1. Site: Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
    0 sec ago
    Since the Council, an idea has been spreading that Judaism is not superseded by the New Covenant of Jesus Christ; that Jews still have available to them the Covenant of the old Law, by which they can be saved. It is therefore unnecessary for them to turn to Christ; unnecessary for anybody to convert them to faith in Christ. Indeed, attempting to do so is an act of aggression not dissimilar to theFr John Hunwickehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17766211573399409633noreply@blogger.com11
  2. Site: Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
    0 sec ago
    S Paul loved his fellow Jews, his 'kinsmen' and believed "the gifts and call of God are irrevocable". He believed that at the End, those among them who had rejected Christ would be brought in to the chosen people. He believed that they were like olive branches which had been cut off so that the Gentiles, wild olive branches, could be grafted in. But, when the fulness of the Gentiles had entered Fr John Hunwickehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17766211573399409633noreply@blogger.com3
  3. Site: Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
    0 sec ago
    Lex orandi lex credendi. I have been examining the Two Covenant Dogma: the fashionable error that God's First Covenant, with the Jews, is still fully and salvifically valid, so that the call to saving faith in Christ Jesus is not made to them. The 'New' Covenant, it is claimed, is now only for Gentiles. I want to draw attention at this point to the witness of the post-Conciliar Magisterium of theFr John Hunwickehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17766211573399409633noreply@blogger.com13
  4. Site: Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
    0 sec ago
    We have seen that the Two Covenant Theory, the idea that Jewry alone is guaranteed Salvation without any need to convert to Christ, is repugnant to Scripture, to the Fathers, even to the post-Conciliar liturgy of the Catholic Church. It is also subversive of the basic grammar of the relationship between the Old and the New Testaments. Throughout  two millennia, in Scripture, in Liturgy, in her Fr John Hunwickehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17766211573399409633noreply@blogger.com7
  5. Site: Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
    0 sec ago
    The sort of people who would violently reject the points I am making are the sort of people who would not be impressed by the the Council of Florence. So I am going to confine myself to the Magisterium from the time of Pius XII ... since it is increasingly coming to be realised that the continuum of processes which we associate with the Conciliar and post-Conciliar period was already in operationFr John Hunwickehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17766211573399409633noreply@blogger.com0
  6. Site: Fr Hunwicke's Mutual Enrichment
    0 sec ago
    In 1980, addressing a Jewish gathering in Germany, B John Paul II said (I extract this from a long sentence): " ... dialogue; that is, the meeting between the people of the Old Covenant (never revoked by God, cf Romans 11:29) and that of the New Covenant, is at the same time ..." In 2013, Pope Francis, in the course of his Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii gaudium, also referred to the Old Fr John Hunwickehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17766211573399409633noreply@blogger.com10
  7. Site: Rorate Caeli
    1 hour 25 min ago
    “A priest must be entirely for God […]. For this the Church clothes him in a long tunic […]. The priest’s cassock must show that the consecrated minister has almost no body and is turned to God with all his heart, seeking only the salvation of souls. Now, if the priest’s cassock has a worldly cut, if  his head is styled fashionably with fringes and even perfumed curls, if under a scanty Francesca Romanahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05458124297326049975noreply@blogger.com
  8. Site: Bonfire of the Vanities - Fr. Martin Fox
    2 hours 3 min ago
    It's about 9 am local time, and we are on the bus from San Giovanni to Lanciano. We will have Holy Mass there around ten am with yours truly as celebrant and homilist. We came down out of the mountains where Padre St. Pio's monastery was located, into a great, flat plain, bounded by mountains on many sides. It is all good farmland; many of the fields are freshly plowed. We have seen a few cows and goats; no chicken houses such as are common around our area, nor pig farms. The crops around here are often fruit trees and many, many olive groves. Also what may be wheat, and certainly hay. Of the other crops I can only offer an ignorant guess so I will refrain; Wikipedia is likely a better source. Just to our right is a quarry now in sight.

    Lanciano is the site of a famous Eucharistic miracle. I will attempt to take, and then post, some pictures later. Now I must prepare something for Mass.
  9. Site: Catholic Herald
    2 hours 5 min ago
    Author: Cindy Wooden

    No one is excluded from the love of God or from being welcomed into the Catholic Church, but God’s love and the Church’s welcome also come with a call to conversion, the English-language groups at the synod of bishops have said. Young people need to know “the Church’s beautiful, yet challenging, vision, teaching and anthropology of the body, sexuality, love and life...


  10. Site: Gloria.tv
    2 hours 54 min ago
    Author: charisma
    The sculpture, in the words of the artist, is a tribute to 'the woman that gives life, because life is valuable from its conception to its end.'
  11. Site: Roman Catholic Man
    3 hours 54 min ago
    Author: Fr Richard Heilman


    “The Declaration of Independence laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity.” – John Adams

    “The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.” – John Adams

    “The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: it connected, in one indissoluble bond, the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity.” – John Adams

    “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” – John Adams

    “I have examined all religions, and the result is that the Bible is the best book in the world.” – John Adams

    “The Christian religion is, above all the religions that ever prevailed or existed in ancient or modern times, the religion of wisdom, virtue, equity and humanity.”– John Adams


    Level of Engagement

    We are asking everyone to do, at least, numbers 1 thru 4 below. If at all possible, we would like as many warriors as possible to go “Full On Spiritual Navy Seal” by doing all eight of these, every day from October 20 to November 6 (Election Day).

    1. Pray in a State of Grace (Go to Confession)
    2. Believe God will answer our prayers
    3. October 20 – October 28 – Novena #1 – Pray the St. Jude Prayer
    4. October 29 – November 6 – Novena #2 – Pray the Immaculate Conception Prayer
    5. Pray the Rosary Daily
    6. Add Penance (recommend follow-through on some “get-healthier” challenge)
    7. Pray the St. Michael Chaplet (Call upon St. Michael & Nine Choirs of Angels)
    8. Enlist 18 Saints & 18 Holy Souls into your Holy Alliance, and pray for 18 people in need of conversion (Learn how HERE)

    We are adding St. Patrick’s Lorica Prayer today (Lorica Prayer HERE), as witches are gathering to put a hex on Justice Kavanaugh

    October 20-28: Novena to St. Jude

    Say once a day for 9 days, beginning on 20 October and ending on 28 October. When the Novena is finished, you must publicly thank St. Jude for his prayers for you. This can be done by posting your “thank you” on social media.

    To Saint Jude, Holy Saint Jude, Apostle and Martyr, great in virtue and rich in miracles, near kinsman of Jesus Christ, faithful intercessor of all who invoke thy special patronage in time of need. To thee I have recourse from the depths of my heart and humbly beg to whom God has given such great power to come to my assistance. Help me in my present and urgent petition, in return I promise to make thy name known and cause thee to be invoked. Saint Jude pray for us and all who invoke thy aid. Amen. 


    Recite an Our Father, Hail Mary, and Glory Be (3 times). Keep your promise to St. Jude and make his name known.


    Please Note:

    You can read about this spiritual warfare campaign in greater detail HERE

    Join our “Special Forces” Facebook group HERE

    Order the St. Michael Combat Chaplet I designed HERE

    Order the Combat Rosary I designed HERE


    Daily Emails

    I will send daily emails with these prayers and reflections. Please sign-up HERE.
    (If you have signed up for Novena for Our Nation or Nineveh 90, you should be signed up already)

    The post Make America Holy Again Spiritual Warfare Campaign – Day 2 appeared first on Roman Catholic Man.

  12. Site: The Catholic Thing
    4 hours 55 min ago
    Author: Bevil Bramwell, OMI

    Priests these days are often getting messages from people worried about the present state of the Church. This is a large question and not one to which we have many immediately comforting answers. A lot of people are certainly aware of the problems: the homosexual network; the sexual abuse of children and young adults; the warping of doctrine; the inability of many bishops to respond to crises; the progressive stuff coming out of Rome (e.g., The Instrumentum Laboris for the Youth Synod).

    Laypeople have every right to be horrified – and even angry – at all this news. But some things have not changed, particularly that they are still baptized and confirmed. This is the time when we will see what stuff the laity are made of.

    The sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation signify that laypeople are adult members of the Catholic community, responsible for the “practice of the faith”– words suggested for the homily at Baptism.

    The practice of the faith involves everything from one’s personal following of Jesus Christ, to making the Christian community a living reality, to participating in the redemptive mission of the Church. This involves what was described by Vatican II and the tradition as “spiritual sacrifice.”

    Spiritual sacrifice is a positive, interior spiritual choice of the individual Christian. Such sacrifice is the basic attitude needed for facing current – or any – crises.

    The first step is not to treat membership of the Church like some club membership, but rather to acknowledge the profound spiritual bonds that join us together. Among other things, this means not leaving in a huff – but if you do, please, also be sure get the abuse figures for the church or the secular institution that you think you want to join!


    Interior spiritual sacrifices do not depend on clergy or Rome. They are the sacrifices needed to build a personal life of virtue and the life of the Church community and to further the mission of the Church, all at the same time.

    The teaching in the Catechism is more than sufficient to help people understand a virtuous Catholic life, which means seeking to make everything you do or say conform to divine truth – in short striving to live a fully Christian life and become a saint. (See Part Three of the Catechism.) When laypeople put Part Three into practice, we then see what laypeople are made of!

    Then there is participation in the life of the sacraments. This too involves spiritual sacrifice as one joins the community prayers and says a heartfelt “amen” to the priestly prayers. Now one can participate in the celebration of the Eucharist regardless of the various crises in the Church.

    The Eucharist is the time to offer the perfect sacrifice to the Father. It is untouched by crises. The Eucharist is the key temporal realization of what Church means. We ritually gather to offer praise and worship and to ask for help from God– who is the chief reason for our existence.

    The angry secular way of communicating that we see all around us now should not be imported into our responses to the present Catholic crisis. A crisis is not an opportunity to indulge in adolescent tantrums. It takes real spiritual sacrifice to come together and communicate like Christians – all of the time, on every issue.

    The Catholic equivalent of “town meetings” might achieve something or other, but they will not resolve the many deep challenges we face unless they are also times of prayer. Legitimate anger may wake up a bishop to his moral and doctrinal responsibilities. The long-term solution, however, is going to require a deep spiritual change of attitude that leads both to different behavior and to a willingness to remedy many poor choices of personnel in the past.

    It is also a Christian sacrifice on the part of the laity to be better informed – and I don’t mean finding the stats about abuse or clergy affairs. I mean being inwardly formed about how you may fully be a Catholic layperson. How do participate in this sinful Church at this time, like a saint, instead of closing down and hoping that it goes away?

    The deeper you advance in understanding this, the better you can stand as a layperson and put questions to clergy. Be aware, however, that the large majority of clergy are as angry as you are about the abuse of the young, but also about the abuse of our Church. It takes collusion by only a very few clergy to hide a case of abuse or to promote an abusive bishop. Just as it takes just a few laity to conceal abuse in a family, which is where the majority of abuse occurs. Know that most clergy are very much on your side.

    A further sacrifice involves accepting that this crisis will be a long term-affair. There are fifty states in the United States and information from the fifty State Attorneys General will be coming out drop by drop, for years. Further, much of the past crisis cannot be “solved.” Whatever new policies are put in place and administative or even criminal penalties are imposed, in the last analysis, the only full resolution is for such sins to be repented of and made reparation for.

    There will now have to be much penance and fasting and prayer. Laity should practice this too because they play as important a role in the process as anyone: “if one member endures anything, all the members co-endure it, and if one member is honored, all the members together rejoice.” (Vatican II)


    *Image: St. John the Baptist Pointing to Christ by BartoloméEstéban Murillo, c. 1655 [Art Institute of Chicago]

    The post Worried Laypeople and Spiritual Sacrifice appeared first on The Catholic Thing.

  13. Site: Fr. Z's Blog
    5 hours 14 min ago
    Author: frz@wdtprs.com (Fr. John Zuhlsdorf)
    The reports of the various language circles of the Synod (“walking together”) are out.  HERE Just try reading for a while.  
  14. Site: Gloria.tv
    5 hours 43 min ago
    Author: kimtaegon
    Spiritual Dialogues with Fr. Odon de Castro - #78
  15. Site: Restore-DC-Catholicism
    6 hours 4 min ago
    Author: noreply@blogger.com (Restore-DC-Catholicism)
  16. Site: RT - News
    6 hours 37 min ago
    Author: RT
    By scrapping the crucial Cold War era nuclear agreement Trump is destabilizing global security, even if his ultimate goal is to negotiate a ‘better deal’ and to include other parties like China, geopolitical experts have told RT.
    Read Full Article at RT.com
  17. Site: Zero Hedge
    8 hours 16 min ago
    Author: Tyler Durden

    China has successfully tested the world's largest commercial drone developed and manufactured by the China Academy of Aerospace Electronics Technology (CAAET) made its first successful test flight at Baotou Airport in North China's Inner Mongolia autonomous region on Tuesday, reported Ecns.cn, the official English-language website of China News Service. 

    SF Express Co., Ltd, a Chinese transport company based in Shenzen, conducted the first public test flight on Oct. 16 with the new delivery drone, named Feihong-98, in cooperation with CAAET. 

    Feihong-98 is a Chinese copy of the Soviet Antonov An-2, which is China's first domestically-built transport aircraft, the Shiefei Y-5B has a 60-year history since its first flight in 1957.  

    According to Liu Meixuan, president of CAAET, the FH-98 is now the most affordable and advanced transport drone in the world.

    The plane has a maximum weight of 5.25 tons, with a payload of 1.5 tons, and a volume space of 15 cubic meters. It can reach a max flight altitude of 15,000 ft. while cruising at 112mph.

    SF Express and CAAET signed an exclusive agreement in 2017, with the intentions of operating a large-scale drone delivery fleet in the next several years. 

    Pandaily said it took about eight months for researchers to apply the technologies and complete the research and development of core technologies that converted the plane into a fully autonomous drone.

    Feihong-98 completed its first flight test in August. It received an operational approval from the Civil Aviation Administration of China and should finish up testing by June 2019. 

    With a takeoff and landing distance of roughly 500 ft., the FH-98 could be the most affordable transport drone for world governments, in need for a low-cost solution to handle emergency and disaster relief missions, and or just a cheap option to transport goods. 

    In the last twenty years, China has emerged as one of Washington's top competitors in the global drone market. China is offering affordable drone technology, that has been rapidly gaining global market share. 

    China manufactures several types of drones. The Caihong 5 (CH-5) Rainbow, its newest multi-role capable drone, has seen increased activity in the Middle East -- especially the Yemeni Civil War. The CH-5 competes with the American Reaper and Israeli Heron TP. 

    China is a major exporter of multi-role strike capable drones. Between 2008 and 2017, China exported a total of 88 drones to eleven different countries. 

    Regarding total drone sales, however, China lags the US (as shown above). Since the financial crisis to 2017, the US has sold 351 drones to numerous countries, followed by Israel's 168 drone export. 

    China's drone exports have greatly benefited from American export controls. The US has historically slapped some countries with weapon bans, which has allowed China to fill the void. If countries cannot buy arms from US defense companies, they usually resort to China. With a wide variety of drones, and now the addition of the world's largest transport drone, it seems China is threatening Washington's global drone market share -- a move that does not sit well with America's military-industrial complex. 

    8 hours 21 min ago
    Author: abyssum
    Whispers of Restoration Blog Timely Resources. Timeless Truth. Catholic Tradition.


    DESTROYER: Pope to Celebrate New Rite of Mass at Youth Synod Closing

    For those just now connecting the dots

    Pattern of Liturgical Deviance

    Plenty of controversy now surrounds Pope Francis: his seemingly invalid election, his long pattern of heterodox teaching, the Viganò report implicating him in cascading sex abuse crimes, the ongoing Amoris Laetitia debacle, the Vatican sell-out to Communist China, pick your disaster.

    As this Pope’s penchant for “making a mess” shows no sign of diminishing to the peril of countless souls, we agree with Chris Ferrara’s assessment over at The Remnantand his call (like Bishop Gracida’s) for an imperfect synod to defend the Church from Francis: a kind of emergency family intervention to stop the violence of an abusive father.

    But having noted earlier controversies, we maintain that the worst dimension of this pontificatus horribilis has been a certain revisionist approach to divine worship, now set to display itself in liturgical spades at the conclusion of the Youth Synod currently underway in Rome.

