All articles from May 18, 2017


Featured Image
Rebeccah Feldhaus, 25, who went by “Rowan"
Lisa Bourne Lisa Bourne Follow Lisa

News

Woman dies after botched transgender ‘sex change’ surgery

Lisa Bourne Lisa Bourne Follow Lisa

AUGUSTA, Georgia, May 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – A woman in the last phase of “gender assignment” died Tuesday of complications from surgery, one of the last procedures in her effort to “transition” to the male sex.

Rebeccah Feldhaus, 25, who went by “Rowan,” had a hysterectomy and was readmitted to the hospital later after going into septic shock and losing oxygen to her brain.

“Rowan knew the risks going in to all of this and he was willing to accept the risks to do what he knew he wanted to do,” friend Austin Akins said.

Feldhaus was an Augusta University student and board member for the LGBT advocacy group Georgia Equality.

She had begun the “transition” process around two years ago, according to WRDW-TV, and petitioned the court last year to legally change her name from Rebeccah Elizabeth to Rowan Elijah.

A local judge denied the request, igniting backlash and national media attention.

"My policy has been that I will not change a name from an obvious female name to an obvious male name and vice versa," Judge David Roper had said.

He had denied the same request from another local transgender woman wanting to change her name as well.

After both women appealed, a state court of appeals overruled Roper and granted the women’s petitions.

"We were all very proud of Rowan for not accepting what was clearly a wrong and to fight for his own personal freedoms," Atkins said.

Feldhaus was part of an Atlanta Journal Constitution (AJC) video segment on “transgender” Georgia students during the time when the state and others were contending with former President Barack Obama’s controversial edict to the nation’s schools.

Georgia was one of several states that sued the federal government in May 2016 over the directive requiring public schools and universities to allow transgender students to use the restrooms, showers, and overnight accommodations of the opposite biological sex.

“It frustrates me they lack empathy about how we just want to live our lives,” she said in the AJC segment. “We’re the ones who feel unsafe.”

Numerous experts and others have warned of the negative effects, psychological and otherwise, of gender reassignment procedures, and say that individuals suffering from gender dysphoria need authentic psychological help.

Former Johns Hopkins Hospital psychiatrist-in-chief Doctor Paul McHugh has conducted studies and written that gender sex reassignment surgery is not the solution to gender dysphoria. McHugh continues to face denigration from LGBT activists for stating his findings.

Other experts and individuals who themselves have attempted gender reassignment have attested to this as well, saying surgery can in fact exacerbate the condition.

A farewell event for Feldhaus has been organized for the evening of May 22 on the Augusta University Summerville Campus.

Featured Image
Alex Folkes / Fishnik Photography
Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy

News,

Leader of leftist British party abandons pro-life stance: ‘I am pro-choice’

Dorothy Cummings McLean Dorothy Cummings McLean Follow Dorothy

LONDON, May 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – As Britain gears up for its June 8 general election, the leader of Britain’s leftist third party has abandoned his pro-life stance under questioning from the press.

After Liberal Democrat party leader Tim Farron was first elected a Member of Parliament in 2007, he gave an interview to the Salvation Army’s magazine War Cry in which he stated “Abortion is wrong. Society has to climb down from the position that says there is nothing objectionable about abortion before a certain time. If abortion is wrong, it is wrong at any time.”

But on Tuesday, when questioned about these statements by the UK’s left-wing Guardian newspaper, Farron denied them, claiming that he had never heard of, read, or seen War Cry. “I am pro-choice,” Farron said. “I believe that abortion should be safe and legal and that the limit should be set by science.”

England’s Society for the Protection of Unborn Children voiced its disappointment in Farron. "This kind of opportunism demonstrates the worst face of politics,” said spokeswoman Antonia Tully. “Mr Farron is betraying unborn babies for political expediency. He fails to think the law should protect the most vulnerable from lethally unjust treatment even though he appears to know (or have known) that they are indeed being treated in a very immoral way.”

Farron, who identifies himself as an evangelical Christian, has come under scrutiny in recent months regarding his privately held views on homosexuality. After giving answers critics called evasive, Farron told British Channel 4’s Cathy Newman that he was passionate about “equality, about equal marriage and about equal rights for LGBT people, for fighting for LGBT rights, not just in this country, but overseas.”

In recent debates over the United Kingdom’s abortion laws, Farron abstained from voting for or against decriminalizing abortion up to 24 weeks (2017), an amendment making explicit that gender selective abortion is illegal (2015), an amendment banning the abortion industry from providing “counselling” (2011), and at least three other amendments aimed at reducing the legal limit on abortion (2008). In 2006, however, he voted in favour of a Bill that would have reduced the legal limit on abortion to 21 weeks and introduced both compulsory counselling and a “cooling-off period.”

Farron, 47, is a married father of four children. He was elected leader of the Liberal Democratic Party in 2015. At the election call, the party held 9 seats in Britain’s House of Commons.

Featured Image
Jess O'Connell speaks at an EMILY's List event at the 2016 Democratic National Convention.
Fr. Mark Hodges Fr. Mark Hodges

News,

The Democrat’s new CEO is a lesbian abortion activist

Fr. Mark Hodges Fr. Mark Hodges
Image
Tom Perez, DNC chairman.

WASHINGTON D.C., May 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) -- The formal governing body of the U.S. Democratic Party has selected its first lesbian Chief Executive Officer.

Democratic National Committee (DNC) chairman Tom Perez announced that his party will be led by Jess O'Connell, a 43-year-old abortion activist who is an open "married" lesbian. O'Connell most recently led EMILY'S List, a national pro-abortion organization devoted exclusively to electing female abortion activists into positions of influence in government.

A party representative noted with a touch of pride that O'Connell will be "the first openly gay staffer leading the DNC."

O'Connell, known as a big-dollar fundraiser for female pro-abortion politicians, takes the DNC reins to oversee political strategy. She will also hire and coordinate key DNC staff, and lead day-to-day operations for the party.

Additionally, O'Connell will assist Hillary Clinton's "Resist" movement in opposing the Trump presidency, including a new training program for anti-Trump activists in the "Resistance" movement.

Critics say that after last year’s losses, the Democrats are self-destructively digging their heels deeper into the causes that led to their upset.

"The hiring of O’Connell may pull the DNC further Left on issues like abortion and put them...further away from resolving the crises plaguing the Democratic Party," NeedToKnowNetwork reported.

Pro-life-and-family organizations see the new hire as proof that the DNC is simply continuing its long-established course as the party of abortion, homosexuality, and transgenderism.

"The Democratic Party continues to move further and further and further away from the political center, both out of momentum and out of fear from 'progressives,'" the National Right to Life's Dave Andrusko wrote.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony List, said Democrats moving further Left is indirectly helping the prolife cause.

"As they push their party more and more to the extreme on abortion, the GOP benefits at the polls," she said. "Never has it been so clear: on abortion, there is no room for dissent or exceptions among Democrats, only support for the party’s radical platform which calls for abortion-on-demand up until the moment of birth, paid for by taxpayer dollars."

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council agrees, stating that "the choke-hold of groups like Planned Parenthood and NARAL (the National Abortion Rights Action League) is even stronger now" with O'Connell as CEO.  He characterizes the Democrats as "the party that talks about diversity but never practices it."

Perkins critiqued the O'Connell hiring as only taking the Democratic Party further away from the average voter. "By almost everyone's estimation, the Left's extremism on issues like abortion and transgender bathrooms cost them the White House," he said.

Indeed, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi admitted that Clinton lost because of her and her party's radical stance favoring abortion, same-sex "marriage," and homosexuality.  

"That's why Donald Trump is president of the United States — the evangelicals and the Catholics, anti-marriage equality, anti-choice. That's how he got to be president," she told the Washington Post.

Earlier this year, Perez issued a statement declaring support for abortion is "non-negotiable" in his party.  

"Every Democrat, like every American, should support a woman’s right to make her own choices about her body and her health. That is not negotiable and should not change city by city or state by state," he said. 

In her first words as CEO, O'Connell vowed to make the Democratic Party "more inclusive," a common euphemism for promoting the normalization and acceptance of homosexual behavior.

“I’m ready to jump in and help make this organization more inclusive, effective, and influential,” she said.

O'Connell is "married" to her "wife" Holly, a librarian for the Montgomery County schools in Maryland.

The party selected O'Connell with the hope of gradually rebuilding the party after a disastrous election year. The top priority on the Democrats' agenda is trying to restore overwhelmingly lost public trust.

“Jess knows that...we need to organize in every zip code and better communicate our message of inclusion and opportunity," Perez said.

Perez spoke of other DNC changes, including hiring full-time grassroots organizers and creating an entire division devoted to fighting voter I.D. requirements.

O'Connell was the National Director of Operations for Hillary Clinton's failed presidential primary in 2007.  After that, she was Chief of Staff and a Senior Vice President for the Center for American Progress, an ultra-liberal think tank dubbed by Time magazine as singularly holding "sway" over the Obama Administration.

The Center for American Progress drew national attention during the 2016 presidential election for ridiculing both Evangelicals and Roman Catholics in private emails exposed by WikiLeaks.

Some grassroots members of the DNC’s own party have taken to social media to express criticism of the O'Connell hire.

“I have not given a dime to the DNC since last May when the emails came out," Chris McCoy commented on Facebook, "and I will not be giving another dime or volunteering, until there is a concrete plan in place to guarantee the DNC is a fair and open arbiter of the voters' will, and not just a front for backroom deals."

“The DNC [is] wasting more money on another Clintonite," John Kennedy responded. "The DNC clearly is unwilling to change or take any of the power away from the corporate donors," he added. 

Featured Image
Lisa Bourne Lisa Bourne Follow Lisa

News,

VICTORY: Planned Parenthood to close its last clinic in Wyoming

Lisa Bourne Lisa Bourne Follow Lisa

CASPER, Wyoming, May 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – The state of Wyoming will soon be rid of America’s largest abortion provider.

Planned Parenthood has announced that it will close its last facility, in Casper, on July 21. That location had been in business for 40 years.

Wyoming will then join North Dakota as the only states without Planned Parenthood.

The Casper closure is one of six imminent closings for Planned Parenthood’s Rocky Mountain region (PPRM). New Mexico is due to lose three facilities, probably in September, the Santa Fe New Mexican reports. Other Planned Parenthood facilities are slated to close in Colorado and southern Nevada.

Planned Parenthood insists that regardless of the closures, it will keep in front its clients, benefactors, and lawmakers.

The abortion giant attributed the closings to financial reasons, part of a larger consolidation effort geared at maintaining solvency.

“This is a challenging decision,” said PPRM spokeswoman Adrienne Mansanares.

The Rocky Mountain region was part of the third video released by the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) in July 2015, when then-Vice President and Medical Director of PPRM Dr. Savita Ginde was videotaped saying a per-item pricing approach was better, “just because we can see how much we can get out of it (the aborted child).”

The Planned Parenthood announcement comes only a few months after the abortion chain experienced a wave of support in New Mexico. A February event raised around $125,000, organizers said, the largest Planned Parenthood benefit ever conducted in the state. 

Mansanares said supporters have been generous, but the donations haven’t been enough to sustain all of the region’s facilities.

The Casper location sees around 500 clients annually, according to the Casper Star-Tribune.

Mansanares said that most Wyoming Planned Parenthood patrons use the abortion chain’s Fort Collins, Colorado location.

The fact that Casper has other alternatives for women to receive “comprehensive reproductive health care” was part of the decision to close that facility, Mansanares said.

The Casper location does not perform abortions, referring for them instead. It does provide birth control and testing for pregnancy and STDs.

In March of this year Wyoming Governor Matt Mead signed two pro-life laws, the first pro-life legislation in 28 years for the state.

One law mandated that abortionists “orally and in person inform the pregnant woman that she has a right to view an active ultrasound of the unborn child and hear the heartbeat of the unborn child if the heartbeat is audible.”

The other bill prohibits the sale, transfer, or distribution of “any tissue or cells from an aborted child” for the purpose of experimentation. 

They both take effect July 1.

Mansanares stressed that Planned Parenthood would maintain a presence in the state via the Wyoming Abortion Fund, a network of abortion providers, and by continuing to offer “sexual education resources.”

She also expects Wyoming donors to keep contributing to the Wyoming Abortion fund and other Planned Parenthood initiatives.

The abortion chain will continue to partner with NARAL Pro-Choice Wyoming on advocacy issues related to women’s health as well.

“The political footprint and the education we provide will continue to remain,” said Mansanares.

The closings come amid the wait to see whether the new U.S. healthcare law cutting most of the abortion business’s multi-millions in annual taxpayer subsidies will clear the Senate.

Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Peter LaBarbera Peter LaBarbera Follow Peter

News, ,

Trump: ‘In America we don’t worship government, we worship God’

Peter LaBarbera Peter LaBarbera Follow Peter

LYNCHBURG, Virginia, May 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – President Donald Trump Sunday extolled Americans’ belief in God and declared that “in America we don't worship government, we worship God,” in his first presidential commencement speech, at Liberty University.

“America is better when people put their faith into action,” Trump said. “As long as I am your president, no one is ever going to stop you from practicing your faith or from preaching what's in your heart.”

Trump was invited by Liberty’s president, Jerry Falwell, Jr., son of the late conservative TV evangelist whose support was critical to Ronald Reagan becoming president. Jerry Falwell, Jr. was a key early backer of then-candidate Trump and his support helped propel the New York businessman to victory.

The following are some key excerpts of Trump’s Liberty speech as provided by TIME magazine:

  • “It's been a little over a year since I've spoken on your beautiful campus and so much has changed. Right here, the class of 2017 dressed in cap and gown, graduating to a totally brilliant future. And here I am standing before you as President of the United States, so I'm guessing — there are some people here today who thought that either one of those things, either one, would really require major help from God…"
  • “[T]here is no place in the world I'd rather be to give my first commencement address as President than here with my wonderful friends at Liberty University. And I accepted this invitation a long time ago. I said to Jerry that I'd be there, and when I say something I mean it…."
  • “Just think for a moment of how blessed you are to be here today at this great, great university, living in this amazing country, surrounded by people who you love and care about so much. Then ask yourself, with all of those blessings, and all of the blessings that you've been given, what will you give back to this country and, indeed, to the world? What imprint will you leave in the sands of history? What will future Americans say we did in our brief time right here on Earth? Did we take risks? Did we dare to defy expectations? Did we challenge accepted wisdom and take on established systems? I think I did, but we all did and we're all doing it."
  • “Or did we just go along with convention, swim downstream, so easily with the current and just give in because it was the easy way, it was the traditional way or it was the accepted way? Remember this, nothing worth doing ever, ever, ever came easy. Following your convictions means you must be willing to face criticism from those who lack the same courage to do what is right — and they know what is right, but they don't have the courage or the guts or the stamina to take it and to do it. It's called the road less traveled."
  • “I know that each of you will be a warrior for the truth, will be a warrior for our country, and for your family. I know that each of you will do what is right, not what is the easy way, and that you will be true to yourself, and your country, and your beliefs…."
  • “America has always been the land of dreams because America is a nation of true believers. When the pilgrims landed at Plymouth they prayed. When the founders wrote the Declaration of Independence, they invoked our creator four times, because in America we don't worship government, we worship God. That is why our elected officials put their hands on the Bible and say, 'So help me God,' as they take the oath of office. It is why our currency proudly declares, 'In God we trust,' and it's why we proudly proclaim that we are one nation under God every time we say the pledge of allegiance."
  • [Liberty University founder Jerry Falwell, Sr.’s] “vision was of a world class university for evangelical Christians. And I want to thank you, because boy did you come out and vote, those of you that are old enough, in other words your parents. Boy oh boy, you voted, you voted.…"
  • “Relish the opportunity to be an outsider. Embrace that label — being an outsider is fine, embrace the label — because it's the outsiders who change the world and who make a real and lasting difference.…"
  • “Liberty University is a place where they really have true champions and you have a simple creed that you live by: To be, really, champions for Christ. Whether you're called to be a missionary overseas, to shepherd a church or to be a leader in your community, you are living witness of the gospel message of faith, hope and love. And I must tell you I am so proud as your president to have helped you along over the past short period of time…."
  • “America is better when people put their faith into action. As long as I am your president, no one is ever going to stop you from practicing your faith or from preaching what's in your heart. We will always stand up for the right of all Americans to pray to God and to follow his teachings…."
  • “What started as a dream with a few good friends he helped shepherd into the largest Christian university in the world. Just look at this amazing, soaring, growing campus and I've been watching it grow because I've been a friend of Liberty for a long time, now, Jerry. It's been a long time…"
  • “We all bleed the same red blood of patriots. We all salute the same great American flag, and we are all made by the same almighty God. As long as you remember what you have learned here at Liberty, as long as you have pride in your beliefs, courage in your convictions and faith in your God, then you will not fail."
  • “And as long as America remains true to its values, loyal to its citizens, and devoted to its Creator, then our best days are yet to come, I can promise you that.”

