Dearest of Friends, I dedicate this story to you

(Fissure of Faith: Journey in A Broken World)

Title: Dearest of Friends, I dedicate this story to you

Article by Marc Aupiais

I do not care much if any other reads this, dear friend of mine. For the longest time I have been writing for you, and one other perhaps. You asked me to write you a story and thus I shall.

I thought of the caves i created, or of the pristine valley you so loved.

I thought of you lying with my words as your pillow, all printed out. Thinking of me as you sleep, of my words, which adore you, dear friend of mine, my words, which you adore. Which make you cry of sorrow, and of joyous love.

As i write, as is usual in my country, it is raining, I hear a thunder storm, as classical music from the Vatican itself does play, and I think of the water you bought me all that time ago, in a place of honour in my soul and mind.

I can tell so many stories, and I shall but a few.

You see, dear friend of mine. This world we see, isn't really real. No, indeed, it is not.

What we see as insurmountable is indeed not at all.

I shall tell you of a dream I had dear friend, dearest of all mine, and you can say if it compares, with the laboured out works, which usually I pen.

I have always believed I shall die violently, perhaps of a shark attack. It is why I never swim, this superstition of mine. I fear, shall I enter the ocean, I shall be carried up and away. I shall die, this fear of mine, mine heart and soul.

A witch, I call her, in this daylight dream. I stand at the strangest place I know, my University, that of the Witwatersrand, dear friend of mine.

Not by the law building, with men carrying crucifixes, but who are not Christ, and men in hell, or something the like, standing, beckoning us to where law students belong.

Nor by the libraries, stories high, with not a book I have bothered to consult, not to care for. Or for the English classes where I nearly got a first, and would have, perhaps, if I'd bothered to read the labourous works.

No, this occurs, at a favourite spot of mine, near where last I saw a friend who soon would die. It happens by a tall building housing a shop, by stairs in front. In front of the shop- the "Lighthouse" we universally call it. Mysterious not.

None the less, this is where I imagine it happening. five students, innocent, and with a sixth. The sixth is our hero, you see.

And a strange woman, everyone calls a witch. She stands there in the background, invisible, unseen, and she transfers the sixth and then all the others, with him. To another world, this beautiful siren she is.

They stand together on a deserted Island, only sand and one tall coconut tree.

And around them are fins, larger than buildings, of sharp razor teeth, we need not mention.

And while the others argue, as the tide rises, sure to soon cover their Island. The sixth hears the siren in his mind, and swims straight towards a giant shark, which fortunately is distracted, and doesn't bother to attempt top eat him just yet.

Here is where I hault in this story I've held for years.

Does he swim below the shark, avoiding attack and find some system of underwater caves, with air within? Does he meet locals, or get saves in a boat, rickety, or a jet ski. What happens to this man, in the see, 27 miles from the mainland beyond. A black rock coast, deadly to those who approach.

If he is the man I believe him, and the siren who she is, either way, with everything against him. It is sure he must fight for his life as he swims and gets nowhere.

Perhaps he holds the shark's fin, and it doesn't kill him by dunking down, or maybe it takes him further out to see or chomps him right up.

I am not sure how it writes.

It the water beyond him is blood, and fish in a frenzy. Perhaps in the middle is the Siren, whom he must save.

In another story dear friend of mine.

A man is climbing a mountain, tireless, and on instinct. He does not desire glory, or the arcane joy of the achievement. No, he knows there is a timepiece of gold, that he must grab unto. It is the soul of a woman, trapped in time, in the world, which is delusion. He climbs up the black rocks, and leans over the edge, knowing he'll sink forever into the snow, if he isn't careful to balance, and not to lean upon. He grabs and grabs at the timepiece, but cannot reach it. He holds unto a rock ledge, much like a tree, and upon a limb, he holds upon his hand, and leans, his legs holding up. He grabs at the timepiece in an avalanche, and finds he grabs a woman's hand. He pulls her up as she reaches for him. Upon the black rock, looking below at the avalanche, he knows he's found his wife.

He was to save her, as she was only but his own and not never for another to touch or to love. For none but him could be so constant or indeed love as much.

I am at a wedding in another world

( Journey in A Broken World)

Article by Marc Aupiais

I am at a wedding, is it not so. There is dancing, there is movement. A twirling, and interplay. People are moving and circling in dance. Man and woman, and a foreign sound plays, a foreign language sings a wedding song. They predict our lives, in this strange ancient tongue. A Song of Songs, and me and her, this strange woman, this foreign woman, we dance.

Is this not life, this image that hit my idle eyes. This author's vision, this thought of dear God?

I am at a wedding in another world?

What world is this, what is a wedding?

Jesus says there is no marriage in heaven, just as there is no confession, baptism of of child. Not, you must surely come to know, because people are not special, more to some. For Mary God says is more special to him than us, and Philomena more care in Mary likewise as well. Some saints are patrons, to a different cause.

They are different.

Marriage is not in heaven, though we are told not to divide what God has made one, and indeed that marriage is permanent even as the law holding one to other ends in their deaths.

But that is just it, there is no need for legal protection of love and sacrifice in heaven.

Marriage exists. A spouse loves their spouse, more than they love others. There is no general communist love... no, in heaven, there is specific love. There are relations.

Heaven is not an ocean, but a city.

Who Am I really Today...[really]...?

Article by Marc Aupiais

A friend was upset with me. She said I was not true to myself. That while I would

never do something alone... that with a friend I would.

She said I was not true to myself.

It got me thinking. What is me..?

I am after all a very complex personality. So strangely off. So caring but ashamed to care. So aware and perceptive physically and mentally of patent and latent... that myself I get terribly upset when others know not to.

But I know to... and also I love someone present. Around. inside of me. In my soul... always. No matter what. Even when I fight with someone I love.

I want them there.. I do need to learn... to own myself more... to be less polite at times.

But. Who I am. Is whom I love. And why. And how. And for how long.

God made us in his image and likeness.

God made us as love. That is what was lost in the not long forgot garden.

That is the Eden of Eden.

US voters oppose move to allow open gays in US armed forces- latest poll results

(Social Justice South Africa)

Article by Marc Aupiais

For our source quotes, analysis, and additional information, please see:

SACNS Quote Analysis:

US voters oppose open gays in US armed forces- latest poll THURSDAY, AUGUST 12, 2010

Contrary to polls, by homosexual special interests supporting organisations, a conservative group, opposing homosexual special interests in this case has conducted a poll- this time focused on persons who plan to vote in the upcoming elections (presumably those to replace representatives later in this year)- the results were the opposite of prior polls which did not focus on professed planned voters. Respondents, the conservative pollsters claimed- opposed prioritizing lifting the American ban on homosexuals in the military.

A network of major opponents to a homosexual special interests effort by US President Barack Obama, and Michael D. Palm Center, to legalize service by homosexuals in the US military has conducted a poll of 1000 respondents who claimed they planned to vote in November elections: which could see an end to Democrat majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The Military Culture Coalition, said that: potential voters nearly unanimously felt that overturning the 1992 law, should not be a focus for the American Congress. Over 50% thought US President Barack Obama was putting political games ahead of principle.

On 9th July 2010, Reuters reported on objections, that those in a group most forcefully pushing the repeal have had, to surveying troops, as to whether they would react negatively, to open homosexuals in the military, calling any survey biased. Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military is the name the Michael D. Palm Center, once went by: this group is the one which opposes surveys of troops, and is often quoted by secular services.

Section 654, Title 10, is the law in question for repeal. A 2006 poll by those promoting the repeal, found similar results to the current one, with 69% neutral or opposed to homosexuals openly serving in the US military.

