Homophile New York Times puts Pope Leo on Notice

A warning shot? The New York Times and Pope Leo XIV

The end of the grace period

30. June 2025

A note by Giuseppe Nardi

Last Saturday, June 28, the New York Times published two articles (here and here) that can hardly be dismissed as randomly placed routine articles. On the eve of the Solemnity of the Apostles Peter and Paul – the outer feast day of the papacy and the visible unity of the Ecclesia militans – the leading American media outlet placed the new pope at the center of a double abuse analysis. Is the grace period over?

The symbolism of the time of publication was probably deliberately chosen: On the very day on which Pope Leo XIV personally awarded the palliums to new metropolitans for the first time again – a ritual that had receded into the background under Francis and particularly emphasizes the unity of the Church sub Petro – the New York Times placed a story that at least scratches this very authority, if not questioned.
Francis – spared, Leo – under supervision?

While Pope Francis has been treated with kid gloves by the influential globalist media for years – one thinks, for example, of the conspicuous restraint in the McCarrick scandal – the tone towards his successor is noticeably cooler, more analytical, more distant. In both articles, Robert Francis Prevost, today's Pope Leo XIV, is evaluated on the basis of two cases of abuse from his time as bishop of Chiclayo in Peru (2014-2020): In one, he is praised for his decisive action against the conservative Sodalicio de Vida Cristiana – even celebrated as a "hero" of the victims. In the other case, on the other hand, which took place within his own diocese, he is accused of a lack of consistency and weak supervision. He had acted "formally according to the rules", but this is presented as insufficient.

The contrasts are sharp: on the one hand, the courageous churchman who opposes an influential, conservative clergy – on the other hand, the administrator, under whose jurisdiction accused priests were allowed to continue to celebrate in public. Today's Pope as Diocesan Shepherd – sometimes consistent, sometimes hesitant? The New York Times does not give a clear answer, but focuses on contradictions.

Ambivalence as a message of the New York Times

The title already hints at it: It's not about a reckoning, but about a kind of test. The articles construct an ambivalent picture: once with integrity, sometimes dubious – a man who has yet to earn his trust. But whose trust? That of the abuse victims? Or that of the global, liberal elites, whose agenda Francis supported for long stretches? (See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.)

Curia Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo summed up the attitude of Leo's predecessor in 2017 as follows, when he praised the Bergoglian pontificate with regard to the globalist establishment:

"Humanity is experiencing a magical moment: for the first time, the Magisterium of the Pope and that of the UN coincide."

Whether compatibility with the Magisterium of the Church was still given was apparently of secondary importance to Sanchez Sorondo.

Instrument or partner?

Was Francis a like-minded person – or a welcome lever to involve the Church in a globalist agenda? The Catholic Church, with its unique, globally structured order, is viewed by parts of this establishment primarily as functional: useful as long as it serves the agenda – annoying as soon as it resists.

So how is Pope Leo XIV rated? The New York Times does not practice open hostility. But it checks, observes, doubts – and sends a signal with a fine needle. The new pope no longer moves in the shelter of benevolent leniency, but is subject to reservations. The tone is professional but cool. The invitation is clear: it will be measured – not only by the standards of the Church, but by the expectations of an agenda that has long since ceased to act in a hidden way.

__

A Bishop Embraces the Holy Father in the Name of All Clerics Present

Primacy of the Love of the Sacred Heart of Jesus--Osuna

“Strengthen yourselves, ye sons of Benjamin, in the midst of Jerusalem, and sound the trumpet in Thecua, and set up the standard over Bethacarem: for evil is seen out of the north, and a great destruction. I have likened the daughter of Sion to a beautiful and delicate woman. The shepherds shall come to her with their flocks: they have pitched their tents against her round about: every one shall feed them that are under his hand. Prepare ye war against her: arise, and let us go up at midday.” (Jer. 6:1-4)

Bethacarem means “house of their lamb,” and it is the house of Israel from which the Lamb of God went out, which had come to save the sheep which had died there; and because Christ was signally sent to this people of Israel, the Holy Spirit says to first put the flag of His love over it, to remedy the evil which comes from aquilon, which is a northeast wind, cold and sharp, which does much harm, and has the shape of the chilling of charity, which brought Christ from heaven to the earth for its remedy; since you should know that just as at the second advent, which will be at the judgment, the charity of many will be chilly, so it was in the first advent, and it was for this that the Lord was born at midnight and in the middle of winter, with ice, which signified the chilling of charity which there was in those times, which Christ came to remedy. So it is written that the boy was born very lively, chosen among thousands, to remedy the lack of love, later beginning to shed blood, which is a very warm liquid; and later when he began to preach, he chided the lack of love, and in this way hoisted the flag of charity over the house of Israel and began to fight the battle of love in the first way, by flatteries and rewards, doing favors and graces to all; and for this reason the prophet compared this holy soul of Christ to the beautiful woman and the refined daughter of Zion; to which, because of her graciousness, the shepherds with their flocks were to come, who are the apostles, with the provinces of the world, which, while Christ lived, they converted to Him.

“Shepherds” in Hebrew means (according to The Gloss) either pastors of lovers; which is very fitting for the apostles, who for Christ, the standard of love, where made lovers of the Holy Spirit, Who gave Him the flag. And I say that they were made His lovers: on the one hand, because the thing which Christ most preached to the apostles was love; and on the other hand, because, telling them many and very great things about the Holy Spirit, He enamored them of Him; and, therefore, the apostles set up their tabernacles around Christ, living and being, and remaining with Him all their lives, and they sanctified the battle of love with much holiness with which they sought to better love, and they desired to ascend to the midday of glory with the wife, where love is in its highest fervor, where the divine sun infuses the most ardent rays to perpetually ignite the loves. The greatest consolation which the most blessed soul of Christ received in this world, was to see that the number of the lovers of God multiplied, and in this he was consoled and was favored as the Standard when he sees that many fighters arrive at his flag; and, therefore, the Canticle (Canticle of Canticles 2:5-6) said that they should garland it with flowers and surround it with apples, because He was sick in love. The flowers which appeared in the land of the Church at that time were new lovers of God which came to join Christ; and the apples, which are of more substance, were those who were more advanced in love, with which the Standard of love was more pleased. Furthermore, it says that the left hand of His beloved the Holy Spirit is under His head, because Christ rested in the love of neighbor, symbolized by the left hand, and night and day he exercised all of his senses in it. And, in Christ, the left hand is called love of neighbor, not because there is anything sinister in it, but rather that this most perfect love of neighbor which He had, made him suffer many human evils and disasters and countless fatigues; but the Holy Spirit put them under his head, giving Him rest in them, because total love, when it works for the beloved, rests.

