecticism of those who, in theological research, uncritically absorb ideas from a variety of philosophical and theological contexts without regard for consistency, systematic connection, or compatibility with Christian truth; finally, the tendency to read and to interpret Sacred Scripture outside the Tradition and Magisterium of the Church. On the basis of such presuppositions, which may evince different nuances, certain theological proposals are developed – at times presented as assertions, and at times as hypotheses – in which Christian revelation and the mystery of Jesus Christ and the Church lose their character of absolute truth and salvific universality, or at least shadows of doubt and uncertainty are cast upon them.   I. THE FULLNESS AND DEFINITIVENESS OF THE REVELATION OF JESUS CHRIST5.  As a remedy for this relativistic mentality, which is becoming ever more common, it is necessary above all to reassert the definitive and complete character of the revelation of Jesus Christ. In fact, it must be firmly believed that, in the mystery of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son of God, who is “the way, the truth, and the life”‌ (Jn 14:6), the full revelation of divine truth is given: “No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son wishes to reveal him”‌ (Mt 11:27); “No one has ever seen God; God the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, has revealed him”‌ (Jn 1:18); “For in Christ the whole fullness of divinity dwells in bodily form”‌ (Col 2:9-10). Faithful to God’s word, the Second Vatican Council teaches: “By this revelation then, the deepest truth about God and the salvation of man shines forth in Christ, who is at the same time the mediator and the fullness of all revelation”‌.9 Furthermore, “Jesus Christ, therefore, the Word made flesh, sent ‘as a man to men’, ‘speaks the words of God’ (Jn 3:34), and completes the work of salvation which his Father gave him to do (cf. Jn 5:36; 17:4). To see Jesus is to see his Father (cf. Jn 14:9). For this reason, Jesus perfected revelation by fulfilling it through his whole work of making himself present and manifesting himself: through his words and deeds, his signs and wonders, but especially through his death and glorious resurrection from the dead and finally with the sending of the Spirit of truth, he completed and perfected revelation and confirmed it with divine testimony… The Christian dispensation, therefore, as the new and definitive covenant, will never pass away, and we now await no further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ (cf. 1 Tim 6:14 and Tit 2:13)”‌.10Thus, the Encyclical Redemptoris missio calls the Church once again to the task of announcing the Gospel as the fullness of truth: “In this definitive Word of his revelation, God has made himself known in the fullest possible way. He has revealed to mankind who he is. This definitive self-revelation of God is the fundamental reason why the Church is missionary by her very nature. She cannot do other than proclaim the Gospel, that is, the fullness of the truth which God has enabled us to know about himself”‌.11 Only the revelation of Jesus Christ, therefore, “introduces into our history a universal and ultimate truth which stirs the human mind to ceaseless effort”‌.126.  Therefore, the theory of the limited, incomplete, or imperfect character of the revelation of Jesus Christ, which would be complementary to that found in other religions, is contrary to the Church’s faith. Such a position would claim to be based on the notion that the truth about God cannot be grasped and manifested in its globality and completeness by any historical religion, neither by Christianity nor by Jesus Christ. Such a position is in radical contradiction with the foregoing statements of Catholic faith according to which the full and complete revelation of the salvific mystery of God is given in Jesus Christ. Therefore, the words, deeds, and entire historical event of Jesus, though limited as human realities, have nevertheless the divine Person of the Incarnate Word, “true God and true man”‌13 as their subject. For this reason, they possess in themselves the definitiveness and completeness of the revelation of God’s salvific ways, even if the depth of the divine mystery in itself remains transcendent and inexhaustible.  The truth about God is not abolished or reduced because it is spoken in human language; rather, it is unique, full, and complete, because he who speaks and acts is the Incarnate Son of God. Thus, faith requires us to profess that the Word made flesh, in his entire mystery, who moves from incarnation to glorification, is the source, participated but real, as well as the fulfilment of every salvific revelation of God to humanity,14 and that the Holy Spirit, who is Christ’s Spirit, will teach this “entire truth”‌ (Jn 16:13) to the Apostles and, through them, to the whole Church. 7.  The proper response to God’s revelation is “the obedience of faith (Rom 16:26; cf. Rom1:5; 2 Cor 10:5-6) by which man freely entrusts his entire self to God, offering ‘the full submission of intellect and will to God who reveals’ and freely assenting to the revelation given by him”‌.15 Faith is a gift of grace: “in order to have faith, the grace of God must come first and give assistance; there must also be the interior helps of the Holy Spirit, who moves the heart and converts it to God, who opens the eyes of the mind and gives ‘to everyone joy and ease in assenting to and believing in the truth’”‌.16The obedience of faith implies acceptance of the truth of Christ’s revelation, guaranteed by God, who is Truth itself:17 “Faith is first of all a personal adherence of man to God. At the same time, and inseparably, it is a free assent to the whole truth that God has revealed”‌.18Faith, therefore, as “a gift of God”‌ and as “a supernatural virtue infused by him”‌,19 involves a dual adherence: to God who reveals and to the truth which he reveals, out of the trust which one has in him who speaks. Thus, “we must believe in no one but God: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit”‌.20For this reason, the distinction between theological faith and belief in the other religions, must be firmly held. If faith is the acceptance in grace of revealed truth, which “makes it possible to penetrate the mystery in a way that allows us to understand it coherently”‌,21 then belief, in the other religions, is that sum of experience and thought that constitutes the human treasury of wisdom and religious aspiration, which man in his search for truth has conceived and acted upon in his relationship to God and the Absolute.22This distinction is not always borne in mind in current theological reflection. Thus, theological faith (the acceptance of the truth revealed by the One and Triune God) is often identified with belief in other religions, which is religious experience still in search of the absolute truth and still lacking assent to God who reveals himself. This is one of the reasons why the differences between Christianity and the other religions tend to be reduced at times to the point of disappearance. 8.  The hypothesis of the inspired value of the sacred writings of other religions is also put forward. Certainly, it must be recognized that there are some elements in these texts which may be de facto instruments by which countless people throughout the centuries have been and still are able today to nourish and maintain their life-relationship with God. Thus, as noted above, the Second Vatican Council, in considering the customs, precepts, and teachings of the other religions, teaches that “although differing in many ways from her own teaching, these nevertheless often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men”‌.23The Church’s tradition, however, reserves the designation of inspired texts to the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments, since these are inspired by the Holy Spirit.24  Taking up this tradition, the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation of the Second Vatican Council states: “For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old and New Testaments, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (cf. Jn 20:31; 2 Tim 3:16; 2 Pet 1:19-21; 3:15-16), they have God as their author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself”‌.25  These books “firmly, faithfully, and without error, teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures”‌.26Nevertheless, God, who desires to call all peoples to himself in Christ and to communicate to them the fullness of his revelation and love, “does not fail to make himself present in many ways, not only to individuals, but also to entire peoples through their spiritual riches, of which their religions are the main and essential expression even when they contain ‘gaps, insufficiencies and errors’”‌.27 Therefore, the sacred books of other religions, which in actual fact direct and nourish the existence of their followers, receive from the mystery of Christ the elements of goodness and grace which they contain.   II. THE INCARNATE LOGOS AND THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE WORK OF SALVATION9.  In contemporary theological reflection there often emerges an approach to Jesus of Nazareth that considers him a particular, finite, historical figure, who reveals the divine not in an exclusive way, but in a way complementary with other revelatory and salvific figures. The Infinite, the Absolute, the Ultimate Mystery of God would thus manifest itself to humanity in many ways and in many historical figures: Jesus of Nazareth would be one of these. More concretely, for some, Jesus would be one of the many faces which the Logos has assumed in the course of time to communicate with humanity in a salvific way. Furthermore, to justify the universality of Christian salvation as well as the fact of religious pluralism, it has been proposed that there is an economy of the eternal Word that is valid also outside the Church and is unrelated to her, in addition to an economy of the incarnate Word. The first would have a greater universal value than the second, which is limited to Christians, though God’s presence would be more full in the second. 10.  These theses are in profound conflict with the Christian faith. The doctrine of faith must be firmly believed which proclaims that Jesus of Nazareth, son of Mary, and he alone, is the Son and the Word of the Father. The Word, which “was in the beginning with God”‌ (Jn 1:2) is the same as he who “became flesh”‌ (Jn 1:14). In Jesus, “the Christ, the Son of the living God”‌ (Mt 16:16), “the whole fullness of divinity dwells in bodily form”‌ (Col 2:9). He is the “only begotten Son of the Father, who is in the bosom of the Father”‌ (Jn 1:18), his “beloved Son, in whom we have redemption… In him the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him, God was pleased to reconcile all things to himself, on earth and in the heavens, making peace by the blood of his Cross”‌ (Col 1:13-14; 19-20). Faithful to Sacred Scripture and refuting erroneous and reductive interpretations, the First Council of Nicaea solemnly defined its faith in: “Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only begotten generated from the Father, that is, from the being of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in being with the Father, through whom all things were made, those in heaven and those on earth. For us men and for our salvation, he came down and became incarnate, was made man, suffered, and rose again on the third day. He ascended to the heavens and shall come again to judge the living and the dead”‌.28 Following the teachings of the Fathers of the Church, the Council of Chalcedon also professed: “the one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity, the same truly God and truly man…, one in being with the Father according to the divinity and one in being with us according to the humanity…, begotten of the Father before the ages according to the divinity and, in these last days, for us and our salvation, of Mary, the Virgin Mother of God, according to the humanity”‌.29For this reason, the Second Vatican Council states that Christ “the new Adam…’image of the invisible God’ (Col 1:15) is himself the perfect man who has restored that likeness to God in the children of Adam which had been disfigured since the first sin… As an innocent lamb he merited life for us by his blood which he freely shed. In him God reconciled us to himself and to one another, freeing us from the bondage of the devil and of sin, so that each one of us could say with the apostle: the Son of God ‘loved me and gave himself up for me’ (Gal2:20)”‌.30In this regard, John Paul II has explicitly declared: “To introduce any sort of separation between the Word and Jesus Christ is contrary to the Christian faith… Jesus is the Incarnate Word – a single and indivisible person… Christ is none other than Jesus of Nazareth; he is the Word of God made man for the salvation of all… In the process of discovering and appreciating the manifold gifts – especially the spiritual treasures – that God has bestowed on every people, we cannot separate those gifts from Jesus Christ, who is at the centre of God’s plan of salvation”‌.31It is likewise contrary to the Catholic faith to introduce a separation between the salvific action of the Word as such and that of the Word made man. With the incarnation, all the salvific actions of the Word of God are always done in unity with the human nature that he has assumed for the salvation of all people. The one subject which operates in the two natures, human and divine, is the single person of the Word.32Therefore, the theory which would attribute, after the incarnation as well, a salvific activity to the Logos as such in his divinity, exercised “in addition to”‌ or “beyond”‌ the humanity of Christ, is not compatible with the Catholic faith.3311.  