Jump to content

thesmellypocket

Member
  • Posts

    770
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by thesmellypocket

  1. THE SUMMA THEOLOGICA An Instructional Theological Handbook for Beginners. Comprising the Sum of All the Truths Necessary for Faith and Morals. Initiated by Bl. Pius of Sutica, FSSCT. Finished by Thomas Williams, FSSCT. Saint Jude, Pray for Us. Saint Kristoff, Pray for Us. Blessed Pius and Seraphim, Pray for Us. PREFACE. Most of the credit for this should go to our venerable founder, Blessed Pius of Sutica. I compiled this work, largely based on the notes he had accumulated for it. However, it fell to me to bring it to completion. One of the main differences was that I myself cite Pius many times as an authoritative source, whereas he, not considering himself one of the Church’s great Doctors, would have scrupled to do so. I have not so scrupled, but have enriched these volumes by his teaching. I remain your obedient servant, Brother Thomas Woodbridge, Priestly Fraternity of SS. Kristoff and Jude. PRIMA PARS. QUESTION I. THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. ARTICLE I. WHETHER IT CAN BE DEMONSTRATED THAT GOD EXISTS? OBJECTION I. It seems that the existence of God cannot be demonstrated. For the existence of God is an article of faith (see Common Creed, Bl. Jude I), and what is of faith, is belief in the unseen, and therefore can have no demonstration. OBJECTION II. Furthermore, we can only demonstrate the existence of God from His effects, since His actual essence Himself is beyond our reckoning. But since the effects are finite and the cause infinite, it seems that an infinite cause cannot be demonstrated from finite effects, and therefore God’s existence cannot be demonstrated. ON THE CONTRARY, I ANSWER THAT: “The existence of God…[is] knowable with certainty by the natural light of human reason from the things that He has made.” (Bl. Pius, Tract IV: Fides et Ratio.) Reply to Objection I: The existence of God and other truths about Him are not so much articles of faith, as preambles to the articles. For it is evident that faith presupposes reason. Divine Revelation itself appeals to reason: Owyn used rhetorical questions in his Epistles (Spirit 1:15-17), and God points to His creation as evidence of His power. (Virtue 4:4, etc.) Indeed, a written Revelation itself is something rationally intelligible, and therefore presupposes reason. Furthermore, whilst the submission of faith in the intellect and the will should be given to divinely revealed truths and they should not be subjected to human reason, because they are above it, there still can and should be motives of credibility for believing that these truths have been revealed in the first place. Otherwise there is nothing to distinguish the claims of the Canonist and Rashidun religions, since both claim to be divinely revealed. Hence faith represents a submission of the intellect to the Revealer of a truth beyond its capacity, but it is not a blind submission, but one that has motives of prior credibility. Hence faith and reason are called “The greatest defences of the Church manifested by the Flaming Sword of Owyn” (Saint Sixtus IV, Iustitia Dei in Nostra Aetate) and “The two wings on which we soar ever upward to the contemplation of truth.” (Bl. Pius, Tract IV.) Reply to Objection II: Whilst it is true that no perfect knowledge of an infinite cause can be demonstrated by finite effects, that does not mean that the existence of the cause cannot be demonstrated. We can therefore demonstrate the existence of God from effects; but we cannot know God perfectly in His essence - hence the need for revealed truths. ARTICLE II. WHETHER GOD EXISTS? OBJECTION I. It seems that God does not exist. Because if two contraries exist, the other would be altogether destroyed. But “God” signifies infinite goodness. If God existed, there would therefore be no evil discoverable, but there is evil in the world. Therefore, God does not exist. OBJECTION II. There is no need to suppose God’s existence, for everything we see in this world can be accounted for by other principles. For all natural things can be reduced to one principle, which is nature (For it cannot be demonstrated that nature has not existed eternally); and all voluntary things to one principle, which is human will, the existence of God is therefore superfluous. ON THE CONTRARY, I ANSWER THAT: “The most fundamental concept of the True Faith is a rigorous monotheism, called the Doctrine of One. The Creator is architect of the universe and progenitor of humankind. He is unique and inherently one, omnipotent, omnipresent, and omnibenevolent.” (Dogma and Principles of the Church.) And: “God, sometimes called “the Creator,” “Godani,” or “the Lord,” is the single omnipotent, omnipresent, omnibenevolent creator of the universe.” (Catechism of the Canonist Church.) The existence of God can be proven in six ways: The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion. It is certain, and evident to our senses, that in the world some things are in motion. Now whatever is in motion is put in motion by another, for nothing can be in motion except it is in potentiality to that towards which it is in motion; whereas a thing moves inasmuch as it is in act. For motion is nothing else than the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality. But nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality, except by something in a state of actuality. Thus that which is actually hot, as fire, makes