The right hand of the Holy Spirit, which embraced the soul of Christ, was the love of God, which was in Him at the sovereign level at which it now is; and because the love of God was exposed the way that the “possessors” of heaven have it, it says that it embraces Him; because, when we embrace someone with an arm, we make the hand return to that from which it came, which is our own body, and make a full circuit around; and in this way the love which the soul of Christ had for God, made the full circle, which is the most fitting image which goes back to its beginning, because that most sacred soul upon leaving from God by creation, turned back to Him by love with greater breadth of heart, in order better to love, than could be said: and the love of God embraced her (His soul), later turning her to Himself, without making it wait in hope as to the other souls; and because the soul cannot embrace God without being embraced by God, nor God perfectly embrace the soul without being embraced by her; because love which is not corresponded is not perfect love.

In the words said above from the Canticle of Canticles you should notice four grades of supreme love; the first is a complete drunkenness which this most blessed soul reached entering the cellar of love, where there are as many ways of love as there are of wines, and all the conditions of wine you will find in love. The second grade is the prison with which the lover gives himself over in the soul and takes complete jurisdiction over her so that no other love may any more have any place, nor may the soul know any other Lord, except that one that has her captive by violent charity. The third grade of love is the sickness that the love itself causes by the vehement desire and fervor to look for lovers that they may help it to love the One Who has her totally captive. The last and final grade of love is laziness within the arms of the Lover, which is reached after many toils and after the consummatum est, when it finally says (Luke 23:46) In manus tuas commendo spiritum meum. Then Jesus the great Lover rested within the arms of His Beloved, which were open awaiting His soul for it to rest from the toilsome love of our redemption, leaving the flag of love stained with His blood, which is the Cross, so that all of the warriors that would fix themselves to it should wait while the true Lover, conquering Himself unto death, conquers the Beloved, and all of the victory which He achieves is itself an obligation which He puts on the one for whom he conquered Himself.

So it is that while we see the flag of love stained with the blood of Jesus Christ, it remains for us, as persons obligated and defeated by such strong love, to open our hearts to also shed our blood in the battle field of love.

Ley de amor santo, c. XIII, Francisco de Osuna

Sts. Peter and Paul Panegyric: Pillars and Protectors of Rome

Panegyric on Saints Peter and Paul: Pillars and Protectors of Rome

Rome, the city of Saint Peter and Saint Paul, is the Seat of the Church of Christ!, chosen by emperors and by the will of Heaven; crowned with laurel and with the palm of martyrdom. Rome was consecrated and sanctified by the blood of the holy apostles— Peter and Paul, the twin pillars upon which the universal Church stands!

Peter, the Fisherman, to whom the keys of the Kingdom were entrusted—rock immovable, foundation of faith! Paul, the Apostle of the nations, fire of the Word, whose sword divides truth from error! These two, joined by divine commission, labored, suffered, and triumphed in Her, eternal Rome, sealing their testimony with their blood, that She, the Church of Rome, might reign forever in the Spirit of Christ.

From the day their voices fell silent in martyrdom, their presence has never left the walls of Rome. They dwell more gloriously now, on invisible thrones set above Her altars, vigilant sentinels of Her fate. Where Caesar once ruled by force, Peter now reigns by faith in Jesus Christ; where legions once trampled, Paul now strides with the gospel of Christ. Through the long centuries of trial—barbarian, plague, heresy, fire, sword—their intercession has sustained Her, Rome, The Mother of Churches!

Remember that most radiant moment, when Attila the Hun, the barbarian threat, attacked Rome like the wrath of the devil. What was Rome's hope then? Her armies scattered, her palaces trembling—but her shepherd, Saint Leo the Great, went out to meet the enemy and stood firm. He met the tyrant, not alone, but borne up by the prayers of the Church and the guardianship of the two apostolic princes, the pillars of Rome.

As Saint Leo spoke with meek majesty, the eyes of Attila saw a frightful sight: he saw Saint Peter and Saint Paul, clothed in heavenly armor, swords drawn, faces aflame with the justice of God, flanking the Supreme Pontiff as protectors of the fold. Leo’s words, and the silent powerful presence of the Apostles, turned the enemy back. The Pope, Saint Leo the Great, saved Rome—not by gold, nor by treaties, nor by the force of arms—but by the intercession of her holy patrons, Peter and Paul.

Her heavenly patrons have thus always labored for the eternal City, the See of Peter, for the successor of Saint Peter, and for the apostolic succession of the Church. Every Pontiff who sits upon Peter’s throne is flanked by the defending care of Saint Peter and Paul; every danger faced by the Church is borne beneath their mighty protection. They who once walked Rome’s streets in humility, and there shed their blood for the Church, they now reign over Her with power from heaven, guardians of the truth, correctors of error, friends of peace.

With joy and trembling hope, we honor Saints Peter and Paul—apostles of the past, heavenly princes of the present. We stand proudly on the Rock of Peter and heed the voice that speaks from his Chair, the voice of His Holiness Pope Leo XIV, for he speaks in the name of Saint Peter, the Vicar of Christ, God Himself. As long as Peter holds the keys of right judgment, and Paul holds the sword of truth, the gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church of Saint Peter and Saint Paul!

O Holy Apostles, pillars of the Church and protectors of Rome, defend your Church today, the Church of Rome, in our Roman Pontiff Pope Leo XIV and every Pope, until Christ returns in glory!

Leo XIV: Natural Law is the Compass for Politics

ADDRESS OF POPE LEO XIV TO MEMBERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL INTER-PARLIAMENTARY UNION

Hall of Benediction Saturday, 21 June 2025

___

Madam President of the Council of Ministers, and Mr President of the Chamber of Deputies of the Republic of Italy, Madam President and Mr Secretary General of the Inter-Parliamentary Union,
Distinguished Representatives of Academic Institutions and Religious Leaders,

I am pleased that we can meet in the context of the Conference of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, during the present Jubilee of Governments. I offer a warm greeting to the members of the Delegations coming from sixty-eight different countries, and, in a particular way, the Presidents of the respective Parliamentary Institutions.

Politics has rightly been defined as “the highest form of charity,” quoting Pope Pius XI (Address to the Italian Catholic University Federation, 18 December 1927). Indeed, if we consider the service that political life renders to society and to the common good, it can truly be seen as an act of Christian love, which is never simply a theory, but always a concrete sign and witness of God’s constant concern for the good of our human family (cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, 176-192).

In this regard, I would like to share with you this morning three considerations that I deem important in the current cultural context.