Similarly, the doctrine of faith regarding the unicity of the salvific economy willed by the One and Triune God must be firmly believed, at the source and centre of which is the mystery of the incarnation of the Word, mediator of divine grace on the level of creation and redemption (cf. Col 1:15-20), he who recapitulates all things (cf. Eph 1:10), he “whom God has made our wisdom, our righteousness, and sanctification and redemption”‌ (1 Cor 1:30). In fact, the mystery of Christ has its own intrinsic unity, which extends from the eternal choice in God to the parousia: “he [the Father] chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world to be holy and blameless before him in love”‌ (Eph 1:4); “In Christ we are heirs, having been destined according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to his counsel and will”‌ (Eph 1:11); “For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers; those whom he predestined he also called; and those whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also glorified”‌ (Rom 8:29-30). The Church’s Magisterium, faithful to divine revelation, reasserts that Jesus Christ is the mediator and the universal redeemer: “The Word of God, through whom all things were made, was made flesh, so that as perfect man he could save all men and sum up all things in himself. The Lord…is he whom the Father raised from the dead, exalted and placed at his right hand, constituting him judge of the living and the dead”‌.34 This salvific mediation implies also the unicity of the redemptive sacrifice of Christ, eternal high priest (cf. Heb6:20; 9:11; 10:12-14). 12.  There are also those who propose the hypothesis of an economy of the Holy Spirit with a more universal breadth than that of the Incarnate Word, crucified and risen. This position also is contrary to the Catholic faith, which, on the contrary, considers the salvific incarnation of the Word as a trinitarian event. In the New Testament, the mystery of Jesus, the Incarnate Word, constitutes the place of the Holy Spirit’s presence as well as the principle of the Spirit’s effusion on humanity, not only in messianic times (cf. Acts 2:32-36; Jn 7:39, 20:22; 1 Cor15:45), but also prior to his coming in history (cf. 1 Cor 10:4; 1 Pet 1:10-12). The Second Vatican Council has recalled to the consciousness of the Church’s faith this fundamental truth. In presenting the Father’s salvific plan for all humanity, the Council closely links the mystery of Christ from its very beginnings with that of the Spirit.35 The entire work of building the Church by Jesus Christ the Head, in the course of the centuries, is seen as an action which he does in communion with his Spirit.36Furthermore, the salvific action of Jesus Christ, with and through his Spirit, extends beyond the visible boundaries of the Church to all humanity. Speaking of the paschal mystery, in which Christ even now associates the believer to himself in a living manner in the Spirit and gives him the hope of resurrection, the Council states: “All this holds true not only for Christians but also for all men of good will in whose hearts grace is active invisibly. For since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partners, in a way known to God, in the paschal mystery”‌.37Hence, the connection is clear between the salvific mystery of the Incarnate Word and that of the Spirit, who actualizes the salvific efficacy of the Son made man in the lives of all people, called by God to a single goal, both those who historically preceded the Word made man, and those who live after his coming in history: the Spirit of the Father, bestowed abundantly by the Son, is the animator of all (cf. Jn 3:34). Thus, the recent Magisterium of the Church has firmly and clearly recalled the truth of a single divine economy: “The Spirit’s presence and activity affect not only individuals but also society and history, peoples, cultures and religions… The Risen Christ ‘is now at work in human hearts through the strength of his Spirit’… Again, it is the Spirit who sows the ‘seeds of the word’ present in various customs and cultures, preparing them for full maturity in Christ”‌.38 While recognizing the historical-salvific function of the Spirit in the whole universe and in the entire history of humanity,39 the Magisterium states: “This is the same Spirit who was at work in the incarnation and in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus and who is at work in the Church. He is therefore not an alternative to Christ nor does he fill a sort of void which is sometimes suggested as existing between Christ and the Logos. Whatever the Spirit brings about in human hearts and in the history of peoples, in cultures and religions, serves as a preparation for the Gospel and can only be understood in reference to Christ, the Word who took flesh by the power of the Spirit ‘so that as perfectly human he would save all human beings and sum up all things’”‌.40In conclusion, the action of the Spirit is not outside or parallel to the action of Christ. There is only one salvific economy of the One and Triune God, realized in the mystery of the incarnation, death, and resurrection of the Son of God, actualized with the cooperation of the Holy Spirit, and extended in its salvific value to all humanity and to the entire universe: “No one, therefore, can enter into communion with God except through Christ, by the working of the Holy Spirit”‌.41  III. UNICITY AND UNIVERSALITY OF THE SALVIFIC MYSTERY OF JESUS CHRIST13.  The thesis which denies the unicity and salvific universality of the mystery of Jesus Christ is also put forward. Such a position has no biblical foundation. In fact, the truth of Jesus Christ, Son of God, Lord and only Saviour, who through the event of his incarnation, death and resurrection has brought the history of salvation to fulfilment, and which has in him its fullness and centre, must be firmly believed as a constant element of the Church’s faith. The New Testament attests to this fact with clarity: “The Father has sent his Son as the Saviour of the world”‌ (1 Jn 4:14); “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world”‌ (Jn 1:29). In his discourse before the Sanhedrin, Peter, in order to justify the healing of a man who was crippled from birth, which was done in the name of Jesus (cf. Acts 3:1-8), proclaims: “There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved”‌ (Acts 4:12). St. Paul adds, moreover, that Jesus Christ “is Lord of all”‌, “judge of the living and the dead”‌, and thus “whoever believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name”‌ (Acts 10: 36,42,43). Paul, addressing himself to the community of Corinth, writes: “Indeed, even though there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth – as in fact there are many gods and many lords – yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist”‌ (1 Cor 8:5-6). Furthermore, John the Apostle states: “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life. God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him”‌ (Jn 3:16-17). In the New Testament, the universal salvific will of God is closely connected to the sole mediation of Christ: “[God] desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God; there is also one mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ, who gave himself as a ransom for all”‌ (1 Tim 2:4-6). It was in the awareness of the one universal gift of salvation offered by the Father through Jesus Christ in the Spirit (cf. Eph 1:3-14), that the first Christians encountered the Jewish people, showing them the fulfilment of salvation that went beyond the Law and, in the same awareness, they confronted the pagan world of their time, which aspired to salvation through a plurality of saviours. This inheritance of faith has been recalled recently by the Church’s Magisterium: “The Church believes that Christ, who died and was raised for the sake of all (cf. 2 Cor 5:15) can, through his Spirit, give man the light and the strength to be able to respond to his highest calling, nor is there any other name under heaven given among men by which they can be saved (cf. Acts 4:12). The Church likewise believes that the key, the centre, and the purpose of the whole of man’s history is to be found in its Lord and Master”‌.4214.  It must therefore be firmly believed as a truth of Catholic faith that the universal salvific will of the One and Triune God is offered and accomplished once for all in the mystery of the incarnation, death, and resurrection of the Son of God. Bearing in mind this article of faith, theology today, in its reflection on the existence of other religious experiences and on their meaning in God’s salvific plan, is invited to explore if and in what way the historical figures and positive elements of these religions may fall within the divine plan of salvation. In this undertaking, theological research has a vast field of work under the guidance of the Church’s Magisterium.  The Second Vatican Council, in fact, has stated that: “the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude, but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a participation in this one source”‌.43 The content of this participated mediation should be explored more deeply, but must remain always consistent with the principle of Christ’s unique mediation: “Although participated forms of mediation of different kinds and degrees are not excluded, they acquire meaning and value only from Christ’s own mediation, and they cannot be understood as parallel or complementary to his”‌.44 Hence, those solutions that propose a salvific action of God beyond the unique mediation of Christ would be contrary to Christian and Catholic faith. 15.  Not infrequently it is proposed that theology should avoid the use of terms like “unicity”‌, “universality”‌, and “absoluteness”‌, which give the impression of excessive emphasis on the significance and value of the salvific event of Jesus Christ in relation to other religions. In reality, however, such language is simply being faithful to revelation, since it represents a development of the sources of the faith themselves.  From the beginning, the community of believers has recognized in Jesus a salvific value such that he alone, as Son of God made man, crucified and risen, by the mission received from the Father and in the power of the Holy Spirit, bestows revelation (cf. Mt 11:27) and divine life (cf. Jn 1:12; 5:25-26; 17:2) to all humanity and to every person. In this sense, one can and must say that Jesus Christ has a significance and a value for the human race and its history, which are unique and singular, proper to him alone, exclusive, universal, and absolute. Jesus is, in fact, the Word of God made man for the salvation of all. In expressing this consciousness of faith, the Second Vatican Council teaches: “The Word of God, through whom all things were made, was made flesh, so that as perfect man he could save all men and sum up all things in himself. The Lord is the goal of human history, the focal point of the desires of history and civilization, the centre of mankind, the joy of all hearts, and the fulfilment of all aspirations. It is he whom the Father raised from the dead, exalted and placed at his right hand, constituting him judge of the living and the dead”‌.45 “It is precisely this uniqueness of Christ which gives him an absolute and universal significance whereby, while belonging to history, he remains history’s centre and goal: ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end’ (Rev 22:13)”‌.46  IV. UNICITY AND UNITY OF THE CHURCH16.  The Lord Jesus, the only Saviour, did not only establish a simple community of disciples, but constituted the Church as a salvific mystery: he himself is in the Church and the Church is in him (cf. Jn 15:1ff.; Gal 3:28; Eph 4:15-16; Acts 9:5).  Therefore, the fullness of Christ’s salvific mystery belongs also to the Church, inseparably united to her Lord. Indeed, Jesus Christ continues his presence and his work of salvation in the Church and by means of the Church (cf. Col 1:24-27),47 which is his body (cf. 1 Cor 12:12-13, 27; Col 1:18).48 And thus, just as the head and members of a living body, though not identical, are inseparable, so too Christ and the Church can neither be confused nor separated, and constitute a single “whole Christ”‌.49 This same inseparability is also expressed in the New Testament by the analogy of the Church as the Bride of Christ (cf. 2 Cor 11:2; Eph 5:25-29; Rev 21:2,9).50Therefore, in connection with the unicity and universality of the salvific mediation of Jesus Christ, the unicity of the Church founded by him must be firmly believed as a truth of Catholic faith. Just as there is one Christ, so there exists a single body of Christ, a single Bride of Christ: “a single Catholic and apostolic Church”‌.51 Furthermore, the promises of the Lord that he would not abandon his Church (cf. Mt 16:18; 28:20) and that he would guide her by his Spirit (cf. Jn 16:13) mean, according to Catholic faith, that the unicity and the unity of the Church – like everything that belongs to the Church’s integrity – will never be lacking.52The Catholic faithful are required to profess that there is an historical continuity – rooted in the apostolic succession53 – between the Church founded by Christ and the Catholic Church: “This is the single Church of Christ… which our Saviour, after his resurrection, entrusted to Peter’s pastoral care (cf. Jn 21:17), commissioning him and the other Apostles to extend and rule her (cf. Mt 28:18ff.), erected for all ages as ‘the pillar and mainstay of the truth’ (1 Tim3:15). This Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in [subsistit in] the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him”‌.54  With the expression subsistit in, the Second Vatican Council sought to harmonize two doctrinal statements: on the one hand, that the Church of Christ, despite the divisions which exist among Christians, continues to exist fully only in the Catholic Church, and on the other hand, that “outside of her structure, many elements can be found of sanctification and truth”‌,55 that is, in those Churches and ecclesial communities which are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church.56 But with respect to these, it needs to be stated that “they derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church”‌.5717.  