Are you looking for Solutions for America in Distress

You are in the right place to find out about what is really going on behind the scenes in the patriot movement in America, including solutions from Oathkeepers, Anna Von Reitz, Constitutional Sheriffs, Richard Mack, and many more people who are leading the charge to restore America to freedom and peace. Please search on the right for over 8400 articles.
You will find some conflicting views from some of these authors. You will also find that all the authors are deeply concerned about the future of America. What they write is their own opinion, just as what I write is my own. If you have an opinion on a particular article, please comment by clicking the title of the article and scrolling to the box at the bottom on that page. Please keep the discussion about the issues, and keep it civil. The administrator reserves the right to remove any comment for any reason by anyone. Use the golden rule; "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Additionally we do not allow comments with advertising links in them for your products. When you post a comment, it is in the public domain. You have no copyright that can be enforced against any other individual who comments here! Do not attempt to copyright your comments. If that is not to your liking please do not comment. Any attempt to copyright a comment will be deleted. Copyright is a legal term that means the creator of original content. This does not include ideas. You are not an author of articles on this blog. Your comments are deemed donated to the public domain. They will be considered "fair use" on this blog. People donate to this blog because of what Anna writes and what Paul writes, not what the people commenting write. We are not using your comments. You are putting them in the public domain when you comment. What you write in the comments is your opinion only. This comment section is not a court of law. Do not attempt to publish any kind of "affidavit" in the comments. Any such attempt will also be summarily deleted. Comments containing foul language will be deleted no matter what is said in the comment.

Sunday, December 22, 2019

Fourth Sunday in Advent

Rev. Fr. Leonard Goffine's
The Church's Year

On this Sunday the Church redoubles her ardent sighs for the coming of the Redeemer, and, in the Introit, places the longing of the just of the Old Law upon the lips of the faithful, again exhorting them through the gospel of the day, to true penance as the best preparation for the worthy reception of the Savior. Therefore at the Introit she prays:

INTROIT Drop down dew, ye heavens, from above, and let the clouds rain the just (Is. 45). Let the earth be opened, and bud forth a Savior. The heavens show forth the glory of God, and the firmament declareth the work of his hands (Ps. 18:2). Glory be to the Father and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
COLLECT Raise up, O Lord, we pray Thee, Thy power, and come, and with great might succor us: that, by the help of Thy grace, that which our sins impede may be hastened by Thy merciful forgiveness. Through our Lord Jesus Christ Thy Son, who liveth and reigneth with Thee, in the Unity of the Holy Ghost, God, world without end, Amen.
EPISTLE (I Cor. 4:1-5). Brethren, Let a man so account of us as of the ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God. Here now it is required among the dispensers, that a man be found faithful. But to me, it is a very small thing to be judged by you, or by man's day: but neither do I judge my own self. For I am not conscious to myself of anything, yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord. Therefore judge not before the time, until the Lord come: who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise from God.
Why is this epistle read on this day?
The Church desires by this epistle to impress those who received Holy Orders on Ember Saturday with the dignity of their office, and exhorts them to fill it with becoming fidelity and sanctity, excelling the laity in piety and virtue, as well as in official dignity. She wishes again to remind the faithful of the terrible coming of Christ to judgment, urging them, by purifying their conscience through a contrite confession, to receive Christ at this holy Christmas time, as their Savior, that they may not behold Him, at the Last Day, as their severe judge.
How should the faithful regard the priests and spiritual superiors?
They should esteem and obey them as servants, stewards, and vicars of Christ; as dispensers of the holy mysteries (I Cor. 4:1); as ambassadors of the most High (II Con 5:20). For this reason God earnestly commands honor to priests (Ecclus. 7:31), and Christ says of the Apostles and their successors (Lk. 10:16): Who despiseth you, despiseth me; and St. Paul writes (I Tim. 5:17): Let the priests that rule well be esteemed worthy of double honor: especially they who labor in the word and doctrine.
Can the priest dispense the sacraments according to his own will?
No, he must have power from the Church, and must exercise his office faithfully, in accordance with the orders of the Church, and act according to the will of Christ whose steward he is. The priest dare not give that which is holy to dogs (Mt. 7:6), that is, he is not permitted to give absolution, and administer the sacraments to impenitent persons, under penalty of incurring eternal damnation.
Why does St. Paul consider the judgment of men a small matter?
Because it is usually false, deceptive, foolish, and is consequently not worth seeking or caring for. Man often counts as evil that which is in itself good and, on the contrary, esteems as good that which is evil. St. Paul says: If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ (Gal. 1:10). Oh, how foolish, and what poor Christians, therefore, are they, who not to displease man, willingly adopt all silly customs, and fashions in dress, manners and appearance, making themselves contemptible to God, the angels, and saints. Recall the beautiful words of the Seraphic St. Francis: "We are, what we are in the sight of God, nothing more"; learn from them to fulfil your duties faithfully, and be indifferent to the judgment of the world and its praise.
Why does not St. Paul wish to judge himself?
Because no one, without a special revelation from heaven, can know if he be just in the sight of God or not, even though his conscience may accuse him of nothing, for "man knoweth not whether he be worthy of love or hatred" (Eccles. 9:1). Thus St. Paul goes on to say, that though he was not conscious of any wrong, he did not judge himself to be justified, God only could decide that. Man should certainly examine himself as much as is in his power, to find if he has anything within him displeasing to God; should he find nothing he must not judge himself more just than others, but consider that the eyes of his mind may be dimmed, and fail to see that which God sees and will reveal to others at the judgment Day. The Pharisees saw no fault in themselves, and were saintly and perfect in their own estimation, yet our Lord cursed them.
ASPIRATION "O Lord, enter not into judgment with Thy servant: for in Thy sight no man living can be justified" (Ps. 142:2).
GOSPEL (Lk. 3:1-6). In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and Philip his brother tetrarch of Iturea and the country of Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilina, under the high priests Annas and Caiphas: the word of the Lord came to John the son of Zachary in the desert. And he came into all the country about the Jordan, preaching the baptism of penance for the remission of sins, as it is written in the book of the sayings of Isaias the prophet: A voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low: the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways plain: and all flesh shall see the salvation of God.
Why is the time in which St. John commenced to preach so minutely described?
The Evangelist, contrary to his usual custom, describes the time minutely, and enumerates exactly, in their precise order, the religious and civil princes in office, that, in the first place, it could not be denied that this was truly the time and the year in which the promised Messiah appeared in this world, whom John baptized, and the Heavenly Father declared to be His beloved Son. Furthermore, it shows the fulfillment of the prophecy of the Patriarch Jacob (Gen. 49:10), that when the scepter would be taken away from Juda, that is, when the Jews would have no longer a king from their own tribes, the Savior would come.
What is meant by: "The word of the Lord came to John"?
It means that John was commissioned by divine inspiration, or by an angel sent from God, to preach penance and announce to the world the coming of the Lord. He had prepared himself for this work by a penitential, secluded life, and intercourse with God. We learn from his example not to intrude ourselves into office, least of all into a spiritual office, but to await the call from God, preparing ourselves in solitude and quiet, by fervent prayer and by a holy life, for the necessary light.
What is meant by: "Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight his paths"?
It means that we should prepare our hearts for the worthy reception of Christ, by penance, amendment, and the resolution to lead a pious life in future. To do this, every valley should be filled, that is, all faintheartedness, sloth and cowardice, all worldly carnal sentiments should be elevated and directed to God, the highest Good, by firm confidence and ardent desire for heavenly virtues; the mountains and hills should be brought low, that is, pride, stubbornness, and ambition should be humbled, and the obstinate will be broken. The crooked shall be made straight, that is, ill-gotten goods should be restored, hypocrisy, malice, and double dealing be renounced, and our intentions turned to God and the performance of His holy will. And the rough ways shall be made plain, that is, anger, revenge, and impatience must leave the heart, if the Lamb of God is to dwell therein. It may also signify that the Savior put to shame the pride of the world, and its false wisdom by building His Church upon the Apostles, who, by reason of their poverty and simplicity, may be considered the low valleys, while the way to heaven, formerly so rough and hard to tread, because of the want of grace, is now by His grace made smooth and easy.
ASPIRATION O my Jesus! would that my heart were well prepared and smooth for Thee! Assist me! O my Savior to do that which I cannot do by myself. Make me an humble valley, fill me with Thy grace; turn my crooked and perverted will to Thy pleasure; change my rough and angry disposition, throw away in me whatever impedes Thy way, that Thou mayst come to me without hindrance. Thou alone possess and rule me forever. Amen.