    Many have decried Francis’ liturgical offenses over the years: offering Masses with giant puppets, balloons, and tango dancing in the sanctuary; omitting genuflections before the Blessed Sacrament; withholding the Papal Blessing at audiences, but publicly blessing psychotropic herbs for pagan rituals; displaying profane items like beach balls on high altars; employing sacred vessels, furnishings, and vestments of novel design or illicit material; and a lengthy record of communicatio in sacris that has united this Pope in worship with – even bestowed on him the formal “blessings” of – heretics, schismatics, Muslims, Jews, and witch doctors. Would that all of it were fake news.

    Still, these past deviations pale in comparison to what’s coming.

    After wielding what appears for all the world to be a Wiccan stang at the opening Mass of the Synod, the Pope has announced that he will celebrate a new form of Mass at its conclusion: a liturgy that priests, bishops, cardinals and theologians are denouncing as barely recognizable as a Catholic rite.

    This is really bad.

    Unprecedented, Catastrophic Rupture Papal Stang?

    Earlier this summer, one of Pope Francis’ advisors elicited justifiably strong reactions after affirming that this Pope “breaks Catholic traditions whenever he wants,” welcoming the same as a “new phase” of Church history in which the faithful are no longer to follow Christ per the dictates of Scripture and Tradition, but are rather to be “ruled by an individual” without any moorings at all.[1]

    Albeit far from Catholic, one could hardly call this diagnosis inaccurate. A number of commentators (Catholic and otherwise) have already shown Francis’ ongoing overthrow of traditional doctrine and discipline to bear marked similarities to the autocratic machinations of organized crime lords and socialist dictators of the past; but none of his earlier departures from Sacred Tradition are as staggering as this coming celebration of a new form of Mass, representing a radical break with all prior liturgical forms in the Roman Rite.[2]

    The Pope announced it as a “liturgical innovation,” a “change in a venerable tradition” that “affects our hereditary religious patrimony, which seemed to enjoy the privilege of being untouchable and settled” – calling this a “special and historical occasion” and insisting that “we should not let ourselves be surprised by the nature, or even the nuisance, [?!] of its exterior forms.”

    Does this sound even remotely like a “hermeneutic of continuity” to anyone?

    From the same announcement (our emphasis):

    “We must prepare for this many-sided inconvenience. It is the kind of upsetcaused by every novelty that breaks in on our habits. We shall notice that pious persons are disturbed most, because they have their own respectable way of hearing Mass, and they will feel shaken out of their usual thoughts and obliged to follow those of others. Even priests may feel some annoyance in this respect. […] This novelty is no small thing.”[3]

    Read the Pope’s words again. Tradition? Forget it. Piety? Over and done.

    Friends, this is a plain announcement from the See of Peter that the sacred rites, once entrusted by Jesus Christ to his Apostles for the offering of eternal mysteries, are no longer binding or relevant.

    This is a declaration of liturgical revolution.

    Considering those involved in the making, it could hardly be otherwise.

    REVEALED: Designed By Heretics, Expressing Heresy

    Earlier this summer, many scoffed when Cardinal Gerhard Müller (former Prefect for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith) denounced a “blatant process of Protestantizing” he was observing in the Catholic hierarchy, with bishops who “justify their infidelity to the Catholic faith with allegedly pastoral concern[.]”[4]

    Now scoffers can do little more than ignore this clear and public demonstration of the same: that a mysterious committee (apparently even Cardinals had no idea who comprised the group) of sundry “liturgical experts” has worked long in closed-door sessions, at the Pope’s behest, to draft a new rite of Mass with direct input from Protestant pastors in the process.[5]

    It already verges on incredible that any Catholic hierarch would have the gall to fabricate a new rite of Mass to suit their contemporary taste (ignoring the anathemas pronounced by the Council of Trent on such ventures!), but to find that formal heretics were invited to contribute to this rupturing of the most venerable liturgical tradition in the world simply beggars belief. Men who routinely violate the divine rights of the Church, reject any number of her Sacraments, contemn Our Lord in the Holy Eucharist, and deny the various dogmas enshrined in the Catholic Mass are invited to help with the impious creation of a new one? Can any devout Catholic fail to be offended by such grievously irreverent treatment of the sacred?

    We even find in a French interview with Mr. Jean Guitton, the Pope’s personal friend and confidant, an (accidental?) admission that changing the Catholic Mass to be as amenable as possible to non-Catholics was one of the Pope’s chief aims:

    “The intention of [the] Pope… with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with the Protestant liturgy… to get as close as possible to the Protestant Lord’s Supper… [in] an ecumenical intention to remove, or at least to correct, or to relax, what was too Catholic, in the traditional sense, in the Mass and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist Mass [sic].”[6]

    So there’s that.

    As if Guitton’s admission weren’t troubling enough, one now finds that the Italian Archbishop selected by the Pope to midwife this unholy aberration confirmed the same operating principle: “Help[ing] in any way the road to union of the separated brethren, by removing every stone that could even remotely constitute an obstacle or difficulty” in the liturgy.[7] This monsignore even describes the lamentable result as “a major conquest of the Catholic Church.”[8]

    Beg your pardon??

    Even the humblest layperson can detect how this Protestantization has been achieved, simply by reading the text of the new rite side-by-side with the old. One finds that the Catholic Mass has been stripped of prayers expressing Catholic doctrine, with roughly 80% of the original content being deleted entirely or significantly altered in this new, intentionally less Catholic rite[9] – and seeing as the Pope’s introductory Instruction itself expresses heretical Eucharistic doctrine[10], it’s debatable whether this form of worship can even be called “Catholic” in any meaningful sense.

    Indeed, the Protestant theologian Max Thurian looks like one of the first to confirm such misgivings (as many feared after last year’s reports of an “ecumenical Mass” in the works): “It is now theologically possible for Protestants to use the same Mass as Catholics.“[11] At the same time, Catholic priests the world over are heard giving dramatic declamations like: “At this critical juncture, the traditional Roman rite, more than one thousand years old, has been destroyed,”[12] and in the words of one Jesuit (naturally) advisor to the committee of liturgical destroyers:

    “Not only the words, the melodies, and some of the gestures are different. To tell the truth, it is a different liturgy of the Mass. This needs to be said without ambiguity: the Roman Rite as we knew it no longer exists. It has been destroyed.”[13]

    Where are the Cardinals??

    Are there any Catholics, any men left among them to rescue the sacred rites?

    To be fair, some have raised an alarm on this liturgical overthrow – although limiting themselves to publishing said “concerns” in roundabout ways, and without taking any concrete steps to stop this shipwreck. One wonders how bad it will need to get before one of them decides to “resist Cephas to the face.” (cf. Gal 2:11)

    Still, one can be encouraged by the efforts of two Cardinals in the sees of Berrhoea and Colonia in Cappadocia, who apparently got advance notice of this impending liturgical madness, sought to intervene privately with the Pope, and then published their theological critique of the bogus new rite (now available in English, see note #14 below).

    Their conclusions are devastating.

    To take one excerpt (our emphasis):

    “[The new liturgy] represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass… The new form of Mass was substantially rejected by the Episcopal Synod, was never submitted to the collegial judgement of the Episcopal Conferences and was never asked for by the people. It has every possibility of satisfying the most modernist of Protestants… To abandon a liturgical tradition which for four centuries stood as a sign and pledge of unity in worship, and to replace it with another liturgy which, due to the countless liberties it implicitly authorizes, cannot but be a sign of division–a liturgy which teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the integrity of the Catholic Faith–is, we feel bound in conscience to proclaim, an incalculable error.”[14]

    The Pope was clearly prepared for such rejection of this rite by faithful Catholics, as can be read in the very text of his announcement:

    “[The new rite] has been thought out by authoritative experts of sacred Liturgy; it has been discussed and meditated upon for a long time. We shall do well to accept it with joyful interest and put it into practice punctually, unanimously and carefully. …So do not let us talk about ‘the new Mass.’ Let us rather speak of the ‘new epoch’ in the Church’s life.”[15]

    Let’s try putting that in layman’s terms:

    “This is happening. Sit down and shut up. Hail the Revolution.”

    Awake Yet?

    Now, if you aren’t already nodding your head with sad recognition and understanding, you may want to brace yourself: for although accurate, some of the news items above aren’t exactly recent.

    The New Mass that Pope Francis will celebrate at the end of the Youth Synod this month was created fifty years ago. It was crafted and imposed on the Church by one of his predecessors – that hapless innovator he now claims to have “canonized,” Pope Paul VI: a man whose sanctity is far from certain, still farther from exemplary (and about as “miraculous” as an inaccurate medical diagnosis), and at whose feet must be laid (among other things) the single greatest catastrophe in Church history: the near-total replacement of the Roman Rite of Mass with a novel, modernist construct – an attempted abortion of liturgical tradition.

    If you were born after 1965, Paul VI’s impious New Mass – the Novus Ordo Missae – is likely the only rite for the offering of the Holy Sacrifice that you have ever known. It’s just as likely you were never told its true history (although much of this is now public record one might explore here), so you can be forgiven for not walking out of it years ago.

    The important thing is to walk out now.

    Otherwise, why be alarmed by the deviations of the current pontificate, or any yet to come? Ecclesiastical innovators have already dared to touch our most precious heritage, seeking to supplant it with a fabrication that even then-Cardinal Ratzinger referred to as a “banal, on-the-spot product”.[16] One thinks of St. Vincent of Lerins’ observation of the mad abandonment of Tradition in his own day:

    “Such is the insanity of some men, such the impiety of their blinded understanding, such, finally, their lust after error, that they will not be content with the rule of faith delivered once and for all from antiquity, but must daily seek after something new, and even newer still, and are always longing to add something to religion, or to change it, or to subtract from it!”[17]

    Happily, no Roman Catholic in good standing needs special permission to return to our true and traditional rites, whether to offer them as a priest or to attend them as a member of the faithful. Still more joyous is the fact that these are increasingly available as the exodus from SquishyChurch continues apace. In fifty years, we have little doubt that the “Traditional Latin Mass” (TLM) will once again be our dominant (if not exclusive, please God) liturgical practice across the globe. Indeed, this trend is already observable.

    Furthermore, the continued claim of various bishops, priests, and theologians is that the TLM alone comprises an act of worship pleasing to God in the Roman tradition, and we have yet to find a cohesive argument to the contrary. More on that here.

    The question is: What’s keeping you from right worship?

    Embrace Right Worship, Resist the Revolution

    “True piety admits no other rule than that whatsoever things have been faithfully received from our fathers the same are to be faithfully consigned to our children; and that it is our duty, not to lead religion whither we would, but rather to follow religion whither it leads.”[18]

    PRIESTS: If you still offer the Novus Ordoit’s time to stop. 

    The wind is changing. Return your flocks to the objective liturgical tradition of the Church; render to God the worship owed to Him, and render to the faithful what is theirs by right: that timeless treasury of ars celebrandi and the countless graces of our priceless heritage in the traditional Mass. If you don’t know it, learn it. Start today. We know you may suffer for this, but the faithful remaining through the growing darkness are prepared to help you. And remember: you signed up for the Cross.

    You’re a priest. Your principle task isto render worthy sacrifice unto God. Regarding the cura animarum, right worship still remains the most significant of your duties towards the faithful; before parish programs, enrollment goals, and all else. If God’s children go hungry, deprived of that supernatural nourishment granted by a Mass grown organically over centuries of faithful devotion, it will be because you chose to feed them with a modernist construct designed by the faithless. Are you prepared to render an account for such withholding from God and His people?

    LAITY: If you still belong to a Novus Ordo parish, it’s time to leave.

    Even apart from the growing likelihood of total infrastructural collapse, you also bear the first duty of rendering God that worship befitting His glory, that which He has crafted in the Church over centuries: the Traditional Latin Mass. Don’t wait for friends and family to understand, or for your pastor to come around – until diocesan priests are ready to refuse to offend God’s glory any longer (braving the “St. Luke’s treatment” if they must), relocation is your path. Let the dead bury their dead; as for you and your house, serve ye the Lord.

    Find an FSSP or ICKSP or other TLM community, and get over there. Change jobs, pack up and move if you have to (like plenty of other families are doing, particularly those with kids to raise), and behold the days of the 4th century relived; wherein the lay faithful groaned to see the majority of their bishops embrace heresy and give their churches over to erroneous rites. What did the layfolk do in those days? They left, clinging to the few faithful priests they could find, recognizing that nothing was more important than worship in Spirit and Truth. St. Basil the Great said of them:

    “Matters have come to this pass: the people have left their houses of prayer, and now assemble in the deserts – a pitiable sight; women and children, old men, and men otherwise infirm, wretchedly faring in the open air, amid the most profuse rains and snow-storms and winds and frosts of winter; and again in summer under a scorching sun. To all this they submit, because they will have no part in the wicked Arian leaven.” (Letter 242)

    Now it’s our turn. What are we prepared to do?

    Nothing supersedes man’s duty to render God that worship proper to His Majesty, and the Novus Ordo just ain’t it. Rooting ourselves in communities that exclusively offer the traditional rites is essential for achieving this end; and once we have done so, it will be necessary to dig in and hold on, with a weather eye to the horizon. Because in point of fact, nobody has ever been to the Novus Ordo – we’ve only ever seen iterations of it. This inherently malleable rite has no enduring essential form. It has no prior tradition to pass on. It has no yesterday in the devotion of centuries, but only a limitless variety of novel tomorrows.

    Wicked tomorrows. Do you see it yet?

    Having been orchestrated to reflect the personal taste of the celebrant and local surround like an endless mirror-hall, amid a resurgent paganism in wider society the Novus Ordo must allow for increasingly evil iterations. Worse is yet to come, and we think very soon. Run far. Run fast.

    Our Lady of Victory, Destroyer of Heresies, pray for us!

    And bravo the restoration!

    [1] For this startling admission, see here.

    [2] Space does not permit a thorough demonstration of the radical rupture represented by this new liturgical rite. More studies on this point will soon be forthcoming around the world, but the two Cardinals’ intervention referenced in note #14 below makes for a good start.

    [3] Emphasis added. See the full text of the Pope’s address here. Pope Paul VI, that is.

    [4] Emphasis added. See Cardinal Müller’s full interview here.

    [5] After this little detail was mentioned in papers from the Vatican’s L’Osservatore Romano to the Detroit News, another Catholic paper unpacked it here.

    [6] As reported in Apropos 12.19.1993 and Christian Order 10.1994.

    [7] As declared by Msgr. Bugnini in L’Osservatore Romano 3.19.1965.

    [8] Bugnini’s full trumpeting is rather frightening stuff, as reads here: “The liturgical reform is a major conquest of the Catholic Church, and it has ecumenical dimensions, since the other Churches and Christian denominations see in it not only something to be admired in itself, but equally as a sign of further progress to come.” (p. 126)

    [9] See a simple chart comparing the two rites here. Find another liturgical scholar’s quantification of the liturgical change in terms of percentages in the work here

    [10] That the Pope’s General Instruction was almost immediately retracted and rewritten to try and cover the heretical Eucharistic doctrine it originally expressed (see especially nos. 7 and 48) has done nothing to change the fact that the new rite itself still expresses the same error. See the Cardinals’ critique in #14 below.

    [11] Find his comments in La Croix 5.30.1969, as noted by D. Bonneterre at p. 100 here.

    [12] This is the lamenting assessment of respected Catholic liturgist Fr. Klaus Gamber at p. 99 of The Reform of the Roman Liturgy (Harrison, NY, 1993).

    [13] This is the gleeful assessment of the questionable Jesuit Fr. Joseph Gelineau at pp 9-10 of Demain la liturgie (Paris, 1976).

    [14] Read (an English translation of) the full letter and theological study of Cardinals Ottaviani, Bacci, and their team of theologians here.

    [15] Find the Pope’s attempt to, in his words, “relieve your minds of the first, spontaneous difficulties which this change arouses” here.

    [16] As penned in his Introduction to La Reforme Liturgique en question (Le-Barroux: Editions Sainte-Madeleine), 1992, pp. 7-8.

    [17] From Ch. 21 of St. Vincent of Lerin’s Commonitory, readable here.

