December 25, 2016

Merry Christmas 2016 (and Kaylee Rogers "Hallelujah")

Merry Christmas To All! May the Blessings of the Christ Child bring to all a Holy and Joyous New Year!

And here is my gift to amazingly beautiful rendition of Leonard Cohen's "Hallelujah" as performed by 10 year old Kaylee Rogers of County Down, Ireland. Reading the commentary on Youtube that accompanies the video makes her and her performance all the more amazing...enjoy!

Copyright 2016 David Heath - All Rights Reserved

December 18, 2016

O Holy Night

Insofar as my personal favorite Christmas Hymns go, "O Holy Night" has to rank up near the top, if not at the top. Perhaps it is the lyrics themselves, but more likely than not, it is simply a few key words that seem to strike the chord in my Immortal Soul, as a reminder of where I belong and what I must do in order to gain Heaven: "Fall on your knees!" Yes, we must all fall on our knees and debase ourselves at the foot of the Christ Child's crib, lest we fall forever into the Eternal Pit in later life.

Though not a truly Catholic hymn, it was nevertheless first read in a Catholic Church in 1843, so done because the priest pastor asked its author,  Placide Cappeau, a hometown native and French Poet, to write a Christmas poem as the church organ was broken. Soon after, Adolphe Adam, the noted French composer and music critic, set it to music.  Unitarian minister John Sullivan Dwight created the modern sung version back in 1855. So, though it was written for a Catholic Church service by (here I assume) a Catholic poet, it only came to prominence via the hand of a Protestant minister. Another "God writes straight with crooked lines" moment in Church musical history, in my opinion, and thus was it elevated above the mere normal Christian holiday song and remains a truly Catholic one able to touch my Soul.

I came across the below You Tube video just this morning, after Mass. I've struggled of late trying to find something worthwhile to write about, even though both Canon 212 and Pewsitter are full of headlines that turns one stomach in disgust and would ably serve as fodder for my less-than-adequate commentary for the week. But, in this week before Christmas, I am glad I found something a bit different to share with my readers, in both song and story - and I dare say, a most sublime and beautiful Catholic rendition of both.


Copyright 2016 David Heath - All Rights Reserved

November 28, 2016

The Catholic Thing: Silence of the Lions

"What is the use of bishops?"

"By no means can we say that bishops always fail us; nor even when they fall silent are we necessarily left to fend for ourselves. God finds others who step forward to give the example. Too, it should be said that we ourselves are entitled, by the grace of our baptism, to step forward – to vindicate the good and the true; to condemn their opposites. But such acts are uncommon."

And so...David Warren writes the above in a recent article posted at The Catholic Thing this past weekend. Indeed, where are all the Bishops, united as one voice against the subversive, quasi-heretical (or even heretical, as in the pages of Amoris Laetitia) teachings, interviews, etc coming out of Rome. When there is glaring conflict between what has always been taught and what is now being promulgated - when there is glaring conflict between what has always been said by Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and Pope Francis (or Cardinals Kasper, Marx and Schönborn LLC), it has been left to the Sheep - many of whom are, in effect, Shepardless in their own diocese with only a BINO* for moral support - to sound the Moral trumpets that will, instead of tumbling down Jericho's walls, actually reinforce them. Michael Matt, Louis Verrecchio, John Vennari, Mundabor- these are just a sampling the sheep who are constantly warning - and many times even prophetically so - the Faithful of those dangers to the Faith that swirl and eddy around us almost constantly nowadays.

And so, David Warren rightly asks: "What is the use of Bishops?" It is more or less the same question I have asked many times before (here, here, here, here), but I have yet to discover the answer. Nor has Mr. Warren, apparently, but he, like many other Catholic writers and bloggers, does ask the right question. 

Click on the quotes above or the link below and read for yourself and see if you don't agree: "What is the use of Bishops?"

Silence of the Lions

*Bishop In Name Only

Copyright 2016 David Heath - All Rights Reserved

November 27, 2016

Cardinal Dolan's Edifying Example of Leadership

From Gloria TV News:

Here are 5 takeaways from this photo, from the perspective of a common, ordinary pewsitter:

1. Cardinal Dolan is immune from the potentiality of placing oneself in a near occasion of sin.
     1a. Cardinal Dolan is smelling the sheep, but obviously not trying to proselytize, ala Pope Francis.

2. Cardinal Dolan is immune from the effects of immodestly dressed women upon his trap-door conscience.

    2a.Cardinal Dolan is taking lessons from professional dancers for his upcoming appearance on DWTS (Dancing With the Stars).

3. Cardinal Dolan is being a good shephard and showing by example just how far he we men can go (notice the hand; how his eyes are facing straight forward; mouth contorted; pectoral cross prominently displayed) in remaining pure and chaste, without compromising one's Conscience.      

     3a. Cardinal Dolan is concerned he missed a key dance move that might eliminate him in Round 2 of DWTS.

4. Cardinal Dolan is leading by example and showing his priests (and fellow Cardinals) just how far he they can go without giving scandal and risk being sent off into forced labor as chaplain to a diocesan elder care facility (or some out-of-the-limelight posting to, say...Malta).

    4a. Cardinal Dolan is not really all that good a Dancer and the DWTS judges will soon find this out. 

5. Cardinal Dolan is a scandal to his Priests and Faithful. 

    5a. Cardinal Dolan doesn't give a crap what others think of him as the leader of 2.8 million Catholics.

Or, am I being to judgemental? Rigid? Insecure? 

