

American Catholic
Blessed Frederic Ozanam
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Antoine-Frederic Ozanam
Blessed Frederic Ozanam: 1813-1853
wiki
Blessed Frederic Ozanam
A Prayer to Blessed Frederic Ozanam

Saint Silouan on Love
The soul cannot know peace unless she prays for her enemies. The soul that has learned of God's grace to pray, feels love and compassion for every created thing, and in particular for mankind, for whom the Lord suffered on the Cross, and His soul was heavy for every one of us.
The Lord taught me to love my enemies. Without the grace of God we cannot love our enemies. Only the Holy Spirit teaches love, and then even devils arouse our pity because they have fallen from good, and lost humility in God.
I beseech you, put this to the test. When a man affronts you or brings dishonor on your head, or takes what is yours, or persecutes the Church, pray to the Lord, saying: "O Lord, we are all Thy creatures. Have pity on Thy servants and turn their hearts to repentance," and you will be aware of grace in your soul. To begin with, constrain your heart to love enemies, and the Lord, seeing your good will, will help you in all things, and experience itself will shoe you the way. But the man who thinks with malice of his enemies has not God's love within him, and does not know God.
If you will pray for your enemies, peace will come to you; but when you can love your enemies - know that a great measure of the grace of God dwells in you, though I do not say perfect grace as yet, but sufficient for salvation. Whereas if you revile your enemies, it means there is an evil spirit living in you and bringing evil thoughts into your heart, for, in the words of the Lord, out of the heart proceed evil thoughts - or good thoughts.
The good man thinks to himself in this wise: Every one who has strayed from the truth brings destruction on himself and is therefore to be pitied. But of course the man who has not learned the love of the Holy Spirit will not pray for his enemies. The man who has learned love from the Holy Spirit sorrows all his life over those who are not saved, and sheds abundant tears for the people, and the grace of God gives him strength to love his enemies.
Understand me. It is so simple. People who do not know God, or who go against Him, are to be pitied; the heart sorrows for them and the eye weeps. Both paradise and torment are clearly visible to us: We know this through the Holy Spirit. And did not the Lord Himself say, "The kingdom of God is within you"? Thus eternal life has its beginning here in this life; and it is here that we sow the seeds of eternal torment.
Where there is pride there cannot be grace, and if we lose grace we also lose both love of God and assurance in prayer. The soul is then tormented by evil thoughts and does not understand that she must humble herself and love her enemies, for there is no other way to please God.
What shall I render unto Thee, O Lord,
for that Thou hast poured such great mercy on my soul?
Grant, I beg Thee, that I may see my iniquities,
and ever weep before Thee,
for Thou art filled with love for humble souls,
and dost give them the grace of the Holy Spirit.
O merciful God, forgive me.
Thou seest how my soul is drawn to Thee, her Creator.
Thou hast wounded my soul with Thy love,
and she thirsts for Thee, and wearies without end,
and day and night, insatiable, reaches toward Thee,
and has no wish to look upon this world, though I do love it,
but above all I love Thee, my Creator,
and my soul longs after Thee.
O my Creator, why have I, Thy little creature,
grieved Thee so often? Yet Thou hast not remembered my sins.
Glory be to the Lord God that He gave us His Only-begotten
Son for the sake of our salvation.
Glory be to the Only-begotten Son that He deigned to be
born of the Most Holy Virgin, and suffered for our salvation,
and gave us His Most Pure Body and Blood to eternal life,
and sent His Holy Spirit on the earth.
O Lord, grant me tears to shed for myself,
and for the whole universe,
that the nations may know Thee and live eternally with Thee,
O Lord, vouchsafe us the gift of Thy humble Holy Spirit,
that we may apprehend Thy glory.
XXXIV. LITURGICAL PRAYER
A. Deformed Psalmody
B. Contemplative Chant


22nd Annual Event
January 16, 17, & 18, 2009Featuring...
Rhonda Vincent & The Rage
- Dailey and Vincent -
- Danny Paisley & The Southern Grass -
- Cedar Hill -
- IIIrd Generation Bluegrass Band -
- The Martins -
- Sawmill Road -
- The Burnett Family -
- Just For Fun -
Pragmatically, one has to decide how much less evil the lesser is, but surely there is a point at which one can truly say, “I will not vote in an election in which my vote will only reinforce the lie that elections are free and fair and that the candidates present a real choice. Does anyone remember the episode of the Prisoner in which Patrick McGoohan is lured into running in the phony election for the #2 spot? That was clearly McGoohan’s take on the politics of 30 years ago, and things are much much worse than they were then. I am not saying that it is necessarily wrong to vote for a major party candidate, but I do think that those who refuse to vote have a point in refusing to collaborate with a system they regard as oppressive.Whom one chooses to vote depends upon, in part, what one thinks of voting and authority. Is a ruler merely an instrument of the people (even if he disappoints the electorate and turn out to have his own plans)? Or is he supposed to rule in accordance with the natural law and the common good, even if this goes against what the electorate desires? (There are also the questions of what the Federal Government is empowered to do and what can be down to limit its power through choosing people for office.)






















Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and my predecessor as Archbishop here in San Francisco, wrote in 2004: "No bishop is eager to forbid members of his flock from receiving the precious Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, who invites us into communion with Himself and his Body, the Church, as grace and salvation." In that same year, the U.S. bishops acknowledged that pastoral sensitivity, and they endorsed the following approach to this question of denying Holy Communion: "Given the wide range of circumstances involved in arriving at a prudential judgment on a matter of this seriousness, we recognize that such decisions rest with the individual bishop in accord with the established canonical and pastoral principles. Bishops can legitimately make different judgments on the most prudent course of pastoral action. Nevertheless, we all share an unequivocal commitment to protect human life and dignity and to preach the Gospel in difficult times." From that statement I conclude that it is my responsibility as Archbishop to discern and decide, prayerfully, how best to approach this question as it may arise in the Archdiocese of San Francisco.
The broader point: most Americans come from somewhere and end up somewhere else. That's a truth of our culture and our economy. The difference lies in whether you think we should seek to preserve and defend those somewheres or join the progressive tide of history in seeking their demise (i.e., through human strip mining operations that liberate us from parochiality and policies that support destruction of local economic entities. Meritocracy meets Wal Mart). It's a progressive project that's advanced simultaneously by the economic "Right" and the "cultural" Left. I've written about the conundrum and even potential hypocrisy of criticizing the cosmopolitan project while ensconced at an elite institution. Sadly, it's possible that the respectability of such a critique is likely to have more credence from within those very institutions. Maybe Wendell Berry can do it all on his own from the farm - but it can't hurt to assign his books in university classes and raise a very different set of questions for tomorrow's leaders. For all the perils, it's worth the risk...I think universities in general are a lost cause. It depends on how necessary it is for young people to get a college degree in order to secure some sort of well-paying job. I don't think I can tell many that their college education is really worth it, in the long run. Nor can I personally benefit from an institution that reinforces the status quo instead of seeking to change it. If I had any knowledge to share, I would do it gladly to those who seek it. But it doesn't mean I should try to make a living from it. Certainly I shouldn't assume that I have such knowledge. And if I do have it, I don't think I should assume that it is my vocation to share it. Would it not be sufficient for God's purposes if God's love had lead me to some knowledge? How I am to love Him and serve others may have very little to do with human scientiae and sapientia.
Pope's Message to Rimini Meeting"Christ Alone Can Reveal to Man His True Dignity"
VATICAN CITY, SEPT. 4, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Here is the message Benedict XVI sent to the 29th Meeting for Friendship Among Peoples, held Aug. 24-30 in Rimini, Italy. The statement, sent on the Pontiff's behalf by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Pope's secretary of state, was addressed to Bishop Francesco Lambiasi of Rimini.
The annual event is organized by the lay movement Communion and Liberation.
* * *
Your Most Reverend Excellency,
On the occasion of the 29th Meeting for Friendship Among Peoples, scheduled to take place in Rimini from 24 to 30 August this year, I am pleased to convey to you, to the sponsors and to all the participants in this important event the cordial greeting of His Holiness Benedict XVI.
The provocative theme of the Meeting: "Either protagonists or nobodies," commands instant attention. Indeed, this was the organizers' precise intention: "to provoke thought on the concept of a person." What does being a protagonist of one's own life and of that of the world actually mean?
The question has become urgent today because the alternative to protagonism seems all too often to be a life without meaning, the grey anonymity of so many "nobodies" who get lost in the folds of an amorphous mass and unfortunately unable to emerge with a noteworthy face of their own.
Then the question should be more focused and could perhaps be rephrased: what does a face give a human being, what makes a person unmistakable and guarantees his/her existence full dignity?
The society and culture in which we are immersed and of which the media are a powerful sound box are largely dominated by the conviction that fame is an essential component of personal fulfillment. To emerge from anonymity, to succeed in imposing oneself on public attention with every possible means and pretext is the goal pursued by many.