Contrary to media reports- "Don't ask don't tell" does not ban open homosexuals, but rather all homosexuals from military service in the United States. However, the system "don't ask don't tell" removed mandatory questions on soldiers' sexual attractions from questionnaires they were compelled to fill out. Whether the system is actually enforced by the Obama administration has come into question, after it emerged that the alleged wikileaks leak- who revealed thousands of US military secrets about war efforts in active war zones- had for a long time served as an open homosexual, and homosexual special interests activist in the US military.

For more information on the history of the debate involving the law which "Don't Ask Don't Tell" relates to, please view our archive article:

Bias in Reuters? :Pentagon says troop survey not biased against gays | Reuters SATURDAY, JULY 10, 2010







South African Catholic News Service: Twitter|Facebook|Facebook Discuss|CAF|YouTube|UStream News|UStream Editorial | Email



As an internationally collaborative: initiative to provide a more transparent, accurate view of the world: This service is brought to you by the Scripturelink Search Engine (quotations, or confers in this service/initiative, are provided to give perspective independently, or reference some external sources: and do not imply collaboration, or any kind of affiliation, or co-operation with other services, or initiatives, which are quoted or noted in articles)



Check the accuracy, and perspectives of our contents via the above listed search engine: against other "Catholic" services

Bias in Reuters? :Pentagon says troop survey not biased against gays | Reuters

(Social Justice South Africa)

Analytical Article by Marc Aupiais

Article summary: looks into either an error or a misrepresentation by a Reuters article, as well as into the arguments surrounding a US policy and the law that policy stifles.

Pentagon says troop survey not biased against gays | Reuters

So goes a headline in a Reuters (British; Independent; Secular) piece on the controversial repeal of the policy of don't ask don't tell, or so they inaccurately claim to start. Don't ask don't tell won't be repealed: all it entailed was taking questions on a trooper's sexuality from questionnaires, without lifting the ban on homosexuals in the military: creating the de facto position, that homosexuals who wanted to serve would keep quiet and other troops would not ask if they were that. Pretty much the same as if our army were to get rid of the question of how old a trooper was.

The more concerning issue lies here, to quote their article:

"The Palm Center, a research institute of the University of California, Santa Barbara, was one of the groups critical of the overall polling approach by the Pentagon.

"Why would you ask those questions unless you thought there was something potentially wrong with (that group)?" asked Palm Center Director Aaron Belkin. "You would never have a survey asking: Would you share a shower with a Catholic soldier?""

09 / 07 | July / 2010

It makes it seem as though the man and centre quoted have no specific agenda, not so if one researches his history and the centre's history (interestingly they call it the Palm Center, and not the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military [CSSMM] by which it was often referred to as in the past, before it decided on a name change it seems),

"WASHINGTON, D.C., June 20, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A pro-homosexual group known as Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military (CSSMM), a think tank at the University of California, Santa Barbara, claims to have unearthed a current Pentagon document that lists homosexuality as a psychological disorder."

LifesiteNews (Catholic; Independent; Canadian; Read in and trusted in the Vatican) 20 / 06 | June / 2006

The Palm Center is more than simply an activist group, even liberal media such as CNN see it as much more:

"The Palm Center, which circulated the statement calling for the repeal of the "don't ask-don't tell" policy, is looking to President-elect Barack Obama to address the controversial issue of gays in the"

CNN (Activist; Left leaning; American; Independent; Secular) 17 / 12 | November / 2008

In other words, the very group with instituted the call for a change of policy is being quoted like an independent objective source which disagrees.

NRO National Review Online's conservative think tank further notes how the Palm Center has been an active proponent of doing away with the law, without military input why they would possibly oppose any survey:

"Someone needs to break this news to the Michael D. Palm Center, an activist group based at the University of California–Santa Barbara that used to call itself the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military. On Monday the Palm Center issued a pretentious and legally absurd report claiming that President Obama can indeed snap his fingers with an executive order suspending enforcement of the 1993 law stating that homosexuals are not eligible to serve in the military. That law, Section 654, Title 10, differs from Bill Clinton’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” administrative policy because it states that homosexuals are not eligible to serve in uniform.

Even Pennsylvania Democrat Joe Sestak, co-sponsor of a House bill (H.R. 1283) to repeal the 1993 law, recently told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow that President Obama should not try to get around Congress on a matter such as this. “We are a nation of laws,” said Sestak, “and in the last administration we saw executive actions that seemed to bend if not break those laws.”

The Palm Center’s desperation strategy seemed to be reflected during last Sunday’s ABC News program “This Week.” Host George Stephanopoulos aggressively questioned Pres. Barack Obama’s national security adviser, James Jones, on the issue of homosexuals in the military. Acknowledging congressional and military resistance to Obama’s position on the issue, Stephanopoulos suggested that the president should try to circumvent the law by suspending enforcement.

The question reflected the Palm Center’s latest polemic, which encourages the president to stop enforcing the law, rendering it essentially meaningless. Using contrived arguments, the Palm Center gay-studies scholars unconvincingly tried to justify unilateral non-enforcement of the law. The document advocates an interpretation based on the rarely used authority that underlies presidential “stop-loss” orders that sometimes are issued to keep troops in the field during a military or national emergency."

National Review Online (American; Independent; Secular; Conservative)analytical editorial on 14 / 05 | May / 2009

The current poll seems to be addressing concerning results in the past which say that there may be a mass exodus of American troops if homosexual troops are allowed to serve de jure in the US military:

"The 2008 Military Times Poll asked a new question that produced jaw-dropping results: “If the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy is overturned and gays are allowed to serve openly, how would you respond?” The article emphasized that 71% of respondents said they would continue to serve. But almost 10% said “I would not re-enlist or extend my service,” and 14% said “I would consider not re-enlisting or extending my service.” Only 6% expressed “No Opinion.” Before voting to repeal the law, Section 654, Title 10, members of Congress, and President-elect Barack Obama, ought to do the math.

[...]

The December 2006 news release announcing the often-quoted Zogby Poll on this subject, which was paid for by the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military (now called the Michael D. Palm Center), blatantly spun the story by omitting mention of responses to the key question asked — Should homosexuals serve openly in the military? The 26% of Zogby respondents who favored repeal of the law could not compete with the combined 69% of people who said that they were opposed or neutral on that question. This was hardly a mandate for radical cultural change in the military."

National Review Online (American; Independent; Secular; Conservative)analytical editorial on 02 / 01 | January / 2009

Christian Science Monitor, an American secular service which supports lifting of the ban says:

"“Is that where we as a country want to be? I think not,” says Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, which is lobbying for a repeal to the "don't ask, don't tell" (DADT) ban.

More than 25 countries specifically allow gays and lesbians to serve in the military, including all original NATO signatories except the US and Turkey.

Some 16 countries – including Pakistan, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen – bar open homosexuals from serving in the military. Across Africa, 37 countries declare homosexuality outright illegal – inside the military or out. Last week, two civilian men in Malawi were convicted and sentenced to serve 14 years in prison for homosexuality.

[...]

Already, US service members serve alongside gays and lesbians. The Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles, has estimated that some 66,000 gay and lesbian troops serve (pdf download) in the US forces today. And Britain, a key ally in Iraq and Afghanistan, has allowed homosexuals to openly serve in its military for a decade.

Canada and Australia lifted their bans in 1992, followed by Israel in 1993, and South Africa in 1998. The lift on bans did not result in a mass “coming out,” the Palm Center found, nor were there instances of increased harassment of or by gay people.

When Britain looked to repeal its ban, its military initially considered DADT. But they found it was a “disaster,” which “hadn’t worked,” was “unworkable” and was “hypocritical,” according to the Palm Center’s report, "Gays in Foreign Militaries 2010: A Global Primer."

Instead, the British military based its regulations on the Australian model, which simply ban public displays of affection, harassment and inappropriate relationships – regardless of whether the couple was gay or straight. In 2002, the British Ministry of Defense reconfirmed that “there has been no discernible impact on operational effectiveness” as a result of ending the gay ban and that “no further review of the Armed Forces policy on homosexuality” was necessary.