Copyright 2016 David Heath - All Rights Reserved

November 21, 2016

G.K. Chesterton, Love and Channeling Pope Francis

(11/21: Updated to correct some grammatical errors-Ed.)

      "To love means loving the unlovable."

We now find ourselves in a crisis of Faith, namely:
  • the direct assaults upon the 6th and 9th Commandments that are explicitly and/or tacitly approved by most of the worlds Bishops; 
  • the near idolization of the current man-in-white-with-black-shoes-who-lives-in-luxury-while-extolling-others-to-smell-like-sheep; 
  • the simple ignoring (or ignorance?) of the above individual who likes to be thought of as just a simple bishop, but actually rules with an iron hand, and a diffusive, divisive and destructive mind;
  • a man who claims to follow a spirit to justify his actions, when even the most mediocre pew-sitting Catholic can judge the fruit and know it is not the True Holy Spirit in action that the former claims his to be...
And the above quote, though erroneously attributed to G.K. Chesterton (see here) nonetheless has a certain Truth to it that cannot be ignored. Regardless of whether Chesterton actually said it or not, I believe it speaks with a great deal of Truth relative to this particular moment in Catholic history. 

The current occupant of the Throne of St. Peter is certainly "lovable" by all those who hold to his ideology and he is most certainly "unloveable" by the far more numerous Catholics who hold fast to Tradition, whether it be in the actual liturgy or more simply, in living the traditional Faith as our forefathers did. The trick is how to reconcile both while one watches the foundation of Catholicism being chipped away, exponentially, day-by-day. 

How can one "love" someone whose sole ambition is the remolding of something that is not even malleable, because its Creator made it so? How can one "love" a father who continually belittles and derides his very own children and yet still expect them to give due reverence and follow his every whim and wish, and that unquestioningly? How can one "love" the person who has been handed the Keys to the Kingdom here on earth for safekeeping, and then have to watch helplessly as that same person unlocks the door that, though always reserved for all, is still only guaranteed to a few...and then throws away the keys in a Papal fiat (no, not the car).

Is the current Pope "unloveable" enough to "love" him? Sure he is...but he doesn't need my "love".

 He needs my prayers. 

I confess I do not like the man. I respect the office the man holds, and therefore pray for him daily and at each Mass. But I will never like the man, let alone "love" him. He doesn't need it. 

But he does need my prayers. 

He doesn't need me to follow his every word-at-30,000 feet as being pure, unadulterated Catholicism; he needs me to hold fast to all that has been taught by him, but only to those teachings that are aligned with what previous Popes, Saints and Our Lord have taught before him. 

And he needs my prayers. 

Pope Francis doesn't need to lecture me about being unstable and rigid and insecure simply because I follow exclusively the Traditional Latin Mass, a Mass that was unjustly suppressed by his predecessors. And of whom I can rightly say were unstable and rigid and insecure in their own right because of their fear of the Mass codified by Pope St. Pius V. 

He does, however, need my prayers.

So, No...I don't have to "love the unloveable", at least not in the way as stated above, whether it was said by Chesterton or some other as-yet unknown poet. What the phrase in its truest sense should read, at least in the context of this post and this particular moment in Catholic History, is:

"To love means loving praying for the unlovable."

Please pray that this Pope, who is Christ's Vicar on earth (that same Christ that even Pope Francis should fear because of His "excessive rigidity" in His moral absolutes) soon realizes comprehends understands has a conversion of heart, mind and Soul and re-orients the Barque of St. Peter back to its True North position.

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, ora pro nobis!

Copyright 2014 David Heath - All Rights Reserved

November 12, 2016

Of Sadness and Stark Reality

"For example, I always try to understand what is behind those individuals who are too young to have lived the pre-Conciliar liturgy, and who want it nonetheless. I have at times found myself in front of people who are too rigid, an attitude of rigidity. And I ask myself: how come so much rigidity? You dig, you dig, this rigidity always hides something: insecurity, at times perhaps something else... [sic] The rigidity is defensive. True love is not rigid... There is a Traditionalism that is a rigid fundamentalism: it is not good." (Pope Francis, in an interview with Civiltà Cattolica) [emphasis mine-dah.]

And with that statement, whatever respect; whatever credibility; whatever naive and idealistic notion that I retained that this man had even an ounce of Charity, of compassion, even of true Catholicism, was blown away. Much like how the liberal Democrats must have felt in the early wee hours of Wednesday, November 9th, such was my Soul shaken to its inner core when I got home from work Friday evening and clicked on the news on my laptop. There it was, straight from the lips of the leader of the Roman Catholic Church. I won't here speak of the desolation and sadness that engulfed me, though I continued on about my business of making supper for my son and myself. But it was there nevertheless and could not be disavowed, no matter how hard I tried. The hard truth suddenly revealed itself to me and I had to acknowledge the basic, stark reality:

Pope Francis, the leader of the Roman Catholic Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ on earth, just disenfranchised and marginalized that core group of Faithful Catholics who practice their faith - including the unwavering allegiance to Rome and to himself - as it was instituted and promulgated by Christ, His Apostles, and every Pope before Francis.

In a Church gone mad; in a Church that sees (and has seen) declines across the board in just about every statistical category that is tracked; in a Church that continues with the auto-destruction of the 6th and 9th Commandments through Papal fiat; in a Church that has seen (and will continue to see) yearly growth in only two sectors - Traditional Catholicism and the Tridentine Mass, the person charged and entrusted with its guardianship has thumbed his nose at Traditional Catholics and all they hold fast to. He has effectively said that he doesn't give a rats-ass about them; definitely stated that they must change and leave behind 2,000 years of Tradition in favor of his visonary idealistic brand of catholicism or they ain't worth diddly squat; assuredly believes that Traditional Catholics are "out of full communion". 

