Speech given by Bishop Thomas G. Doran, of the Diocese of Rockford, Illinois

On Tuesday, November 8th, bishop Doran of the Diocese of Rockford gave a speech on the Criteria for Admission to a Catholic Seminary. This talk was hosted by the Catholic Central Union and Credo of the Catholic Laity at the Annual Christ the King Dinner.

The norms for admission to seminary as promulgated at the Second Vatican Council were quite high, and many dioceses aren't even living up to these standards. He discussed the absolute requirement for priestly celibacy, and how modern practice subverts the formation of young men. Bishop Doran stated that the seminary system was set up after the Council of Trent for reasons similar to what we are experiencing now: in the Renaissance, young men were sent to secular universities for their priestly education, and got caught up in the worldly excitement of the big city, with alcohol, parties, girls, and fraternities. Seminaries were set up to avoid these distractions, to better form holy priests.

At one point during his talk, Bishop Doran said that his biggest problem was money, and pointing to Archbishop Burke, said "you know what I mean". Healthcare benefits for retirees is the major cost, followed by lawsuits.

The solution for these problems is increased vocations to the religious life, and tort reform. Our problems are both spiritual and worldly. We need to make healthcare a charity again instead of a business or government service. We need to eliminate punitive damages in lawsuits.

The loss of vocations is due to loss of faith, while the vast increase of lawsuit damages is due to greed.

We've got a lot of work ahead of us. Pray for assistance.

Add yourself to the map

Where do you live? Add youself to the map.

Why Men Don't Listen and Women Can't Read Maps -- A book review

I just finished reading Why Men Don't Listen and Women Can't Read Maps, by Barbara and Allan Pease, published in 2001. The title gives a good overview of roughly the first half of the contents. This book is a quick read, informative, and is entertaining, but it is also rather explicit in places, and it contains an apologia for homosexuality.

The book describes and explains several key differences between the sexes, as its title suggests. It is completely secular, and is based on evolutionary biology, medical studies, and surveys. The authors claim to be politically incorrect in their analysis, and that is a refreshing diversion from the Marxist-inspired political oppression of Feminism.

The main point of the book is that men and women think and act differently—as a biological fact, not caused by social conditioning—and takes the true philosophical stance that differences in kind are not differences in value. Both chauvinists and feminists make the same mistake, that to be different in kind is to be different in value: because of this, feminists think that there is no difference between men and women, while chauvinists think that one sex is superior to the other even though they are not comparing the same attributes.

The equal ontological value of all persons is very Catholic, with roots going back to ancient Israel, and it is such an important concept and matter of faith because we can demonstrate that it is true. Stray from orthodoxy and you get slavery, chauvinism, feminism, and genocide.

I found the first part of the book more enjoyable, since it is anecdotal, humorous, and sometimes painfully familiar. For example:

• Women tend to be able to do many things at one time, and can carry on multiple conversations at one time, while overhearing other conversations. Men tend to talk in turn, using fewer words and a much more concrete vocabulary.


• Men usually cannot both listen to conversation and to either read, work or watch television. A man engrossed in his work or reading is nearly psychologically deaf.


• Women use words in a fluid fashion: 'yes', 'no', 'always', and 'never' do not have definite, absolute meanings.


• A woman's hearing is tuned to the shrill cry of a baby; a man's hearing is tuned to distant sounds of motion. Both will instantly wake up from sleep if their particular kind of sound is present, and will usually sleep though the other.


• Men tend to be able to imagine things in three dimensions, and is able to mentally rotate both two and three-dimensional models. Women usually can't imagine in three dimensions, and find it difficult to even rotate a mental image in two dimensions.


• Men tend to be able to use maps for navigation, are able to discern North without a compass or celestial clues, and can recall large amounts of spatial information. With a good map, a man can usually find his way just knowing the starting and ending point. Women tend to be frustrated by maps, and tend to turn them in the direction that they are going. Women tend to need many landmark descriptions and left-right directions for navigation; men more often can use distance and compass directions.


• Women have a broader field of view, and can observe activity without turning the head or moving the eyes. Men's eye focus is typically much narrower, requiring head-turning and staring for observation.


