Saturday, 30 December 2017

Hugh Hefner a destroyer of the West

Good-bye Hugh Hefner
Goodbye, Mr. Hefner.  Our world is the world you made; the media landscape we know today was really your creation.  You opened a world of porn to everyone; now pornography has been completely normalised and is 'free at the point of use' or available on subscription or ready to buy – all options open.  Not just explicit porn, in pornographic publications like your own, but titillating images across the media – the entire landscape has been pornified and bunnified.  TV presenters, newsreaders and weathergirls go on screen in what would be bunny costumes if they only had their ears on – sleeveless, low-cut or skin-tight and short in the skirt.  Newspapers too, even the supposedly serious ones, like to lead with a pretty girl in as little as possible; who cares who she is – politician, actress, spy, criminal, murder victim, estate agent of the year – what are her vital statistics?  Your influence, of course, goes beyond the media.  Wherever there were settled social norms and mores, you fought to bring them down, hence your support for 'civil rights' against everything anyone had ever known as normal.  Then there was the womens' movement, you made it what it is today.  How did you do it? 

They have been convinced that abortion, contraception, and being 'a slut' are good for women and things to celebrate on scantily-clad slut walks, while marriage and motherhood represent patriarchal oppression.  I would say 'You couldn't make it up', but you could and did.  In popular culture, morality and decency are nothing more than the butt of jokes, your work too.  How could conservatism withstand the assault?  The libertarianism you preferred supplanted it in so many places.  If you were not quite the Lord of this world, you were its Prince of the permissive, the Jefe of hedonism who handed it over to the rule of vice and sin.  Farewell, Heff Old Sport, your legacy is so strong who knows how long it will be before we feel you have really gone? 

By Prayer Crusader St Philip Howard.

Wednesday, 13 December 2017

Gun Control

The Enemies of Freedom

The shooting in Las Vegas was an incomprehensible tragedy the reason for which was known only to the dead gunman.  Little or nothing more can be said on the subject, but that has not stopped the media from commenting.  They all had much the same thing to say, at least in this country, and almost all of them elsewhere too, certainly the mainstream media, notably the supposedly impartial BBC.  What they had to say was, as we have so often heard from them before, that America should introduce the same kind of gun control that we have suffered here. They present a situation in which the population at large has been disarmed by the State as if it were a norm from which America has deviated when the precise opposite is the case.

The first ten amendments to the US Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights, did not arise by chance and were not written as the result of some strange whim on somebody's part.  They, rather, represent the Constitutional Convention's considered opinion as to what are the most basic rights necessary if a nation is to constitute itself as a free country.  That the right to bear arms was among those rights is testament to its importance as a cornerstone of freedom.  In a very real sense the right to bear arms is the necessary guarantee of any other rights anybody might have. It is, in any case, not so much a right granted by the US Constitution, but simply the normal state of affairs, which is to say that it is a right grounded in natural law as an inseparable corollary of such other rights as the right to establish a family, to hold property, to practise the one true Faith without hindrance and, above all, the right and duty to establish and maintain a system of law and government consonant with divine law.  

In the absence of an acknowledged right to bear arms the State has a monopoly of force.  It may do as it pleases to whomsoever it pleases without fear of effective resistance.  Gun control is, therefore, the hallmark of tyranny.  It is what governments do to those whom it neither likes nor trusts, so what can universal gun control mean if not that those in power dislike and mistrust those they govern, and what kind of government treats the entire populace as its at least potential enemies if not a tyranny?  The history of gun control in the British Isles is that Catholics were its first victims after the overthrow of King James II & VII, then Scotsmen after the rising of 1715, after that universal gun control was introduced for a six year period in one of the universally hated Six Acts passed after the Peterloo massacre by an administration that thought it might well have provoked a revolution. It was then reimposed in 1968, some twenty years into 'the post-War settlement', by which time people had become accustomed to dependence upon the State, and servility in dealing with its various branches.  It is not in any sense natural or normal that the State should confiscate weaponry, it was a parliamentary abuse of power half a century ago that would have been unthinkable twenty or thirty years earlier, much like legalised sodomy and abortion.

If gun control means that the relationship between State and citizenry has gone radically wrong and turned toxic why do the media love it so much?  The mainstream media are not a disparate group of intellectually independent, freethinking news outlets; rather, they exhibit a lemming-like herd mentality on all possible occasions.  Yes, in Britain there are tribal differences in the political allegiances of newspapers; but the opinions advanced by them all are similar on both sides, and where they disagree they do agree on the terms of permissible debate.  The people in the media have a certain view of themselves, both collectively and as individuals; they regard themselves as having a right to run the country, and see the State as being theirs for the taking.  For that to be a reasonable prospect, they need a State that is not simply, as it should be, the political expression of the nation or the people organised for action, but a governmental superstructure run by a political caste to which the media types belong, or see themselves as belonging.  The more powerful the State, the better for those who control or hope to control it.  The greater the separation between the political class and the people, them and us, again the better for these media types who either hope to pull the levers, exercising 'power without responsibility', or else plan a move into the front line of Party politics.  Look how many media people there are in Parliament – and see what low-grade politicians so many of them make, especially the ones “off the telly”!  There are exceptions to that amongst those from the more internationally-minded media groups; but BBC people all, by definition, believe in large, publicly-funded organisations and support them instinctively as well as from self-interest.

Statism is the result of a megalomaniacal hatred of popular freedoms.  The right to bear arms is the ultimate guarantor of freedom, hence the statist media types who aspire to capturing the State and holding it as their private plaything with the entire populace helpless as marionettes forced to dance to their tune hate the right to bear arms with a passion.  They want to make its restoration unthinkable just as they have made abolishing socialised medicine, State-controlled education and planning control or the recriminalisation of abortion and sodomy unthinkable.  They are the enemies of freedom.  They are the enemies of us all.  Reject them and reject the politics of us and them, the politics of exclusion, dividing the political rulers from those they govern.  Demand the restoration of our ancient liberties and, above all, demand a renewal of political life that eliminates the baleful influence of the media so that all the options and opportunities can be explored properly, free from the trivia, gossip, propaganda and outright untruths in which they obscure what should be the terms of our national debate.