    [18] Ibid., Ch 6

    Share this: Related

    [+WINNER] Book Review & Giveaway: “Phoenix from the Ashes” by H.J.A. SireIn “History”

    Buzzword Immunity Boost: Amazonia Synod EditionIn “Culture”

    To the Roots, To the Heights: Discovering the Latin Mass (His)In “Liturgy”

    Post navigation

    Previous30% OFF: Traditional Baptism Program *Parish Pack*

    1. Magdalene POCTOBER 17, 2018 AT 4:36 PM Although I did move once from a parish, diocese, and home town to escape a sodomite priest, moving again is not in my future. We have Novus Ordo parishes in a Novus Ordo diocese BUT we do have a TLM every Sunday. There is a FSSP parish in the diocese but almost 2 hours from me; not practical to go or even possible at present. I think of my relatives, especially those in small towns who have no choice of a TLM to assist at and must be satisfied with what the Lord has provided for them where they are at. Yes, the faithful deserve more. They have for years. They have deserved the whole Rite of all the SAcraments, they have deserved true teachings and holy priests but these things are rarely provided for them. May God have mercy and intervene soon.LikeREPLY
    2. BartOCTOBER 17, 2018 AT 5:59 PM “Pope to Celebrate New Rite of Mass at Youth Synod Closing” Do you mean he will use the Novus Ordo, or has he drafted some new mess?LikeREPLY
      • WhispersofRestorationOCTOBER 17, 2018 AT 8:30 PM Indeed, he will use the Novus Ordo. We’re pointing out that the Novus Ordo itself is still newsworthy, and allows in principle for unlimited novel adjustments in the future – something being strongly signaled in the Amazon Synod preparations, and which we intend to write more on in the near future. Stay tuned!LikeREPLY
        • editorOCTOBER 17, 2018 AT 10:35 PM I’m afraid I strongly dislike this type of writing. The page was emailed to me by a Catholic Truth reader who said something to the effect that things can’t get much worse… and I’ve just replied to tell him that, true enough, when the novus ordo was introduced all those years back, that was about as bad, liturgically, as it could get. I added that he’d presumably not realised that this was one of those articles calculated to shock only to realise you’d been fooled. I had realised quickly, not least when I read the quote from Paul VI NOT attributed to him, about the “nuisance” of ditching the traditional Mass. I think that’s dishonest. Causing unnecessary angst in souls already deeply disturbed by what is going on in the Church. Honestly, things are so bad now, nobody with even a smattering of awareness of how the Devil is attacking the Church today, nobody should be attending, let alone writing about, the new Mass. Just vote with your feet. And if you are two hours away from a TLM, stay at home, read your missal, pray your rosary, do some extra spiritual reading. Nobody is obliged to participate in any “liturgy” which is a spiritual danger. So, I disagree – the new Mass is anything but newsworthy. It’s dead. Cardinal Ranjith foretold, some years ago, that in 30 years, it would be gone. Don’t try to resuscitate it. Let it rest in peace.Liked by 1 person
        • WhispersofRestorationOCTOBER 18, 2018 AT 3:08 AM We couldn’t agree more with your encouragement to “vote with your feet” in leaving the Novus Ordo behind, and it’s precisely to this end that we’ve written the article. You are certainly free to disagree that a rite not a half century old is still NEWS in the long memory of the Church (or not worth reporting on); but while some Catholics have the blessed awareness of this novelty and are “over it” as you suggest, they remain the exception to date. This article is not chiefly for them, but rather for those who (as the first line suggests) are just beginning to “connect the dots” regarding the nature of the NO as a revolutionary abandonment of right worship and objective liturgical tradition.Also, if you note any missing or incorrect attributions, or faulty references, we would welcome learning of such. All citations are accurate to our knowledge, albeit carefully positioned to make the aforementioned point. Blessings to you and your work! Like
    3. JBOCTOBER 17, 2018 AT 6:17 PM This is a very thorough commentary, expressing many concerns of mine all in one place. I will share it. Does anyone else feel as if they are being ripped into two by the constant instence of non-truth as Truth? God help usLikeREPLY
    4. cmsgretOCTOBER 17, 2018 AT 6:51 PM So the only thing that won’t change is the collection?LikeREPLY
    5. laicosunidosencristoOCTOBER 18, 2018 AT 3:34 PM That is how these modernist heretics pervert the Catholic Tradition and experiment with the young making them participants in their sacrilegious masses https://www.facebook.com/itakaescolapiosgeneral/photos/a.369663249851139/1162527570564699/?type=3&theaterLikeREPLY
    6. Steve JacobsonOCTOBER 18, 2018 AT 6:01 PM I’m sorry, but this blog entry is quite misleading as it implies that Bergoglio would be undertaking to celebrate something different altogether from the rite of Mass he always presides over. I was skeptical after realizing that all of the footnotes referenced criticism of VII, as opposed to what readers are led to believe is something even beyond the Novus Ordo Missae. This only detracts from what should be real and contemporary criticism of his words and actions that occur on an almost daily basis, and are part of what is diabolical within what some people have referred to as a Youth “Sin-Nod”.Liked by 1 personREPLY
      • WhispersofRestorationOCTOBER 19, 2018 AT 12:56 AM No need to apologize for mistaking the article’s central point. Still, if one were to consider a given Pope’s continued celebration of an impious, heterodox liturgical rite as somehow less “real” or “contemporary” (significant?) than ANYthing else among that Pope’s sundry words and deeds, such a one might benefit from a read of Jackson’s “Nothing Superfluous”; Mosebach’s “Heresy of Formlessness”; SIre’s “Phoenix from the Ashes”; or even our article below; for nothing could be more important than right worship, and thus nothing more disastrous than its loss, its removal, its replacement with a deviant construct – be that construct fifty seconds or fifty years old. Bravo the restoration!https://whispersofrestoration.blog/2018/03/27/et-invisibilium-why-we-cant-make-rites-or-doctrine/
  19. Site: Zero Hedge
    8 hours 46 min ago
    Author: Tyler Durden

    Authored by Tom Luongo,

    Every crisis is also an opportunity.  Don’t worry I’m not about to go all Rahm Emmanuel, Mr. Realpolitik, on you today.  The death/dismemberment of Jamal Khashoggi is both a crisis and an opportunity for the worst people in the world.

    And all of them are seizing the day, as it were. ..

    Frankly, most of it makes me sick to my stomach. Because where were these virtue-signaling champions of human rights like Jamie Dimon of J.P. Morgan or Lindsay Graham (R – AIPAC) for the past three years as Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) prosecuted a starvation campaign in Yemen with U.S. complicity?

    Does Lindsay not know that MbS is funding the U.S. occupation in eastern Syria he’s so in love with?

    Now all of a sudden, every war-monger in Washington and Wall St. wants to cut ties with him because killing a political opponent is “beyond the pale?”  Even Christine LaGarde of the IMF will be a no-show at MbS’s big “Davos in the Desert” conference. 

    This is a political hit job. 

    If this faux outrage wasn’t so transparent it would be pathetic.  On second thought, it is pathetic.

    The truth is MbS is a monster.  But, he’s our monster, unfortunately.  We’ve known this since the moment he entered the scene. 

    Since getting Trump’s stamp of approval in early 2017 MbS has used that to go too far a number of times which the U.S. has had to clean up behind him.  His blockade of Qatar didn’t have Washington’s approval. 

    I’m sure killing Khashoggi in the Saudi Turkish consulate didn’t either.

    His consolidation of power was swift and brutal. 

    It’s only just now dawning on American media companies that the Saudis are a bunch of brutal thugs that make the Lannisters look like Quakers?

    MbS has upset the apple carts of long-standing relationships within the U.S. and European elites and bureaucracies while Trump and Jared Kushner attempt to rebuild the U.S./Saudi/Israeli alliance which languished under Obama.

    And that’s the key to understanding this situation.  They want their satraps back. 

    The over-the-top moralistic chest-beating by the U.S. media is a clear sign that the The Davos Crowd ­– the unelected elites and their government quislings who think they run the world -- wants things returned to the way they were before Trump.

    And with Trump’s huge victory over them in the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, Mueller’s Russia-gate nonsense coming to a close and polls tightening like nooses around the DNC’s neck it was time to launch that last ditch effort to derail Trump before he consolidated power post mid-terms.

    So, with that as the motivation all that is lacking is the catalyst. 

    There must have been a reason why MbS went after Khashoggi now, at a time when it could do the most political damage to Trump.  What that could be I have no idea. Better minds than mine are working on that.  What I know is that all of this stinks of former CIA Director John Brennan and Hillary Clinton trying to derail Trump’s recent domestic political victories and possibly save their own hides.

    Why else would Brennan be all over MSNBC being spoon-fed the official narrative by the talking head in this video if there wasn’t an angle here

    Because they all know that if the Democrats fail to retake at least the House of Representative on November 6th, they will have almost zero leverage left on Capitol Hill to protect them from their myriad of crimes.  The Senate is a lost cause, the Republicans will likely take 58 seats into 2020.

    So, the timing here is what is interesting to me. 

    This situation screams manufactured crisis and everyone is looking at this as an opportunity to get something out of it.  Either MbS was set up or he was provoked (thanks to his now legendary poor impulse control) into offing Khashoggi. 

    There are almost as many theories out there as to why he would do this as there are motives for someone to go after MbS himself. 

    Turkey is looking for a way out of Trump’s dog house.  President Erdogan offered up Pastor Brunson as a peace offering.  Turkey also wants concessions on U.S. backing of Kurdish militias in Syria and buying Iranian oil in two weeks. 

    Wayne Madsen covers the Game of Thrones happening within the Gulf Cooperation Council which only adds to the murk.

    That said, regardless of MbS’s motivations he’s taking the brunt of this.  But the real target is Trump.  And Trump may be forced to ditch MbS along the way. 

    None of this, in the end, is a bad thing.  Trump will survive this thing with Khashoggi because his base doesn’t care.  They care that the Saudis are awful people, though, so eventually Trump will have to wind down the love affair.

    And while I’m loathe to be happy about the ‘bad guys’ winning a battle in some ways, anything that weakens Saudi Arabia’s hold over both U.S. media and foreign policy is a welcome development.

    The Saudis cannot survive without friends.  The Night of the Long Knives is coming within the GCC and MbS hasn’t made many friends in the past four years. 

    It’s time for the Trump administration to end its quixotic quest to overthrow Iran and keep the world safe for Neoconservatism.  We may have gotten an early inkling of this with the removal of Nikki Haley from the U.N. and Trump calling out Defense Secretary James Mattis as “something of a Democrat.”

    Since Mattis and former National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster were the strongest supporters of staying in both Syria and Afghanistan which Trump reluctantly went along with.  But, I think, the IL-20 shootdown has Trump in a different state of mind. 

    The real opportunity here isn’t for the dead-enders in D.C. and Davos.  The real opportunity is for Trump to remake his cabinet and retake control of his foreign policy from the Israeli Firsters and Neocons he’s had to surround himself with now that he’ll be in charge of the GOP next month.

    Beginning the process of loosening ties with Saudi Arabia in light of Khashoggi-gate would be a good start. 

  20. Site: Zero Hedge
    9 hours 15 min ago
    Author: Tyler Durden

    The Department of Justice admitted in a Friday court filing that the FBI used more than one "Confidential Human Source," (also known as informants, or spies) to infiltrate the Trump campaign through former adviser Carter Page, reports the Daily Caller

    “The FBI has protected information that would identify the identities of other confidential sources who provided information or intelligence to the FBI” as well as “information provided by those sources,” wrote David M. Hardy, the head of the FBI’s Record/Information Dissemination Section (RIDS), in court papers submitted Friday.

    Hardy and Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys submitted the filings in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for the FBI’s four applications for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants against Page. The DOJ released heavily redacted copies of the four FISA warrant applications on June 20, but USA Today reporter Brad Heath has sued for full copies of the documents. -Daily Caller

    Included in Hardy's declaration is an acknowledgement that the FBI's spies were in addition to the UK's Christopher Steele - a former MI6 operative who assembled the controversial and largely unproven "Steel Dossier" which the DOJ/FBI used to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on Page. 

    Christopher Steele, Nellie and Bruce Ohr

    The DOJ says it redacted information in order to protect the identity of their confidential sources, which "includes nonpublic information about and provided by Christopher Steele," reads the filing, "as well as information about and provided by other confidential sources, all of whom were provided express assurances of confidentiality." 

    Government lawyers said the payment information is being withheld because disclosing specific payment amounts and dates could “suggest the relative volume of information provided by a particular CHS.” That disclosure could potentially tip the source’s targets off and allow them to “take countermeasures, destroy or fabricate evidence, or otherwise act in a way to thwart the FBI’s activities.” -Daily Caller

    Steele, referred to as Source #1, met with several DOJ / FBI officials during the 2016 campaign, including husband and wife team Bruce and Nellie Ohr. Bruce was the #4 official at the DOJ, while his CIA-linked wife Nellie was hired by Fusion GPS - who also employed Steele, in the anti-Trump opposition research / counterintelligence effort funded by Trump's opponents, Hillary Clinton and the DNC. 

    In addition to Steele, the FBI also employed 73-year-old University of Cambridge professor Stefan Halper, a US citizen, political veteran and longtime US Intelligence asset enlisted by the FBI to befriend and spy on three members of the Trump campaign during the 2016 US election. Halper received over $1 million in contracts from the Pentagon during the Obama years, however nearly half of that coincided with the 2016 US election. 

    Stefan Halper

    Halper's involvement first came to light after the Daily Caller's Chuck Ross reported on his involvement with Carter Page and George Papadopoulos, another Trump campaign aide. Ross's reporting was confirmed by the NYT and WaPo

    In June, Trump campaign aides Roger Stone and Michael Caputo claimed that a meeting Stone took in late May, 2016 with a Russian appears to have been an "FBI sting operation" in hindsight, following bombshell reports in May that the DOJ/FBI used a longtime FBI/CIA asset, Cambridge professor Stefan Halper, to perform espionage on the Trump campaign. 

    Roger Stone

    When Stone arrived at the restaurant in Sunny Isles, he said, Greenberg was wearing a Make America Great Again T-shirt and hat. On his phone, Greenberg pulled up a photo of himself with Trump at a rally, Stone said. -WaPo

    The meeting went nowhere - ending after Stone told Greenberg "You don't understand Donald Trump... He doesn't pay for anything." The Post independently confirmed this account with Greenberg.

    Aftter the meeting, Stone received a text message from Caputo - a Trump campaign communications official who arranged the meeting after Greenberg approached Caputo's Russian-immigrant business partner. 

    How crazy is the Russian?” Caputo wrote according to a text message reviewed by The Post. Noting that Greenberg wanted “big” money, Stone replied: “waste of time.” -WaPo

    In short, the FBI's acknowledgement that they used multiple spies reinforces Stone's assertion that he was targeted by one. 

    Further down the rabbit hole

    Stefan Halper's infiltration of the Trump campaign corresponds with the two of the four targets of the FBI's Operation Crossfire Hurricane - in which the agency sent former counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok and others to a London meeting in the Summer of 2016 with former Australian diplomat Alexander Downer - who says Papadopoulos drunkenly admitted to knowing that the Russians had Hillary Clinton's emails.

    Interestingly Downer - the source of the Papadopoulos intel, and Halper - who conned Papadopoulos months later, are linked through UK-based Haklyut & Co. an opposition research and intelligence firm similar to Fusion GPS - founded by three former British intelligence operatives in 1995 to provide the kind of otherwise inaccessible research for which select governments and Fortune 500 corporations pay huge sums

    Alexander Downer

    Downer - a good friend of the Clintons, has been on their advisory board for a decade, while Halper is connected to Hakluyt through Director of U.S. operations Jonathan Clarke, with whom he has co-authored two books. (h/t themarketswork.com)

    Alexander Downer, the Australian High Commissioner to the U.K. Downer said that in May 2016, Papadopoulos told him during a conversation in London about Russians having Clinton emails.

    That information was passed to other Australian government officials before making its way to U.S. officials. FBI agents flew to London a day after “Crossfire Hurricane” started in order to interview Downer.

    It is still not known what Downer says about his interaction with Papadopoulos, which TheDCNF is told occurred around May 10, 2016.

    Also interesting via Lifezette - "Downer is not the only Clinton fan in Hakluyt. Federal contribution records show several of the firm’s U.S. representatives made large contributions to two of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign organizations."

    Halper contacted Papadopoulos on September 2, 2016 according to The Caller - flying him out to London to work on a policy paper on energy issues in Turkey, Cyprus and Israel - for which he was ultimately paid $3,000. Papadopoulos met Halper several times during his stay, "having dinner one night at the Travellers Club, and Old London gentleman's club frequented by international diplomats." 

    They were accompanied by Halper’s assistant, a Turkish woman named Azra Turk. Sources familiar with Papadopoulos’s claims about his trip say Turk flirted with him during their encounters and later on in email exchanges.