[...]

Concern that the repeal of DADT will reduce the number of volunteers is unfounded, according to Dr. Nathaniel Frank, primary author of the Palm Center Report. In Britain and Canada, roughly two-thirds of the military said it would refuse to serve with open gays, but in reality no more than three people in each country actually resigned, according to the report. [Although it is not resignations which are referred to in American polls but people who refuse to re-enlist]"

28 / 05 | May / 2010

Of course in the cases noted, the countries involved are ones where homosexuals enjoy special political or legal protections, as compared to the vastly polarised United States, and what seemed to be cited as working was a more general ban on relationships in the military, and troops it seems were still too scared to "come out" the Palm Center, once again cited as pushing for the reform, claims. If there is real tolerance in the military structures of these countries, and homosexuals are not intimidated into silence, why would they not "come out", many of the inside concerns related more to unit cohesion in combat than to people resigning. The concern is over lives possibly lost, due to the position homosexuals in a military face. I might note, South Africa is not, and since Apartheid, has not been an ally of America, South Africa is a member of the non-aligned movement and is much more closely linked to China and Cuba, than it is to America. In fact, it is one of the few countries which periodically stands up to America, and 4 of 5 South Africans oppose all homosexual acts, meaning that even if gays were to serve in an organization as dangerous as the underpaid under resourced SANDF, they would be very unlikely to "come out", for fear of reprisals. Once again a fact checking error. Though yes, homosexuals, and HIV/AIDS sufferers are both allowed in the SANDF.

As the US's Catholic Bishop of the Armed Forces opposes the repeal of the ban, our service has determined to research into this issue. I personally am unsure of my own position on this issue, as is our service. However, what I personally do best, and what our service is known for is our fact checking ability, and I thought it important to note this bias, the quoting of a particular source as though a differing opinion, as yet not noting that it is in fact an activist organization, this is done both by Reuters, and by the Christian Science monitor, which take the views of the Palm center as though they were fact on face value. The British Army also has a policy of not shooting to kill where possible, simply because an organization says it has been successful with a strategy does not mean it has been. The questions the US military are asking are exactly the applicable ones. The note of "would you shower with a Catholic" equates sexual preference to religion. Interestingly the biggest opponents to homosexuals openly in the US military are in the Catholic church and hierarchy.

As I noted before, our service has no viewpoint on this matter. We do however affirm the teachings of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the norms of marriage set out in Canon law vis-a-vis the theological delict of the recognition of homosexual unions, and the theological delict of homosexual acts, and of endorsing these. I do however think it highly possible, that those who choose to discriminate against homosexuals on duty whether for fear of harassment by them, or due to a general dislike or other reasons, may well choose other methods of discouraging their service in the US military, or of practising their dislike, due to the very different nature of American society. If this law is repealed, it is also almost certain to be used to further the means of Islamist organizations which already have had great success in recruiting militia in their war against America and other western powers, notably due to the sexual mistreatment of prisoners. As this is happening, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), which I noted oppose the lifting of the law prior Don't Ask Don't Tell's policy, has banned all people who currently experience strong homosexual urges, from US seminaries, in accordance with Vatican norms on the matter. I think the reason Republicans and the US Catholic hierarchy so opposes the lifting of the ban, lies in the polarisation of America, a tug of war which is beyond reason, whether or not it would be reasonable in the specific US situation for homosexuals to serve in the military.

This move, as with the Obama administration's choice to change "Freedom of Religion" for less tolerant "Freedom of Worship", since an unstable man of what in America is the minority Islamic faith, shot up Fort Hood, as with many other moves the US has made while ignoring conscientious objectors and religious voices in recent times: will certainly be noted by America's enemies, allies and neutrals throughout the world. If bible verses on rifles and bullets were feared to cost American lives, then there may be a very real concern that these moves may even further fuel the fire of America's enemies.

It is however vital that the US military does not ask its questions vaguely. It also is a matter of concern that Reuters did not note exactly who they were quoting. Further, religion is very different than sexual preference, and even more different than acts of a sexual nature. While I strongly oppose America's wars in the Middle East and elsewhere, if it were my country, I would be asking about the mortality statistics and injury statistics in countries which lifted their bans, especially among those suspected by other soldiers of homosexuality, as well as whether Islamist extremists gained more recruits. The first right of any human being gay or straight is the right to life.








South African Catholic News Service: Twitter|Facebook|Facebook Discuss|CAF|YouTube|UStream News|UStream Editorial



As an internationally collaborative: initiative to provide a more transparent, accurate view of the world: This service is brought to you by the Scripturelink Search Engine (quotations, or confers in this service/initiative, are provided to give perspective independently, or reference some external sources: and do not imply collaboration, or any kind of affiliation, or co-operation with other services, or initiatives, which are quoted or noted in articles)



Check the accuracy, and perspectives of our contents via the above listed search engine: against other "Catholic" services

Subscribe to our articles via email: Subscribe to South African Catholic Add your email to our system to: subscribe to: "South African Catholic News Service"'s dispatches: via email

Email:

View Archives

What the Pope wants your annulment to look like

(Tridentine South Africa)

Analytical Article by Marc Aupiais

An issue which recently caused some concern, and which resulted in our service being contacted for comment, is the papacy's recent comments about annulments. The Pope believes tribunals have not been strict enough in applying the law. We were corresponded with due to concern over his comments and their effects on valid annulment cases.

Firstly, the pope's comments:

"JUSTICE, CHARITY AND TRUTH MUST GUIDE THE ROMAN ROTA

VATICAN CITY, 29 JAN 2010 (VIS) - This morning in the Vatican, Benedict XVI received the dean, judges, promoters of justice, defenders of the bond, officials and lawyers of the Tribunal of the Roman Rota, for the occasion of the inauguration of the judicial year.

In his address the Holy Father focused his attention on the role of that institution, from the triple perspective of the justice, charity and truth which must inspire it.

"It is necessary to take account of the tendency - widespread and well-rooted though not always obvious - to contrast justice with charity, almost as if the one excluded the other", said the Pope. "Some people maintain that pastoral charity justifies any measures taken towards the declaration of nullity of the marriage bond. ... Truth itself ... would thus tend to be seen in a functional perspective, adapting itself to the different requirements that arise in each case".

"Your ministry", he continued, "is essentially a work of justice, a virtue ... of which it is more important than ever to rediscover the human and Christian value, also within the Church. Canon Law ... must always be considered in its essential relationship with justice, maintaining an awareness that the Church's juridical activity has as its goal the salvation of souls".

"In this perspective it must be borne in mind that, whatever the situation, trial and sentence are fundamentally linked to, and at the service of, justice", said Benedict XVI, and he went on: "Apart from this 'objective' dimension of justice, there exists another dimension ... which concerns the 'operators of the law'; that is, those who make law possible. ... They must be characterised by their exalted practice of human and Christian virtues, in particular those of prudence and justice, but also that of strength".

This latter virtue "becomes more important when injustice seems the easiest path to follow, in as much as it involves giving in to the desires and expectations of the parties involved, or to the conditioning of the social environment".

"Everyone who works in the field of the Law, each in his or her own role, must be guided by justice", said Pope Benedict. "I am thinking in particular of lawyers, who must not only take great care to respect the truth of the evidence, but also to avoid taking on ... cases which they know in their conscience to be objectively unsustainable.

"The action of those who administer justice cannot neglect charity", he added. "A charitable perspective and charitable measures will help us not to forget that those before us are always people marked by problems and suffering. The principle whereby 'charity goes beyond justice' also holds good in the specific field of the work of 'operators of justice'".