Political or financial power, prestige acquired in one's profession, a display of wealth, the renown of one's own achievements, even the ostentation of one's own excesses... all this is quietly taken to be "success" and a "triumph" in life. That is why the new generations aspire increasingly to idealized professions and careers precisely because they bring them into the limelight, which enables them to "appear," to feel that they are "somebody." The ideal for which they strive is represented by cinema actors, the mythical celebrities of television and of the entertainment world, by athletes, soccer players, etc.
But what happens to those who have no access to this level of social visibility? What happens to those who are forgotten, if not actually crushed by the dynamics of worldly success on which the society they live in is based? What happens to those who are poor, defenseless, sick, elderly or disabled, those who have no talents to forge ahead among others or no means to cultivate them, who have no voice to make their own ideas and convictions heard? How should one perceive those who lead a hidden life, of no apparent importance to newspapers and television?
Contemporary men and women, like all people down the ages, strive for their own happiness and pursue it wherever they think they can find it. Here then is the real question the word "protagonism" conceals, which this year's Meeting proposes for our reflection: In what does happiness consist? What can truly help people to achieve it?
This year Pope Benedict XVI established a special Jubilee Year dedicated to a "champion" of Christianity of all time, the Pharisee of Tarsus called Saul, who after ferociously persecuting the early Church, converted when the Lord's call "broke through" to him.
Gospel servant who laid the Christian foundations of the world
From that moment he served the cause of the Gospel with total dedication, tirelessly traveling the then known world and helping to lay the foundations of what was to become the European culture, enlightened by Christianity.
Few have shown a breadth of knowledge and an acumen equal to Paul's. His letters express the explosive force of his passionate personality and have attracted millions of readers, exercising a unique influence on generation after generation of men and women and on entire peoples and nations.
In his writings Paul never ceases to present Christ as an authentic source of respect among men, of peace among nations, of justice in coexistence. Two thousand years later, we can all consider ourselves "sons" of his preaching, and our civilization knows that it is actually indebted to this man for the values on which it is founded.
Yet St Paul's existence is very far from being in the limelight of public recognition. When he died, the Church he had helped to disseminate was still a tiny seed, a group that the supreme authorities of the Roman Empire could allow themselves to neglect or endeavor to crush with bloodshed.
Moreover Paul's existence, examined it in its daily dimension, appears troubled, beset by hostility and dangers, full of difficulties to face rather than consolations and joys to enjoy. He himself bears a vivid witness to this in a great many passages of his writings.
This is what he says, for example, in his Second Letter to the Corinthians: "Five times I have received at the hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one. Three times I have been beaten with rods; once I was stoned. Three times I have been shipwrecked; a night and a day I have been adrift at sea; on frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, danger from robbers, danger from my own people, danger from Gentiles, danger in the city, danger in the wilderness, danger at sea, danger from false brethren; in toil and hardship, through many a sleepless night, in hunger and thirst, often without food, in cold and exposure. And, apart from other things, there is the daily pressure upon me of my anxiety for all the Churches. Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is made to fall, and I am not indignant?" (11: 24-29).
It was with determination and in the Name of his Redeemer that Paul ended or rather completed this obstacle race -- as we might describe it -- in Rome, where he was condemned to death and beheaded. Many other Christians died with him in the Emperor Nero's raging persecution and among them was Peter, the fisherman of Galilee and head of the Church.
Can Paul's life really be considered "successful"? Here we are before the paradox of Christian life as such. Indeed, to Christians what does "succeeding" mean? What do the existences of so many holy people, who lived in the retirement of their convents tell us? What do the lives and deaths of numberless Christian martyrs tell us, most of whose names are unknown, who ended their lives not amidst acclamation but rather surrounded by contempt, hatred and indifference? In what does the "greatness" of their lives consist, the luminosity of their witness, their "success"?
Humble conditions do not prevent true human fulfillment
Recently too, the Holy Father Benedict XVI recalled that man was made for the eternal fulfillment of his life. This goes far beyond mere worldly success and is not in opposition to the humility of the condition in which he makes his earthly pilgrimage.
The fulfillment of the human being is knowledge of God, by whom every person was created and for whom he strives with every fiber of his being. Neither fame nor popularity with the masses serves to achieve this. This is the protagonism that the title of this year's Rimini Meeting seeks to propose anew.
The protagonist of one's own existence is someone who gives his life to God, who calls him to cooperate in the universal project of salvation.
The meeting intends to reaffirm that Christ alone can reveal to man his true dignity and communicate to him the authentic meaning of his life. When a believer follows him docilely, he can leave a lasting trace in history. It is the trace of love, of which he becomes a witness precisely because he has been grasped by love.