Films and TV are the problem not
gun control or the lack of it is the problem.
That debate needs to include cutting the media, as well as the State, down to size.  Without saying anything specific about Las Vegas, there can be no doubt that the reason very many spree killers, especially young people, 'go postal' (if that phrase is still current) is that killing sprees, and shooting in general, are a staple of popular entertainment, in the cinema, on TV and in video games.  A similar link might be made between the growth in sexual assaults, again especially amongst the young, and the prevalence of casual coupling on screen.  Shooting people is everywhere.  That is the problem the media do not address because the news and entertainment media are closely intertwined, more closely even than politics and the media are.  I am not, at this stage, advocating censorship, but I am advocating a voluntary self-restraint on the part of broadcasters and games-writers, and I would strongly suggest that that restraint would be promoted if the news media were to create a climate in which broadcasting such material was regarded as irresponsible and antisocial.  I would certainly support a move into politics by journalists favouring a responsible and wholesome media environment.  Advertisers should be pushed to avoid having their products promoted alongside sex and violence; that would send broadcasters a powerful message.  Use the power in your pockets to boycott the products of companies that support socially damaging television.  Now who in the media fancies repeating that message instead of demanding that people be denied the ability to reap the harvest of nature, and to defend themselves and their property?        

By Prayer Crusader St Philip Howard. 

Tuesday, 28 November 2017

Rainbow flag rules

LGBT totalitarianism

With rainbow adorned livery a Merseyside police car is parked outside Liverpool football club, Liverpool manager wears rainbow coloured laces in his boots, young mascots carry rainbow flags onto the pitch at Bournemouth; their parents and club must be unaware that these poor children could be victims of predatory homosexuals or could even be fooled into believing that they need a sex change very soon. We are now facing a form of totalitarianism not far removed from models of the past where you dare not speak for fear you are shut up or forfeit your livelihood.

Poor children forced to carry the Satanic rainbow flag
They didn't stand a chance!
Under the guise of anti-hate anti-(so called) homophobia, Stonewall have successfully infiltrated football and most sports; their perversion is now fully accepted everywhere. Dare anyone speak out against this perversion anymore? We are now fast approaching the situation where if you dare speak the truth about the LGBT crowd and these perversions you could be in trouble with the law. I use perversion out of love for the sinner and not out of hate; hate the sin, yes, but not the sinner. Therefore we use the word perversion as simply telling it as it is; we must not be cowed into submission, or go with the flow. We must suffer as a sacrifice for sinners, as Our Lady of Fatima asks us. When we are challenged and called haters or worse still "homophobic", we must offer as a sacrifice any abuse we get thrown our way by the LGBT "community" and by those brainwashed by the media. Remember, the real homophobes are those in the media who in their hearts know that all this LGBT promotion is wrong and yet go along with it.

Chelsea's Men Team's captain and their lady's team captain.
Are they about to change places?
Remember what Our Lady of Fatima said to Jacinta: "More souls go to hell for sins of the flesh than for any other reason”. And Sr Lucia said to Cardinal Caffara that "the last battle between Satan and Our Lord will be over the family." Perhaps this battle for the family has already begun and includes the Church herself.

Here is a link to an interesting with Dr Silvana de Mari WHAT IS NATURAL

Thursday, 9 November 2017

BBC's transgender agenda

Who cares? Why care?

The character Dr. Who is to be played by a woman. Does this matter? As the programme is the BBC's flagship show for children, young adults and science fiction fans of all ages, and is sold for broadcast across the world, it must be recognised as a significant transmitter of values; but what values does it transmit? The programme has already introduced its predominantly young audience to homosexual themes in its storylines – one teacher commented that, when they were playing, the children in her school all wanted to be a particular gay or bisexual character – in keeping with the Corporation's long-term project of normalising the queer. This new development is another step in that old project. The concept of Dr. Who is, metaphysically speaking, one of essential or substantial continuity coupled with accidental or incidental change. To have the title character played by a woman, therefore, amounts to an assertion that gender is not an integral element of personal identity; it is merely a surface detail. This goes even further than the transgender agenda which asserts that gender is integral to identity, but is not constrained by biological sex. It may be understood to mean the abolition of gender, but what that really means, or how it will be taken, is more difficult to determine.

It may be understood to mean the abolition of (or, at least, an aspiration to abolish) the social meaning of sexual difference, which would entail an acceptance of the externalities of the male or female body but a rejection of any notion that any social rôle is determined by sex. This has clear implications for clerical and religious life in the long term as the rationale for the male priesthood and the spousal character of the nun's vocation (already undermined by liturgical change) would cease to be comprehensible within a disgendered frame of reference. The concept of marriage, even in a natural let alone a sacramental sense, would also be under threat.

Then again, it might be understood to mean that there are no objective reference points or criteria for the externalities of the person, they may simply be moulded into an expression of a subjective perception of identity. This is an extension of current practice; it amounts to a rejection of the Christian understanding of the person as a totality in whom the soul gives the body its form as its own actualisation in corporeal matter, and of the biblical teaching that our first parents were created as gendered beings with Eve created from the side of Adam. If our bodies are not intrinsic to ourselves how real is the reality we experience through them? That way lies the madness of solipsism and fantasy.

The programme's young viewers will similarly absorb these ideas without articulating them intellectually. They will go on to form their own opinions and take philosophical, theological and political positions on the basis of the things they see and hear now; this will form the substance of their subconscious minds.   

By Prayer Crusader St Philip Howard

Monday, 30 October 2017

500 years of Heresy

Martin Luther's legacy -
Nazism, Same-Sex 'Marriage'
and Halloween

Nazi  propaganda poster from 1933
reads, “Hitler’s fight and Luther’s
teaching are the  best defence
for the German people.”
It's hard to keep Martin Luther out of the news these days especially this week as Thursday 31 October 2017 is the 500th anniversary of his in-famous nailing of his 95 theses to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg. Perhaps it's no surprise that the day he did so also coincides with the ancient pagan festival of Samhain when the spirits of the dead were supposed to visit their homes. As Catholics of course we believe that demons exist as does the Devil and on this day the Devil is often invoked by pagans. Is it more than a coincidence that Luther chose this day to nail his theses to a church?

In doing so he ended up by splitting Christendom and many of those who rallied to his cause had other motives; they wanted to have a divorce, or marry their mistress as in the case of one of his great supporters of "Reform" Philip of Hess who had a concubine, or grab church property and turn it to their own personal secular use.

The sayings of Martin Luther surely condemn him as an anti-Christ.