President Trump's full address:

 

RELATED: ‘Meaningless’ or ‘vigorous’? Conservatives divided on Trump’s religious freedom order

Featured Image
Prof. Roberto de Mattei address Voice of the Family's Rome Life Forum on May 18, 2017. Claire Chretien / LifeSiteNews
Lianne Laurence Lianne Laurence Follow Lianne

News,

Famed historian: ‘The sexualization of society is the death of society’

Lianne Laurence Lianne Laurence Follow Lianne

ROME, May 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — Famed Catholic historian Roberto de Mattei says the family is facing a “profound crisis” as the result of a sexual revolution that unleashed its greatest violence in the 1960s, but had its “first decisive moment” in the Protestant Reformation.

“This crisis is founded on the idea that only in the sexualization of society, the revolutionary process can find its fulfillment,” de Mattei, former professor at the European University of Rome and founder of the Lepanto Institute, told participants at the fourth annual Rome Life Forum on Monday.

Read Professor de Mattei’s full talk here.  

“The act of procreation is the object of anti-Christian hate, because this affirms that man has an end which surpasses him,” he said.

“The negation of procreation turns Christian morals upside down and affirms a Gnostic metaphysical principle: sex as an ultimate end of man, closed up in its own immanence.”

Indeed, “hate for the family characterizes all the heretical sects,” including medieval sects that proclaimed man was “divinized” and promiscuous sex a return to the state of Adam and a liberation.

These were harbingers of the greater assault against the family that followed the “religious revolution” that “exploded with all its virulence” after Martin Luther nailed his theses to the door of Wittenberg Cathedral on Hallowe’en 1517.

Out of this came “antinomianism” — or negation of the moral law — preached and lived by Anabaptists, for whom “as for the Gnostics of the first centuries, the ‘spiritual’ man is incapable of sin,” de Mattei said.

The Anabaptist belief that man had recovered his original innocence led to a reign of terror by self-proclaimed prophets in Münster, as well as Familists sect in Friesland, and the Ranters and Libertines in England.

“Sexual promiscuity, nudism, and free love become in these sects, a fundamental ritual,” de Mattei said.

While these attempts at a “pan-sexual utopia” were ultimately crushed by the state, the heresy persisted and moved from the “religious level to the political level” in the French Revolution.

When the revolutionaries stormed the Bastille on July 14, 1789, to release political prisoners, they found only seven prisoners, but among these was the notorious Marquis de Sade, who thereupon joined and influenced the revolution, according to de Mattei.

De Sade, who died in an insane asylum, provided the theory of “revolutionary pansexualism,” de Mattei said, and “listed as revolutionary achievements the following: blasphemy, theft, homicide and every type of sexual perversion, incest, rape, sodomy.”

De Mattei quoted a character in De Sade’s novel The Story of Juliette who expresses a desire to marry “twice in one day. At ten of the morning, dressed as a woman, I desire to marry a man; at twelve, dressed as a man, I desire to marry a homosexual dressed as a woman.”

“All gender theory is already contained in these words,” de Mattei said.

Moreover, “De Sade wants to convince us that vice is a virtue, that horror is beautiful, and that torment is a pleasure. In this sense, his vision of the world is satanic,” said de Mattei.

“The last two centuries have seen his plans realized, to a great extent. That which still hasn't come to pass is, maybe, part of our future.”

The French Revolution, which implemented divorce, among other things, was brought to completion by the Bolshevik Russian Revolution, de Mattei said.

The Bolsheviks introduced divorce a few weeks after seizing power in 1917, and in 1920 they legalized abortion, the “first time in the world that the procedure was available without restriction,” de Mattei said. In 1922, the Bolsheviks decriminalized prostitution and homosexuality.

De Mattei also detailed the influence of the Austrian psycho-analyst Wilhelm Reich, who wrote the seminal text for “Marx-Freudism,” and who saw “the family as the repressive social institution par excellence, and affirmed that the nucleus of happiness is sexuality.”

These ideas spread to the West and were disseminated by influential intellectuals such as Herbert Marcuse and Michel Foucault.

And the Catholic Church, the “one force alone” that could have “stopped this process of moral dissolution,” had its “own revolution” in the Second Vatican Council of 1962 to 1965, noted de Mattei.

“We did not arrive at Pope Francis' Exhortation Amoris laetitia (2016) in a single day,” he said. “Fifty years were necessary, but the roots are there, in the Second Vatican Council.”

Added de Mattei: “And the Council didn't do anything except search for a compromise between the doctrine of the Church and the anti-Christian theories of the modern Cultural Revolution.”

The “remedy” to the crisis is “indicated by Pius XI in Casti connubii: meditate on the Divine idea of the family and marriage, and live in conformity to this model,” concluded de Mattei.

The family, he said, “contains life, in itself. Physical life contained in the cribs which multiply, and spiritual life, expressed by parents and children united in prayer to God Who can do everything.”

He also pointed out that at Fatima, “Our Lady announced that Russia would spread its errors in the world.

The message of Fatima is “a message against any form of Gnostic and Egalitarian ideology, as it was [against] socialism in the twentieth and twenty-first century,” de Mattei said.

“The last apparition of Fatima October 13, 1917, that of the Holy Family, constitutes in this sense a manifesto which sums up all our principles and which opposes all the errors of our time.”

The full text of Professor de Mattei’s talk is available on LifeSiteNews here.  

The Rome Life Forum was organized by Voice of the Family and takes place May 18 and 19.

Featured Image
Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug

News

‘Avengers’ director produces ‘horror’ movie… about a world without Planned Parenthood

Doug Mainwaring Doug Mainwaring Follow Doug

May 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – The Avengers’ writer/director Joss Whedon has created a short—2 minutes, 55 seconds—video displaying his dystopian vision of a world without Planned Parenthood.

Titled Unlocked, the video seeks to show what a grim, hostile world this would be if Planned Parenthood were to have to shutter its doors because it lacked funding.

Whedon said:

If politicians succeed in shutting down Planned Parenthood, millions of people lose access to basic health services. STD testing, birth control, cancer screenings…how can these be at risk? UNLOCKED is about what a world without Planned Parenthood would look like, which is truly dire. I’ve supported Planned Parenthood in the past, but until I worked with them closely on this, I didn’t understand how many services they — and for some, they alone — provide.

The progressive Hollywood director tells the story of three women, showing alternative outcomes for each of their lives, with and without Planned Parenthood.  

With Planned Parenthood they are happy, fulfilled, living self-actualized lives, surrounded by smiling loved ones.  Without it, their lives are decimated. They each become victims, unable to go to college, powerless to save from their friends from STDs, or dying of cancer, despite the fact they can afford to live in homes with beautiful sweeping staircases and have expansive kitchens with beveled-edge granite countertops, stainless steel appliances and raised-panel, solid cherry wood cabinetry.

The errant emotional message delivered is “Planned Parenthood empowers women.”

The scope of the movie did not similarly include the dystopian futures of the unborn children who pass through Planned Parenthood’s unlocked doors.  

Preceding the release of the video, on Mother’s Day Whedon tweeted the loving message, “Today I gratefully give my mother the gift of having been dead for 25 years and not having to see what a tub of f***ery our country’s become.”  

Three weeks previous to that, he attacked via Twitter the appearance of teen cancer survivors as they shook hands with U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan on the west portico of the U.S. Capitol, describing the valiant young women as “Not a 10.”

In the end, he tweeted, “So I tweeted something that inadvertently offended everyone except the people I was trying to offend.”

Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Lisa Bourne Lisa Bourne Follow Lisa

News, , , , ,

Theologian: Church must ‘prioritize’ procreation in marriage to combat abortion, gay ‘marriage’

Lisa Bourne Lisa Bourne Follow Lisa
Image
Father Francesco Giordano speaking at the 2017 Rome Life Forum.

ROME, May 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) -- There is a need to “prioritize” procreation as the primary end of marriage today, because when this “distinctive” and “proper” purpose is questioned or doubted, the “marriage institution itself — and society thereafter — begins its slide down the slippery slope,” the head of Human Life International’s (HLI) Rome office told an international gathering of pro-life and family groups there today. 

Father Francesco Giordano, a professor in Rome who addressed the fourth annual Rome Life Forum today, said that a de-emphasis of procreation within marriage has not only resulted in legalized abortion, but homosexual “marriage.”

To illustrate his point, he presented the main argument behind the U.S. Supreme Court 2015 decision that legalized same-sex “marriage.” 

We read in a Catholic World News article from the day: “Claiming that the institution of marriage has “evolved over time,” Justice Kennedy wrote that the essence of the marital bond is a sharing of intimacy, which does not require partners of opposite sexes. He argued that the plaintiffs in the Obergefell case were not undermining the institution of marriage, but showing their respect for that institution by seeking to participate in it. The majority opinion reasoned that the ability to marry would help to stabilize same-sex unions, and benefit the children raised by homosexual partners. Justice Kennedy explicitly rejected the notion that marriage is intrinsically oriented to procreation, writing: “An ability, desire, or promise to procreate is not and has not been a prerequisite for a valid marriage in any state.”” With the stress on the end or good of union, we are seeing these sorts of results, so it only confirms me in stressing the procreative end as the proprium of marriage. 

Giordano noted how Pope Paul VI’s 1968 Encyclical Humanae Vitae, which outlined the moral evil of contraception, was a “novel” approach to conjugal relations in that it “placed the unitive end of marriage at par with the procreative end.”

He said that while the unitive purpose of the conjugal act “works with the procreative end in harmonizing the love between the parents” it is the procreative purpose which makes the act “unique” when compared to any other human act. 

“The telos [purpose by nature] of the union between man and woman is generative. It is the proprium of marriage after all. It is the first end of the sexual act to be intimately united to the second end, but we have to prioritize the procreative end of marriage because it is the distinctive, proper and privative end of marriage,” he said. 

He went on to quote the first account of Creation, including that God created man in his image, created them male and female, and told them: "Be fertile and multiply."

“So it is clear that the first duty of the first family was to generate children,” he said.

Not only is this the Church’s teaching, he said, it is substantiated by natural law, not something we just follow in an abstract way. 

“We adhere to a teaching because of its compelling truth,” Giordano said, “a truth which the Church naturally defends.” 

Giordano’s presentation comes days after rumors began circulating in Rome of a secret committee set up by Pope Francis to study Humanae Vitae. Francis’ position on contraceptive practices — which the Church has always taught to be gravely immoral — remains sufficiently ambiguous to be interpreted as lending support to the use of contraception and condoms, in certain cases. 

In a March 2014 interview with Corriere della Sera, Francis said that the question of birth control must be answered not by “changing the doctrine” but by “making pastoral (ministry) take into account the situations and that which it is possible for people to do.”

During a November 2015 press conference on his return flight from Africa, Francis, when asked if it was time for the Church to allow the use of condoms to prevent HIV agreed that condom use is “one of the methods,” but that it brought into conflict the fifth and sixth commandments. 

And during his February 2016 return flight from Mexico, Francis said that contraception may be the “lesser of two evils” for parents wanting to avoid conceiving a child in areas affected by the Zika virus. Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi confirmed the pope’s words the following day, stating: “The contraceptive or condom, in particular cases of emergency or gravity, could be the object of ‘discernment’ in a serious case of conscience. This is what the Pope said.”

Giordano also outlined a number of threats facing the family, including gender ideology and transhumanism.

"The end of man is the adoration of God. The end of gender ideology is the adoration of the body," he said. 

Giordano also discussed how the negative social changes resulting from the family’s decline, including the breakdown in the understanding of the human being as male or female, are now being advanced by a transhumanist mentality.  

“Unlike animals, men can truly shape their lives, and this the transhumanists understand. However, what the transhumanists do not seem to understand is that there are limits posed by our nature on what we can do to shape our lives,” he said. 

“In order to bring about the reduction of human identity to a freely chosen, mutable sexual orientation and avoid its formation in the countless influences besides sex, the elimination of these other influences—such as family, culture, and religion—are necessary [for the transhumanists,]” he said. 

This mentality represents a sign of man's demise, he said, “and the only response to all of these threats is found in strong traditional family units.”

Giordano went on to explain how the transhumanist movement is based on the belief that man is a failed experiment, and its assumption that man can come to salvation by knowing or doing something particular displays elements of the Gnostic-Pelagian heresies.

As man moves further away from human nature today, and we also see an increase in barbarous acts, it shows rejection of God and His law, said Giordano. 

Conversely, he said, “When we search for that which is most elevated, dignified, and noble, we inevitably find God who is Truth, Beauty, and Goodness itself."

“The Magisterium in the papal teachings on Marriage and the Family has been attentive to the family seeing it as a real jewel of a social institution to be protected for the greater common good of society and each man,” stated Giordano. 

“If the family unit is hurt, man is ultimately hurt, and the results are evident all around us that there is indeed an abolition of man in course. If instead, the family unit is united and faithful to God, focused on Our Lord, then there is order in its life and that of its members,” he added.

Fr. Giordano's full talk:

 

From 'us to 'me'

In discussing the importance of marriage, Giordano said emphasis has shifted from the family to the individual since the time of the French Revolution.

The family is understood as an institution that is beyond social functions, however, the priest said. And he told the forum “the family is very much under attack, starting with the very sacrament that is its foundation: marriage.”

He explained how problems have emerged from the center of work being moved from the household to outside the home since the Industrial Revolution.

Further, divorce has come about from many social, economic and political issues. Giordano cited the sexual revolution, the move to an industrial society over the last 200 years, and the way governments have interfered in marriage, being agents of divorce.

“We know from our fight with the abortion industry just how important legalization of such matters is in influencing the mindset,” said Giordano.

A long time coming

A look at the works written by the popes since the 19th-century on the subjects of family and marriage show they were already addressing the crisis then, he continued, citing Benedict XIV, Pius IX and Leo XIII.

“The popes were very conscious of the fact that the Church’s role was to protect sacred matrimony from all sorts of confusion because both the Church and society as a whole would suffer,” Giordano stated.

“Marriage is not merely a convention which the State can decide upon at whim,” he said, quoting Pope Leo XIII’s Arcanum divinae Sapientiae. “Marriage was established by God after the creation of our first parents so that they would transmit the life that He had given to them.”

“Marriage sanctifies the union of man and woman, and in these two accounts we see two ends of marriage clearly identified: procreative and unitive,” explained Giordano. “Through marriage, there is a remedy in store for man’s wounded nature.”