Therefore, there exists a single Church of Christ, which subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the Successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him.58 The Churches which, while not existing in perfect communion with the Catholic Church, remain united to her by means of the closest bonds, that is, by apostolic succession and a valid Eucharist, are true particular Churches.59 Therefore, the Church of Christ is present and operative also in these Churches, even though they lack full communion with the Catholic Church, since they do not accept the Catholic doctrine of the Primacy, which, according to the will of God, the Bishop of Rome objectively has and exercises over the entire Church.60On the other hand, the ecclesial communities which have not preserved the valid Episcopate and the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic mystery,61 are not Churches in the proper sense; however, those who are baptized in these communities are, by Baptism, incorporated in Christ and thus are in a certain communion, albeit imperfect, with the Church.62 Baptism in fact tends per se toward the full development of life in Christ, through the integral profession of faith, the Eucharist, and full communion in the Church.63“The Christian faithful are therefore not permitted to imagine that the Church of Christ is nothing more than a collection – divided, yet in some way one – of Churches and ecclesial communities; nor are they free to hold that today the Church of Christ nowhere really exists, and must be considered only as a goal which all Churches and ecclesial communities must strive to reach”‌.64 In fact, “the elements of this already-given Church exist, joined together in their fullness in the Catholic Church and, without this fullness, in the other communities”‌.65“Therefore, these separated Churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from defects, have by no means been deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church”‌.66The lack of unity among Christians is certainly a wound for the Church; not in the sense that she is deprived of her unity, but “in that it hinders the complete fulfilment of her universality in history”‌.67  V. THE CHURCH: KINGDOM OF GOD AND KINGDOM OF CHRIST18.  The mission of the Church is “to proclaim and establish among all peoples the kingdom of Christ and of God, and she is on earth, the seed and the beginning of that kingdom”‌.68 On the one hand, the Church is “a sacrament – that is, sign and instrument of intimate union with God and of unity of the entire human race”‌.69 She is therefore the sign and instrument of the kingdom; she is called to announce and to establish the kingdom. On the other hand, the Church is the “people gathered by the unity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit”‌;70 she is therefore “the kingdom of Christ already present in mystery”‌71 and constitutes its seed and beginning. The kingdom of God, in fact, has an eschatological dimension: it is a reality present in time, but its full realization will arrive only with the completion or fulfilment of history.72The meaning of the expressions kingdom of heaven, kingdom of God, and kingdom of Christin Sacred Scripture and the Fathers of the Church, as well as in the documents of the Magisterium, is not always exactly the same, nor is their relationship to the Church, which is a mystery that cannot be totally contained by a human concept. Therefore, there can be various theological explanations of these terms. However, none of these possible explanations can deny or empty in any way the intimate connection between Christ, the kingdom, and the Church. In fact, the kingdom of God which we know from revelation, “cannot be detached either from Christ or from the Church… If the kingdom is separated from Jesus, it is no longer the kingdom of God which he revealed.  The result is a distortion of the meaning of the kingdom, which runs the risk of being transformed into a purely human or ideological goal and a distortion of the identity of Christ, who no longer appears as the Lord to whom everything must one day be subjected (cf. 1 Cor 15:27). Likewise, one may not separate the kingdom from the Church. It is true that the Church is not an end unto herself, since she is ordered toward the kingdom of God, of which she is the seed, sign and instrument. Yet, while remaining distinct from Christ and the kingdom, the Church is indissolubly united to both”‌.7319.  To state the inseparable relationship between Christ and the kingdom is not to overlook the fact that the kingdom of God – even if considered in its historical phase – is not identified with the Church in her visible and social reality.  In fact, “the action of Christ and the Spirit outside the Church’s visible boundaries”‌ must not be excluded.74 Therefore, one must also bear in mind that “the kingdom is the concern of everyone: individuals, society and the world. Working for the kingdom means acknowledging and promoting God’s activity, which is present in human history and transforms it. Building the kingdom means working for liberation from evil in all its forms.  In a word, the kingdom of God is the manifestation and the realization of God’s plan of salvation in all its fullness”‌.75In considering the relationship between the kingdom of God, the kingdom of Christ, and the Church, it is necessary to avoid one-sided accentuations, as is the case with those “conceptions which deliberately emphasize the kingdom and which describe themselves as ‘kingdom centred.’ They stress the image of a Church which is not concerned about herself, but which is totally concerned with bearing witness to and serving the kingdom. It is a ‘Church for others,’ just as Christ is the ‘man for others’… Together with positive aspects, these conceptions often reveal negative aspects as well. First, they are silent about Christ: the kingdom of which they speak is ‘theocentrically’ based, since, according to them, Christ cannot be understood by those who lack Christian faith, whereas different peoples, cultures, and religions are capable of finding common ground in the one divine reality, by whatever name it is called. For the same reason, they put great stress on the mystery of creation, which is reflected in the diversity of cultures and beliefs, but they keep silent about the mystery of redemption. Furthermore, the kingdom, as they understand it, ends up either leaving very little room for the Church or undervaluing the Church in reaction to a presumed ‘ecclesiocentrism’ of the past and because they consider the Church herself only a sign, for that matter a sign not without ambiguity”‌.76 These theses are contrary to Catholic faith because they deny the unicity of the relationship which Christ and the Church have with the kingdom of God.   VI. THE CHURCH AND THE OTHER RELIGIONS IN RELATION TO SALVATION20.  From what has been stated above, some points follow that are necessary for theological reflection as it explores the relationship of the Church and the other religions to salvation. Above all else, it must be firmly believed that “the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and baptism (cf. Mk 16:16; Jn 3:5), and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through baptism as through a door”‌.77 This doctrine must not be set against the universal salvific will of God (cf. 1 Tim 2:4); “it is necessary to keep these two truths together, namely, the real possibility of salvation in Christ for all mankind and the necessity of the Church for this salvation”‌.78The Church is the “universal sacrament of salvation”‌,79 since, united always in a mysterious way to the Saviour Jesus Christ, her Head, and subordinated to him, she has, in God’s plan, an indispensable relationship with the salvation of every human being.80  For those who are not formally and visibly members of the Church, “salvation in Christ is accessible by virtue of a grace which, while having a mysterious relationship to the Church, does not make them formally part of the Church, but enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation. This grace comes from Christ; it is the result of his sacrifice and is communicated by the Holy Spirit”‌;81 it has a relationship with the Church, which “according to the plan of the Father, has her origin in the mission of the Son and the Holy Spirit”‌.8221.  With respect to the way in which the salvific grace of God – which is always given by means of Christ in the Spirit and has a mysterious relationship to the Church – comes to individual non-Christians, the Second Vatican Council limited itself to the statement that God bestows it “in ways known to himself”‌.83  Theologians are seeking to understand this question more fully.  Their work is to be encouraged, since it is certainly useful for understanding better God’s salvific plan and the ways in which it is accomplished. However, from what has been stated above about the mediation of Jesus Christ and the “unique and special relationship”‌84 which the Church has with the kingdom of God among men – which in substance is the universal kingdom of Christ the Saviour – it is clear that it would be contrary to the faith to consider the Church as one way of salvation alongside those constituted by the other religions, seen as complementary to the Church or substantially equivalent to her, even if these are said to be converging with the Church toward the eschatological kingdom of God. Certainly, the various religious traditions contain and offer religious elements which come from God,85 and which are part of what “the Spirit brings about in human hearts and in the history of peoples, in cultures, and religions”‌.86 Indeed, some prayers and rituals of the other religions may assume a role of preparation for the Gospel, in that they are occasions or pedagogical helps in which the human heart is prompted to be open to the action of God.87One cannot attribute to these, however, a divine origin or an ex opere operato salvific efficacy, which is proper to the Christian sacraments.88 Furthermore, it cannot be overlooked that other rituals, insofar as they depend on superstitions or other errors (cf. 1 Cor 10:20-21), constitute an obstacle to salvation.8922.  With the coming of the Saviour Jesus Christ, God has willed that the Church founded by him be the instrument for the salvation of all humanity (cf. Acts 17:30-31).90 This truth of faith does not lessen the sincere respect which the Church has for the religions of the world, but at the same time, it rules out, in a radical way, that mentality of indifferentism “characterized by a religious relativism which leads to the belief that ‘one religion is as good as another’”‌.91 If it is true that the followers of other religions can receive divine grace, it is also certain that objectively speaking they are in a gravely deficient situation in comparison with those who, in the Church, have the fullness of the means of salvation.92  However, “all the children of the Church should nevertheless remember that their exalted condition results, not from their own merits, but from the grace of Christ. If they fail to respond in thought, word, and deed to that grace, not only shall they not be saved, but they shall be more severely judged”‌.93 One understands then that, following the Lord’s command (cf. Mt 28:19-20) and as a requirement of her love for all people, the Church “proclaims and is in duty bound to proclaim without fail, Christ who is the way, the truth, and the life (Jn 14:6). In him, in whom God reconciled all things to himself (cf. 2 Cor 5:18-19), men find the fullness of their religious life”‌.94In inter-religious dialogue as well, the mission ad gentes “today as always retains its full force and necessity”‌.95  “Indeed, God -desires all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth’ (1 Tim 2:4); that is, God wills the salvation of everyone through the knowledge of the truth. Salvation is found in the truth. Those who obey the promptings of the Spirit of truth are already on the way of salvation. But the Church, to whom this truth has been entrusted, must go out to meet their desire, so as to bring them the truth. Because she believes in God’s universal plan of salvation, the Church must be missionary”‌.96 Inter-religious dialogue, therefore, as part of her evangelizing mission, is just one of the actions of the Church in her mission ad gentes.97 Equality, which is a presupposition of inter-religious dialogue, refers to the equal personal dignity of the parties in dialogue, not to doctrinal content, nor even less to the position of Jesus Christ – who is God himself made man – in relation to the founders of the other religions. Indeed, the Church, guided by charity and respect for freedom,98 must be primarily committed to proclaiming to all people the truth definitively revealed by the Lord, and to announcing the necessity of conversion to Jesus Christ and of adherence to the Church through Baptism and the other sacraments, in order to participate fully in communion with God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Thus, the certainty of the universal salvific will of God does not diminish, but rather increases the duty and urgency of the proclamation of salvation and of conversion to the Lord Jesus Christ.   