wood, which is potentially hot, to be actually hot, and thereby moves and changes it. Now it is not possible that the same thing should be at once in actuality and potentiality in the same respect, but only in different respects. For what is actually hot cannot simultaneously be potentially hot; but it is simultaneously potentially cold. It is therefore impossible that in the same respect and in the same way a thing should be both mover and moved, i.e. that it should move itself. Therefore, whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover; seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are put in motion by the first mover; as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God. (For He would be Pure Actuality itself: in the First Mover there would be no distinction between potential and actual.) The second way is from the nature of the efficient cause. In the world of sense we find there is an order of efficient causes. There is no case known (neither is it, indeed, possible) in which a thing is found to be the efficient cause of itself; for so it would be prior to itself, which is impossible. Now in efficient causes it is not possible to go on to infinity, because in all efficient causes following in order, the first is the cause of the intermediate cause, and the intermediate is the cause of the ultimate cause, whether the intermediate cause be several, or only one. Now to take away the cause is to take away the effect. Therefore, if there be no first cause among efficient causes, there will be no ultimate, nor any intermediate cause. But if in efficient causes it is possible to go on to infinity, there will be no first efficient cause, neither will there be an ultimate effect, nor any intermediate efficient causes; all of which is plainly false. Therefore it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God. The third way is taken from possibility and necessity, and runs thus. We find in nature things that are possible to be and not to be, since they are found to be generated, and to corrupt, and consequently, they are possible to be and not to be. But it is impossible for these always to exist, for that which is possible not to be at some time is not. Therefore, if everything is possible not to be, then at one time there could have been nothing in existence. Now if this were true, even now there would be nothing in existence, because that which does not exist only begins to exist by something already existing. Therefore, if at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist; and thus even now nothing would be in existence — which is absurd. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must exist something the existence of which is necessary. But every necessary thing either has its necessity caused by another, or not. Now it is impossible to go on to infinity in necessary things which have their necessity caused by another, as has been already proved in regard to efficient causes. Therefore we cannot but postulate the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God. The fourth way is taken from the gradation to be found in things. Among beings there are some more and some less good, true, noble and the like. But "more" and "less" are predicated of different things, according as they resemble in their different ways something which is the maximum, as a thing is said to be hotter according as it more nearly resembles that which is hottest; so that there is something which is truest, something best, something noblest and, consequently, something which is uttermost being; for those things that are greatest in truth are greatest in being, as it is written in Bl. Pius. Now the maximum in any genus is the cause of all in that genus; as fire, which is the maximum heat, is the cause of all hot things. Pythagoras shows the existence of something supremely true from the observed fact that of two false things one is more false than the other, which means that one is more true than the other. This comparison is based on the nearness to that which is absolutely and supremely true. From these Akritian texts we may further infer that there is something that is supremely being. This we call God. Therefore there must also be something which is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God. The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things which lack intelligence, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that not fortuitously, but designedly, do they achieve their end. Now whatever lacks intelligence cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the arrow is shot to its mark by the archer. Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God. The sixth way is the argument from participation, and was given by the Akritian philosopher, Pythagoras. “Consider existence (or being) as a property possessed by objects in themselves. This means that, to determine existence, it would be relative to each object. But this would violate the law of non-contradiction, because then it could be that something exists to one object and not to another one, as existence is only one state at a time; for something cannot simultaneously exist and not exist, and cannot simultaneously be in both the mind and in reality in the same manner. Thus, existence must not be something possessed by objects, but something granted by an object which we call existence, or that possesses existence in its absolute. Now since personality is a positive attribute under being, it must be therefore in some