"Our dealings with people", the Pope explained, "must take account of each specific case in order, with delicacy and attentiveness, to facilitate the parties' contact with the tribunal". Likewise, "it is important that effective efforts be made, whenever there seems to be hope of a successful outcome, to encourage the spouses to convalidate their marriage and restore conjugal cohabitation. It is also vital not to stint efforts to establish a climate of human and Christian openness between the parties, founded on the search for truth".

The Holy Father then highlighted another important question, "that of avoiding pseudo-pastoral demands which place the issue on a merely horizontal plain, in which what counts is satisfying subjective requests in order to achieve a declaration of nullity at any cost, with the aim of overcoming, among other things, the obstacles to receiving the Sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist. ... It would however be a false advantage", he said, "to ease the way towards receiving the Sacraments, at the risk of causing people to live in objective contrast with the truth of their own individual state".

"Both justice and charity require love for truth, and essentially involve the search for what is true. ... Without truth charity slides into sentimentalism. Love becomes an empty shell to be filled arbitrarily. This is the fatal risk of love in a culture without truth".

This can happen, the Pope went on, "not only in the practical activity of passing judgment, but also in theoretical studies which have such an influence on concrete judgements. The problem arises when the essence itself of marriage becomes more or less obscured. ... Examination of the conjugal bond in existential, personalist and relational terms must never be undertaken at the expense of indissolubility, an essential property which in Christian marriage has, with unity, a special firmness by virtue of the Sacrament".

"Marriage enjoys the favour of the law. Hence, in case of doubt, a marriage must be held to be valid until the contrary is proven. Otherwise we run the serious risk of remaining without an objective point of reference for pronouncements of nullity, transforming all conjugal difficulties into a symptom of a failed union whose essential nucleus of justice - the indissoluble bond - is thus effectively denied".
AC/.../ROMAN ROTA VIS 100129 (850)"

Having noted the comments of the Pope, we must note, he is talking about the case where Canon law is ignored out of empathy or sympathy for those seeking annulments. The Pope desires that marriages be presumed rebuttably to be valid first and foremost, and for annulments to only be granted when it is reasonable to believe there was not a valid marriage. His comments have no bearing on a valid claim. One must simply remember to argue correctly and to present the truth with the correct evidence if need be. I am not a canon lawyer, and one follows my advice at their own risk. I do not see any serious change in the way canon law should be viewed.

Saint Agnus, January 21: an early martyr, virgin

links to liturgy of today January 21: [according to the American calendar]:

Saint Agnus: according to catholic News Agency
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/catholicnewsagency/saintoftheday/~3/OxrK_34-d5k/saint.php

First Reading - 1 Sam 18:6-9; 19:1-7
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/reading.php?n=6380&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+catholicnewsagency/dailygospel+(CNA+-+Daily+Readings)

Psalm - Ps 56:2-3, 9-10a, 10b-11, 12-13
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/reading.php?n=6381&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+catholicnewsagency/dailygospel+(CNA+-+Daily+Readings)

Gospel - Mk 3:7-12
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/reading.php?n=6382&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+catholicnewsagency/dailygospel+(CNA+-+Daily+Readings)


(Journey in a Broken World)

---- Saint Agnus ----

Article by Marc Aupiais

None around, could explain her blessing, her name meaning lamb, her name meaning chastity, a blessing- Agnus, was beautiful , and the aspiration of all true Italian men.

But none love her more than her husband, her heavenly spouse. She served him on earth, her invisible love. The men proposed, and did what they could to outdo. And seeing their every charm disabled, one finally accused her in court.

The judge, not of justice petitioned the saint, the young beauty, so heavenly in stature and name. She was threatened with fire, and torture and death, yet would not deny her spouse, to whom she had wed.

Her chastity important, the judge had an idea. She was sent to the brothel, by order of court. The men of Rome, could do as they pleased. But Agnus was hardly impressed, “My jealous spouse in heaven, will keep me a virgin”, one may paraphrase how she insisted.

At the brothel, a crowd of men gathered, beset by vile lust, they aimed to upset.

Though seeing this saint, many did desist, many not all- one was not shamed. He was determined to take her sanctity away. And driven by the lust of eyes, by lightning God took his sight.

And by prayer, the virgin healed him, by God’s work was God’s curse undone.

Still the judge pleaded, or so it would seem, but the spouse of Christ knew this- what god has made one, man must not divide. She had looked with joy at the instruments of torture, and hope at her reunification with Christ. She would not marry him who took her to court. She was thus beheaded, as those watching were moved to tears. Saint Agnus, of Chastity, Saint Agnus the lamb. Lead to the slaughter, yet also to the feast.

She served God by living, she did not take her own life. The martyr and the suicide are opposites. One destroys all, by taking his life. The other is so loyal to life, that she or he sacrifices it, that it may live as she is made to die.


Saint Agnus, on this day: ora pro nobis.

Factual Information based indirectly on the account rendered in Butler’s Lives of Saints, Edited by Rev. Bernard Kelly, published by Virtue. Saint Agnus is the saint listed by this ancient work, for today!

All Roman Catholic Priests are married

Editor's personal note:

I would like to point our readers to an article by of Msgr. Charles Pope of the Archdiocese of Washington in the United States of America, to give a hint of the article, this is how it ends:

12 / 01 | January / 2008

"Complementary images but one reality – But you may wonder how can the Church be both Bride of Christ and Body of Christ? And yet this is not only possible but it is essential to understanding the Church as a marital union of Christ and His Bride. The scriptural teaching about marriage is that the two spouses become one. And thus it is that the Church is at one and the same time the Body of Christ and the Bride of Christ. Christ says of Bride and Groom, They are no longer two, they are one (Matt 19:6). And St. Paul directly links this mystery to the Church and Christ: Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body.”For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the Church(Eph 5:28-32).

In terms of her human members the Church is imperfect and sinful. But she is no less loved by Christ. In her Bridegroom and the Divine Head of the Church, the Church is perfect. We ought to love her personally and intensely. She is not an institution, not an “it” she is Bride, She is Mother, The Church is the Body of Christ.

As a priest, I am not a bachelor. I have a bride, the Church. She is a beautiful (and demanding) bride. Religious Sisters are not single either. One of the beautiful images of women religious is that they are Brides of Christ. In this video from the Nun’s Story, the postulants are invested in their habits. In the traditional ceremony the women come in dressed in bridal gowns of the world and and then depart to be invested in the bridal gowns of their religious habits. They are brides of Christ, imaging the the Church as Bride and mother. "

http://blog.adw.org/2010/01/the-problem-of-a-depersonalized-church/

If God's body is that unsatisfactory, that those married to it need another spouse, then perhaps it is not so divine as one may desire. I personally believe myself called to marriage, not the priesthood etc. Therefore, I shall then have a spouse who is human, but would be no less married than the priest who marries Mother Church!

The divine, sublime gift of our true suffering

(Journey in a Broken World)

Article by Marc Aupiais

I take great joy in heartbreak,
God's heart is always broken,

I take great joy in humiliation,
It teaches me my position before God, before saints, before my fellow man,

I take great joy in obscurity,
It teaches me that I am obscure,

I have often felt pain,
It humbles me,

It makes me think of heaven,
And of the alternative to heaven

In pain, I feel close to you, in pain I learn to love with you,
To love with the love which Christ loves with,

With suffering, I become a disciple, with pain and longing,
The heart grows fond of heaven,

In suffering, I learn to cry, tears are special,
I will never cry in heaven,

In suffering, I learn to become wise,
Pain either grows us, or we gradually die,

In suffering, I imitate my Lord and my Saviour Jesus,
And the Trinity, in whom my salvation is viable,

Suffering gives the divine gift of sanity,
Of the sublimely present clarity of vision.

Suffering, I write while suffering, suffering, a gift,
of evidence of our love!