    Emails were also brought up during Papadopoulos’s meetings with Halper, though not by the Trump associate, according to sources familiar with his version of events. The sources say that during conversation, Halper randomly brought up Russians and emails. Papadopoulos has told people close to him that he grew suspicious of Halper because of the remark. -Daily Caller

    Meanwhile, Halper targeted Carter Page two days after Page returned from a trip to Moscow. 

    Page’s visit to Moscow, where he spoke at the New Economic School on July 8, 2016, is said to have piqued the FBI’s interest even further. Page and Halper spoke on the sidelines of an election-themed symposium held at Cambridge days later. Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6 and a close colleague of Halper’s, spoke at the event.


    Page would enter the media spotlight in September 2016 after Yahoo! News reported that the FBI was investigating whether he met with two Kremlin insiders during that Moscow trip.

    It would later be revealed that the Yahoo! article was based on unverified information from Christopher Steele, the former British spy who wrote the dossier regarding the Trump campaign. Steele’s report, which was funded by Democrats, also claimed Page worked with Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort on the collusion conspiracy. -Daily Caller

    A third target of Halper's was Trump campaign co-chairman Sam Clovis, whose name was revealed by the Washington Post on Friday. 

    In late August 2016, the professor reached out to Clovis, asking if they could meet somewhere in the Washington area, according to Clovis’s attorney, Victoria Toensing.

    “He said he wanted to be helpful to the campaign” and lend the Trump team his foreign-policy experience, Toensing said.

    Clovis, an Iowa political figure and former Air Force officer, met the source and chatted briefly with him over coffee, on either Aug. 31 or Sept. 1, at a hotel cafe in Crystal City, she said. Most of the discussion involved him asking Clovis his views on China.

    “It was two academics discussing China,” Toensing said. “Russia never came up.” -WaPo

    Meanwhile, Bruce Ohr is still employed by the Department of Justice, and Fusion GPS continues its hunt for Trump dirt after having partnered with former Feinstein aide and ex-FBI counterintelligence agent, Dan Jones.

    It's been nearly three years since an army of professional spies was unleashed on Trump - and he's still the President, Steele and Downer notwithstanding.

  21. Site: Zero Hedge
    9 hours 45 min ago
    Author: Tyler Durden

    As Russia continues to outmaneuver the US by developing new ballistic missiles like the 9M729 ground-launched cruise missile, as well as hypersonic weapons capable of carrying a nuclear payload, President Trump said Saturday that he plans to abandon a 1987 arms-control treaty that has (on paper, at least) prohibited the US and Russia from deploying intermediate-range nuclear missiles as Russia has continued to "repeatedly violate" its terms according to the president, the Associated Press reports.

    "We’re not going to let them violate a nuclear agreement,” Trump said Saturday after a campaign rally in Elko, Nevada. “We’re going to terminate the agreement."

    In a report that undoubtedly further complicated John Bolton's weekend trip to Moscow, the Guardian revealed on Friday that the national security advisor - in what some described as an overreach of the position's typical role - had been pushing Trump to abandon the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.

    The announcement comes after the U.S. had been warning Russia it could resort to strong countermeasures unless Moscow complies with international commitments to arms reduction under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, a pact struck in the 1980s.

    When first signed by President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev following their historic 1986 meeting, the INF was touted as an important deescalation of tensions between the two superpowers. But it has since become a flashpoint in the increasingly strained relationship between the US and Russia, as both sides have accused the other of violating its terms.

    But for the US, Russia is only part of the problem.

    The New York Times reported that the pact has limited the US from deploying weapons to counter the burgeoning military threat posed by China in the Western Pacific, where the country has ignored claims of sovereignty in the South China Sea and transformed reefs into military bases. And since China was never a party to the treaty, Beijing can hardly cry foul when the US decides to withdrawal, especially because Russia is already openly using the treaty as toilet paper.

    Speaking at a rally in Elko Nevada, President Trump accused Russia of violating the agreement and said he didn't want to leave the US in a position where Russia would be free to "go out and do weapons and we're not allowed to."

    "Russia has violated the agreement. They have been violating it for many years," Trump said after a rally in Elko, Nevada. "And we’re not going to let them violate a nuclear agreement and go out and do weapons and we’re not allowed to."

    Therefore, unless both Russia and China - which isn't a party to the pact - agree to not develop these weapons, the US would be remiss to continue abiding by the terms of the agreement.

    "We’ll have to develop those weapons, unless Russia comes to us and China comes to us and they all come to us and say let’s really get smart and let’s none of us develop those weapons, but if Russia’s doing it and if China’s doing it, and we’re adhering to the agreement, that’s unacceptable," he said.

    While the decision to abandon this treaty - which doesn't bode well for negotiations to extend the New START treaty after it expires in 2021 - carries serious weight, many Americans and Russians, having never lived through a war, might remain ignorant to the potential consequences, as one analyst opined.

    "We are slowly slipping back to the situation of cold war as it was at the end of the Soviet Union, with quite similar consequences, but now it could be worse because (Russian President Vladimir) Putin belongs to a generation that had no war under its belt," said Dmitry Oreshkin, an independent Russian political analyst. "These people aren’t as much fearful of a war as people of Brezhnev’s epoch. They think if they threaten the West properly, it gets scared."

    Russian President Vladimir Putin appeared to try and get in front of the US's decision to leave this week when he declared that Russia would abide by a policy of nonaggression regarding its nuclear arsenal, agreeing only to use its nuclear weapons if it is attacked first.

    Although some inside the Pentagon are reportedly wary of abandoning the treaty, Putin's word is hardly enough to reassure uberhawks like Bolton because the fact remains that if Russia did decide to use any of the array of nuclear arms that it is currently developing, there would be nothing stopping it. And with the US already behind in its push to manufacture advanced weapons like hypersonic missiles, any obstacles to deploying these types of weapons will only serve to weaken the US and strengthen its geopolitical adversaries.

    Watch President Trump's remarks from the rally below:

  22. Site: Peter Hitchens blog
    9 hours 55 min ago
    Author: DM

    Negotiation is a test of strength. And Britain is far weaker than the giant German empire that is the EU. 

    Sooner or later, if we truly want to get out of that empire, we are going to have to grasp this. Poor, hopeless Theresa May hasn’t a chance, not least because she has never really wanted to leave. So she flounders between wild fake militancy, adopted to protect her right flank, and pathetic weakness – her actual position.

    But I have even less time for the posturing braggarts, on all sides of the question, who now pretend that their positions are so pure and wonderful that they cannot give an inch. The Europhiles are ghastly, especially their dangerous call for a second referendum.

    It was one of them, the disastrous David Cameron, who lumbered us with the first referendum. Now, like a man with a crushing hangover who reaches with trembling hands for the bottle that gave it to him, they whimper for another one.

    But worst of all are those who demand a total, pure exit from the EU, even if it means a catastrophic walkout with nothing agreed.

    As I sometimes point out, I don’t recall seeing most of these heroes around when I was one of the few voices calling for British independence in the long years before 2016.

    Back then, most of these born-again, all-or-nothing fanatics, in politics and the media, were keen allies of Mr Cameron, perhaps the worst Prime Minister this country has ever had.

    Remember how he derided anyone who objected to the loss of national independence as silly old fools ‘banging on’, or as ‘fruitcakes’. Well, it seems, they are all fruitcakes now. Though their obsessions are strange.

    I wanted to get out of the EU, and still do, because I believe continental law and forms of government will eventually destroy English law and our unique free Parliament.

    I couldn’t give a farthing for the freedom to import chlorine-washed chicken from the USA, or fling our markets open wide to Asia. In fact, I rather fear it. I do not think that, by leaving the EU, we will suddenly export more. Why would that happen? Our goods are not especially cheap and we make little that the world actually wants. I think we will import more.

    What I want to do is rip up our allegiance to the European Arrest Warrant, a grave breach of our ancient liberties which everyone seems to have completely forgotten about. I want to get rid of the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, now our real Supreme Court. And I want to stop rubber-stamping European Commission directives and pretending they are our own laws. And I would also like to shake free of the crazy policy of pushing the EU eastwards into Ukraine and the Caucasus.

    If Brussels and Washington really want a war with Russia, then let them have one. But Britain has no interest at all in reviving this grubby, aggressive conflict, which has already convulsed Europe twice in one century.

    These aims can be achieved by doing what I have now been urging for months – the Norway Option. This needs no permission from Brussels. It formally takes us out of the EU, so fulfilling the referendum vote. It would make the Irish border as relaxed as the current frontier between Norway and Sweden, which is pretty relaxed. It frees us from three-quarters of EU interference in our laws and life.

    It keeps us in the European Economic Area, so there is no risk to the economy. It frees us from the EU’s damaging Common Agricultural Policy and from the daylight robbery of the Common Fisheries Policy. It hugely cuts our contributions to Brussels.

    But, thanks to strident, inflexible groups of MPs whose main concern is their future careers, it has barely been considered.

    I can’t stop them. But if they manage to lead us into chaos and an economic crash, then I shall at least try to make sure that their selfish folly is not forgotten.


    A whiff of decay swirls around Britain

    I have often predicted that we would soon be applying for full membership of the Third World. But I think we may actually have secretly joined it.

    In the last week, my regular railway line, in the throes of a vastly expensive and interminable modernisation, grossly behind time and over budget, was shut down. 

    Why? Because a test train ran along it and managed to pull down 500 yards of newly installed electric cable. But this was just an inventive new sort of mess. Normally it closes, or slows down to the speeds of the 19th Century, every few days for a ‘signal failure’ or because the weather is too hot, too cold or too windy, or because of mysterious disappearances of train crew. Are they being abducted by aliens?

    While I endure this, I am unceasingly hectored by automated announcements, the latest being a creepily friendly voice that urges me to hold the handrail as
    I go up the stairs on the station footbridge.

    The fewer and later the trains, the more announcements there are. But when everything goes totally wrong, silence falls, staff disappear and electronic screens go blank.

    On my way to the station, I have to pick my way past unending roadworks (I do not think the three-mile journey has been free of these for a single day in the past three years). Most of the time nothing at all is actually happening, and it would take a trained archaeologist to work out what has changed from one week’s end to the next.

    At the luxurious cinema in a newly built shopping mall (which took longer to complete than the Pyramids), buckets recently appeared to catch leaks from the ceiling after some moderately heavy rain. Its air-conditioning was overpowered by the summer heatwave, which is surely what it was built to deal with.

    And ever and again, as I walk or bicycle down the streets of modern British cities, which are flashy and modern on the surface, my nose picks up the ancient, unmistakable smell of malfunctioning drains, which you might expect to encounter in Baghdad, Cairo or Bombay, but is something new here.

    And if it’s not that, it is the equally unwelcome aroma of marijuana, that is now legal here in all but name.

    Perhaps the two are connected.


    I am rather ashamed now by how unmoved I was by the original Moon landings in 1969. 

    It was only after I saw, in a Moscow museum, the tiny fire-blackened capsule in which Yuri Gagarin returned to Earth that it came home to me just how much courage astronauts needed to go into space. 

    The powerful if rather gloomy film First Man, in which Ryan Gosling plays Neil Armstrong, is a useful reminder of an astonishing episode which I lived through, but which is now as remote as the first flight of the Wright brothers was to me in my childhood.

    It’s also amusing to be reminded that man went to the Moon in supposedly archaic miles, feet and inches, not modern metres. 


    If you want to comment on Peter Hitchens, click on Comments and scroll down

  23. Site: Zero Hedge
    10 hours 10 min ago
    Author: Tyler Durden

    After a painful stretch of five consecutive down months, September couldn't come fast enough for Horseman Global, which we previously dubbed "the world's most bearish hedge fund", due to its exposure which, while fluctuating, has been bearish for the past 6 years even as it generated significant alpha, and most recently had a net short position of -47.33%, even more bearish than its -43.5% net last month. 

    In September, the fund finally rebounded, rising 1.8% - its first up month since March -  bringing its YTD return to -8.79%, with "gains coming from the long book and the short book. The currency book lost money" according to CIO Russell Clark's latest monthly letter.

    So after what is setting up to be Horseman's most painful year since 2016 in which the fund lost 24%, is Clark ready to throw in the bearish towel, stop "fighting the Fed", and join the countless ranks of momentum chasers?

    Not at all. One month after Clark wrote in his September letter to clients that he is confident the time for the next big short has come, the Horseman CIO says in the latest letter to clients to "make no mistake, this fund is run to make a positive return for investors. You might think with the fund being net short I am trying to position it as a hedge, or that I am super cautious, but this could not be further from the truth. Why not just buy the market, or buy momentum then? Well, my personal experience of "buying assets that are going up" has been decidedly mixed. What I have found really works for me is doing detailed analysis of an industry, working out what has to happen from basic business and economic logic and having positions in these areas, ready to take advantage of the outcome."

    Unwilling to join the bullish crowd, Clark then explains his preferred strategy as follows:

    The idea is, while we are waiting for a downturn which I see as inevitable, these different assets will trade independently of each other, but hopefully produce a small upward bias to the fund. Then when the inevitable occurs, these previously uncorrelated assets become correlated and the fund has a huge move. It's an odd strategy I know, but it does allow the fund to run net short for prolonged periods of time.

    This bearish strategy worked remarkably well for 4 years - from 2012 to early 2016 - when even as global stock markets continued to rise, the fund which was running extremely net short, and made positive returns year after year (see table above). According to Clark, this alpha "was the culmination of work done in 2010 and 2011 as we worked out what was going on in the Chinese steel industry and how its inevitable problems would affect miners, Latin America, currencies and bonds."

    And after what the CIO says was "a lot of hard work in 2017 and 2018" he finally feels that he has "found the combination of assets both long and short that offer the return profile that we want."

    So what is Horseman seeing?

    In a word: oil. In 5 words: oil prices going much higher.

    As Clark wrote in his most recent Market View letter, data from the EIA, price action of stocks, and comments and capital market activity "are all pointing to the oil industry beginning to move away from US onshore. Not in a huge way, but a bit," he adds. Looking at the "brutal and unrelenting economics of US shale oil drilling", Clark predicts that US oil production will slow and quite possibly contract.

    This is made even more likely in my view by the consolidation of large shale drillers, who may well feel that it is in their self-interest to slow oil production and help to push up WTI oil prices. Betting on self-interest, particularly when it comes to Americans, has historically been a good bet.

    What happens next could be a replay of the oil price shock observed in the days just before the global financial crisis struck in mid 2008.

    WTI prices have already risen from 30 USD at the low in 2016 to 74 USD today. The last time US oil production slowed, the discount to WTI disappeared, and if that happened today it would move to 85 USD. Given the current issues with Iran, in anything but a recession, it's hard to see oil prices falling.

    Should this thesis pan out, Clark predicts that the sudden jump in oil prices would cause US auto demand to weaken, a sector that is already falling and suffering from slowing demand in China and rising commodity prices. Next, falling auto demand would impact a semiconductor market that is already seeing inventory builds and rising competition from China.

    Aside from specific sectors, a slowdown in US oil production and a rise in oil prices, would also have broader economic implictions and cause a sharp slowdown in US growth.

    And given that the US fiscal deficit is already at 4% of GDP, "even a minor slowdown would cause this to widen dramatically, likely leading to the US dollar falling, either due to changes in the expectation of Fed tightening, or concerns about the fiscal stability of the US."  And as the spread in oil prices closes, this also reduces a huge competitive advantage for the US.

    A falling US dollar would feed into our very short USD currency book and would aid our large short positions in European and Japanese auto manufacturers and suppliers.

    But what has Clark most excited about this sequence of bearish events is that "all these different trades feed off of each other, and they are beginning to correlate. Much like in the period from 2011 to 2016, as one area begins to work, we can move the fund to other areas as weakness in one area bleeds into another."

    As usual, Clark's letter ends with his net positioning, which "remains short developed markets and long commodity related companies", and nowhere is the fund more short than tech...

    ... which is a net -50% of the fund's entire book.

    We conclude with the parting words from his September letter, which we suggest being read in conjunction with his latest one:

    2011 and 2018 are playing out very similarly for me. Easy momentum trades of the past year are breaking down, and investors are herded from one area to another. While all the talk is of an emerging market crisis, the biggest emerging markets are all engaging in reform, while the developed markets are still overly reliant on easy money. In 2011, selling the then outperforming emerging markets, and buying Irish debt was the right trade. And in 2018, shorting developed markets and buying emerging markets looks the right trade now.

