+JMJ+

We homeschool our children with a popular Catholic curriculum that relates all their various subjects to the Faith.   The other day one of my teenagers complained about an American Literature assignment: “Why,” the child lamented, “does everything have to be about Catholicism?” 

I fear this is a question inspired by the world—and therefore by the prince of this world—even though my children’s exposure to secular culture is more limited than most.

Unfortunately we have come to a place where the majority in western society outright reject religion as the objective rule for right living.  Even some Catholics and other Christians who are considered “religious” for going to Church on Sunday live their lives and pursue their material objectives as if there is no God.   

The worldview that religion is purely subjective—if not irrational—and therefore should be kept out of public life entirely, is communicated to our kids by every possible means twenty-four hours a day.  But no matter how often it is repeated it remains a false conception. 

In fact, the incessant flood of anti-religious nonsense that proceeds from the government and the media and the academy is pure fantasy. Those who believe that man is the measure of all things, that people of the same gender can get married, or that a society can thrive while aborting and contracepting itself out of existence, are living precisely in denial of reality.   

God is real. Sin is real.  Death is real.  Choices have consequences.

Everyone you have ever met, or ever will meet, will either spend eternity with God or irrevocably separated from Him.  Anyone who tells you differently does not represent reality, but the secular fantasy world of idolatry - where people worship money, and sex, and power, and their own imaginary self-importance.

Despite the incessant drumbeat that secularism will make you happy, people that refuse to accept the reality of God, and/or the attendant responsibility to act accordingly, live miserable lives; the statistics on suicide, abortion, addiction, divorce, child abuse, pornography, etc., speak for themselves. Moreover such people (“Christians” included) risk eternal separation from God.

The Bible says, “The fool says in his heart there is no God” (Psalm 14.1), but also records the words of Jesus: “[T]he Son of Man… will repay everyone according to his conduct.” Just believing in God is not enough, we must respond to Him in our actions; in public as well as in private.

As I explained to my teenager, the Catholic Faith is based upon Divine Revelation.  God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived, revealed to us many things—things that we could never know by reason alone—precisely so we can know him better.  In due course He became man as the ultimate act of self–revelation. 

Jesus said:

“I am the way and the truth and the life” (John 14.6).

“For this I was born and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth.  Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice” (John 18.37).

 “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end” (Revelation 22.13). 

The truth of Christ, like the graces won by Him on the Holy Cross, is communicated to the world through the Church He founded. In other words:

Everything is about Catholicism because Catholicism is reality.

Sometimes even the faithful can lose sight of this truth.  How often do I hear Catholic parents and youth ministers declare: “We need to prepare our kids for the real world.”  If that means teaching them to live the truths of the Faith in opposition to a hostile culture all well and good; but the Faith represents reality, not our culture.  Preparing them to achieve secular success apart from the truths of the Faith is anything but preparing them for the "real world"  which includes an eternal destiny in heaven or in hell.

Our goal as parents, educators and evangelists must be to raise up a generation of saints, but this goal cannot be met by falling into the error that Catholicism is something to be imposed on “reality.”  On the contrary, Catholic education and Catholic evangelization will bear far greater fruits when we recognize that the truths of the Faith define reality.  Our task is to wake people up from their worldly fantasies in order to discover happiness and holiness in the ultimate reality of Christ.

+JMJ+

As a promoter of Christian Chivalry, I find it distasteful to criticize a lady in these musings.  However, the woman who was recently “ordained” a Catholic “priestess” is clearly no lady.

Yes, the now ten year-old organization Womenpriests has added another aged radical feminist to their roster of imaginary clergy.  The “ordination” took place in Kentucky and the video footage I suffered through demonstrates their manifest rejection of the teaching of Christ and His Church.

According to the Louisville Courier-Journal, the newly “ordained” woman, 70 year-old Rosemarie Smead said, “It’s illegal, but it’s valid.”  This is a lie.  Even if the one to be ordained had been a man, the woman “bishop” who did the “ordaining” was herself not truly ordained and that alone invalidates the proceedings.