Marriages by those baptised in the Catholic church: if performed outside the church- will now be INVALID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[English; Afrikaans; français]


(Tridentine South And Southern Africa)

Note by Marc Aupiais

Persons baptised Catholic are obligated to marry in the Catholic church, or with its approval, or their marriages are invalid. Previously there was a clause exempting those who formally abandoned the faith in a certain way from this- the clause is removed by the Muto Proprio just released by the pope, lets let the Vatican explain the rest:

"MOTU PROPRIO: VARIATIONS TO THE CODE OF CANON LAW

VATICAN CITY, 15 DEC 2009 (VIS) - Made public today was Benedict XVI's Motu Proprio, "Omnium in mentem". The document is dated 26 October 2009 and contains two variations to the Code of Canon Law (CIC), variations which have long been the object of study by dicasteries of the Roman Curia and by national episcopal conferences.

The document published today contains five articles modifying canons 1008, 1009, 1086, 1117 and 1124. According to an explanatory note by Archbishop Francesco Coccopalmerio, president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, these variations "concern two separate questions: adapting the text of the canons that define the ministerial function of deacons to the relative text in the Catechism of the Catholic church (1581), and suppressing a subordinate clause in three canons concerning marriage, which experience has shown to be inappropriate".

The variation to the text of canon 1008 will now limit itself to affirming that "those who receive the Sacrament of Orders are destined to serve the People of God with a new and specific title", while canon 1009 "will be given an additional third paragraph in which it is specified that the minister constituted into the Order of the episcopate or the priesthood receives the mission and power to act in the person of Christ the Head, while deacons receive the faculty to serve the People of God in the diaconates of the liturgy, of the Word and of charity".

Archbishop Coccopalmerio's note then goes on to explain that the other changes contained in the Motu Proprio all concern the elimination of the clause "actus formalis defectionis ab Ecclesia Catholica" contained in canons 1086 para. 1, 1117 and 1124. This clause, "following much study, was held to be unnecessary and inappropriate", he writes.

"From the time the Code of Canon Law came into effect in the year 1983 until the moment of the coming into effect of this Motu Proprio, Catholics who had abandoned the Catholic Church by means of a formal act were not obliged to follow the canonical form of celebration for the validity of marriage (canon 1117), nor were they bound by the impediment concerning marriage to the non-baptised (canon 1086 para. 1), nor did they suffer the prohibition on marrying non-Catholic Christians (canon 1124). The abovementioned clause contained in these three canons represented an exception ... to another more general norm of ecclesiastical legislation according to which all those baptised in the Catholic Church or received into her are bound to observe ecclesiastical laws (canon 11).

"With the coming into effect of the new Motu Proprio", Archbishop Coccopalmerio adds, "canon 11 of the Code of Canon Law reacquires its full force as concerns the contents of the canons thus modified, even in cases were there has been a formal abandonment. Hence, in order to regularise any unions that may have been made in the non-observance of these rules it will be necessary to have recourse, if possible, to the ordinary means Canon Law offers for such cases: dispensation from the impediment, sanation, etc".
MP/OMNIUM IN MENTEM/COCCOPALMERIO VIS 091215 (520)"

South Africa: DA's SA Christian voters lose say?

(Scripturelink Voters Guide)

Note: the DA's leader's office's head of staff replied to our request: http://southafricancatholic.blogspot.com/2009/03/south-africa-da-leaders-office-denies.html

Article By Marc Aupiais

Recently, we came accross the following:

"

Post #1

Ian Ollis wroteon February 25, 2009 at 1:49pm

Ok, so huge numbers of people have been asking about the gay thing, so I decided we should start a discussion on the board! Currently, the DA has a large number of gay (LGBTI) people as public rep's either as MP's MPL's and Councillors around the country. Yes, I am one of them! On our election lists for the 2009 general elections, I was extremely happy to see the number of gay people that have been chosen on the lists for parliament and the various provinces as candidates. A case in point is the Gauteng Parliamentary Candidates list. I am currently one of 5(that I know of) gay or lesbian people in the top 16 positions on the list. That is a huge plus for the party and for our representivity. Show me one other party in SA that has that many? An many of us, like myself, Mike Waters, Paul Willemburg are very out about our sexuality. we are not a pink party however. We support equal rights for gay people, just as we support say, the equal rights of both genders, all races and each language group in the country. For those of you out there who are thinking of voting DA and for whom this is an issue, rest assured, the DA is the party that most represents the rights and views of gay people and not just in words. we have actions that support what we say! Viva Helen Viva!"

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2226300562&topic=7506

Ian Ollis, is the 11th member listed on the DA's GAUTENG NATIONAL ASSEMBLY LIST listing. I see no reason to discount that the person speaking is him.

 Last year, when asking the DA, whether or not they had altered their policy on gay marriage, their answer to our organization was no: they still had no policy. This was after a decision involving Internation Politics, which technically favored "Gay Marriage".

We have requested a reply from the Democratic alliance, on this issue, since, having seen this admittal by a potential MP.

This was posted on their facebook group.

The DA, has also refused to alter the constitution, so that abortion is clearly relegated to the criminal arena, as any South African, no matter their age, can legally request an abortion. The only restrictions in South Africa, seem to focus on protecting the mother's health. The Judiciary, largely seems to have a certain view of the Constitution, and some believe that if South Africa's abortion laws are overturned, they will overturn the nullification of ANC: African National Congress: policy. This trial has yet to occur however.

Such moves either mean nothing, or everything. The DA would not have succeeded in changing the constitution, and so their choice had no effect, but they seemed to say that the constitution was over in 1994.

If the DA values their Pro-life, pro-family, pro-catechism voters, I suggest that they clarify this issue: as one of their representatives seems to be saying that they have purposely placed a large portion of homosexual voters on their parliamentary list high up. Such would mean a pragmatic change in a possibly neutral vote on a pro-life issue: marriage.

Such calls into account: how does the DA stand on other issues of policy, such as abortion: another issue, of importance to Christians voting. If they are that sort of "liberals" now, leaving what I would have thought was the PFP behind, then: where else are they liberal. America's Democratic Party has jumped on both issues, so have many others. Such concern lies not in homosexual ideas, which generally may change from each to each: but what is considered liberalism in many nations.

Both support of "Gay Marriage", and support of abortionist policies, are issues which make a party very unlikely to be the best for Catholic voters. The question is whether or not the DA is still neutral on these issues, or if they simply are officially neutral, but have hidden practical policies.

I would like it if the DA were to reply to my request.

Can the DA say that it is still neutral on these morally concerning issues to Christian voters?

If the man above is not Ian Ollis, I request that the DA inform us, as it is, I suspect it is the DA potential Parliamentarian, and I hope that the DA, is not discriminating against heterosexuals in their representation in parliament.

Vatican City, Vatican: Paper claims Pill is known for environmental effects: AFP denies claims, via contraceptives players: despite American studies

(Social Justice South Africa; c.f. Catholic Culture 05/01/2009; Creative Minority Report 05/01/2009)

Article by Marc Aupiais

AFP, has reported that the Vatican's newspaper (it is not the official newspaper, but considered to have weight): L'Osservatore Romano: is reporting that the "Pill", has negative environmental effects: AFP, claims that no study is being quoted, and instantly quotes players in the Contraceptives business: to deny claims, saying that plastics (not mentioned here for pollution caused by such), also have many of the same substances.

The claims by the Vatican's paper: follow an American study, where fish had unnaturally been mutated: into half one sex, half another: scientists involved in the University Study: blame hormones, which they thought to be entering the water: via the contraceptive. The Vatican paper: has claimed, based on studies, I have also heard of: that the pill: pollutes water sources, causing problems: among which is human male infertility.