CONCLUSION 23.  The intention of the present Declaration, in reiterating and clarifying certain truths of the faith, has been to follow the example of the Apostle Paul, who wrote to the faithful of Corinth: “I handed on to you as of first importance what I myself received”‌ (1 Cor 15:3). Faced with certain problematic and even erroneous propositions, theological reflection is called to reconfirm the Church’s faith and to give reasons for her hope in a way that is convincing and effective. In treating the question of the true religion, the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council taught: “We believe that this one true religion continues to exist in the Catholic and Apostolic Church, to which the Lord Jesus entrusted the task of spreading it among all people. Thus, he said to the Apostles: ‘Go therefore and make disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you’ (Mt 28: 19-20). Especially in those things that concern God and his Church, all persons are required to seek the truth, and when they come to know it, to embrace it and hold fast to it”‌.99The revelation of Christ will continue to be “the true lodestar”‌ 100 in history for all humanity: “The truth, which is Christ, imposes itself as an all-embracing authority”‌. 101 The Christian mystery, in fact, overcomes all barriers of time and space, and accomplishes the unity of the human family: “From their different locations and traditions all are called in Christ to share in the unity of the family of God’s children… Jesus destroys the walls of division and creates unity in a new and unsurpassed way through our sharing in his mystery. This unity is so deep that the Church can say with Saint Paul: ‘You are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are saints and members of the household of God’ (Eph 2:19)”‌. 102The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience of June 16, 2000, granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with sure knowledge and by his apostolic authority, ratified and confirmed this Declaration, adopted in Plenary Session and ordered its publication. Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, August 6, 2000, the Feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord.    Joseph Card. Ratzinger Prefect   Tarcisio Bertone, S.D.B. Archbishop Emeritus of Vercelli Secretary (1) First Council of Constantinople, Symbolum Constantinopolitanum: DS 150. (2) Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 1: AAS 83 (1991), 249-340. (3) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Ad gentes and Declaration Nostra aetate; cf. also Paul VI Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii nuntiandi: AAS 68 (1976), 5-76; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio.(4) Second Vatican Council, Declaration Nostra aetate, 2. (5) Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue and the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, Instruction Dialogue and Proclamation, 29: AAS 84 (1992), 424; cf. Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, 22. (6) Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 55: AAS 83 (1991), 302-304. (7) Cf. Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue and the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples, Instruction Dialogue and Proclamation, 9: AAS 84 (1992), 417ff. (8)  John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et ratio, 5: AAS 91 (1999), 5-88. (9) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei verbum, 2. (10) Ibid., 4. (11) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 5. (12) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et ratio, 14. (13) Council of Chalcedon, Symbolum Chalcedonense: DS 301; cf. St. Athanasius, De Incarnatione, 54, 3: SC 199, 458. (14) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei verbum, 4. (15) Ibid., 5. (16) Ibid.(17) Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 144. (18) Ibid., 150. (19) Ibid., 153. (20) Ibid., 178. (21) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et ratio, 13. (22) Cf. ibid., 31-32. (23) Second Vatican Council, Declaration Nostra aetate, 2; cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Ad gentes, 9, where it speaks of the elements of good present “in the particular customs and cultures of peoples”‌; Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 16, where it mentions the elements of good and of truth present among non-Christians, which can be considered a preparation for the reception of the Gospel. (24) Cf. Council of Trent, Decretum de libris sacris et de traditionibus recipiendis: DS 1501; First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, cap. 2: DS 3006. (25) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei verbum, 11. (26) Ibid.(27) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 55; cf. 56 and Paul VI, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii nuntiandi, 53. (28) First Council of Nicaea, Symbolum Nicaenum: DS 125. (29) Council of Chalcedon, Symbolum Chalcedonense: DS 301. (30) Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, 22. (31) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 6. (32) Cf. St. Leo the Great, Tomus ad Flavianum: DS 294. (33) Cf. St. Leo the Great, Letter to the Emperor Leo I Promisisse me memini: DS 318: “…in tantam unitatem ab ipso conceptu Virginis deitate et humanitate conserta, ut nec sine homine divina, nec sine Deo agerentur humana”‌. Cf. also ibid. DS 317. (34) Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, 45; cf. also Council of Trent, Decretum de peccato originali, 3: DS 1513. (35) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 3-4. (36) Cf. ibid., 7; cf. St. Irenaeus, who wrote that it is in the Church “that communion with Christ has been deposited, that is to say: the Holy Spirit”‌ (Adversus haereses III, 24, 1: SC211, 472). (37) Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, 22. (38) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 28. For the “seeds of the Word”‌ cf. also St. Justin Martyr, Second Apology 8, 1-2; 10, 1-3; 13, 3-6: ed. E.J. Goodspeed, 84; 85; 88-89. (39) Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter, Redemptoris missio, 28-29. (40) Ibid., 29. (41) Ibid., 5. (42) Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, 10. Cf. St. Augustine, who wrote that Christ is the way, which “has never been lacking to mankind… and apart from this way no one has been set free, no one is being set free, no one will be set free”‌ De civitate Dei 10, 32, 2: CCSL 47, 312. (43) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 62. (44) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 5. (45) Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, 45. The necessary and absolute singularity of Christ in human history is well expressed by St. Irenaeus in contemplating the preeminence of Jesus as firstborn Son: “In the heavens, as firstborn of the Father’s counsel, the perfect Word governs and legislates all things; on the earth, as firstborn of the Virgin, a man just and holy, reverencing God and pleasing to God, good and perfect in every way, he saves from hell all those who follow him since he is the firstborn from the dead and Author of the life of God”‌ (Demonstratio apostolica, 39: SC 406, 138). (46) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 6. (47) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 14. (48) Cf. ibid., 7. (49) Cf. St. Augustine, Enarratio in Psalmos, Ps. 90, Sermo 2,1: CCSL 39, 1266; St. Gregory the Great, Moralia in Iob, Praefatio, 6, 14: PL 75, 525; St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, III, q. 48, a. 2 ad 1. (50) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 6. (51) Symbolum maius Ecclesiae Armeniacae: DS 48. Cf. Boniface VIII, Unam sanctam: DS 870-872; Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 8. (52) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 4; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Ut unum sint, 11: AAS 87 (1995), 927. (53) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 20; cf. also St. Irenaeus, Adversus haereses, III, 3, 1-3: SC 211, 20-44; St. Cyprian, Epist. 33, 1: CCSL 3B, 164-165; St. Augustine, Contra adver. legis et prophet., 1, 20, 39: CCSL 49, 70. (54) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 8. (55) Ibid.; cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Ut unum sint, 13. Cf. also Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 15 and the Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 3. (56) The interpretation of those who would derive from the formula subsistit in the thesis that the one Church of Christ could subsist also in non-Catholic Churches and ecclesial communities is therefore contrary to the authentic meaning of Lumen gentium. “The Council instead chose the word subsistit precisely to clarify that there exists only one ‘subsistence’ of the true Church, while outside her visible structure there only exist elementa Ecclesiae,which – being elements of that same Church – tend and lead toward the Catholic Church”‌ (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Notification on the Book “Church: Charism and Power”‌ by Father Leonardo Boff: AAS 77 [1985], 756-762). (57) Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 3. (58) Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Mysterium Ecclesiae, 1: AAS65 (1973), 396-398. (59) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 14 and 15; Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter Communionis notio, 17: AAS 85 (1993), 848. (60) Cf. First Vatican Council, Constitution Pastor aeternus: DS 3053-3064; Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 22. (61) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 22. (62) Cf. ibid., 3. (63) Cf. ibid., 22. (64) Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration Mysterium Ecclesiae, 1. (65) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Ut unum sint, 14. (66) Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 3. (67) Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter Communionis notio, 17; cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 4. (68) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 5. (69) Ibid., 1. (70) Ibid., 4. Cf. St. Cyprian, De Dominica oratione 23: CCSL 3A, 105. (71) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 3. (72) Cf. ibid., 9; cf. also the prayer addressed to God found in the Didache 9,4: SC 248, 176: “May the Church be gathered from the ends of the earth into your kingdom”‌ and ibid. 10, 5: SC 248, 180: “Remember, Lord, your Church… and, made holy, gather her together from the four winds into your kingdom which you have prepared for her”‌. (73) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 18; cf. Apostolic Exhortation Ecclesia in Asia, 17: L’Osservatore Romano (November 7, 1999). The kingdom is so inseparable from Christ that, in a certain sense, it is identified with him (cf. Origen, In Mt. Hom., 14, 7: PG 13, 1197; Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem, IV, 33,8: CCSL 1, 634. (74) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 18. (75) Ibid., 15. (76) Ibid., 17. (77) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 14; cf. Decree Ad gentes, 7; Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 3. (78) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 9; cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 846-847. (79) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 48. (80) Cf. St. Cyprian, De catholicae ecclesiae unitate, 6: CCSL 3, 253-254; St. Irenaeus, Adversus haereses, III, 24, 1: SC 211, 472-474. (81) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 10. (82) Second Vatican Council, Decree Ad gentes, 2. The famous formula extra Ecclesiam nullus omnino salvatur is to be interpreted in this sense (cf. Fourth Lateran Council, Cap. 1. De fide catholica: DS 802). Cf. also the Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston: DS 3866-3872. (83) Second Vatican Council, Decree Ad gentes, 7. (84) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 18. (85) These are the seeds of the divine Word (semina Verbi), which the Church recognizes with joy and respect (cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Ad gentes, 11; Declaration Nostra aetate, 2). (86) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 29. (87) Cf. ibid.; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 843. (88) Cf. Council of Trent, Decretum de sacramentis, can. 8, de sacramentis in genere: DS 1608. (89) Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 55. (90) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 17; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 11. (91) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 36. (92) Cf. Pius XII, Encyclical Letter Mystici corporis: DS 3821. (93) Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 14. (94) Second Vatican Council, Declaration Nostra aetate, 2. (95) Second Vatican Council, Decree Ad gentes, 7. (96) Catechism of the Catholic Church, 851; cf. also 849-856. (97) Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Redemptoris missio, 55; Apostolic Exhortation Ecclesia in Asia, 31. (98) Cf. Second Vatican Council, Declaration Dignitatis humanae, 1. (99)  Ibid.(100) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides et ratio, 15. (101) Ibid., 92. (102) Ibid., 70.