He told the forum that the Congregation for Rites having inserted the Feast of the Holy Family in the Calendar of the Roman Rite in 1921 upon the directive of Pope Benedict XV, while not the beginning of the devotion to the Holy Family, displayed the deep concern of the Holy Father for the breakdown of the family.

“Each time I read documents from the early part of the 20th century I notice that many good Catholic writers were lamenting the breakdown of the family and society back then, and I wonder: what would they say today?” the priest queried for those in attendance. “In many ways, they predicted what is happening today.”

Regarding gender, Giordano discussed St. Thomas Aquinas’s definition of man as a composite of body and soul; the two are not separate. 

He explained how a number of subsequent modern philosophies reject this. And also that disruption of the natural order of man’s make-up, whether material, physical, spiritual or psychological, can have devastating effects on the whole. 

These can lead to gender confusion and transhumanism.

“In a time when nature itself is questioned,” Giordano said, “when its goodness is doubted and reproduction altered, when it is no longer considered enough in itself, and attempts are made to go beyond it in the realm of transhumanism, St. Thomas’ insights are now quite valuable to consider.”

“St. Thomas teaches that even in the state of being separate, the soul is inclined to being united to its specific body,” he told the forum. “It is in this union that we see how maleness and femaleness characterize the whole person, uniting the body’s biological structure to the soul.” 

“Even if this can be a debated position,” said Giordano, “we affirm that the soul is itself not a gender, or else the distinction between men and women would make them different species. The gender is in the body, but the soul is not immune from its influence since it is so integrally united to the body.”

Further, he said, if gender deals with the whole person the way that the soul does, then sex-reassignment surgery really cannot change one's gender.

According to St. Thomas, the common end between male and female is the procreative end, he said. The particular material ends between male and female, though, are complimentary, but different.

Editor's note: Pete Baklinski contributed to this report. 

Featured Image
Lightening strikes the Vatican Feb. 11, 2013, hours after Pope Benedict XVI announced his resignation.
Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete

News, ,

We are witnessing St. John Paul II’s prophesy of an ‘anti-Church’: Catholic priest

Pete Baklinski Pete Baklinski Follow Pete
Image
Fr. Linus Clovis at the 2015 Rome Life Forum. Claire Chretien / LifeSiteNews

ROME, May 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) -- St. John Paul II’s 1976 prophetic warning about the rise of an “anti-Church” that would preach an “anti-Gospel” is being fulfilled today by leaders within the Catholic Church, even at the highest levels, said a priest in a talk given at a Catholic conference today in Rome. 

Fr. Linus Clovis of Family Life International said in his talk at the Rome Life Forum, organized by Voice of the Family, that the anti-Gospel of the anti-Church is often “indistinguishable from secular ideology, which has overturned both the natural law and the Ten Commandments.”

“This anti-Gospel, which seeks to elevate the individual’s will to consume, to pleasure and to power over the will of God, was rejected by Christ when tempted in the wilderness. Disguised as ‘human rights,’ it has reappeared, in all its luciferian hubris, to promulgate a narcissistic, hedonistic attitude that rejects any constraint except that imposed by man-made laws,” he said. 

Read Fr. Clovis' full talk here.

During his visit to America 41 years ago, Cardinal Karol Wojtyla, the archbishop of Cracow who two years later would become Pope John Paul II, delivered his prophetic message in Philadelphia, on the occasion of the bicentennial anniversary of American Independence. Wojtyle said:

We are now standing in the face of the greatest historical confrontation humanity has gone through. I do not think that wide circles of American society or wide circles of the Christian community realize this fully. We are now facing the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-Church, of the Gospel versus the anti-Gospel.

We must be prepared to undergo great trials in the not-too-distant future; trials that will require us to be ready to give up even our lives, and a total gift of self to Christ and for Christ. Through your prayers and mine, it is possible to alleviate this tribulation, but it is no longer possible to avert it. . . .How many times has the renewal of the Church been brought about in blood! It will not be different this time.

Clovis said that while the rise of the anti-Church has been happening slowly but steadily over the past decades, it’s emergence has been especially noticeable in the last few years. 

“For the past half-century, there has been a growing crisis in the Church, arising as much from a lack of clear and unambiguous teaching, as from the climate of dissent among priests, religious and laity. Within the contemporary Church, the crisis has been brought to fever pitch, if not breaking point, by the rejection of Our Lord’s yes/no paradigm and the undermining of established doctrinal positions by protean pastoral practises,” he said. 

He noted that there is a sense among faithful Catholics that “things ecclesiastic and catholic are falling apart and a pastoral anarchy has been loosed upon the Church.” He said that a “hidden exercise of power” is currently at work within the Church that is fueling such anarchy. 

[It] can reform the marriage annulment process without the customary consultation of the appropriate Roman dicasteries; issue a broad and scathing rebuke of the Roman Curia in a Christmas address; purge a dicastery’s membership, which effectively vitiate the influence of its Prefect who had stood firmly against innovations injurious both to the teachings on marriage and to the tenets of the liturgy; cripple the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate; and shut down the Melbourne campus of the John Paul II Institute. 

Clovis said that accompanying the rise of the anti-Church is a direct assault on the very “pillar of creation” and foundation of the social order, namely, the truth of the relationship between man and woman as expressed in marriage and the family. He recalled how Sister Lucia, one of the Fatima visionaries, once said that “the final battle between the Lord and the kingdom of Satan will be about marriage and the family.”

“It is well known that any tampering with a keystone risks the collapse of the entire building," he said. “The keystone, the basic cell of society is marriage and family.”

And the anti-Church is working its hardest to undermine that keystone.

“With the tacit acceptance of contraception and divorce, the recent ‘merciful’ embracing of remarried civil divorcees and the benign nod to same-sex ‘marriage,’ the keystone has been tampered with and the omega point has been reached,” Clovis said. 

He noted how atheistic secularism, which fuels the anti-Church, has been “working for the demise of the family, its driving spirit being the LGBT ideology; its public face, ‘political correctness;’ its Sunday dress, ‘inclusivity and non-judgmentalism.’

He warned Catholics how the anti-Church will try to deceive the faithful by passing itself off as the true Church.

It is self-evident that the Catholic Church and the anti-Church currently co-exist in the same sacramental, liturgical and juridical space. The latter, having grown stronger, is now attempting to pass itself off as the true Church, all the better to induct, or coerce, the faithful into becoming adherents, promoters and defenders of a secular ideology.

Should the anti-Church succeed in commandeering all the space of the true Church, the rights of man will supplant the rights of God through the desecration of the sacraments, the sacrilege of the sanctuary, and the abuse of apostolic power.

Thus, politicians who vote for abortion and same-sex “marriage” will be welcome at the Communion rails; husbands and wives who have abandoned their spouses and children and entered into adulterous relationships will be admitted to the sacraments; priests and theologians who publicly reject Catholic doctrines and morals will be at liberty to exercise ministry and to spread dissent, while faithful Catholics will be marginalised, maligned and discredited at every turn.  Thus, the anti-Church would succeed in achieving its goal of dethroning God as Creator, Saviour and Sanctifier and replacing Him with man the self-creator, the self-saviour and the self-sanctifier.

Clovis said that the anti-Church works to achieve its goal of overcoming the true Church by intimidating the faithful, including the laity, priests, and bishops, into submission.

To achieve its objectives, the anti-Church, in collaboration with the secular powers, uses the law and media to browbeat the true Church into submission. By adroit use of the media, the activists of the anti-Church have managed to intimidate bishops, clergy and most of the Catholic press into silence.  Equally, the lay faithful are terrorised by fear of the hostility, ridicule and hate that would be visited upon them should they object to the imposition of LGBT ideology.

For example, in 2015, the congregation of St Nicholas of Myra in the Archdiocese of Dublin gave a standing ovation to their parish priest when he declared from the pulpit that he was gay and urged them to support same-sex ‘marriage’ in the Irish referendum. It is not difficult to imagine the kind of treatment that an objector would have received. Thus, the oppressive influence of the anti-Church is most clearly seen at work when a person is fearful to openly uphold God’s revelation about homosexuality, abortion or contraception in their parish community.

Adherents to the anti-Church especially target priests and bishops to tow the line of the anti-Gospel, knowing that once they are brought into submission they can influence countless souls away from the true Church.  

Priests and bishops are the immediate and more natural leaders of the laity and they, above all, are caught in the broadening spectrum of fear generated by the anti-Church.  Additionally, because of the clerical vow of obedience and respect, their fear, being reverential, is greatly aggravated, especially when they find their ranks divided; their unity split; long standing sacramental disciplines violated; canon law ignored; their evangelising spirit dismissed as proselytism and solemn nonsense. 

In regard to their persons, they are labelled as little monsters throwing stones at poor sinners, or who reduce the sacrament of reconciliation to a torture chamber or, hide behind the Church’s teachings, sitting on the chair of Moses and judging at times with superiority and superficiality.  

As clerical sons, they see themselves as less deserving of a papal embrace than Italy’s arch-abortionist Emma Bonino and even less worthy of rehabilitation than renowned false prophet and global population and abortion advocate, Paul Ehrlich.  

As priests, they are told they owe an apology to gays and that the ‘great majority’ of Catholic marriages they would have blessed are invalid; in addition, they are called sayers of prayers and, for considering Mass attendance and frequent confession as important, are branded Pelagians.  

As Catholics, knowing that the Five First Saturdays were requested in reparation for blasphemy against our most Blessed Lady, they are personally affronted by the scurrilous musings that, on Calvary, where She became the Mother of all those redeemed by Christ, the Holy Virgin of Fatima perhaps, desired in Her heart to say to the Lord “Lies! Lies! I was deceived.”  As ‘trees of the forest shake before the wind,’ so clerical hearts quake with fear at the possibility that they could actually be more Catholic than the Pope!

Clovis called Pope Francis’ influence within the Church a “great and true blessing” since the Pope’s ambiguous teaching have prompted the anti-Church to emerge from the shadows in clear view of all the faithful. This now gives the faithful a clear choice regarding which master they will follow. 

“A hidden conflict has been raging in the Church for over one hundred years: a conflict explicitly revealed to Pope Leo XIII, partially contained by St. Pius X, unleashed at Vatican II.  Under Francis, the first Jesuit pope, the first pope from the Americas and the first pope whose priestly ordination was in the New Rite, it is now full blown, with the potential of rendering the Church smaller but more faithful,” he said. 

He said that Francis’ most recent Exhortation Amoris Laetitia is an example of a force at work within the Church today that helps establish the dividing line between the anti-Church and the true Church of Jesus Christ. 

“The Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia is the catalyst that has divided not only bishops and Episcopal Conferences from each other but, priests from their bishops and from each other, and the laity, anxious and confused,” he said. 

“As a Trojan horse, Amoris Laetitia spells spiritual ruin for the entire Church. As a gauntlet thrown down it calls for courage in overcoming fear. In either case, it is now poised to separate the anti-Church of which St. John Paul II spoke from the Church that Christ founded.  As the separation begins to take place, each one of us, like the angels, will have to decide for himself whether he would rather be wrong with Lucifer than right without him,” he added.

Clovis tied his main points to the 100th anniversary of Our Lady appearing in Fatima. He said that she “proposed a strategy which, if adopted would secure the salvation of a great number of souls.” 

“The strategy required that, in order to ‘appease God, who was already so deeply offended,’ three major conditions should be satisfied, namely, a reform of morals with full adherence to natural and divine laws, the Five First Saturdays devotion and the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary,” he said. 

“Then to further emphasise how perilous the approaching times would be, the Virgin, with motherly concern, warned of the consequences of ignoring Her message: wars, Russia spreading her errors, the persecution of the Church and of the Holy Father.  She, nonetheless, concluded Her message with a vestige of hope: ‘in the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph and a period of peace will be given to the world,’” he added.

Clovis said that Catholics seeking to be faithful to Christ and the Church he founded need not be afraid of the present turmoil they are witnessing.

“At Baptism, we became members of the Church Militant and, at Confirmation, soldiers of Christ; we, therefore, have been recruited and armed for deadly combat against the three implacable enemies of our souls: the world, the flesh and the devil,” he said. 

“Recognising that ‘we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places,’ we fight, like the Apostles, taking the martyrs for our models and Christ Jesus, Himself as our reward,” he added. 

Read Fr. Clovis' full talk here.

Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Voice of the Family

News

Cardinal Burke, 100+ pro-life leaders meet in Rome to discuss ‘crisis’ in Catholic Church

Voice of the Family

May 18, 2017 (Voice of the Family) – Today at Hotel Columbus, steps from the Vatican, commenced the fourth annual Rome Life Forum. This year’s gathering brings together over 100 life and family leaders from over 20 nations to discuss the crisis in the Church and in the family and especially the hope for renewal in Our Lady of Fatima.

For the past four years leaders have come together and recognised the crisis of faith in the Church itself as one of the greatest crises for the movements for life and family around the world.

Speaking at the Forum this year are some of the most heroic leaders in the Church, including Cardinal Raymond Burke, Cardinal Carlo Caffarra and Bishop Athanasius Schneider.

The centenary of the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima give this year’s Forum a hopeful way forward in anticipation of the sure triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

As usual the Forum will close with all the leaders participating in the Rome March for Life on Saturday.

“One hundred years ago, Our Lady warned us of the tragic errors that threatened to ravage the world,” said Maria Madise of Voice of the Family and the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), one of the Forum organizers.

“The 2017 Rome Life Forum comes at a critical time in the life of the Church: 100 years after the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima calling for repentance and conversion, and just over a year after the publication of Amoris Laetitia,” said John-Henry Westen, editor-in-chief and co-founder of LifeSiteNews, another Forum organizer. “The pro-life and pro-family movement faces increasing persecution inside and outside the Church. Our Lady showed three little children in Portugal a clear path to renewing humanity and saving souls. We must listen to her as disorder reigns in the Church and the world.”

“There is no more necessary time than now for the pro-life leaders who love the teaching of Christ about marriage, life, and family to gather in the capital of Christendom, show their support for one another, and forge relationships that will carry forward their work on a global scale,” Madise said.

Human Life International, Associazione Famiglia Domani (Italy), and Family Life International New Zealand are also sponsors of the conference.

Duke Paul Von Oldenburg of Federation Pro Europa Christiana and Italian Professor Roberto de Mattei of the Lepanto Foundation will also speak at the Forum.

Featured Image
Screen shot from Alien Covenant.
Jesse Russell

Opinion,

‘Alien’ movie seemed like a lot of fun…until I found Satan was behind the script

Jesse Russell

ANALYSIS

May 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) -- The sixth installment of the popular Alien franchise, Alien Covenant, will burst onto screens across the United States and Canada on May 19. Don’t be fooled into thinking that this is simply another spawning of the never-ending parade of mindless, slime-soaked sci-fi horror films released for the masses to consume. No, this is the culture of death at its best providing so-called “entertainment” for anyone who holds a diabolical vision of the world where babies in the womb are viewed as parasites, abortion is glorified, and population control is a necessity. 

Understanding the culture’s fascination with the Alien series helps diagnose the malaise of our contemporary, death-obsessed world, which is important for anyone wanting to evangelize those souls wandering in the cavernous desolation of the culture of death. 

The original Alien, released in 1979, was crafted to shock and awe the viewer. The tagline of Alien was the chilling, “In space, noone can hear you scream.” 

Alien was among the movies in the seventies and eighties — including works such as The Exorcist (1973), The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974), Friday 13 (1980), and A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) —  which transformed the horror genre from simply being “scary” to being means of inflicting serious and permanent psychological damage on the audience. This transformation has had profound implications for all of Western, Christian civilization. 