The pill is known for increasing the risk of sexual disease phenomenally, and also has many negative side affects. Creative Minority Report, a satirical, but as to facts quoted: accurate political and social initiative, is asking why no objection has been made by environmentalists: as to the accuracy of opinions: of those profiting from sales of the contraceptive.

Listening for Permission to be "Me": A look at relationships, love, and life: in our exile from heaven

Relationships are neither heaven or hell, maybe they are all purgatory. Is a relationship supposed to be mediocre, I’m not settling for mediocre? We don’t want a tolerable coexistence. We all want “ecstasy” true companionship with an anticipated lifetime of this happiness, I want my knight in shining armor, to come flying in and sweep me off my feet and make all my dreams come true with one heck of a spiritual base, a fairy tale with my soulmate that I have been waiting to meet throughout my lifetime … do you think I am dreaming, I’ll certainly keep you posted.

No relationship is ideal or easy, thats not the fairy tale. If anyone tells you that their relationship is perfect it is not true. Was Adam and Eve perfect or closest to it, he didn’t have to hear about all the other guys she could have married and she didn’t have to listen to him say how his mother cooked better. Ouch, enter the intrusions of sin.

At the beginning you have a huge chemistry with each other, they might be very handsome or beautiful and have caught your eye, you get these butterflies in your stomach, you want to learn about this person and a friendship begins. Everything from the outside is good, but what about the inside, is the inside complete, mature and able? They have a fabulous job, marvelous personality, so totally hot and handsome, it'd be the perfect match right, life would be easy, but …

Throughout our lives we meet all kinds of people, some will stay and some will go, they all bring different experiences into our lives, why do some become part of our lives forever, maybe even become part of our family or our spouse? Do we have a check list of qualifications that are needed to cross that friendship line into maybe something more like a beautiful marriage?? Do Catholics only marry Catholics, what if you are a practicing catholic and marry a cradle catholic (one born with the name catholic)?? Will that work? What if you fall in love with a non-catholic, yikes then what? Would it rip your heart out if you fell in love with someone and they said you have to have these certain qualifications before there would even be a possibility of a future together ... after the fact you have fallen in love? Relationships are brutal sometimes and hurt … those are the true facts!!

Falling in love sometimes sneaks completely up on you, its not lust, its deep, its understanding where that other person is coming from, its making sure that persons needs are met sometimes before yours. Sometimes you don't even realize you are in love with someone right in front of you and you are looking?? It’s a lot more giving than receiving. Loving relationships aren’t always just couples. The first and biggest thing in any relationship is learning really hard to listen. Listening to what your significant other, girlfriend, boyfriend, friend or spouse is saying to you, not what you are saying or what you want to hear, listening to their thoughts first. Great communications skills penetrate your heart and soul. These are base skills. We all lack these skills and they are superior to anything else.

Are you in fear of being assertive, speaking your true thoughts, for fear of disappointing them your partner, friend, associate or hurting them, not being you, being the person they desire first?? Awe, what about spiritual communication, the glue to the relationship, God? Do we need God in our relationships as couples even if we are perfect for each other? Uh-huh, I'm warning you we all need God, that I know for sure and I learnt the hard way.

We all spend time learning skills in school, taking courses etc., but does anyone spend time connecting and learning the psychology of relationships? What about the teachings or classes taken before getting married, are they effective? Are you taking the class or just attending because it’s a pre-requisite or are you truly involved and participating in that class??

It always bamboozles me to learn that sometimes we wake up after several years together in a relationship or marriage and really do not know a person. We scream “eish” at the top of our lungs, it happens sometimes after a couple of years together dating or twenty years later married and you realize your partner doesn’t know who or what you are all about, this is not uncommon, but it sure is sad. It a lack of communication and effort on one or both partners in any relationship. It happens frequently. This wasn't discussed in any course that I attended?

It takes huge amounts of time and commitment to keep a relationship happy and making it grow, it doesn’t just happen, its work and lots of work, harder work than you can imagine with huge communication skills and trust that each of you must realize this.

Its strange that sometimes during a relationship we get this awakening to the fact that something is wrong with this union, it’s in your stomach and intuition, you might not want to realize this, you might argue a lot, not hear what the other person is saying, you truly love this person and want it to work. You ignore these waves inside you for fear of what the unknown?

You might realize you have never had a true heart to heart talk, person to person totally connecting and understanding each other as individuals. Maybe you have but you don't get that feeling of connection. We are are always individuals regardless of any relationship or marriage. Sometimes as much as you love a certain individual you are fighting to keep it together and Gods powers are saying something different. The grass isn’t greener on the other side, this person is truly good but its like you are fighting against something, nobody is perfect and you wonder why this working isn’t. Both parties seem to want it to work??

A good relationship requires core teaching of loving myself first, connecting with our loving God.

We live in a world where sin affects all of us, individually and in married couples. Why is this, because nobody is perfect and each of us is flawed with huge idiosyncrasies, immature neurotic traits and they don’t go away when you say “I do” and that most beautiful diamond is slipped onto your finger. They become magnified by the significant other immature neurotic behaviors of the partner, girlfriend or spouse in the relationship.

When the relationship between two people starts to disintegrate there is friction, some panic, become afraid, don’t want to lose the other person, hurt and fear being alone, nobody wants to be lonely or spend their life alone. This is difficult time in any relationship to endure, both individuals know when something is not quite right and most know that relationships will change they don’t stay all happy. Sometime this comes from a sense of disillusionment. At some point in a relationship you each realize the shocking realization that romantic dreams of a perfect relationship or matrimonial bliss is unrealistic. The wife or girlfriend wants continued courtship with lasting, loving attention from her prince charming, the one she will marry and the wife is disappointed if this becomes a dashed dream after marriage. We get caught up in the wants in life.

The boyfriend or husband is disconsolate because he isn’t receiving the love and respect he assumed would always be there. The reality of it all hurts, hurts real bad. Relationships take lots of work, tons of work, but none of it is going to work without the faith of God inside any type of relationship first, if you don’t have this, no amount of love or work is going to help, you are missing the base of faith. You can never have the rest though regardless how hard you try or good without this faith?? Who knew?

Having a broken relationship before marriage is Gods way of telling you to look deep inside. It doesn’t matter how much it hurts or time spent together, what people say about how good of a couple you are together, listen to your conscience and not a broken heart. A broken marriage can be brutal, you endure the whispers, gossip, and condescension of others, and the worst is you have to bare Gods’ disdain as well??

Whether a relationship is broken or still hanging together by a thread, what is that gnawing feeling inside us that tells us its unreasonable and impossible for this to ever be, why when we are lonely and only just want this to be does it have to be??

The relationship gives you a sense of peace or makes you laugh, its teaches you something and the joy you receive is still unbelievable but it’s still not right and its goes away. It can’t withstand something to keep it strong and it’s not meant to be, oh it could be the most beautiful relationship you have ever had but it’s an experience inside your heart only. A life experience you will take onto the next. Sometimes we make mistakes and never realize this for fear of being alone or lonely so we settle and ignore that thing inside your stomach. We wait.

Any relationship needs realization that it is a lot of work and giving and compromise are a priority. Nobody can provide you with a sense of worth or wholeness like God. All is never lost if a relationship breaks down along with a marital breakdown, God is still there. God is forgiving and doesn’t want anyone unhappy, there are reasons things happen along our paths.

A successful relationship that has a chance will consist of three people, a woman, a man and God. God is the most essential component in your life when your relationship is successful or unsuccessful. You have to have faith together or there is no chance. Don’t be desperate for relationships or marriage be desperate for God in your life.

Simple rule of honoring God is doing what he expects of you. By doing so you will have a positive influence in a relationship. You can’t change the attitudes of the other member of the relationship or for that matter members of your family. Infusing any relationship with a godly character that comes directly from you is the best thing. You have to love when you don’t feel like it. Love when you aren’t loved back. Love when it appears there is no hope of reconciliations.