way manifest in the Absolute Being we have inferred. Therefore, God exists as commonly described.” Reply to Objection I: Since God is the highest good, He would not allow any evil to exist in His works, unless His omnipotence and goodness were such as to bring good even out of evil. This is part of the infinite goodness of God, that He should allow evil to exist, and out of it produce good. As Bl. Fabian the Lesser Wrote: "One of the more difficult tasks of a theologian in speaking with an unbeliever or a devotee plagued by doubt is justifying the “problem of evil,” in which God permits suffering despite His infinite power, knowledge, and benevolence. This is a vexing task that requires deep study and scholarship. Assuredly, God is infinitely wise and infinitely powerful, for He could not create the world without these abilities, and proof of His might surrounds us every day. This leaves the astute but uneducated pupil only to question His infinite benevolence, a path which too often leads to the sin of denial. Why does the plague afflict virtuous men? Why does the lion hunt gentle creatures like the lamb or the child? Certainly, it is just for God to punish the wicked, but why do the virtuous suffer as well? We cannot deny that the blight is an evil, nor the hunting of men by beasts. And if all things arise from God, have not these as well? First we must address that while the Lord makes clear to us the nature of virtuous living, and furthermore the nature of sin, we often find these definitions inadequate in describing “evil” as an abstraction. While certainly, to commit sin is to commit evil, not all evils are sinful-- sin arises only from the choices of free willed descendants, and is meaningless in regard to the natural world. Both the beast and the babe cannot sin, because they lack moral judgement. By definition, to sin is to trespass God, and not all evils in the world result from this. Poverty, disease, ignorance, famine, and injurious accident may all transpire without motivation from mortal choice. Likewise, these evils befall the virtuous and the iniquitous alike. Thus, we are engendered to broaden our definition of evil beyond merely the moral evil of sin, but to all suffering and failure, be they manmade or natural. In this regard the author has found it useful to divide evil into three classifications: moral, physical, and metaphysical. Moral evil is the evil of sin, or trespassing the commands of God, and is the only evil that results in the damnation of its perpetrator. Murder, theft, blasphemy, adultery, and diabolism are all moral evils, and their consequence is punishment in the hereafter. Physical evil is the evil brought into the world by the fall of the descendents to Iblees; the evils such as disease, poverty, mortality, and want, which are spawned by demons, and are a result of the sins of our forefathers. Its consequence is the worldly deprivation of the blessings God granted us, such as food, long life, or beloved friends. Metaphysical evil is the “natural” evil of the world, inherent in its nature. This evil arises from our realm’s distance from God, as decreed by Him. When He rendered the planes, He named that which is with Him the Seventh Sky, that which is farthest the Void, and between them the World. The Lord is perfect, lacking no knowledge or ability. The Void is a place of oblivion and helplessness. Accordingly, the World between contains a mixture of knowledge and ignorance, of ability and inability; men build mighty kingdoms, but each soon falls; they measure the world’s width, but cannot traverse it; they love and are married, but sometimes desire others. This is metaphysical evil, the suffering which comes simply by being unlike God, and its consequence is that we are tested by temptation. The existence of a “metaphysical evil” may be somewhat counterintuitive to the layman, as we are aware of the Lord’s infinite benevolence. However, in further defining the three evils, we will find that they are wholly absent in God. He commits no moral evil because moral evil is to choose to trespass the will of God--He cannot trespass His own will. He contains no physical evil because physical evil is to be deprived of the blessings of God--none can deprive the omnipotent Lord. He experiences no metaphysical evil because metaphysical evil is the imperfection of what is distant from Him--God is wholly perfect, and cannot be far from Himself. Thus, these evils arise not because of God, but because we do not fully apprehend Him. Through Him, however, we may overcome the threefold sufferings. Through His Virtue, we resist the temptation of moral evil. Through faith, we resist the pains of physical evil. Through nearness to Him in the Skies, we overcome metaphysical evil. By His benevolent nature, any who draw closer to God through virtue will find the pains of life fade, not only in this world, but in the hereafter.” (As Quoted in the Catechism of the Canonist Church.) Hence it is clear that evil is a privation of the Good. Reply to Objection II: Since nature works for a determinate end under the direction of a higher agent, whatever is done by nature must needs be traced back to God, as to its first cause. So also whatever is done voluntarily must also be traced back to some higher cause other than human reason or will, since these can change or fail; for all things that are changeable and capable of defect must be traced back to an immovable and self-necessary first principle, as was shown in the body of the Article.