Since the time of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, the purpose of dramatic art was to allow for a cathartic release, or purging, of the emotions of the audience by inspiring fear and pity in them.

The contemporary horror genre, however, is not intended to be an outlet for one’s emotions but a deeply traumatizing event meant to radically and perhaps permanently alter the worldview of the audience. 

The Alien series has proven to be an almost a forty year experience of terror for several generations of moviegoers. Ridley Scott, the director of the first installment in the series as well as the most current releases Prometheus and Alien Covenant, said that the whole point of the movie series is “terror, and more terror.” More recently he said his goal in the Alien series is to “scare the [expletive delete] out of people.” 

Replacing Christian civilization

The Alien series certainly has accomplished this task of terrifying generations of audiences. But there is more going on here. The Alien movies terrify the audience while at the same time “deconstructing” Western Christian civilization, replacing it with a new, darker and “alien” one. 

The Alien movies deconstruct the Christian understanding of the natural world as a home for humans that is fundamentally harmonious and good. In the world of Alien, nature is gruesome and violent, reflecting the Darwinist or “neo-Darwinist” view of a violent and hostile world full of organisms at war with one another. 

The iconic figure of the movies is, of course, the xenomorph, (a word that literally means “alien”) the large, insect-like creature that mutilates human bodies and drags them away to be used as hosts into whom the eggs of future xenomorphs can be laid. At the same time, this creation has human-like features (since it can be “born” from a human host), and this parallel with the human form is meant to both make it more frightening as well as make the human body itself seem grotesque and frightening. 

As an artistic creation, this creature has a curious history. It is based upon the 1976 painting Necronom IV by the Swiss Surrealist painter and Satanist H.R. Giger whose works are known for their ugliness, occultism, violence, and perverse vision of human sexuality and reproduction. Another of Giger’s most famous paintings is The Birth Machine, which depicts deformed babies being loaded into a 9mm Luger pistol. Similar to the gross humanoid “alien” in Necronom IV, The Birth Machine is intended to encourage contempt for the physical world. 

Giger has said that this work was inspired by his fear that human overpopulation is the greatest threat to the world’s existence. Like Giger’s paintings and sculptures, the Alien series is, in a sense, a long advertisement for population control by portraying the physical world and human reproduction as being fundamentally grotesque and violent. 

The various directors of the movie series have used this anti-life vision as a palette for the most memorable scenes of the Alien franchise. 

One of the most iconic scenes in Alien 3 occurs when Ellen Ripley, the primary protagonist of the film series, is in the infirmary of a penal colony. A xenomorph enters the infirmary and after killing one of the patients, presses its slimy terrifying but nonetheless humanoid face very close to Ripley’s. This scene is clearly meant to be a gross parody of human tenderness captured in traditional paintings such as the Madonna and Child. 

In the more recent Prometheus and Alien Covenant, there is a deeper and more explicit attack on Christian theology.

Director Ridley Scott adopts the “directed panspermia” theory held by neo-Darwinists such as Richard Dawkins, which suggests that life on earth was seeded by extraterrestrials. In Prometheus, it is a group of extraterrestrials called the engineers who seed life on earth through a mysterious black goo. Instead of teaming birds and animals that God created in Genesis, however, the engineers create violent and revolting monstrosities, which, the movie implies, include humans.

Nasty life must be destroyed

This crude, dark, gnostic theology provides the ultimate basis of the anti-life message permeating all the Alien movies: all of this nasty life must be destroyed.  

It is not a coincidence that Alien premiered just five years after abortion became legal in 1973 with Roe vs. Wade. Abortion and infanticide are perhaps the dominant themes of the movie series. 

The process of gestation of the aliens in the movies clearly follows the pro-abortion theory of the human child as a parasite or “alien” in the womb of the mother that, after worming its way out of the mother, leaps into the world, consuming everything in site. 

Thus, according to the pro-abortion logic of the movies, the only way to prevent the offspring from devouring and destroying the world is to kill them. 

It’s not too surprising that there are several abortions performed in the series. In Alien 3, Ridley performs a gruesome after-birth abortion of a queen. In Prometheus, Elizabeth Shaw performs an abortion on an alien who was impregnated by her lover who himself was infected with the black goo. 

The overt, anti-life message is that the organisms that are generated from the human body are grotesque consumers who must be exterminated for the greater good of the community.

The final core component of the Alien movie series is transgenderism and role reversal of males and females. The most prominent example of this is that most of the “births” of aliens in the movie are spawned from males. From the famous eruption of the first xenomorph from the character Kane in Alien to the gestation of the “deacon” xenomorph from the male engineer in Prometheus, the Alien movies reverse the image of the male, making him like a female who can grow life within and give birth. 

The second element of reversing gender roles is the positive portrayal of Ripley as a machine-gun wielding female who makes war with other life-forms. This reverses the Christian ideal of the woman being a life-giving mother who is the heart of the home. Exalting the character Ellen Ripley as an empowered female soldier who makes war certainly does not empower women, but degrades them to the level of Darwinian organisms who are at war with one another. 

The most prominent scene of this degrading view of women is found in Ripley’s fight with the queen xenomorph at the end of the second Alien movie. In the scene, the human female and xenomorph female are paired as two violent “mothers” at war with one another for survival. Ripley is protecting her (adopted) offspring Newt from the alien queen and, at the same time, is trying to destroy the queen’s eggs, her offspring. 

As one violent female organism (human) attempts to destroy the offspring of a rival violent female organism (alien), the message is clear: There is no fundamental difference between humans and xenomorphs, to whom the humans are in fact the “aliens.” There are only violent females who must destroy others to survive. 

These anti-life and anti-woman messages can certainly be expected in the new installment of the series. 

Covenant is already being praised by reviewers for “upping the ante” in regard to graphic violence. Trailers indicate that the movie continues the diabolic message of the series. In the trailers, plant spores on alien moons infect humans with monstrous offspring. Humans become fragile targets for hungry creatures that are, in the end, not so much different in form and function from the humans they greedily devour. 

Yes, the Alien series provides a good view into the workings of the culture of death.

Exposing the darkness and lies of the series can provide the life-and-family movement ammunition for the fight for a true culture of life. But Christians wanting to win the culture war must boycott the works of darkness that present themselves as “entertainment.” And they must engage in the production of their own culture, a culture of life, that weaves a noble vision of the created world as a common home where every person is welcome and each is valued for being created in the image and likeness of God. 

Featured Image
Deacon Nick Donnelly

Opinion,

UK bishops’ group pushing radical LGBT propaganda in Catholic schools

Deacon Nick Donnelly

LONDON, May 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – Parents in the UK have taken to social media to protest LGBT ideology being introduced into Catholic schools. An agency of the UK bishops has approved a program that in part draws material from high-profile LGBT activist groups.

The program, titled Made in God’s Image: Challenging homophobic and biphobic bullying in Catholic Schools, was produced by the Catholic Education Service (CES), an agency of the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, with a leading Catholic University, St Mary’s Twickenham.  It is purportedly to assist Catholic schools meet their government mandated obligation to address and challenge bullying among pupils.

Head Teachers’, teachers’ and governors’ performance in tackling bullying is monitored by UK government school inspectors, the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted). Furthermore, all schools have a legal duty to ensure that pupils do not suffer any form of discrimination due to race, sex, sexual orientation and gender reassignment, amongst other protected characteristics set out in the Equalities Act, 2010.

Those Catholic parents protesting about the bishops’ agency program Made in God’s Image are not against taking appropriate measures to stop bullying and unfair discrimination in Catholic schools. They are protesting the program for focusing only on “homophobic” and “biphobic” bullying and distorting the Church’s teaching on sexuality, and homosexuality.

The scandal has deepened with the discovery that the CES programme uses unacknowledged material taken from the militant gay activist groups Stonewall and LGBTYouth Scotland. Stonewall has a reputation for being anti-Catholic, in particular through its “Bigot of the Year” award.

Ben Trovato, the pseudonym of the Catholic parent who posts on the blog Countercultural Father, has taken the lead in exposing the presence of material from LGBT groups in this CES programme.  Other Catholic parents who have expressed concerns about Made in God’s Image include Dr Joseph Shaw, Caroline Farrow and Mark Lambert.

Trovato told me about his concerns for children participating into the LGBT program:

What concerns me most about the CES programme is two things. Firstly, that this could lead to children having a wholly wrong, secular, understanding of human love and sexuality, that will do them great harm, rather than a truly Catholic understanding; secondly, that those charged with providing materials for Catholic Schools could not see that the philosophy underlying much of this approach is wholly at odds with a Catholic understanding.

The CES programme does not present a truly Catholic understanding

The authors of Made in God’s Image refer to the Church’s teaching on marriage and sexuality in the introduction, even referencing key magisterial documents such as the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s (CDF) definitive document, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.

But having referenced these magisterial documents, Made in God’s Image sidelines Church teaching on sexuality by stating:

This document does not seek to set out the Church’s teachings on relationships and marriage, as these are set out fully elsewhere, but it is situated within them. For the teachings themselves, reference should be made to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, particularly paragraphs 2331-2400.

Thenceforward, through omissions, selective quotes and the use of material from LGBT groups, the CES programme proceeds to present an understanding of homosexuality that is totally contrary to the teaching of the Church.  Simply put, homosexuality is presented alongside heterosexuality as a positive “sexual orientation” and “identity.”

For example, in the first lesson, Setting the scene on LGBT issues, 14-year-old children have to complete an exercise that matches words with definitions. So in a Catholic school pupils will learn that a “Lesbian” is “A woman who is primarily attracted to other women”, alongside the definition of a “Heterosexual” as “A person who is only attracted to members of the opposite sex. Also called ‘straight.’”

The CES’s neutral presentation of homosexuality alongside heterosexuality is the serious error addressed by the CDF in its Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, which Made in God’s Image mentions in the introduction:

An overly benign interpretation was given to the homosexual condition itself, some going so far as to call it neutral, or even good. Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder. Therefore special concern and pastoral attention should be directed toward those who have this condition, lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option. It is not. (Section 3)

It is indicative of the distortion of Church teaching on homosexuality found throughout Made in God’s Image that it selectively quotes Church teaching. It states, “The School should be mindful that the Church teaches that homosexual inclinations are not sinful” (p.5) without continuing with the crucial teaching, “it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.”

The danger inherent in this LGBT program, carrying with it the authority of an agency of the Bishops’ Conference, is that it will lead the 14-year-old children at which it is targeted to “believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option” when the Church categorically declares, “It is not.”

The CES programme represents ideological colonisation

Made in God’s Image includes quotations from Pope Francis about mercy and being non-judgemental but not his hard hitting warnings against LGBT ideological colonisation in schools. Since 2015 Pope Francis has challenged, through speeches and papal documents, the coercive imposition of gender ideology in schools. During his meeting with Polish bishops in 2016 the Holy Father said:

In Europe, America, Latin America, Africa, and in some countries of Asia, there are genuine forms of ideological colonisation taking place. And one of these - I will call it clearly by its name – is [the ideology of] “gender”. Today children – children! – are taught in school that everyone can choose his or her sex. Why are they teaching this? Because the books are provided by the persons and institutions that give you money. These forms of ideological colonisation are also supported by influential countries. And this terrible!

Gender ideology is at the heart of the Made in God’s Image program, with the word “gender” mentioned over 40 times. It even vaunts the benefits of exposing pupils to LGBT issues, especially to those children who display signs of being hostile, disinterested, nervous or discomforted during sessions: Regardless of the reasons, hearing positive messages about anti-homophobia and LGBT issues can only be beneficial to them” (p.12).

The CES programme also appears to be seeking to coerce adherence to its ideology through a series of inherent threats of punitive action by Ofsted inspectors. It states: “In making judgements, inspectors will pay particular attention to the outcomes for the following groups: lesbian, gay and bisexual children and learners; transgender children and learners” (p.10).

The concern raised by Pope Francis about finance being used to impose gender ideology on Catholic schools is also an issue in the CES scandal. In the email promoting Made in God’s Image to dioceses, the CES stated that they had “received funding to cover the printing and distribution of a hard copy for each school.”

The question raised by concerned Catholic parents is, who has provided the funds to distribute LGBT ideology to Catholic schools? Was it Stonewall? In a statement to The Catholic Herald newspaper, the CES stated, “The document is a collaboration between the CES and St Mary’s and no external funding has been received for it.” Then why mention the extra funding in the first place?  The self-contradictory nature of the two statements about funding raises serious questions.

Stonewall has denied “that the group had any specific involvement with the production of the document,” but praises the Bishops’ agency for using its material. Stonewall welcomed Made in God’s Image as a “positive and welcome step from the Catholic Education Service.” Terence Weldon, the Catholic gay activist who runs the blog Queering the Church, highlights the significance of the CES using Stonewall’s material: “What I find particularly striking about this initiative, is that deliberately or not, the English bishops have in effect entered an informal partnership with Stonewall.”

And this takes us to the heart of the scandal. English bishops have oversight of the actions of the Catholic Education Service, with five of them members of the Management Committee. Catholic parents have a right to respectfully ask these bishops: Why, instead of dealing with the issue of bullying, have they approved what amounts to an LGBT Trojan Horse in their children’s schools?

Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Fr. Linus Clovis

Opinion, ,

The anti-Church has come. Why faithful Catholics should not be afraid

Fr. Linus Clovis
Image
Fr. Linus Clovis at the 2017 Rome Life Forum. Claire Chretien / LifeSiteNews

Editor's Note: Fr. Clovis gave this talk at the Rome Life Forum on May 18, 2017. Read LifeSiteNews' article about the talk here.

ROME, May 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) -- Pope St John Paul II’s first words, on appearing on the loggia of St Peter’s Basilica, on 16th October, 1978, the day of his election, were “Be not afraid”. Now, thirty-nine years later, in light of the events that have overtaken contemporary Catholicism, his first words seem to be, not only prophetic but more, a clarion call in preparation for battle (1).

Whenever the pendulum of human and salvation history swings through a period of encroaching darkness and turmoil, God often inspires prophets to speak so that some light may be cast to dispel the darkness and, that the turmoil may be assuaged with hope. These prophets appealed for more trust in God’s active and caring concern for His people (2).  Thus, for example, with entreaties to have faith in God’s loving providence, Isaiah (3) begged King Ahaz to ask God for a sign before he acted and, Jeremiah (4) warned that God would save Jerusalem from total destruction only if the city surrenders to the Babylonians. The Church herself, has not been deprived of the blessings of the prophetic grace as is amply demonstrated by God raising up saints such as Bernard of Clairvaux,  Francis of Assisi, Catherine of Siena, Margaret Mary Alacoque and, in more recent times, by sending His Blessed Mother to Lourdes, La Salette and Fatima.

A century ago, God sent the Queen of Prophets to the Cova da Iria in Fatima, Portugal with a double pronged message for our contemporary world.  First, She warned that the world was already facing a peril far more destructive than that which faced Jerusalem and, secondly, She presented a heavenly solution, wiser and more prudent than that offered to Ahaz who had refused to ask God for a sign either as “deep as Sheol or high as heaven” (5).  The Virgin, however, from maternal solicitude, established the gravity and veracity of Her twin message with a vision and a sign.  On 13th July, 1917 ‘deep as Sheol’ was illustrated by a disturbing vision of hell.  Four months later, on 13th October, ‘high as heaven’ was confirmed with a sign, the awe-inspiring miracle of the “dance of the sun” which was witnessed by more than seventy thousand people. 