The greatest test of love is whether we can love those who act unloving towards us. Forgiveness is 70 x 7, indefinite forgiveness.

Even if you are well-intentioned the breakdown of relationships whether married or not can be initiated by outside factors, different goals, family ideas, financial problems, health challenges, or conflicts of belief. Sometimes it’s just not meant to be and that’s hard to swallow.

When a relationship or marriage is failing or has failed you cannot be responsible for or capable of changing the attitudes of the other member. We must remember the poem, some people come into our lives for a reason, some stay for awhile, some teach us something and then go regardless if they take a part of our heart with them. Sometimes someone comes along and you know deep inside they are staying for a lifetime and nothing is taking them away from you, you know this inside your heart immediately, it’s an experience you have shared, they are the keepers and require work, Gods work. They are lifetime relationships and friends. This might not even be or become a spouse it’s just a relationship, a really good one.

We all want these lifetime relationships. These relationships teach us a lesson. Things we build on in order to have an emotional solid foundation. We accept the lesson wholeheartedly, and know everything we have learnt from past relationships and areas of our lives is going to be put into this certain relationship. We pray and we keep our fingers crossed and with God we wait for that realtionship which might be once in a lifetime, sometimes its more than once. Sometimes it becomes our spouse other times not but we pray for this regardless, God will let us know and you will have no doubt when it happens it will be crystal clear, its only what I believe, hope and have faith for us all.

Note from editor:

While marriage is indessolvible, sometimes it never occured in the first place, a breakdown or sense may be justification of looking into whether or not canonically marriage even occured: a way to save one from the mortal sin of Fornication. Also, a marriage may be indessolveable, but a civil divorce is acceptible, but cannot separate what God has made one: marriage cannot be dissolved by civil authority: yet when some breakdowns occur, living apart is often a necessity. c.f. Canon Law. Use our Scripturelink Search engine on the side or:

EWTN global Catholic TV and Radio, and Information Network
Annulments: EWTN

Annulments: In Light of the Law: an Expet in Canon Law
An Article

Some Canons in Vatican Site
Please scroll back and forward by links

South Africa, SADC Region, Africa: Government's focus on prevention with condoms backfires: "shortage in condoms"- pro-condom TAC: on E News

(Scripturelink Voter's Guide; c.f. E News Channel (Secular) 26/11/2008)

Article by Marc Aupiais


The TAC, has fronted on live television: claims that there are not enough condoms to meet demand in South Africa, and that all strategies should take over 6 months. This follows South Africa's insistence in originally not treating AIDS, leaving this to Roman Catholicism, then suggesting use of fruits and other plants, and miracle "cures" by persons associated with officials, and then fronting a condom campaign: which included a contraception day advertisement on facebook, where many teenagers hang out. Underage, or teenage, and premarital sex is common in South Africa. The Catholic weekly, the Southern Cross, sold in parishes, even apposed the Vatican in support of contraception (mind you, they have since been listed as a danger site by a major Catholic Watchdog : for their support of condoms, which is, and always has been decried by both Vatican and Catholic dogma), and the fact that Contraception campaigns to end AIDS, are very ineffective, compared with abstinence campaigns, well designed by governments, has not been noted in the more liberal media in South Africa.

We at South African Catholic have asked the DOH to consider mimicking the Ugandan abstinence project, seen as successful by the SACBC. Use of condoms is condemned as lust and masturbation by the Catholic Dogma, based on the death of Onan, who God smote for "spilling" his seed, in the bible, and on the definition of lust: pursuit of sexual pleasure apart from its unitive and pro-creative qualities.

Mexico, Latin America: Mexico's "Catholic" population: does it again: free murder, and a bit of heresy from priests

(Catholic Watchdog South Africa; c.f. Reuters (secular) 25/11/2008; Reuters (secular)23/11/08)

Article by Marc Aupiais

Heterodox versions of a "Catholicism" of sorts, reigns not only with Mexico's senate, which recently legalized euthanasia, in the Latin American nation, but also among people who should be Catholic. On the 23rd of November, Reuters reported on a Catholic priest, who blessed transvestites on the way to a festival where they dress as such and wonder around, an open sign of disobedience to the Vatican. It is a festival, the Catholic conquerors of Mexico banned early, which went underground. Mexico city is also one of the few cities in Latin America, where abortion is legal.

All three of these situations, if Reuters is correct in their reporting of them: can easily fall under condemnation of dogma. Inculturation never extends to adopting parts of a culture which are contrary to Catholicism, and it is rituals like these: for which the ancient Israelis were to kill their fellows, showing in essence a clear, direct condemnation in the bible, and therefore in Catholic tradition: of such. In the modern time, what is needed is repentance and confession among those in Mexico, who have abandoned their heritage.

US News- California Bans Gay Marriage

(Social Justice South Africa; c.f. Catholic in Film School 05/11/08)

Article by Marc Aupiais

Catholic In Film School, an interesting news source on media and California, is reporting that while America's most Pro-Abortion man to make the presidency, perhaps ever, who even voted for infanticide, and has vowed to aid Planned Parenthood, the abortion firm who teach sexual education in American Schools, mentioned for trying to impose a two child limit on the Philippines recently, to impose harsher abortion measures.

The positive side for human rights and social justice, and religion- is supported in that "Gay Marriage" is once again illegal in California, after voters voted to pass Proposition 8, an amendment to the state's constitution to ban same sex unions.

Much thanks is said to be due to the Mormons, for this, a non-Catholic religion, who spent millions on ensuring that the ban passed.

Abortion- and our crisis- how many Catholic bishops are automatically excommunicated- we need to admit this and replace them!

(Journey in a Broken World)

Article by Marc Aupiais

Recently a close friend of mine mentioned he had joined the SSPX. We always talk about coming out of the closet, it is something gay people did (My friend is perfectly strait)- probably with bad connotations, but I don't think this friend was coming out of the closet, he had been wrestling with it for a while now, and it seems he finally gave in. The Latin was important to him, and there have been monkey games in South Africa- he traveled all the way to Pretoria for a final meeting on setting up the Tridentine rite here, and the priest suddenly withdrew- probably under the influence of South Africa's more liberal bishops, or possibly for personal reasons. In essence, I think my friend had had enough. He is right, to a degree at least, but not to the extent of his choice- I personally see- Vatican Two allowed for some use of English- but for a Latin Norm, and for the use of English which is by churches to be supplemented in every mass by some Latin. In other words, I do not disagree that many leaders of the church are not applying the actual recommendations in this section, of Vatican II.

The problem in his stance also lies in canon 1372 of Canon Law- in that if we appeal to a council of the church in opposition of an act of the pope- we are to be punished with a censure- that is to say- that while I for instance believe that Latin may have huge benefit, should I say the Vernacular is not valid- and quote a council to do so- I am in fact violating Canon law.

Jesus said- it is impossible for any person to convert, but that what is impossible is not impossible to God. This is to say that if we focus so much on livening up the mass, or making it understandable- we lose the battle, because we are trying to save the world on human, not divine resources. In my archdiocese- 9 out of ten catholics do not attend mass on Sunday, and the Protestant population is probably worse off. We have a serious issue, and instead of going back to God's recommendations at the Holy Council- we are trying our own human ways to save our church, this said- the stance of the current church is valid, and what I say is not in opposition to the union of bishops- in that Latin is of benefit, but also we must remember Canon 1372. The church is a sacrament, through which all sacraments are gained. The Sacrament is the name given to the Roman Empire's military pledge of allegiance, it is a word which appears in the Bible, when Saint Peter (I Peter chapter 3 verse 21) says that it is not the water of baptism, but the Sacrament of a good conscience to God which saves us. Basically- the Sacrament is the pledge- the acting which happens in two plains, our plain where actions happen, and the spiritual, where God accompanies these loyal actions with grace. At the heart of Sacramental Theology, Catholic Theology- is the idea that obedience gets grace- and only obedience and faith can save us.