  2. Shortly after the publishing of Cardinal Buron's dialogue, a prayer card with an image of SS. Kristoff and Jude finds itself posted in many an Orenian household. "Look down from heaven, Holy Father, from the loftiness of that mountain to the lowliness of this valley; from that harbour of quietness and tranquillity to this calamitous sea. And now that the darkness of this world hinders no more those benignant eyes of thine from looking clearly into all things, look down and visit, O most diligent keeper, this vineyard which thy right hand planted with so much labour, anxiety and peril. To thee then we fly; from thee we seek for aid; to thee we give our whole selves unreservedly. Thee we adopt as our patron and defender; undertake the cause of our salvation, protect thy clients. To thee we appeal as our leader; rule thine army fighting against the assaults of the devil. To thee, kindest of rulers, we give up the rudder of our lives; steer this little ship of thine, and, placed as thou art on high, keep us off all the rocks of evil desires, that with thee for our pilot and guide, we may safely come to the port of eternal bliss. Amen." It is published under the name "Traditional Prayer to St. Jude, Attributed to Pius of Sutica, FSSCT. Imprimatur Cardinal Gawain, Bishop of Providentia, FSSCT. 1823."
  3. Blessed Pius of Sutica says to Venerable Boniface: "The time of controversy is over, now let us enjoy the Skies together as brothers as God intended when He made us."
  4. Application Discord name (or you can just add me: wealthypiano#5651): TotusTuusEgoSum #3901. Desired faction: The Kings.
  5. Discord name (PM if you wish): You have it. Nation Type (County/Marcher Lord/Free City): County. Nation Flag (optional): See above. Nation Name: The Archdiocese of Romulus. Nation Culture (Brief description): The centre of Romulus ife is the monastery. Great monasteries and nunneries dominate the land. A mostly rural land with one market town, Romulus consists of two primary classes: the monastic class, and the class of free peasants who live on these lands, in exchange for a tithe. The Vaseric religion is despised in these lands, because the Jozsefite religion is the heartbeat of the country, upon which all the livelihoods depend. The classes are kept together by a popular piety which venerates great men and women called Saints, or sometimes Prophets, Prophetesses, Confessors and so forth. The monastic class contains many skilled artificers. One of the great monasteries' mottos is "ora et labora" - work and pray. They have lived by that motto. Hence, Romulus is unusual among Jozsefite areas in possessing some serious Mechanical capability, possessing blast furnaces that would not be matched except in post-industrial days. The few secular nobles in the land form a tiny army made up of heavy cavalry knights and light cavalry squires. The people speak a language which is IRL Ecclesiastical Latin. Nation History: Romulus was considered an inhospitable land of snakes and lakes, a backwater swamp-country. It was inhabited by a small population of ignorant men. 400 years ago, the Church sent Saint John, a rather jovial figure, to become Bishop. He established a monastic rule, and from all over the world men joined the monasteries. With the motto "ora et labora", they transformed the country, draining swamps and turning it into one of the great productive centres. Romulan Wine became a product famous around the world, and when the first furnaces were built, so soon too did Romulan cannon. The monasteries also were responsible for the tireless work of copying and preserving manuscripts, therefore becoming centres of learning and knowledge. Many Bishops and Archbishops later, and now monasteries outnumber swamps. The great religious orders have become more lax in their living of the Rule of John, and also many more monastic rules and orders have appeared, including two orders of learned preachers called the Stanfordites and the Barberites. Unfortunately, whilst there is harmony between peasant and monk, the rivalry between these different orders and rules is the main tension in the country. Archbishop Ioannes VI takes the Episcopal Seat this year. Religion (Jozsefite, Vaseric): Jozsefite. Special Characters (Up to 3, generals/agents may be added or included if purchased with starting funds): Archbishop Ioannes VI is an aging man who represents the status quo, as it has existed for many generations. He is a learned, prudent and diplomatic man, with little appetite for change, but who simply desires to rule well, to keep the peace and production going, and not poke any bears too much. Father Dominicus of the Barberites is a great preacher and reformer, the exact opposite of the Archbishop. A jovial man who does not cut a very fine figure, he is also very formidable and preaches moral and monastic reform. He is extremely popular and influential but highly distrusted by many in the other orders, although ironically whilst they distrust him, the Vaserics respect him for his virtue, and he is famous for converting a famous Vaseric intellectual. They call him a living Saint. Ignatius is a young general who commands a tiny army. But, with the strength of production and a formidable class of peasants, he is also an ambitious man who sees the potential for the County to raise up a mighty levy. But it will be a great challenge, and he may well face bitter opposition.