As any Catholic second-grader should know, a sacrament requires two things for validity, namely, proper matter and form.  For example, one cannot be validly baptized in peanut butter or with the words, “in the name of the Creator, the Redeemer and the Sanctifier.”  This is because water and the words “I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” constitute the proper matter and form of the Sacrament of Baptism.

Likewise, for Holy Orders to be valid, the requisite matter and form demand a validly ordained bishop laying hands on a baptized man. 

The sacraments were instituted by Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church has no authority to change them, even if she wanted to.   And just because schismatic splinter groups deign to blasphemously simulate the ordination of women, they do not have the authority to change the matter and form of the sacrament either.  Therefore all such “ordinations” are not just illicit, but invalid.

Our society may have strayed far from Christ, but He does not change. Jesus instituted a male-only priesthood.  As with all other enemies of Christ, those who desire the logical contradiction of “women priests” may heap as much ridicule upon His Church as they like, but that will not make it so.  As we read in the book of Numbers:

God is not like people who lie; He is not a human who changes His mind.

23.19 (GNT)

Since fidelity to Christ and His Church is obviously meaningless to these ladies, one might legitimately ask, “Why not just become Old Catholics or Episcopalians or join some other non-Catholic group?”  The answer: because then these “ordinations” would stop being news.  “Woman Becomes Catholic Priest” is a man-bites-dog headline that gives these heretics an undeserved platform, whereas “Bitter Old Feminist Leaves Church” is no news at all.

+JMJ+

I suspect that when a good many Catholics hear the name Francis of Assisi, they think immediately of the prayer that begins, “Make me a channel of your peace…”  Put to music, it is often sung at the novus ordo mass as The Prayer of Saint Francis.

Because of this familiar prayer—and the 1960’s film Brother Sun, Sister Moon—many have a conception of Saint Francis as a timid, nature-loving, pacifist.

What many do not know is that the “Prayer of Saint Francis” was not composed by Francis at all.  It is not even medieval, but was first published anonymously in French in 1912.¹  Some years later it was presented to Pope Benedict XV, but as an example of the spirituality of William the Conqueror.²  

It was first published in English in 1927 in a Quaker magazine³ where it was first attributed to Francis of Assisi.  Presumably, the popular image of Saint Francis as a plaster bird-feeder made this Catholic prayer more acceptable to the Protestant - and pacificst - Quakers.  But the real Francis was a vigorous saint of prayer, courage, and action.  

Contrary to his popular pacifist image, the medieval saint defended the justice of the Crusades so long as the Muslims refused to accept Christ and obstinately held onto the Christian lands they had taken unjustly by force.

Like everyone, he hoped for an end to the hostilities, but not “peace at any price.”  Rather, he desired the conversion of the Muslims, and conceived a bold plan to end the war through evangelization.

Saint Francis & the Sultan

Risking torture and death, Francis and some companions made a pilgrimage to Egypt in 1219.  In Damietta, Francis crossed enemy lines and was received by the Sultan of Egypt, Melek-el-Kamel, “brother” (probably nephew) of the late Saladin. 

Francis challenged the Sultan’s Muslim scholars to a test of true religion: he proposed they enter together into a bonfire to see which of them God would choose to protect.  Not surprisingly, they refused.

Then Francis proposed to enter the fire alone, under the condition that if he emerged unharmed, the sultan would accept Christ as the true God.  When the Sultan demurred, Francis told him:

“If you do not wish to believe, we will commend your soul to God.  Because we declare that if you die while holding to your law, you will be lost; God will not accept your soul.”⁴

Then the Sultan argued that the Crusaders were not true followers of the Gospels because Jesus taught to “turn the other cheek” (Cf. Matthew 5.39).   Francis answered by quoting Our Lord’s own words taken from the very same discourse:

“If thy right eye scandalize thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee.” (Matthew 5.29)

 He explained:

“Here Jesus wanted to teach us that every man, however dear and close he is to us—and even if he is as precious to us as the apple of our own eye—must be repulsed, pulled out, expelled if he seeks to turn us aside from the faith and love of our God. That is why it is just that Christians invade the land you inhabit, for you blaspheme the name of Christ and alienate everyone you can from His worship.”⁵

Saint Francis’ bold dialogue with the Sultan was one of conversion to Jesus Christ. Melek-el-Kamel was so impressed, that he allowed the saint to preach to his subjects. And although he himself did not convert, the Sultan besought Francis,

“Pray for me that God may deign to reveal to me that law and faith which is most pleasing to him.” ⁶

Francis's visit to Egypt and attempted rapprochement with the Muslim world had far-reaching consequences. After the fall of the Crusader Kingdom it was the Franciscans, of all Catholics, who were allowed to stay on in the Holy Land as “Custodians of the Holy Places” on behalf of Christianity.

Mere Peace vs. "My Peace"

It was another Franciscan, Saint Raymond of Penyafort (d. 1275), who later championed tolerance and dialogue with the Muslims, but with the same end as his sainted founder, i.e., to achieve the conversion of the Muslims; not merely to “get along,” but to introduce them to Christ who offers us His peace.

It is not surprising that the Quaker’s took the “Peace Prayer” as their own.  Modern people often confuse “peace,” meaning the absence of conflict, with what Jesus called “My peace,” which is the tranquility of soul that flows from a rightly ordered relationship with God.  Jesus promised the latter as “the peace the world cannot give”: 

“Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, do I give unto you.” (John 14.27)

But He did not promise us absence of conflict.  On the contrary, He said:

“Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.  And a man' s enemies shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for me, shall find it.”  (Matthew 10.34-39)

This is a fine description of the conflict that arose in Francis’ own life due to his choice of vocation.

As a boy Francis dreamt of being a chivalrous knight.  A commoner, albeit a well-to-do one, he hoped to satisfy his desire by embracing life as a soldier.  Instead, he ultimately found the fulfillment of his noble longing by a radical embrace of the Gospel.

With so much being made of the new Pope’s choice of name, it is well to remember the real Saint Francis of Assisi and His heroic following of Christ.

1 The prayer was published in La Clouchette (The Little Bell), a magazine of Catholic spirituality, as a good prayer to be said during Holy Mass.

2  The Anglo-French association Souvenir Normand, which called itself “a work of peace and justice inspired by the testament of William the Conqueror” sent the prayer to the Pope in 1915.

3  The Friend Intelligencer

4  Codex Vaticanus, Ott.lat.n.552

5  Ibid.

6  Chronicle of Jacques de Vitry, Bishop of Acre, c.1221

“The highest norm of human life is the divine law—eternal, objective and universal—whereby God orders, directs, and governs the entire universe and all the ways of the human community by a plan conceived in wisdom and love.  Human beings have been made by God to participate in this law, with the result that, under the gentle disposition of divine Providence, they can come to perceive ever more fully the truth that is unchanging.” – Dignitatus humanae (no. 3)

“The Council proclaims that all must hold to the absolute primacy of the objective moral order, that is, this order by itself surpasses and fittingly coordinates all other spheres of human affairs… for human beings who are endowed by God with the gift of reason and summoned to pursue a lofty destiny are alone affected by the moral order in their entire being.  And likewise, if human beings resolutely and faithfully uphold this order, they will be brought to the attainment of complete perfection and happiness.” – Inter mirifica (no. 6)

As the above words from the documents of the Second Vatican Council affirm, if we wish to be happy, rational, and fully human—which includes attaining eternal beatitude—we must obey the law of God.  The truth does not change; the Church’s traditional teaching has not changed; the law of God is the highest norm by which Catholics must govern our lives.

