Thursday, December 31, 2020

Twenty “missionaries” killed in the world in 2020

Twenty “missionaries” killed in the world in 2020 The Vatican’s news agency has drawn up a list of pastoral workers, men and women they describe as “missionaries”, who were killed in the world during 2020. By Vatican News staff writer The annual list says that the 20 “missionaries” killed include 8 priests, 1 male religious, 3 nuns, 2 seminarians and 6 lay people. Fides uses the term "missionary" for all the baptized, aware of what Pope Francis explains in his Apostolic Exhortation, Evangelii gaudium: “In virtue of their baptism, all the members of the People of God have become missionary disciples.” In fact “Every Christian,” the Pope says, “is a missionary to the extent that he or she has encountered the love of God in Christ Jesus: we no longer say that we are ‘disciples’ and ‘missionaries’, but rather that we are always ‘missionary disciples’”. The highest number of casualties this year were in the Americas, with 5 priests and 3 lay people killed. Africa comes next with 3 nuns, 2 lay persons and a priest and a seminarian each. In Asia, a priest, a seminarian and a lay person were killed, and in Europe, a priest and a male religious were murdered. In the last 20 years, from 2000 to 2020, 535 pastoral workers have been killed in the world, including 5 Bishops. “Witnesses” among their people For some time now, Fides has been including in its annual list not only missionaries “ad gentes” in the strict sense, that is, those working in largely non-Christian mission territories, but tries to include all the baptized involved in the life of the Church. Many of these pastoral workers died in a violent way, not explicitly “in hatred of the faith”, i.e. martyrdom. Without using the term “martyrs” for them, Fides intends to imply the word’s etymological meaning of "witness". In this regard, the Vatican’s news agency notes that in 2020, many pastoral workers were killed during robbery or theft, sometimes with ferocity. Some of them were kidnapped or were caught in crossfires or acts of violence. They fell while carrying out their commitment in situations marked by economic and cultural poverty, moral and environmental degradation, where violence and oppression in total disregard for respect for life and every human right are a norm. In El Salvador, Father Ricardo Antonio Cortéz was killed by gunshots on the road on 7 August. In Brazil, Father Adriano da Silva Barros was kidnapped and his dead body was found on 14 October. In Burkina Faso, a catechist was killed along with a group on 16 February, during an assault by jihadists on the village of Pansi. In Gabon, Sister Lydie Oyanem Nzoughe was attacked and killed in March, in a home for abandoned elderly in Libreville where she was working. Meanwhile, in Indonesia, the dead body of seminarian Zhage Sil was found in a ditch in Jayapura on 24 December. In Italy, Father Roberto Malgesini was murdered by a homeless man with mental problems in Como on 15 September. The priest was working among the poor. The Vatican news agency notes that none of them was engaged in outstanding projects. They simply shared in their small way the life of most of the people entrusted to their care, bearing witness to Christian hope. “Martyrs” of the pandemic Fides also notes that hundreds of priests, religious, hospital chaplains, pastoral workers in the healthcare sector as well as bishops have died during the pandemic, carrying out their service. They fell doing their utmost to help those afflicted by the virus in places of care, without cutting down on their ministry. Fides reports that priests and religious are the second largest group, after doctors, who fell to Covid-19 in Europe. According to a partial report by the Council of Bishops' Conferences of Europe, from February end to September end, at least 400 priests have died in the continent. Many of them were missionaries, who worn out by long years in mission lands amidst hardships and difficulties, have succumbed to the virus. (Source: Fides)

Saturday, December 5, 2020

UK Bishops encourage Catholics to get vaccinated against Covid-19

UK Bishops encourage Catholics to get vaccinated against Covid-19 The Catholic Bishops of England and Wales are encouraging Catholics to get vaccinated against Covid-19, saying they do not commit a sin by using the vaccines developed by Pfizer & BioNTech, Moderna, and AstraZeneca, which were authorized this week by the British Government. By Lisa Zengarini Some people have questioned the moral permissibility of AstraZeneca's coronavirus vaccine, produced by Oxford University, arguing it has been developed from cell-lines originating from the cells of an aborted foetus in 1983. According to a statement released Thursday by the Department for Social Justice of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales (CBCEW), however, “one does not sin by receiving the vaccine”. 'Not a sin' The statement, signed by Bishop Richard Moth, cited the views expressed by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Pontifical Academy of Life (PAV), according to which “one may in good conscience and for a grave reason receive a vaccine sourced in this way, provided that there is a sufficient moral distance between the present administration of the vaccine and the original wrongful action”. “In the Covid-19 pandemic, we judge that this grave reason exists,” said Bishop Moth. “Each of us has a duty to protect others from infection with its danger of serious illness, and for some, death. A vaccine is the most effective way to achieve this unless one decides to self-isolate”, he added. “Catholics may in good conscience receive any of these vaccines for the good of others and themselves. In good conscience, one may refuse a particular vaccine but continues to have a duty to protect others from infection”, the statement concluded. US Bishops A similar view was expressed in late November by the two chairmen of the US Bishops' doctrine and pro-life committees, citing three Vatican documents which treat the matter of tainted vaccines: the 2005 study by the Pontifical Academy for Life, "Moral Reflections on Vaccines Prepared from Cells Derived From Aborted Human Fetuses"; the 2008 "Instruction on Certain Bioethical Questions" ("Dignitatis Personae") by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and the 2017 "Note on Italian Vaccine Issue," by the Pontifical Academy for Life.

Fr Paul Grogan, subject of a new film entitled "Priest" (Photo credit Michael Whyte)Fr Paul Grogan, subject of a new film entitled "Priest" (Photo credit Michael Whyte)