On October 13, 1884, exactly 33 years before Our Lady’s appearance at Fatima, Pope Leo XIII, had an extraordinary spiritual experience.  He overheard a conversation between God and Satan in which Satan challenged God, boasting that, given greater power over priests (6), he could destroy the Church within 100 years.  God granted him that time to test the Church - ultimately for His own honour and glory (7) and also, to confirm that His Church was indeed built on rock and able to sustain the attacks of hell (8) with as much fortitude as the Patriarch Job.  In preparation for this trial, Pope Leo immediately composed the Leonine prayers, with a particular invocation of St Michael, for the defence and protection of the clergy and he ordered their recital after every Mass.

Aware of how desperate modern times would be, with the battle being fought at fever pitch, the Virgin proposed a strategy which, if adopted would secure the salvation of a great number of souls.  The strategy required that, in order to “appease God, who was already so deeply offended”, three major conditions should be satisfied, namely, a reform of morals with full adherence to natural and divine laws, the Five First Saturdays devotion and the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.   Then to further emphasise how perilous the approaching times would be, the Virgin, with motherly concern, warned of the consequences of ignoring Her message: wars, Russia spreading her errors, the persecution of the Church and of the Holy Father.  She, nonetheless, concluded Her message with a vestige of hope: “in the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph and a period of peace will be given to the world.”

On 13th August, 1917, the children were kidnapped and, through no fault of theirs, were unable to keep their tryst with the Lady.  Appearing to them six days later, the Lady asked them to return to the Cova da Iria on 13th September, confirming that She would work the promised miracle, although it would not be “as great”.  This incident highlights the importance of observing all Heaven’s instructions exactly (9)  since partial compliance diminishes the proffered blessings. In 1929, Our Lady specifically promised a period of world peace if the Pope, in union with the bishops of the world, would consecrate Russia to Her Immaculate Heart.  This specific consecration has not yet been done and, I believe, that, this has contributed to the present crisis.  While blessings may follow partial compliance to Heaven’s requests, these, no doubt, are bestowed as encouragement to proceed to full compliance.  Thus, both Spain and Portugal were spared the Second World War, after their bishops consecrated those countries to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  Similarly, the Second World War was shortened, after Pope Pius XII, even without the bishops’ participation, consecrated the world to the Immaculate Heart and, Communism collapsed soon after Pope John Paul II, with the bishops’ participation but with no explicit mention of Russia, consecrated the world to the Immaculate Heart.  

The social and political uncertainties of the post World War I years provided the conditions for the twin spectres of Nazism and Communism to grow until 25-26 January, 1938, that fateful “night of the unknown light”.  This “unknown light” signified the imminent outbreak of a worse war which, Our Lady of Fatima predicted, in July 1917, would occur during the pontificate of Pius XI.  This Second World War ended in 1945 with the defeat of Nazism but peace was not assured as the now hungry spectre of Communism, having swallowed half of Europe, ominously and threateningly, loured and looked to further territorial expansion.

The Church

The election of a cardinal from Communist Poland at the second Conclave of 1978 was sufficiently a threat to the status quo that an attempt to eliminate him was made on 13th May, 1981.  Two years, prior to his election as Pope John Paul II, Karol Wojtyla, the archbishop of Cracow, delivered a prophetic message in Philadelphia on the occasion of the bicentennial anniversary of American Independence.

We are now standing in the face of the greatest historical confrontation humanity has gone through. I do not think that wide circles of American society or wide circles of the Christian community realize this fully. We are now facing the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-Church, of the Gospel versus the anti-Gospel.

We must be prepared to undergo great trials in the not-too-distant future; trials that will require us to be ready to give up even our lives, and a total gift of self to Christ and for Christ. Through your prayers and mine, it is possible to alleviate this tribulation, but it is no longer possible to avert it. . . .How many times has the renewal of the Church been brought about in blood! It will not be different this time.

Today, forty years later, this speech has such an ominous ring to it that, in the current global climate, it is difficult not to recall Our Lord’s own words: People will faint from fear and foreboding of what is coming upon the world, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. (10) At present we are experiencing recurring afflictions and uncertainties causing fear which can be attributed to the wilful neglect of the Virgin’s warning.

There is a growing sense, even among the least sophisticated, the spiritually indifferent and the historically naive, that something is wrong, that something has to give or, as W. B. Yates expressed with poetic elegance:

Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;

Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,

The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere

The ceremony of innocence is drowned;

The best lack all conviction, while the worst

Are full of passionate intensity. (11)

Certainly, in regard to the Church, it seems that the centre can no longer hold. The Petrine authority has stealthily been whittled away that it seems to no longer possess the supremacy of judicial power but rather only that of primus inter pares.  One need only recall Paul VI’s prohibition against Communion in the hand and the outright disobedience, if not defiance, of several hierarchies that forced his capitulation or, the uproar and denunciation that followed his issuance of Humanae Vitae. Equally the declaration (12) of John Paul II against female altar servers was soon undeclared by a new and authentic interpretation of Canon 230§2 in the Code of Canon Law.  Benedict XVI’s Summorum Pontificum, like a lame duck, fared no better.

Perhaps even more serious is the feeling that “things ecclesiastic and catholic” are falling apart and a pastoral anarchy has been loosed upon the Church.  The current media spin presents the Petrine office as little more than the opinion, even the most insouciant, of the incumbent.  Yet, even in the midst of this imbroglio, there seems to be a hidden exercise of power at work that can reform the marriage annulment process without the customary consultation of the appropriate Roman dicasteries; issue a broad and scathing rebuke of the Roman Curia in a Christmas address; purge a dicastery’s membership, which effectively vitiate the influence of its Prefect who had stood firmly against innovations injurious both to the teachings on marriage and to the tenets of the liturgy; cripple the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate; and shut down the Melbourne campus of the John Paul II Institute.  One can hardly be blamed for judging like Isaac, mutatis mutandis that “Although the voice is Jacob’s, the hands are Esau’s” (13).

With such teachings and with unespied power behind it (14), it is no surprise that the “best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity”.  Indeed, the sensus catholicus is troubled and voices that should be raised in its defence are muted, while the spirit of the age is not short of tongues that proclaim from the housetops (15) what could well be the anti-Gospel of which, four decades ago, Cardinal Wojtyla had spoken.  It becomes even more dire as the Cardinal went on to warn that we should be “prepared to undergo great trials in the not-too-distant future; trials that will require us to be ready to give up even our lives, and a total gift of self to Christ and for Christ”.

Cardinal Wojtyla’s anxiety gives us additional grounds to take the message of Fatima seriously.   In August 1931, Our Lord Himself appeared to Sister Lucia and, referring to His command for the collegial consecration of Russia, commanded her to “Make it known to My ministers that given they follow the example of the King of France in delaying the execution of My request, they will follow him into misfortune.” (16) This warning, together with the Cardinal’s declaration that this trial cannot be averted, is perhaps, what has so many fearful.  Like every passion, fear, in order to be morally good, must be regulated by reason.

Fear 

In Thomistic thought (17), a passion is that motion or modification that the recipient undergoes when acted on by some agent.  In human nature, a passion is that motion which arises from the senses and can even affect the body when one imagines or thinks of good or evil.  One such passion is fear which springs from the perceived threat of some present or future evil and whose power resides in the belief that one lacks the ability to overcome the evil.  In simple terms, fear is an unsettling of soul - a mental disturbance that regards a present or future evil as irresistible and actually able to conquer good.  It can be contrasted with hope, whose object is a future good, difficult but possible to attain.

St. Thomas enumerates the various manifestations of fear as: laziness, shamefacedness, shame, amazement, stupor and anxiety.  The cause of fear may be intrinsic or extrinsic.  The first three are intrinsic since they come from one’s personal actions and may be defined as follows. Laziness is that response which shrinks from work for fear of effort. This is characterised by the third servant in the parable (18) of the talents who, having hidden his talent, offered the excuse he was afraid. He was punished for being “wicked and lazy”. Shamefacedness, a kind of embarrassment, is that fear that deters one from committing a disgraceful act. The parable (19) of the steward who was afraid to beg illustrates that fear.  Adam hid from God because of shame for having disobeyed.  Amazement, stupor and anxiety are extrinsic since they have their origin in external factors far greater than one can overcome.  Amazement is the fear that is felt when the threat is so great that one is unable to gauge its magnitude, whilst at the threat of an unprecedented evil one feels stupor even to the point of being cataleptic.  Lastly, anxiety is the kind of fear produced by an unforeseen occurrence resulting from an unexpected event.  Examples of these would be the resurrection of Our Lord from the dead, which was a source of amazement (20) to the disciples, stupor (21) to the guards at the tomb who were like dead men and, anxiety to those who were responsible (22) for the crucifixion of the Lord.

Amazement and stupor paralyse the understanding just as laziness is the paralysis brought about by fear of exertion.  This implies that amazement and stupor shrink from the difficulty of grappling with a great and unwonted occurrence just as laziness shrinks from undertaking physical toil.  There is a subtle difference between stupor and amazement in that the one amazed shrinks from forming a judgment on what, at present, amazes him but, he would be willing to do so later.  Stupor, however, places one in a seemingly permanent coma. Amazement, therefore, may be the beginning of philosophical research to which stupor is a hindrance since, the one overcome by stupor fears both to judge at present and to inquire into the future.

For our purpose, two different kinds of fear need to be considered. First, fear may be grave if it influences a steadfast person but slight if it affects only a person of weak will.  In order for fear to be grave,

  1. It  must be grave in itself and not merely in the estimation of the person fearing
  2. It must be based on a reasonable foundation
  3. The threat must be possible of execution
  4. The execution of the threat must be inevitable

Grave fear diminishes will power but does not necessarily remove it totally.  This is exemplified by those of the disciples who, after their panic when Jesus was arrested, followed Him at a distance (23). Slight fear is not considered as even diminishing will power.

Second, reverential fear is that disposition one has towards one’s parents or towards those in positions of authority and it springs primarily from one’s reluctance to offend them.  If such fear is used as a compelling force, then its justness or otherwise comes from the validity for which it was exercised.

It is important to recall that fear did not exist in human nature at the time of creation but rather, is one of the consequences of the sin of our first parents. In the state of original innocence, Adam lived with beasts without any fear and his relationship with God was also void of fear. Once he sinned, however, he became exceedingly afraid and hid himself among the trees.  When God called him, he responded: “I heard the sound of thee in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself"(24).

This fear arose not only from dread of punishment but also from shame for having disobeyed God. Human fear increased and became terror when Cain had to face the consequences of his act of fratricide: “My punishment is greater than I can bear. Behold, thou hast driven me this day away from the ground; and from thy face I shall be hidden; and I shall be a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will slay me” (25). From the moment Cain laid violent hands on his brother, fear morphed itself into a hierarchy: dismay, fright, cowardice, dread, terror. Additionally, fear, arising from many sources and manifesting itself in multitudinous ways, has enthroned itself in the human psyche and, even more grievous, the devil uses it as a weapon to enslave and oppress us (26).

In acknowledging the reality and indeed the power of fear, Christ distinguished between the two kinds of fear to which we are subjected.  “And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell, .... yes, I tell you, fear him!” (27).  Although threats to our body may provoke many degrees of fear, these fears can all be vanquished by a holy and reverential fear: “The fear of the Lord is a fountain of life, that one may avoid the snares of death” (28).  Fear of God leads to awe and obedience to Him, that is, to keep His commandments, to love Him and to lead a life of repentance.  The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (29).

In Christ’s counsel that we should fear our Creator above all things is a simple reminder of the existence of a hierarchy of fears.  In particular, since death, the greatest of the natural objects of fear, is inescapable, we should be even less afraid of losing all the things belonging to this world, that is, all material goods, all social and professional advantages, all titles and all dignities which, on our departure, must, in any case, be left behind. “God said to him, ‘Fool! This night your soul is required of you; and the things you have prepared, whose will they be?’” (30).  Moreover, Our Lord merely confirmed what the heroes of the Maccabeus period had already believed, articulated and zealously practised.  The great martyr Eleazar who was determined not to violate the ancestral laws by eating pig’s flesh, vociferously rejected, his friends’ ploy that he should only pretend to do so.

Such pretence is not worthy of our time of life,” he said, “lest many of the young should suppose that Elea′zar in his ninetieth year has gone over to an alien religion, and through my pretence, for the sake of living a brief moment longer, they should be led astray because of me, while I defile and disgrace my old age.  For even if for the present I should avoid the punishment of men, yet whether I live or die I shall not escape the hands of the Almighty.  Therefore, by manfully giving up my life now, I will show myself worthy of my old age and leave to the young a noble example of how to die a good death willingly and nobly for the revered and holy laws (31).

This narrative illustrates Eleazar’s two major fears.  First, was his inability to escape the hand of God and the second, the fear of setting a bad example which could mislead the young.  Interestingly, we are told that “Those who a little before had acted toward him with good will now changed to ill will, because the words he had uttered were in their opinion sheer madness” (32). This supposed madness of Eleazar was also shared by the mother of the seven sons who exhorted each and every one of them to hold faithfully to God’s laws and to accept a most cruel death rather than to abandon their “ancestral way of life,” (33) saying “Do not fear this butcher, but prove worthy of your brothers. Accept death, so that in God’s mercy I may get you back again with your brothers” (34).

The zeal and clear-sightedness of the Maccabean martyrs should be a source of inspiration and encouragement for us, especially as we are currently confronted with resolute policies that threaten to undermine and to change our ancestral customs and traditional beliefs.  We need to recall that, even when those advocating such change seem to have the support (35) of authority, we are not facing anything new as the Preacher (36) once declared “What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; and there is nothing new under the sun”.

As disciples of Christ, as believers and more, as leaders aware of our responsibilities before God, we need to become “full of passionate intensity” for our convictions and, to proclaim, even “from the housetops”, the unadulterated Gospel of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.  It is time to cleave the deepening darkness with the light of truth.

The Church and anti-Church

Pope Paul VI (37) spoke of the “smoke of Satan” having entered the Church, and Sister Lucia, that the apostasy in the Church would begin at the top.  For the past half-century, there has been a growing crisis in the Church, arising as much from a lack of clear and unambiguous teaching, as from the climate of dissent among priests, Religious and laity. Within the contemporary Church, the crisis has been brought to fever pitch, if not breaking point, by the rejection of Our Lord’s yes/no

 paradigm and the undermining of established doctrinal positions by protean pastoral practises.  One recent example is Bishop Fernando Ocariz’s pixilated declaration in defence of Amoris Laetitia’s proposed Holy Communion for adulterers - quote – “a new pastoral impulse which requires concrete answers in continuity with the doctrine of the Magisterum” (39). The blood-dimmed tide is loosed as there emerges from the darkness and confusion a real and open conflict between those who remain faithful and loyal to Our Lord’s Gospel and the increasing numbers of the uncatechised, who, by adhering to the praxis of  ‘political correctness’ formulated by LGBT ideologues, reject the Christian Gospel. The open and unilateral imposition of this politically correct ideology in many parishes and dioceses is validating an anti-Church that is in opposition to the Catholic Church, the true Church of Christ.

The anti-Gospel of the anti-Church is, in many cases, indistinguishable from secular ideology, which has overturned both the natural law and the Ten Commandments, the sources that, from time immemorial, have informed and protected man’s moral, spiritual and physical well-being. This anti-Gospel, which seeks to elevate the individual’s will to consume, to pleasure and to power over the will of God, was rejected by Christ when tempted in the wilderness (40).  Disguised as “human rights”, it has reappeared, in all its luciferian hubris, to promulgate a narcissistic, hedonistic attitude that rejects any constraint except that imposed by man-made laws.  Thus approaching its fulfilment is St. Pius X’s prophesy that “the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer.” (41)

 Cardinal Carlo Caffarra, the founding president of the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family, wrote to Sister Lucia asking for prayers for this new undertaking.   She declared in a signed response (42) to him that “the final battle between the Lord and the kingdom of Satan will be about marriage and the family. Do not be afraid, (she added), because anyone who works for the sanctity of marriage and the family will always be fought and opposed in every way, because this is the decisive issue.” And then she concluded: “however, Our Lady has already crushed his head.”  The Cardinal noted that for John Paul II this was the crux, as it touches the very pillar of creation, the truth of the relationship between man and woman, and among generations. It is well known that any tampering with a keystone risks the collapse of the entire building.  The keystone, the basic cell of society is marriage and family.  With the tacit acceptance of contraception and divorce, the recent ‘merciful’ embracing of remarried civil divorcees and the benign nod to same-sex ‘marriage’, the keystone has been tampered with and the omega point has been reached.  With this background, the question as to whether Amoris Laetitia should be treated as a gauntlet thrown down or a Trojan horse naturally raises its head.