Sadness doesn't even begin to describe it. Abandoned is the more accurate word, He has abandoned probably the largest of his flock; left them to the wolves; left them to continue to wander around to find the Immemorial Mass, the only Mass that fills the void in a Soul left soulless by the Faith-wrecking policies and ideologies of Vatican II. They are now left to continue to rebuild on their own the Faith of their Fathers, Mothers, Aunts, Uncles and Grandparents. They can expect no help from Rome and its current CEO. 

SSPX beware! ICK beware! FSSP beware! 

It should now be apparent to all Traditional Catholics that no priest, bishop or cardinal - and especially not this pope - that ascribes to the fullness of the "new dawn" of Vatican II will ever think of them as anything but a bastard child, needing to be  nurtured only to keep them from starving to death. Hence, a little crumb of a once-monthly Tridentine Mass "community" here; the use of a fallen-into-disrepair church there. I know there are diocese worldwide - and especially so in the USA - whose Bishops actively promote the return of the Traditional Rite in their diocese - the EF and the OF on equal footing. But nor am I afraid to state that they are just that - exceptions. If it is not the exception, then both forms would be taught in every seminary worldwide, and every seminarian would be bound to say both forms after their Ordination. But they are not, though I am open to correction on this if I am wrong. Until then, I stand by the statement. 

No...I am not going rogue Catholic. Not turning sedevacantist. Not naming myself Pope, as some have done. Francis is still the valid Pope to whom I am conscience bound to support, obey and pray for. But relative to the support and obey factors, only when he follows what Our Lord, the previous 265 Popes and the Church, including Vatican II (when itself follows the former) have taught. When he promotes such as Amoris Laetitia, I am not bound by anything that departs from perennial Church teaching. In prayers for him, however, I am conscience-bound to do so and will never depart from that...he will always have my prayers at every Rosary and Mass.

But it doesn't mean I have to like him, his policies, his face or his constant berating of Faithful Catholics, whether lay or cleric. He alienates anything and everyone that doesn't follow his warped brand of Catholicism and has mishandled the Guardianship of the Body of Christ handed down to him. He doesn't have to be "my Pope", but he does have to be Christ's Pope - and right now he is neither. Nor apparently will he ever, judging by his past actions and words. His picture will remain prominently displayed on this blog as long as he has breath left in his body and prayers for his Soul will be asked for on these pages after his death. But it might now be harder to escape from the thoughts that he is deserving of neither, though please pray for me that they remain only that - passing thoughts and not an actual wilful desire. And pray especially so for Pope Francis, for the strength, courage and fortitude that he needs in governing Christ's Church on Earth.

Mary, help of Christians:Pray for us!

Oratio pro Summo Pontifice Prayer for the Pope

V. Oremus pro Pontifice nostro Francisco. 

R. Dominus conservet eum, et vivificet eum, et beatum faciat eum in terra, et non tradat eum in animam inimicorum eius. 


Deus, omnium fidelium pastor et rector,
famulum tuum Franciscum, quem pastorem Ecclesiae tuae praeesse voluisti, propitius respice: da ei, quaesumus, verbo et exemplo, quibus praeest, proficere: ut ad vitam, una cum grege sibi credito, perveniat sempiternam. Per Christum, Dominum nostrum. Amen.

V. Let us pray for our Pontiff Francis.

R. May the Lord preserve him, and give him life, and make him blessed upon the earth, and deliver him not up to the will of his enemies. 

Let us pray.
O God, Shepherd and Ruler of all Thy faithful, look mercifully upon Thy servant Francis, whom Thou hast chosen as shepherd to preside over Thy Church: grant him, we beseech Thee, that, by word and example, he may edify those over whom he hath charge, so that together with the flock committed to him, he may attain everlasting life. Through Christ, our Lord. Amen.

Copyright 2016 David Heath - All Rights Reserved

November 7, 2016

The Bottom Line Of the USA 2016 Election - Fr. George Rutler

One final comment on tomorrows election, courtesy of Fr. Rutler, that bears demands wide dissemination, even at this late hour:

From the Rorate Caeli blog, the clearness of Fr. Rutler speaks (emphasis mine): 

"It is incorrect to say that the coming election poses a choice between two evils. For ethical and aesthetic reasons, there may be some bad in certain candidates, but badness consists in doing bad things. Evil is different: it is the deliberate destruction of truth, virtue and holiness.

While one may pragmatically vote for a flawed candidate, one may not vote for anyone who advocates and enables unmitigatedly evil acts, and that includes abortion. “In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to ‘take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or vote for it'” (Evangelium Vitae, 73).

At one party’s convention, the name of God was excluded from its platform and a woman who boasted of having aborted her child was applauded. It is a grave sin, requiring sacramental confession and penance, to become an accomplice in objective evil by voting for anyone who encourages it, for that imperils the nation and destroys the soul.

It is also the duty of the clergy to make this clear and not to shrink, under the pretense of charity, from explaining the Church’s censures. Wolves in sheep’s clothing are dangerous, but worse are wolves in shepherd’s clothing. While the evils foreseen eight years ago were realized, worse would come if those affronts to human dignity were endorsed again. In the most adverse prospect, God forbid, there might not be another free election, and soon Catholics would arrive at shuttered churches and vacant altars. The illusion of indifference cannot long be perpetuated by lame jokes and synthetic laughter at banquets, for there is handwriting on the wall."