  24. Site: RT - News
    10 hours 11 min ago
    Author: RT
    Boldly accusing Russia of violating the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty, Donald Trump has vowed to pull out of the “unacceptable” deal. Moscow however has its own view on who is in violation of the key Cold War era pact.
    Read Full Article at RT.com
  25. Site: La Salette Journey
    10 hours 46 min ago

    My last Facebook post:

    Dr. Germain Grisez, in a talk entitled "Legalism, Moral Truth and Pastoral Practice" given at a 1990 symposium held in Philadelphia, had this to say:

    "Theologians and pastors [pay attention here Francis] who dissent from received Catholic teaching think they are rejecting legalism because they set aside what they think are mere rules in favor of what they feel are more reasonable standards. Their views are thoroughly imbued with legalism, however. For dissenters think of valid moral norms as rules formulated to protect relevant values. Some even make their legalism explicit by denying that there is any necessary connection between moral goodness (which they restrict to the transcendental level of a love with no specific content) and right action (which they isolate at the categorical level of inner-worldly behavior). But whether their legalism is explicit or not, all the dissenters hold that specific moral norms admit exceptions whenever, all things considered, making an exception seems the best - or least bad - thing to do. Most dissenters also think that specific moral norms that were valid in times past can be inappropriate today, and so they regard the Church's contested moral teachings as outdated rules that the Church should change."

    Dr. Grisez reminded his listeners at the Philadelphia symposium that, "During the twentieth century, pastoral treatment of repetitious sins through weakness - especially masturbation, homosexual behavior, premarital sex play and contraception within marriage - grew increasingly mild. Pastors correctly recognized that weakness and immaturity can lessen such sins’ malice. Thinking legalistically, they did not pay enough attention to the sins’ inherent badness and harmfulness, and they developed the idea that people can freely choose to do something that they regard as a grave matter without committing a mortal sin. This idea presupposes that in making choices people are not responsible precisely for choosing what they choose. That presupposition makes sense within a legalistic framework, because lawgivers can take into account mitigating factors and limit legal culpability. But it makes no sense for morality correctly understood, because moral responsibility in itself is not something attached to moral acts but simply is moral agents’ self-determination in making free choices. Repetitious sinners through weakness also were handicapped by their own legalism. Not seeing the inherent badness of their sins, they felt that they were only violating inscrutable rules. When temptation grew strong, they had little motive to resist, especially because they could easily go to confession and have the violation fixed. Beginning on Saturday they were holy; by Friday they were again sinners. This cyclic sanctity robbed many people’s lives of Christian dynamism and contributed to the dry rot in the Church that became manifest in the 1960s, when the waves of sexual permissiveness battered her."

    Dr. Grisez then went on to explain that, "Pastors free of legalism will teach the faithful how sin makes moral requirements seem to be alien impositions, help them see through this illusion, and encourage them to look forward to and experience the freedom of God’s children, who rejoice in the fruit of the Spirit and no longer experience the constraint of law.."
  26. Site: Zero Hedge
    10 hours 46 min ago
    Author: Tyler Durden

    Authored by Ritesh Jain via WorldOutOfWhack.com,

    Ned Davis research writes...

    ...note the red arrow at the top right.

    Readings above 70 have found us in recession 92.11% of the time (1970 to present).

    Several months ago, the model score stood at 61.3. It has just moved to 80.04.

    Expect a global recession. It either has begun or will begin shortly. Though no guarantee, as 7.89% of the time since 1970 when the global economic indicators that make up this model were above 70, a recession did not occur.


    China, Europe and Emerging Markets economic growth is already rolling over, and if US continues to raise rates into the year end, we might even see US growth taking a hit by first quarter of next year.

    That is when the chances are that the global economy enters into recession.

  27. Site: southern orders
    11 hours 16 min ago

  28. Site: Zero Hedge
    11 hours 16 min ago
    Author: Tyler Durden

    Want to know when you'll die? 

    UCLA biostatistician Steve Horvath stumbled across a reliable method of predicting a person's lifespan based on 300-500 DNA markers which reveal whether someone is aging unusually fast or slowly compared to their chronological age, according to a recent research paper. And while it can't predict the exact date and time of your demise (yet), it comes pretty close. 

    Horvath became particularly intrigued by how certain chemical changes to cytosine—one of the four DNA bases, or “letters” of the genetic code—make genes more or less active. Given someone’s actual age, looking for these changes in that person’s DNA can tell him whether the person’s body is aging unusually fast or slowly. His team tested this epigenetic clock on 13,000 blood samples collected decades ago, from people whose subsequent date of death was known. The results revealed that the clock can be used to predict mortality. -MIT Technology Review

    Horvath, a straight man who grew up in Frankfurt, Germany with a gay identical twin, made the discovery while helping a colleague analyze biological data from the saliva of twins with opposite sexual orientations. The original goal was to determine whether chemical changes could indicate whether certain genes were turned on or off. 

    Steve Horvath​​​​

    And while he wasn't able to link homosexuality to so-called epigenetic changes (which alter the activity of DNA but not the DNA sequence itself), Horvath found a powerful link between epigenetic changes and aging

    "I was blown away by how strong the signal was," he says. "I dropped most other projects in my lab and said: ‘This is the future.’"

    Aging eight or more years faster than your calendar age equates to twice the typical risk of dying, while aging seven years slower is associated with half the risk of death, Horvath says. His lab has developed a new version that is such a precise life span predictor they named it after the Grim Reaper: DNAm GrimAge. The epigenetic clock is more accurate the younger a person is. It’s especially inaccurate for the very old. -MIT Technology Review

    Luck vs. genetics

    Horvath finds that around 40% of the speed of the epigenetic clock is determined by genetics, while te rest if due to "lifestyle and luck."

    As we age, the cytosine at hundreds of thousand of spots in our DNA either gains or loses methyl chemical groups (CH3). Horvath’s insight was to measure these increases and decreases in methylation, find the 300 to 500 changes that matter most, and use those to make his clocks. His findings suggest that the speed of the clock is strongly influenced by underlying genes. He estimates that about 40% of the ticking rate is determined by genetic inheritance, and the rest by lifestyle and luck. -MIT Technology Review

    Scientist Morgan Levine, who completed postdoctoral research on Horvath's lab and currently heads a lab at Yale, has begun to compare epigenetic profiles with profile cells extracted from the lining of a healthy umbilical cord. She thinks that she will eventually be able to predict who is at the greatest risk of which diseases, as well as determine how to delay aging. 

    "Your genes aren’t your fate, but even less so with things like epigenetics," she says. "There definitely should be things we can do to delay aging if we can just figure out what they are."

    A few likely contenders are totally unsurprising. Eating a healthy diet including lots of vegetables and fish is associated with slower epigenetic aging. Feel older when you’re sleep deprived? It’s probably not a coincidence. Horvath has shown that people with insomnia are more likely to show accelerated epigenetic aging. “Everything you associate with a healthy lifestyle does relate to the new biomarkers in the expected way, which is a boring result, but it’s scientifically very exciting,” he says. -MIT Technology Review

    Exercise is bullshit (ok, not entirely) 

    While diet and lifestyle are a significant factor in longevity, Horvath surprisingly found that regular exercise doesn't add more than a few months to your life. That said, he says he wants like to look at changes in muscle too in order to see whether exercise makes a difference there. 

    Horvath hopes that refinements to his method will make it precise enough to reflect changes in lifestyle and behavior, as well as assist in the science of aging. While hundreds of millions of dollars have been thrown behind biotech solutions to slow down aging and defer disease, Horvath hopes that his clock might be able to help researchers determine whether various treatments are effective without having to wait 50 years to find out. 

    Insurance companies really like the cut of Horvath's scythe

    If there's one group who would love a crystal ball when it comes to death, it's the insurance industry. Companies such as Reinsurance Group of America have already begun exploring epigenetic clocks to "tweak and personalize risk assessments" for life insurance products, reports the Review

    Right now, rates are based largely on demographics—people’s gender and age—and a few health metrics, such as whether they smoke. The clock adds another useful data point.

    Such personalization raises questions about fairness. If your epigenetic clock is ticking faster through no fault of your own, should you be charged a higher rate for life insurance? The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008—known as GINA—protects against discrimination on the basis of genes. But it doesn’t address epigenetics.

    There’s also the issue of privacy. Your likely life span or true biological age is information that many consider intensely personal. For now, regulations and privacy policies don’t even consider the possibility of such information. But as the science quickly progresses, questions about how to use and protect this data will become ever more pressing. -MIT Technology Review

    Death clocks for death panels?

    Gal Salomon, CEO of Israeli company Clew Medical, which uses artificial intelligence to identify medical risks in hospitals, initially thought the notion of a death predictor was unethical. Then, he realized that it could help doctors "to understand where we need to stop." Clew has developed an algorithm which can help doctors and family members switch from aggressive to palliative care, "overruling the typical instinct to provide heroic life-saving measures." Clew's technology can also alert a family that the end is near, according to Salomon. 

    That said, some have doubted the usefulness of Horvath's death clock. "I haven’t seen any of these purported predictive algorithms be precise in terms of timing of death—to the contrary," says Diane Meier, a professor of geriatrics and palliative medicine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City. "People live for a really long time with a very high burden of disease and frailty," she says.

  29. Site: The New Theological Movement
    11 hours 22 min ago
    By considering the love of God, we are inspired to set aside every worldly attachment and love God in return.

    This is what makes the Rosary a "school of prayer" -- by praying the Rosary, we learn how to pray.  The Rosary focuses on the love that God has revealed in the essential mysteries of our Lord's life, and moves us to imitate the love of Jesus. The Rosary is nothing more than the Scriptures: Both in the prayers and in the meditations.

    St Louis Marie de Montfort recommends that you pray all fifteen decades of the Rosary every day, and I also recommend this. Be grateful to God for whatever devotion you have for the Rosary, and for however many decades you already prayer regularly!  If we pray even one decade daily with much love, I am convinced that our Lady will lead us to praying all fifteen decades regularly.

    Listen online [here]!

  30. Site: RT - News
    11 hours 36 min ago
    Author: RT
    Not satisfied with the Saudi story on how journalist Jamal Khashoggi died in Turkey, EU leaders are demanding an in-depth probe, with Germany's foreign minister saying that Berlin shouldn’t sell arms to Riyadh until it’s finished.
    Read Full Article at RT.com
  31. Site: Zero Hedge
    11 hours 46 min ago
    Author: Tyler Durden

    Authored by EconomicPrism's MN Gordon, annotated by Acting-Man's Pater Tenebrarum,

    End of the Road

    The confluence of factors that influence market prices are vast and variable.  One moment patterns and relationships are so pronounced you can set a cornerstone by them.  The next moment they vanish like smoke in the wind. One thing that makes trading stocks so confounding is that the buy and sell points appear so obvious in hindsight.  When examining a stock’s price chart over a multi-year duration the wave movements appear to be almost predictable.

    The fascinating obviousness of hindsight – it is now perfectly clear when one should have bought AMZN. Unfortunately it wasn’t quite as clear in real time. [PT]

    Trend lines matching interim highs and lows, and bounded price movements within this range, display what, in retrospect, are the precise moments to buy and sell. In practice, the stock market dishes out hefty doses of humility with impartial judgment. What’s more, being right does not always translate to success.  Sometimes it is more costly to be right at the wrong time than wrong at the right time.

    One fallacy that has gained popularity over the last decade is the zealot belief that the Fed disappears risk from markets.  That by expanding and moderating the money supply by just the right amount, and at just the right time, markets can grow within a pleasant setting of near nonexistent volatility.  Some even trust that when there is a major stock market crash, the Fed, having the courage to act, will soften the landing and quickly put things back upon a path of righteous growth.

    Believers in the all-powerful controls of the Fed have a 30 year track record they can point to with conviction.  Over this period, the Fed has put a lamp unto the feet and a light unto the path of the stock and bond market.  But what if the Fed’s adventures in fabricating a market without risk are approaching the end of the road?  Let’s explore…

    Sometimes the road just ends… and you either hit a wall or fall right off a cliff. [PT]

    White On Rice

    When Alan Greenspan first executed the “Greenspan put” following the 1987 Black Monday crash, markets were well positioned for this centrally coordinated intervention.  Interest rates, after peaking out in 1981, were still high.  The yield on the 10-Year Treasury note was about 10 percent.  There was plenty of room for borrowing costs to fall.

    The mechanics of the Greenspan put are extraordinarily simple.  When the stock market drops by about 20 percent, the Fed intervenes by lowering the federal funds rate.  This typically results in a real negative yield, and an abundance of cheap credit.

    This gimmick has a twofold effect of seen and observable market distortions.  First, the burst of liquidity puts an elevated floor under how far the stock market falls.  Hence, the put option effect.  Second, the interest rate cuts inflate bond prices, as bond prices move inverse to interest rates.

    Of course, Wall Street money managers took to the symbiotic forgiveness of the Greenspan put like white on rice.  With this new brand of central planning firmly in place, market uncertainty was largely mitigated. The workings of the Greenspan put made markets behave in more or less predictable ways.

    A portfolio manager could smile in the face of the occasional and inevitable stock market crash because it meant their bond holdings were rising.  Then, after a pleasant dip buying opportunity, their stocks would be running back up to new highs.  This was the story of U.S. financial markets and money management from 1987 to 2016.

    The infamous crash of 1987 – when the „Greenspan put“ was born. Ten year note yields fell from more then 10.2% to 8.8% within days of the crash. The punters didn’t know it yet at the time, but yields would keep falling for years to come… [PT]

    No doubt, there were several gut wrenching sell offs during this period – like 1987, 2001, and 2008.  But every time, the Fed came to the rescue by cutting interest rates, bumping up bond values, and engineering an extended stock market rally.  Few questioned whether this Fed intervention would ever cease to be available.

    Why You Should Expect the Unexpected

    Over the decades, risk management strategies were invented that advocated the virtues of a 60/40 stock-to-bond allocation portfolio.  And why not?  The Greenspan put brought a comforting certainty to the market.  When stocks go down, bonds go up. Somewhere along the lines the flow of funds from stocks to bonds during a market panic became regarded as a flight to safety.  But what if, in the year 2018, this flight is no longer to safety; but, to danger?

    What may come as a great big surprise in the next market downturn is that this relationship between stocks and bonds is not set in stone.  In fact, over the next decade we suspect this relationship will be revealed to have been an aberration.  An artifact of a now defunct disinflationary world.

    We haven’t done a thorough analysis.  But we have an inkling that prior to the Greenspan put, the ‘stocks down bonds up’ relationship of the last 30 years was far less certain.  What we mean is that during the prior decade, the 1970s, there were occurrences where both stocks and bonds went down in unison.  Such occurrences could happen again.

    Correlations between bond yields and stock prices have indeed alternated significantly over extended time periods. During the Great Depression, WW2 and the post-war recovery, interest rates and stocks were most of the time positively correlated – they fell and rose in tandem. From around 1969 to 1998 they were mostly negatively correlated, when bond yields declined, stock prices surged and vice versa. After the Russian crisis of 1998, the relationship changed once again to an increasingly positive correlation, with falling stock prices coinciding with falling bond yields and vice versa (even though the larger trend in bond yields remained down because the declining phases were stronger then the rising phases). [PT]

    You see, the conditions that made the Greenspan put possible are the opposite of the conditions that exist today.  Rates are low and are moving higher.  The world is oversaturated with debt.  Policies of mass money debasement have bubbled stocks and treasuries out to extremes well beyond what was honestly fathomable.

    Yes, the doom and gloom of an epic stock and bond market meltdown are approaching.  At the moment, Fed Chair Powell’s even determined to bring it on.  We applaud his efforts.

    Yet when push comes to shove, and the Fed lowers the federal funds rate, expect the unexpected to happen.  The Greenspan put – the market savior – will be mowed over like a ground squirrel beneath a tractor rotary tiller.  The market carnage left in its wake will be grotesque and unrecognizable.

  32. Site: Zero Hedge
    12 hours 58 sec ago
    Author: Tyler Durden

    One day after Saudi Arabia admitted that WaPo journalist and US resident Jamal Khashoggi was killed at the Saudi consulate, a senior official in Turkey's ruling party responded on Saturday saying that Turkey will "never allow a cover-up" of the Khashoggi killing, reflecting international skepticism over the official Saudi account released late on Friday that the writer died during a "fistfight."

    Saudi Public Prosecutor: Preliminary Investigations into Case of Citizen Jamal Khashoggi Show Death. https://t.co/ncutAdXA3h

    — Saudi Embassy (@SaudiEmbassyUSA) October 20, 2018

    The Turkish response was one of many critical reactions to the Saudi announcement of the writer’s violent death, indicating the kingdom’s efforts to defuse a scandal that has gripped the world were not only falling short, but likely to provoke even further scrutiny. U.S. President Donald Trump, however, was an exception. Asked late on Friday whether he thought the Saudi explanation was credible, he replied: "I do. I do."