The first concerns your responsibility to promote and protect, independent of any special interest, the good of the community, the common good, particularly by defending the vulnerable and the marginalized. This would mean, for example, working to overcome the unacceptable disproportion between the immense wealth concentrated in the hands of a few and the world’s poor (cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum Novarum, 15 May 1891, 1). Those who live in extreme conditions cry out to make their voices heard, and often find no ears willing to hear their plea. This imbalance generates situations of persistent injustice, which readily lead to violence and, sooner or later, to the tragedy of war. Sound politics, on the other hand, by promoting the equitable distribution of resources, can offer an effective service to harmony and peace both domestically and internationally.

My second reflection has to do with religious freedom and interreligious dialogue. This area has taken on greater significance in the present time, and political life can achieve much by encouraging the conditions for there to be authentic religious freedom and that a respectful and constructive encounter between different religious communities may develop. Belief in God, with the positive values that derive from it, is an immense source of goodness and truth for the lives of individuals and communities. Saint Augustine spoke of the need to pass from amor sui – egotistic, myopic and destructive self-love – to amor Dei – a free and generous love, grounded in God and leading to the gift of self. That passage, he taught, is essential for the building of the civitas Dei, a society whose fundamental law is charity (cf. De Civitate Dei, XIV, 28).

In order to have a shared point of reference in political activity, and not exclude a priori any consideration of the transcendent in decision-making processes, it would be helpful to seek an element that unites everyone. To this end, an essential reference point is the natural law, written not by human hands, but acknowledged as valid in all times and places, and finding its most plausible and convincing argument in nature itself. In the words of Cicero, already an authoritative exponent of this law in antiquity, I quote from De Re Publica: “Natural law is right reason, in accordance with nature, universal, constant and eternal, which with its commands, invites us to do what is right and with its prohibitions deters us from evil... No change may be made to this law, nor may any part of it be removed, nor can it be abolished altogether; neither by the Senate nor by the people, can we free ourselves from it, nor is it necessary to seek its commentator or interpreter. And there shall be no law in Rome, none in Athens, none now, none later; but one eternal and unchanging law shall govern all peoples at all times” (III, 22).

Natural law, which is universally valid apart from and above other more debatable beliefs, constitutes the compass by which to take our bearings in legislating and acting, particularly on the delicate and pressing ethical issues that, today more than in the past, regard personal life and privacy.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, approved and proclaimed by the United Nations on 10 December 1948, is now part of humanity’s cultural heritage. That text, which is always relevant, can contribute greatly to placing the human person, in his or her inviolable integrity, at the foundation of the quest for truth, thus restoring dignity to those who do not feel respected in their inmost being and in the dictates of their conscience.

This brings us to a third consideration. The degree of civilization attained in our world and the goals you are charged to achieve are now facing a major challenge in the form of artificial intelligence. This is a development that will certainly be of great help to society, provided that its employment does not undermine the identity and dignity of the human person and his or her fundamental freedoms. In particular, it must not be forgotten that artificial intelligence functions as a tool for the good of human beings, not to diminish them, not to replace them. What is emerging is in fact a significant challenge, one that calls for great attention and foresight in order to project, also in the context of new scenarios, healthy, fair and sound lifestyles, especially for the good of younger generations.

Our personal life has greater value than any algorithm, and social relationships require spaces for development that far transcend the limited patterns that any soulless machine can pre-package. Let us not forget that, while able to store millions of data points and answer many questions in a matter of seconds, artificial intelligence remains equipped with a “static memory” that is in no way comparable to that of human beings. Our memory, on the other hand, is creative, dynamic, generative, capable of uniting past, present and future in a lively and fruitful search for meaning, with all the ethical and existential implications that this entails (cf. Francis, Address to the G7 Session on Artificial Intelligence, 14 June 2024).

Politics cannot ignore a challenge of this magnitude. On the contrary, it is called to respond to many citizens who rightly look with both confidence and concern at the issues raised by this new digital culture.

During the Jubilee of the Year 2000, Saint John Paul II indicated Saint Thomas More as a witness for political leaders to revere and an intercessor under whose protection to place their work. Sir Thomas More was a man faithful to his civic responsibilities, a perfect servant of the state precisely because of his faith, which led him to view politics not as a profession but as a mission for the spread of truth and goodness. He “placed his public activity at the service of the person, especially the weak and poor; he handled social disputes with an exquisite sense of justice; he protected the family and defended it with strenuous commitment; and he promoted the integral education of youth” (Apostolic Letter E Sancti Thomae Mori, 31 October 2000, 4). The courage he showed by his readiness to sacrifice his life rather than betray the truth makes him, also for us today, a martyr for freedom and for the primacy of conscience. May his example be a source of inspiration and guidance for each of you!

Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen, I thank you for your visit. I offer my prayerful good wishes for your work and upon you and your loved ones, I invoke God’s abundant blessings.

Thank you to all of you. God’s blessings upon you and your work. Thank you.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Preamble

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in cooperation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, therefore, The General Assembly, Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

Article I All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2 Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3 Everyone has the right to life, liberty and the security of person.

Article 4 No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5 No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6 Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7 All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8 Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9 No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10 Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11 1. Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence. 2. No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Article 12 No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 13 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State. 2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Article 14 1. Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. 2. This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 15 1. Everyone has the right to a nationality. 2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Article 16 1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. 2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses. 3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article 17 1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. 2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Article 18 Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance. Article

19 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. 2. No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21 1. Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives. 2. Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country. 3. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Article 22 Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Article 23 1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment. 2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work. 3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection. 4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 24 Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25 1. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. 2. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26 1. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit. 2. Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace. 3. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

Article 27 1. Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits. 2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Article 28 Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Article 29 1. Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible. 2. In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society. 3. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30 Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

CHARTER OF THE RIGHTS OF THE FAMILY

Presented by the Holy See to all persons, institutions and authorities concerned with the mission of the family in today's world October 22, 1983

Preamble

Considering that:

A. The rights of the person, even though they are expressed as rights of the individual, have a fundamental social dimension which finds an innate and vital expression in the family;

B. the family is based on marriage, that intimate union of life in complementarity between a man and a woman which is constituted in the freely contracted and publicly expressed indissoluble bond of matrimony and is open to the transmission of life;

C. marriage is the natural institution to which the mission of transmitting life is exclusively entrusted;

D. the family, a natural society, exists prior to the State or any other community, and possesses inherent rights which are inalienable;

E. the family constitutes, much more than a mere juridical, social and economic unit, a community of love and solidarity, which is uniquely suited to teach and transmit cultural, ethical, social, spiritual and religious values, essential for the development and well-being of its own members and of society.