Fr Paul Grogan, subject of a new film entitled "Priest" (Photo credit Michael Whyte)Fr Paul Grogan, subject of a new film entitled "Priest" (Photo credit Michael Whyte) WORLD PRIESTS FAITH CULTURE New film “Priest” explores value of faith A new documentary film released online, follows the day-to-day life of an English priest from the beginning of Lent to Easter Sunday. By Lydia O’Kane Down through the years, there have been numerous portrayals of priests on the big screen, whether it be two time Oscar winner Spencer Tracy in Boys Town or a young Gregory Peck in Keys to the Kingdom. Television too, has had its fair share of clerics, some of whom end up helping the local constabulary with their crime cracking abilities: think G.K. Chesterton’s amiable Father Brown or Fr Dowling. However, in a new film currently available online, British director Michael Whyte chooses instead to present a “fly on the wall” view of day-to-day priestly life. Entitled simply “Priest”, the documentary follows Father Paul Grogan as he carries out his ministry in the parish of Mary, Mother of God, in the city of Bradford, in the north of England. Fr Grogan, originally from Halifax, worked as a journalist after graduating from the University of Cambridge. He then went on to train for the priesthood at the Venerable English College in Rome in the late 80s to mid-90s. Made before the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the film shows the priest supporting parishioners in various moments of their lives from the opening scene of a funeral, to the administering of the Last Rites. In an interview with Vatican Radio, Michael Whyte explains why he wanted to make a film that explores the highs and lows of priestly mission. Listen to the interview Highs and lows of priestly life “I think that people have a rather simplistic view of the work of a priest; they tend to see it as quite an easy life, they’ve got a roof over their heads, they’ve got a job for life, they’ve got God on their side… I wanted to show that it was much more than that, and also to show that priests are human beings, they have feelings, they’re not removed from the day to day anxieties and stresses of life.” This is not the director’s first foray into faith based filmmaking. In fact, it is the final work of a trilogy, following on from No Greater Love, a documentary about a Carmelite Monastery in London and Relics and Roses, which charts the journey of the Relics of St Thérèse of Lisieux on their visit to England. Questions of faith Asked why he was drawn to make three films exploring the Catholic faith, Whyte says, “it comes back to the perennial question that everybody asks. What is the meaning of life? Why am I here? What am I doing here? And nobody seems to have an answer to that.” However, the primary focus for his first entrée into a faith based film, he recalls, came from his curiosity about the Carmelite monastery in his own neighbourhood of Notting Hill. “I was intrigued by the idea that there was this monastery, literally a hundred yards away from where I live.” When the project eventually came to fruition after a year of filming, the director describes how he came away “with a profound respect for their life and their values.” “I found it one of the most beautiful experiences I’ve had in the course of making films,” he said. Brought up as a lower church Anglican, Mr Whyte notes that he was intrigued by the “theatre or drama” of Catholicism. He also comments that it is a faith that has survived for 2000 years “and is still very intact; it still has a tremendous number of followers, so they’ve got to have something right.” “Priest” was filmed from the beginning of Lent right through to Easter Sunday, the most important period in the Church’s calendar. And while the director says it was important to chart the events of Holy Week, he adds, it was also due to “God’s providence.” Privilege Although Michael Whyte has a long and distinguished CV and has won numerous awards for his work, he is keen to point out that he never takes for granted the privilege that his work affords him. “You enter into a complete stranger’s life and you are by their side, you become part of their life and you become very much aware of their strengths and weaknesses and vulnerabilities and if you like, it's a gift because you know if you think about it generally, would you share all your secrets or inner most thoughts with a complete stranger? You probably wouldn't. So when you're suddenly being filmed it’s very difficult to hide those things from somebody… to have access to that is a real privilege.” One of the scenes in the film shows Fr Grogan administering the Last Rites to parishioner Mary Cunningham. “To be in that room was such a privilege,” Whyte says, “and I found myself thinking I shouldn’t be in this room, I have no right to be in this room because…this is a very intimate moment. At the same time, I’m thinking well, this is exactly what I need to film to show what it’s like, to show what it’s like to be a priest and what a priest’s daily life consists of. So you have those contradictory sorts of feelings, but that in a sense illuminates that kind of privilege that one has when you’re making films, or making documentaries.” Value of faith Asked what he would like people to take away from this film, he replies, “I’d like people to see the value of faith…, the comfort of joy and unity it brings to people. That spirit of love and care and beauty and truth, if you like. Also the fact that Fr Paul is a human being; he’s not dissimilar to the rest of us, he has feelings and he gets upset, he can get angry, he can be low, he can be high. He adds that even if you’re not a “God fearing person, you could watch this film and see that there is a value in the faith that these people have.” To view the trailer for “Priest” you can follow this link

Friday, December 4, 2020

Saturday, November 14, 2020

Canadian Bishops reiterate opposition to euthanasia Bill

Canadian Bishops reiterate opposition to euthanasia Bill The Canadian Catholic Bishops submit a Brief on Bill C-7 on euthanasia to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, reiterating their opposition to the Bill and calling for palliative care for all.. By Lisa Zingarini In a Brief submitted to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights this week, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) has reiterated its steadfast opposition to the C-7 Bill that further expands euthanasia and assisted suicide (referred to as “medical assistance in dying” - “MAID”) in Canada. The new law If the new law is approved, MAID would be provided to people who are not even approaching death, but who are experiencing suffering which they find intolerable and who no longer wish to live. Its provisions also allow euthanasia to be performed without a patient’s explicit consent at the time of the procedure in certain circumstances. The changes are being introduced after a ruling issued by the Superior Court of Quebec on September 11 2019 (“Truchon v. Attorney General of Canada”) stating that the “reasonable foreseeability of natural death” criterion provided for in the law which legalized MAID in 2016, is unconstitutional as it excludes non-dying patients. Call for accessible palliative care for all According to the Canadian Bishops, the proposed legislation “remains deeply flawed, unjust, and morally pernicious”. In the Brief, CCCB President, Archbishop Richard Gagnon, also maintained that the Bishops are “deeply troubled” that the Federal Government chose not to appeal the Quebec Superior Court ruling. Archbishop Gagnon stressed that the new law goes far beyond the “Truchon” ruling “by relinquishing and broadening some of the remaining and important ‘safeguards’“, on the basis of “a flawed consultation”, which was conducted by the Government last January. He also recalled the national and international opposition to euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, including other Canadian religious leaders and the World Medical Association. The Brief insisted that the only answer to patients’ suffering is good quality and accessible palliative care for all: “The pastoral experience of the Bishops has shown that patients are more likely to request euthanasia/assisted suicide when their pain is not properly managed by good quality palliative care, when their dependence on others to provide assistance and support is not adequately met, or when they are socially marginalized. Palliative care provides the choice of a better option which is not truly accessible to all Canadians”, the Bishops argued. Good palliative pain “addresses loneliness, fear, distress, and despair in a compassionate manner through the support of family and community” and “respects the dignity of the person and recognizes that human life has an objective and transcendent value”, they added, recalling the recent letter Samaritanus bonus by the Holy See’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Bishops' appeal to legislators The Canadian Bishops therefore renewed their call upon Canadian legislators to reject the Bill C-7 and to “Catholics and all people of good will” to make their voices heard, stressing that such laws “strike at the foundation of the legal order and deeply wound human relations and justice and that the legitimation of assisted suicide and euthanasia “is a sign of the degradation of legal systems”.