    Meanwhile, despite widespread outrage over the killing of the columnist for The Washington Post, it was still unclear to what extent the top leadership of Saudi Arabia, including crown prince Mohammed bin Salman, the 33-year-old crown prince - whose early promises of sweeping reform are being eclipsed by concerns that he is an impulsive, even sinister figure - would be held accountable for what human rights activists describe as an extrajudicial killing by Saudi agents.

    Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman

    Adding pressure for a full blown probe, the editorial board of The Washington Post said that the only way to find out what happened to its reporter, would be through an international investigation led by a U.N.-appointed panel. Saudi Arabia’s "latest version asks us to believe that Mr. Khashoggi died after becoming engaged in a “brawl” with officials who had been sent to meet him. His body, Saudi officials told several journalists, was handed over to a “local collaborator” for disposal,” it said, while also criticizing Trump for allegedly trying to help top Saudi leaders escape “meaningful accountability.”

    On Saturday, the Saudis defied calls for a probe when Saudi Arabia's judiciary said it enjoys full autonomy to deal with the case of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the Kingdom's Justice Minister Waleed Al-Samaani said in a statement issued by state news agency SPA on Saturday.

    Saudi Arabia's Justice Minister Waleed Al-Samaani

    He added that the Khashoggi case took place on Saudi sovereign territory and it will be looked at by Saudi courts when all procedures are complete.

    The justice minister explained that the directives and decisions ordered by King Salman, in the wake of the unfortunate and tragic event that led to Khashoggi’s death, are a continuation of the Kingdom’s approach to “establish the foundations of justice, according to our tolerant law, and the leadership's keenness to protect the safety of all its citizens and care for them wherever they are.”

    Al-Samaani added that the Kingdom is steadfast in its justice and will not be destabilized by any hostile behaviors, including reckless media outlets that lack professionalism and credibility.

    In lieu of an international investigation, Saudi Arabia said 18 Saudi suspects were in custody and intelligence officials had been fired. But, as the AP notes, critics claim the complex scheme that led to Khashoggi’s death could not have occurred without the knowledge of the Crown Prince, who according to unconfirmed reports may be on his way out with the Saudi royal family considering his replacement, with his much less ambitious and more predictable brother, the Saudi Ambassador to the US, Prince Khalid bin Salman.

    Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. Prince Khalid bin Salman. He was recalled last week after Jamal Khashoggi's disappearance

    The Saudi narrative of Khashoggi’s death, which reportedly occurred in a "brawl" following discussions with visiting officials in the consulate, contrasts with Turkish pro-government media reports that a Saudi hit squad, including an autopsy expert, traveled to Istanbul to kill Khashoggi and dispose of his body, which has not yet been found.

    “It’s not possible for the Saudi administration to wiggle itself out of this crime if it’s confirmed,” said Numan Kurtulmus, deputy head of Turkey’s Justice and Development Party. He also said Turkey would share its evidence of Khashoggi’s killing with the world and that a "conclusive result" of the investigation is close. Another Turkish ruling party official also criticized Saudi Arabia, saying the kingdom should have given its explanation “before the situation reached this point.”

    The irony here is that suddenly it is Turkey - which in the aftermath of the 2016 "attempted coup" on president Erdogan detained and imprisoned thousands of public servants who were allegedly working for the "shadow state" without due process - that has become the beacon of judicial and civil rights purity.

    That said, the Saudi response was botched from the start: the oil-rich kingdom initially denied any knowledge of the fate of Khashoggi, who disappeared after entering its consulate. The overnight admission that the writer died in the consulate came in Saudi state media more than two weeks after Khashoggi, 59, entered the building for paperwork required to marry his Turkish fiancée and never came out. The kingdom has described assertions in Turkish media leaks, based on purported audio recordings that Khashoggi was tortured, killed and dismembered inside the consulate, as “baseless.”

    “God have mercy on you my love Jamal, and may you rest in Paradise,” Khashoggi’s fiancée, Hatice Cengiz, tweeted following the Saudi announcements.

    وَإِذْ قَتَلْتُمْ نَفْسًا فَادَّارَأْتُمْ فِيهَا ۖ وَاللَّهُ مُخْرِجٌ مَّا كُنتُمْ تَكْتُمُونَ
    البقرة (72)
    رحمك الله يا حبيبي جمال وجعل مثواك الفردوس الأعلى مع سيد الشهداء حمزة#السعودية_قتلت_خاشقجي#شهيد_الكلمة#الشهيد_جمال_خاشقجي#ولكم_في_القصاص_حياة#أين_جسد_الشهيد_خاشقجي

    — Hatice Cengiz / خديجة (@mercan_resifi) October 20, 2018

    Meanwhile, in firing officials close to "progressive" Prince Mohammed, Riyadh stopped short of implicating the heir-apparent of the world’s largest oil exporter and the de facto head of OPEC. King Salman, his father, appointed him to lead a committee that will restructure the kingdom’s intelligence services after Khashoggi’s slaying. No major decisions in Saudi Arabia are made outside of the ultraconservative kingdom’s ruling Al Saud family.

    As a result, with many - including members of Congress - seeking to punish the Crown Prince, it is unlikely that the Saudi announcement will be the end of the Khashoggi scandal, especially now that the UN is also involved. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres "stresses the need for a prompt, thorough and transparent investigation into the circumstances of Mr. Khashoggi’s death and full accountability for those responsible,” his spokesman Stephane Dujarric said. Standing outside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, Dujarric said the “authority that gave the orders” in the killing of Khashoggi should be punished.

    As for the White House, which has repeatedly stated its reluctance to crack down on Saudi Arabia too forcefully over fears of losing hundreds of billions in lucrative weapons contracts, not to mention access to Saudi oil, press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the U.S. will advocate for justice in the Khashoggi case that is “timely, transparent and in accordance with all due process.” And while Trump called the Saudi announcement a “good first step,” but said what happened to Khashoggi was “unacceptable.”

    Saudi Arabia has already hinted that pushing too hard for retaliation against the Crown Prince, or implementing Saudi sanctions, could prove disastrous. Last weekend, a Saudi government source told the official Saudi Press Agency that "the Kingdom affirms its total rejection of any threats and attempts to undermine it, whether by threatening to impose economic sanctions, using political pressures, or repeating false accusation," adding that "the Kingdom also affirms that if it receives any action, it will respond with greater action."

    The biggest surprise, however, came when Saudi-owned Al Arabiya channel’s general manager Turki Aldakhil warned we could see an explosive move in oil prices if relations with Saudi Arabia imploded.

    "If U.S. sanctions are imposed on Saudi Arabia, we will be facing an economic disaster that would rock the entire world,” he wrote in an op-ed. "If the price of oil reaching $80 angered President Trump, no one should rule out the price jumping to $100, or $200, or even double that figure."

    This mess could ultimately throw the entire Muslim world “into the arms of Iran, which will become closer to Riyadh than Washington,” Aldakhil said. “The truth is that if Washington imposes sanctions on Riyadh, it will stab its own economy to death, even though it thinks that it is stabbing only Riyadh."

    * * *

    For now Saudi Arabia is hoping that its actions in response to the killing will be sufficient: on Friday, in addition to the detention of 18 unnamed Saudis, the kingdom announced the firing of four top intelligence officials, including Maj. Gen. Ahmed bin Hassan Assiri, a one-time spokesman for the Saudi military’s campaign in Yemen who later became a confidant of Prince Mohammed.

    Saud Qahtani, a powerful adviser to the prince, also was fired. Qahtani had led Saudi efforts to isolate Qatar amid a boycott of the country by the kingdom and three other Arab nations as part of a political dispute. On Twitter, where Qahtani had launched vitriolic attacks against those he saw as the kingdom’s enemies, he thanked the Saudi government for the opportunity to serve. “I will remain a loyal servant to my country for all times,” he wrote.

    For now, the key man in the Khashoggi death - the Crown Prince - has not been implicated, but some skeptics have been reading between the lines and wonder if the entire event is not just a setup for a power shift within the Saudi royal family: recall that it was two months ago when Reuters reported that the Saudi (allegedly senile) King Salman had shelved the historic Saudi Aramco IPO to "teach his son, Prince Mohammed, a lesson."

    Referencing last November's unprecedented crackdown on Saudi oligarchs - another crackdown orchestrated by the Crown Prince, which however received far less foreign condemnation - we said in August that "as last November's events showed, when it comes to family ties in Saudi Arabia, which along with its oil deposits is legendary for its extended, constantly shifting intra-family feuds, the King's affectation with MbS could turn on a dime following another flawed decision."

    It appears that the dimes have now turned.

  33. Site: Community in Mission
    12 hours 13 min ago
    Author: Msgr. Charles Pope

    In the Sunday Gospel, the Lord Jesus speaks of crosses and crowns. The apostles have only crowns in mind, but Jesus knows the price of the crown. So, He must teach them and us that crowns—the things we value most—come only through the cross.

    It may help to review the context of this Gospel. Jesus is making His final journey to Jerusalem. He is on his way to the cross and has already announced this to His disciples on two occasions. Throughout Jesus’ final journey, the apostles prove unwilling and/or incapable of grasping what He is trying to teach them.

    This Sunday’s Gospel is a perfect illustration of a common biblical theme that I refer to as the inept response. It is a common situation in the Gospels wherein Jesus presents a profound teaching, yet within a matter of verses or sometimes even just a few words, the apostles demonstrate that they have absolutely no understanding of what He has just told them.

    You may recall that in the Gospel readings for the previous two Sundays, the Lord gave critically important teachings. Two weeks ago, he stood a young child in their midst and spoke of the child as being truly great. He also warned that we must be able to receive the Kingdom of God like a little child. Last week, He warned of the pernicious effects of wealth and spoke about how hard it is for the rich to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

    Despite these recent teachings, this Sunday’s Gospel opens with James and John (and later all the apostles) wishing honors upon themselves. They want seats at the head of the table, high offices in the Kingdom, which they still conceive of in worldly terms. Never mind that Jesus has taught them that the place of honor is not at the head or even the foot of the table; the honor is upon those who serve those at the table.

    The apostles (and we) just don’t understand, no matter how clear Jesus is or how often He repeats Himself.

    Let’s look at today’s Gospel in three stages.

    Misplaced Priorities – The Gospel begins in this way: James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to Jesus and said to him, “Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you.” He replied, “What do you wish me to do for you?” They answered him, “Grant that in your glory we may sit one at your right and the other at your left.”

    James and John ask an inept question and even demand to sit in places of honor. This is a misplaced priority. Their understanding of the place of honor is worldly. Further, they want to move to the head of the table. They want the Lord to grant them this honor. Even in a worldly way of thinking, places of honor must usually be earned. Although some people are born into royalty, most attain leadership and honors only after years of effort. Thus, even from a worldly point of view, James and John are being overly bold, exhibiting little understanding that prior to honors comes labor, comes the earning of those honors. They want the crown without the cross.

    Major Price – The Lord Jesus replies to them, “You do not know what you are asking! Can you drink the cup that I drink or be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?”

    Was Jesus astonished, amused, or saddened? It is not easy to say, but clearly James and John had absolutely no idea what they were asking—and neither do we. Too often we want blessings, honors, or seats in high places, but give little thought to the crosses that are necessary to get there and to stay there.

    Those who finally attain leadership often understand what a cross it is. It can be lonely. There are many pressures and long hours of toil. True leadership has its benefits, but it is hard. Most leaders know also the sting of criticism.

    There is an old joke among bishops that goes something like this: “When a man becomes a bishop, two things are certain: he will never again have a bad meal, and he will never again hear the truth.” Leaders in many other walks of life can relate to this.

    The Lord Jesus wonders whether James and John have any idea what they are really asking. His question is also poignant, for He has been trying to teach them of the passion, the pain, the crucifixion that awaits Him, and which even He, the Lord of glory, must endure before entering into His glory. No, they do not know what they are asking; they just don’t get it.

    This must make the Lord very sad. Sometimes we underestimate the suffering Jesus endured long before the garden of Gethsemane that fateful night, when His passion began in earnest. Prior to that evening, the Lord endured a kind of death by a thousand cuts: enemies trying to trap Him, crowds wanting medical miracles but no true healing, strident and judgmental religious leaders, and disciples who walked away from Him as he taught about the Eucharist. Even the Twelve, to whom He looked for friendship, seemed completely disconnected from what He was trying to teach them. He also knew that one of them would betray Him, another would deny Him, and all but one would abandon Him, never making it to the foot of the cross. Oh, the grief that they gave the Lord!

    Oh, the grief that we continue to offer up! How we continue to offend His external glory and be difficult cases for Him! How easy it is for us to be hardheaded and stubborn, to have necks of iron and foreheads of brass! No, we should not be so quick to scorn the apostles because we do the same things.

    The Lord can only remind them and us of the monumental price, the true cost. No cross, no crown! Ultimately, Heaven costs everything, for we must leave this world behind to reach it. The Easter Sunday of glory, whether in this world or in the world to come, is accessed only by a journey through Good Friday.

    It is a major price, but it is one that James and John seem to dismiss. They simply state, categorically, that they are able to drink the cup that the Lord drinks and to be baptized into His death. They have no idea what they’re talking about, however, and neither do most of us.

    Medicinal Prescription – The text continues, They said to him, “We can.” Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink, you will drink, and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized; but to sit at my right or at my left is not mine to give but is for those for whom it has been prepared.” When the ten heard this, they became indignant at James and John. Jesus summoned them and said to them, “You know that those who are recognized as rulers over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones make their authority over them felt. But it shall not be so among you. Rather, whoever wishes to be great among you will be your servant; whoever wishes to be first among you will be the slave of all. For the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

    Thus, the other apostles join in the inept response by becoming indignant that James and John are trying to get special dibs on the seats of honor. Their indignity simply shows that they also have no idea what the Lord is talking about.

    The Lord tries to bring the big picture of the cross down to earth. He tries to make it plain, saying that the greatest in the kingdom is the servant of all, indeed the slave of all. It is not those who sit at the head of the table, the foot of the table, or any place at the table at all who are the greatest; the greatest are those who serve at the table.

    Do they understand? Probably not, but neither do we. It takes most of us a lifetime before we finally get it through our thick skulls that the point in life is not to have the corner office with the view. We have everything upside down, backwards. We are not rich in what matters to God. We think of bank accounts, prestigious addresses, the square footage of our houses, high salaries, and impressive titles—not service.

    We may be on our death beds before we finally realize that the greatest people in our lives are those with the ministry of care, those who feed us, those who change our bandages and give us basic care.

    Like the apostles, we can be so foolish. At our final judgment, God will not care about the square footage of our house, our titles, or our worldly honors. What will capture His attention is the times when we served, when we gave a cup of cold water to the thirsty or food to the hungry, when we instructed the ignorant, when we prayed for the dying, when we cared for the needs of the poor. He will look for the calluses and the wounds of our service. He will listen for our proclamation of His Kingdom. He will tell us that what we did for the least of our brothers, we did for Him.

    Don’t miss the point: there is no crown without the cross. In the Kingdom, honors and crowns are reserved for those who serve, who take up the cross of washing the feet of others, of going to the lowest of places.

    In the Gospel this Sunday, the Lord speaks of crosses and crowns—in that specific order. We will not, we cannot, gain any crown in His Kingdom without being baptized into His death, into His cross, into the humble servitude of dying for others in loving service.

    The post No Cross, No Crown – A Homily for the the 29th Sunday of the Year appeared first on Community in Mission.

  34. Site: Zero Hedge
    12 hours 16 min ago
    Author: Tyler Durden

    After a series of contentious encounters between US and allied ships and aircraft and China's military in the South China Sea defense officials have reached an agreement on guidelines which are intended to prevent crashes, as well as possible misunderstandings and escalation between aircraft in the region. 

    The new rules have been endorsed by US Secretary of Defense James Mattis seven regional military chiefs in the Pacific. Crucially this includes China’s General Wei Fenghe, who also agreed to the non-binding guidelines that were formally issued on Friday by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations summit hosted in Singapore. This comes as the Western Pacific has witnessed a significant uptick in military activity by air and sea, including the American and British navies

    U.S. Navy aircraft carrier, the USS Carl Vinson, approaches Busan port in Busan, South Korea, in 2017. AP file photo

    Bloomberg summarizes the contents of the agreement as follows

    The document, which follows similar guidelines on naval encounters signed in 2014, urges military planes to establish communication with other aircraft, identify themselves and avoid maneuvers or signals that could provoke a response. “These guidelines will help reduce the likelihood of encounters or incidents spiraling into conflict in the event of a miscalculation,” it said.