• Men excel at activities that require analysis of motion, velocity, and position. Women have a terrible time parallel parking.


• Men typically can't lie to a woman, since she can pick up on subconscious nonverbal clues.


• Women, upon entering a crowded room, size up the people and their relationships. Men tend to mentally map out the room, seek entry and exit points, food locations, and analyze the state of repair of the building structure.


• Women usually excel at jobs requiring close human relationships and multitasking. Men usually excel at jobs that require numerical, spatial and motion ability.


• Men naturally form themselves into hierarchies, choosing the best as their leaders, and making decisions by debate. Women form small collaborative groups, where aggressiveness is frowned upon.


• Men overwhelmingly identify themselves with their work. Women overwhelmingly identify themselves with their relationships.


• Women show and use facial expressions far more than men do. Men tend to avoid the use of facial expression.


• Men tend to need a lot of silence for thinking, planning, and relaxation. Women use silence as a sign of rejection.


• Women need to talk out problems, and will be restless and "mind-racing" if unable to hold a conversation. Men tend to be able to compartmentalize thoughts silently


• Men under stress talk less. Women under stress talk more.


• Men tend to be able to utilize statistics, numerical measures, and charts.


• Women tend to be able to distinguish more colors and odors.


• Women tend to be far more sensitive to touch than men.


• Women tend to better nurses, primary school teachers, interpreters, manual detail workers, and secretaries. Men tend to be better ball players, engineers, scientists, tradesmen, architects, and accountants. In school systems where an equal sex ratio between teachers is enforced, women dominate conversational language courses, and men dominate the sciences.

Since this is a modern book, the authors take great pains to provide scientific evidence for these conclusions, although some of them are "duh" moments, kind of like a scientific study that determines conclusively that fish, generally, live in water, although it is not certain whether it is due to genetic, environmental, or social conditioning. Scientists are known for often lacking common sense.

These sex differences are shown to be generally due to differences in brain structure. Men have specialized portions of the brain for navigation, aiming, catching, estimating velocities, and generating three-dimensional mental maps. Women have specialized centers for speech and hearing. When a person lacks these centers of specialization, more thought is required, and they tend to be either incapable or very slow at doing these tasks.

The authors state that hormone exposure during early pregnancy causes this brain specialization, and since this process is somewhat separate from primary sexual development, variations in these hormones is what causes an inclination to homosexuality. These variations during pregnancy are typically due to excessive stress in the mother, although some common drugs prescribed in the 1950s and 1960s had a great affect. The authors completely discount social factors after birth.

The book is full of practical advice to avoid conflict between the sexes.

• For men: talk more, actively listen more, be generally nice and gentle to women.


• For women: talk less, express requests in a concrete and direct manner, give a man plenty of time alone.

Generally, the authors suggest that we need to accept human nature and not try to force-fit people into roles for which they are ill-suited. This is a step towards right reason. Virtues, after all, have an objective component, but are also affected by each individual's circumstances, nature, and state of mind.

The last part of the book talks about sex and relationships. It sees monogamy as being basically the desire of women and is for the good of society. It rejects the feminists' masculine sexuality as being against the nature of most women. That is obvious for me...as a ten year old kid I saw that the feminists of that era were not like other women, and were changing society for their own selfish desires and not for the good of the majority of women.

---

Catholicism has a rational view of morality that is based in human nature, and it rejects modern theories like utilitarianism and feminism that denies this nature. Traditional Catholicism has long had specific roles for men and women that used their separate abilities in a wise and natural manner. Much nonsense of the past several decades is due to a thoughtless egalitarianism that says that men and women are the same in both kind and value.

Men are hierarchical in their social structure, granting leadership to the strong and just. God, however, is the strongest and the most just: he can and does lay waste to nations and grants plenty or allows famine to rule the land; men can recognize this, and therefore can naturally organize themselves into a hierarchy with God at the top. That the priesthood and ecclesial structure is hierarchical is quite natural to men. But men can willfully obey his superior only as long as the superior is just and orthodox; having a heretic as a leader is distressing to men. Men who are drawn to the current heresy in the Church seem to be feminine thinkers, who don't respect authority, and who work through personal relationships instead of the chain of command. A masculine religion that completely excluded women would lack the social aspects of caring for the sick and poor and teaching the very young, and would tend to be violently expansionist.