Listen to this priest, dear US readers! This is what being Catholic means - defending your Faith, even if it is only by voting for a flawed candidate. Do not listen to those who tell you otherwise: To vote for the Clinton-Kaine ticket is a direct acceptance and promotion of the continued attacks upon the very core of the moral principles of Catholicism and Christianity. It is co-operating in sin, something which no Catholic can morally do.

I tell you again: DO. NOT. VOTE. FOR. CLINTON-KAINE! Do not enable this evil any longer! If you value what freedoms you have - both civil and religious - put away your damnable emotions and use your God-given and Catholic right reason to make the right choice - for yourself, your country and, ultimately but indirectly, your Faith!


Copyright 2016 David Heath - All Rights Reserved

November 6, 2016

SSPX - SPECIAL REPORT: Video, Photos and Report from Seminary Blessing

More than one thousand faithful gathered at the new home of St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary on Friday, November 4th, to celebrate the blessing of the recently built house of formation. With the Superior General, Bishop Fellay, several district superiors, and dozens of priests, this joyous today for Tradition in America began, as is fitting, with the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
In the sermon, His Excellency explained how a building this noble and grand helps the formation of the future priests. By reflecting the attributes of the eternal and majestic God, the architecture leads to an interior silence and reminds souls that their vocation is not a normal one!
After a catered lunch, Fr. Yves le Roux, the Rector, thanked those who made such a work possible: the  benefactors, the workers, the volunteers, and all those who have prayed and sacrificed to make this work possible. 

Copyright 2016 David Heath - All Rights Reserved

November 5, 2016

Of Trumppence and Choices

In reality, I claim no particular party, though admittedly I am a registered Republican. I generally self-identify as an independent democratic republican, with liberal tendencies that lean conservative. That way I don't get into trouble when talking politics with others, as I can truly "feel" what they are saying and "get" what they mean. It makes for a friendly debate (I don't do well in a confrontational environment, a by-product of my being disenfranchised and marginalized as a youth due to my short stature, ya know. Or so I remember from Psych 101 in college, anyway.)

I tend to vote for the "man" (generically offense intended or implied to women, young adults, ethnic citizens, geriatrics, people of shortened height, people of color, people of no color, people who identify as (fill-in-the-blank), people who hate cats, people who hate other people...whew! did I leave anyone out??) and not the party, so much. That particular "man" must uphold certain Catholic ideals and teachings, even if that "man" be not Catholic. Automatically excluded is anyone who claims to be, or is registered as, a Democrat, for nothing in the Democratic platform approaches, even remotely, the upholding of anything Catholic. And any Catholic who claims allegiance to the Democratic Party has, in my not-so-humble opinion, placed themselves, materially speaking, outside the Catholic fold. (You can't be mad at me for saying this, as we are still within the Year of Mercy, so...shutup.)

That all being said...

I am voting for Donald Trump! 

There. I said it. I admit it openly. I am coming out of the political closet. ("Thank you; oh, Thank you! I was so-o-o-o worried you wouldn't be supportive of me. What a load off my mind!")

Seriously, a Catholic, it really is a no brainer. Only if DJT was espousing all that the Democrats hold dear while still campaigning as a Republican would I not vote for him. I would, in fact, probably have to sit this election out (or write in my own name.) But he does not and whatever else his egregious faults were in the past, he at least has sincerely admitted to a change of heart in the things that matter the most, especially as regards abortion. Michael Matt over at The Remnant had a recent article that enunciates things quite well for Catholics still in angst over DJT, and which follows my own line of sensus catholicus objective reasoning concerning the man. And Raymond Arroyo over at EWTN did a recent interview with DJT which should force any still-undecided and angst-ridden Catholics other foot over the line - and into the Trump line at their local polling station.

Don't allow others to tell you who to vote for. Don't allow the MSM to tell you who to vote for. In some cases, don't even allow your local bishop or priest to tell you who to vote for, for their opinions are just as varied as the man-on-the-streets. In truth every Catholic Bishop and every Catholic priest should all be telling you the same thing, and that is: vote for the candidates that uphold the closest the Roman Catholic ideals that are the core of each and every one of us. And I will say what they are not - at present anyway - able to do: those candidates are not Hillary Rodham Clinton or Timothy Michael Kaine.

It is, in this election anyway, Donald John Trump and Michael Richard Pence.

Copyright 2016 David Heath - All Rights Reserved

October 31, 2016


"It is at moments like these when it is helpful to recall the words of Pope Felix III (as quoted by Pope Leo XIII in Inimica Vis): “An error which is not resisted is approved; a truth which is not defended is suppressed…. He who does not oppose an evident crime is open to the suspicion of secret complicity.” ( from "An Error Not Resisted is Approved", posted on the blog 1P5, August 28, 2015)

I am not a very good Catholic. I know very little Latin by heart - I can't pray the Hail Mary in Latin without a missal in front of me, nor the Our Father, for that matter. I understand it even less (I got a D- in Latin in high school), except for that required in order to serve a Latin Mass (I've never served an English one, even as a teen). I have sinned and, sadly, many times grievously so. I feel rather embarrassed when the priest may recite the Prayers after Mass in Latin and almost the entire congregation at that Mass follows effortlessly along - without looking at their missal (I know...I've stolen a look or two just to be sure.) I've bookmarked webpage after webpage of Papal Encyclicals to read, but have yet to read a single one - save Casti Connubii many years ago. One could say I am a small-c Catholic, at worst; a mediocre Catholic at best. If I am objectively honest about the whole matter, I really only do slightly more than the minimum necessary to attain praying the Rosary daily.

