August 10, 1792

...On 10 August 1792, His Majesty the King and his family are removed (escape is too kind a word) from the Tuileries by the National Guard and brought before the so called "National Assembly". Within minutes of the their departure, attackers, the mob, burst through the gates of the Tuileries and confront The Swiss Guards who are in formation on the grand staircase of the palace arrayed as for battle. Their bright red uniforms and white cross belts immaculate in the sunlight.

Shouts for the surrender arose from the crowd. One traitor who speaks German yells to the Swiss.

"Surrender to the Nation!"…

" We would think ourselves dishonoured! We are Swiss and we surrender only with our lives!" Comes the reply in return.

The crowd becomes angry and and increasingly violent attempting to pull the soldiers of the stair case with the hooks of halberds. They succeeded with five, removing their weapons and butchered them. Then 60 of the Guard form a hollow square and force the mob back down the street. Turning a piece of the National Guards artillery back on them they fire and have the attackers running down the street.

The King, secluded in a cramped stenographers box was told to have the Guard lay down its arms and return to the barracks. The King, who grieves at the thought of his subjects having their blood shed reluctantly agrees and orders the Guard to lay down its arms. Captain Durler of the Guard refuses to believe this order. It is madness. He asks for it in writing. He has just seen with his own eyes what the mob has done to 5 of his men moments before.

He knows surrender means death. The King gives him the order in writing.

Captain Durler orders his men to lay down their arms and return to the barracks. As they withdraw they are attacked, where ever they run, where ever they attempt to hide they are dragged out and murdered. No not murdered, that would be to kind a word for it, for they are hacked to pieces, women and children lustily calling for their death, whistling and cheering at each head piked, each arm severed. The heads of the guards are kicked like balls in the streets of Paris. 900 are killed in this way.

At the end of the day no street in Paris is without it's head on a pike.

THIS is the glory of which The French Republic is so proud. This is the true story of the Godless proto-communists and their anarchical government, begun in fear, savagery and repression, maintained by threats and the guillotine.

Let them be remembered here.

"HELVETIORUM FIDEI AC VIRTUTI" – "To the Loyalty and Courage of the Swiss".

A of the hero of the Vendee' is a witness to the atrocity of 10 August 1792. Henri de la Rochejaquelein is at the Tuileries to offer his services to the royal family. He arrives just as the mob begins the massacre and escapes only by exchanging his coat with that of a republican. The short coat and tricolour cockade probably don't fool as many people as the leg of a Swiss Guardsman he carries over his shoulder...

Vive le Roy,



I recently fielded a question by a friend concerning salt, I have reseached this further and I found out this, from Fisheaters.

Salt, with its preservative properties, had always been treasured as precious 1 in the ancient world, and seen as a symbol of incorruption and wisdom. It's use was commanded by God --

Leviticus 2:13-14
Whatsoever sacrifice thou offerest, thou shalt season it with salt, neither shalt thou take away the salt of the covenant of thy God from thy sacrifice. In all thy oblations thou shalt offer salt. But if thou offer a gift of the firstfruits of thy corn to the Lord, of the ears
-- and it was seen by God, as recorded by Moses, to act as a symbol for that which can't corrupt:

Numbers 18:19
All the firstfruits of the sanctuary which the children of Israel offer to the Lord, I have given to thee and to thy sons and daughters, by a perpetual ordinance. It is a covenant of salt for ever before the Lord, to thee and to thy sons.
Its first recorded sacramental use was by Eliseus (Elisha) to restore waters of a well:

4 Kings 2:19-22
And the men of the city, said to Eliseus . Behold the situation of this city is very good, as thou, my lord, seest: but the waters are very bad, and the ground barren. And he said: Bring me a new vessel, and put salt into it. And when they had brought it, He went out to the spring of the waters, and cast the salt into it, and said: Thus saith the Lord: I have healed these waters, and there shall be no more in them death or barrenness. And the waters were healed unto this day, according to the word of Eliseus, which he spoke."
And, of course, there is Our Lord's calling His people "salt of the earth" and warning of salt that loses its savor (Matthew 5:13, Mark 9, Luke 14), and there is St. Paul's warning in Colossians 4:6 to "Let your speech be always in grace seasoned with salt: that you may know how you ought to answer every man."