This cannot be overemphasized today, especially in light of the many conflicts between virtue and license that plague American culture.  Moral questions are a matter of constant debate in our society.  As Catholics, those of us who enjoy the right to vote have an obligation to exercise that right to support candidates of experience and Christian principles who may be expected to act justly in questions of morality.  It has been often stated by “conservative” Catholic commentators that U.S. Catholics could change the course of our country in the direction of Christian virtue within a single generation if only we would vote exclusively for pro-life, pro-family candidates and say “no” to any politician who advocates “gay marriage” and “abortion rights.”  What they are requesting, in essence, is that Catholics “vote their conscience.”  The trouble is that Catholic voters who gave us the likes of Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and Barak Obama seem to think that they have; their conscience is precisely the problem.

Let Your Conscience be Your Guide?

Conscience is sometimes called the “voice of God,” insofar as it reflects the moral law of God; the law that is “written on the heart” according to St. Paul (Romans 2. 12-16).  The name “conscience” applies both to individual acts of moral judgment and to the faculty that makes the judgments.  This faculty is human reason exercising its natural function of recognizing moral good and moral evil.  As a faculty of moral judgment, conscience admits to greater or lesser development depending upon the person.  However, as St. Paul admonished the Romans, no one with the use of reason can be ignorant of basic moral precepts (i.e., that murder is morally wrong or that love and respect of parents is morally good).

“In the depths of their conscience, human beings detect a law they do not impose upon themselves, but which holds them to obedience. […] In a wonderful manner conscience reveals that law which is fulfilled by love of God and neighbor…

Hence, the more right conscience holds sway, the more persons and groups turn away from blind choice and strive to be guided by the objective norms of morality.  Conscience frequently errs from invincible ignorance without losing its dignity.  The same cannot be said for a person who cares little for truth or goodness, or for a conscience which by degrees grows practically sightless as a result of habitual sin.”  – Gaudium et spes (no. 16)

So for Catholics to follow our conscience means that we have an on-going obligation to conform our conscience to the moral law of God as expressed in Sacred Scripture and taught by His Holy Catholic Church.

As one must often readjust a mechanical clock to solar time, so Catholics must consistently adjust our conscience over and over again to what God demands of us.  Why this constant adjustment?  It is not that morality changes, but that our conscience is fallible—and therefore can err—on the other hand there is an unchanging, infallible truth to which we must consistently conform our life; the truth that Christ teaches us through His Holy Church.

The Blind Leading the Dead

Conscience may be “God’s voice within us” but that voice is often drowned out by other voices; of the world, the flesh, and the devil.  It is only by having a well-formed conscience that we may be sure that the voice we hear is His. 

“Many pressures are brought to bear upon the people of our day, to the point where the danger arises lest they lose the possibility of acting on their own judgment.  On the other hand, not a few can be found who seem inclined to use the name of freedom as the pretext for refusing to submit to authority and for making light of the duty of obedience.” – Dignitatus humanae (no. 8)

If we dissent from Catholic teaching on faith and morals in whole (apostasy) or in part (heresy), if we never study Catholic doctrine, never listen to a homily or engage in prayer or spiritual reading, conscience becomes a faithless, deceitful voice; a “blind guide.” 

In circumstances where a Catholic is blinded by habitual sin or becomes reprobate (i.e., obstinate in sin, refusing correction); when such a one declares “I am following my conscience,” this most likely means he or she is merely yielding to his or her own disordered desire; truly ”the blind leading the blind” (Matthew 15.14).  For all practical purposes, such a conscience is dead, just as a Catholic in mortal sin remains Catholic but is a “dead member” of the Body of Christ.

Catholics that flaunt the teaching of the Church, refuse obedience to its lawful authority in matters of faith and morals and encourage others to do the same are not acting in good conscience.  We live in a world where access to the true teaching of the Church is more easily available than ever before in history: the official Catholic Catechism, the Holy Bible, the Documents of Vatican II (not to mention important documents from every other Council) are all available online for free.   It is preposterous to suggest that well-educated Catholics who have attained high political office can plead invincible ignorance.  When such a Catholic willfully misrepresents Church teaching or appeals to “conscience” when flaunting the law of God he or she is not an ignoramus but a “spiritual zombie.” 