But regardless of the above, I've never tried to sidestep or internal forum-ize the gravity of sin, hoping to get a definite mortal one, for instance, modified into a teeny-weeny venial one (" Father, I really and truly was pushed into that strip club by the crowd"). I've never lost the Conscience-pricking knowledge that my tiniest and least grievous mortal sin - left unconfessed - could send me for eternity into the darkest reaches of Hell, forever spewing vitriolic hatred towards myself, everyone else and God. I always knew that if I ever got the chance as a young male adult - and a more-or-less non-practicing Catholic - to wake up next to a warm female body - sans marriage, of course - that I'd just as likely wake up in Hell if I died in my sleep. The same thing in my wanting to date and hopefully marry an attractive, but divorced, young woman, which I seriously tried to do once a very, very long time ago - and almost succeeded but for that prickly Conscience thingy. 

I still know that the Catholic Faith is predicated upon plain old Objective know, the Truth that: 

  • God is God; 
  • Jesus Christ is God; 
  • The Holy Spirit is God; 
  • The Ten Commandments were written by God Himself and handed down to Moses.
  • God smited by the thousands the Israelites who revolted against Him while He and Moses were chatting (and wasn't this the first case of the just punishment due to man for violating the 6th Commandment, written just hours or minutes before?)
  • The Bible is the inspired Word of God, written for our instruction and sanctification by men enlightened by God Himself. Therefore, it cannot be in error.
  • Christ told Mary Magdalene to go and sin no more in order to be saved, not to just "go" and still be saved simply because she touched His hem, spoke His name and/or gazed upon His countenance.
  • Outside of the Catholic Church there is no Salvation (and no amount of ecuminism now or in the future will change that Objectively True statement. One either dies in the bosom of Holy Mother Church, or one doesn't...God won't let us have it both ways, I'm afraid.) 

So how does all this tie in to the quote at the beginning? Just this: I will bend my earthly Will to Rome and her pronouncements only as they are re-stated and defended as they have always been for 2,000 years or so. I will bend my earthly Will to any Pope  - no matter how he dresses - as long as he is doing what has always been done in defending and promoting - including proselytizing - the Roman Catholic Faith. I will bend my Will to any Cardinal, Bishop or Priest who does the same thing, just like all those before them.

I will not bend my Will to any of the above who turns the Objective Truth of the Catholic Faith into a subjective one, whether that subjectiveness is wielded by a single priest, a bishop, a cardinal, a bishop's conference or a Pope. They have no right to expect that of me and cannot even command me to do so, even under edict - unless and until they disavow or abrogate the extant Truth (example: 6th Commandment) that is in direct opposition to the re-formulated version being promoted (example: Amoris Laetitia). There can never be two differing versions of an Objective Truth (example: adultery is a mortal sin, except in Amoris Laetitia) and I have every right to challenge such drivel. A cleric can tell me that I must believe in the 10 Commandments to be a true son of the Catholic Church, but, how can he also tell me in the same breath that there are two different-but-same versions of the 6th? That would mean that there are now 11 Commandments, with a bunch a sub-commandment variations labeled 11a, 11b, 11c, 11d, etc. 


I fear the Church is fast losing one of its Four Marks: "ONE". How long before the others - Holy, Catholic and Apostolic -  fall prey to this ecuministic nightmare? The one world religion of the new world order is appearing just around the corner, and are there no Princes of the Church willing to rise to Her and their defense? Will those few whose voices were being heard, but that are now being silenced continue to allow themselves to be shunted aside for those with more heterodox views of Catholicism?  Will they continue to two-step around the truth to protect their citadels? Are earthly trappings more important than Heavenly ones? When will the line in the sand be drawn - and by whom? Vocal-only resistance simply emboldens those in the minority to continue unabated. It took the marshalling of the Vendeans into battle to defend their Holy Mother Church, not words; it took the marshalling of the Cristeros into battle to defend their Roman Catholic Faith, not words. Can any one Prince of the Church believe this war will require less of them than it did simple peasants? Are their earthly trappings somehow worth more than those of Bl. Miguel Pro? Somehow, I doubt it...

I'm going to pay some homage to ecuminism here and borrow from and slightly edit the oft-quoted Protestant catch-all acronym: WWJD.  Instead of "What Would Jesus Do?" however, I will Catholicize it by changing it to: WHAT WOULD JESUS DEFEND?  

For very good reasons, I don't think He would be defending one iota of what some in high places are currently attempting to do with His Church and His Mass.

Nor would it surprise me to see Him marshalling a few nearby peasants, grabbing his whip and chasing them out of His temple...again. 

Copyright 2016 David Heath - All Rights Reserved

October 22, 2016

Public Rosary Procession in St. Marys (Kansas, USA)

Ed. note: I was privileged to be part of the walking Faithful again this year...

From the SSPX District of the USA:

Public Rosary Procession in St. Marys

October 19, 2016 
To mark the beginning of the month of the Holy Rosary, Assumption Chapel in St. Marys, KS held a public Rosary Procession.

As night fell on St. Marys, Kansas on Sunday, October 2, a train of candles, like an earthly Milky Way, stretched itself through the streets. Nearly 1,300 candles and torches illumined the evening while hymns to the Blessed Virgin and the repetition of Hail Marys made their way heavenward.
The candlelight procession honored the Virgin Mother during the month of the Holy Rosary. And it is done annually to pray for the restoration of Christ the King. Such a restoration, St. Pius X reminded the world in his encyclical Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum, begins with Mary. The Pontiff asked:
Can anyone fail to see that there is no surer or more direct road than by Mary for uniting all mankind in Christ and obtaining through Him the perfect adoption of sons, that we may be holy and immaculate in the sight of God?”
The procession, which started on the Academy grounds, wove its way into the center of town. At the head of the procession marched the Knights of the Immaculata and Honor Guard of Mary, two Marian sodalities for the boys at the Academy. Close behind them, Fr. Joseph Wood, accompanied by Fr. John Bourbeau and Fr. Paul Franks, carried a reliquary of the Blessed Virgin that contained a piece of her veil. And following immediately after the priests came the religious, the Children of Mary, the Eucharistic Crusaders, and finally over 1,000 faithful from Assumption Chapel.