Who is Saint John Lateran?

Who is Saint John Lateran?: By Father Brian Morris Last Thursday, November 9, we celebrated Mass for the feast of St. John Lateran. Some of you might ask, who is this fellow? You won’t find him in the authoritative …

Tuesday, November 10, 2020

Supremacy and Survival: The English Reformation: St. John Henry Newman's "Re-Imagining" of Purgatory

Supremacy and Survival: The English Reformation: St. John Henry Newman's "Re-Imagining" of Purgatory: On Monday, October 26, I watched Professor Kenneth Parker's Journey Home episode on EWTN. He is currently the Ryan Endowed Chair for Ne...

: Belloc on "The French Revolution"

Book Review: Belloc on "The French Revolution" Posted: 09 Nov 2020 08:06 AM PST Hilaire Belloc, born in France of a French father and an English mother, does not tell the history of the French Revolution in this relatively brief book. He analyses the causes, characters, events, and issues of the Revolution, including the military campaigns fought in France by the Revolutionaries against European monarchies. He offer character sketches, much as he did in his Characters of the Reformation, and argues that the Catholic Church has nothing to fear from democracy nor democracy from the Catholic Church. His target audience is an English reader or student; perhaps one hostile to Catholicism based on centuries of prejudice. The book was published in 1911, just 61 years after the Restoration of the Catholic hierarchy in England to a most hostile public and legislative response. Belloc attempts to explain the context of Catholicism in France after the Wars of Religion and after the Revolution to an audience not prepared for sympathy with Catholics or the hierarchy. His tone and style throughout the book is precise, measured, and even rather limited. Ultimately, I'm not sure his approach is effective. Belloc in Chapter 1 begins with an explanation of the political theory of the French Revolution, hoping to help Englishmen, who should recognize it as their own, look past their country's history of the Napoleonic Wars: The political theory upon which the Revolution proceeded has, especially in this country [England], suffered ridicule as local, as ephemeral, and as fallacious. It is universal, it is eternal, and it is true. It may be briefly stated thus: that a political community pretending to sovereignty, that is, pretending to a moral right of defending its existence against all other communities, derives the civil and temporal authority of its laws not from its actual rulers, nor even from its magistracy, but from itself. But the community cannot express authority unless it possesses corporate initiative; that is, unless the mass of its component units are able to combine for the purpose of a common expression, are conscious of a common will, and have something in common which makes the whole sovereign indeed. It may be that this power of corporate initiative and of corresponding corporate expression is forbidden to men. In that case no such thing as a sovereign community can be said to exist. In that case "patriotism," "public opinion," "the genius of a people," are terms without meaning. But the human race in all times and in all places has agreed that such terms have meaning, and the conception that a community can so live, order and be itself, is a human conception as consonant to the nature of man as is his sense of right and wrong; it is much more intimately a part of that nature than are the common accidents determining human life, such as nourishment, generation or repose: nay, more intimate a part of it than anything which attaches to the body. If that is the political theory of the French Revolution, Robert Cardinal Bellarmine would agree with it. In Chapter 2 Belloc summarizes Jean-Jacques Rousseau's Contrat Social, which he calls the "text of the Revolution", emphasizing Rousseau's style and diction throughout: Nevertheless, if it be closely read the Contrat Social will be discovered to say all that can be said of the moral basis of democracy. Our ignorance of the historical basis of the State is presumed in the very opening lines of it. The logical priority of the family to the State is the next statement. The ridiculous and shameful argument that strength is the basis of authority—which has never had standing save among the uninstructed or the superficial—is contemptuously dismissed in a very simple proof which forms the third chapter, and that chapter is not a page of a book in length. It is with the fifth chapter that the powerful argument begins, and the logical precedence of human association to any particular form of government is the foundation stone of that analysis. It is this indeed which gives its title to the book: the moral authority of men in community arises from conscious association; or, as an exact phraseology would have it, a "social contract." All the business of democracy as based upon the only moral authority in a State follows from this first principle, and is developed in Rousseau's extraordinary achievement which, much more than any other writing not religious, has affected the destiny of mankind. It is indeed astonishing to one who is well acquainted not only with the matter, but with the manner of the Contrat Social, to remark what criticisms have been passed upon it by those who either have not read the work or, having read it, did so with an imperfect knowledge of the meaning of French words. The two great counter arguments, the one theoretic the other practical, which democracy has to meet, stand luminously exposed in these pages, though in so short a treatise the author might have been excused from considering them. The theoretical argument against democracy is, of course, that man being prone to evil, something external to him and indifferent to his passions must be put up to govern him; the people will corrupt themselves, but a despot or an oligarchy, when it has satisfied its corrupt desires, still has a wide margin over which it may rule well because it is indifferent. You cannot bribe the despot or the oligarch beyond the limit of his desires, but a whole people can follow its own corrupt desires to the full, and they will infect all government. In Chapter 3 "Characters of the Revolution", Belloc is merciless in his analysis of the characters and personalities of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette. Of the king he states: Few men are possessed of the eye, the subtle sympathy, the very rapid power of decision, and the comprehension of human contrasts and differences which build up the apt leader of an armed force great or small. Most men are mediocre in the combination of these qualities. But Louis was quite exceptionally hopeless where they were concerned. He could never have seen the simplest position nor have appreciated the military aspects of any character or of any body of men. He could ride, but he could not ride at the head of a column. He was not merely bad at this trade, he was nul. Drafted as a private into a conscript army, he would never have been entrusted with the duties of a corporal. He would have been impossible as a sergeant; and, possessed of commissioned rank, ridicule would have compelled him to take his discharge. This lack did not only, or chiefly, betray itself in his inability to meet personally the armed crisis of a revolution; it was not only, or chiefly, apparent in his complete breakdown during the assault upon the palace on the 10th of August: it was also, and much more, the disastrous cause of his inability to oversee, or even to choose, military advisers. . . . . . . From the beginning to the end of the movement, the whole of the military problem escaped him. . . . Of the queen he notes: Marie Antoinette presents to history a character which it is of the highest interest to regard as a whole. It is the business of her biographers to consider that character as a whole; but in her connection with the Revolution there is but one aspect of it which is of importance, and that is the attitude which such a character was bound to take towards the French nation in the midst of which the Queen found herself. It is the solution of the whole problem which the Queen's action sets before us to apprehend the gulf that separated her not only from the French temperament, but from a comprehension of all French society. Had she been a woman lacking in energy or in decision, this alien character in her would have been a small matter, and her ignorance of the French in every form of their activity, or rather her inability to comprehend them, would have been but a private failing productive only of certain local and immediate consequences, and not in any way determining the great lines of the revolutionary movement. As it was, her energy was not only abundant but steadfast; it grew more secure in its action as it increased with her years, and the initiative which gave that energy its course never vacillated, but was always direct. She knew her own mind, and she attempted, often with a partial success, to realise her convictions. There was no character in touch with the Executive during the first years of the Revolution comparable to hers for fixity of purpose and definition of view. It was due to this energy and singleness of aim that her misunderstanding of the material with which she had to deal was of such fatal importance. He likewise dissects the leaders of the Revolution: Mirabeau, La Fayette (sic), Dumouriez, Danton, Carnot, Marat, and Robespierre--the latter with surprising sympathy, attempting to absolve him from blame for the Reign of Terror. Belloc breaks down the Revolution into six phases, briefly summarizes and then analyses the events in each phase: From May 1789 to 17th of July 1789. From the 17th of July 1789 to the 6th of Oct. 1789. From October 1789 to June 1791. From June 1791 to September 1792. From the invasion of September 1792 to the establishment of the Committee of Public Safety, April 1793. From April 1793 to July 1794. In his description of the military campaigns