Here are a few of his "great" theological sayings:
“I look upon God no better than a scoundrel” (ref. Weimar, Vol. 1, Pg. 487. Cf. Table Talk, No. 963). - CUT - For a start is this man even a Christian? Perhaps this is why he chose one of Satan's feasts to nail his theses to a church door?

“I have greater confidence in my wife and my pupils than I have in Christ” (ref. Table Talk, 2397b) - CUT - well no wonder anything goes in Protestant Churches!

"Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tells us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’ Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the woman taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died.” (ref. Trishreden, Weimer Edition, Vol. 2, Pg. 107. – CUT - Just another one of the blasphemous sayings of a man who is regarded as “great reformer”!

“St. Augustine or St. Ambrosius cannot be compared with me.” (ref. Erlangen, Vol. 61, pg. 422) CUT - Modest too.

Martin Luther's love for his fellow man
“To kill a peasant is not murder; it is helping to extinguish the conflagration. Let there be no half measures! Crush them! Cut their throats! Transfix them. Leave no stone unturned! To kill a peasant is to destroy a mad dog!” – “If they say that I am very hard and merciless, mercy be damned. Let whoever can stab, strangle, and kill them like mad dogs” (ref. Erlangen Vol 24, Pg. 294). CUT - well not much Social Justice here either.

Where did the Nazis' hatred of the Jews really come from - Martin Luther?
“The Jews deserve to be hanged on gallows seven times higher than ordinary thieves.” (ref. Weimar, Vol. 53, Pg. 502). CUT - No wonder that Nazism hated the Jews

Martin Luther by Cranach
Look like a bully
“My advice, as I said earlier, is: First, that their synagogues be burned down, and that all who are able toss sulphur and pitch; it would be good if someone could also throw in some hellfire… Second, that all their books– their prayer books, their Talmudic writings, also the entire Bible– be taken from them, not leaving them one leaf, and that these be preserved for those who may be converted…Third, that they be forbidden on pain of death to praise God, to give thanks, to pray, and to teach publicly among us and in our country…Fourth, that they be forbidden to utter the name of God within our hearing. For we cannot with a good conscience listen to this or tolerate it… He who hears this name [God] from a Jew must inform the authorities, or else throw sow dung at him when he sees him and chase him away”. (ref. Martin Luther; On the Jews and Their Lies, translated by Martin H. Bertram, Fortress Press, 1955). CUT - I think that's enough of Luther's views on the Jews but there are lots more where these come from.

What about Luther on the Sanctity of Marriage?
“If the husband is unwilling, there is another who is; if the wife is unwilling, then let the maid come.” (ref. Of Married Life). CUT - Where is the teaching of Jesus on marriage in this godforsaken man and his church?

“The word and work of God is quite clear, viz., that women are made to be either wives or prostitutes.” (ref. On Married Life). CUT - So much for equal rights of women here then, no wonder that God has abandoned Lutheran women "clergy" to Lesbianism.

So what has the father of Protestantism bequeathed the Church?
Well within 10 years of the first Protestant baptism the church in which it took place was closed. The areas that are Protestant in Europe close to where the Reformation started have the lowest Church attendance in the Christian world, the lowest baptisms and are the most secular. The Baltic states are now only 20% Christian the rest are mainly atheist except for Poland which is Catholic and has one of the highest church attendances in the world.

So what about his legacy?
Many say it is because of Luther's almost pathological hatred of the Jews that Protestant northern Germany was so ready to accept the Nazi party and Hitler in opposition to the Catholic German bishops who throughout the ages came to the rescue of the Jews often when ordinary Catholics expressed anger at their disproportionate power and wealth as they believed this was at the expense of ordinary Christians.

Pro-abortion Protestant clergy "bless" abortion clinic 
Today we can see Luther's "fruits" in the constant distancing of Protestant moral theology from the teaching of Christ and His apostles, for example the many Protestant Churches' failure to support the Culture of Life and support Catholics in the prayer vigils outside abortion clinics, which of course Jeremy Corbyn wants to ban by law.

Eva Brunne - Lutheran
"Bishop" of Stockholm
But perhaps the clearest manifestation of Protestant disbelief and rebellion against Christ is the performing of same-sex "marriages" in their churches. Too quick are they to worry about the Zeitgeist and the church coffers. Branches of the Anglican Communion form a case in point, even now ready to acquiesce in the main stream media's brainwashing and marry those who diabolically believe that they were born to be attracted in a sexual way to their own self's sex, this is nothing but Satanic. Despite the Government exemption of Angliancism from performing same-marriages, the Scottish Episcopal Church (part of the Anglican Communion) has already done it. Of course the Lutheran "Church" has been doing this for years. And the Lutheran Bishop of Stockholm Eva Brunne is openly Lesbian, and been in some sort of "union" with another "priestess" of the Lutheran "Church"; this "Church" has blessed this union. However, this is so far from the teaching of Christ and his apostles that it beggars belief. Brunne also proposed the removal of crosses from Stockholm's Harbour church and a direction indicator to Mecca installed so that Muslim visitors will know in which direction they should pray.

However, before we laugh too loud at our fallen Protestant brethren many believe that Pope Francis hopes to take the Catholic Church down the same heretical path!

Monday, 23 October 2017

Anthem Protest

All stand for the National Anthem

In one of his books, a fictionalisation of his illustrious family's history, Péter Esterházy comments on standing up when the National Anthem is played on television: “The National Anthem lifts us out of our everyday lives, raises us into the timelessness of eternity, while television takes us nowhere.” By which he, or the character to whom the words are ascribed, means that, when considered precisely as a symbol of the nation, a National Anthem should inspire in its hearers a feeling of patriotic pride, a dedication to duty, and a selfless love for one's fellow-countrymen.  It should place the individual in relation to the nation, which is a forum in which the virtues developed are exercised.  Patriotism is in itself a real virtue which St. Thomas classifies as a species of justice whereby we demonstrate our gratitude for the fellowship of the community and all the benefits of citizenship, and recognise our community as a wider family, the milieu into which it has pleased divine providence to place us.  The routine mockery and denigration of patriotism and patriots by the BBC, certain other media outlets and elements of the political class indicates not merely their adherence to the revolutionary values of chaos and disorder, but also real rejection of divine goodness and a hatred of the holy in its everyday expression.  Patriotism is a species of piety, the virtue enjoined by the fourth commandment, and it detractors almost invariably oppose religious piety as well as the love of country that is an extension of filial or familial love.  These opponents of patriotism are untrustworthy and dishonest without exception.