Read the rest here, which also includes a photo gallery:

Copyright 2016 David Heath - All Rights Reserved

October 15, 2016

Divorce: 6 Years On - Part III / III

         "I've dealt with my ghosts and faced all my demons
                         Finally content with a past I regret
        I've found you find strength in your moments of weakness
                         For once I'm at peace with myself
       I've been burdened with blame, trapped in the past for too long
                         I'm movin' on..."
 ("I'm Movin' On" by Rascal Flatts)

And so here we are, today, October 15, 2016, the 6th anniversary of living within the bubble wrap of divorce. In it's entirety, the timeline breaks down as follows:

  • 6 Years
  • 72 Months
  • 313 Weeks
  • 2,193 Days
  • 28 Minutes
  • 45 seconds

Not a long time, by others standards who have lived it far longer than I, but nonetheless an era I'd just as soon not have had to live through. Nor should anyone, for that matter. My opinion of divorce as a means to solve marital woes is no secret (at least within this blog) and will never change. I still believe it to be - in the cases of the 80-plus percent of "irreconcilable differences" - an escapism for the sake of the adults, more so than the "it's for the children" meme. My justification for this statement? Simply this: Can an action that has as its main byproduct known and documented harm to children really be undertaken just "for the children?" How could any parent fall for such drivel? How could any parent (especially Catholic ones) truly justify an emotional action that perhaps may end their own emotional woes, but at the same time have no interest (can they be so naive?) nor, apparently, the understanding in knowing that all they have done is to transfer their own emotional woes onto the backs of their own children? Children who - no matter their age - are ill-equipped to handle them? It defies logic, and Mr. Spock would raise his quizzical eyebrow at the very thought of trying to parse that objectively true fact. 

I've long since stopped trying as well, and have learned to live within the bubble I had a hand in the making of; a hand in trying to stop before it got its own wind; and a hand in trying to repair the damage already done. The die has been cast and little in the way of overt and external actions on my part are going to change mindsets that have seemingly become immune to change. If I had to put a finger on the exact moment in time this revelation sunk in, it was probably the day one of my older teenage children remarked to me:

       "I don't mind sacrificing my happiness..."

Now...tell me that your Parental Heart didn't just have a fatal myocardial infarction. I know mine did before the last sound of "happiness" ever reached my ears. I was simply dumbfounded at such a statement and it did but confirm the emotional cocoon that some of my children were yet wrapped in after 6 years - and likely will be for some time to come, apparently. No less so than other children of divorce, and no less the heartache for the parent or parents of those children.

In searching for a theme for the final entry of this divorce trilogy, I fell back onto the oft-used and ubiquitous meme of "..movin' on", which seems to be yet extant - but no longer exclusive - to the bubble of divorce. The first stanza of Rascal Flat's song surely speaks to a large majority of those enmeshed in divorce as innocent respondents (and here I refer to those who neither promoted nor wanted divorce - no matter their own frailties) and who continue the march onward in the battle to repair family and parent-child relationships - and their children's lives. Respondents who can identify "...with [their] ghosts and faced all [their] demons, Finally content with a past [they] regret". As would we all, for who would not have any regrets over the incalculable harm inflicted upon their own children? And the contentment comes from knowing that, although they may not yet be forgiven by some, they are at least forgiven by the only One that trully matters through the power and efficacy of the Sacrament of Penance. It is within this Sacrament that they "find strength in [their] moments of weakness", as well as the courage and fortitude to continue to carry the Cross their Lord has placed before them. And no, Christ does not Will - nor want - evil to befall us, but when it does so unbidden, He will always provide the means to endure - if not always with patience, at least with conviction and courage. to end this? What do I pass along that has not already been said before? I'll not write of my personal woes any longer to be sure - there are others who have fared far, far worse than I, and continue to do so more silently. I sincerely hope that what has already been written has, at the least, caused some who are contemplating divorce to step away from the precipice and re-evaluate their priorities - and your own personal happiness is not one of them when you have children, my friends. You willingly, albeit implicitly, gave your assent to the potential for marital unhappiness the moment you said:

                       "I Will."

Does a personal commitment vowed then, mean so very little now?

For me, I will continue to do what I have always done, though now more so in the background than overtly. Too much time has elapsed for certain minds and hearts to voluntarily change, though I fear the life's lessons yet to be learned for those dear to me. But such is life, is it not? We either change of our own volition, or we are forced into change by circumstance, which many times is not going to be to our liking. Whatever the future may bring, I will continue to ensure that my children will always know they will forever remain much loved in my heart - as I hope will all children of divorce concerning their own parents.

            "At last I can see life has been patiently waiting for me
                     And I know there's no guarantees, but I'm not alone
           There comes a time in everyone's life
                   When all you can see are the years passing by
           And I have made up my mind that those days are gone."

Please. Wake up to reality before your days are gone - along with your wife or husband...and your children.

October 9, 2016

Restore-DC-Catholicism: Stand With Faithful Catholics Of Nashville TN

Lending my voice to what is posted over at Restore DC Catholicism, link below...