Women are more collaborative, seeing each other as friends and expecting equal treatment. Women in the Church excel in upholding the Communion of Saints and popular devotion. It is the women who raise the next generation of Catholics, women who form prayer groups, and women who rule the parish hall. Historically, women made up the vast majority of Religious, and did the bulk of the social aspects of the Church. Women tend to have great devotions to the Saints, who are just like us, and are our friends. Feminine-only religion has its problems. Seeing God—the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth—as just a good friend can lead to tremendous disappointment when things go badly. Anglican Priestesses are notorious for having heretical New Age views, as do many 'masculinized' female religious orders in the Catholic Church. I've noticed that women who attempt to do what most men do naturally often end up being perverse imitations of the worst sort of men. Also, women can end up spending much money on superstition: occultists prey almost entirely on women, for women like the intuitive aspect of things like fortune telling. Modern 'spiritual' foods and cosmetics that promise "salvation through consumption" can be very expensive: "Whole Foods" supermarkets has the disparaging nickname "Whole Paycheck". For this reason, the spiritual goods of the Church are always and everywhere free of charge, by Canon Law; we had the Reformation when this was ignored.

Women have been key to upholding the Church under extreme persecution. It was women and just one boy who were with Christ when he was on the Cross, while the men ran and hid. In the days of the Soviet Union, mainly women would attend Divine Liturgy, even when being spied on by the State, and up to 80% of all children were baptised, thanks to the women who defied the authorities.

Societies where women do the architecture are societies that live in huts made of sticks covered with mud; women just want or have to do too much else than spend much time constructing a house. Societies where men do the architecture have complex, large, beautiful, and durable buildings. The hierarchical organization of men leads to specialized trades that are expert in certain fields, and when these groups organize themselves under a leader with clear direction, great buildings can be made. Feminized architecture emphasizes passing trends, is built cheaply, and tends to be horizontal. Modern churches, which have a congregational feel, allow the parishoners to see each other, while masuline church architecture is vertical, with the order of worship towards the altar. Also, masculine architecture is far more three-dimensional, while feminine architecture has a simpler two-dimensional structural aspect. Modern architecture often is an inversion of the natural male/female exterior/interior emphasis, with simplistic, cheap structures and cold, brutal interiors, instead of the natural complex and durable exteriors, and warm, loving, and comfortable interiors.

The institution of marriage, as seen by the authors of the book, is primarily based on the desire of women and is for the good of society. Catholic Natural Law sees this in a somewhat similar fashion, and holds marriage in the highest esteem. This is a Sacrament that is overwhelmingly dominated by women, and in Catholic theology, is performed by the couple themselves and merely witnessed by a Priest or Deacon. The evidence shows that the weakening of the institution of marriage that started in the Reformation has been more directly harmful to women and children than to men, and attempted solutions to these problems has led to a vast reorganization of society and an expensive government.

The authors of this book emphasize that men need to romance women for long-term happiness, and that couples who marry or move in together while still in an initial infatuation may be headed for trouble. The authors say that this stage lasts for about three to six months. Catholic custom, law, and moral theology demands extended courtships, a minimum of six months, and prohibits "shotgun weddings" and "marriages of convenience". Not surprisingly, by following the rules, marriage will take place only after the infatuation stage is over. Also, the art of romance is greatest in Catholic countries: men must put a great effort into wooing a woman long enough to marry her; this is most true if sexual activity is delayed until after the wedding. Formerly Catholic countries like France have recently changed to an American-style infatuation-based, romance-free dating life, which usually does not lead to marriage, but just a long series of broken relationships that end when infatuation is over.

How Charles Carroll Influenced U.S. Founding Fathers

See the article, How Charles Carroll Influenced U.S. Founding Fathers from la nouvelle théologie (http://ressourcement.blogspot.com/). The "Whig view" of American history, popular until the 1960s, ignored some aspects of the Revolution: "...the Founding Fathers, in their recovery of natural law and in other ways ...unknowingly reinvented the Catholic political tradition...".