F. the family is the place where different generations come together and help one another to grow in human wisdom and to harmonize the rights of individuals with other demands of social life;

G. the family and society, which are mutually linked by vital and organic bonds, have a complementary function in the defense and advancement of the good of every person and of humanity;

H. the experience of different cultures throughout history has shown the need for society to recognize and defend the institution of the family;

I. society, and in a particular manner the State and International Organizations, must protect the family through measures of a political, economic, social and juridical character, which aim at consolidating the unity and stability of the family so that it can exercise its specific function;

J. the rights, the fundamental needs, the well-being and the values of the family, even though they are progressively safeguarded in some cases, are often ignored and not rarely undermined by laws, institutions and socio-economic programs;

K. many families are forced to live in situations of poverty which prevent them from carrying out their role with dignity;

L. the Catholic Church, aware that the good of the person, of society and of the Church herself passes by way of the family, has always held it part of her mission to proclaim to all the plan of God instilled in human nature concerning marriage and the family, to promote these two institutions and to defend them against all those who attack them;

M. the Synod of Bishops celebrated in 1980 explicitly recommended that a Charter of the Rights of the Family be drawn up and circulated to all concerned;

the Holy See, having consulted the Bishops' Conferences, now presents this "Charter of the Rights of the Family" and urges all States, International Organizations, and all interested Institutions and persons to promote respect for these rights, and to secure their effective recognition and observance.

Article 1

All persons have the right to the free choice of their state of life and thus to marry and establish a family or to remain single.

a) Every man and every woman, having reached marriageable age and having the necessary capacity, has the right to marry and establish a family without any discrimination whatsoever; legal restrictions to the exercise of this right, whether they be of a permanent or temporary nature, can be introduced only when they are required by grave and objective demands of the institution of marriage itself and its social and public significance; they must respect in all cases the dignity and the fundamental rights of the person.

b) Those who wish to marry and establish a family have the right to expect from society the moral, educational, social and economic conditions which will enable them to exercise their right to marry in all maturity and responsibility.

c) The institutional value of marriage should be upheld by the public authorities; the situation of non-married couples must not be placed on the same level as marriage duly contracted. Article

2 Marriage cannot be contracted except by free and full consent duly expressed by the spouses.

a) With due respect for the traditional role of the families in certain cultures in guiding the decision of their children, all pressure which would impede the choice of a specific person as spouse is to be avoided.

b) The future spouses have the right to their religious liberty. Therefore to impose as a prior condition for marriage a denial of faith or a profession of faith which is contrary to conscience, constitutes a violation of this right.

c) The spouses, in the natural complementarity which exists between man and woman, enjoy the same dignity and equal rights regarding the marriage.

Article 3

The spouses have the inalienable right to found a family and to decide on the spacing of births and the number of children to be born, taking into full consideration their duties towards themselves, their children already born, the family and society, in a just hierarchy of values and in accordance with the objective moral order which excludes recourse to contraception, sterilization and abortion.

a) The activities of public authorities and private organizations which attempt in any way to limit the freedom of couples in deciding about their children constitute a grave offense against human dignity and justice.

b) In international relations, economic aid for the advancement of peoples must not be conditioned on acceptance of programs of contraception, sterilization or abortion.

c) The family has a right to assistance by society in the bearing and rearing of children. Those married couples who have a large family have a right to adequate aid and should not be subjected to discrimination.

Article 4

Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception.

a) Abortion is a direct violation of the fundamental right to life of the human being.

b) Respect of the dignity of the human being excludes all experimental manipulation or exploitation of the human embryo.

c) All interventions on the genetic heritage of the human person that are not aimed at correcting anomalies constitute a violation of the right to bodily integrity and contradict the good of the family.

d) Children, both before and after birth, have the right to special protection and assistance, as do their mothers during pregnancy and for a reasonable period of time after childbirth.

e) All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, enjoy the same right to social protection, with a view to their integral personal development.

f) Orphans or children who are deprived of the assistance of their parents or guardians must receive particular protection on the part of society. The State, with regard to foster-care or adoption, must provide legislation which assists suitable families to welcome into their homes children who are in need of permanent or temporary care. This legislation must, at the same time, respect the natural rights of the parents.

g) Children who are handicapped have the right to find in the home and the school an environment suitable to their human development.

Article 5

Since they have conferred life on their children, parents have the original, primary and inalienable right to educate them; hence they must be acknowledged as the first and foremost educators of their children.

a) Parents have the right to educate their children in conformity with their moral and religious convictions, taking into account the cultural traditions of the family which favor the good and the dignity of the child; they should also receive from society the necessary aid and assistance to perform their educational role properly.

b) Parents have the right to freely choose schools or other means necessary to educate their children in keeping with their convictions. Public authorities must ensure that public subsidies are so allocated that parents are truly free to exercise this right without incurring unjust burdens. Parents should not have to sustain, directly or indirectly, extra charges which would deny or unjustly limit the exercise of this freedom.

c) Parents have the right to ensure that their children are not compelled to attend classes which are not in agreement with their own moral and religious convictions. In particular, sex education is a basic right of the parents and must always be carried out under their close supervision, whether at home or in educational centers chosen and controlled by them.

d) The rights of parents are violated when a compulsory system of education is imposed by the State from which all religious formation is excluded.

e) The primary right of parents to educate their children must be upheld in all forms of collaboration between parents, teachers and school authorities, and particularly in forms of participation designed to give citizens a voice in the functioning of schools and in the formulation and implementation of educational policies.

f) The family has the right to expect that the means of social communication will be positive instruments for the building up of society, and will reinforce the fundamental values of the family. At the same time the family has the right to be adequately protected, especially with regard to its youngest members, from the negative effects and misuse of the mass media.

Article 6

The family has the right to exist and to progress as a family.

a) Public authorities must respect and foster the dignity, lawful independence, privacy, integrity and stability of every family.

b) Divorce attacks the very institution of marriage and of the family.

c) The extended family system, where it exists, should be held in esteem and helped to carry out better its traditional role of solidarity and mutual assistance, while at the same time respecting the rights of the nuclear family and the personal dignity of each member.

Article 7

Every family has the right to live freely its own domestic religious life under the guidance of the parents, as well as the right to profess publicly and to propagate the faith, to take part in public worship and in freely chosen programs of religious instruction, without suffering discrimination.

Article 8

The family has the right to exercise its social and political function in the construction of society.

a) Families have the right to form associations with other families and institutions, in order to fulfill the family's role suitably and effectively, as well as to protect the rights, foster the good and represent the interests of the family.

b) On the economic, social, juridical and cultural levels, the rightful role of families and family associations must be recognized in the planning and development of programs which touch on family life.