of the French Revolution, Chapter 5, he compares the initial success to the final defeat, with the first substantial mention of Napoleon Bonaparte: The Revolution would never have achieved its object: on the contrary, it would have led to no less than a violent reaction against those principles which were maturing before it broke out, and which it carried to triumph, had not the armies of revolutionary France proved successful in the field; but the grasping of this mere historic fact, I mean the success of the revolutionary armies, is unfortunately no simple matter. We all know that as a matter of fact the Revolution was, upon the whole, successful in imposing its view upon Europe. We all know that from that success as from a germ has proceeded, and is still proceeding, modern society. But the nature, the cause and the extent of the military success which alone made this possible, is widely ignored and still more widely misunderstood. No other signal military effort which achieved its object has in history ended in military disaster—yet this was the case with the revolutionary wars. After twenty years of advance, during which the ideas of the Revolution were sown throughout Western civilisation, and had time to take root, the armies of the Revolution stumbled into the vast trap or blunder of the Russian campaign; this was succeeded by the decisive defeat of the democratic armies at Leipsic [Leipzig], and the superb strategy of the campaign of 1814, the brilliant rally of what is called the Hundred Days, only served to emphasise the completeness of the apparent failure. For that masterly campaign was followed by Napoleon's first abdication, that brilliant rally ended in Waterloo and the ruin of the French army. When we consider the spread of Grecian culture over the East by the parallel military triumph of Alexander, or the conquest of Gaul by the Roman armies under Cæsar, we are met by political phenomena and a political success no more striking than the success of the Revolution. The Revolution did as much by the sword as ever did Alexander or Cæsar, and as surely compelled one of the great transformations of Europe. But the fact that the great story can be read to a conclusion of defeat disturbs the mind of the student. Please note that Belloc ends both the consideration of the phases of the Revolution and the military campaigns in 1794 with the fall of Robespierre, so he does not discuss the Thermidorean Reaction or The Directory, nor the French army's invasions of the Netherlands, Spain, and Italy, etc. England was less involved in the military actions of the period Belloc covers; he notes at the conclusion of this chapter that the naval superiority of Britain's fleet was obvious, but not as consequential at this phase of the war: the heroism of Admiral Nelson was to come. Image credit: Le Massacre des Carmes by Marie–Marc–Antoine Bilcocq Finally, Belloc comes to his last argument, that democracy and Catholicism are not incompatible--and yet, the Catholic Church in France suffered greatly during phases of the Revolution--at first by focusing on the political theory of the French Revolution and the social doctrine of the Catholic Church: We must, then, approach our business by asking at the outset the most general question of all: "Was there a necessary and fundamental quarrel between the doctrines of the Revolution and those of the Catholic Church?" Those ill acquainted with either party, and therefore ill equipped for reply, commonly reply with assurance in the affirmative. The French (and still more the non-French) Republican who may happen, by the accident of his life, to have missed the Catholic Church, to have had no intimacy with any Catholic character, no reading of Catholic philosophy, and perhaps even no chance view of so much as an external Catholic ceremony, replies unhesitatingly that the Church is the necessary enemy of the Revolution. Again, the émigré, the wealthy woman, the recluse, any one of the many contemporary types to whom the democratic theory of the Revolution came as a complete novelty, and to-day the wealthy families in that tradition, reply as unhesitatingly that the Revolution is the necessary enemy of the Church. The reply seems quite sufficient to the Tory squire in England or Germany, who may happen to be a Catholic by birth or by conversion; and it seems equally obvious to (let us say) a democratic member of some Protestant Church in one of the new countries. Historically and logically, theologically also, those who affirm a necessary antagonism between the Republic and the Church are in error. Those who are best fitted to approach the problem by their knowledge both of what the Revolution attempted and of what Catholic philosophy is, find it in proportion to their knowledge difficult or impossible to answer that fundamental question in the affirmative. They cannot call the Revolution a necessary enemy of the Church, nor the Church of Democracy. So why is there such a lasting--and Belloc emphasizes that the conflict goes on in 1911 (six years after the official Separation of Church and State in France)--conflict and such grievances between the Catholic Church and the spirit of the Republic and democracy in France? First he examines the condition of the Gallican Catholic Church under the Ancien Regime, under which anti-clerical disbelief was accepted and allowed, and the practice of the faith was weakening while the officials of the Church, the bishops and cardinals, were protected, worldly, and wealthy. I think Belloc errs though when he tries to compare monasticism during the reign of Henry VIII to the Catholic hierarchy in eighteenth century France. He also ignores the Vendee (as he mentioned the uprisings there only briefly in Chapter 5) and the massacres there. He places the blame for the conflict on the Civil Constitution of the Clergy and the oaths required of priests and bishops because the politicians were wrong about the Catholic Church: Had the Catholic Church been, as nearly all educated men then imagined, a moribund superstition, had the phase of decline through which it was passing been a phase comparable to that through which other religions have passed in their last moments, had it been supported by ancient families from mere tradition, clung to by remote peasants from mere ignorance and isolation, abandoned (as it was) in the towns simply because the towns had better opportunities of intellectual enlightenment and of acquiring elementary knowledge in history and the sciences; had, in a word, the imaginary picture which these men drew in their minds of the Catholic Church and its fortunes been an exact one, then the Civil Constitution of the Clergy would have been a statesmanlike act. It would have permitted the hold of the Catholic Church upon such districts as it still retained to vanish slowly and without shock. It proposed to keep alive at a reasonable salary the ministers of a ritual which would presumably have lost all vitality before the last of its pensioners was dead; it would have prepared a bed, as it were, upon which the last of Catholicism in Gaul could peacefully pass away. The action of the politicians in framing the Constitution would have seemed more generous with every passing decade and their wisdom in avoiding offence to the few who still remained faithful, would have been increasingly applauded. If the French had known about Catholics in Ireland or England under the Tudors and the Stuarts, they wouldn't have made such a mistake. When the priests and a few bishops refused the oaths and the conflict inside and outside France ramped up in intensity, the massacres of September 1792 and the campaign of De-Christianization marked Catholic memories in France as surely as Irish memories of Cromwell: There followed immediately a general attack upon religion. The attempted closing of all churches was, of course, a failure, but it was firmly believed that such attachment as yet remained to the Catholic Church was due only to the ignorance of the provincial districts which displayed it, or to the self-seeking of those who fostered it. The attempt at mere "de-christianisation," as it was called, failed, but the months of terror and cruelty, the vast number of martyrdoms (for they were no less) and the incredible sufferings and indignities to which the priests who attempted to remain in the country were subjected, burnt itself, as it were, into the very fibre of the Catholic organisation in France, and remained, in spite of political theory one way or the other, and in spite of the national sympathies of the priesthood, the one great active memory inherited from that time. Belloc believes that this memory--and the opposite memory of supporters of the Republic perceiving Catholic intransigence--will take generations to fade. Here is one of the examples of Belloc's measured and even rather limited approach, which I think fails. He devotes much more explanation to the weakness of the Catholic Church in France before the Revolution--eight paragraphs detailing the worldliness of the clergy, the "moribund condition of the religious life of France upon the eve of the Revolution", and the intertwining of the Church and the State--and but one paragraph to the great efforts to de-Christianize France. I think Belloc missed a great opportunity with his audience here: English public opinion had been sympathetic to the exiled French non-juring priests; English monks and nuns re-established the religious life in England after fleeing France. Belloc does not recount the September massacres; the changes in the calendar; he mentions the closing of churches but does not offer details about their desecration; he ignores the efforts to establish different cults of Reason and the Supreme Being: in short, in his dedication to the political theory of the French Revolution, Belloc passes over its abuses, injustices, and cruelties. This is not the book on The French Revolution I expected from the author of Europe and the Faith. Perhaps I need to re-read the latter.