It is then that what was possible for St. Paul also becomes possible for each one of us. It does not matter whether or not God's design provides for a reduced sphere of action. It does not matter whether we live within the walls of a cloistered monastery or are immersed in the multiple and different activities of the world; it does not matter whether we are fathers and mothers of families or consecrated people, or priests.
God uses us in accordance with his plan of love according to the ways that he chooses and he asks us to support the action of his Spirit; he wants us to be his collaborators for the realization of his Kingdom. He says to each one: "Come, follow me" (Luke 18: 22), and only by following him does man experience the true exaltation of his being.
The experience of the saints, men and women who very often lived their fidelity to God in a discreet and ordinary manner, teaches us this. Among them we find many true protagonists of history, people who are totally fulfilled, living examples of hope and witnesses of a love that fears nothing, not even death.
The Holy Father hopes that these reflections will help those taking part in the meeting to encounter Christ, to understand the value of Christian life better and to achieve its meaning in the humble protagonism of service to the mission of the Church, in Italy and throughout the world. To this end he assures you of his prayers for the meeting's success and imparts a special blessing to you, to the organizers and to all those present.
I very willingly add my own fervent good wishes for the fruitful success of the event and gladly take advantage of the occasion to confirm my sentiments of distinct respect.
[Translation by L'Osservatore Romano]
I’ve talked about some of the steps in question already on this blog, but today I’d like to turn to something a bit different from those previous discussions: the question of how people will make a living during the long unraveling of the industrial age.
That’s a question that has received surprisingly little attention in recent years, and a good deal of that neglect, I think, can be laid at the door of the apocalyptic narrative. According to that narrative, after all, nothing much changes until everything does; you keep on punching the timeclock at your present job until the day that civilization falls apart, and then, if you happen to be among the survivors, you step into whatever new role the apocalypse has ordained for you – subsistence farmer, tribal hunter-gatherer, protein source for the local cannibal population, or what have you. At the same time, the absence of a 9-to-5 routine on the far side of apocalypse is likely to be an important source of the narrative’s popularity; I’m far from the only person who noticed, during the runup to the Y2K noncrisis, how many people predicting imminent doom seemed exhilarated by the notion that they would not have to go to work on January 2, 2000.
If I’m right and the descent into the deindustrial future unfolds over generations, though, that enticing prospect is not in the cards. Rather, the vast majority of us will need to earn our livings in a world that, while it will be changing around us, is extremely unlikely to change in ways that will make that process any easier than it is now. During the period I’ve described in other posts as the age of scarcity industrialism, something like today’s money economy will likely remain firmly in place, though the household economy and other forms of production and exchange outside the money economy will likely play a steadily growing role. During the age of salvage economies that I expect to follow the twilight of the industrial system, money of some sort will likely remain in use on a small scale, as it does in most dark ages, but most day-to-day transactions will take place via barter or other systems of exchange outside the money economy; again, that’s standard practice in dark ages. In both periods, though, people will work for their livings – and will likely work a good deal harder than many Americans do today.
Nor will their jobs be the same as the ones that employ most Americans nowadays. The flood of cheap abundant energy that surged through the industrial world during the twentieth century reshaped every dimension of the economy in its image, and nearly all the things we have grown up considering normal and natural are artifacts of that highly abnormal and unnatural state of affairs. Very few people in the industrial world today spend their workdays producing goods or providing necessary services; instead, pushing paper has become the standard employment, and preparation for a paper-pushing career the standard form of education. The once-mighty archipelago of trade schools that undergirded the rise of America as an industrial power sank with barely a trace in the second half of the twentieth century. I once lived three blocks away from the shell of one such school; it had been engulfed by a community college, and classrooms that once hummed with the busy noises of machine-shop equipment and the hiss of hot solder were being used to train a new generation of receptionists, brokers, and medical billing clerks









It is we, and not the neocons, which the liberal Left is seeking to drive off the planet, and trying to get them to notice that we’re “antiwar” is a useless conciliatory gesture. Our task is simple but also dauntingly expensive. It is to create our own counter-media and counter-establishment, a task aiming at giving our side at least a seat in the public political discussion. In this work we can expect not help but torrents of hostility from the left. And if we go anywhere, the Robert Wexlers of this world would proclaim us to be the reincarnations of Hitler and Hamas.
Our work of consolidation must therefore be carried on alone, and we must never allow the words to fall from our lips or even to appear on our computer compositions starting with the indescribably stupid phrase “nice people right and left would agree.”