A person with a well-formed conscience turns from “blind choice” and “strives to be guided by the objective norms of morality.”  If this does not describe America's political leaders, Catholic voters have no one but ourselves to blame.  

Joseph Ratzinger has had a long vocation of service in the Church.  As a priest, a teacher, a theologian, an expert at Vatican II who helped draft two important documents, as a bishop and cardinal, as prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), and as Pope Benedict XVI.  Long at the forefront of the Church in our modern era, he has, paradoxically, often been described as “medieval.” 

In August 2000, as head of the CDF, he signed the document Dominus Iesus, which reiterated the proper understanding of the axiom extra ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the Church there is no salvation¹).

Insisting that the Catholic Church is the one true Church in our modern age of ecumenism?  How medieval!

As pope, his 2007 motu proprio Summorum Pontificum liberated the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass for any priest of the Roman rite without the need for special permission. In a letter accompanying the document the Holy Father explained: “What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.”

Extolling the virtues of the Old Latin Mass in the midst of a “springtime of liturgical renewal?” Now that’s really medieval.

During his eventful pontificate we have seen many such actions, the most recent being the correction of the English translation of the Roman Missal which restores such familiar phrases as, “and with your spirit”; “consubstantial with the Father”; “through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault,” etc.

A Paradoxical Progress

Many have accused the Pontiff of “turning back the clock” or being against “progress in the Church.”  On the contrary, Pope Benedict was not “looking backward,” but looking ahead.  He knows full well that Vatican II has wrongly been perceived as a “break with tradition” by those on both the right and the left, and has dedicated his pontificate to the application of the true interpretation of the council.  What some perceive as “going backward” is really a matter of correcting the course of the bark of Peter.  As C.S. Lewis once pointed out: "We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive."

All the above examples provoked powerful reactions in part because they were quite unexpected².  On February 11, 2013, Pope Benedict surprised the world again by announcing his decision to abdicate the papacy.  Among the many reactions in the press and on the Internet, the one that was conspicuously missing was, “That’s medieval.”  Some even thought it was unprecedented, but it soon came to light that popes had indeed abdicated before--all of them in the middle ages--the last being Gregory XII in 1415.

“Pilgrim” Benedict

In a blog post on the day of Benedict’s abdication—and again in a February 14, 2013 article for the National Catholic Register—Scott Hahn commented on a couple of related, but largely unnoticed, actions of Pope Benedict, involving the rather medieval practice of going out of his way to venerate the relics of a saint.

On April 29, 2009, the Pontiff visited the tomb of an obscure medieval pope named Saint Celestine V (1215-1296).  After several minutes of prayer, Benedict placed his pallium³ on the tomb.  The next year on July 4^th Benedict prayed before relics of the same Pope Saint Celestine V at the Cathedral of Sulmona, near Rome.

Scott points out that Celestine was elected pope in the year 1294, “somewhat against his will, shortly before his 80th birthday” not unlike our current Holy Father who was 78 when he was elevated in 2005.  Five months after his election, Celestine issued a decree allowing popes to abdicate the papal throne and then stepped down.

This, according to Scott, explains Pope Benedict’s actions at the tomb and before the relics of Saint Celestine:

“Only now, we may be gaining a better understanding of what it meant. Both acts were more than pious gestures. More likely, they were profound and symbolic actions of a very personal nature, which conveyed a message that a pope can hardly deliver any other way…

Pope Benedict XVI has chosen to follow in the footsteps of this saint.  Celestine didn’t resign because he was a saint. He wasn’t a saint because he resigned. He resigned to become a saint.”⁴

Martha, Mary and Benedict XVI

Another medieval saint, Thomas Aquinas, taught that the contemplative life is superior to the active life, because contemplation has God as its direct object.  This is consistent with the traditional interpretation of the story of the very active Martha, who was occupied in preparing supper for Our Lord, and her contemplative sister Mary, who sat at her Savior’s feet to listen to His words. When Martha asked Jesus “Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me alone to do the serving?” Our Lord replied: “Martha, Martha, you are anxious and worried about many things.  There is need of only one thing. Mary has chosen the better part and it will not be taken from her” (Cf. Luke 10.38-42).