March 25, 2023

“Words carried by an angel come not forth until the location and the recipient are such that it fulfills the will of God

For words carried by an angel are placed there by an act of God and locked inside until what has been willed by God comes to pass

But the moment this angel of which you have been told arrived on earth

Then the earth fell pregnant with the words he carried

For indeed the world was called to the travail that would come to pass

And which would culminate with the birth of this baby into the world.

And as I stood drenched in the majesty of God

That dripped from the wings of this angel,

The words that he spoke pierced the fabric of the world,

Now pregnant with anticipation.

And as the angel’s words pierced my womb,

The Spirit, which had arrived in anticipation of the angel’s arrival,

Gave life to the words which then fell upon fertile ground

Prepared for this moment,

And a wondrous union took place.

I knew not how such things could be

But the angel spoke the words given by the Father,

And the Spirit quickened at the words,

And the Son, the beloved of the Father,

Became the recipient of the creation He had himself formed.

And myself?

Why, I was an untarnished vessel, and a holder of grace,

And although I knew not how such a thing could be wrought within me,

I knew indeed that once the words were spoken, it was so.

And now to the expectant gaze of a pregnant world,

I echoed the words of the Spirit, “It is done.”

The words of an angel, carried to earth intact,

And locked away until brought forth by the perfect plan of God,

Had now been spoken.

And the world entered into the travail, although largely unsuspecting,

And animals cried, and rocks moved, and the sand blew against the door.

And I stood, and praised the name of the Lord,

For my womb had become a cradle of love,

And indeed within me was now prepared a bed of grace,

In which the Son of God would grow.

And although I knew not how this could be,

I knew that indeed it was,

And within me the words welled up,

“Oh, what I now carry will carry me,

And indeed all the world.”

And the pregnant world waited,

And entered into the travail

Which would set the stage for all of time.

And the words welled up in me,

“What now has been done unto me,

Has been done unto the world,

And the One that I carry will carry the world,

And I will be His Mother, and theirs.”

Indeed, today, angels now gather and come again to visit the earth,

And the words that they carry have been placed there by an act of God

And cannot be released until the location and the recipient are that

Which has been willed by the hand of God.

And the angels ask, “So is there one who will stand and receive these words,

And take them forth into a world that awaits in anticipation?”

And so I have come here today, and am even now among you,

And I form a conduit for the angels’ words,

For Christ comes again unto the world.

And in His eyes is the fire of justice,

And in His hands is the mercy of the ages,

And in His Sacred Heart is His love, the love of God.

The world is pregnant with anticipation,

For He comes unto man again,

And if you will come and walk with me,

I will provide the vessel of grace,

By which you may receive the words of the angels,

And I will walk with you through the travail of these last days.

For the world is pregnant, 

And reels in anticipation of the travail that now unfolds.

But walk with me,

And I will be that vessel of grace,

That will receive the Son

And bring Him even now unto you.“

-S

This email contains graphics, so if you don’t see them, view it in your browser
RTV Update
		Hello RENE HENRY GRACIDA, Michael Matt’s latest video is available now! CANCELING RELIGIOUS FREEDOM: From Francis to Zelenskyy & Kiev to ChicagoNew from Remnant TV… Watch Video on the Remnant Website…
The Remnant Newspaper | P.O. Box 1117 | Forest Lake, MN 55025This message was sent to rhg1923@gmail.com as you requested updates from the Remnant Newspaper. Click Here to update your email preferences from Remnant Newspaper.

ReplyForward

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0?ui=2&ik=513e54dcd3&attid=0.1.1&permmsgid=msg-f:1760992217555100923&th=18704d177b9964fb&view=att&disp=safe