Not Called Great for Nothing By Br. Nicodemus Thomas, O.P.|November 10, 2020|Catholicism, Papacy, Saints

Not Called Great for Nothing By Br. Nicodemus Thomas, O.P.|November 10, 2020|Catholicism, Papacy, Saints View Larger Image Today’s patron, Saint Leo is indeed great. The fifth century bishop of Rome reigned as Pope during the last years of the Western Roman empire. His list of accomplishments is impressive. He heroically met with Attila the Hun to save the Italian peninsula from invasion, and he was a father to the Roman people whom the emperors abandoned. However, the Church does not call St. Leo “great” merely because of his patrician birth or his political savvy. After all, the empire was falling apart and would end officially a decade after his death. So it might seem, if we only examine his secular accomplishments, that St. Leo is called “great” for reasons that do not merit the title. During the fifth century, St. Leo preached against a group called the Monophysites who argued that there is a single nature in Christ. In other words, they claimed that Jesus Christ is not both really God and really man. Saint Leo, both in his famous Letter to Flavian and in his preaching, refuted their heresy and elucidated the mystery of the Incarnation for his brother bishops. Leo’s theology is not written in inaccessible language or specialized jargon. Rather, this Doctor of the Church explains to his universal flock the beauty and fittingness of the Incarnation. In Leo’s Christmas homily, he explains: “[Jesus] came to overthrow the devil, the origin of death, in that very nature by which he [the devil] had overthrown mankind.” The profundity of Leo’s reflection shines forth in the closing lines of his homily when he exhorts Christians to recall their dignity because they become “partners in the Divine nature.” The Pope is not claiming that Christians are now the divine essence; we have not become part of God, in a pantheistic sense. Rather, since God assumed our nature in the person of Jesus, Leo is arguing that we should “throw off our old nature and all its ways and as we have come to birth in Christ, let us renounce the works of the flesh.” In other words, we are able to be radically changed because “through the sacrament of baptism you have become a temple of the Holy Spirit.” How are we changed into temples of the Holy Spirit? Leo reminds us in a homily from today’s Office of Readings, “[Jesus] overflowed with abundant riches from the very source of all grace, yet though he alone received much, nothing was given over to him without his sharing it.” This means that we are capable of receiving grace in Christ because he assumed our nature, a grace with transformative power. Through grace we are able to receive the theological virtues, the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and ultimately eternal life itself. So why is Leo Great? Leo is not only great because he was a follower and imitator of Christ like all of the saints, but also because he preached who Jesus is to all people. Therefore, the Church calls Leo “Saint” on account of his holiness and she has called him “great” on account of his teachings which not only make us wiser but also help us to know Jesus Christ. So let us celebrate St Leo, because as he reminds us who Christ is, he also reminds us who we are. Although we are not all called to be great theologians and teachers like St Leo, through Christ we are called to be saints.

