We are not just material beings, but spiritual persons with a need for meaning, purpose, and fulfillment that transcends the visible confines of this world. This longing for transcendence is a longing for truth, goodness, and beauty. Truth, goodness, and beauty are called the transcendentals of being, because they are aspects of being. Everything in existence has these transcendentals to some extent. God, of course, as the source of all truth, goodness, and beauty, has these transcendentals to an infinite degree. Oftentimes, he draws us to himself primarily through one of these transcendentals. St. Augustine, who was drawn to beauty in all its creaturely forms, found the ultimate beauty he was seeking in God, his creator, the beauty “ever ancient, ever new.”―Sister Gabriella Yi, O.P.

H/T LifeSiteNews: Bob Hope on Zombies and Democrats

Friday, July 29, 2016

Month in Review: Persecution of Christians

From the Esshad database: http://eshhad.timep.org/database/

Click on image to Enlarge

Faux-feminism called out.

Andrea Peyser of the New York Post writes:
I, for one woman, find it insulting that Team Hillary is attempting to shut down debate by shoving the candidate’s XX chromosomes in our faces, essentially accusing critics of sexism.
Rubbish. Her entire campaign is sexist.
I’d welcome a woman president who is qualified for the job, irrespective of gender, not because of it. Don’t blame that mythical glass ceiling for, as Hillary claims, once preventing an entitled, morally and legally corrupt woman from getting ahead.
She’s using that ceiling as a metaphor for her struggle against a supposedly rigged “system’’ that, in reality, paid her handsomely financially and ensured that she moved ahead professionally. She never had to smash anything to smithereens (except, perhaps, her philandering husband’s head.) I think it’s a shame that no glass ceiling exists that’s capable of keeping Hillary Clinton down. That one should be shatterproof.
http://nypost.com/2016/07/28/im-a-feminist-and-im-tired-of-hillarys-sexist-campaign/

Thursday, July 28, 2016

'Tis a gathering. Adding to the Ad Orientem Library

If a bishop's orders are not within his legal competence, and a scrupulous presbyter is in doubt what to do, he will find help in the repetition by Canon 14 of the ancient adage Leges ... in dubio iuris non urgent. Doubtful laws, including doubtful episcopal precepts, do not bind. And, while Cardinal Sarah's words were not legislative, a mere presbyter may surely feel that the publicly expressed opinions of a dicasterial Prefect about what is lawful within his own area of dicasterial competence are prima facie reliable guides.


We are all called to do things beyond what is mandated. We are called to be generous with Our Lord. So as we the faithful pledge to be generous with our gifts and talents in the service of the Church despite the stigma the world attaches to that, courageous priests and bishops have done the same and are willing to sacrifice the admiration of the world to honour Our Lord.
It’s up to the faithful to encourage their own priests and bishops to adopt Cardinal Sarah’s suggestions for liturgy. Some of their own brother priests and bishops who prefer the 1970s-style liturgy will likely look down on them for taking the step.
But we can encourage them with the words of the head of the Church’s congregation in charge of liturgy. Cardinal Sarah said this practice should be implemented with “a pastor’s confidence that this is something good for the Church, something good for our people.”
(W)e have lost much of the eschatological, eternal orientation of the pilgrim Church. It is all about here and now, our feelings, the immediate payoff, charisma and personality. Hence, also , the rejection of meditative ‘other worldly’ Gregorian chant, polyphony, splendid vestments, clear and direct sermons that challenge one to perfection and so on. We are way too absorbed in clappy-hands, guitars, emotive ballads, inclusivity and feelin’ good.

H/T Rorate Cæli

Wednesday, July 27, 2016

Clinton, Trump, leftspeak and media spin.

Let's face it folks, we Canadians enjoyed the protection of the American military for the duration of the Cold War. Much of our defence structure is woven together with that of our American cousins. Because the American president is the Commander in Chief of the United States military, it matters to Canadians who the President of the United States of America is and what he or she stands for.

The behaviour of both candidates vying for the Office of President leaves much to be desired. Granted, few presidents have demonstrated unimpeachable characters. However, when the going gets really tough and, given the many signs appearing around the world, the times are getting tough, who do we want in the White House? A pie-in-the-sky liberal who promotes dependence upon the nanny state, someone who draws red lines in the sand only to keep erasing said line which then allows terrorists to expand their grasp on lands and allows the same DAESH Islamist militants to commit genocide? Or, do we want someone who is resilient, who understands human nature? Someone, that is, who will stand up to injustice and knows how to help people by inspiring them to invest in a common cause to help them realize their potential together?