Article 9

Families have the right to be able to rely on an adequate family policy on the part of public authorities in the juridical, economic, social and fiscal domains, without any discrimination whatsoever.

a) Families have the right to economic conditions which assure them a standard of living appropriate to their dignity and full development. They should not be impeded from acquiring and maintaining private possessions which would favor stable family life; the laws concerning inheritance or transmission of property must respect the needs and rights of family members.

b) Families have the right to measures in the social domain which take into account their needs, especially in the event of the premature death of one or both parents, of the abandonment of one of the spouses, of accident, or sickness or invalidity, in the case of unemployment, or whenever the family has to bear extra burdens on behalf of its members for reasons of old age, physical or mental handicaps or the education of children.

c) The elderly have the right to find within their own family or, when this is not possible, in suitable institutions, an environment which will enable them to live their later years of life in serenity while pursuing those activities which are compatible with their age and which enable them to participate in social life.

d) The rights and necessities of the family, and especially the value of family unity, must be taken into consideration in penal legislation and policy, in such a way that a detainee remains in contact with his or her family and that the family is adequately sustained during the period of detention.

Article 10

Families have a right to a social and economic order in which the organization of work permits the members to live together, and does not hinder the unity, well-being, health and the stability of the family, while offering also the possibility of wholesome recreation.

a) Remuneration for work must be sufficient for establishing and maintaining a family with dignity, either through a suitable salary, called a "family wage," or through other social measures such as family allowances or the remuneration of the work in the home of one of the parents; it should be such that mothers will not be obliged to work outside the home to the detriment of family life and especially of the education of the children.

b) The work of the mother in the home must be recognized and respected because of its value for the family and for society.

Article 11

The family has the right to decent housing, fitting for family life and commensurate to the number of the members, in a physical environment that provides the basic services for the life of the family and the community.

Article 12

The families of migrants have the right to the same protection as that accorded other families.

a) The families of immigrants have the right to respect for their own culture and to receive support and assistance towards their integration into the community to which they contribute.

b) Emigrant workers have the right to see their family united as soon as possible.

c) Refugees have the right to the assistance of public authorities and International Organizations in facilitating the reunion of their families.

Sources and References

A. "Rerum novarum", no. 9; "Gaudium et spes", no. 24.
B. "Pacem in terris", Part 1; "Gaudium et spes", nos. 48 and 50;
"Familiaris consortio", no. 19; "Codex Iuris Canonici", no. 1056.
C. "Gaudium et spes", no. 50; "Humanae vitae", no. 12; "Familiaris consortio", no. 28.
D. "Rerum novarum", nos. 9 and 10; "Familiaris consortio", no. 45.
E. "Familiaris consortio", no. 43.
F. "Gaudium et spes", no. 52; "Familiaris consortio", no. 21.
G. "Gaudium et spes", no. 52; "Familiaris consortio", nos. 42 and 45.
I. "Familiaris consortio", no. 45.
J. "Familiaris consortio", nos. 46.
K. "Familiaris consortio", nos. 6 and 77.
L. "Familiaris consortio", nos. 3 and 46.
M. "Familiaris consortio", no. 46.

art. 1
"Rerum novarum", no. 9; "Pacem in terris", Part 1; "Gaudium et spes", no. 26; "Universal Declaration of Human Rights", no. 16, 1.
a) "Codes Iuris Canonici", nos. 1058 and 1077; "Universal Declaration", no. 16, 1.
b) "Gaudium et spes", no. 52, "Familiaris consortio", no. 81.
c) "Gaudium et spes", no. 52; "Familiaris consortio", nos. 81 and 82.

art. 2
"Gaudium et spes", no. 52; "Codex Iuris Canonici", no. 1057; "Universal Declaration", nos. 16, 2.
a) "Gaudium et spes", no. 52.
b) "Dignitatis humanae", no. 6.
c) "Gaudium et spes", no. 49; "Familiaris consortio", nos. 19 and 22; "Codex Iuris Canonici", no. 1135; "Universal Declaration", no. 16, 1.

art. 3
"Populorum progressio", no. 37; Gaudium et spes, nos. 50 and 87; Humanae vitae, no. 10; Familiaris consortio, nos. 30 and 46.
a) Familiaris consortio, no. 30.
b) Familiaris consortio, no. 30.
c) Gaudium et spes, no. 50.

art. 4
Gaudium et spes, no. 51; Familiaris consortio, no. 26.
a) Humanae vitae, no. 14; Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration on Procured Abortion, November 18, 1974; Familiaris consortio, no. 30.
b) Pope John Paul II, Address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, October 23, 1982.
d) Universal Declaration, no. 25, 2; Convention on the Rights of the Child, Preamble and no. 4.
e) Universal Declaration, no. 25, 2.
f) Familiaris consortio, no. 41.
g) Familiaris consortio, no. 77.

art. 5
Divini Illius Magistri, nos. 27-34; Gravissimum educationis, no. 3; Familiaris consortio, no. 36; Codex Iuris Canonici, nos. 793 and 1136.
a) Familiaris consortio, no. 46.
b) Gravissimum educationis, no. 7; Dignitatis humanae, no. 5; Pope John Paul II, Religious Freedom and the Helsinki Final Act
(Letter to the Heads of State of the nations which signed the Helsinki Final Act), 4b; Familiaris consortio, no. 40; Codex Iuris Canonici, no. 797.
c) Dignitatis humanae, no. 5; Familiaris consortio, nos. 37 and 40.
d) Dignitatis humanae, no. 5; Familiaris consortio, no. 40.
e) Familiaris consortio, no. 40; Codex Iuris Canonici, no. 796.
f) Pope Paul VI, Message for the Third World Communications Day, 1969; Familiaris consortio, no. 76.

art. 6

Familiaris consortio, no. 46.
a) Rerum novarum, no. 10; Familiaris consortio, no. 46; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, no. 17.
b) Gaudium et spes, nos. 48 and 50.

art. 7
Dignitatis humanae, no. 5; Religious Freedom and the Helsinki Final Act, 4b; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, no. 18.

art. 8
Familiaris consortio, nos. 44 and 48.
a) Apostolicam actuositatem, no. 11; Familiaris consortio, nos. 46 and 72.
b) Familiaris consortio, nos. 44 and 45.

art. 9
Laborem exercens, nos. 10 and 19; Familiaris consortio, no. 45; Universal Declaration, nos. 16, 3 and 22; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, nos. 10, 1.
a) Mater et magistra, Part II; Laborem exercens, no. 10; Familiaris consortio, no. 45; Universal Declaration, nos. 22 and 25; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 7, a, ii.
b) Familiaris consortio,nos. 45 and 46; Universal Declaration, no. 25, 1; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, nos. 9, 10, 1 and 10, 2.
c) Gaudium et spes, no. 52; Familiaris consortio, no. 27.

art. 10
Laborem exercens, no. 19; Familiaris consortio, no. 77; Universal Declaration, no. 23, 3.
a) Laborem exercens, no. 19; Familiaris consortio, nos. 23 and 81.
b) Familiaris consortio, no. 23.

art. 11
Apostolicam actuositatem, no. 8; Familiaris consortio, no. 81; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, nos. 11, 1.

art. 12
Familiaris consortio, no. 77; European Social Charter, 19.