Of course, there have been historical situations in which a people found itself alienated from some political regime or other, and looked to some more local loyalty as the basis of its patriotic fervour.  There have also been nations that have failed their people; indeed, a nation state may be judged very strictly according to its effectiveness as a vehicle for individual and collective human development, as St. John Paul II said: “The history of the nation deserves to be adequately appraised in the light of its contribution to the development of man and humanity, to intellect, heart and conscience.”

Those are, however, rare and extraordinary situations.  Ordinarily speaking, to stand for or sing the National Anthem and to honour the flag are the simplest of gestures, so simple as almost to be reflex actions.  The rejection of anthem and flag are not simple acts of political protest in opposition to the Government of the day; it is, rather, a profound rejection of the nation, the people, or at the very least, of the current political expression of the people, the State as currently constituted.  It is, then, a statement of disloyalty, a statement to those who remain loyal that they are held in contempt by those who choose this mark of rejection.  Yes, in the extreme such a gesture may well be justified, when the flag was that of the Spanish Republic, the Derg's Ethiopia, the Soviet Union or the anthem that of East Germany.

Readers are well aware that I do not write in a vacuum, or about hypothetical matters, but in the context of the high profile American protest undertaken in the first instance by sporting figures led by Colin Kaepernick and later by entertainers in support of the Black Lives Matter campaign.  Needless to say, the individuals involved enjoy far more than the basic benefits of citizenship, their fame and vast fortunes are derived solely from the opportunities their lives in America make available to them.  When celebrities choose to participate in such protests they manifest their contempt for the people who made them rich and famous, and their arrogant belief that they are above gratitude, patriotism or fellow-feeling with their local communities.

It is also worth looking closely at the campaign to which they have chosen to attach themselves.  The media routinely present Black Lives Matter as being a group that formed itself spontaneously from the friends and relatives of black people killed by the police, the clear implication of the name being that their opponents believe black lives do not matter.  The truth, however, is that the campaign is organised over social media by individuals connected with the Black Liberation Collective, which regards itself as a latterday reincarnation of the Black Panther Party and movement.  It is insurrectionary and revolutionary in its ideals, but talks about use of Gandhian non-violence as a tactic.  The use of protests in a sporting arena is a deliberate harking back to the 1960s, recalling the clenched fist salutes at the Mexico City Olympics.  The objective is to precipitate a polarisation of society around racial identity in which people of colour separate themselves from white communities and seek self-determinatioin funded by reparations for historic wrongs committed by the colonising or slave-owning powers.  So far, efforts to extend the movement beyond North America have met with only limited success although it is certainly to be found, on university campuses across the United Kingdom and Western Europe, and its rhetoric is routinely employed by student activists inspired (I might almost say 'radicalised') by material posted on the internet.

There is a very long history going back decades, at least to the pro-Soviet campaigners of the inter-War years, of celebrity support for radical causes – remember the Redgraves and Hanoi Jane?  These people are so accustomed to adulation that they really believe they are better than the rest of us, and simple patriotic decency is beneath them.  They succumb to the lure of radicalism because it flatters their vanity; the revolutionaries allow them to think that they can save the world by embracing their cause.  The moneymen who own sporting franchises, record labels and movie studios support them because they bring in the cash.  This has taken place in the current dispute as owners have spoken out in favour of protesting NFL stars, putting profit before principles in a thoroughly contemptible fashion.  Until they are prepared to tell the celebrities where they get off and fire these false Messiahs, it behoves every decent, God-fearing, patriotic believer in a free society to boycott everything they have to offer.  Do not go to the games, the films or the gigs starring these people or produced by the same companies.  Do not buy the products they endorse or others from the same manufacturers.  Show them the contempt that they show you.  Use your buying power to demand the bosses say: “You're fired!”.  Stand by President Trump as he fights this battle on behalf of us all.  Back him in both new and traditional media if moderators and editors will let you.

Péter Esterházy's words that “television takes us nowhere” are very true.  It must be noted that people seldom show respect for broadcasts of the National Anthem, even on occasions when it is broadcast in earnest, as opposed to when it is used in whole or in part in the course of a drama or comedy, such as on flag days, at the close of HM The Queen's Christmas address, or during relays from concerts and sporting events.  The radio and television are merely part of the furniture, and people relate to them as such, they have them on whilst they go about whatever they happen to be doing, so they do not treat a broadcast of the National Anthem as the real thing.  Yet the National Anthem is always the real thing, a priest saying Mass anywhere is always the real thing, prayer is always the real thing; anything that “raises us into the timelessness of eternity” and places before us the eternal verities of being, goodness, truth and beauty is always the real thing because these are the things of God.  The National Anthem speaks to us of virtue, and virtue manifests goodness; always, therefore, stand for it, and thank God for an earthly homeland that reflects, in some poor measure, our heavenly true Patria.           

By Prayer Crusader St Philip Howard 

Thursday, 19 October 2017

The liberal media and the Antifa

Whitewashing the Black Bloc

 There have been so many lies told, and truths concealed, that it is difficult to know where to start, but I should begin with the protest against the attack on Confederate monuments. The vast majority of the protesters had no connection with extremists of any kind, and they hate the fact that such protests attract extremist elements.  They are, overwhelmingly, good people, Southern patriots defending their heritage and the ideals for which the Confederacy stood – a traditionary rather than a positivist approach to law, recognition of divine authority, limited government, subsidiarity in the form of States' rights, and a preference for civilisation over modernity and technological progress. There is no connection between such ideals, which are grounded in the British and European heritage of the South, and Nazism; nothing could be further from the Southern spirit than Hitler's dictatorship. As for white supremacism, I must admit that the dishonesty on that point pre-dates the modern media as it began with the lie that the War Between the States was fought over slavery when Lincoln was very clear in saying that he would be happy not to free any of the slaves if the Union could be saved, indeed he guaranteed that slave States loyal to the Union could retain slavery for all time if they pleased. It was fought over States' rights, and it took place at a time when black people living in the North suffered random violence on a regular basis.  Mrs. Beecher Stowe wrote truthfully in describing abolitionists who could not stand the sight of a black, not even a child.  Many black people, including the Pentecostal Protestant rapper Kanye West, are happy to rally behind Southern symbols as emblems of rebellion against irreligious so-called 'progress'. When it comes to antisemitism, Jews and Catholics enjoyed full social and civic equality in the Confederate South, and both were represented in President Davis' cabinet long before a Jew held executive office in New England. I might add that, just as there is no connection between most of the protesters and any of these ideologies, neither is there any link between President Trump and that sort of thing either.  How can a man who has made his Jewish son-in-law one of his key advisers be accused of Nazism or antisemitism?  He has also promoted people of colour within his administration and as ambassadors.