The heavy handedness of the local Ordinary is simply NOT CATHOLIC. No one should have any qualms of conscience about withholding funds from any parish any where that openly supports what is known by Roman Catholics to be at odds with the perennial Church teaching. No matter who promulgates such drivel; no matter what subjective interpretation has been used cover over the Objective Truth as it has always been taught, we still must hold fast to that TRUTH! - despite its subjective covering. 

Kudo's to the above blog owner and to those parents who choose to fight such un-Catholic and uncharitable tactics. My prayers are with you.

Restore-DC-Catholicism: Stand With Faithful Catholics Of Nashville TN

Copyright 2016 David Heath - All Rights Reserved

October 8, 2016

Dear Jorge

Dear Jorge, 

Hey! How ya doin', Bud? It's really nice to see everyone lovin' ya, you makes this Baby Boomer's heart flutter, as it seems to me the 60's and 70's have arrived in the Catholic Church - "Make Love, not war"; "I'd like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony"; "Imagine there's no heaven. countries, no possessions" and this beauty, "You may say I'm a dreamer..." All this is what you are wanting, is it not? Isn't this is your personal mantra; your belief, your ideology? Glad to see it's all working for you...  Yep. I'd say you are living the dream, no? I mean...molding and forming a big, out-dated, medieval and archaic conglomerate out of its Dark Ages and into the Modern Man era? It's hard to imagine that everyone - and I mean everyone - wouldn't be onboard with you.

I have to tell you, though - and don't take this personally  - but I can't be one of them. I know you don't really care about that, as you've already made known what you think, me being a Traditionalist and all. But no matter, you know I've "got your back" with my daily Rosary intentions. I still hope - and pray, obviously - that you'll come around to my way of thinking. But that's in your "God of surprises" hands, is it not? When that time comes, I hope that you are not all that surprised...and further still, pray that time comes before your Particular Judgement. Ah, ah...don't laugh, my Friend...despite all you do and hope to accomplish, that particular aspect of this medieval and archaic conglomerate  is still an extant teaching. At least, I think so. I haven't checked the Vatican homepage this morning...

Which begs a question as to why you leave all these past teachings intact, all the while you promote through your executive actions the exact opposite? For instance, I - and probably all Catholics - know that you want, approve and more or less demand Communion for the divorced and remarried sans annulment, but yet you leave intact the 6th and 9th Commandments, the strong words of Our Lord against adultery in the Bible as well as the various Saints and prior Papal documents against it. Wouldn't it clear the air for all concerned if you simply wrote and promulgated another Papal document that negated all these that conflict with your desires? Just asking, man...hope you're not offended...don't mean to be judgemental, but it is a fair question, isn't it? I know I'm repeating what I've written before, Jorge, but you have never answered...why?

I also - and again, please don't be offended - but I'm getting tired of seeing your picture plastered all over the newswires, day in and day out - don't you ever sleep, my friend? You aren't that photogenic after all - a clown nose, really?? Can you imagine me posting daily pictures of myself in the blogosphere, in various good will poses, in the same white robe/black shoes outfit? Couldn't you at least shake things up a bit and wear a different pair of shoes? Red ones, would be good, don't you think? White and Red are always good companion colors. After all, they have symbolic meanings: White = Purity and Red = Blood (as in Martyrs and Our Lord's Passion). Wouldn't that shake things up a bit!! Hey, now that I think of it, didn't your predecessor's of old wear red shoes? Everyone seemed to like it, and it's all about being liked nowadays, is it not? I can't wait to see your next photo!! Surprise me!

More seriously, though, I really can't get too excited about all that you're doing - chalk it up to my faulty upbringing, I suppose. My parents must have been radicalized in their youth and  gifted me with that same radicalization. But, you know...all that radicalization makes sense: Clarity. Order. Discipline. Universality. Forgiveness (but forgiveness with mercy and justice). And most importantly - Hierarchy. Hierarchy with God and Christ at the top, me at the bottom and you, remember, in between. I sometimes think that you think that you are at the top...but you aren't, really. You do know that, right, Jorge? You do know that you are only a caretaker of sorts, correct? That you cannot change the basic foundation of this medieval and archaic conglomerate, without changing its Divine and Salvific origins? You have to remember that its founding members restricted it to all those who willingly enter by its narrow gates, and not to those who simply walk in at the open borders? That it is we - the common ordinary peoples of the world - who must change and NOT this medieval and archaic conglomerate? Remember these prophetic words uttered by your Boss (which you have chosen not to abrogate, at least not yet: "Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat." and "Strive to enter by the narrow gate; for many, I say to you, shall seek to enter, and shall not be able." 

Take it or leave, Jorge...but I'd be concerned about getting fired for not following the Boss's directives. You're only the CEO, ya know; your Boss, however, is Chairman-in-Perpetuity, with the exception that he will always own the conglomerate you represent and therefore can never lose control nor have it or the conglomerate wrested from him. He seems to me to be pretty strict, at least as it regards the foundation of his company. careful. Forewarned is forearmed, they say. I'll keep praying for ya, to be sure!

Well, I have to get moving..have to go to the grocery store, balance the checkbook, etc. Hey! do I wish I had my very own personal bank like you would sure make my financial statement look tons better! After 6 years of paying for this unwanted divorce and annulment (remember? I sent you an appeal and your court denied it? Remember that?) I could sure use the extra cash! Hah! Hah!