Mons. Georg Gänswein: A week after the death of Pope Francis

RATZINGER FOUNDATION / UNIVERSITY OF NAVARRA

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE

Evangelization.
Believing, thinking, and celebrating
according to
J. Ratzinger / Benedict XVI
Pamplona (Spain)
April 28-30, 2025

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30, 2025
Location: Aula Magna, Central Building

10:00 Final report: Faith, Reason and University Mons. Gänswein, Nunzio apostolico in Lituania, Estonia e Lettonia
Evangelizzazione. L'eredità di Joseph Ratzinger/Benedetto XVI

The Church's primary missionary task is the announcement of Christ and of His Gospel, together with the subsidiary functions of human, social and cultural promotion of all people. The very heart of our task always remains: to make God known, Who comes to us in Christ, and gives us the Gospel which makes of us the Church and the People of God.

Liberation theology is first of all liberation, by Jesus Christ, from slavery to the devil and to sin.

The Gospel presupposes culture; it does not substitute it but molds it.

Without God man--image of God--does not know himself. And a society without God does not succeed in finding the rules of justice and of peace and becomes a slave to the structures of sin, the central nucleus of which is precisely the ignorance of God.

Religions cannot save nor liberate. Only Jesus Christ can accomplish this salvation and liberation from the devil and from sin. Only the Truth in Person can fully liberate from evil and from sin. The encounter with Christ, inseparable from the Church, is the fundamental event for the liberation and the healing of all persons and all peoples. Reconciliation and peace with God in Jesus Christ is even the necessary condition to build a reconciled society, a society of justice and peace. And it is therefore necessary to broaden the perspectives...for an efficacious and lasting salvation.

__

Also of interest is this address by Tracey Rowland
Prof. Tracey Rowland, Notre Dame University, Australia
Milestones along the Path of Modernity’s Closure of the Rational Mind

Here is last year's lecture by her on the thought of Joseph Ratzinger, "Defending Hellenism," Notre Dame University. Go to minute 26:20.

"Christianity is the religion of the Logos."

Lust is Lust

That is my response to the banner I saw yesterday at a suburban Massachusetts Protestant Meeting House which read "Love is Love" under the title "All are Welcome" and the rainbow flag.

How many sins are committed in the name of love? The head of Saint John the Baptist, whose birthday we celebrate today, is a testimony to the inviolability of marriage under God: "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife" was his divine testimony to the king, who, impelled by the wicked women, had John beheaded, in the name of adultery! In the name of "love," lust!

Saint John the Baptism, defender of marriage made by God, pray for us!

All are indeed welcome, to convert, believe in Jesus Christ and change their lives, by His saving grace, to live a life of holiness, which includes chastity, according to one's state in life.

Forgive Thy Enemies: Christ with Judas

**What the Evangelist tells us about Judas—as Saint Thomas notes—is meant to lay bare the depth of his malice: how, surrounded by so many signs of love, he could still harden his heart. And it also reveals to us the boundless charity of Jesus Christ, who did not cease to burn with love, even in the presence of His enemy. For Christ, as man, grieved more over the loss of Judas than over His own death upon the cross.

Still, He did not hold back His acts of love: He washed Judas’s feet, just as He did the others’; He gave him His very Body; He even gently warned him, hoping he might choose another path.

But we—so small in love—if we see one enemy among our friends, we grow cold, lose our joy, and cannot eat in peace. Because of one, the rest suffer the loss of our friendship. Yet Christ’s love, burning unquenchably to the very end, was not dimmed by Judas’s presence or his known betrayal.

O blazing Heart of Jesus—lover even of those who hate You—who could fathom the depth of Your love, as You entrusted Yourself, consecrated, into the dark soul of Judas, Your betrayer? And still You saw that even this did not soften his heart. You Yourself urged him to go and do what he must, for he had already given You over to sin when he received You.

And the Evangelist tells us more: that Jesus knew—all-sufficient Redeemer that He is—what He came to redeem. He knew that all things would pass into the eternal possession of the Father, through the victory He would win over the devil."**
__

Another, more literal version.

**"What the Evangelist says about Judas is, as Saint Thomas notes, to emphasize his great malice: that amid so many signs of love, he could still harden his heart. And also to show us the charity of Jesus Christ, who did not cease to burn with the highest degree of love, even though Judas, his enemy, was present—one whose loss Christ, as man, grieved more than his own death on the cross. For this reason, He did not fail to perform for him the works of charity He did for the others: washing his feet, giving him His body, and admonishing him to make a better decision.

We are so lacking in love that, if we see one of our enemies among our friends, we cannot show joy or eat a bite with pleasure; on account of one, the others lose our friendly companionship. But since the love of Christ was burning to the utmost until the end, neither the presence nor the known malice of Judas could extinguish it.

Oh most ardent Jesus, lover even of your enemies! Who could fathom with what depths of charity you gave yourself, consecrated, into the malign entrails of Judas your betrayer—and then saw that not even this appeased his malice? You yourself urged him to go and hand you over to the Jews, for he had already handed you over to his sins when he received you.

The Evangelist also says that Jesus knew, as the all-sufficient Redeemer—who must know what He redeems—that all things were to pass into the everlasting possession of His Father by overcoming the devil."**
__

A poetic translation.

The Charity of Christ in the Face of Judas
(A poetic rendering of Fray Francisco de Osuna, Ley del Amor Santo, c. 12)

What the Evangelist tells us of Judas,
as Saint Thomas notes with piercing eye,
is told not lightly—
but to magnify the depth of his betrayal:
that amid such overflowing signs of love,
he could still choose to harden.

And more than that:
it is to show the burning heart of Christ,
whose love blazed even with His enemy beside Him—
a love unshaken,
a fire unquenched
though the shadow of betrayal stood so near.