No different than a
So if they have little to do with the spirit of the South, why do neo-Nazis and white supremacists attend such protests?  To be frank, people like that really do like a fight, but generally only with their opposite numbers in far left outfits, much as football hooligans enjoy fighting each other, but seldom attack the general public. They know that wherever anybody stands up for anything that is good, and noble, and honest, and true the organised far left will go on the attack, and the leftists have no compunction, none at all, about whom they go for. That brings me to the other side of the media dishonesty in this matter.  The media have a blind spot when it comes to the far left, and only ever report on them when they absolutely cannot be ignored, such as when they conduct Mayday mayhem city riots or attack the venues of G7 meetings.  If the protesters were mainly local Southern patriots defending their heritage with a small fringe of undesirable types, the Antifa crowd were the precise opposite with a fringe of decent local people who saw the neo-Nazis and wanted to  demonstrate against their unSouthern character and a large body of violent thugs armed to the teeth.  As President Trump said, “You had troublemakers. You see them come with the black outfits, and the helmets, and the baseball bats.... you got a lot of bad people”. These people are Antifa. Have you ever heard of them before?  Well done if you have!  The mainstream media never report on their activities.  The first time I have ever heard the word Antifa pass the lips of a BBC reporter was in the reports of the events at Charlottesville, but these people have been active for years.  They are black flag anarchists acting in concert with Trotskyites, 'orthodox' Marxists and other less ideologically distinctive leftists as a popular front of the kind described in communist literature as the form of organisation they should adopt when in a minority so as to maximise their capacity for violent destruction – just think of the Spanish War, and the various militias on the Republican side, that is what you see in Antifa, all of them together, without the complications of the Moscow connection, and they would all be proud of that comparison, proud to be compared with the red horde whose reign of terror came so close to destroying a great Christian nation, proud to be named alongside the people whose atrocities against the Church rivalled those of Nero and Diocletian.  Antifa are the black bloc in the thick of the fighting at the city riots and G7 meetings I mentioned. They, and the various groups from which their attack mobs are assembled, have a vast and grossly under-reported record of rioting, violence and intimidation to their name; they are not simply 'anti-fascist' as their name implies, they call anything they dislike 'fascism' then proceed to attack it.  As Antifa operations are planned by different groups, they choose a wide variety of targets, indeed the Antifa name has been used both by people associated with the murderous terror-gangs of the Jewish Defense League and also by radical anti-Zionists. Sometimes they go for the political meetings of the ordinary political Parties, sometimes for honest journalists whenever they manage to track one down. Sometimes they go for normal, decent people standing up for the things in which they believe.  Sometimes, just sometimes, they do find some real live fascists to attack, but they always fight back, which is a bit less fun for the brave boys and girls in black!  Mainly, however, they go for academics and student societies, partly because there are so many universities around the developed world that some of them can stage an outrage somewhere every week and send footage to their comrades, and partly because action on campus serves to recruit intellectually vulnerable undergrads to their nihilistic project of tearing down everything we know as Christian civilisation.  The attack on intellectual and academic freedom, and on free speech in general, and the fact that Antifa is not a membership organisation, but one to which individuals and groups simply adhere at will, betrays its origins in the international (somewhat ideologically impure) Maoist drive to imitate the Red Guard of the Cultural Revolution. Antifa is a modern manifestation of the spirit of '68, with tactics, techniques and local organisations of various kinds having been handed down and developed from generation to generation, at least from the 1960s.  Antifa is the spirit of nihilism and, therefore, they hate us because in Christ and His Church there is life and the fullness thereof.  Its members appear elsewhere under other labels such as Femen, We Are the Majority, Pro-Choice, Black Liberation Collective, Black Lives Matter etc., etc., but they are easily recognised by their violence and hatred for all that we love and call decent: modesty, morality, faith, hope, charity, patiotism, social and cultural integrity, truth, the family, childhood innocence, unborn life – they have attacked public demonstrations in favour of them all, or else they have attacked lectures, prayer groups and student meetings on these themes.

How bad is the problem? It is very difficult to say because, as President Trump so rightly says the  mainstream media are so dishonest.  At the national level, in America, and here in our country, they have only just admitted the existence of Antifa and they will now ignore it, if at all possible, in the hope that the general public forgets all about it.  It was only after the events at Charlottesville that the Gray Lady deigned to report on the $100,000s worth of damage Antifa did in a Molotov cocktail raid on UC Berkeley six months beforehand (and they call it news!).  The attempt to take down the statue of General Lee (who, incidentally, emancipated his own family slaves) in Charlottesville is being undertaken through legal means; but elsewhere, during the Antifa raid on Duke University, for example, monuments have been taken down or blown up by the masked terrorist gangs. Straight after Charlottesville they rioted in Phoenix, Arizona, Boston, Berkeley again and Portland, OR.  On our side of the ocean there have been fewer bombs and fires, but a lot of broken windows, furniture and equipment of various kinds; the Oxford and Cambridge Unions have been targetted, as has the LSE in another throwback to the '60s, plus a whole range of other, less well known institutions that have failed, or whose student societies have failed, to comply with Antifa's demand that certain speakers should always be denied a platform, and certain opinions never be heard.  There have also been clashes with real fascists up and down the country.  Nationalists, fascists, 'identarians' and similar sorts of racist activist have taken to holding closed door meetings in hotels and conference centres across the country under the name London, South-West, Yorkshire etc. Forum.  We all know what we think about such people, and it is not the business of CUT to defend them; but, as President Trump noted with respect to the Charlottesville protesters, they are acting in an entirely lawful manner.  Anything offensive that they might have to say is said only to people who will not take offence as they are only talking to each other.  Antifa customarily gathers a mainly masked mob (I imagine they follow the fascists on Facebook to find out where to go!) outside the venue, drawing in any decent, honest anti-fascists they can lure, smash all the windows, throw in smoke bombs, thunderflashes or fireworks, depending on what they happen to have to hand, then set on the fascists when they come out, fight until the police turn up, then run away, presumably leaving the fascists liable for the glaziers' bill.  How much of this have you heard before?  If you read a local newspaper, you might well have read a report or two, but they never seem to make it onto the BBC or into even the Daily Mirror, sister paper of so many local titles, or the Daily Mail which used to share ownership of them with Trinity Mirror. 