Salt is now used sacramentally in two main ways in the Church.

First, in Baptisms: like the baptismal waters, salt is blessed and exorcised. Then it is put on the tongue of the catechumen during the Baptismal Rite.

Second, for use in the preparation of Holy Water and for the use of the faithful: regular salt is exorcised and blessed and is used in the preparation of Holy Water. It is also given to the faithful for their everyday use -- e.g., for use in cooking; for sprinkling around rooms, doorways and yards, to protect against evil, etc.

Because of its exorcism and blessing, it is a powerful sacramental in keeping away demons. To obtain blessed salt, just take ordinary salt to your priest and ask him to bless it.

Note: salt -- usually not blessed -- is also used to purify the priest's fingers after Unction.

1 Salt was considered so valuable that Roman soldiers were paid, at least in part, by salt, or "sal" in Latin. This is the root of our word "salary."



St Peter is the Rock, not the pebble.

As Catholics we are taught that St Peter is the "Rock" upon whom Jesus built his bride the Church. Not everyone believes this, our bretheren those of the "new faith" find refuge in detail. Here is the answer.

...Protestant argument revolves around the idea that there are two words for "Rock" in the Greek language: petra and petros, and that the former refers to a big boulder while the latter refers to a small pebble. They claim that because the Greek rendering of Matthew's Gospel uses the word "petros," that Jesus was playing down Peter's significance. Petros and petra meant exactly the same thing at the time Matthew was translated into or written in Greek, as Greek literature attests (lithos is the word for "little stone"). Petros was chosen because it's a masculine noun and Peter was a man. If you had High School French, here's an analogy for you: even if petros and petra had different meanings in the Koine Greek spoken at the time of Christ (which isn't so), the use of the masculine form, petros, by the Greek translator of Matthew would have made sense anyway. Say you were wanting to refer to a man metaphorically as "a portal" and were wanting to give him a nickname that reflected that. In French, you could call him "la porte," a feminine noun meaning door, or "le portail," a masculine noun meaning gate. It'd make sense to use the masculine noun even though "gate" is a smaller thing than "door." At any rate, "big rock" or "little rock," rock is rock and Christ said THOU art "Rock" -- and Jesus was not speaking Greek, but Aramaic and used the word "Kepha"; this is why Simon Peter is most often called "Cephas..."

Now you know the rest of the story...


St. Ignatius of Loyola, feast day July 31

The founder of the Jesuits was on his way to military fame and fortune when a cannon ball shattered his leg. Because there were no books of romance on hand during his convalescence, Ignatius whiled away the time reading a life of Christ and lives of the saints. His conscience was deeply touched, and a long, painful turning to Christ began. Having seen the Mother of God in a vision, he made a pilgrimage to her shrine at Montserrat (near Barcelona). He remained for almost a year at nearby Manresa, sometimes with the Dominicans, sometimes in a pauper’s hospice, often in a cave in the hills praying. After a period of great peace of mind, he went through a harrowing trial of scruples. There was no comfort in anything—prayer, fasting, sacraments, penance. At length, his peace of mind returned.

It was during this year of conversion that Ignatius began to write down material that later became his greatest work, the Spiritual Exercises.

He finally achieved his purpose of going to the Holy Land, but could not remain, as he planned, because of the hostility of the Turks. He spent the next 11 years in various European universities, studying with great difficulty, beginning almost as a child. Like many others, his orthodoxy was questioned; Ignatius was twice jailed for brief periods.

In 1534, at the age of 43, he and six others (one of whom was St. Francis Xavier) vowed to live in poverty and chastity and to go to the Holy Land. If this became impossible, they vowed to offer themselves to the apostolic service of the pope. The latter became the only choice. Four years later Ignatius made the association permanent. The new Society of Jesus was approved by Paul III, and Ignatius was elected to serve as the first general.

When companions were sent on various missions by the pope, Ignatius remained in Rome, consolidating the new venture, but still finding time to found homes for orphans, catechumens and penitents. He founded the Roman College, intended to be the model of all other colleges of the Society.