Christ saw him, Judas,
and still the flame did not falter.
He grieved—yes—
not for the nails or scourge,
not for His blood that would be spilled,
but for the loss of this soul,
who sat at His side
and would not be saved.

And so, what did He do?
Did He draw back, close His hands,
withhold His grace?
No—
He knelt,
and washed the dust from his betrayer’s feet,
as He did for the others.
He broke the bread—no, more—
He gave His Body,
His very self, into that soul
already turned toward darkness.
He pleaded still,
that he might choose again.

But we,
so thin in love,
so quick to close our hearts,
cannot even sit in peace
when one we do not trust is near.
Our joy is gone,
our table cold—
for one enemy among our friends,
we withhold ourselves from all.

Not so with Christ.
His love burned bright
even in the face of treachery.
Judas sat beside Him,
and Christ, knowing all,
still gave and gave.

O burning Heart,
O Jesus,
lover even of Your enemies—
who can imagine
with what divine tenderness
You entered the foul soul of the one
who would hand You over?

You gave Yourself, consecrated,
to the one who conspired to destroy You.
You placed Your purity
within the hands of death.
And You saw—
saw that it did not soften him.

Still, You urged him,
gently,
to go and do what he would do.
For he had already given You away
when he received You
with a heart closed to grace.

And John, the Evangelist,
tells us more:
that You, Jesus,
Redeemer complete and wise,
knew what You came to redeem—
and who.

You knew that all
would pass into the hands of the Father,
that through this hour of hell,
this night of loss,
the kingdom would be won.
You knew
that the devil would be cast down,
and what seemed defeat
would become
eternal possession.
__

Another version.

The Charity of Christ
(after Fray Francisco de Osuna, c. 12)

What the Evangelist wrote of Judas,
Saint Thomas saw with sharpened eye—
that one so cloaked in signs of love
could still grow cold, and harden.

It shows the weight of malice deep,
but more, it shows the heart of Christ:
a flame that would not cease to burn,
though Judas sat beside Him.
His enemy—yet still
He washed his feet,
He broke the Bread,
He warned him gently,
even then.

O Christ!
You grieved not more
for thorns, nor scourge, nor cross,
than for that soul
you could not win.
And still you loved,
and still you gave,
and still you burned.

But we—how quickly
love grows thin.
If one we fear or hate draws near,
we turn from all,
lose peace,
and chill the room.

Yet You,
whose love was fierce and full
until the final breath,
were not undone
by Judas' gaze,
nor by the evil in his heart.

O burning Jesus,
lover of your foes—
who can conceive
what love it took
to place Yourself,
so consecrated,
in the cruel hands,
the darker soul
of him who sold You?

You saw
his heart unmoved,
his will unbowed—
and still, You urged him on.
For he had handed You away
long before the silver clinked,
when he received You in his sin.

And You, Redeemer,
all-complete,
knew what You came to do:
to wrest all things
from demon's grip
and place them
in the Father's hands
forever.
__

Here in metered verse.

The Charity of Christ toward Judas
(Iambic Pentameter Couplets)

The Evangelist reveals of Judas’ mind,
As Saint Thomas notes, a malice hard to find.
Though countless signs of love were given there,
His heart grew cold, immersed in dark despair.

Yet Christ, whose love no hatred could outlast,
Burned fiercer still, though Judas stood so fast.
His enemy was near, but love did blaze,
More grieved He Judas’ loss than cross or praise.

He washed his feet, as with the rest He’d done,
And gave His Body—the eternal Son.
He warned him gently to amend his way,
But Judas chose the night instead of day.

We, frail in love, if one foe joins our band,
Can scarce delight or break bread hand in hand.
For one we shun the rest withhold their grace,
Yet Christ embraced His traitor face to face.

O flaming Heart! Who loves His foes so deep,
Entrusting self to Judas’ soul to keep.
Though consecrated in that traitor’s hold,
Not even this could make his spirit fold.

He urged him on to do what must be done,
For Judas sold not Christ—but sin begun.
And Jesus knew, all-knowing Redeemer bright,
That through this dark, He’d claim eternal right.

All things would pass to God, His Father true,
By conquest won o’er Satan’s foulest crew.
Thus, in this hour, though pain and loss were vast,
The love of Christ endured and holds us fast.
__
Here is the Spanish original.

Lo que el evangelista dice de Judas es, como nota Santo Tomás, para nos encarecer su gran malicia, que entre tantas señales de amor se pudo endurecer; y aun también para nos intimar la caridad de Jesucristo, que no dejó de arder en sumo grado, aunque estaba Judas su enemigo presente, de cuya pérdida Cristo hombre más se dolió que de su propia muerte de cruz; y por esto no dejó de le hacer las obras de caridad que hizo a los otros lavándoles los pies y dándole su cuerpo y amonestándole que tomase mejor acuerdo. Nosotros somos de tan poco amor, que, si vemos un enemigo nuestro entre nuestros amigos, no podemos mostrar placer ni comer bocado con gana, sino que por uno pierden los otros nuestra comunicable familiaridad; mas como el amor de Cristo estuviese ardiendo a más no poder hasta la fin, no pudo impedirlo la presencia ni malicia conocida de Judas. ¡Oh ardientísimo Jesús, amador aún de tus enemigos, ¿quién pudiese pensar con qué entrañas de caridad te entregaste tú consagrado en las entrañas malignas de Judas tu entregador, y después viste que ni por esto se aplacó su malicia? Tú mismo le diste prisa para que ya te entregase a los judíos, pues que ya te había entregado a tus pecados cuando te recibió. Dice más el evangelista que sabía Jesús, como suficientísimo Redentor que ha de saber lo que redimoe, que eran todas las cosas que su Padre había de tomar en perdurable posesión venciendo al demonio. --Fray Francisco de Osuna, Ley del Amor Santo, c. 12
__

La Caridad de Cristo y la Traición de Judas
(al estilo de Lope de Vega)

Lo que dice el Santo Evangelio,
como apunta el sabio Tomás,
es mostrar la gran maldad
que en Judas hubo, sin desvío:

que entre el amor más tibio
se endureció su vil faz,
pues vio la gracia sin más,
mas cerró su alma al auxilio.

Mas Cristo, fuego sin reposo,
que en su amor nada apaga,
arde en medio del traidor,

y aunque cruel, y aunque horroroso,
le dio su Cuerpo, 
y lavó sus pies con amor.

¡Oh ardiente amor sin medida,
que al enemigo abrazas,
y en sus entrañas negrizas
te das por su caída!

No huimos como hacemos
los hombres, frágiles almas,
que si un enemigo asoma,
la amistad se vuelve helada.