    Later, the full 18-member ASEAN-Plus Eight Partners grouping is expected to adopt the updated air-encounter guidelines during next year's summit. This would include countries like Australia, Russia, and New Zealand. 

    Speaking to reporters on the significance of the new aerial defense guidelines, Singaporean Defense Minister Ng Eng Hen said, “Once a mishap occurs, there’s a dynamic that ensues that you cannot control.” The defense minister chaired the meetings related to the non-binding pact, and added, “We recognize that the price of any physical incident is one that is too high and unnecessary to either assert or prove your position.”

    Such mishaps have actually been close of late, and have involved the US and China, as well as the Philippines and China. Tensions have been heightened over the past two months, resulting a fierce exchange of accusations between Beijing and Washington, per Bloomberg:

    The rules seek to build on the 2014 agreement signed by 21 nations on naval protocols, known as the Code of Unplanned Encounters at Sea, or CUES. Earlier this month, the U.S. accused China’s navy of “unsafe and unprofessional” conduct after a Chinese destroyer maneuvered close to the bow of an American warship near a disputed South China Sea reef.

    During that incident Chinese ships carried out what was essentially an intercept of the USS Decatur while the US ship was carrying out what has become standard "freedom of navigation" operations for the U.S. Navy - or "freeops" - in the South China Sea. The Navy destroyer had to maneuver to avoid a Chinese ship that came within 45 yards of its bow while the Decatur was sailing through the Spratley Islands on September 30th in what was the closest direct confrontation between US and Chinese ships since Trump's inauguration (after which the Navy began conducting these freeops with increasing frequency).

    That particularly dangerous incident of a near collision followed a series of American B-52 bomber flights over the South China Sea in the two months prior all of which resulted in radio warnings from the Chinese military. One August B-52 incident involved Beijing issuing radio threats while telling the U.S. plane to "Leave immediately and keep out to avoid any misunderstanding," according to a CNN report at the time. Subsequent American flyovers of what's recognized as international waters have come with similar warnings from the Chinese military. 

    While the the notion of a shooting war between the US and China may seem remote to casual observers, some market observers have noted the time honored progression of economic tensions like trade wars and currency wars eventually leading to a full-on hot war.

    However, Mattis has recently sought to cool tensions, as Bloomberg reports:

    Mattis has sought to play down military disputes with China during the trip, which included a 90-minute meeting Friday with Wei. While Wei reaffirmed Chinese concerns about the South China Sea and Taiwan, the two sides agreed to deepen trust and let military ties play a stabilizing role in the relationship, according to the country’s defense ministry.

    And further according to the Bloomberg report, Singaporean Defense Minister Ng Eng Hen related to reporters that he told Wei that China needed a response to such “freedom-of-navigation operations” in a way that wouldn’t escalate tensions. “General Wei’s general reply was that they are playing very close attention to it at the highest levels and we were reassured by that,” Ng said.

    For the time being, we expect such tense encounters to continue as China is not going to give up it's expanded claims over vast swathes in the East and South China seas. 

    12 hours 34 min ago
    Author: abyssum

    McCarrick Scandal Spotlights Bishops’ Appointment ProcessPosted by Joan Frawley Desmond on Saturday Oct 20th, 2018 at 9:26 AMDoes the failure to act on reports of the disgraced ex-cardinal’s alleged sexual misconduct reflect problems with the Church’s process of appointing bishops, or were established practices ignored?

    WASHINGTON — When Cardinal Daniel DiNardo of Galveston-Houston, the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, called for a “prompt and thorough examination” of questions posed by the scandal engulfing Archbishop Theodore McCarrick, he spoke on behalf of a lot of Catholics when he singled out one unresolved mystery.

    Why, asked Cardinal DiNardo, did Archbishop McCarrick’s misconduct fail to impede “his advancement” from auxiliary bishop to bishop and from archbishop to cardinal?

    Given the scope of the Catholic Church’s established process of identifying, vetting and appointing episcopal candidates, it is a puzzle that deserves careful examination. But some analysts would frame the problem a little differently: Did the failure to act on reports of Archbishop McCarrick’s alleged misconduct reflect problems with the Church’s process of appointing bishops, or were established practices ignored?

    “That is a good question,” agreed Archbishop Joseph Kurtz of Louisville, Kentucky, the past USCCB president.

    The conference did not respond to interview requests for this story, but Archbishop Kurtz, speaking on his own behalf, told the Register that he was reserving judgment until he could review the findings of an upcoming U.S.-led investigation into the four dioceses where the ex-cardinal had once served (Metuchen, New York, Newark and Washington), as well as the results of the Vatican’s review of relevant archival documents.

    “Until we have the facts, we won’t know what caused McCarrick’s situation to continue for so long without action,” he said.

    But if Church leaders and authorities contacted for this story are cautious about affixing blame for the failure to remove Archbishop McCarrick after reports of his misbehavior first surfaced almost two decades ago, they are in agreement about the path that should be followed in the vetting of episcopal candidates.

    The search for suitable episcopal candidates involves local bishops and lay leaders, the USCCB and the nuncio, the Holy See’s Congregation for Bishops and the pope as the definitive arbiter.

    Canon law sets the framework for identifying and vetting candidates.

    A “suitable” candidate is a man with “solid faith, good morals, piety, zeal for souls, wisdom, prudence and human virtues” (Code of Canon Law, 378).

    Canon 378 also states that he must be of “good reputation,” no younger than 35 years old, and “ordained to the presbyterate for at least five years.” Further, he must possess advanced degrees in “sacred Scripture, theology or canon law from an institute of higher studies approved by the Apostolic See.”

    Archbishop Naumann

    Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kansas, told the Register that when he searches for prospective bishops, he looks for “holy men of prayer,” leadership, an ability to direct “multiple ministries” and a willingness to collaborate with fellow priests and laypeople.

    “Finally, you look for humility: someone who understands their limitations,” he said.

    “Being a bishop is an impossible responsibility, but God makes it possible and brings other people in our lives that help a bishop fulfill his mission,” he added.

    The Kansas City archbishop, the chairman of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities, still remembers the “surprise” he felt after learning that he had been appointed auxiliary bishop for St. Louis.

     “There was no prior interview or application,” he said. “You get a call from the nuncio telling you that the Holy Father has appointed you to this position and asking if you accept.”

    The lack of prior notice underscores the secrecy of the entire process. And over the years, Archbishop Naumann has learned a great deal about the grave responsibility of naming prospective bishops.

    “Every bishop is encouraged to look for candidates, and every bishop is free to propose candidates directly to the apostolic nuncio,” he said.

    As the metropolitan archbishop of an episcopal province, he is also required to meet in secret about every three years with other bishops to share and evaluate candidates, forwarding the top choices to the nuncio.

    The USCCB leadership follows the same general guidelines and pattern to conduct its own review of possible candidates.

    However, Archbishop Kurtz made clear that the outcome of this effort is hard to read.

    Any time there is an opening, the USCCB is “always invited to give a list of three names — known as the terna (triad).

    “But there is no built-in dialogue or opportunity to know whether our insights are going to be used at all or how they will be used,” said Archbishop Kurtz.

    Rome’s Role

    The apostolic nuncio leads the initial investigation of top episcopal candidates and usually casts a wide net, seeking confidential assessments from bishops, priests and laypeople before submitting his short list to the Holy See.

    Church law holds that the “definitive judgment concerning the suitability of the one to be promoted pertains to the Apostolic See.”

    In Rome, the Congregation for Bishops will initiate its own inquiry, soliciting the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and other relevant dicasteries for information about a candidate, said Dominican Father Joseph Fox, the vicar for canonical services for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.

    The unexpected phone call to the man chosen for the post, like the one Archbishop Naumann received, is the final outcome of this elaborate investigation, at least as it is defined in canon law. But Church leaders and experts emphasized that this critical work is also shaped by the personal relationships and priorities of the pope, the nuncio and other high-ranking Church leaders engaged in the process of appointing bishops.

    For example, Archbishop Naumann said he had not been in regular contact with the nuncio.

    “The nuncio develops a network of people he has a lot of confidence in, and I am not one of those people,” he said matter-of-factly.

    In contrast, when Archbishop Naumann had the “privilege” to work with Cardinal Justin Rigali, during the latter’s tenure as archbishop of St. Louis, he witnessed a high level of trust and respect between Cardinal Rigali and “nuncios who were here during the time of his service.”

    The basis for that trust, he suggested, was the fact that Cardinal Rigali had served on the Congregation for Bishops and thus was personally known to the U.S. nuncios.

    Surprise Papal Picks

    The same dynamic can apply when a pope appoints a nuncio with whom he has a strong bond. However, when the papal legate is appointed by a previous pontiff, the newly elected pope may bypass the nuncio and look for guidance elsewhere.

    To take one recent example, Archbishop Carlo Viganò was named the U.S. nuncio by then-Pope Benedict XVI, but he remained in his post after the election of Pope Francis.

    In his Aug. 25 testimony, Archbishop Viganò alleged that Pope Francis had relied on the counsel of then-Cardinal McCarrick in the appointment of Cardinal Blase Cupich of Chicago — despite Archbishop Viganò’s reported warnings about Archbishop McCarrick’s record and the fact that Cardinal Cupich was not among the leading candidates on the list forwarded to Rome.

    In fact, similar tensions have surfaced during previous pontificates, and experts note that Pope St. John Paul II bucked the preferences of the USCCB when he opted to appoint then-Bishop John O’Connor of Scranton, Pennsylvania, as the archbishop of New York and to appoint Cardinal Francis George of Chicago.

    “The two most important appointments John Paul II made in the U.S. were John O’Connor to New York and Francis George to Chicago,” George Weigel, the papal biographer, told the Register.

    “The O’Connor appointment revitalized the pro-life movement when spirits were beginning to flag, and the appointment of Francis George to Chicago set in motion a basic change in the self-understanding and direction of the USCCB, which was confirmed when Cardinal George was elected its president.” 

    Shifting Process

    Stepping back from the recent crisis in the Church, Christopher Ruddy, an associate professor of systematic theology at The Catholic University of America, traced the shifting role of the pope in the selection of bishops across the arc of Church history.

    In the early Church, “most famously, St. Ambrose was acclaimed and chosen as bishop by the people of Milan,” said Ruddy. “He wasn’t even baptized.”

    And in the Middle Ages, monarchs and local rulers were in firm control of the process. As late as the 19th century, the pope had very limited powers in this regard.

    “In 1829, when Pope Leo XII died, there were 646 diocesan bishops in the Latin Churches,” said Ruddy.

    Of that group, the vast majority were appointed by the state, and 67 were named by cathedral chapters — the leading clergy of a given diocese, he said. “Only 24 were appointed by the pope.”

    The exception to this general pattern, he suggested, was the hands-off approach to Church appointments of the Founding Fathers.

    “The story goes that at some point Benjamin Franklin was asked by a Vatican diplomat, ‘What role does the U.S. government want to have in the appointment of bishop?’” recalled Ruddy. “Franklin replied, ‘None.’”

    Yet over time, the pope’s influence on episcopal appointments steadily increased in tandem with the advance of a more centralized papacy. And by the Second Vatican Council, the Church had repudiated the state’s entanglement in the appointment process.

    “In the future, no rights and privileges of election, nomination, presentation or designation of bishops are granted to civil authorities,” reads another passage of canon law dealing with bishops’ appointments.

    Recent Events

    Ruddy noted that the recent pact between the Holy See and China had raised serious questions about the outsized role of the Chinese Communist Party in the selection of the nation’s Catholic bishops. But details of the agreement have not been released, and he said he would delay comment.

    Yet if the Holy See’s negotiations with Beijing have sparked a storm of criticism from Catholics within China and beyond, the questions posed by Archbishop McCarrick’s unchecked rise to the College of Cardinals could, if unresolved, shake the credibility of the episcopal appointment process.

    And though Pope Francis’ recent acceptance of Cardinal Donald Wuerl’s resignation was framed by the cardinal as a necessary first step toward healing in the Archdiocese of Washington, his critics were surprised to learn that he will continue to serve on the Congregation for Bishops, as one of two Church leaders in the U.S. with considerable influence over the selection of future U.S. bishops.

    “Cardinal Wuerl’s suggestion that the Pope appoint someone who has become a bishop since 2002, because they won’t have a [problematic] track record” on abuse, may not solve the problem, said Terrence McKiernan, who leads Bishop Accountability, a watchdog group. ”We know that someone who became a bishop after 2002 may have previously been vicar general, where they might have performed badly.” 

    Indeed, experts say future episcopal candidates may also face additional scrutiny over their handling of financial matters and cited growing concerns about Church leaders’ handling of the Papal Foundation to emphasize this point.

    Meanwhile, the recent letter from the prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, Cardinal Marc Ouellet, who offered a scathing critique of Archbishop Viganò’s testimony, was designed to bolster the Holy See’s credibility, but seemed to backfire.

    Cardinal Ouellet challenged Archbishop Viganò’s account of the Holy See’s repeated failure to address reports about McCarrick, and yet the prefect’s letter implicitly accepted the substance of the nuncio’s central claims, fueling further criticism of Vatican stonewalling.

    Archbishop Viganò responded to Cardinal Ouellet’s criticisms in an Oct. 19 letter.

    And now, critics and supporters of the Holy See are waiting to see how the Pope will handle the next important test: the high-stakes selection of Cardinal Wuerl’s successor.

    “I don’t know if the normal appointment process was followed with McCarrick,” said one bishop, who did not want to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject. “But after the most recent events,” he told the Register, “the process will likely be followed more diligently.”

    Trusting the Holy Spirit

    Archbishop Naumann, for his part, agreed with the suggestion that an approach mandated by canon law could be tightened up in practice.

    “Absolutely, we need to look at how we can hopefully prevent” someone like Archbishop McCarrick from being appointed in the future, he said.

    Then he issued a caveat designed to maintain a measure of perspective during a time of destabilizing crisis.

    “We need to look at Jesus: If he had gone to a human resources officer and had the apostles evaluated, probably none of them would have qualified,” said the archbishop. “The Lord likes to use weak individuals to make sure we know that he is doing the work, and, personally, I find that consoling.”

    No process will be “fullproof” in preventing someone who makes gravely immoral choices from becoming a bishop — “we are dealing with human beings,” he concluded. And yet, we must “trust that the Holy Spirit is guiding this process.”

    Joan Frawley Desmond is a Register senior editor.

  36. Site: RT - News
    12 hours 43 min ago
    Author: RT
    The very first “Cannabis Legalization Festival,” held in Georgia’s capital, produced doobie-ous results, as police prevented revelers from installing a stage and kiosks, and the main organizer was detained for handing out joints.
    Read Full Article at RT.com
    12 hours 55 min ago
    Author: abyssum
    “This Evening I saw the Future of the Church: The Future is the Traditional Mass”

    by Fr. Richard G. Cipolla


    This evening I saw the future, the real Future of the Church, not the one being imagined by the crowd in Rome who mistake the future because of the mindless bureaucracy that thinks it has the Spirit imprisoned in the 1960s under the title of the “spirit of Vatican II.”  When the present Pontiff was elected, I wrote an essay called “Back to the Future”, which predicted that the Church would have to relive the sixties but this time with a vengeance. All those prelates and their briefcase carrying followers who went underground during the pontificate of John Paul II would meet and talk with great nostalgia during those dark (for them) years under John Paul II and Benedict XVI. They talked about the “unfinished work” of the Council, that work that had little to do with Council documents but much more to do with their image of the New Church that would be updated to fit the needs and desires of Modern Man. 

    Poor things.  They did not realize that Modern Man died in the sixties and that Post-Modern Man was emerging and was slouching towards Bethlehem. When you live in a sealed container that is the Vatican and its bureaucracy, there is little chance you will be conversant with what is really happening in the world and in the mind and hearts of people.  But the 60s crowd are back and with a vengeance.  The only 60s program that kept on going during their exile was the program of the moral corruption of the clergy.  That continued to grow and flourish. The destruction of the liturgical life of the Church was for a time halted, and it seemed that there might be a possibility of questioning the basis of liturgical reform following the Council and of at least thinking that there was in fact a discontinuity in the liturgical life of the Church that resulted in the emptying out of our churches. 