A New Resistance Is Rising - Crisis Magazine

A New Resistance Is Rising - Crisis Magazine: A friend of mine, an early activist in the Christian Democrat party in El Salvador, told me a story that I have been thinking about lately. Before I had ever gone to that country as a missionary, the parish school building served as a polling place. When they were setting up for an election, my …

We're Headed for the Catacombs - Crisis Magazine

We're Headed for the Catacombs - Crisis Magazine: “I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square. His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the Church has done so often in human history.” — Francis Cardinal George I had …

Sunday, November 8, 2020

The Way of Death

Our culture not only permits, but promotes abortion, euthanasia, murder, revenge, suicide (assisted or otherwise), war, capital punishment, contraception, human cloning, human sterilization, embryonic stem cell and fetal research, In Vitro Fertilization, homosexuality, promiscuity, infidelity, and divorce. These proclivities lead to the destruction of life and its natural origins. They devalue human life, leading to an explosion of all types of sins. When we do not value human life, we do not value people. This leads us to sin by harming ourselves and others since we do not see the face of God in others. Here is what the Didache says about the “Way of Death”: And the way of death is this: First of all it is evil and full of curse: murders, adulteries, lusts, fornications, thefts, idolatries, magic arts, witchcrafts, rapines, false witnessing's, hypocrisies, double-heartedness, deceit, haughtiness, depravity, self-will, greediness, filthy talking, jealousy, over-confidence, loftiness, boastfulness; persecutors of the good, hating truth, loving a lie, not knowing a reward for righteousness, not cleaving to good nor to righteous judgment, watching not for that which is good, but for that which is evil; from whom meekness and endurance are far, loving vanities, pursuing requital, not pitying a poor man, not laboring for the afflicted, not knowing Him that made them, murderers of children, destroyers of the handiwork of God, turning away from him that is in want, afflicting him that is distressed, advocates of the rich, lawless judges of the poor, utter sinners. Be delivered, children, from all these.

Thursday, October 29, 2020

The Bishops Have Spoken: Abortion Trumps - Crisis Magazine

The Bishops Have Spoken: Abortion Trumps - Crisis Magazine: The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has been very clear in its characterization of the most important issue in this election: “The threat of abortion remains our preeminent priority.” Other issues—immigration, racism, poverty and the death penalty—are of great importance and require urgent attention, but even though they are prominent issues, abortion is preeminent among them. …

Xi's Mandate of Heaven: Rewriting the Bible - Crisis Magazine

Xi's Mandate of Heaven: Rewriting the Bible - Crisis Magazine: What do Xi Jinping and Thomas Jefferson have in common? There may be a hundred interesting answers (which you can consider at your leisure), but as yet there is one that is both fairly substantial and sufficiently documented: both men set out to rewrite the Bible. Jefferson’s project—initially undertaken while president of the United States—was …

Wednesday, October 28, 2020

Voting for Abortion is a Crime Against Humanity - Crisis Magazine

Voting for Abortion is a Crime Against Humanity - Crisis Magazine: Abortion is an intrinsic moral evil. It involves carrying out or arranging to carry out the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. An intrinsic evil is an action that is always gravely sinful regardless of the circumstances. There are no exceptions, no grey areas. The U.S. federal government is guilty of and complicit in …

Tuesday, October 27, 2020

Pope Francis to Europe: Be Yourself! Rediscover Your Ideals.. Remain Under the Protection of Your Patron Saints - ZENIT - English

Pope Francis to Europe: Be Yourself! Rediscover Your Ideals.. Remain Under the Protection of Your Patron Saints - ZENIT - English: Francis Sends Letter to Cardinal Parolin on 40th Anniversary of COMECE, 50th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Holy See & EU and of Presence of Holy See as Permanent Observer at Council of Europe (Full Text)

Monday, October 19, 2020

Gnawed Off Fingers By Br. Bartholomew Calvano, O.P. on October 19, 2020

Gnawed off fingers. That was the reward Saint Isaac Jogues received for preaching the Gospel. There were other tortures too, but the missing fingers were what really left their mark. They couldn’t be hidden. They weren’t just any fingers either. His thumb and index finger on both hands were either missing or mutilated. You’d be hard-pressed to find worse wounds you could give a priest. At the time, these were the only fingers with which a priest could lawfully touch the Eucharist. That meant that even after escaping his imprisonment he was unable to celebrate Mass. It would be months before he made it back to Europe and received permission to be allowed to hold the Eucharist with his remaining digits, which only the Pope could give. These wounds could reasonably spell the end of a missionary career, but St. Isaac Jogues returned to the New World again to preach the Gospel. He was martyred in 1646, only ten years after he had gone to New France for his first mission. Today we celebrate not only St. Isaac Jogues, but all of the North American Martyrs: eight Jesuits martyred between 1642 and 1649 in New York and Canada. These men believed the Gospel was worth suffering and dying for. They counted the cost they paid as a more than fair exchange to lead men and women into a relationship with Jesus Christ. All of us have heard this same Gospel. Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, became flesh, was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered, died, and on the third day rose from the dead. He then ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He did this for our sake, so that we might be forgiven of our sins and have eternal life with him. What value do we place on this Gospel? Is it worth a few fingers? Death? Some of us may have received the Gospel at such a price. There are still martyrs today. For many of us, however, we received the Gospel in more peaceful circumstances. Blood wasn’t spilled to preach it to us. The surpassing worth of our faith may be less obvious to us. For this reason, remembering the lives of the saints who poured out their blood for the sake of the Gospel can help enkindle in us a commensurate appreciation for the worth of the Gospel we have heard. Even if we have received the Gospel peaceably, we may not always be able to live out that Gospel faithfully without persecution. The class of persecution we might face is unlikely to be that of gnawed off fingers. The wounds we receive will be less gruesome and more easily hidden. They might be ridicule, mockery, exclusion from social circles, not being promoted at work, not being hired for a job, or abandonment by friends and family. Should such struggles come our way, the example of the saints such as Isaac Jogues and the other North American Martyrs can serve as encouragement that the Gospel really is worth the suffering we endure. ✠Image: St. Isaac Jogues, CC BY-SA 4.0

Sunday, October 18, 2020


According to 1949 census data, 70 percent of the Hungarian population, or about 6.5 million people, were Catholic. Therefore, the Catholic Church had significant social, public and political influence as well as important material resource.  Their education, social, cultural and church institutions covered the entire country. Consequently, the Catholic Church played a major role in the cultivation and observation of national culture and traditions. 

On 7 October 1945, the Holy See placed a charismatic pontiff at the head of the Hungarian Catholic church, József Mindszenty, who said no to both terror and dictatorship.  As the Bishop of Veszprém, he was imprisoned first by the Arrowcross and later by the Communists in 1949. Under the leadership of Archbishop Mindszenty, the Catholic Church roused hundreds of followers to protect church institutions.  Above all, the church protected Catholic schools and protested the compulsory termination of religious education. The Communist ideological performers incited extreme hate against Cardinal Mindszenty and the entire Church. 