So why would journalists want to sit on these stories, they are really great news stories, what could be more newsworthy than domestic terrorists using violence to further their agenda, and blackmailing people to keep their enemies out of sight and earshot, and 'trolling' people on the internet with threats to life and limb?  Just look at who these silent journalists are, and who their friends are. Curious how shy some of them are when it comes to publishing details about themselves, isn't it?  Next time the BBC goes on strike just take a good look at the photos, or look at some old pictures of last time. You will see official placards from whichever union organised the strike, but also a number of others representing the caucuses of political Parties organised within the union – the same unions, with the same Party groupings, also operate in other media outlets, as do print unions unrepresented at the BBC – look at them, Socialist Labour Party, TUSC (many of them used to be in Militant), Socialist Workers Party, Workers Revolutionary Party all had placards on show a few years back.  These impartial reporters, from our politically neutral State broadcaster, these members of its editorial, production and technical staff are the comrades in arms of the low life scum on whose activities they so frequently fail to report, or whom they misrepresent as fine, upstanding citizens.  This is the massive problem – who knows the scale of it – that nobody ever cares to mention of hard left, far left, alt-left, and any other kind of left anybody cares to mention, infiltrating the media in Britain, America and right across Europe. In the past, of course, there was the question of loyalty to a foreign power; now those people have no loyalty at all, except perhaps to each other.  As for the American media, well who knows anything at all about those people?  Why would a writer for the New Yorker complain about the police standing calmly by as a planned protest with a permit marched in an orderly and peaceable fashion, and talk about “black people angry at the murder of teenagers” being “met with tanks and riot gear” when she must know that known militants in the Black Panther tradition from the Black Liberation Collective have been active in promoting the Black Lives Matter campaign?  We can guess, sure we can guess, and we can look to the past: to the fine example of Ed Murrow, Edgar Snow or John Reed, communist stooges and fellow-travellers.  Frankly, until Congress gets around to empanelling an UnAmerican Activities Committee to investigate the media, guessing is all anyone can do. Until then, the best anyone can do, either side of 'the Pond', is to stand with President Trump in calling out both the dishonest media and the alt-left domestic terrorists; he speaks for all of us, and deserves our support in this. Call on Amber Rudd to proscribe Antifa as an organisation that uses and advocates the use of violence to achieve political ends.  Fly the flag – the Stars and Bars, or the Battle Flag of the Southern Cross.  Always remember that the fight for truth is ultimately a fight for Christ, Who is the very Truth eternal and incarnate.  The fight for civilisation, culture, history and tradition is the fight for the ideal of a Christian society formed after the mind of our Lord.  The fight against the atheistic materialism at the heart of the rogues gallery that goes to make up Antifa is a fight for our humanity made in the image of God and the fullness of life lived in and through His Son.  This is the fight that matters – Prayer Crusaders, Comrades, to arms!

By Prayer Crusader St Philip Howard

The Sword of General Lee

Forth from its scabbard, pure and bright,
  Flashed the sword of Lee!
Far in the front of the deadly fight,
High o'er the brave in the cause of Right
Its stainless sheen, like a beacon light,
  Led us to Victory!

Out of its scabbard, where, full long,
  It slumbered peacefully,
Roused from its rest by the battle's song,
Shielding the feeble, smiting the strong,
Guarding the right, avenging the wrong,
  Gleamed the sword of Lee!

Forth from its scabbard, high in the air
  Beneath Virginia's sky--
And they who saw it gleaming there,
And knew who bore it, knelt to swear
That where that sword led they would dare
  To follow--and to die!

Out of its scabbard! Never hand
  Waved sword from stain as free,
Nor purer sword led braver band,
Nor braver bled for a brighter land,
Nor brighter land had a cause so grand,
  Nor cause a chief like Lee!
Forth from its scabbard! How we prayed
  That sword might victor be;
And when our triumph was delayed,
And many a heart grew sore afraid,
We still hoped on while gleamed the blade
  Of noble Robert Lee!

Forth from its scabbard all in vain
  Bright flashed the sword of Lee;
'Tis shrouded now in its sheath again,
It sleeps the sleep of our noble slain,
Defeated, yet without stain,
  Proudly and peacefully!

       - Fr Joseph Abram Ryan

Friday, 29 September 2017

Feast of St Michael 2017

The Feast of St Michael the Archangel

On this day the feast of one of the patron saints of CUT and the Prayer Crusade, St Michael the Archangel, there are two things we could like you to pay for. One is the loss of a Prayer Crusader under the patronage of St Maria Goretti who died last night after a long illness. He died after saying the Angelus with family around him. May he rest in peace.

The other is Poland as we would like you all to join the Polish people from now until the 7th of October. the feast of Our Lady of the Rosary. It is the date upon which the Christian fleet defeated the Ottomans in the battle of Lepanto. There are expected to be over a million Poles take part to try and protect Poland from the spread of Islam.

Tuesday, 12 September 2017

What the MSM really hate

The Main Stream Media really Hate a Catholic who stands by Catholic Teachings

Whenever there is Main Stream Media interest in anything Catholic it's usually if some member of the hierarchy gets involved in a scandal, or denies Catholic Teaching or some scandal involving a priest. Apart from that they're not really very interested, or they do not want to draw attention to anything Catholic if it's good. Perhaps that's why we are so very rarely talked about. However, if a prominent Catholic like a MP who has been linked with the PM's job affirms traditional Catholic values, the vitriolic knives are out with a vengeance. The BBC, ITV, Sky, the lot all go for it - this orthodox Catholic must be killed off before he becomes attractive! Rees-Mogg is a case in point, we can't have this true Catholic believer, and more to the point, seen to be believing in real Catholic teachings given a positive press, he must be belittled and scorned and pulled off his perch and the sooner the better!

yuck logo here is copyright Huffpost!
nothing to do with us - thank heaven.
I often take a look at the Huffton hissy-fit Post to gauge the impact of anything Catholic that's in the news - and they didn't disappoint, the anger the vitriol and misinformation, the sheer mendacity of it all was truly exceptional, if fact I think they outdid themselves.