The problem my friend has yet to address- and the argument above is mine, not his- is that the SSPX are in an irregular canonical position- because their bishops broke canon law, and were automatically excommunicated. I myself believe that no small amount of disobedience can save- I believe in subsidarity- that we obey God in obedience to the church, but where God demands we act against it so be it- but God placed the liturgy in the hands of the papacy.

He appointed the bishops to safeguard the church, even if they disobey him. Saint Peter certainly did, when he chose to sit with the Jews apart from the gentiles for the sake of their cause. God himself would one day reduce utterly the amount of Jewish converts- and Saint Peter was not aiding the cause of the church- in fact, Saint Paul heavily rebukes him. He says- you hypocrite. Saint Paul knew that the essence of the gospel was at stake, and attacked Saint Peter's actions, actions which were not infallible, but human, and popes are human, even as at certain times they yield to the divine by asking to be clear of moral and doctrinal error in their words.

What Saint Paul did not do is join an irregularly positioned order of the church, no- he challenged the first Pope as a hypocrite- and worked to change things from within, but he did not join any odd group within.

Now, saying this- I must approach another issue- EWTN notes it softly on their website, but I note it as loudly as possible. Those who support abortion- through action, or silence, who vote for a party which does or is likely to support abortion, who allow this plague strength in our nations and cultures, in any way as to allow even one additional abortion- are excommunicated from the Catholic church.

Recently, when a bishop stood against abortion and the Democrats, who in 1992 caused the current financial crises, a group of nuns wrote the papers, apposing the bishop- in support of Obama. These nuns, in this action are no longer Catholics- they excommunicated themselves. The Canadian bishops who participated in a pro-abortion, pro-homosexuality march, the Catholic Women's league in Canada's leadership who did, and the bishops who did not appose this stance in Canada- are also automatically excommunicated under canon law, and so are many bishops, and media persons in South Africa, and America and Australia and around the world. It is not simply a fight for the culture of life- any Catholic who aids and abets the cause of abortion- is excommunicated.

The Bishops of SSPX, are also excommunicated by an automatic excommunication- via the appointing of bishops against the express objections of the Holy See. Summorum Pontificum, was actually initially the brain-child of Pope John Paul the Second, not Benedict XVI. The act of schism by the bishops of the SSPX, was it seems unnecessary. In fact, it could be why we face so much opposition today in the church to the Latin Mass, asked for by Vatican II, and Trent, and used for all ages until now, and by Pope Benedict XVI, when he says mass.

We however have a dual problem, the church has been wise in noting that the SSPX bishops are excommunicated, they have been unwise in not replacing also- the bishops who are excommunicated on the other fringe- for support of the intrinsic evil of abortion. It is no wonder these bishops and priests also push for gay marriage, and women priests. They have already been cut from the vine of the Catholic church- they no longer are Catholic bishops, but simple administrators, who need to be replaced, because they have left the flock via excommunication. Perhaps the crisis with vocations- and the opposition to the Latin Liturgy of the ages- and the open opposition by many to our Pope, Holy Father- Benedict XVI- lies in the fact that these bishops, priests, nuns, monks and others, including laymen- now operate from outside the church. These people who have given up their lives for Christ and service to the church- are no longer of her flock, and those not of the flock are not worth listening to on matters of doctrine and morals, for Catholics.

Our salvation, and the salvation of the church- lies non in schism, for the bible directly says "Schisms are evil" (Paul writing to the Corinthians), but rather- it must come through obedience, through obeying the letter of Canon Law- as many Charismatics, Traditionalist, and Liberals- have forfeited, for the sake of evangelization- also forfeiting from God- the grace needed and vital to carry this out.

Let us follow the example of Josemaria Escriva', let us be utterly Orthodox, but do it within Canon law, and within the church, but also- our leaders need to clarify and replace those bishops who have either supported one extreme or the other. Those outside the church must no longer pretend to govern her provinces. The sees of those who have supported abortion, and not returned to the church, are empty. This said, just like with SSPX, one is not excommunicated by attending mass in a diocese where the bishop should be replaced. This also said- we are discouraged from attending SSPX masses, this is considered an occasion to sin, and occasions to sin we promise to avoid every confession. Yes, if our life is at risk we may attend it, but not simply to get our daily Latin. The same applies to these excommunicated priests and bishops- we are not lifted of our Sunday obligation, but we should attend masses where the priest is against abortion, and the church, is in fact obligated by morals and conscience, I truly believe that they should take the same steps against these bishops and priests as they did against the SSPX. They need to replace them, and inform them and the world, that these people no longer represent the Catholic church, and full the empty sees, whether by repentance on the part of these bishops, or by replacing them. Something needs to be done, for the salvation of souls.

We have enough Orthodox bishops to survive, and perhaps this small loss in numbers- will bring much in ways of salvation. Once again we need to trust God, and admit to ourselves, and the world- the Truth, about what is and isn't true, and what is and isn't Catholic. What I love about Catholicism, is that I doubt these excommunicated people get any reprieve in obeying every other regulation of the church. Even in mortal sin, every small evil we do- allows for more evil in our self, and world. Let us obey our bishops, and love them for who they represent.

Surely- God created a church for a reason- we may appeal for changes- but we must never despise, nor lead others to despise the authority of our valid bishops, and our pope.

Journey in a Broken World- Spanish Queen attacks gay marriage, abortion

(Journey in a Broken World; c.f. Reuters (Secular) 31/10/08)

Article by Marc Aupiais

In her latest Bibliography, an update of one 13 years ago, the Queen of Spain was quoted as attacking Gay marriage as not marriage- asking that it drop the term marriage, as not understanding gay pride, nor parades of this, or why they got on floats. She also attacked abortion.

Spain recently created the first "Designer baby"- a child who was chosen from a number of embryos(the other babies disposed of), to be a perpetual blood donor for a biological brother who had a blood disease. Spain has legalized gay marriage (2005), and abortion is also legal in the country.

VIS- Vatican- Canada has done much for world, with Catholicism as a cornerstone of its society, but Pope benedict fears loss of understanding of human dignity having emerged in his oppinion in the North American Nation

(Journey in a Broken World; c.f. Vatican Information Services (VIS) 30/10/08)

Article by Marc Aupiais

Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI's address to Canada's new ambassador to the Holy See, Anne Leahy, complimented Canada on its many good traits, including "Rich humanism", but the Holy Father, also feared that Canada had lost some of its understanding of what it means to be human, though manifestations of this in the value of life, and true sexuality.

He was also noted as mentioning that the role the church and her organizations play in Canada- are vital enough to consist of a cornerstone of the Nation's society.

He especially noted that true freedom has as its very foundation- God and must be developed in God. Perhaps a rebuke of some elements entering into the Canadian situation, but also an invitation for the nation's true potential to be realized via embracing God's version of natural and true.

Chastity South Africa- Vatican Psychiatrist- Celebacy is a way of standing against a false view of sexuality, and marriage- in Defence of celebacy

(Chastity South Africa; c.f. CathNews 22/10/08; Catholic News Service 20/10/08)

Article by Marc Aupiais

Dr Manfred Lutz, psychiatrist to the Congregation for the Clergy- said that the vocation of celibacy is not only at utmost a practice required in utmost necessity in the role of many within the church- but powerfully- a permanent protest against mass superficiality, within large parts of modern culture. He appealed that those who cannot live chastely- should not marry. He informed those who still have different opinions than that he was presenting- that marriage was about more than sex, and that those who view the role of a woman in a relationship as to satisfy sexual ideas- often cannot stand natural and good practices such as celibacy- in that it contradicts their worldview.