For nearly three centuries, the popes have confronted the dark trinity of masonry, liberalism and modernism, which in our time, having transmuted into atheistic secularism, has a baneful grip on all the major institutions of global influence but particularly on education, communications, politics and the law.  Atheistic secularism has been working for the demise of the family, its driving spirit being the LGBT ideology; its public face, “political correctness”; its Sunday dress, “inclusivity and non-judgmentalism”.   

St. Pius X was the first to clearly identify Modernism, that subversive rebellion against fixed moral norms and religious belief, as the synthesis of all heresies and as the hidden enemy within the Church.   Though he unmasked Modernism, with his Encyclical Pascendi, he failed to uproot it and, like the cockle (43) in the field, it continued growing and developing ideals, doctrines and goals that were quite alien, if not diametrically opposed to the Catholic Church.  Thus, Modernism, remaining within the Catholic Church, has metastasised into the anti-Church.   

It is self-evident that the Catholic Church and the anti-Church currently co-exist in the same sacramental, liturgical and juridical space. The latter, having grown stronger, is now attempting to pass itself off as the true Church, all the better to induct, or coerce, the faithful into becoming adherents, promoters and defenders of a secular ideology (44).  Should the anti-Church succeed in commandeering all the space of the true Church, the rights of man will supplant the rights of God through the desecration of the sacraments, the sacrilege of the sanctuary, and the abuse of apostolic power. Thus, politicians who vote for abortion and same-sex “marriage” will be welcome at the Communion rails; husbands and wives who have abandoned their spouses and children and entered into adulterous relationships will be admitted to the sacraments; priests and theologians who publicly reject Catholic doctrines and morals will be at liberty to exercise ministry and to spread dissent, while faithful Catholics will be marginalised, maligned and discredited at every turn.  Thus, the anti-Church would succeed in achieving its goal of dethroning God as Creator, Saviour and Sanctifier and replacing Him with man the self-creator, the self-saviour and the self-sanctifier.

To achieve its objectives, the anti-Church, in collaboration with the secular powers, uses the law and media to browbeat the true Church into submission. By adroit use of the media, the activists of the anti-Church have managed to intimidate bishops, clergy and most of the Catholic press into silence.  Equally, the lay faithful are terrorised by fear of the hostility, ridicule and hate that would be visited upon them should they object to the imposition of LGBT ideology. For example, in 2015, the congregation of St Nicholas of Myra in the Archdiocese of Dublin gave a standing ovation to their parish priest when he declared from the pulpit that he was gay and urged them to support same-sex “marriage” in the Irish referendum.  It is not difficult to imagine the kind of treatment that an objector would have received. Thus, the oppressive influence of the anti-Church is most clearly seen at work when a person is fearful to openly uphold God’s revelation about homosexuality, abortion or contraception in their parish community.

Indeed, faithful Catholics, both lay and clerical, are increasingly subjected to a legitimate fear that their livelihood and careers would be in jeopardy should they stand up against the anti-Church (45).  Employers are particularly fearful when activists of secular groups level charges of ‘homophobia’ or ‘transphobia’ against their faithful Catholic employees.  Dreading the potential loss of business, employers, in these situations, often feel constrained into silencing or even dismissing accused Catholics.  Whilst bad publicity from the LGBT lobby can damage business, most employers have an even greater fear of the adverse legal judgments that conflicts with such groups can bring them.  Even so, one should not ignore the reality that there are still other employers who would readily acquiesce to complaints against a faithful Catholic because consciously, or unconsciously, they are in sympathy with the anti-Church.  As is well known from numerous test cases, when employers are faced with pressure from LGBT activists, freedom of speech and freedom of conscience of their employees are disregarded, if not suppressed. Most faithful Catholics, especially those working in the public sector, know this, feel intimidated and so keep quiet about their opposition to secular ideology.

Priests and bishops are the immediate and more natural leaders of the laity and they, above all, are caught in the broadening spectrum of fear generated by the Anti-Church.  Additionally, because of the clerical vow of obedience and respect, their fear, being reverential, is greatly aggravated, especially when they find their ranks divided; their unity split; long-standing sacramental disciplines violated; canon law ignored; their evangelising spirit dismissed as proselytism and solemn nonsense. In regard to their persons, they are labelled as little monsters throwing stones at poor sinners, or who reduce the sacrament of reconciliation to a torture chamber or, hide behind the Church’s teachings, sitting on the chair of Moses and judging at times with superiority and superficiality.  As clerical sons, they see themselves as less deserving of a papal embrace than Italy’s arch-abortionist Emma Bonino and even less worthy of rehabilitation than renowned false prophet and global population and abortion advocate, Paul Ehrlich.  As priests, they are told they owe an apology to gays and that the "great majority" of Catholic marriages they would have blessed are invalid; in addition, they are called sayers of prayers and, for considering Mass attendance and frequent confession as important, are branded Pelagians.  As Catholics, knowing that the Five First Saturdays were requested in reparation for blasphemy against our most Blessed Lady, they are personally affronted by the scurrilous musings (46) that, on Calvary, where She became the Mother (47) of all those redeemed by Christ, the Holy Virgin of Fatima perhaps, desired in Her heart to say to the Lord “Lies! Lies! I was deceived.”  As “trees of the forest shake before the wind” (48), so clerical hearts quake with fear at the possibility that they could actually be more Catholic than the Pope (49)!

In the end ...

The advent of Pope Francis has, in the divine order of things, proved a great and true blessing.  A hidden conflict has been raging in the Church for over one hundred years: a conflict explicitly revealed to Pope Leo XIII, partially contained by St. Pius X, unleashed at Vatican II.  Under Francis, the first Jesuit pope, the first pope from the Americas and the first pope whose priestly ordination was in the New Rite, it is now full blown, with the potential of rendering the Church smaller but more faithful.  Consequently, there is a burgeoning fear among the more astute of the clergy who, because of their training, education and expertise in matters ecclesiastical, are generally able to see further and understand better than the average lay person the fallout from either an open conflict or the maintenance of the status quo.  The apostolic exhortation, Amoris Laetitia is the catalyst that has divided not only bishops and Episcopal Conferences from each other but, priests from their bishops and from each other, and the laity, anxious and confused.  As a Trojan horse, Amoris Laetitia spells spiritual ruin for the entire Church, as a gauntlet thrown down it calls for courage in overcoming fear.  In either case, it is now poised to separate the anti-Church of which St. John Paul II spoke from the Church that Christ founded.  As the separation begins to take place, each one of us, like the angels, will have to decide for himself whether he would rather be wrong with Lucifer than right without him.

At this point, if Amoris Laetitia is interpreted “in continuity with the doctrine of the Magisterum” the conflict will continue surreptitiously as anti-Church not only flourishes best in double speak, ambiguities and uncertainties but also fears the sensus catholicus.  On the other hand, should it be interpreted as actually contrary to the perennial Magisterum, it is difficult to conceptualise how an open break can be avoided and even more difficult to predict the fall out.  It falls to Pope Francis, whose charism is to confirm his brethren, to resolve the doubts rising in the wake of Amoris Laetitia and, until he does so, great fear is being generated by the uncertainties the separation will precipitate.  If, however, it is remembered that one is called to be united first and foremost to Christ (50) and through Him to all those who belong to Him (51), then this fear will be greatly mitigated.  

To further reduce our fear it is necessary that we face squarely the reality of our situation.  That is, since ignorance is a cause of fear, we must both admit that there is a problem and identify the nature of the problem Thank God, this work has already been done for us by St Pius X who unmasked Modernism, the enemy within; by St John Paul who alerted us to the anti-Church, the form of the enemy within; and by Pope Paul VI, who on the 60th anniversary of the Miracle of the sun, described the extent of the success of the enemy within “The tail of the devil is functioning in the disintegration of the Catholic world. The darkness of Satan has entered and spread throughout the Catholic Church even to its summit. Apostasy, the loss of the faith, is spreading throughout the world and into the highest levels within the Church.” (52) Grappling with the thought that the evil of the great apostasy of which the Apostles spoke (53) could actually be imminent and hearing of its source, magnitude, extent, influence and power, we are naturally overwhelmed by fear.

To conquer our fear we must first identify and overcome its various manifestations. Given that we love the shepherds whom Christ has placed over us as the guardians of our souls (54), our fear is reverential.  Our fear can also be considered grave since the thought that the true Church could disappear or, that the teaching of error could be attributed to her, would disturb even the most steadfast among us.  We must, therefore, be zealous and ready to defend the Church first, by living its teachings uncompromisingly; second, by preaching its truths courageously from the housetops (55); and third, by being willing and ready, like the Maccabean martyrs, to die for it.  Thus, fear’s first manifestation, laziness, is overcome.

A consideration of the fact that we brought nothing into this world and can take nothing out (56) should be sufficient for us to overcome shamefacedness, the second manifestation of fear.  The loss of our jobs, positions, titles, family, friends, is of little import as long as we can remain faithful to Christ’s Church which is the light (57) He has placed on the lamp stand to give light to all in the house (58).

The Apostles’ joyful resilience after suffering dishonour for the sake of the Name (59), illustrates that shame, fear’s third manifestation, can be conquered when one realises there is absolutely nothing to fear in being ridiculed or, abused or, punished for doing what is right (60).

We are overwhelmed by a fear that is essentially extrinsic in as much as the unthinkable suddenly becomes possible.  It is with amazement that we observe that the Church we love and know to be the barque of Peter, while under attack from all sides, “is drifting perilously like a ship without a rudder, and indeed, shows symptoms of incipient disintegration”.  We gain encouragement from the Gospel story of the Apostles (61), who, while the Lord slept at the stern of the boat, were caught in a violent night storm on the Sea of Galilee and, though frightened, worked all the harder at baling the water.  Far from being paralysed ourselves, we should, therefore, like them work even harder, all the time calling on the Lord, who sleeps in the barque of Peter:  Lord, do you not care that we are going down?  Thus, amazement and stupor, the fourth and fifth manifestation of fear are overcome.

The present situation in the Church and in the world is a consequence of our infidelities and sins as Our Lady had made abundantly clear one hundred years ago at Fatima.  Our sins make us anxious, especially when we realise that we are once again responsible for crucifying Christ, albeit in His Mystical Body.  Knowing, however, that God is always ready to forgive and to show mercy to a repentant sinner, let us beat our breasts, saying, “Lord be merciful to us sinners” and we would have overcome anxiety, fear’s sixth manifestation. 

At Baptism we became members of the Church Militant and, at Confirmation, soldiers of Christ; we, therefore, have been recruited and armed for deadly combat against the three implacable enemies of our souls: the world, the flesh and the devil.  Recognising that “we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places” (62), we fight, like the Apostles, taking the martyrs for our models and Christ Jesus, Himself as our reward.  Since Our Lord has told us explicitly that we should not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul, we can immediately dismiss those whose greatest injury to us is in the material order.  Christ, however, does warn us about the soul killers, namely, the “many false prophets (who) will arise and lead many astray” (63), especially those prophets who “show signs and wonders, to lead astray, if possible, the elect.” (64) Further, since the world will speak approvingly (65) of these false prophets, they will be readily believed by people who “will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths” (66).  These then we should fear because they lead poor sinners to eternal damnation as much with a multiplicity of words and writings that dilute the rigor of the Gospel as with their deliberately ambiguous and confused affirmations (67).   

Whilst it is true that we should be wary of those who, like Eleazar’s friends with their specious reasoning and counterfeit compassion, seem to have our best interests at heart, ultimately, however, it is the Creator of all, whose law is life (68), whom we should fear.  God has told us to listen to His Son (69).  The rigor of His Son’s Gospel, that is, those things that in the words of St Vincent of Lerins are believed “always, everywhere and by everybody”, is what will save souls (70). Any dilution of the rigor of Christ’s Gospel (71), whether in the name of modern scholarship or, in light of a new and more profound understanding or, out of mercy, not only reduces it to a human gospel (72) but also, by proposing only a pharisaic righteousness (73), does great spiritual injury to souls. 

The salvation of souls is the supreme law (74). This was the reason that one hundred years ago our most Blessed Lady came to Fatima and convinced three young children to embrace an austere lifestyle and to practise rigorous penances that the souls of poor sinners may not fall into hell.  Encouraged by St John Paul II’s first words and confident in Her promise that “in the end My Immaculate Heart will triumph”, let us not be afraid.  Rather, let us “Be strong!” We will not give in where we must not give in.  We will fight, not hesitantly but, with courage; not in secret but, in public; not behind closed doors but, in the open. Audemus fidem nostram defendere! Non timemus!

1 1Cor.14:8

2 Jn.3:16

3 Is.7:10-14

4 Jer. 38 - 40

5 Is.7:11

6 Job 1:6-2:10

7 wjpbr.com/leoxiii.html 

8 Mt16:18

9 1Sam.15:22

10 Lk.21:26

11 Yates, W. B., The Second Coming 

12 John Paul II, Inaestimabile donum, no.18

13 Gen.27:22

14 Lk.4:36

15 Lk.12:3

16 http://www.fatima.org/essentials/facts/rianjo.asp 

17 Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I-IIae, qq.22-48

18 Mt.25:14-28

19 Lk.16:1-8

20 Lk.24:41

21 Mt.28:4

22 Lk.23:48

23 Mt.27:56; Lk.22:54

24 Gen.3:10

25 Gen.4:13-14.

26 Heb.2:14-15

27 Mt.10:28; Lk.12:5

28 Prov.14:27

29 Prov.9:10

30 Lk.12:20, see also Lk.9:25

31 Macc.6:24-28

32 2Macc.6:29

33 2Macc.8:17

34 2Macc.7:29

35 1Macc.1:23

36 Eccles.1:9

37 On June 29, 1972, Pope Paul VI remarked that the smoke of Satan was seeping into the Church through the cracks in the wall.  On October 13, 1977, he said: “The darkness of Satan has entered and spread throughout the Catholic Church even to its summit. Apostasy, the loss of faith, is spreading throughout the world and in to the highest levels within the Church.

38 Mt.5:37

39 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCH2JKOM7sY 

40 Mt.4:1-10

41 St. Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, 15 August, 1910

42 http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/fatima-visionary-predicted-final-battle-would-be-over-marriage-family-17760/ 

43 Mt.13:24-30

44 Cardinal Dolan led the 2015 St Patricks Day Parade, which included a gay activist component but excluded a pro-life group. https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/cardinal-dolan-marches-with-homosexual-activists-at-nyc-st.-patricks-parade 

45 Priest reprimanded for denying Holy Communion to lesbian.  https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archdiocese-of-washington-reprimands-priest-for-denying-communion-to-a-lesb 

46 Morning Meditation in Domus Sanctae Marthae, December 20, 2013

47 Jn.19:26-27

48 Is.7:2

49 2Pet.2:10-16

50 1Cor.1:12

51 Rom.1:6; 7:4, 1Cor.1:10, 2Cor.18:8

52 Pope Paul VI’s October 13, 1977 address on the Sixtieth Anniversary of the Fatima Apparitions

53 2Thess.2:3

54 1Pet.5:2

55 Lk.12:3

56 1Tim.6:7

57 Jn.1:9; 3:21; 8:12; 12:46

58 Mt.5:15

59 Acts.5:41

60 2Tim.2:9; Heb.11:36; 1Pet.2:20, 3:14-17, 4:12-19

61 Mk.4:38

62 Eph.6:12

63 Mt.24:11

64 Mk.13:22

65 Lk.6:26

66 2Tim.4:3-4, 1Tim.4:1, 2Pet.2:1

67 1Tim.4:1

68 Prov.19:16

69 Mt.17:5; Mt.9:7; Lk.9:35

70 Catholic is defined as “quod semper, ubique et ab omnibus”. That is, catholicity implies antiquity, universality and consent. 