    But a bureaucrat cannot possibly conceive of a discontinuity in the life of the Church, for the bureaucrat must believe that whatever happens is by definition the work of the Holy Spirit, and so the only thing that he must do is to rethink and change course according to what he hears and what he is told is the latest manifestation of the Spirit, be it in a synod, or a sermon, or an encyclical, or a press conference, or what is whispered in the hallways and the loggia. 

    It is the bureaucrats at all levels of the clergy who kept the apparatus alive for fifty years, so that when a Pope resigned, they only had to change the direction in which they faced when they woke up in the morning: from the East to the West.  One need not wonder how the double coup of a resignation of a Pope and an election of a 60s bishop to the papacy did not result in confusion and chaos.  For when those formerly in power and then underground for fifty years came into their own once again, back to the future, the supporting bureaucracy in all levels of the Church were ready and able to support them in their project of remaking the Church in their own 60s image.  

    And part of the glue holding this together and making it possible was the damnable success of the moral corruption of the clergy at all levels, a corruption that enabled the bureaucracy to control by intimidation based on incriminating knowledge and to advance their agenda unimpeded, except for a few gadfly cardinals and bishops.

    So it is precisely while the Synod for Youth is meeting in Rome in quasi-secrecy that I saw the Future this evening.  I was invited to sit in choir during a Traditional Solemn Mass in a parish church of my diocese.  The celebrant, the pastor of the parish, the deacon and the sub-deacon were each young priests of the diocese.  The Mass was celebrated with no frills, no excesses, no sign of aestheticism.  The Feast was the Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, instituted by Pius XI to celebrate the anniversary of the Council of Ephesus, at which Mary was proclaimed as Theotokos, the bearer of God, affirming the full divinity of the person of Christ.  The music of the Mass was all Gregorian chant, Mass IX.  The servers were all young men, some new to this, some quite practiced in serving this Mass.  It was the worship of God in its purest form, in its traditional form, a form whose liturgical modesty and reticence invites prayer and therefore worship.  The sacred ministers gave themselves over to their roles in the Mass in a naturally self-effacing way. They knew the proper tones for the various chants and sang them well. The sermon was intelligent and truly Catholic. These three men made worship possible by getting themselves out of the way and letting the rite speak for itself.

    Many of the young priests in my diocese have learnt the Traditional Roman Mass, aka the Extraordinary Form.  They love this Mass in a sober way without any hint of “high church” prancing or panting.  They love Christ and his Church. They are loyal to the teaching of the Magisterium.  They are priests who are at home in any situation and who enjoy each other’s company.  They enjoy the company of both men and women in their parishes. The bureaucrats who run the Church do not know that these priests exist. And that is good.  For while the bureaucrats are running around at synods and conferences and trying to put out noxious fires without the water of moral purity and therefore failing every time:  these young priests, not only in my diocese, but in most dioceses through the Catholic world, are just learning once again how to worship and are discovering the beauty of worship, and they are teaching this to their flock.  And they, and the Traditional Mass they love,— they are the Future of the Church.

    By Richard Cipolla at Saturday, October 13, 2018

  38. Site: Gloria.tv
    12 hours 59 min ago
    Author: Lisi Sterndorfer
    The hymns will be in 'contemporary English' and 'represent a significant change'
    The US bishops are set to consider 139 English translations of Latin hymn texts that can be used in praying the Liturgy of the Hours when they meet from November 12 to 14 in Baltimore for their general assembly.
    The US Conference of Catholic Bishops “approved a scope of work for a new translation of the breviary in November 2012,” Archbishop Wilton Gregory of Atlanta, chairman of the USCCB Committee on Divine Worship, wrote in September to the USCCB’s Administrative Committee, which approves placement of items on the agenda.
    “That plan (in 2012) directed ICEL (the International Commission on English in the Liturgy) to prepare English translations of the 291 Latin hymns of the typical edition, some of which have never been put into contemporary English,” Archbishop Gregory said. The 139 translations are the completed portion of those hymns.
    “Pending a successful vote in November 2018, the remaining hymns will likely be presented …
  39. Site: Gloria.tv
    13 hours 15 min ago
    Author: AlexBKaiser
    A Catholic about current affairs in the Catholic Church in Europe and the world.
  40. Site: The Eponymous Flower
    13 hours 18 min ago
    Edit: won’t his ordinary have something to say? These are usually the types of women who insist that they only practice “white” magic? Here’s a story from Newsweek:
    [Newsweek] In a battle of beliefs, a Catholic exorcist is planning to fight an upcoming hex on Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh with a special Mass. On Saturday, Catland Books, a “Metaphysical boutique and occult bookshop” in Brooklyn, New York, is hosting a hex on Kavanaugh in an effort to make him “suffer,” and send a message to his supporters.“No, you don’t win. He may have been confirmed, but that’s something we already knew was going to happen,” co-owner Dakota Bracciale previously told Newsweek. “We know the system is broken, and the people in charge need to be taken down by any means necessary, magical or otherwise.”
    Read further.... 

  41. Site: The Orthosphere
    13 hours 27 min ago
    Author: Kristor

    A sovereign who has lost the Mandate of Heaven is no longer legitimate, and is sooner or later doomed.

    “Legitimate” stems from the Latin legitimus, which meant originally “fixed by law, in line with the law.” Sovereigns lose their legitimacy and so – with their domains – become weak when they promulgate law that is at variance with the Law of GNON – laws that are perverse, and that are therefore at war with Heaven, and so with Earth. Such laws are themselves illegitimate. As perverse, and so ill fitted to things as they truly are, they cannot work too well – indeed, prevent things from working as well as they might otherwise have done in the absence of their interference – and force all those who obey them to enact by that obedience an ontological falsehood; to behave falsely, to lie by their acts. Everything then starts to go wrong, as acts informed by bad law work out badly in practice.

    As deformed by ill-formed law, and so less properly coordinated to reality, acts grow more and more corrupted by noise and error, and so tend further to corrupt their successors. Confidence in acts deteriorates, uncertainty increases; legal, compliance and due diligence costs rise; regulation by the sovereign cannot but increase; so commerce is ever harder, riskier, and more anxious. Counterparties then become more and more dubious. Social trust degrades. Things fall apart; the center no longer holds. The people then no longer believe the sovereign in their guts, or believe in him. Their guts tell them that the sovereign is lying to them about what is real, and about how they ought therefore to act. They grow cynical and bitter – not to mention poor, so restless and irritable.

    His subjects then soon begin to resent and then eventually come to despise their sovereign, and so likewise his faction. So then they begin to despise all other factions, in the bargain. If the sovereign’s faction is illegitimate, how good can any of the others possibly be? For, all of them have been shaped and thus deformed and corrupted by their responses to the whacked policies of the sovereign? When one faction is distrusted, eventually no faction can be trusted. So society grows more and more adversarial, contentious, litigious, bitter. Internal enmity infects the polis.

    When the sovereign has lost the Mandate of Heaven, politics begins; intrigue, or cold civil war, whether or not formalized, begins.

    Politics is the process of replacing the sovereign who has lost the Mandate of Heaven.

    For regimes such as ours, in which politics has long been highly formalized – so that laws compound in more or less orderly fashion, with the result that the accretion of inapt laws that enforce ineptitude is an ancient, dense, deep and interwoven thicket, not penetrable even by the sword, but rather only by devastating wildfire – which everyone desperately wants to avoid – politics is continuous, and incorrigible. There can then be no such thing as true domestic peace.

  42. Site: Gloria.tv
    13 hours 33 min ago
    Author: Don Reto Nay
    Bringing Christian issues into the secular media cycle russian-faith.com/support
  43. Site: Catholic Herald
    14 hours 8 min ago
    Author: Christine Rousselle/CNA

    The idea that high fertility rates are a barrier to economic success is a contemporary myth, Catholic University of America economics professor, mother of eight, and viral hashtag creator Dr. Catherine Pakulak told CNA. Pakulak started the viral “#PostcardsForMacron” hashtag on Monday in response to French President Emanuel Macron’s comment at a Gates Foundation event. Macron suggested that...


    14 hours 12 min ago
    Author: abyssum


    Well this goes a long way to explain it! Consider this:

    Chief Heather Fong (left), is the first SFPD female, lesbian chief of police.

    Theresa Sparks (center),  a former male, is president of the San Francisco Police Commission,  CEO of a multi-million dollar sex toy retailer, and a transgender woman.

    Sgt. Stephan Thorne (right), a former female, is the first transgender male SFPD police officer.

    Their Representative in Congress is Nancy Pelosi.

    Where else are you going to find an Asian lesbian police chief, one deputy chief who is a woman who was a man, another deputy chief who is a man who was a woman, and a police commissioner who was a man and is now a woman whose full-time job is running a dildo store. Now that’s diversity. Get with it.

    14 hours 21 min ago
    Author: abyssum
    Fr. JOHN RUTLER’S Weekly Column
    October 21, 2018   There are those who would not let facts get in the way of theory, and      such was the English philosopher Herbert Spencer who promoted the       “survival of the fittest.” This “Social Darwinism” theorized that the weak and poor would gradually die out to make way for an inevitable social     progress. He was idolized by Andrew Carnegie, even though that richest man in the world was generous in philanthropies that Spencer disdained.

    Carnegie prevailed upon his mentor to visit Pittsburgh, whose Bessemer mills were supposed to be a model of social progress. Spencer confessed: “Six months’ residence here would justify suicide.”   Spencer’s theory that people are shaped by culture rather than shaping it, opposed the “great  man” theory of the historian Thomas Carlyle, for whom culture is shaped by individuals of “Godly inspiration and personality.” But Carlyle did        acknowledge the influence of cultural conditions and, moreover, warned that personal influence could be benign or evil.   

    The greatest figures in history have been the saints, for their spiritual       influence is more long-lasting than even their political impact. Consider   two saints that the Church celebrates this week.   

    Saint John of Capistrano was a skilled lawyer and diplomat in the
    fifteenth century. As governor of Perugia in Italy, his reforms were so       radical that he was arrested by some who needed reformation.                  The imprisonment afforded him time to reflect on what really changes     society, and he became a Franciscan. He did not relinquish his powerful mind and energy when he relinquished glamor, and he became a polyglot missionary throughout more than a dozen countries in Europe. His           crowds were so huge that he had to preach outdoors, and he could be      heard by 125,000 without a microphone. In 1456, at the age of 70, he          joined the Hungarian general Hunyadi in lifting the siege of Budapest,      riding on horseback into overwhelming numbers of Ottoman Turks, and saving western civilization.   

    Another saint we celebrate this week is Pope John Paul II. On his return    to Poland as Vicar of Christ, the nervous hands of the Communist leader Wojciech Jaruzelski shook, and soon afterward the Marxist empire            collapsed. As Karol Wojtyla, his Polish culture shaped him, with its legacy of heroism and suffering, and he in turned shaped much of our present  world.   If our secular schools and media are bewildered by the influence of saints, and do not mention them, it is because any recognition of their existence must acknowledge the existence of God who made them heroically virtuous beyond the abilities of the naturally great. Saint John Paul II wrote in the encyclical Centesimus Annus:   “For an adequate formation of a culture, the involvement of the whole man is required, whereby he        exercises his creativity, intelligence, and knowledge of the world and of   people. Furthermore, he displays his capacity for self-control, personal     sacrifice, solidarity and readiness to promote the common good.”
  46. Site: Roman Catholic Man
    15 hours 25 min ago
    Author: Fr Richard Heilman


    All day today, on a photo of Justice Kavanaugh laid on the altar in my private chapel, I placed two special items for his protection …

    1) These are stones consecrated with the presence of the St. Michael the Archangel from the miraculous sacred cave in Monte Gargano, Italy. This is a place where a series of approved apparitions took place of the Archangel Michael.

    2) This Challenge Coin was touched to 165 First Class Relics of Saints, including a Relic of the True Cross, and a verified piece of the veil of the Blessed Mother.


    This is in response to this …

    Brooklyn witches are brewing up a swirl of spells that they plan to unleash on US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

    An occult bookstore in Bushwick called Catland promises to curse the newly-minted justice as well as “all rapists” and “the patriarchy” during the an Oct. 20 ritual that 1,000 have pledged to attend.

    “He will be the focal point, but by no means the only target,” the event description reads. “So bring your rage and and all of the axes you’ve got to grind.”

    Continue reading …

    The post Protection for Justice Kavanaugh appeared first on Roman Catholic Man.

  47. Site: Fr. Z's Blog
    16 hours 9 min ago
    Author: frz@wdtprs.com (Fr. John Zuhlsdorf)
    A reminder to my friends and acquaintances in Rome that it is, once again, time to hide the silverware.  I hit the City on Tuesday, 23 October.  I think the Carabinieri have already been warned, if the Great Roman™ has … Continue reading →
  48. Site: Ron Paul Institute - Featured Articles
    16 hours 9 min ago
    Author: Tyler Durden

    Facebook banned several pages operated by disabled by Air Force veteran Brian Kolfage, after he says he spent $300,000 on advertising. The social media giant removed without warning Kolfage's Right Wing News and Military Grade Coffee Company (which donates 10 percent of all profits to veteran organizations), in a site-wide effort to crack down on "misinformation" on the network.

    Right Wing News alone had over 3 million followers at the time of its banning. 

    According to his new wesbite, Kolfage, a triple amputee, explains:  I’m not a 'conservative.' I’m not a 'liberal.' I’m an American, with deep beliefs in what our country stands for. I proved this by vowing to protect and fighting for Americas greatest tenet: free speech.

    Many Americans have fought for these political freedoms … freedom of speech … and every American has enjoyed those freedoms … UNTIL TODAY. On October 11, 2018, Facebook shut down thousands of Facebook accounts for their political opinions, saying in effect that they don’t have a 'legitimate political argument.' STOP SOCIAL MEDIA CENSORSHIP NOW! -Fight4freespeech.com Kolfage says his "income as a father and husband is threatened," and that he "invested over $300,000 in ads at Facebook's own request," according to Breitbart's Lucas Nolan. 

    In a Facebook post on his personal page, Kolfage wrote "Facebook lied, they shut down my page because it was conservative, powerful, and the elections are in 2 weeks.

    Operation Iraqi Freedom

    In 2004, Kolfage was on his second deployment in Iraq when his airbase came under rocket attack. He would lose both legs and an arm as a 107mm rocket shell "exploded about three feet" away, throwing him into the air and against a wall of sandbags. Airman Kolfage’s best friend was thrown from his bed during the attack. He heard the screams and rushed outside to find his friend bloody, mangled, and clinging to life. The Airman and a medic rushed to help Airman Kolfage, who was struggling to breathe with only one lung after the other had collapsed. Brian’s friend desperately tried to divert his attention from the seriousness of his injuries, but calmly, Airman Kolfage assured him that he already knew the extent of his wounds, and that he just wanted to go home to his family. -Briankolfage.com  Brian spent 11 months at Walter Reed medical center, and claims that to this day he is "still the most severely wounded Airman to survive any war." 

    Not going quietly

    "If I have to roll into their headquarters and sit there with people in the media, I will," said Kolfage of his plans to fight Facebook's decision. "I will be there exposing everything they’ve done to me and my family and our employees. We’re going to take legal action if we don’t get our pages back. It’s just going to turn into a sloppy mess for them. I think they’ve underestimated what they’re dealing with, attacking me, attacking conservatives in general, right before the elections. Never once did Facebook come to us to say there was any issue with RWN or our other pages. Never. But they sure loved taking our money." 

    Reprinted with permission from ZeroHedge.
  49. Site: RT - News
    16 hours 10 min ago
    Author: RT
    China’s new flying boat, the AG600, has successfully performed a water take-off and landing for the very first time. The plane is said to be the largest amphibious aircraft currently in operation, equal in size to a Boeing 737.
    Read Full Article at RT.com
  50. Site: Call Me Jorge...
    16 hours 23 min ago

    Kasper continued, “They are different personalities of course, different backgrounds. One is European, the other comes from Latin America. [But] if you read exactly what they write, it’s the same line and substance.”

    We have republished these lines from Kasper’s speech in case there is still anyone out there clinging to the hope that if only Benedict XVI was in charge, things would be different.  The only differences would be negligible — Benedict XVI talked less, granted less interviews, dressed better, and had more smells & bells.  Both Benedict XVI and Francis are modernists hell bent on imposing the ever changing vision of what Vatican II is at the moment onto the Novus Ordo.  As we have written more than a few times this will only stop when St. Peter’s resembles a synagogue and the Vatican a shtetl.

    Kasper speaks the truth!
    Quotes are from Kasper’s speech upon receiving the “Civitas Dei” medal from Villanova University, 18 October 2018.


Subscribe to Feeds