Benedict is not abandoning his post, nor is he is retiring from the papacy to star in his own reality show or write a “tell-all" book about his life as pope; he is retiring to a monastery in the Vatican in order to embrace a life of prayer⁵.  According to the Vatican II Decree on the Adaptation and Renewal of Religious Life, Perfectæ Caritatis: “[Monasteries] are entirely ordered toward contemplation, in such wise that their members give themselves over to God alone in solitude and silence, in constant prayer and willing penance."

It sounds to me that Benedict is teaching by example.  Given that he currently holds the “keys to the kingdom of heaven,” the Holy Father is the most powerful churchman in the world.  In the face of opposition from every quarter, he has done all he can to address the problems in the Church according to his own, authoritative interpretation of Vatican II.  He has accomplished far more than I thought possible in my lifetime, but there is more to be done. And Benedict has decided that the best course of action for the Church is trusting the Holy Spirit to guide the cardinal electors to choose a worthy successor to his active role as pope, while he embraces a life of prayer on behalf of the Church he has served so well. 

I believe Benedict XVI’s choice to abdicate the papal throne for a life of contemplation is no act of sloth or cowardice as some have impiously claimed, but, rather, an act of great humility whereby the Holy Father reminds us of the “one necessary thing” and invites us to choose “the better part.” 

A life of humility, obscurity, and prayer is the answer to the problems in the Church?  How very medieval, indeed.

Footnotes

1. Coined by Saint Cyprian (d. 258) this axiom has been officially clarified a number of times in the last three centuries by Popes Pius XII, Pius IX, and Clement XI and by then-cardinal ratizinger under Blessed John Paul II. The doctrine does not teach that non-Catholics may not go to heaven, rather, according to Vatican II: “Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter it or to remain in it, could not be saved” (Lumen Gentium, 14, emphasis mine).

2. Primarily because many do not realize that Catholics confess their Church as the one true church in the Credo every Sunday, or that the Traditional Mass was never officially abrogated, or that Rome ordered the correction of the English Missal a decade ago

3. A sacred garment like a long, stiff scarf, the pallium is the primary symbol of the pope’s episcopal authority as bishop of Rome

4. Scott Hahn, Benedict Will Still be there for Us, National Catholic Register, 02.14.2013

5. Which monastery he ordered to be restored, as it was not in use

Today the Blessed Virgin Mary presented the child Jesus in the Temple; and Simeon, inspired by the Holy Spirit, took Him in his arms, and gave thanks to God.

Antiphon from Evening Prayer II, Presentation of the Lord

Today pilgrims gathered in Quito, Ecuador for the “Rosary of the Dawn” in honor of the 402^nd anniversary of the consecration of the Miraculous statue of Our Lady of Good Success.  We join them in spirit to beseech her powerful intercession:

O Mary, Our Lady, Our Queen, and Our Mother,

In the Name of Jesus, we implore thee

to take our cause into thy hands

and grant it “Good Success”

AMEN

May God richly bless you and your family today and always.

+JMJ+

The following post is based on my response to a recent e-mail from a person that was greatly concerned about the escalating persecution of Catholics.  Current events and Marian prophecies seem to agree that persecution of the Church will certainly get worse before it gets better, and this person suggested that continued anxiety about coming circumstances was better than a complacency that might lead to hell.  I answered that confidence in God is not presumption and Jesus does not want us to worry, just be faithful and remain in the state of grace (which is quite enough for anybody).
 