March 25, 2023 Special EditionThe Existential Seed Corn Crisis: Reproductive “Freedom;” Gender Insanity; Manipulation of Student Brain Chemistry; And Complete Loss of Rational Social Mores. There’s No Hiding It Anymore.   Ti(c)k-To(c)k; Time Is Running Out  Pogo Was A Genius: “The Enemy Is Us”   By: Pem Schaeffer pemster4062@yahoo.com  March 19, 2023    “We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious  is the first duty of intelligent men.” “Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them.”  – Orwell  52 years ago, 10 hours after a horrendous Southern California earthquake shook and rolled the new house we had bought less than two years before, my wife gave birth to our first child, a beautiful baby girl.  A few weeks later, this proud father had an epiphany.   I was sitting on a central open half-stairway of our Tri-Level home, our wondrous and precious new daughter on my lap. It suddenly dawned on me I was holding a miracle in my hands.  A blessing from God, given to us to nurture, protect, raise, teach, and love.  She was and is the very essence of earthly human life.  We sure have come a long way since those days that here, “in the November of my years,” I think of as impossibly innocent.  This is why I am writing this offering — in response to a recent news item here in Maine:  https://www.themainewire.com/2023/03/maine-education-chief-academic-learning-takes-backseat-to-social-emotional-gender-and-race/  The brazen clarity of the Maine State Commissioner of Education in front of Legislators makes it all too clear that there is no hiding the truth anymore, or disguising the facts.  She is more focused on new-speak and manipulating brain chemistry than on educating children.  This is like a cult leader finding new ways to get kids to drink the Kool-Aid, figuratively speaking.  Her Instagram-like glamour headshot evokes the thought of a serpent in the tree of education, disguised as a beguiling “Educator,” now Commissioner of the Maine Department of Education.  Can you imagine what the Chinese will think of this as they develop their strategic assessment of the Outlook for America?  The subject of government schools has been big in the national news for some years now, ranging from direct effects on elections (Glen Youngkin, after Terry McAuliffe “accidentally” told the truth about his ideology) to the weaponization of federal DOJ powers to control public objections at local school board meetings.  Bald-faced lying and word-mincing on the part of school officials are all too common to hide the realities from the public.  Commissioner Makin’s public testimony relayed in the linked article pierces right through the veils of obfuscation spoken, broadcast, and published everywhere.  “Seed Corn” may seem a bit in-artful to some as a way to describe our offspring….our progeny….but at the most basic level that’s exactly what they are.  We hear lots of uproar from the tender souls of our society about not wanting to consume foods that derive from “GMO” sources, which stands for Genetically Modified Organisms.  One could make a case, as I see it, that all the intellectual and bodily manipulations and mutilations being inflicted upon our children these days are akin to the dreaded “GMO”science and far more dangerous to the future of humankind.  And it’s being done by those we entrust with the care of our youngsters and at our expense!  With our tacit approval, unless we do something to stop it!  We are, after a fashion, willing accessories to the abuse taking place right before our eyes.  As Pogo said, “We have met the enemy, and it is us!”  I feel compelled to comment on a few of the widely prevalent ways in which the “existential threat to our seed corn” is now manifestly routine and ordinary in our society, ideology, and emerging moral fabric.  Before I do so, a reminder of a related reality.  We are often advised to “follow the money” when it comes to understanding various social and political pathologies.  Howie Carr, a favorite radio talk show host of mine, often repeats that there is a typical path that activists follow.  It begins with activism, which becomes a cause, which then becomes a racket, to which I add shakedowns of various forms.    Black Lives Matter is a perfect example.  They leveraged the shakedown angle at the highest levels, using systemic racism as the hammer.  The founders raised untold millions in building public empathy, only to enrich themselves in various ways before collapsing from their greed and corruption.  Still, they did lasting and serious damage, demanding the dismantling of “systemically oppressive” Police.  They convinced many of their marks to buy into that, and the damage done is lasting, and may never be reversed.  Ask yourself if the same thing isn’t happening with a thriving Consulting Industrial Complex, pushing DEI, CRT, 1619 Theory, Gender Ideology, and other bright and shiny new arrows in the Critical Social Justice quiver.  How much is new revenue stream potential driving the ground swell of Heath Care Sector support for Gender Manipulation Theory?  How much can they spend on lobbying to drive related policy evolution?  And elect sympathetic politicians?  This, in particular, is disgusting at the most basic level.  Selling drugs is one thing.  Selling body mutilation and related life-altering therapies is beyond all rational and moral justification.  Now on to subject area-specific comments:  Reproductive Rights & Freedom:  These are callous, political euphemisms for the purposeful taking of a life in the womb, right up to the moment of birth.  They are damnable abuse of common, decent use of language intended to disguise an underlying reality.  Abortion is, in fact, the polar opposite of reproduction, terminating the process itself before it completes.  It is many things but is anything but reproductive.  Furthermore, the concepts of freedom and rights, properly understood, come with attendant responsibilities. With very few exceptions, both parties to the conception have easy access to modern-day birth control, often at no cost, simply for the asking.  As well, widespread organizations are willing to help women take an unwanted pregnancy to term, and then assist in the process of putting the infant up for adoption.  There has always been a high demand for adoptable infants with willing, loving potential parents ready to take on those obligations. Abortion is in the purest sense destruction of our “seed corn”to eliminate various forms of inconvenience.  The mental health of the mother, if she had to raise the child, is a false rationale, given the ready and waiting adoptive parents.  Abortion advocates demand that we “keep our hands off their bodies;” imagine, if you will, a baby in the womb holding up a similar sign, asking that abortive hands be kept off their bodies.  Advocates also demand that pro-lifers do not impose “their own religious beliefs” upon them, yet both non-secular and secular abortion rights supporters have elevated abortion to holy sacrament status in their catechism.  They want to see this dystopian act only in the context of demands for government subsidies and protections, not in the larger perspective of human decency and spirituality.  Or the transcendence of life itself.  Gender Insanity:   Various purveyors of distorted gender conceptualization claim that “Doctors may have made a mistake when they assigned your gender at birth.”  Give me a break!  Gender is not “assigned.”  That term applies to home rooms, homework assignments, chores, and other arbitrary factors that must be administered. Gender is determined at birth.  Anyone who has seen a newborn in their “birthday suit,” is well aware of the gender of the infant, and knows full well that no one involved in the delivery process made a mistake in this regard.  Yet the more zealous of the mind-benders argue that infants only months old can sense that they are “in the wrong body.”  Use of this foolishness as a predicate for stimulating gender questioning and/or transition in young minds as young as kindergarten, especially on the part of so-called educators in government schools, should be considered criminal abuse of common sense, rational thought, scientific reality, and the individual rights of students and their parents or guardians.  Being secretive about it only magnifies the violative nature of the abuse, most often perpetrated by adults who are acting well above their expertise and “pay grade.”  They are selling toxic Kool-Aid to gain membership in an ideological cult capturing minds everywhere, to get with the latest “fashion trends” in education.  Why bother with tattoos, piercings, garish hair colors, and cuts when you can up your “look at me” quotient with gender experimentation, and be a hit on social media? Guiding unknowing child targets to puberty blockers, hormone therapy, lifestyle inversion, and eventual bodily mutilation in the hands of medical “professionals” goes well beyond the worries of GMO food products.  Amputation of various gender-specific body parts in pursuit of a new identity is near Frankensteinian in concept.  It is clearly beyond the acceptable bounds of government schools founded to ensure an educated, civilized population, and is an egregious dereliction of fiduciary obligations and “in loco parentis” public trust.  The grotesque nature of this entire pursuit should not escape us. And let’s not forget the current faves of the Woke School Boards and School Administrators.  That would be Drag Queen Story Hours and LGBTQ Soft Porn Picture Books for elementary-aged kids.  I can only imagine how much more balanced and successful I’d have grown up if I had those experiences instead of recesses in “grammar school.” Come to think of it, why did they call them that? Here in particular is where the “follow the money” side of the advocacy – cause- racket continuum comes into play, as the Health Care Sector rapidly evolves to latch onto a major new revenue stream potential.  At the same time, government agencies and other public entities, such as colleges and universities, are jumping on the bandwagon to offer psychological and surgical modifications of vulnerable teenagers and older specimens in the human seed-corn chain.  Witness this: https://www.themainewire.com/2023/03/pentagon-actively-working-to-find-doctors-who-will-provide-hormones-puberty-blockers-for-us-military-kids-abroad/   It should not escape us that this fad, now a cult, is also gaining religious stature in the Church of Woke Perversions.  Martyrs and saints to serve as examples for the unchurched are zealously sought wherever they can be found.  Fame and the status of an “influencer” are there for the taking if wanted.  Manipulation of Student Brain Chemistry:  The linked article and testimony of Education Commissioner Makin exemplify the distortion of government school charges and responsibilities from educating citizens in the necessary skills and knowledge to lead a responsible, rewarding, productive, and happy life as an adult in our society.  I remember well the classroom environment in my elementary school days, and the transition to more mature atmospheres and pursuits in junior high, followed by the adult stature granted to us in high school.  The college added to the progression by granting independence, while also placing the burden of learning on us as students.  We would sink or swim on our own, as was the expectation at the time for adult life across the spectrum of life pursuits.  All of this has changed to degrees barely recognizable to this octogenarian, and our students and society overall are clearly worse off as a result.  Better we should nurture young minds and souls to accept the teachings of the social media cosmos, and seek fame and fortune as “influencers.” Here comes Makin, brazenly articulating the real agenda of modern education theory.  Skills and knowledge once thought necessary for capable, responsible, self-reliant, and happy adult membership in adult society have been lowered to second-class status, or worse.  Instead, the primary objective of government schools, funded by taxpayers, is to manipulate student brain chemistry and to use government force via policy and funding to accomplish it.  She uses pedagogy psychobabble to argue for her intentions, no doubt glazing over many eyes that witnessed the testimony, and those of us reading about it post-facto. She preaches this in a clear attempt to condition young brains to readily accept the mantras and ideological precepts of modern-day pedagogy.  Your math is culturally flexible; mine is hopelessly oppressive.  Your English is identity-affirming; mine is racist.  Your history is enlightened and sensitive; mine is hopelessly fascist. We can’t have students questioning what we teach, let alone listening to their parents when they challenge what their kids hear in school.  Instead, we will dope their intellects using social forces to bend them in the right direction, where they will readily accept the commandments of Woke Theology. This is nothing less than an intentional and purposeful alteration of growing seed corn to accept approved Woke conceptualizations and reject all persons and ideas that challenge them.  The fact that Makin could make such statements in a public legislative setting would seem to evidence a cold and nearly hypnotic disdain for conventional human understanding and a belief that she could not be held to any account for such bizarre pronouncements regarding the charter of her high office. What more do we have to hear before alarms go off in every school and parents everywhere immediately seek alternative education settings?  Except of course, for those who drink the Kool-Aid Makin carries with her everywhere she goes.  Those parents who act on this will, of course, leave the remaining students and parents in increasingly “pure” indoctrination factories.  Collapse of Societal Moral Fabric:  This pathology reduces in simple terms to normalizing deviancy in every way imaginable; consider recasting pedophiles as “minor addicted persons,” in an attempt to increase sympathies and tolerance for their inhumane conduct, which can scar a child for life. Behaviors considered objectionable become the opposite: worthy of praise, emulation, and encouragement. Pursuing “alternative”lifestyles, dangerous bodily mutilations, and consumption of assorted drugs, intentionally or not, is increasingly adding to the death count among the young; sometimes intentionally, sometimes accidental.    Homelessness is widespread.  Yet various advocating individuals and organizations see these as worthy of societal undergirding and funding in various ways.  Revenue streams anyone? DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, for the unwoke reading this) eliminates the common-sense principles that guide the processes by which the most qualified become Doctors, Professors, Executives, Pilots, and government leaders – elected or not.  In fact, in the limit, Commissioner Makin would not qualify for her current office.  Instead, we get situations like Joe Biden’s Cabinet and prominent public staff, who collectively embarrass him, his administration, and America overall.  Add to that the contribution to Chinese and other threat assessments of our strengths and weaknesses, and you have a disaster with immeasurable consequences.  CRT (Critical Race Theory) inverts the dream of Martin Luther King, Jr. insisting that we be judged by the color of our skin rather than our character and personal behaviors.  Whites are genetically irredeemable racists, and non-whites are eternal victims.  The fact that we can allow such social understanding to take hold throughout our society further encourages enemy views that we have lost our minds, our principles, and our way overall. We are at this point doing all we can to encourage the criminal lifestyle, both through demonization and reduction in funding of Police Forces, and the widespread softening of consequences for criminal behavior.  What did they expect would happen when you could walk in and shoplift up to $900 worth of products off the shelves without fear of any consequences?  And repeat the same thing day after day as “new age entrepreneurship,” one supposes.  Again: will the world outside see us as becoming stronger and more civil, or weaker and in the throes of anarchy?  Unable to tend to the business of daily national life let alone worry about threats from elsewhere. “Higher Education,” in the person of faculty they employ with virtually no accountability, is behind much of the “enlightened” social thought describing the pathologies described above.  As Thomas Sowell has written: “Someone once defined a social problem as a situation in which the real world differs from the theories of intellectuals. To the intelligentsia, it follows, as the night follows the day, that it is the real world that is wrong and which needs to change.  Having imagined a world in which each individual has the same probability of success as anyone else, intellectuals have been shocked and outraged that the real world is nowhere close to that ideal. Vast amounts of time and resources have been devoted to trying to figure out what is stopping this ideal from being realized — as if there was ever any reason to expect it to be.” And this: “The most fundamental fact about the ideas of the political left is that they do not work. Therefore we should not be surprised to find the left concentrated in institutions where ideas do not have to work to survive.” And,  if you will indulge me,  one more: “Historians of the future will have a hard time figuring out how so many organized groups of strident jackasses succeeded in leading us around by the nose and morally intimidating the majority into silence.”   End Note:  For those of you who can abide the notion of reading further on the subjects above, I offer the following: https://www.themainewire.com/2023/03/maine-wire-schools-education-survey-poll-dei-gender-mills-makin/ https://www.themainewire.com/2023/02/maine-lgbt-gender-ideology-transgender-lgbt-doe-education-schools/ Under the heading of Never Say Now We’ve Seen It All: https://www.themainewire.com/2023/02/state-website-tells-public-employees-how-to-decolonize-our-dreams-use-neopronouns-and-understand-privilege/ (please contact me if you can explain the meaning of “Decolonize Your Dreams”) pemster4062@yahoo.com  If you do not take an interest in the affairs of your government, then you are doomed to live under the rule of fools.PlatoTo be added to my distribution list, please click: SUBSCRIBE To be removed from my distribution list, please click: UNSUBSCRIBE To leave a comment, please click: COMMENT ©2022 Rip McIntosh Enterprises. All rights reserved.