  6. "A most excellent work of popular piety, edifying and well-written." Says one poor squire.
  7. "Dear Father, Yes, I say that it might do them much good. God bless, Brother Williams."
  8. A man pens a brief note: "Grace and peace to you from the Singular and Merciful God, I thought I would offer a few passing thoughts on your recent thesis. You will catch more flies, Father, with a single spoonful of honey, than with all the barrels of vinegar you might muster. The first law must not be hatred of sin, but love of God. We don't start with sin and hate, that is to have it wrongly proportioned, for we know that sin is wrong because it is a violation of the Good. I am not a pacifist. But if I were, the anti-war pamphlets would not be full of gruesome pictures of battles, but of sunshine and flowers and rainbows - things that men never got to love, because the war cut their lives short. God created us as rational creatures that we might enjoy Him forever. That is the fundamental truth of our religion. Owyn himself demonstrated an approach rather different to the one you claim he had. You name your stick over carrot philosophy after him. But if Owyn used the stick, he also liberally - and first - employed the carrot. Observe his Epistles. When inter-acting with the gentile races and peoples, he does not begin with what they have gotten wrong, but begins by praising them. He does not merely rebuke, but he also consoles with God's mercy. If I might be permitted to quote from the Canonist Commentary on Sacred Scripture: "Owyn does not wreck or tear out everything the Godwinites do. They, like all creatures, depend on God entirely for their existence. He works from what is good and right and true in their preconceived notions and then corrects what is wrong. Therefore in evangelisation, we ought to start from some common, agreeable ground, and then expand outwards - starting with commonality and ending with admonishment, rather than the other way around." (This same written by the founder of the FSSCT.) I think that we will get much further in all things if we induce men by sweetness, than if we assault them by beatings. After all, as a wise man once said, if we must err on the side of severity or mercy, let us err on the side of mercy. For we know that if we have erred on the side of mercy in a doubtful instance, we shall come much cleaner before that Judge who admits of no excuse, rather than, out of an unjustified severity, we shall have wronged man. For, not having been mercy, we can expect that no mercy shall be given us. I do not think that the best Priest is a mere fiery zealot, or a mere pleaser of crowds, or a mere learned scholar, or a mere parish clerk - I think he is all of these things. Because, remember, that, first and foremost, as the gatekeeper of the sacraments, you are, first of all, the floodgate of God's mercy. The time for severity comes at judgement: judgement of each and every man at his death. We do not want man to pass through the gates of severity, but through the gates of mercy: namely, the sacraments. Severity is only good and useful insofar as it helps people draw to this gate. So, I do not think we should really like or want to be severe. It should go against the Priest's nature. We should want to be kind, to praise and to show affection. Severity should be a heavy burden we sometimes are forced to yield, not a cane we deal out with all the gleeful liberality of a cruel schoolteacher. Too often among flamenists (I do not accuse you) I find this love of severity which goes against the heart of the Faith. I will end this little letter with a quote from the Angelic Doctor, Saint Jude, to show you how that man in whose name you have co-signed this letter drew souls to God: "We are meant to love God above all things. We should not love him out of fear but like the love of a Father to his eldest son. We need to make sure our love is pure and good. I am not saying not to love other people, but love God above all and you shall be rewarded in his kingdom and live in his love forever." I remain your most humble servant in the Most High, Brother Thomas Williams."