Anyway, I "gotta git" as they say. But I'll leave you with this promise, Jorge: I'll always keep praying for you and your "good" intentions and that you will someday find it easier to gulp more and just follow your Boss's directives a bit more will certainly make your life easier, in some regards, and you will most certainly find many more "friends in low places"...true friends who have nothing but your best interests at heart, along with your Salvation. You might loose a few of your friends in your current entourage, but believe me, the return on your investment will be much greater - and who knows, but you might even "convert" a few dozen of those purported friends. 

At the least, I'll see less of your mug in the papers! HAH! HAH!

Kindest Regards, 


Copyright 2016 David Heath - All Rights Reserved

October 4, 2016

Divorce: 6 Years On - Part II / III

The Scarlet "D" (of divorce) an innocent respondent seems to forever face is the assumption that he/she didn't know the first thing about marriage: how it works; how to keep their spouse and kids "happy"; how to overcome their own frailties; how to adapt, to adjust or to adjudicate the myriad of problems - real or imagined - of self, spouse and kids. It's not true, of course, but it seems that way to me. More specifically, the various attitudes and the seemingly overwhelming personalities which have to be navigated are compounded into infinity when spouses are on opposite sides of pretty much all things, including children and marital problems. If the words "United We Stand; Divided We Fall" had a clearly narrowed meaning when eloquently spoken by Patrick Henry, their meaning today is more broadly interpreted. And nowhere is that interpretation more broader than in marriage and divorce. If Charity is the first of the Theological Virtues to fall in a divorce, then certainly temporal marital Unity follows closely on its heels. You can't keep both intact if either one falls, for both are, in this writer's opinion, enjoined when the "I Do" is pronounced. The mortal crack forms the moment the gavel falls and, except in the rarest of cases, cannot be stopped.

You must be aware that there are no winners in a divorce and unless you are exceedingly wealthy, no one wins the financial security award: credit ratings fall out the bottom due to divorce, especially for Respondents. In my case, only in the past few months have I experienced the beginning of recovery after almost 6 years of this tragicomedy of errors. If I am financially stable at the moment (meaning I can work more-or-less normal hours, pay my bills and still have funds leftover for weekly savings deposits...mostly), true financial security won't come for another half-decade at least.

I’ve said before that divorce is an emotional decision that relies on the lower passions for validity…and is also akin to what amounts to a business decision that no businessman, whether large or small, would ever make because the ROI is not worth the inherent risk – whether to the company (the nuclear family), the employees (the parents & the children) or the officers (the Spouses). Unfortunately, at least one spouse (if not both) fail to see this reasoning, remain oblivious the pleadings of financial insecurity, and barrel onwards towards their goal, unconcerned with the devastation that has already begun to accumulate in the swelling wake behind them.

No... people aren't always swayed by reason, but nor should they be swayed by their emotions. We Catholics are taught that the Passions must be subdued by Reason and this teaching is still extant even in the current Catechism (see #1767). As well, Part 3, Article's 5 & 6 are an indictment against divorce by any Catholic, in my opinion, were that section ever taught rightfully.  Unfortunately and thanks to No Fault Divorce, a Respondent is powerless to stop the civil and legal effects of divorce once initiated by the petitioner. And just as unfortunate, no (or very little) help is forthcoming from the Catholic Church, who prefers to just follow the "happiness" meme of modern marriages and promote annulments as the cure for the "irreparably broken" marriages that they themselves do not even make an attempt to save. (And this is made all the more apparent with recent changes to the annulment process.)

It is also an unfortunate reality that many divorced spouses fall prey to the modern meme that divorce and annulment solves all marital problems and embrace the always-promoted "healing" it provides (except for the children, of course, who carry the scars to their grave. Children are, in effect, an unwilling party to this travesty, for they have no voice in the matter, do they? Wither goes the Parent, so goes't the kids...) Truly, in some regards and from a strictly secular premise, I cannot blame them - who wants to live alone again after having been married for 5, 10 or 25 years? Who wants to face the reality of silent walls, silent bedrooms and silent dinners, when for years and decades you have lived with the cacophony of adult and children's voices, all chirping at once about the day's activities at work, at school and at home?

 It is truly a hard yoke to carry for the remainder of one's life, as the past 6 years have proven, although I've also been fortunate Blessed to have had three of my children return to live with me these last three years while completing high school. This has been the savior of sorts for me - being once again a custodial parent and relieving the ache of a heart that had long since given up hope. The human heart is a resilient muscle to be sure, but no heart can long withstand - without Divine assistance -  the loneliness of divorce and the death, decimation and destruction that it brings to spouses and families.

All of the above is brought to you courtesy of your friendly and ubiquitous No Fault Divorce. Please do not fall prey to all the modernist hype of how divorce is your everlasting friend and able to place before you your very own personal "happiness platter" that you seemingly think you deserve, after having been involuntarily starved all these years. In truth - and outside of any type of abusive marital situations (which this blog does not cover - ever), divorce is friends with no one except divorce lawyers, and the Social Workers who deal with the aftermath of those known statistically as "Children of Divorce".

As I have repeatedly said, any law that has as its main by-product, well-known and documented harm to the innocent - YOUR very own children!! - needs no further reason in order to be scrapped, or at the very least, gutted so as to make it unenforceable by any civil or ecclesiastical judge.

It bears us all to remember two admonitions of Our Blessed Lord concerning HIS children:

"Suffer the little children, and forbid them not to come to me: for the kingdom of heaven is for such." (Matthew 19:14) 

And especially the more important - and the most severe - admonition that precedes it:

"But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea."
(Matthew 18:6)

Part I here.

Part III here.

Copyright 2016 David Heath - All Rights Reserved