Mas Cristo, lleno de gracia,
supo que en Judas moraba
un pecado tan profundo,
que el mismo infierno pesa;

y aun así su amor no cede,
no cesa, no se apaga,
le amonesta y le invita
a que cambie su rumbo.

Y Tú, Jesús, puro y santo,
que en tu Pasión te entregas
a quien tu cuerpo rompe,
¿quién puede pensar tu llanto?

Que en manos del traidor
entregaste tu esencia,
y aún viendo su negrura
no perdiste paciencia.

Sabías, Señor supremo,
como Redentor sin pena,
que todo a tu Padre vuelve
por vencer la condena.

Así, aunque te entregaron
con hiel y negra pena,
tu amor fue ley eterna
que nunca se quebranta.

Source for translations and poetic versions: ChatGPT

Mystery VS Problem

Arthur Brooks gave a lecture to my presbyterate a few weeks ago with advice on how to live a happy life. The key was depth, meaning.

It seems to me that the entire lecture can be best understood in terms of the Gospel, "deny yourself, take up your cross daily and follow Me," says the Lord. Relationship is everything. God is love, he who lives in love lives in God.

Philosophically, the lecture content is very much related to the existential philosophy of Gabriel Marcel: mystery vs. problem. Man is most deeply made for mystery. The perfect man is Jesus Christ, one in Being with the Father. Relationship! Your heart was made for God; it is only filled in a personal relationship with Him. You need a personal and living relationship with Jesus Christ. He alone is the Logos, the meaning of your existence. The virtuous life is the normal way to follow Jesus Christ, because grace builds on nature.

Here are 7 keys to healthy old age by Brooks (with some Plinthos editing):

1- Don't smoke-or if you already smoke, quit now. You might not succeed on your first try, but the earlier you start the quitting process, the more smoke-free years you can invest in your happiness account.

2- Watch your drinking. Alcohol abuse is strongly correlated with smoking in the Harvard study, but plenty of other research shows that even by itself, it is one of the most powerful predictors of winding up sad-sick. If you have any indication of problem drinking in your life, get help now. If you have drinking problems in your family, do not take your chances: Keep that switch turned off. Although forgoing alcohol can be difficult, you'll never be sorry you made this decision.

3- Maintain a healthy body weight. Eat a diet with lots of fruits and vegetables and moderate serving sizes, but avoid yo-yo diets or intense restrictions that you can't maintain over the long run.

4- Prioritize movement in your life by scheduling time for it every day and sticking to it. Arguably the single best, time-tested way to do this is by walking daily.

5- Practice your coping mechanisms now. The earlier you can find healthy ways to deal with life's inevitable distresses, the more prepared you'll be if ill luck strikes in your 80s. This means working consciously-perhaps with assistance from spiritual practices or even therapy-to avoid excessive rumination, unhealthy emotional reactions, or avoidance behavior.

6- Keep learning. More education leads to a more active mind in old age, and that means a longer, happier life. That doesn't mean that you need to go to Harvard; you simply need to engage in lifelong, purposive learning. For example, that can mean reading serious nonfiction as part of a routine to learn more about new subjects.

7- Do the work to cultivate stable, long-term relationships now. For most people, this includes a steady marriage, but other relationships with family, friends, can fit in this category as well. The point is to find people with whom you can grow, whom you can count on, no matter what comes your way.

8- Cultivate and live the virtue of chastity according to your state in life.

9- Pray to God, daily.

__

Here is a good summary of the problem mystery distinction in Marcel.

The Distinction between Problem and Mystery (from Existentialist Thought: Gabriel Marcel, by Ronald Grimsley, 1955, Cardiff 1967)

To raise the question of Being is to reveal the limitations of all pure ‘problems’. A problem is in some way outside us, something apart from our intimate experience and something towards which we adopt a merely impersonal attitude. Hence it can become an object of general knowledge and public inquiry. As ‘ob-jective’ a problem confronts me in the manner of an obstacle which has to be overcome. In scientific investigation it seems possible to make a clear-cut distinction between the subject which interrogates and the object which is being examined, between what is in me and what is before me. In this way a problem emerges as something definite and specific and of a fixed pattern. This is revealed through the way in which we believe that a given problem may be resolved in terms of a ‘solution’ which can be tested and verified in experience. There is a ‘universal reason’ or ‘thought in general’ capable of laying down certain conditions necessary for the acceptance of any particular solution as valid. When those conditions have been satisfactorily fulfilled, we say that the solution has been ‘verified’. It is normal to suppose that such verification is carried out by a mind of a ‘depersonalized subject’ and that one investigator ought to be able to reach exactly the same conclusion as another. This is an essential condition for the establishment of any kind of objective knowledge, the search for which always entails, says Gabriel Marcel, a certain form of concupiscence by which the world is brought to myself and compelled to submit to a set of techniques considered suitable for dominating it.

As soon as we begin to inquire about Being we are faced by a different situation. Whereas the objective problem is conveniently located in a region which is apart from us, questions about Being immediately make us realize that in some intimate and perhaps perplexing way we are implicated in it from the very outset. In fact I cannot separate the question: What is Being? from the further question: Who or what am I? Whenever I interrogate Being I also have to ask: Who am I who ask this question concerning Being? Since questions concerning the totality of Being always involve my own existence and since questions about myself also involve an interrogation of Being, we are forced to admit the insufficiency of the distinction between the ‘subjective’ and the ‘objective’ as it emerges in questions concerning limited aspects of the physical world and man in his natural aspects. The conventional distinction must be transcended. It is this general consideration which prevents Marcel from speaking of the ‘problem’ of Being. We are here dealing not with a problem but with a ‘mystery’.

The ‘mystery’ of Being brings us to the region of the ‘metaproblematical’ where it is necessary ‘to transcend the opposition of a subject which would affirm Being and of Being which is affirmed by this subject’. The very antithesis involved in the subject-object relationship is only possible, in the first place, through the existence of a ‘metaproblematical’ sphere which gives priority to Being over knowledge. A cognition is always enveloped by Being and therefore in some sense ‘within’ Being. A mere theory of knowledge and an epistemological distinction between subject and object can never account for the full depth of a mystery which springs directly from Being itself. A mystery is really a ‘problem which encroaches upon its own data’ – and therefore ‘transcends itself as problem’. In whichever way the polarity of the questioner and the object of his question be conceived in the case of a mystery, we are forced to recognize the existence of a kind of reciprocal penetration of the inquiring self and the ontological reality to which it is related. This interpenetration makes it quite impossible to reduce the question to the level of those usually treated in terms of rational categories.

Dégénération by Mes Aïeux