Ignatius was a true mystic. He centered his spiritual life on the essential foundations of Christianity—the Trinity, Christ, the Eucharist. His spirituality is expressed in the Jesuit motto, ad majorem Dei gloriam—“for the greater glory of God.” In his concept, obedience was to be the prominent virtue, to assure the effectiveness and mobility of his men. All activity was to be guided by a true love of the Church and unconditional obedience to the Holy Father, for which reason all professed members took a fourth vow to go wherever the pope should send them for the salvation of souls.

Ad majorem Dei gloriam

More Anti-Catholic Hollywood hate speech.

From Hollywood another edition of why they hate Catholics. This new film staring Kathleen Turner, (Jewel of the Nile) portrays a Catholic mother.

The Perfect Family.

By Joseph McAleer
Catholic News Service

NEW YORK (CNS) -- A more appropriate title for "The Perfect Family" (Variance) would be, "The Year's Most Virulently Anti-Catholic Movie."

Staged by newcomer Anne Renton (director) and screenwriters Paula Goldberg and Claire V. Riley, this dramedy ridicules just about every aspect of the Catholic Church, its teachings and members, offering broad caricatures of clergy, religious and laity to score negative points.

The film's opening scene sets the perplexing and often sacrilegious tone.

Eileen Cleary (Kathleen Turner), supermom and "ultimate Catholic," is the altar server at Mass, assisting Msgr. Murphy (Richard Chamberlain, channeling his Father de Bricassart role from "The Thorn Birds"). It's time for Communion, and Eileen holds a platter of consecrated hosts. The monsignor turns to her, takes a host, then turns to the communicant and offers the Eucharist.

That detail -- entirely alien, of course, to the reality of Catholic liturgy -- is a pretty good hint that no one involved in this bilious project has any familiarity whatever with the life of the church they're attacking.

Distracted, Eileen brushes lint from her server's robe, jostles the platter, and several hosts fall to the ground. She proceeds to kick the body of Christ under the altar so the monsignor will not notice what's happened.

"The Perfect Family" sinks even lower. The parish announces the "Catholic Woman of the Year Award," setting up a vicious rivalry between Eileen and a den of superficially pious vipers. The award will be presented by the archbishop of Dublin, who will bestow the "prayer of absolution" on the winner, wiping away all her sins.

As if.

In the Catholic Church that actually exists, of course, absolution -- at least of mortal sin -- requires sincere and sacramental confession (unless the airplane is going down), and is not some kind of booby prize.

The award committee is headed by a mean-spirited nun -- is there any other kind? -- Sister Joan (Rebecca Wackler), who insists on a thorough examination of the potential honoree's family and marriage. "What makes a nun an expert on marriage?" one candidate snipes.

Eileen is considered a shoo-in ("Who leads a more divine life than you?" her friend asks) until layers of deception are slowly peeled away, and Eileen desperately tries to conceal the cracks in her perfect image.

You see, her daughter, Shannon (Emily Deschanel), is a lesbian, pregnant and getting "married" in a week. Her son, Frank Jr. (Jason Ritter), has left his wife and is having an affair with a manicurist. And her husband, Frank (Michael McGrady), is a recovering alcoholic and philanderer.

Challenged by her daughter to ignore the pope and decide for herself what's right and wrong, Eileen barks, "I don't have to think! I'm a Catholic!"

It gets worse. Shannon is wed, on the sly, by Father Joe (Scott Michael Campbell), a Catholic priest. Father Joe eventually counsels Eileen to lighten up, noting that God simply wants us "to do the best we can," with or without the church's help.

Predictably, Eileen's redemption only comes when she throws off the shackles of the wicked institution and embraces her truly "perfect" family, warts and all.

This offensive, obnoxious and anything-but-funny propaganda piece amounts to Hollywood hate speech.

The film contains pervasive anti-Catholic prejudice, sacrilegious humor, a benign view of premarital sex and homosexual acts as well as of same-sex marriage, an abortion theme and some rough language. The Catholic News Service classification is O -- morally offensive. The Motion Picture Association of America rating is PG-13 -- parents strongly cautioned. Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13.

McAleer is a guest reviewer for Catholic News Service.

This film should rightly make every Catholic cringe, but it won't. In fact, truth be known, it was probably a CINO who helped make this film by offering "technical" advise. Judgment is coming. The above photo is from the picture.