Take this article for instance from the aforesaid Huffpost:

Jacob Rees-Mogg’s Views On Abortion And Same Sex Marriage ‘Wouldn’t Be So Acceptable Coming From A Muslim' Huffpost 

The cowardice here is truly risible they won't tell the actual truth about Muslim terror because they know that some Muslims will do a Charlie Hebdo on them.

I like the part 'Wouldn't Be So Acceptable Coming From A Muslim' in fact this would really only be said by a moderate Muslim, Muslims are in fact and action, far more extreme.  Perhaps the real reason why Muslims can't be bothered to get involved in the pro-life and the anti-same-sex marriage debate is that they see both of these issues as being ways the West is killing itself off?

Here is a link to some Hissy Huffy  classic 'attack Rees-Mogg at all costs' posts for you all to savour, but only read if you are really keen on bitter herbs and have a very strong stomach.

Fox TV positive TV drama series about the Devil
And here I should not try to be funny for the member of CUT under the patronage of St Anthony has asked me to alert you all to a new TV series from Fox TV on the Devil, yes you got it they are portraying him in a positive charming way, he asks to protest to Fox, here is a link Fox TV

With prayers - Prayer Crusader St Philomena

Friday, 8 September 2017

Ress Mogg and the media

Are YOU a Nazi?

Or just an ordinary orthodox Christian?

Piers Morgan - Photo Wikipedia 
Perhaps more to the point is Piers Morgan an ordinary Catholic or is he a Nazi?

Modern media presenters like Nicky Campbell like to label everyone who is opposed to LGBTQ infiltration into every aspect of our lives as far Right. Likewise if you dare to suggest that the more Muslims there are in a country the more likelihood there will be terror attacks you have fascist tendencies. Therefore we have to ask you - are you a Nazi?

I hear the response now,  'no, we're just orthodox Catholics, just ordinary family men and women trying to find our way through the minefield of modern day life.'

The ultra liberal media browbeat a traditional Catholic politician
It is perhaps a useful lesson for us all to learn especially as we are trying to study and understand why the media is so militant towards Christians and especially Catholics. For to occupy the public sphere whilst professing traditional Christian values is giving the media hacks a larger stick than usual to browbeat the supporters of decency.

A lesson in media aggression
This article and interview regarding Catholic politician Jacob Rees-Mogg is a case in point. Having been recently linked with a challenge for the leadership of the Conservative party and therefore prime minister, he went on Good Morning Britain to talk about Brexit but may have had some inkling that he would be ambushed, and pointed out to Piers Morgan that as he is a Catholic he takes the teachings of the Catholic Church seriously. Piers Morgan retorted that he is also a Catholic but does not agree with the Catholic Church! Therefore Morgan is a heretic and should not be allowed Holy Communion of course. Many think Rees-Mogg was not properly prepared to face such fierce questioning. Dr Joseph Shaw makes some important suggestions for Catholics in the public sphere when answering questions put by the secular media. They need to be rehearsed in answering the 'bloody question' like the Jesuits who could be asked  (viz.: if the Spaniards invaded to topple Queen Elizabeth, who would you support?)

Jacob Rees-Mogg
It is probable that Rees-Mogg was continuing an off camera or pre-interview briefing with the producer and presenters - he knew he was in for it but what else could he do but assert the teachings of the Church to the obvious heretic and hypocrite "Catholic" Piers Morgan, therefore exposing Morgan, but he could have done it better. Nevertheless we should be grateful to Rees-Mogg for opening the debate again on abortion and same-sex marriage in politics and on the media. The howling wolves of the mainstream media are out to get him. This probably shows that they are not so secure in their liberal world after all.

 I do pray and hope that Piers Morgan has some humility and repents.

Wednesday, 30 August 2017

Pray for Artists

Praying with the Holy Father

August. This month the Holy Father asks us to pray “that artists of our time, through their ingenuity, may help everyone discover the beauty of creation”. What does Pope Francis mean by asking us to pray thus? Quite clearly, in the first instance, he means to tell us what he expects of the arts, returning to a theme raised in the first year of his pontificate: “In every age the Church has called upon the arts to give expression to the beauty of her faith and to proclaim the gospel message of the grandeur of God's creation, the dignity of human beings made in His image and likeness, and the power of Christ's death and resurrection to bring redemption and rebirth to a world touched by the tragedy of sin and death.”

Pope Francis meeting Martin Scorsese
An art in which beauty is concealed rather than revealed, faith is denigrated, creation is belittled in comparison with technological progress, humanity is degraded, and the spiritual knowledge necessary to the Christian encounter with the mystery of our redemption and that of the entire created order is resolutely excluded in favour of an atheistic materialism is not an art worthy of the name; it is an art we should shun for the good of our souls. An art which is not “an expression of our hope in the coming of that Kingdom whose beauty, harmony and peace are the expectation of every human heart and the inspiration of mankind's highest artistic aspirations” is unworthy of the dignity of those created in the image of the divine.

As is well known, the Holy Father does not watch television.

by Prayer Crusader St Philip Howard

Sunday, 27 August 2017

BBC continue to undermine Christian values

The Carnival of Perversion

On TV and on our streets - a time to act

"Gay" agenda undermines modern civilisation

I still get exasperated by the continued infiltration of the "Gay" agenda into every aspect of our modern "civilisation", and I gasp an incredulous little laugh in amazement at every gain the LGBTQ lobby make. As faithful Christians, - those with traditional family values, who believe in honesty, decency and natural order -  retreat from the public sphere, I shake my head, as we are the bad guys now, we are the ones labelled evil, right wing, homophobic, queer bashers, even though we are just Christians and only want to save souls!

One day we will all answer to the Lord our God

However, I can't help laughing when I hear of another weird gender bending innovation. I'm one of those who take it seriously, because (a weak and poor Christian though I am) I take my faith seriously and if Sacred Scripture and the teachings of the Church call these acts grave sins then what am I do? Furthermore I believe these sins if unconfessed before death will lead to eternal damnation, therefore when I die and come before the Lord, He will ask me what did I do to try and save these souls, was I lacking in love and charity for these poor sinners - did I sacrifice enough for them.

Prayer Crusaders called to action, letters to your council, Your MP and to the BBC

Our Birmingham prayer crusader under the patronage of St. Bernadette has asked us what can we do as there is a Birmingham Pride as well. She wants us to write letters of polite protest. So please write a polite letter to your local council leader/mayor if there is a "Gay pride parade" in your town saying that you do object to such public displays in your town. Likewise to your MP. And last but not least to the BBC because of their Gay Britannia season. So, Prayer Crusaders, you are called to action and to prayer to help save your city and your country.