    Letter #76, 2023 Thursday, March 23: Roche    The Novus Ordo represents a “change in the theology of the Church”: Cardinal Roche    British Cardinal Arthur Roche, 73 (link) the Pope’s head of the Dicastery for Divine Worship since 2021, spoke briefly in a BBC report on Sunday, March 19 (link) on the issue of the Vatican’s limiting of the Traditional Latin Mass (abbreviated as the “TLM”) in 2021.     The BBC report also included the opinions of several British Catholics who attend and appreciate the old rite of the Mass.    Roche’s abbreviated remarks featured most prominently his claim that, in regard to the liturgy, in regard to what happens at Mass, “the theology of the Church has changed.”     This was striking, and is material for reflection.    Roche explained his viewpoint this way:     “You know, the theology of the Church has changed. Whereas before, the priest represented, at a distance, all the people — they were channeled, as it were, through this person who alone was celebrating the Mass. It is not only the priest who celebrates the liturgy, but also those who are baptized with him. And that is an enormous statement to make.”    He is right: it is an “enormous statement to make.”    Enormous, because it seems to say what very few up to now have been willing to say explicitly: that there has not been “continuity” in Catholic teaching on this matter from prior to the Council, through the Council, and after the Council, up until today, but a kind of “rupture,” a “change” in teaching.    However, it seems that it was the chief burden of Pope Benedict XVI‘s theological endeavor to express, define and defend the belief that what the Church believes about the liturgy, about the Mass, was not a rupture with the past, was not changed by the Council, but was in continuity, presenting traditional teaching at and after the Council in a way which enabled the inner, unchanging, meaning, the perennial meaning, the meaning handed down “from the beginning,” from apostolic times, of the Church’s teaching on the Mass, and the priesthood, to be presented effectively in this period of history, our present time.    Not change, but continuity.    Because it would create a theological problem to say “the teaching has changed.”    The striking thing about what Roche is saying is precisely this, that it seems to contradict the central teaching of Pope Benedict: that the new Mass is not simply a “more accessible” Mass for ordinary people in the pews (because, for example, the words are in the vernacular rather than an ancient language, Latin, that few people know) but that it actually represents a “change” in the theology of the Mass.    Is this actually what the assembled bishops at the Second Vatican Council said, or intended?     Is there any place where the Council Fathers say “we are going to have a new theology of the Mass”? (Evidently, considering what the Church had taught up to that time on the matter was in some way deficient, or incomplete.)    Is it not rather the case that Pope John XXIII and the Council Fathers said, “we would like to keep the same theology of the Mass as always, but allow the ordinary faithful to understand it better”?    And is it not the case that some of the changes made — in order to make the Mass “more accessible” — like (for example) the shift of the position of the priest, from facing the altar to facing the people, had the opposite effect from the one intended?    That is, in the old Mass, do not the people sense clearly that they indeed, along with the priest and, as it were, led by him, are, yes, participating in the offering of the Holy Sacrifice?    And is it not, rather, in the Novus Ordo, with the priest facing the people, that the assembled laity feel as if they are a passive audience at the rather unpredictable “show” that the priest presents, not according to time-honored rubrics handed down for centuries, but according to the events of the day and the whims of the particular priest?    In any case, is it not the case that Catholic theology holds that the priest is ordained to offer the very bodily sacrifice of Christ Himself, in a way that the people may participate in, but cannot accomplish without the presence of the ordained priest?    To suggest that the primary action of the ordained priest is not different from that participatory action of the people at Mass would seem not in keeping with traditional Catholic teaching on this matter; that is, it would seem to represent a change in theology… risking being a development not in keeping with perennial Catholic teaching.    Listen to the BBC report here: (link).    You must skip the first 5 minutes, and start precisely at 5:12 into the program, to hear the newsman ask Cardinal Roche about the Latin Mass, which the newsman says, quite dramatically, has become “an unexpected battleground in a Catholic culture war over the future direction of the Church.”    At 5:47, someone (evidently a priest) sings a few words from the old Latin liturgy, “vere dignum et iustum est, aequum et salutare…” (“truly worthy and just it is, fitting and helpful for salvation,” link) and then the correspondent says that, while Pope Benedict provided space for the traditional Latin Mass, Pope Francis has “changed the rules” and required bishops to seek permission from Rome before any celebration of the old Latin Mass. A Catholic speaks of the beauty of the silences in the old Mass.    The correspondent then explains how many vibrant traditional communities are being repressed.    And a priest from England who favors the celebration of the old Mass asks Pope Francis and Cardinal Roche to reverse their restrictions on the old Mass.    Catholic journalist Austen Ivereigh then defends the decision of Pope Francis, saying there are valid reasons for it.    Precisely at the 10:19 mark in this report, the correspondent introduces Cardinal Arthur Roche.    So simply begin to listen to this report by clicking in to the 10:19 mark…    Roche begins to speak at the 10:36 mark. He finishes right at the 11 minute mark. In those 24 seconds, he says the words also quoted above:    “You know, the theology of the Church has changed. Whereas before, the priest represented, at a distance, all the people — they were channeled, as it were, through this person who alone was celebrating the Mass. It is not only the priest who celebrates the liturgy, but also those who are baptized with him. And that is an enormous statement to make.”    That is the extent of his remarks. The report ends after another Catholic layman speak, at the 11:54 mark.    So, if you wish to hear the whole BBC report on the old Mass, listen from 5:12 to 11:54. If you wish to simply listen the Cardinal Roche’s words, listen from 10:36 to 11:00.    As Lifesitenews reported (link), Liturgical scholar Matthew Hazell highlighted Roche’s comments, noting that contrary to the cardinal’s claim, the teaching of the Church had not changed.    He pointed to the teaching of Pope Pius XII in his 1947 encyclical Mediator Dei, in which the pontiff outlined the Catholic teaching on the congregation uniting themselves to the priest in the sacrifice of the Mass.    ”Now it is clear that the faithful offer the sacrifice by the hands of the priest from the fact that the minister at the altar, in offering a sacrifice in the name of all His members, represents Christ, the Head of the Mystical Body. Hence the whole Church can rightly be said to offer up the victim through Christ…. The fact, however, that the faithful participate in the eucharistic sacrifice does not mean that they also are endowed with priestly power. It is very necessary that you make this quite clear to your flocks… Now the faithful participate in the oblation, understood in this limited sense, after their own fashion and in a twofold manner, namely, because they not only offer the sacrifice by the hands of the priest, but also, to a certain extent, in union with him. It is by reason of this participation that the offering made by the people is also included in liturgical worship…” (Pius XII, Mediator Dei, 1947)

On “systemic sins.” by MICHAEL WARREN DAVISMAR 24  SAVE▷  LISTEN The Wolf of Gubbio by Luc-Olivier MersonMy God, what is a heart?  That thou shouldst it so eye, and woo,  Pouring upon it all thy art,  As if that thou hadst nothing else to do?Everybody wants to talk about how nobody wants to talk about sin. Our newspapers, newsletters, magazines, podcasts, blogs, and vlogs are scrambling to impress upon us a sense of our own wickedness.  What’s fascinating is that, despite these heroic efforts, we don’t seem to be getting anywhere.  There’s a huge demand for guilt and self-loathing, but not much supply.  That’s why our schoolchildren read The Scarlet Letter but not The Pilgrim’s Progress, or even Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.  The Puritans founded America; more importantly, they lost it.As it happens, the latest campaign to Bring Back Sin comes from our friends on the Christian Left.  Take, for example, “The Wages of Idolatry” by Tish Harrison Warren.  For those of you who don’t know, Rev. Warren a minister of the Anglican Church of North America who moonlights as a columnist for The New York Times.  (Not a bad gig!)  In her column, Rev. Warren admits that sin is “an idea that for many bears the mothball scent of a religious relic long packed away and best left forgotten”:For some, the terms “sin” and “sinner” seem self-hating or judgmental.  For others, they sound silly, associated with things like lingerie and decadent chocolate cake, what the English writer Francis Spufford deemed “enjoyable naughtiness.”  Even those of us comfortable with these terms often think of sin as individual bad choices, like stealing and committing adultery.  All of these notions seem inadequate to describe the source of so much oppression, violence, chaos and heartbreak in our world and our lives.Yet there is a specific though less discussed category for sin that sheds light on human fault and failure that is particularly helpful in understanding our society and ourselves:  idolatry.It’s hard to think of a mothballier word than idolatry.  Never fear, though—it too is getting a facelift:With more guns in the United States than people, many see gun ownership as part of their identity and an inalienable right.  Guns take on a sacred quality among devotees.  Sometimes this is overt, such as the trend highlighted by The Atlantic last year of Catholic gun enthusiasts posting illustrations of saints holding AR-15s or photos of guns draped in rosaries.  Usually, idolatry presents with far more subtlety.  Most people would not valorize violence.  They would not profess a worship of weapons.  But our devout attachment to guns springs from a broad societal adoration of power and of individual rights.  These interact with other cultural idols, like money, in complex ways as the gun lobby buys an outsized voice in politics.  Our inability to pass meaningful gun control measures is irrational.  Idolatry, however, is impervious to rational arguments because it is driven by passions deeper than cognition.Naturally, there are other, more terrible “systemic sins.”  Racism, of course, is another.  I learned that, too, from the Gray Lady.In 2021, the Times ran an op-ed by Esau McCaulley, a professor at Wheaton College.  It’s called, “Why Christians Must Fight Systemic Racism”.  According to Dr. McCaulley,Christianity teaches that humans, left to our own devices, often pursue their own distorted interests.  We call this tendency sin.  When you add in political and economic power to get what you want at the expense of others, you have the recipe for systemic injustice. Therefore,When people point out bias or racism in structures (health care, housing, policing, employment practices), they are engaging in the most Christian of practices:  naming and resisting sins, personal and collective.  A Christian theology of human fallibility leads us to expect structural and personal injustice.  It is in the texts we hold dear.  So when Christians stand up against racialized oppression, they are not losing the plot; they are discovering an element of Christian faith and practice that has been with us since the beginning.This should give us an idea of how progressives think about the “S”-word.  And now, let me say this about that.First of all, I think it’s worth noting that neither Rev. Warren nor Dr. McCaulley ever mentions God in their articles. Rev. Warren uses the word gods (plural, with a little “g”) to talk about the false gods worshiped by conservatives, but there’s no mention of the true God worshiped by Christians. Dr. McCaulley mentions Jesus once, but only to quote Him quoting Isaiah’s call to “set the oppressed free.”This point is pretty important, because sin is not (as the good doctor claims) a tendency to pursue our disordered interests. It’s not a “tendecy” at all. Sin is an action—an action that damages our relation with the Father. It creates a wound that can only be healed by the grace of Christ. So, a sin without God is like a victimless murder. It cannot be. It’s a contradiction in terms.Secondly, Rev. Warren and Dr. McCaulley both suggest that sin can be a corporate as well as an individual act. But that’s not quite true, either. There can be no such thing as a systemic sin, because systems don’t have relationships with God. Obviously, groups of people can commit a sin in concert. Three Klansmen can burn a cross outside a black family’s house. Or (to use a more modern example) three white bankers may deny a black family a mortgage, ensuring they never have a house to begin with. Wherever there’s hatred, there’s sin. Still, either way, there are three individual sins committed by three individual sinners. There are three souls in need of grace—the grace of contrition, the grace of penance, the grace of forgiveness, the grace of love.By the same token, yes: presumably, there are Christians who love guns too much—i.e., Christians whose love of guns substracts from their love for God. Yet there are probably Christians whose love of stamp-collecting also subtracts from their love of God. Maybe one skips church on Sundays to attend philatelists’ conventions. Maybe another left his wife for a rich widow with a whole book of Black Empresses. More importantly, though, I think it’s clear that Rev. Warren isn’t really that anxious about the sin of idolatry as it exists among 21st-century American conservatives. She’s certainly not worried about the “idolators” or their relationship with God. She’s mostly concerned with the lack of “meaningful gun control measures.”That’s why think-pieces like Rev. Warren’s or Dr. McCaulley’s are just a little too clever. I understand what they’re getting at. They’re trying to inject a certain moral urgency into our debates over racism, gun control, etc.—an urgency that only the word sin really conveys. Calling something sinful is more effective than calling it bad, or wrong, or evil. It’s just not, you know, accurate.There’s a reason we’re not in the habit of using “sin” as a synonym for “systemic injustice” or “the lack of meaningful legislative action.” It’s because they’re different things.By (mis)using “sin” this way, we distort and cheapen its true meaning. And that’s a real problem. Because the story of our sins is also the story of God’s love. We can’t run from him without Him running after us. We can’t hide from Him without him seeking us out. Our falling down is nothing more than an excuse for Him to gather us up in His arms.Really, we might go far as to say that this is the only way Christians should tyalk about sin. You’ve heard the expression, “Hate the sin and love the sinner.” But St. Francis of Assisi said that we should hate the sin for the love of the sinner. “That person truly loves his enemy,” the Little Poor Man said, “who is not upset at any injury which is done to himself, but out of love of God is disturbed by the sin of the other’s soul. And,” he adds, “let him show his love by his deeds.”Let me ask you this, dear reader: when Rev. Warren talks about the NRA, does it sound like she’s concened about their souls? Does it sound like she’s being spurred, first and foremost, by the love of God? Or is she just giving a religious inflection to the usual center-left talking-points about gun control?Now, I’m sure the same could be said for us “conservatives.” We’re pretty good at hating sins; loving sinners is more of a struggle. Hating sin for the love of sinners is a whole new concept for most of us, and I do include myself in that category. As for reckoning with our own sins—being able to introduce ourselves, like the Pilgrim, as “a Christian by the grace of God, and by my deeds a great sinner”—that’s the work of a lifetime.Yet that’s all the more reason (isn’t it?) to keep our attention fixed on the romance of our redeption. No offense to Rev. Warren, but Lent isn’t the right time to “broaden” our definition of sin. That kind of broadening is always really a narrowing. Instead of opening our hearts to the mystery of divine Love, we sprinkle a few Bible quotes over our usual talking-points and call it religion.Don’t fall for it. Remember, Lent isn’t an excuse to damn our opponents instead of merely disagreeing with them. Lent is a courtship. It’s like mating season for the soul. From before time began, God has pined for us—for me, and for you. Now, through fasting and prayer (and that other one), we finally accept His advances. Like the Virgin Mary, we empty our selves to make ourselves vessels for His love. On Good Friday, He duels with His great rival, Death. Then, on Easter—at long last—He ravishes us. After aeons of patient waiting, the Bridegroom has His bride.Unless we understand the greatness of God’s love, we can never understand the gravity of refusing God, our lover. And that refusal, ladies and gentlemen, is sin—nothing more, and absolutely nothing less.