71 Gal.1:6-9; Heb.13:9

72 2Cor.11:4

73 Mt.5:19-20

74 Code of Canon Law, canon 1752

Featured Image
Professor Roberto de Mattei Pete Baklinski/LifeSite
Roberto de Mattei

Opinion,

Historian lays out how we’ve arrived at today’s unprecedented attacks on the family

Roberto de Mattei

Editor's note: This is a talk that Prof. De Mattei, former professor at the European University of Rome and founder of the Lepanto Foundation, delivered May 18, 2017 at Voice of the Family's fourth annual Rome Life Forum.

May 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – We appreciate good things when we lose them. If we do not wish to lose them, then we must appreciate them for that which they are worth. 

The family is a good thing which we are losing. This is the obvious reality from which we must start. The family in Europe and in the West is undergoing a profound crisis. Relativist-Sociologists do not want to speak of a crisis, because this word contains, according to them, a moral judgement on the analyzed phenomenon. They speak, rather, of a transformation of family patterns or of an evolution of familial forms. But these words, too, contain a moral judgement. According to the relativist perspective, all that which takes place in history and in society is good. The absolute good is represented by change, evil by stability and permanence in being. Relativist morals are founded on an evolutionary cosmology, which pretends to be scientific, without being so. Evolutionism is a false philosophy which stands on a false science, and at the same time, is a pseudo-science which is based on an erroneous philosophical choice. Because of this, a speech on the family, like every speech, must begin with the definition of terms and concepts on which we wish to speak. 

The family is a true juridical and moral society, founded on matrimony and intended for the transmission of life and the raising of children. The procreation of children is the primary end to which marriage is ordered by nature, from its very origin. The origin of the family and of matrimony is in human nature. The child is not born because of his own choice, and he is not autonomous. The law of birth and the raising of the child is dependence. Dependence is the law of humanity reunited in society. Everything depends on something, nothing is determined by itself. The principle of causality rules the universe. This rule belongs to the first and indemonstrable principles which Aristotle already learned from reality[1]. This principle presupposes the first philosophical primacy of being, to which modern culture opposes the primacy of becoming, which is the negation of any immutable and permanent reality. 

The Family in History

The family is a society whose primary end is to transmit life and to raise children. Because it is the source of life and of new human relationships, it constitutes the fundamental and irreplaceable cell of society. All the classical philosophers and political thinkers have affirmed it, and history has confirmed it. Well before Christianity, in ancient Rome, the familia was the cell of the civitas, and matrimony assured social stability, constituting, according to the precise definition of Cicero, the seminarium rei publicae[2], the seedbed of society which is born and expands from the family. 

Christianity elevated matrimony to a sacrament, and when the Roman Empire fell, crushed by the barbarians, the only entity which survived and constituted the basis of the society which was born, was the family. The birth of the European nations, from dawn of the year One-Thousand, coincided with the development of the institution of the family. The same etymology of the word 'nation', from natus, moreover, does not refer to a "choice" but to birth, and indicates a set of men who have a common origin and have a blood-tie. The territory in which various authorities were exercised in medieval society – referring to the head of the family, of the feudal baron or of the king - was uniformly called in documents, the patria, the dominion of the father[3]

Such a conception of the family, which survived until the French Revolution and beyond, is founded on the idea that man is born within a given historical condition, which has insurmountable limits, beginning with death; that an objective and unchangeable nature exists; that this nature has its origin in God, Creator of the order of the universe. The Catholic Church, in her teaching, has always confirmed this conception of man and society[4]

Many documents of the Church in the last two centuries reiterate this teaching, but the most ample and articulate of these are the encyclicals of Leo XIII, Arcanum of February 10, 1880[5], and of Pius XI, Casti connubii of December 31, 1930[6]. This teaching would be reconfirmed in many documents of Pius XII and in the apostolic exhortation Familiaris consortio of John Paul II of November 22, 1981[7].  

The Attack on the Family

The most violent attack that the family has ever undergone in the West was with the Cultural Revolution of 1968: a Revolution against the family conducted in the name of sexual liberation. But the hate for the family characterizes all the heretical sects which have developed throughout history, and constitutes a supporting element, although not always an explicit one, of that Revolution which for over five centuries has assaulted the Church and Christian Civilization[8]

The act of procreation is the object of anti-Christian hate, because this affirms that man has an end which surpasses him. The negation of procreation turns Christian morals upside down and affirms a Gnostic metaphysical principle: sex as an ultimate end of man, closed up in its own immanence. 

In Medieval times, one of the most noted sects was that of the Brethren of the Free Spirit. The adherents were convinced of having reached such an absolute perfection as to be incapable of sin: "In fact, one can be so united to God as to not sin no matter what one does."[9] The focal center of the ideology of the Free Spirit was not God, but divinized man, who is freed from the sentiment of personal sin and stands at the center of creation.

In the 15th Century, the Thaborites, a pre-Lutheran sect, preached, like the Brethren of the Free Spirit, the return to an Adamic state, which expressed itself in nudity and sexual promiscuity. Basing itself on the affirmation of Christ regarding prostitutes and publicans (Matthew 21:31) these declared that the chaste were unworthy of entering the Messianic Kingdom. Nudism assumed a worth of "liberation" from all the brakes of law and of morality: the same worth that "free love" possesses in our days. The "spiritual" person frees himself from every moral limitation: his will identifies himself with that of God and sin loses for him every meaning. 

Lutheran Antinomianism

But the process of the dissolution of the family had its first decisive moment in the Protestant Revolution. In Wittenberg, the city in which on October 31, 1517, Martin Luther nailed his famous theses to the Cathedral door, the religious Revolution exploded in all of its virulence. While Luther was "protected" by the Elector Friedrich the Wise in the Wartburg Castle, his followers put his ideas into practice, to the extreme. Among these were the priest Andreas Bodenstein (Karlstadt: cir. 1480-1541) who on Christmas Day in 1521 celebrated in lay clothes the first "Evangelical Mass" of the Reform, omitting the elevation of the Host and every reference to the sacrifice[10], and Johannes Schneider, also known as Agricola (1494-1566) who proclaimed the abolition of the ancient mosaic law. Martin Luther fought Agricola and coined the term "Antinomian" to describe his negation of the nomos, the moral law. Agricola, however, was a disciple of his, who brought to fulfillment the Lutheran principle of sola fide. Luther had said, in fact, that man, radically corrupted by sin, is incapable of observing the law, and can be saved only by faith, without good works. The sentence pecca fortiter, crede fortius[11] sums up Luther's moral theology. That which counts is not sin, which is inevitable, but confidence in the mercy of God which the believer must have before, during and after the sin. For the Antinomians, as for the Gnostics of the first centuries, the "spiritual" man is incapable of sin. God acts in him, and every action, good or bad, becomes a divine action. 

One can say that Agricola was a marginal figure in the Protestant Revolution, but one cannot say this of Anabaptism, which is one of the most famous expressions of the so-called "left wing" of the Protestant Reform. The Anabaptists did not limit themselves to expressing Antinomian ideas, they practiced them in the years 1534-35 in Münster[12], the New Jerusalem of the Apocalypse, where the Dutch tailor Jan Bockelson, better known as John of Leiden (1509-1536) came to power, and the upholsterer Bernhard Knipperdolling (cir. 1500-1536) was made burgomaster.

Münster became a sort of "sacred city" for the "sons of Jacob" who had to help God to establish His kingdom punishing the "sons of Esau". In an atmosphere of terror, the private possession of money was abolished, and measures were adopted aimed at instituting the collective possession of goods and obligatory polygamy. To symbolize the rupture with the past, all the books of the city, with the exception of the Bible, were brought to the Cathedral square and burned in a bonfire. Orgies and the worst sexual license were presented as a "baptism of fire" which had to substitute for that of water. John of Leiden became king of the "holy City" while Knipperdolling, armed with a heavy sword, administered "justice" by decapitating recalcitrants. 

The Anabaptist community was repressed with the iron and fire of united Catholics and Lutherans, but the utopia did not disappear. "Moderated" Protestantism rejects the violent and extremist methods of the Münster Anabaptists as a heresy. However that which is refuted is not the doctrinal substance, but the tragic failure of the experience. Münster remains a betrayed dream for many Protestants, analogous to the City of Paris for the Socialists in the 19th Century. 

Shortly after 1540 in Emden, a center of eastern Friesland, there began another Anabaptist sect, that of the "Familists" founded by Hendryck Niclaes (1502-cir. 1580)[13]. He gathered among himself a community, under the name of Familia charitatis (Family of Love, Huis der Liefde), organized clandestinely in which an ecumenical pantheism was professed and the sharing of goods and free love were practiced. Niclaes based this on the principle of mystical union with God meant for the absolute identification of the creature and of the Creator and by this metaphysical principle deduced that sin could not exist in the hearts of the regenerated. He held himself to be the third and last great prophet, after Moses and Jesus. His mission consisted in revealing the fullness of love, the work of the Spirit.

In England, the same world vision was expressed in the pantheistic and Libertine sects which in the 17th century represented the extreme Puritanical left and were known as the "Ranters" [14]. Against the Ranters, Libertines and "blasphemers," the English Parliament promulgated the famous Blasphemy Act on August 9, 1650, by which all those who held that acts of "homicide, adultery, incest and sodomy" were not sinful but sanctioned by God Himself, would incur the wrath of the law[15]

Sexual promiscuity, nudism, and free love become in these sects, a fundamental ritual. Thanks to internal illumination, they said man becomes "deified" and recovers Adamic integrity, that is the state of innocence enjoyed by Adam and Eve before the fall. In this sense, sexual promiscuity and the sharing of women, is a fundamental point of Anabaptist doctrine, as the theologian François Vernet observed[16]

The French Revolution

The pan-sexualist utopia also accompanied the revolutionary process in 1789 when it passed from the religious level to the political one. The fateful date of the French Revolution is July 14, 1789, the day in which the Bastille fell, a fortress which the revolutionaries believed was overflowing with political prisoners and instead held only seven common criminals, among whom was the Marquis Alphonse-François de Sade (1740-1814).

The Marquis de Sade is known as the author of pornographic novels, and his name is tied to sexual perversion. In reality he was a "philosopher" who, after having been freed, actively participated in the Revolution. On July 1, 1790 he became an "active citizen" of the Jacobin section of Place Vendôme which went down in history as the "square of the beatings." On September 3, 1792 while the famous "September massacres" began, he was named secretary and a year later, president of the section. Citizen Sade composed numerous political writings during the Revolution, of which the most famous is called Français, encore un effort si vous voulez etre républicains (A further effort if you want to be republican).[17] In this text, he invited the French people to put into practice all the principles of 1789, and extirpate the roots of Christianity. “You who have the axe in the hands, give the final blow to the tree of superstition" [18]; “Europe wait to be delivered from the sceptre and the Altar[19]. The ideology is that of 1789. One freedom of conscience and of the press is admitted, namely to give to all the freedom to act. If everything can be said, everything can be allowed. 

De Sade listed as revolutionary achievements the following: blasphemy, theft, homicide and every type of sexual perversion, incest, rape, sodomy. "Never has sensuality been considered criminal according to the Wise of the earth. All the philosophers know well that it is only christian impostors have transformed  it into a crime[20]. He imagines building places in all the towns, where: "all sexes, all ages, all creatures would be given to the unfeatured desires and the absolute subordination to these unfeatured desires will be the rule of the individual and the lightest refusal will be absolutely punished by the one would attempt this[21].

One can freely vent impulses and desires, including mating with animals, since there is no qualitative difference between men and animals: both are born, procreate, deteriorate. For Sade, life is nothing else but material in movement. Death is no more than a "trasmutation” at the foundation of which is “the perpetual movement, that is the true essence of the material"[22].  

De Sade does not merely propose pleasure as the individual’s ultimate goal, but goes far beyond this. He wants to convince us that vice is a virtue, that horror is beautiful, and that torment is a pleasure. In this sense, his vision of the world is satanic. The devil at first seems an angel of light to be worshipped, but will achieve his final triumph when he is worshipped in all his horror, making us believe that the sufferings in hell are the peak of pleasure. This is the philosophy underlying the 120 days of Sodom, where men and women, old people and small children, mothers and their children, fathers and their children decide to practice incest, rape, coprophagia, necrophilia, and all kinds of aberration.

Every sexual difference is obliterated. The supreme aspiration is to abolish all differences and inequalities in order to bring society to primordial chaos. Noirceul, a character of « L'histoire de Juliette » says: “I want to marry twice in the same day. At ten of the morning, dressed as a woman, I desire to marry a man; at twelve, dressed as a man, I desire to marry an homosexual dressed as a woman”[23].  All gender theory is already contained in these words.

De Sade spent the last years of his life in an insane asylum. His lucid folly made him a prophet of the Revolution. Erik Kuehnelt-Leddihn defines him as “the patron saint of all leftist movements[24].  The last two centuries have seen his plans realized, to a great extent. That which still hasn't come to pass is, maybe, part of our future. He has the merit, in our eyes, of not having left in the dark any of the goals of the Revolution[25].  

While, with De Sade, Revolutionary Pansexualism was theorized, the French Revolution started in 1791 with the introduction of divorce, a process of radical reform of the institution of the family which Napoleonic Law would extend to the whole continent[26]

The utopic socialism of De Sade and Charles Fourier (1772-1837), who in his "Phalanstère" argued for the uninhibited freedom of the passions to reach the highest point of social evolution, was then surpassed by the so-called "Scientific Socialism" of Karl Marx (1818-1863) and Friedrich Engels (1820-1895).

The American ethnologist Lewis Henry Morgan (1818-1881), starting from the existing family relationships among the Iroquois of North America, conceived a fantastic history of the family, tracing the origins in a primitive throng, in which sexual relations were totally promiscuous and not subject to any rules. Marx and Engels enthusiastically subscribed to this materialistic conception, which confirmed Darwinian theories. The booklet of Engels The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State (1884), is an attack on the fundamental institutions of society, to bring about the utopian "classless society" which is the very totally-egalitarian society, without the family, without private property, without the State, without God. 