  9. "My son, what have you done?" Laments Blessed Pius of Sutica, FSSCT, from the Skies. Pius petitions Almighty God for a miracle to rain down hundreds of little 'RULE OF THE FSSCT' booklets on the man's head.
  10. I'm leaving lotc. goodbye

    1. JoanOfArc

      JoanOfArc

      I love you mr smellypocket

  11. "Kinda defeats the point if you write a missive, publicising your penance, don't it?" Says one boy.
  12. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MFd3gtRYLNFHXMY5hxbcHmoVTORWhfBdZ0th0M-Ba0g/edit ((There is the doc, although I reckon that the final post probably ended up a little different. Historically, the Turkins converted to Canonism rather than Rashidun. Because first they migrated to Lorraine and many were converted to that religion by the local Bishop. And Semih converted loads of them to Canonism at some point. A few would still remain in their original religion, Tigirism, although they have perhaps disappeared now. They did have some Qali influence thanks to their adoption (alongside the flexio/common) of the Qali alphabet and some of their education system. So I suppose this could have allowed the Rashiduns to convert them. Some elements of Tigirism are recorded in the Chronicle of Suleyman, who refused to convert to Canonism. Their religion was also monotheistic! The Akritian theory of Turkin origins can also be found in the Chronicle of Alexandros, but it's just a myth to explain the historical enmity between the two peoples. For example the reader (whichever idiot played him I don't know) didn't understand the Turkin religion.))
  13. ((I didn't know your char but now I wish I had, wonderful post!!!! A child lights a candle at St. Julia's altar for the departed soul.
  14. Philip decides to keep the poem "The Boulevard of Sprites" on his desk, enjoying it greatly. "The outrageous joy of the Saints", says he "Lies in their smallness!"
  15. "Perhaps we must set up institutions which aim to provide a solid Canonist education, which preserves this balance which our Pontiff has laid out." Suggests Philip.
  16. "Truly this is a promising man. The world is not suffering from want of wonders, but from want of wonder." Says Philip.
  17. Philip makes a request to be stationed in Jorenus.
  18. "The author has said that words are futile and meaningless, and then refuted his own argument by using words to prove it; this is the biggest self-own I have ever seen." Says Philip.
  19. "I have already shown that such a rule, viz. that knights must not decline a request for a duel, is a hateful one, unworthy of the Canonist profession, and clearly the knight would be sinning if he fought on such trivial grounds as personal honour. They should rather fear the eternal dishonour of the Void which iniquitous actions merit!" Says Philip.
  20. Philip says "This is very evil, perhaps we need to finish Bl. Pius' work "Adversus Haereses.""
  21. A jolly young man of shining countenance skips into the office. “Good to see you here on this day, brother. We shall begin quite simply. What is your name?” "My name is Philip Romolo Vaz." “How old are you?” "I am 31." “This question is obvious, but it is for the sake of these records. What race of the descendants are you of?” "I am a Heartlander, si." “You are able to read and write, am I right?” "Yes." “And with that, I hope you are familiar with the Holy Scrolls and Catechism of our Church?” "Si, God has given me that mercy!" “You are of course baptized?” "Si. It was an emergency Baptism, actually. “Good, good. Are you married? Do you have children?” "No, Signore." “In what way of the clergy do you wish to serve? As a Priest, or a Monastic?” "In obedience to my Confessor, I seek ordination." “This really depends on the needs of the Church, but in what Diocese would you prefer to serve in? You can simply name a city or Kingdom.” "I have often wanted to serve as a mission to heathen races, but I think Jorenus is where I am called." “A rather personal question, why have you chosen to walk this path in God?” "I am a great fool, a sinner and very unworthy, but it is God's will and so He will make me a fitting instrument." “And lastly, are you truly devoted to this way of life? Prepared to take any vows involved with ordination and commit oneself to this lifetime bond with the Lord Almighty?” "Yes, I am prepared to die rather than forsake it."
  22. Francois d'Ibelin, squire of Augustus, first Duke of Lorraine, in the part of the Skies which holds good Canonists, grieves at his old master's race falling to apostasy. "They have traded the God and Father of all things, for another 'god', other than the singular and omnipotent - a mere imitation of the true Father of all. They have betrayed the very foundation of their race. I should not expect a building without foundations to stand."