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

International Child Advocate Attorney Elizabeth Yore: Francis Works for “Anti-God, Anti-American & Anti-Catholic” Soros & the UN

March 23, 2023

Elizabeth Yore served as Special Counsel to Oprah Winfrey as her child advocate, both at Harpo, Inc., and at the Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls in South Africa. Previously, Liz held the position of General Counsel at the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, where she created the first missing children unit for runway wards, and collaborated with federal law enforcement on human trafficking prosecutions. Elizabeth was the General Counsel and Director of the International Division at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in Virginia. She handled domestic and international child abduction cases there. – Yore Children

“Elizabeth Yore’s career as a lawyer has taken her to unexpected places –like The Hague and the newsrooms of MSNBC and ABC Nightly News as a guest expert.” – Legatus [https://legatus.org/news/oprahs-attorney]

Internationally respected investigator and attorney Elizabeth Yore as well as the documented facts gives us the detailed answer below on whom Francis is really working for:

Francis on September 1, 2016 said he was “gratified that on September 2015 the nations of the world adopted the Sustainable Development Goals” which calls for universal access to abortion.

Does this means that he is “gratified” about universal access to abortion because he made no qualifying exception to abortion in his endorsement then or to this day as far as we know?

Does the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals really plan universal access to abortion?

Goal 6 of the United Nations (UN) Substantial Development Goals (SDG) states that nations must:

“Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights.”

The UN Conference in Cairo in 1994 said “abortion (as specified in paragraph 8.25)” is a “basic component of reproductive health care services.”

In simple words, Francis, in a backhanded way, endorsed universal access to abortion.

Internationally known sex abuse expert, investigator and attorney Yore at the 2016 Fatima conference in Chicago said the Francis endorsement was no surprise.

The papal approval of the UN plan for universal access to abortion and its population control scheme was planned and orchestrated well in advance by wealthy global elites according to the investigator and attorney.

At the Fatima conference Yore gave a speech that was really a presentation of the enemies battle plans and then she gave a battle cry.

On YouTube you will find her speech called “An Unholy Alliance: the UN, Soros, and the Francis Papacy.”

In her website yorechildren.com and in the complete speech she presents detailed evidence to back up the part of her talk I present below.

All Catholics need to hear her battle cry.

Here is the most important part of her speech which I hand typed with my two fingers as J.R.R. Tolkien once said:

“After spending the last three years investigating and witnessing, first hand, I am convinced this is a intentional and coordinated alliance between the Vatican, the UN and Soros.”

“The radical one world order agenda is hidden and obscured by the false and manufactured climate change movement.”

“Shockingly the movement found and secured its missing power broker: its missing link and its long sought after moral voice. The golden ring of the papacy was won and secured by George Soros through infiltration at the Vatican.”

“Folks take note, they are moving at lightning speed. The mission has been accomplished by the environmental agenda. The new world order is well underway.”

“The global warming globalists secured a perfectly timed and coordinated Vatican Apostolic Exhortation Laudato Si written intentionally in time for the UN vote on the Sustainable Development Goals.”

“Then Pope Francis spoke at the UN general assembly which was timed on the very day the vote occurred and was passed.”

“Francis repeatedly said he hoped his Exhortation would help pass the SDG and Paris treaty. The unthinkable happened: the Paris Climate Treaty passed in December 2015, a mere eight months after Laudato Si.”

“Soros operatives pulled off a miracle with the most popular men on in the world.”

“Who is George Soros? He is anti-God, anti-American and anti-Catholic. Even though he is a billionaire. He lavishly funds Planned Parenthood, Hillary Clinton, Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter and countless media outlets.”

“He seeks a one world order world governed by the elites.”

“Make no mistake: this is about tyranny.”

This is megalomaniac who bragged that he considered himself a god. This is George Soros. And he even claimed he was the boss of the pope. That was in the early 2000’s. That has become a fact.”

“Suddenly it appears his prophecy has come true. George Soros operatives are embedded in the Vatican. They have drafted Vatican documents that set up the Soros agenda which mirrors the Francis agenda.”

“Mass immigration which George Soros funds and Black Lives Matter and environmentalism. The gig is up.”

“We are in a death struggle with the secular culture and a global domination of elitists who seek to reduce the worlds population by force, redefine marriage and gender and govern by tyranny.”

“As the photo shows, Pope Francis shared the podium with Jeffery Sachs and expressed his gratitude to the UN for its partnership. Jeffery Sachs was pointed to as the Vatican Academy’s greatest supporter.”

“We now know Soros directed money to influence the USCCB and to coordinate the Vatican through Cardinal Maradiaga.”

“The mortal enemy of the Church has breached the Vatican walls and now is in encampment there.”

“The author Micheal Crichton said that the greatest challenge facing mankind is the challenge of distinguishing reality from fanasy, truth from propaganda.”

“What is the reality about our world and those who wish to control humanity by tyranny, demagoguery, nuanced language and lies.”

“The Left has given the world the sin of the century which is the sin against the child.”

“More children have been willfully killed by adults in the last hundred years than in the whole preceding history of humanity.”

“In the last hundred years, the eradication of the child is promoted by none other than the United Nations and funded by the mega-billionaire George Soros through his many Open Society Foundations.”

“It is a object horror that these two entities are given a prominent role, a sit at the Holy See; that they have infiltrated the Chair of Peter; that they have formed a unholy alliance is beyond imaginable.”

“But it is a reality we can’t deny.”

“The globalist control the media. They own the wealth. They control all the wealthy foundations. And now tragically control the Vatican and its mega-star pope.”

“We can no longer play prevent defense. It is time to go on the offensive.”

“What are we to do?”

This might be the final fight. Or it could be the definitive battle for the freedom of mankind.”

“They have the money. We have the truth. They have the power and influence. We have the truth.”

“They have the powerful United Nations. We have the Blessed Mother. No other weapon do we need.”

This is Holy Mother Church that has been invaded by marauders of death. They are inside the walls. They are issuing edicts and plotting new strategies in the cover of darkness.”

“We must shine the light on them. Sunlight is the best disinfectant. But we must speak up and do battle.”

“I presume everyone here was confirmed. You are soldiers of Christ. Well its time to reenlist. As the dark cloud envelopes the Holy See and our beloved Mother Church. You are Our Lady’s army of advocates.”

“You must understand the cautionary words of C. S. Lewis which mirrors a Chestertonian epic.”

“C. S. Lewis said ‘This is enemy occupied territory. That is what this world is. Christianity is the rightful story that the rightful King has landed. You might say he landed in disguise and is calling us all take part in a great campaign of sabotage.”

When you go to church, you are really listening in to the secret wireless from our friends. That is why the enemy is so anguished to prevent us from going. “

These has all been uncomfortable and terrifying. I know.”

“But I am reminded of St. Therese, the Little Flower. The sweet gentlee young saint discovered the words of Our Lord in St. Matthew’s Gospel:

‘I came not to bring peace, but a sword.'”

“In her letter to her beloved sister Celine, the Little Flower wrote:

‘There remains nothing else for us to do, but to fight. When we don’t have the strength, it is then that Jesus fights for us.'”

“At the end of her life, she said, with the voice of a battle worn warrior, ‘I shall die with weapons in my hands.'”

“Our Lady Queen of heaven and earth pray for us.”

Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis’s Amoris Laetitia.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

– If Francis betrays Benedict XVI & the”Roman Rite Communities” like he betrayed the Chinese Catholics we must respond like St. Athanasius, the Saintly English Bishop Robert Grosseteste & “Eminent Canonists and Theologians” by “Resist[ing]” him: https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/12/if-francis-betrays-benedict-xvi.html 

 –  LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”

–  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”

– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes: 

– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html

– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1

– A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020:
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1

What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”:
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1] 

Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it.

Pray an Our Father now for America.

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.SHARE