The child abusing LGBTQ lobby

Perhaps even worse than this is the LGBTQ lobby targeting of the young. This, more than anything, is the most evil thing they are doing. There are gender neutral schools, where calling boys, boys and girls, girls is now against the rules; boys can now wear dresses to school and many secondary schools have LGBTQ clubs (in my day it was chess or cricket). Catholic friends of mine are reporting that among other parents same sex dating among teenagers is becoming normal and it's getting common to see teenage boys holding hands, likewise girls. The poor creatures are trying out same sex, sex just to see if they are homosexual, so brainwashed by the media have they become. Things are getting so bad that it's almost time to pray the prayer of Abraham. As he did for Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18), so should we for London and Birmingham and most of the cities of the Western world.

Cardinal Napier attacks the BBC (At least Africa will stand up against the Western Media) See link

Thursday, 10 August 2017

The BBC and the NHS Part 2

Casualties of 'Casualty'

Of course, with us the contraceptive mentality is combined with the moral and psychological effects of socialism. Socialism removes the ability to exercise choice and responsibility; as I have already said, it prevents psychological growth to adult maturity. It creates dependency, which in turn creates a sense of fear as people are made incapable of self-sufficiency and, like fretful children, demand protection from the vicissitudes of life. We have become the society that chose security over liberty and lost both. How often do our media echo with the cry for something to be done, as they call for more laws, more wars, more Government action, more gun control, more cameras, more taxes, more spending, more anything except more Christian freedom, more truth, more virtue or more self-restraint? Socialised medicine in particular created the state of dependency that brought us to our current condition as the country with the most CCTV cameras, where thousands of telecommunications interception warrants are issued every week, where every public authority can hire detectives and enlist paid informants (including children) or use advanced technology to enforce any regulation, and where an unarmed public lives in fear of terrorism and crime. Try looking up “garbage gestapo” or “town hall stasi” for news stories to illustrate this.

Beyond the political level this dependency “makes it much more difficult for” man “to recognise his dignity as a person” (Centesimus Annus 13) because the loss of responsibility destroys the sense of moral agency. Under socialism, people believe the materialistic claims inherent in socialism because they cease to be aware of their own capacity to exercise free will as 'autonomous subjects of moral decisions'. From this it follows naturally that conscience and the sense of sin are diminished as people feel themselves to be moved inexorably by circumstances beyond their control. Yet conscience, which is “strictly related to human freedom” is “the most secret core and sanctuary of a man” and “constitutes the basis of man's interior dignity and, at the same time, of his relationship to God” (Vatican II, quoted Reconciliatio et Poenitentia 18); and as that relationship constitutes our humanity, we are truly dehumanised by this diminution in the sense of sin.

When did you last hear a British campaigner mention compulsory complicity?

The socialist institutions, with the NHS foremost among them, are structures of sin, meaning that they institutionalise injustice in such a way that no individual feels responsible for the way in which the system works, and compulsory complicity ceases to have moral meaning for anybody. The USCCB has rightly been criticised for having suggested that there should be legally mandated universal health care; but, faced with the reality of Obamacare, the American bishops have fulfilled their teaching office in campaigning vigorously against forcing anybody to fund contraception, abortion or sex-change operations – when did you last hear a British campaigner mention compulsory complicity? When the USCCB says that people and businesses should not be forced against their consciences to fund immoral procedures, they remind us that to fund such procedures as contraception, abortion, sterilisation and gender reassignment should be against our consciences. We should feel morally violated by being made to pay for these offences against God and mankind, we should feel righteous outrage against the bi-partisan socialist regime that forces us to do so; and we must pray to overcome the complacency and hardness of heart that allows us to tolerate the perpetration of these horrors in our midst, in our name, and with our unthinking collusion. Omnípotens et mitíssime Deus, qui sitiénti pópulo fontem vivéntis aquae de petra produxísti: educ de cordis nostri durítia lácrimas compunctiónis; ut peccáta nostra plángere valeámus, remissionémque eórum, te miseránte, mereámur accípere.  Pius XI noted that “the sin of the century is the loss of the sense of sin”, and St. John Paul II wrote on the fact that all are affected by any sin at all; how much more true is that when we are actually made party to the offence andare  blinded to its horror? “With greater or lesser violence, with greater or lesser harm, every sin has repercussions on the entire ecclesial body and the whole human family” (Reconciliatio et Poenitentia 16).

A final consideration must be the relationship between the NHS and migration. Whether for economic or socio-political reasons many individuals and families find migration to be an unfortunate necessity; but migration is never desirable, it always means broken families and broken communities at the point of origin and may well mean significant social disruption at the destination. To solicit or encourage unnecessary migration is, therefore, always and invariably an act of injustice. The welfare state was always intended to be funded, at least in part, by migrant workers, initially from the colonies. The system is a pyramid (or Ponzi) scheme, which is sustainable only when a sizeable proportion of those paying into the scheme receives nothing from it; it was always hoped that that proportion would be supplied by migrants who would return home before they made significant claims, but those hopes were thwarted by the migrants' having to immigrate permanently as they were unable to earn enough here to go back home and live in luxury as the Attlee administration promised the Windrush generation would be possible. Beyond that structural feature of the welfare state, the NHS has always relied on immigrant labour. This amounts to asking less wealthy and less developed nations to subsidise health care in this country, and to live with the social costs of emigration. The greatest resource of a nation, and the source of its wealth is its population and their talents; to lure educated workers here is, therefore, an act of injustice against their countries of origin. That is even more true when countries shape their national economies with a view to exporting people and reaping remittance income from them instead of developing their domestic resources.

What can we do? To start with, we should register our objection to socialised medicine every time the media say that 'everybody loves the NHS'; we should tell newly elected or re-elected Members of Parliament that we want change; and, if (having paid our taxes at the confiscatory rates the system demands) our means allow, we should disengage from the system. Pro-life and pro-family organisations should demand transition to a health care delivery model that fosters integral human development by promoting personal, family and social responsibility, and has due regard to the integrity of family structures – it means abolition of the current system, but will not frighten electoral candidates and will enable them to be held to account if they declare themselves to be pro-life. Finally, never forget to remind everybody you know that what they see on TV is written by people with personal and political agendas to push.    

By Prayer Crusader St Philip Howard