The Founders naturally rejected the objectively immoral systems of Absolutism and the "Divine Right of Kings"; however, their faith in the parliamentary system of the Puritans was shattered by the Intolerable Acts. While the Founders were seeking good political theory, Charles Carroll reintroduced the traditional notion of the "Natural Law", which forms the philosophical basis of Catholic moral teaching and is the background of the Common Law of England.

Natural Law principles in American Jurisprudence were weakened over time, never being really understood, and have been essentially abandoned by the 1970s.

---

English Common Law developed under that nation's Catholic era. Formerly, disputes between parties were settled by "Trial by Battle" where the strongest won, or by appeals to superstition in the "Trial by Ordeal". Ecclesiastical courts changed matters by developing a rational and moral method of justice in the philosophical tradition of Plato, Aristotle, Roman jurisprudence, and the Doctors of the Church. But now the Common Law tradition has been lost and the old moral order is gone; instead social change is decided by new kind of Trial by Battle, where the strongest still win.

We hope that the new Supreme Court can reintroduce morality and rationality back into the American legal system.

Dies iræ

Posted November 2nd, 2005, All Souls Day

Dies iræ, dies illa
solvet saeclum in favilla:
teste David cum Sibylla.

Quantus tremor est futurus,
quando iudex est venturus
cuncta stricte discussurus!

(Day of wrath, day that
will dissolve the world into burning coals,
as David bore witness with the Sibyll.

How great a tremor is to be,
when the judge is to come
briskly shattering every grave.)

—First stanzas of the 13th Century poem Dies iræ

Dies iræ is a rather shocking text that is used in the Tridentine Requiem Mass and the Divine Office for the occasions of All Souls Day and for funerals.

Lacrimosa dies illa,
qua resurget ex favilla
iudicandus homo reus:
huic ergo parce, Deus.

(That sorrowful day,
on which will arise from the burning coals
Man accused to be judged:
therefore, O God, do Thou spare him.)

In the typical timid religious fashion of our days, Dies iræ, upsetting as it is, is left untranslated in the Liturgy of the Hours.

Modern Enlightenment culture, from which the New Liturgy springs, is indeed timid; its pinnacle was the Victorian era, which was known for its squeamishness of all things unsettling. Postmodern culture, which arose after the Second Vatican Council, which loves the Grateful Dead and considers pornography good, is not timid, but crass and selfish.

But Moderns and Postmoderns alike have a similar dislike for unpleasantness regarding death. It has been said that everyone in the hospitals know who is dying except for the physicians and the patients; medical progress of the 1960s seemed to claim that no one would die. But who would have guessed that the Universalism of the 19th century would have become the standard philosophy of the afterlife? We no longer speak of Hell, but instead assume everyone goes to a pleasant afterlife, and will go there immediately upon demise. The Moderns see everyone in Heaven, and the Postmoderns too, for they think that we are all God(dess).

Everywhere in history and in all places we find that people pray for the dead. Orthodox and Catholic Christians, Orthodox Jews, Muslims, some Anglicans, and nearly every other religion in world except for post-Reformation Christians and Western secularists pray for the dead. The theologies might be different, but nearly everyone everywhere has always assumed that souls, after death, do not arrive at their final resting place until after a spiritual journey or purification, and that we help them in this. All agree that prayers for the dead are effective.

Libera me, Domine, de morte aeterna
in die illa tremenda
quando coeli movendi sunt et terra,
dum veneris judicare saeculum per ignem.
Tremens factus sum ego et timeo,
dum discussion venerit atque venture ira:
quando coeli movendi sunt et terra.

(Deliver me, O Lord, from eternal death
on that awful day
when the heavens and earth shall be shaken
and you shall come to judge the world by fire.
I am seized with fear and trembling
until the trial is at hand and the wrath to come:
when the heavens and earth shall be shaken.)

—From the Requiem Mass

An ancient Catholic custom is visiting cemeteries on All Souls Day and its octave, or the eight days starting with November 2nd. From my visits today, I've noticed that there is plenty of available parking and no crowds, so it should be convenient to follow this custom.

I can't say it any better than the source, so here is an extract from the Directory on Popular Piety and the Liturgy: Principles and Guidelines, from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, promulgated in 2001.