  23. "You shall not judge your own virtue, be it great or small, for all fall short of Me."-Virtue 7:8. An exhortation to the people, against tabloid newspapers. O senseless sons of Horen, cease this nonsense, but prove yourselves worthy of that name. It is indeed a reproach to you from Almighty God that again it should fall to an idiot and wretch like me to be the one to rebuke you. Point I. The Immoral Nature of these "Tabloids" is Now Clear. To Even Read Them, is a Sin. To Write or Promote Them, a Grave Sin. What shall I say about these "tabloids" circulating in Oren and Haense today? They are not fit even to be mentioned. It is certain that those who write them are certainly the slaves of iblees, for of them we read: "their lies are lifted up in worship, for the slaves [Flexio: servi] of Iblees proclaim them truth." Even if they are not lies, even if they are true, then still a grave evil there is in the writing of them. For they show themselves to be utterly unrestrained in their imprudence, completely wanton in their effeminacy, and unreservedly rampaging in their calumny. Such publications and the interest in them reveal a very sinful and prideful civilisation. For indeed, why else would we want to hear about other people's evils? Why is a publication gossiping about immoralities more popular than reading about virtue? It is simple. It is because a society that is overwhelmed with guilt wants to hear about other people's problems. For the more they read of adulteries in others, comparing themselves to those, the more they become secure in their own self-assessment. But, as we have read, this is not the way God teaches us. God says: "Judge not your own virtue." Constantly comparing yourselves with others and holding yourselves above them, is a trick of iblees that leads straight to the Void. Therefore we should avoid reading such things. Such gossiping is undoubtedly a sin. It is a grave sin against charity and prudence. For, if we love the sinner, we will seek to uphold and exhort him, not calumniate him. To publish, far and wide, gossip about him will destroy our neighbour and wreck him to misery, and it is a common temptation for women, who, seduced by the love of illicit pleasure, do grave injury to their fellows. We desire to bring the sinner to repentance. But I speak as assuming these persons are sinners. For these "tabloids" speak only in shades and in the venomous poison of snakes, and there is no knowing whether what they say is true or not. They are filled with horrible insults and meanness, and deserve to be burned. Indeed, if we must err on any point, let us err on the side of mercy. I mean that, if there is probable but not certain evidence of sin in another person, we should not believe it until proven beyond reasonable doubt, for, if we err in that a man has sinned when we thought he did not, we will have erred on the part of humility and mercy, whereas to condemn a man wrongly is to gather up kindling for one's own eternal fire, which we shall deserve, for, wrongly having judged another, he shall find himself before that Judge who admits of no excuse. These publications excuse sin, which, according to Blessed Seraphim the Tractarian, is the worst blasphemy. It is the gravest violation of the very first maxim we receive from Almighty God: "Blaspheme NOT!" (Virtue 1:8.) There is one such case where such a woman as this or that has committed adultery, and one of these - I mention not the name - and the publication, although saying they do not excuse the sin, go on to do so. They say that such a husband is a dullard, or something of that nature. Apologies if I get some details wrong, I have already done what each and every one of you ought to have done by now, and committed this rubbish to the flames. It is straight from the mouth of iblees, all of it. People nowadays are very careful with what they eat. There is talk of sanitation laws. If a little dirt gets on a man's bread, he will not eat it. He will refrain from sweet foods in the knowledge that they are bad for him. But filth for the mind? We gobble it up with wanton gluttony! We will pour in all of the most poisonous vomit, and think nothing of it. But know that the filth of the mind is far worse than that of the body, and far more damaging. And as for the sweet foods of the soul, we will be seduced by the sweetness of gossip and calumny, and not care for the future bitterness that we reap thereby. Better it is to be good in poor health than evil in good health. For observe this: we become like that which we spend time with. Do you want to be a good man? Spend time with good men. Women, do you want to be like Saint Julia? Go and spend some time with her. A man among robbers, blasphemers, adulterers, drunkards and so on, ought to take care, lest he become one himself. At first, the sake of friendship he will at first excuse evil, and then he will share its delight, and then finally assent to it. Stay away from the sorts of people who make