Police operations were carried out against church institutions and schools and harassment and intimidation followed. The state took 30 high school students by force from Gyöngyös with their Franciscan teacher, Father Szaléz Kis. They were charged for concealing weapons and accused of being a revolutionary organization. Father Kis, 17 year old Ottó Kizmán and László Bodnár as well as 16 year old Sándor Kiss were convicted and executed in early September 1946. Their classmates were sentenced to prison and forced labor.

In January 1948, Rákosi gave the order that ˝by the end of the year we must end the Church rebellion.˝ The Communists organized a national campaign to nationalize Church-run schools. In Pócspetri, an accidentally discharged rifle led to a tragedy (3 June 1948), when it became a pretext for the Communists to begin a military campaign against the Catholic clergy, the believers within the Hungarian peasantry, and the entire village. János Kádár, Gábor Péter, a representative from the Party newspaper, ˝Free People˝ and Miklós Vásárhelyi went to the site which had been completely occupied by the ÁVO.

The Communists assaulted almost every resident of the village. The entire country resounded with the clerical reaction murdered a policeman.

On 20 June 1948, 6,500 Church-run schools were nationalized. Not long afterwards, the Communists expelled the churches from the health and social care sectors.  With the revoking of operational permits of these now ˝useless˝ religious orders, and the brutal treatment of the monks and nuns, they were able to exercise pressure on the still free leaders of the church. On 26 December 1948, the Communists already arrested and then sentenced to life imprisonment József Mindszenty, Archbishop of Esztergom and head of the Hungarian Catholic Church.

Mindszenty´s trial was held from 3-8 February 1949 at the Budapest Court of the People before Vilmos Olti´s council. The prosecutor was Gyula Alapy. Throughout the entire trial the public opinion was worked and manipulated. The regime tried to convince the frightened country with hundreds of unprecedented press campaigns, protests and demonstrations of Mindszenty´s ˝crimes˝ or in their language: the harmful ˝black reaction˝ and fury against the people.

The conviction of the Archbishop - and the Communists were well aware of this - was by no means enough to induce the total submission of the Roman Catholic Church.  They introduced the concept of ˝clerical reaction˝ as well. Everyone from the Pope to the smallest village parish became a reactionary. The prisons were filled with Catholic priests and the harassment of Catholics became an everyday occurrence. The Catholic Church resisted as long as it could.

Then in summer 1950, after three consecutive events, the church finally recoiled. The Catholic episcopacy came to the realization that the Communists´ cruelty and brutality knew no boundaries. They were shaken by the dismantlement of the religious orders, the deprived and persecuted nuns and monks, the fate of more than 10,000 of their brothers. They were conscious of their powerlessness and defenselessness. They had to fear that the ˝peace priest˝ movement that was forced on to the church by the Communists might lead to a schism inside the church. They were also hopeless because the strong and prestigious Polish episcopacy was coerced into an agreement with the socialist state in Poland. In the ˝agreement˝, the Catholic Bishops agreed to support the state order and government of the Hungarian People´s Republic. In return, the government promised to ensure religious and operational freedom of the church. The church received back eight church-run schools, where they could guarantee a Catholic education run by its own teaching order.

Less than a year later the signatory of the agreement, József Grősz, the Archbishop of Kalocsa, ended up in the crossfire.  József Révai, a member of the Communist party´s highest leadership body, elaborated the conception of a show trial, which was organized in the summer of 1951.  Archbishop Grősz was condemned to 15 years in prison, Ferenc Vezér, a monk from the Order of St. Paul, was sentenced to death,  Father Vendel Endrédy from Zirc received a 14 year prison term and his colleagues were also given serious prison sentences.  The ÁVH demanded that the bishops in Vác, Székesfehérvár and Szeged-Csanád appoint ˝peace priests˝ to important church positions. In July 1951, under the leadership of Archbishop Gyula Czapik of Eger, the free members of the episcopacy pledged their allegiance to the constitution of the Hungarian People´s Republic.

The Communists achieved their goals. The ÁVH terror broke down the resistance of the pontiffs and expanded the party´s scope of power to the church.

In 1956, Archbishop Mindszenty was freed and briefly resumed his leadership of the Church. However, on the day the Soviet attacked to put down the revolution, the Archbishop sought and was granted asylum in the US Embassy on Szabadság square, where he spent  the next 15 years captive. In 1971, under pressure from the Holy See and the Hungarian government, he emigrated.  He lived for another 4 years.  In 1991, his remains were returned to Hungary and buried in the Esztergom Basilica.  His beatification is under consideration by the Holy See. Pope John Paul II´s visit to Hungary in August 1991 symbolized the end of the 40 years of religious persecution.

Thursday, October 15, 2020

Catholics Pray For Protesters Who Knocked Down Statue Of Junipero Serra ...

California Catholics pray, protest at destroyed St. Junipero Serra statue

California Catholics pray, protest at destroyed St. Junipero Serra statue: Catholics in California rallied in a peaceful demonstration Tuesday evening at the former site of a statue of St. Junipero Serra, which a group of activists defaced and pulled down earlier this week.

Rethinking the Enlightenment - Crisis Magazine

Rethinking the Enlightenment - Crisis Magazine: “We are victims of our century,” wrote one of the Carmelites of Compiègne before going to the guillotine in 1794, “and we must sacrifice ourselves that it be reconciled to God.” Attacks on Catholic churches, anti-Christian elites, and suffocating political correctness—the eighteenth century witnessed cultural conflict every bit as intense as our own today. Yet …

Wednesday, October 14, 2020

Hawley vs. the Know-Nothings - Crisis Magazine

Hawley vs. the Know-Nothings - Crisis Magazine: At last. On the first day of Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Republican senators stood up to the anti-religious bigotry of their Democratic colleagues over the disgraceful treatment of Judge Barrett’s Catholic faith. One of the greatest highlights was Senator Josh Hawley’s impassioned opening statement against the blatant anti-Catholic bigotry …

Thursday, October 8, 2020

Democrats Are the New Know-Nothings - Crisis Magazine

Democrats Are the New Know-Nothings - Crisis Magazine: With the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court, Catholics should buckle their chinstraps for the torrential cascade of anti-Catholicism that will be belched up by her opponents. The vituperative attacks on Catholics will probably rival the Know-Nothing riots that rocked the nation in the 1840s and 1850s. But this time, there …

Wednesday, October 7, 2020

The Box: in it or Out of it

                                                                    The Oldest Camera (In Italian Camera = Room)

                                                       Old RCA_630-TS_Television

                                                                     Newer TV's 

                                                                Older Computer

                                                                Older smart phones

                                                            Surveillance Cameras

                                             Big Brother has been watching us and still is

                                     Don't Panic, Repent and Reconcile with The Holy Church

                                                  Tabernacle Saint George Catholic Church, 

St Edith Stein: "The parables present the divine truth in a locked box, as it were. Often it is left to us to look for the key."