I will say prayers for these people.



Chivalry is not dead

Treat every woman as you would treat the Mother of God.

The Code of Chivalry

To fear God and maintain His Church.
To serve the liege lord in valor and faith.
To protect the weak and defenseless.
To give succor to widows and orphans.
To refrain from the wanton giving of offense.
To live by honor and for glory.
To despise pecuniary reward.
To fight for the welfare of all.
To obey those placed in authority.
To guard the honor of fellow knights.
To eschew unfairness, meanness and deceit.
To keep faith.
At all times to speak the truth.
To persevere to the end in any enterprise begun.
To respect the honor of women.
Never to refuse a challenge from an equal.
Never to turn the back upon a foe.

Attributed to the Emperor Charlemagne.


Thanks to Elena Maria at Tea at Trianon

American exorcist-in-training shares his experience

Jul 25, 2012 / 04:03 am (CNA).- “I never thought I’d end up doing this, no,” admits the middle-aged priest whose unexpected path to becoming an exorcist began while saying one of his first Masses after he was ordained 15 years ago.

“At the moment of consecration of the precious blood I asked the Lord to shower his blood upon the youth and to help any young men who may have a vocation to the priesthood.”

The instant reaction of one 13-year old boy shocked the young priest, “he fell backwards and started growling. And I thought, ‘I wasn’t expecting this!’”

Several years later, and he is one of a new generation of exorcists-in-training following a decision by the U.S. bishops in November 2010 to vastly increase the number of exorcists, which might number as low as 50 in America.

The priest, who is from the U.S. Midwest, spoke to CNA on the basis of anonymity so that he will not be deluged with inquiries. As he explained, “we have set structures to make sure those who most need help get it.”

He now finds himself in Rome, sent by his bishop to shadow the work of the six official exorcists of the Rome diocese. In practical terms that means he is “involved in about three exorcisms a day.”

And the learning curve has been steep. “No two cases are alike. That’s been a real education for me. The rite of exorcism is not a magic formula,” he said.

“It is not the devil or the exorcist who is at the center of this but a person is suffering a lot and who is in need of certain liberation through Christ.”

As for correct terminology, is it a demon or a devil? “Demon comes from Greek, devil comes from Latin, either is okay,” he explained. What you are dealing with “are fallen angels who were created good.”

The early Church Fathers, including St. Jerome and St. Augustine, speculated that these angels rebelled “because of the revelation to them of God’s plan of incarnation” and their “repulsion at the notion that God, who is pure spirit and infinite, should become a man.”

For this reason, the priest observed, they have a “fascination with physicality” and “making people suffer.”

“So once the rite begins, normally he starts to manifest himself in the suffering person different ways - violence, changing of the face, changing of the voice is different,” he said, recalling recent exorcisms.

“He just wants to intimidate, but you basically have to ignore him and say ‘Hey, I am the one giving orders around here, buddy,’” he laughed.

The demon’s angelic knowledge, he said, also means they are aware that God only permits their diabolical activities to bring about the salvation of people through “expiating suffering.”

“These suffering people are becoming saints (by) the offering of their sacrifices” which God then receives and “blesses large parts of the Church around the world.”

“When you remind the Devil of that it makes him furious,” because he knows he is losing and hence “he wants to get what he can, while he can. If he can’t win these peoples’ souls, he wants to at least make their lives miserable.”

So an exorcist dialogues with the devil?

“Yes, I ask them a series of questions: ‘What’s your name?’ since when you use his name in a command it weakens him.” Once a demon gives his name, the exorcist then tells him to “get out” and also might ask “how he got in and when he’s going to leave.”

“The last one, it’s like they’ve all been coached with the same line, ‘I’m never leaving,’ but they will someday!”

The key is to limit dialogue, said the trainee exorcist. “You don’t want to ask them questions just out of curiosity, that’s not healthy.”

It is also possible to “throw in things just to humiliate the demon,” such as invoking the presence of saints, guardian angels and – most feared of all – Our Lady. It is then that “you can really see that there is a change in the behavior of the demon.”

The end-game often comes when the devil start revealing himself in angry and violent outbursts, when “it is common that there is foaming at the mouth.”