Our Lord admonishes us in the Holy Scriptures: "Be not afraid... Let not your hearts be troubled... do not be anxious..." (cf. Matt 6.34, 14.27; Mark 6.50; John 6.20, 14.1; et al).  I understand that the words, "Be not afraid," or the equivalent, appear in the Bible 365 times; that's once for each day of the year. Clearly there is a theme here.  The Gospel is a message of joy and hope, even though one of the first reactions to Christ entering the world was a slaughter of innocents (Cf. Matthew 1.16-18); and if that world has not changed, neither has the Gospel.*

Jesus said, "Do not worry about tomorrow; tomorrow will take care of itself. Sufficient for a day is its own evil" (Matt 6.34). In book three, chapter thirty of the Imitation of Christ, He reminds us, "I am the Lord who will give strength on the day of distress (Nahum1.7). Come to me when all is not well with you. What hinders you most of all from receiving heavenly consolation is your slowness in turning to Me in prayer."

Private devotions like the Rosary are important, but the most essential and efficacious prayers are the Holy Mass and the Divine Office.  For many lay people it is not always possible to make daily Mass, or to pray the entire Liturgy of the Hours. However, it is to be highly recommended to cultivate the habit of morning and evening prayers according to "Shorter Christian Prayer." This is an arrangement of the four week psalter (Book of Psalms) approved for use in the dioceses of the United States that can be purchased in book form or followed online.

A participation in the official liturgical prayer of the Church, even the private recitation of the Psalter puts one in touch with thousands of devout souls praying around the world.  The Psalms are the very prayers that Our Lord Himself prayed, even on the Cross (Psalm 22.1; cf. Matt 27.46, Mk 15.34) and we are called to imitate Him. Finally, as Scriptural prayers the Psalms are an inspired antidote to anxiety; they give voice to all our deepest longings and assure us of God’s hand in every aspect of our lives.

As for persecution, Our Lord reminds us that if the world hates us, it hated Him first (Cf. John 15.18); Yet St. Paul writes; "Have no anxiety at all, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, make your requests known to God. Then the peace of God that surpasses all understanding will guard your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus" (Phil 4.6-7); and as we were admonished in the Introit and second reading for Gaudete Sunday: “Rejoice in the Lord always. I shall say it again: rejoice!” (Phil 4.4)

We need not fear persecution.  Our Lord instructs the twelve about how to handle persecution (Matt 10.16ff) and promises at the end of the Beatitudes, "Blessed are you when they insult you and persecute you and utter every kind of evil against you [falsely] because of me. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward will be great in heaven. Thus they persecuted the prophets who were before you" (Matt 5.11-12).

I am not a prophet, but I do not believe that Scripture or Mary's words for our times (Fatima, Quito, etc.) suggest that we are headed for the immanent "end of the world." It may well be the end of an era, but that is to be expected; no worldly kingdom will last forever. The only lasting kingdom is the Kingdom of God which will come in its fullness after the Final Judgment; the outpost of that Kingdom on the earth today is the Church.  Our role as subjects of Christ's Kingdom—as it has been for the saints throughout Christian history—is to remain faithful, not to be anxious. In the words of Saint Pio of Pietrelcina, "Pray, hope, and don't worry." Perhaps easier said than done, but nothing is impossible with God (Cf. Luke 1.37, Matt 19.26, etc.).

*The message of Mary of Good Success is also a joyful one, because of the promise of the restoration of the Church. She reiterates the prophecy of Genesis 3.15 that she will "crush the head of proud satan." Mary crushes the head of the serpent by giving birth to the Messiah; Jesus crushes the head of the serpent by His Sacrifice on the Holy Cross; the Church crushes the head of the serpent through God's grace communicated to the world through the Sacraments instituted by Christ. The final defeat of satan is certain, and, I believe, will be achieved through the promised restoration of the Catholic Church; surely none of this is a cause for anxiety. For more on this please see "Mary of Good Success and the 2012 Election" below.

Put not your trust in princes: in the children of men, in whom there is no salvation.

The Second Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church teaches us that through the Church’s imitation of Mary, "Christ may be born and may increase in the hearts of the faithful" (Lumen Gentium 8.65). Mary is the Model of the Church.