Sunday, October 4, 2020

The whole see of Denmark is a Prison as it is all Nations-Digital Prisons-"We are all just prisoners here, of our own device"

        "We are all just prisoners here, of our own device"

                                                     Old School

                                                 Radio Towers

                                        Radio Networks across usa

                                       Radio Towers in Canada

                                         Microwave Towers

                                                 TV Towers to  Your Home

                                     Rock Stations Network across usa

                                             Cell phone Towers


                                        The electronic noose tightens 

                                       The Digital prison in the air

Future is now

Escape from the Rock Alcatraz Island

In Denmark, punishment is not about the place,’ he explains. ‘It is about the lack of freedom.’ 

The inevitable implication of course is that the whole state of Denmark has been corrupted by the king's bad habits and vicious nature, until "the dram of eale, Doth all the noble substance of a doubt To his own scandal." (I. iv. 36-8.) This condition of corruption impresses both Hamlet and his friends almost from the outset.

At the same time, Hamlet gives the impression of being the only one who seems to feel imprisoned by Claudius's rule:

"Why, then, ’tis none to you, for there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so. To me it is a prison." (act 2 scene 2)

It's not surprising that Rosencrantz, for example, doesn't feel the same way about Denmark (or England) as Hamlet. After all, pursuing the prison metaphor further, he's one of the jailers. Or, at the very least, he's a spy sent by Claudius to keep a close eye on Hamlet. In any case, Hamlet seems to be the only one resisting his uncle's morally corrupt tyranny. That, more than anything else, makes him feel like he's in prison. Shakespeare chose Denmark as the setting for Hamlet because he likely knew about the castle in Helsingør, which translates to the English spelling Elsinore. 

                                              Saying it in Song


Whoa, oh, oh
Whoa, oh, oh
Whoa, oh, oh

I'm waking up to ash and dust
I wipe my brow and I sweat my rust
I'm breathing in the chemicals
[Inhale, exhale]

I'm breaking in, shaping up, then checking out on the prison bus
This is it, the apocalypse
Whoa oh

I'm waking up, I feel it in my bones
Enough to make my system blow
Welcome to the new age, to the new age
Welcome to the new age, to the new age
Whoa, oh, oh, oh, oh, whoa, oh, oh, oh, I'm radioactive, radioactive
Whoa, oh, oh, oh, oh, whoa, oh, oh, oh, I'm radioactive, radioactive

I raise my flag and dye my clothes
It's a revolution, I suppose
We're painted red to fit right in
Whoa oh

I'm breaking in, shaping up, then checking out on the prison bus
This is it, the apocalypse
Whoa oh

I'm waking up, I feel it in my bones
Enough to make my system blow
Welcome to the new age, to the new age
Welcome to the new age, to the new age
Whoa, oh, oh, oh, oh, whoa, oh, oh, oh, I'm radioactive, radioactive
Whoa, oh, oh, oh, oh, whoa, oh, oh, oh, I'm radioactive, radioactive

All systems go, the sun hasn't died
Deep in my bones, straight from inside

I'm waking up, I feel it in my bones
Enough to make my system blow
Welcome to the new age, to the new age
Welcome to the new age, to the new age
Whoa, oh, oh, oh, oh, whoa, oh, oh, oh, I'm radioactive, radioactive
Whoa, oh, oh, oh, oh, whoa, oh, oh, oh, I'm radioactive, radioactive

"Hotel California" 
On a dark desert highway, cool wind in my hair
Warm smell of colitas, rising up through the air
Up ahead in the distance, I saw a shimmering light
My head grew heavy and my sight grew dim
I had to stop for the night
There she stood in the doorway
I heard the mission bell
And I was thinking to myself" This could be Heaven or this could be Hell"
Then she lit up a candle and she showed me the way
There were voices down the corridor
I thought I heard them say
Welcome to the Hotel California Such a lovely place (Such a lovely place) Such a lovely face Plenty of room at the Hotel California Any time of year (Any time of year) You can find it here Her mind is Tiffany-twisted, she got the Mercedes bends She got a lot of pretty, pretty boys she calls friends
How they dance in the courtyard, sweet summer sweat Some dance to remember, some dance to forget So I called up the Captain" Please bring me my wine." 
He said, "We haven't had that spirit here since nineteen sixty nine." And still those voices are calling from far away Wake you up in the middle of the night Just to hear them say 
Welcome to the Hotel California 
Such a lovely place (Such a lovely place) Such a lovely face They livin' it up at the Hotel California What a nice surprise (what a nice surprise) Bring your alibis Mirrors on the ceiling The pink champagne on ice And she said "We are all just prisoners here, of our own device" And in the master's chambers They gathered for the feast They stab it with their steely knives But they just can't kill the beast
Last thing I remember I was running for the door I had to find the passage back to the place I was before "Relax," said the night man "We are programmed to receive You can check-out any time you like
But you can never leave!"

Radar love 
I've been driving all night, my hands wet on the wheel There's a voice in my head that drives my heel

It's my baby calling, says "I need you here" And it's a half past four and I'm shifting gear 

When she is lonely and the longing gets too much
She sends a cable coming in from above

Don't need no phone at all 

We've got a thing that's called radar love
We've got a wave in the air Radar love

The radio is playing some forgotten song
Brenda Lee's "Comin' on Strong"

The road has got me hypnotized 

And I'm speeding into a new sunrise
When I get lonely and I'm sure I've had enough
She sends her comfort coming in from above 

We don't need no letter at all
We've got a thing that's called radar love
We've got a line in the sky 

Radar love
No more speed, I'm almost there
Gotta keep cool now, gotta take care
Last car to pass, here I go 

And the line of cars goes down real slow
And the radio played that forgotten song
Brenda Lee's "Coming On Strong"

And the newsman sang his same song

Oh, one more radar lover gone
When I get lonely and I'm sure I've had enough
She sends her comfort coming in from above
We don't need no letter at all
We've got a thing that's called radar love
We've got a line in the sky
We've got a thing that's called radar love

We've got a thing that's called
Radar love