The Memorial of the Dead in Popular Piety

256. As with the Liturgy, popular piety pays particular attention to the memory of the dead and carefully raises up to God prayers in suffrage for them.

In matters relating to the "memorial of the dead", great pastoral prudence and tact must always be employed in addressing the relationship between Liturgy and popular piety, both in its doctrinal aspect and in harmonising the liturgical actions and pious exercises.

257. It is always necessary to ensure that popular piety is inspired by the principles of the Christian faith. Thus, they should be made aware of the paschal meaning of the death undergone by those who have received Baptism and who have been incorporated into the mystery of the death and resurrection of Christ (cf. Rm 6,3-10); the immortality of the soul (cf Lk 23, 43); the communion of Saints, through which "union with those who are still on their pilgrim journey with the faithful who repose in Christ is not in the least broken, but strengthened by a communion of spiritual goods, as constantly taught by the Church our prayer for them is capable not only of helping them, but also of making their intercession for us effective"; the resurrection of the body; the glorious coming of Christ, who will "judge the living and the dead"; the reward given to each according to his deeds; life eternal.

Deeply rooted cultural elements connoting particular anthropological concepts are to be found among the customs and usages connected with the "cult of the dead" among some peoples. These often spring from a desire to prolong family and social links with the departed. Great caution must be used in examining and evaluating these customs. Care should be taken to ensure that they are not contrary to the Gospel. Likewise, care should be taken to ensure that they cannot be interpreted as pagan residues.

258. In matters relating to doctrine, the following are to be avoided:

• the invocation of the dead in practices involving divination;


• the interpretation or attribution of imaginary effects to dreams relating to the dead, which often arises from fear;


• any suggestion of a belief in reincarnation;


• the danger of denying the immortality of the soul or of detaching death from the resurrection, so as to make the Christian religion seem like a religion of the dead;


• the application of spacio-temporal categories to the dead.

259. "Hiding death and its signs" is widespread in contemporary society and prone to the difficulties arising from doctrinal and pastoral error.

Doctors, nurses, and relatives frequently believe that they have a duty to hide the fact of imminent death from the sick who, because of increasing hospitalization, almost always die outside of the home.

It has been frequently said that the great cities of the living have no place for the dead: buildings containing tiny flats cannot house a space in which to hold a vigil for the dead; traffic congestion prevents funeral corteges because they block the traffic; cemeteries, which once surrounded the local church and were truly "holy ground" and indicated the link between Christ and the dead, are now located at some distance outside of the towns and cities, since urban planning no longer includes the provision of cemeteries.

Modern society refuses to accept the "visibility of death", and hence tries to conceal its presence. In some places, recourse is even made to conserving the bodies of the dead by chemical means in an effort to prolong the appearance of life.

The Christian, who must be conscious of and familiar with the idea of death, cannot interiorly accept the phenomenon of the "intolerance of the dead", which deprives the dead of all acceptance in the city of the living. Neither can he refuse to acknowledge the signs of death, especially when intolerance and rejection encourage a flight from reality, or a materialist cosmology, devoid of hope and alien to belief in the death and resurrection of Christ.

The Christian is obliged to oppose all forms of "commercialisation of the dead", which exploit the emotions of the faithful in pursuit of unbridled and shameful commercial profit.

260. In accordance with time, place and tradition, popular devotions to the dead take on a multitude of forms:

• the novena for the dead in preparation for the 2 November, and the octave prolonging it, should be celebrated in accordance with liturgical norms;


• visits to the cemetery; in some places this is done in a community manner on 2 November, at the end of the parochial mission, when the parish priest takes possession of the parish; visiting the cemetery can also be done privately, when the faithful go to the graves of their own families to maintain them or decorate them with flowers and lamps. Such visits should be seen as deriving from the bonds existing between the living and the dead and not from any form of obligation, non-fulfilment of which involves a superstitious fear;


• membership of a confraternity or other pious association whose objects include "burial of the dead" in a the light of the Christian vision of death, praying for the dead, and providing support for the relatives of the dead;


• suffrage for the dead through alms deeds, works of mercy, fasting, applying indulgences, and especially prayers, such as the De profundis, and the formula Requiem aeternam, which often accompanies the recitation of the Angelus, the rosary, and at prayers before and after meals.