such publications, as well as the publications themselves. It seems that men become like that which they love. If they love what is noble, they will become noble. But if they love that which is base, they will become base. Take care, then. Guard your mind against all bad books and pamphlets. It will avail you very little if you are very careful of what you eat and live to be an hundred, if all those years are pride, griping, lust, calumny and so on, because that is what you have poured into your mind, and so you will have become evil. Go instead to read the lives of the Saints, the Scriptures or Tractarian writings. Or even read books of wholesome recreation, not necessarily religious but ennobled by good characters, stories and wonderful language. Even despite occasional liberal nonsense, Epochs of the Empire is well-written and not sinful, but teaches of our ancestors, and makes for better reading. You are called to be spiritual sons of Horen and Julia. Just like Owyn, Godfrey and Sigmund. Why then do you become like worms in the ground? Rise up, do manfully, and be strengthened in the faith. "But this man or that is a sluggard!" "This woman has done this!" ENOUGH! Are you yourself perfect? Can you yourself, a sinner, so judge others? You highlight the sins of others because you are yourself guilty. Stop this, and humble yourselves; do penance for the evil you have done. For if Godfrey, a man we all agree was most excellent, called himself a grave sinner (Proverbs 1:3), which of you shall be blameless? Do good deeds. Pray. Go to Confession. You are called by God to love your fellow man and woman. That does not mean loving a perfect man, it means loving the sluggard whom God, in His infinite wisdom, has given you. For it is in the extremity that virtues are tried. To crush a little ant is no sign of courage, and so to love someone who is always giving you sweets is not so difficult a thing. But we are not called to be courageous against ants, but a soldier must stand against enemy soldiers perhaps stronger and more numerous than his own. And so, you are called to love. Remember the example of a certain Priest, Ven. Humbert, who, upon seeing criminals about to be executed, exclaimed: "There but for the grace of God goes Humbert!" And Bl. Pius the Tractarian, who used to, upon hearing of a crime, say: "Thank God I have not done worse!' To the victims of the calumny, I beg them to forgive their calumniators, to not care for the opinions of men and women, but to lift their hearts to God. For, though our misery be great, yet is His mercy infinite, and, as Blessed Pius says, until God's mercy ceases to be infinite and your wickedness begins to be, then you have a right to stop hoping. But as for now, since God's mercy is infinite and you are very small in comparison, go and cast all your casts upon Him, plunging yourselves into the vast ocean of His mercy. Point II. Young Women and Effeminate Men are Drawn to Such Pleasures Because they Are Idle. I said this in the previous little homily. But idleness is a chief cause of these evils. Women do these evils, especially so-called noble women (for they rather less deserve that name than humble peasant girls whom God loves for their simplicity of soul), because they are bored. Illicit pleasure is, to them, an intoxicating remedy for their boredom. And it is the same with effeminate men who take to this manner of foolishness. But, as we know, there is such a thing as sweet poison, and that is what this is. We see it in the fruits of what has transpired: sickly envy, vengefulness and crime. But there is a sweet thing that costs nothing to drink, and bears no bitterness in it. It is the free air. Preserve yourselves then, little ones, from this idleness. Go and enjoy the free air, go and dance and play among the lillies, those games which you played when you were children. These pleasures are freer, more wholesome and joyous than any these evil things can give, whilst, by the self-forgetfulness and lightness they endow unto the soul, induce us to humility and playfulness. So bless the Lord at all times, occupy yourself with your looms and your children, and, when you have time, calumniate not, but play, and, in fact, do anything that will keep you from idleness and sin. A blessing I wish you all, in the Name of He who lives and reigns forever and ever, Amen.
  24. "What a load of degenerate nonsense and women's gossip! This immoral sham of a publication should be shut down. Whoever wrote this should repent, he is in danger of hellfire." Says Philip, scandalised. He makes sure to dispose of any copies he can find.
  25. "Surely you should have consulted the Pontiff privately first? It was imprudent and uncharitable for you to write first an open letter. Whatever his alleged misdemeanours, he is, indeed, due reverence as your Bishop." Says Philip. "If indeed they are even partly untrue, you have wrought condemnation for yourself by acting thus imprudently."
×
×
  • Create New...