In the case of a curse being broken, the person will “start vomiting objects that were used in the curse or, you know, the vomit or saliva changes from clear to colored.”

It is then the exorcist knows “I’m hitting home, that this is really being effective and so those are good signs. It’s not pleasant to see, but you know that ‘I’m being effective here.’”

The American exorcist-in-training explained that the causes of demonic influence vary from case to case and the impact of participating in evil practices also changes with each case.

But one factor that seems to be a common foundation for people coming under the sway of the Devil is “deep wounds in their lives and, above all, in their family,” particularly where “parents have made really bad choices” and in doing so “have invited evil influence into their home.”

He lists such things as “marital infidelity, abortion, doing things that break the family apart.”

“What is the family?” he asked rhetorically, “A family is an icon; it’s an image of the blessed Trinity, and so the devil hates the family.”


Profession of Faith

Jul 13, 2012 / 11:57 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The Diocese of Arlington hopes to strengthen teaching in Catholic schools and churches, by asking religious instructors to promise allegiance to the Church's teachings, even on controversial subjects.

“This is viewed as a positive gesture – one of community and communion, in which our catechists profess their faith in communion with Bishop Loverde, Pope Benedict, and the entire Church,” diocesan communications director Michael Donohue said in a July 12 CNA interview.

While a small number of teachers say they cannot make the profession, Donohue said a “far greater number” have told the diocese they see the profession of faith as “a positive gesture.”

The profession has been sent to religious instructors to sign by September 2012. It contains the articles of the Nicene Creed, and an affirmation of faith in all teachings “whether written or handed down in Tradition, which the Church … sets forth to be believed as divinely revealed.”

It asks signatories to “firmly accept and hold each and every thing definitively proposed by the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals,” giving “submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops enunciate.”

Its requirements are based on teachings found in the Second Vatican Council document “Lumen Gentium,” which reaffirms the status of bishops as successors to the apostles and states that the faithful “are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent” in matters of faith and morals.

Nearly half a million Catholics, including almost 5,000 religious instructors, live and worship in the Arlington diocese. On July 11, the Washington Post published a lengthy story about five Sunday school teachers who left their positions after refusing to sign the oath of fidelity to Church teaching.

Objectors were quoted describing the faith requirement as a “shock” and “a slap in the face.” A former teacher acknowledged the bishops' “authoritative role,” but told Arlington's Bishop Paul S. Loverde that only someone “willing to abandon her own reason and judgment” could sign the statement.

But Donohue explained that the pledge was not instituted to punish dissent from Church teaching. Rather, its purpose is to build and strengthen the faith within Catholic institutions, ensuring that they pass on the truth of the Gospel in its entirety.

“This all occurs in the context of the Year of Faith, as well as the context of marking the 50th anniversary of the opening of the Second Vatican Council,” Donohue noted.

In his announcement of the Year of Faith, the Pope described various ways in which dioceses and parishes could join in professing the Church's beliefs. Based on this suggestion, the Arlington diocese extended the profession of faith – already expected of others in Church offices – to its religion teachers.

While some Catholics may struggle with particular doctrines, Donohue suggested it would be wrong for religion teachers to withhold anything that the Church accepts as revealed by God.

“All Catholics, at some point or another, might have had difficulty understanding or accepting the truth of a particular teaching,” he acknowledged.

That sort of personal struggle, he said, is “not an uncommon experience. That's not what this is about.”

Donohue also said the oath should not be seen primarily in terms of the errors it forbids, but in terms of the faith it promotes. Since every aspect of Church teaching relates to God's grace, and Christ's offer of eternal life, the faithful deserve to hear the Gospel message without omissions.

“The Church wants what's best for its flock, and for everyone,” he said.

For this reason, “it provides the tools, and the teaching, to help every individual Catholic – and anyone who would come to the Church – to understand and accept the teaching of Christ's Church.”

"...While a small number of teachers say they cannot make the profession..." These few should not be Cathecists. If you do not believe and teach the truths of the faith you should not be a catechist. the Chuurch does not teach opinion it deals in truth.

While my Diocese does not require this profession, I plan to stand before the congregation and state my profession, hand on Scripture, that I will teach the truth as it has been passed down from the Apostles, the Church Fathers, the Popes and Sacred Tradition. Amen.