The Russian Revolution

The Russian Revolution brought the French Revolution to completion. In the sealed carriage that in April, 1917 brought back to Petrograd the "professional revolutionaries," with Lenin, Zinoviev and Radek, also travelled Inessa Armand (1874-1920), member of the Executive Committee of the Bolshevik Party, foundress of the "Zhenotdell", the "women department" of the party. A woman who had the absolute confidence of Lenin, who was her lover. She died of cholera in 1920 and had the honor of being buried in the "Red Cemetery" under the walls of the Kremlin with the principal protagonists of the Revolution. Her name is less-noted than that of Aleksandra Kollontaj (1872-1952), but her influence on Lenin was perhaps greater[27]. Inessa Armand and Aleksandra Kollontaj publicly advocated for free love and fought for the introduction of divorce and abortion in Russia. They were convinced that sexual liberation was a necessary premise for the bringing about of a socialist society. On December 17th, 1917, a few weeks after the Bolsheviks had rose to power, divorce was introduced and, in 1920, abortion was legalized; it was the first time in the world that the procedure was available without restriction; prostitution and homosexuality were de-criminalized in 1922[28]. Trotzky wrote in 1923: "The first destructive period is still far from being over in the life of the family. The disintegrating process is still in full swing."[29]

Kollontaj wrote in 1920 in the second number of the magazine Komunistka:  "In place of the individual and egoistic family, a great universal family of workers will develop, in which all the workers, men and women, will above all be comrades. This is what relations between men and women, in the communist society will be like. These new relations will ensure for humanity all the joys of a love unknown in the commercial society of a love that is free and based on the true social equality of the partners. (...) The red flag of the social revolution which flies above Russia and is now being hoisted aloft in other countries of the world proclaims the approach of the heaven on earth to which humanity has been aspiring for centuries." [30]

In Russia and Germany, in the 1920's and 30's, the transition from the Political Revolution to the Sexual Revolution was formulated[31]. In 1922, a meeting was held at the Marx-Engels Institute of Moscow, directed by David Ryazanov (1870-1938), to examine the concept of cultural Revolution, or a total Revolution which would involve man himself, his nature, his customs, his deepest being.

The Marx-Engels Institute of Moscow was connected to analogous institutions born in those same years. In 1919 doctor Magnus Hirschfeld (1868-1935) founded in Berlin  the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft (Institute for Sexology) with the goal of "normalizing" homosexuality[32].  In 1921 Hirschfeld organised the First Congress for Sexual Reform, which led to the formation of the World League for Sexual Reform, a League for coordinating knowledge about the enhancement of sexual activity.  Grigory Batkis, director of the Moscow Institute for Sexual Hygyene, led the Soviet delegation to the first World League for Sexual Freedom conference.

In 1923 Felix Weil (1898-1975) financed the Erste Marxistische Arbeitswoche ("First Marxist Work Week"), in the German town of Limenau. The success of this event led him to found the Institut für Sozialforschung[33] (Institute for Social Research), directed from 1930 to 1958 by Max Horkheimer. The Frankfurt Institute was at the origin of the Marxist-Hegelian Frankfurt School, and collaborated with the Moscow Institute for the publication of the works by Marx and Engels.

In 1929 the Soviet political leaders invited a student of Freud, the Austrian psycho-analyst Wilhelm Reich (1897-1957), for a series of conferences which led to the publication in Moscow of his paper "Dialectical Materialism and Psychoanalysis" which constitutes the founding text of so-called "Marx-Freudism." In this, and in his later works, Reich presented the family as the repressive social institution par excellence, and affirmed that the nucleus of happiness is sexuality. For him the abolition of family is necessary and the revolution from Sex-negation to Sex-affirmation[34].

Reich, who dedicates the second part of The Sexual Revolution to The Struggle for the New Life in the Soviet Union, was a great admirer of Vera Schmidt's nursery school (1889-1937), created in 1921 in downtown Moscow, where small children were initiated to masturbation and early sexual excitement[35]. He states that: "her work was entirely in the direction of affirming infant sexuality"[36].  Trotzkij supported the work of Vera Schmidt and the ideas of Wilhelm Reich.  The Reich Sexual Revolution was an essential part of Trotzki's Permanent Revolution.

Like any Revolution, the Bolshevik one also experienced an internal dialectic. The two tendencies were that of Stalin, who, though not giving up on Terror, in order to keep power, was forced to moderate revolutionary radicalism, and the other was of Trozkij, who accused Stalin of having betrayed the Revolution[37]. Trotzkij's defeat marked the end of the Sexual Revolution in Russia, but the subsequent failure of Stalinism in the Fifties saw the victory of Trotzkism, which affirmed itself in the world with the “Sixty-eight Revolution”.

Reich's ideas, disowned by Stalin, spread in the West and met those of the Frankfurt School, the representatives of which were able to occupy key-places in important American universities like Harvard, Berkeley, and San Diego. Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979), researcher of the Horkheimer Institute, in his best-sellers Eros and Civilization (1955) and One-Dimensional Man (1964) reduced, as did Reich, human nature to the free yielding to sexual impulses. These ideas were the basis of  a cultural Revolution which did not compromise the previous ones, but led to something worse: the tears of a generation which not only lost its very bodies, but its souls. '68 was the most devastating of all the preceding Revolutions because it assaulted the family, and transformed the everyday life of Western society. Today the utopic dimension of '68 is fallen, and postmodern Relativism is left as its heritage, expressed by intellectuals like Michel Foucault (1926-1984). Foucault theorized the importance of the thought of De Sade in his Histoire de la folie (1961) and in Les Mots et les choses (1966). His thought, according to Thibaud Collin, "constitutes the conceptual foundation of the gay lobby[38]

Under the influence of Foucault, the American Judith Butler was one of the first authors to elaborate "gender" theory, which constitutes the last frontier of post-modern ideologies. Evolutionary materialism remains the subjected philosophy, which sees man as changing material, without a proper nature, which can be molded at will according to the desires and the will-power of everyone. The final horizon is that described by De Sade and Reich. 

The Second Vatican Council and its Consequences

One force alone could have stopped this process of moral dissolution: the Catholic Church. But between 1962-1965 the Catholic Church, too, knew its own revolution. It was the Second Vatican Council.

On the eve of the Council convened by John XXIII, the best Catholic theologians had compiled an excellent schema on the family, which was approved by the Pope and presented in the conciliar hall[39]. This schema confirmed with clarity, the end of matrimony and the duty of the family in the modern world, condemning the widespread errors in the field of morals. But a few weeks after the beginning of the Council, the schemas presented by the Preparatory Commission were thrown out by the Bishops and theologians of Central Europe, the so-called “Alliance européenne"[40]. Everything was redone from the beginning, and the schema on the family was substituted by a new working document. This text, which became Gaudium et Spes, was dedicated to the contemporary world and was interested with entering into dialogue with it, rather than reaffirming the doctrine of the Church against it. The birth and education of children were placed on a secondary level, following the need for love between the spouses. These needs, of impulses and desires, according to some theologians, could not be closed in a juridical cage, but would to justify contraception and extra-marital cohabitation. The idea of nature was substituted by that of the person as a transforming reality, in continual change. Cold rigidity began to be contrasted to the warmth and fluidity of life; realizing the theory of Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937): the primacy of praxis over theory, of life over truth, of experience over doctrine, as many are affirming in the theological field. 

We did not arrive at Pope Francis' Exhortation Amoris laetitia (2016) in a single day. Fifty years were necessary, but the roots are there, in the Second Vatican Council. And the Council didn't do anything except search for a compromise between the doctrine of the Church and the anti-Christian theories of the modern Cultural Revolution. Today, that which is at stake is not only the institution of the family, but the existence of an absolute and immutable moral law. Four Cardinals have well seen this, and have asked Pope Francis to confirm with clarity the absolutely, universal and binding character of the Natural and Divine Laws. If one allows for the transgression of morals on one point, the whole collapses. If morals collapse, De Sade, Reich and the Antinomians of all the centuries triumph. 

Meditate on the Divine model of the family

In the last 50 years, the crisis of the family has assumed frightening dimensions. This crisis is founded on the idea that only in the sexualization of society, the revolutionary process can find its fulfillment. That which renders the situation graver, is that the attacks on the family are not only external, but come from within the Church. The remedy is indicated by Pius XI in Casti connubii: meditate on the Divine idea of the family and marriage, and live in conformity to this model. 

Meditating on the Divine model of the family means contemplating the truths which regulate the universe: overturning the thesis according to which praxis generates the theory; reestablishing the primacy of doctrine, that is the Platonic-Aristotelian-Thomistic primacy of contemplation over action; living in conformity with this truth. And against the new-Antinomians, who are spread throughout the Catholic Church, we must remember that the Magisterium of the Church either welcomes all of Tradition, theological and moral, or it welcomes none of it. 

Tradition includes Sacred Scripture, correctly interpreted, and Sacred Scripture and Tradition constitute the two fonts of the one Revelation of Christ, of which not even one iota can be changed (Mt, 5, 18), because everything created changes, but God is always the same; His Words do not pass away, His law does not change. This law is carved in our hearts and we must ask God that our words will always be an echo, faint but faithful, of His own words. 

Above all, it is necessary we be convinced that Tradition is a vital principle, while the revolutionary process is oriented and cannot but be oriented towards self-destruction. The negation of procreation leads to biological extinction, the denying of the raising of children, of education, which is the handing on of traditional values, leads to death. Today, Europe is dying not only because it is killing its own children with abortion and contraception, but because it is unable to transmit, to hand on to those who are born, the values which disappear every day. 

In his book Dialectics of Nature (1883),  Engels proclaimed this principle: "All that comes into being deserves to perish";[41] death not life, is for him the secret of the universe. The death of humanity constitutes, according to Igor Safarevic, the heart and the goal of socialism[42]. Sade expressed the same thought, celebrating homicide and suicide. The sexualization of society is the death of society. 

The family, on the contrary, contains life, in itself. Physical life contained in the cribs which multiply, and spiritual life, expressed by parents and children united in prayer to God Who can do everything.

At Fatima, Our Lady announced that Russia would spread its errors in the world. The anarcho-libertarian post-Trotskyism that dominates today in the West and the nationalist post-Stalinism that has affirmed itself in Putin's Russia have the same ideological matrix. Fatima's message is a message against any form of Gnostic and Egalitarian ideology, as it was socialism in the twentieth and twenty-first century.    

The last apparition of Fatima October 13, 1917, that of the Holy Family, constitutes in this sense a manifesto which sums up all our principles and which opposes all the errors of our time.

Translated by Brendan Young

 

[1] Aristotle, Metaphysics, lib. I.

[2]  Cicerone, De Officiis, I, 54.

 [3] Franz Funck-Brentano, L’Ancien Régime, Fayard, Paris 1926, pp. 12-14.

[4] Moines de Solesmes (sous la direction de), Le mariage,Textes du magistère romain, Desclée de Brouwer, Paris 1956

[5] Leo XIII, Enc.  Arcanum divinae Sapientiae Consilium of February 10 1880, in ASS, 12 (1879-1880), pp. 385-402.

[6] Pio XI, Casti connubii.E nc.  del 31 dicembre 1930 in A.A.S. 1930, pp 539-590.

 [7] Giovanni Paolo II, Apostholic Exhortation Familiaris consortio of November 22 1981 in AAS(1981), pp. 81-191. 

[8] Plinio Correa de Oliveira, Rivoluzione e Contro-Rivoluzione, tr. it. Sugarco, Milano 2009.

[9] Ilarino da Milano, Eresie medievali, Maggioli, Rimini 1983, p. 26-27.

[10] George H., Williams, The Radical Reformation, Westminster Press, Philadelphia 1962, p. 40.

[11] "Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly" (Letter to Melanchton of August 1 1521, in Luther's Works, vol. 48, Letters, Fortress Press, Philadelphia 1975, p. 282),

[12] Cfr.  Ernest Belfort Bax, Rise and Fall of the Anabaptist, Sonneschein, London 1903; C. G. H. Williams, The Radical Reformation, cit., pp. 362-388.

[13] About  Niclaes and the  Family of Love see:  Serge Hutin, Les disciples anglais de Jacob Boehme, Denoel, Paris 1960, pp. 58-61; G. H. Williams, The Radical Reformation, pp. 477-482 J. Dietz Moss, “Godded with God”, Hendryck Niclaes and His Family of Love, The American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia 1981; Alistair Hamilton, The Family of Love, The Attic Press, Greenwood (S. C.) 1981.

[14] Cf. Christopher Hill, The World Turned Upside Down, Penguin, London 1991, passim; A. L. Morton, The world of the ranters. Religious radicalism in the English Revolution, Lawrence and Wishart, London 1979 (1970); J. Friedmann, Blasphemy, Immorality and Anarchy. The ranters and the English Revolution, Ohio University Press, London 1987.

[15] An Act against several Atheistical, Blasphemous and Execrables Opinions, derogatory to the honor of God, and destructive to human Society, in Acts and Ordinancy of the Interregnum, ed. by C. H. Firth and  R. S. Rait, Stationery Office, London 1911, pp. 409-412.

[16] François Vernet, Condorments, DTC, vol. III,1 (1938), pp. 815-816.

[17] A. F. de Sade, Français, encore un effort si vous voulez etre républicains, in La Philosophie dans le boudoir, Gallimard, Paris 1976, pp. 187-267.

[18] Sade, op. cit. , p. 188.

[19] Sade, op. cit. , p. 190.

[20]  Sade, op. cit. , p. 229.

[21] Sade, op. cit. , p. 221

[22] Sade, op. cit., p. 239.

[23]  Sade,  L’histoire de Juliette (1797) in Oeuvres complètes,Cercle du Livre Precieux, Paris 1967, vol. 9, p. 569.

[24] Erik Kuehnelt-Leddihn, Leftism Revisited. From de Sade and Marx to Hitler and PolPot, Regnery, Washington 1991, p. 67

[25] See François Ost,Sade et la loi, Odile Jacob, Paris 2005

[26] Xavier Martin, Nature humaine et révolution française, du siècle des lumières au Code Napoléon, Dominique Martin Morin, Poitiers 2002

[27] See Letters to Lenin of Inessa Armand andAleksandra Kollontaj of March 1917 in V. I. Lenin, Opere complete, tr. It., vol. 35, Editori Runiti, Roma 1952, pp. 210-212.

 [28] Cfr.  Giovanni Codevilla, Dalla Rivoluzione bolscevica alla Federazione Russa, Franco Angeli, Roma 1996.

[29] Leon Trotzkji, Problems of everyday life, Monad Press, New York 1986, p. 37

[30] https://www.marxists.org/archive/kollonta/1920/communism-family.htm

[31] Gregory Carleton, The Sexual Revolution in Russia Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Press, 2005

[32] See Rodolfo de Mattei, Dalla sodomia allaìomosessualità. Storia di una normalizzazione, Solfanelli, Chieti 2016.

[33] Cfr. Rolf Wiggershaus, Die Frankfurter Schule. Geschichte. TheoretischeEntwicklung. PolitischeBedeutung, Carl HanserVerlag, München-Wien 1986; Martin Jay The dialectical imagination. A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research, 1923-1950, Little, Brown and Co. Boston 1973.

[34] Wilhelm Reich, The Sexual Revolution, Peter Nevill- Vision Press, London 1951, p. 163.

[35] Vera Schmidt. Rapporto sull'asilo sperimentale di Mosca, Andromeda 2016.  For psychoanalysis in the Soviet-Union, see Martin A. Miller, Freud and the Bolsheviks, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1998, and Alexander Etkind, Eros of the impossible: the history of psychoanalysis in Russia, Westview Press, Oxford, 1997

 [36] Reich, The Sexual Revolution, p. 241

[37]  Leo Trotzkj, The Revoluton betrayed (1936), Dover Publications, New York 2004.

[38] Thibaud Colin, Le mariage gay. Les enjeux d’une revendication, Eyrolles, Paris 2005, p. 97.

[39] See Il primo schema sulla famiglia e sul matrimonio del Concilio Vaticano II, ed. by R. de Mattei, Edizioni Fiducia, Roma 2015.

[40] See R. de Mattei, Il Concilio Vaticano II. Una storia mai scritta, Lindau, Torino 2011, pp. 203-210.

[41] Frederick Engels, Dialectics of Nature, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1976, pp. 37-38

[42] Igor Chafarévitch, Le  phénomène socialiste, Editions du Seuil, Paris 1977, p. 323

Print All Articles
View specific date