“Preaching the baptism of penance for the remission of sins"(Lk. 3:3).
What is penance, and how many kinds are there?
Penance, says the Roman Catechism (Cat. Rom. de Pcenit. 54), consists in the turning of our whole soul to God, hating and detesting the crimes we have committed, firmly resolving to amend our lives, its evil habits and corrupt ways, hoping through the mercy of God to obtain pardon. This is interior penance, or the virtue of penance. The sincere acknowledgment of our sins to a priest and the absolution he accords, is exterior penance, or the holy Sacrament of Penance, which Christ instituted (Jn. 20:22-23), through which the sins committed after baptism, are remitted.
Which of these penances is necessary for the forgiveness of sins?
Both are necessary, for unless the conversion of the heart to God, a true consciousness of, and sorrow for sin, the firm purpose of amendment and confidence in God's mercy, precede the confession, declaring all our sins to a priest cannot obtain forgiveness of mortal sin committed after baptism. At the same time a really contrite turning to God, will not, without confession to a priest, obtain forgiveness, except when by circumstances, a person is prevented from approaching the tribunal of penance. Such a person must, however, have the ardent desire to confess as soon as possible.
Can any one who has committed mortal sin be saved without penance?
No, for penance is as necessary to such a one as baptism, if he wishes not to perish: Unless you do penance, says Christ, you shall all likewise perish (Lk. 13:3, 5).
Is this penance performed at once?
This penance is necessary every day of our lives: that is, we must from day to day endeavor to be heartily sorry for our sins, to despise them, to eradicate the roots of sin, that is, our passions and evil inclinations, and become more pleasing to God by penance and good works.
Why do so many die impenitent?
Because they do not accept and use the many graces God offers them, but put off their repentance. If such sinners, like the godless King Antiochus (II Mac. 9) intend to repent on their deathbed for fear of punishment, they usually find that God in His justice will no longer give them the grace of repentance, for he who when he can repent, will not, cannot when he will. "Who will not listen at the time of grace," says St. Gregory, "will not be listened to' in the time of anxiety." And it is to be feared that he who postpones penance until old age, will not find justice where he looked for mercy.
Can all sinners do penance?
With the grace of God all can, even the greatest sinners; as a real father God calls them when He says: As I live ...I desire not the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way, and live. Turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways: and why will ye die, O house of Israel? And the wickedness of the wicked shall not hurt him, in what day soever he shall turn from his wickedness (Ezech. 33:11-12).
Do all who go to confession perform true penance?
Unfortunately they do not; for all is not accomplished with confession. If there is no sincere detestation of sin, no true sorrow for having offended God; if the evil inclinations and bad habits are not overcome, ill-gotten goods restored, and calumny repaired, the occasions of sin avoided; if a sincere amendment of life, or, at least, its earnest purpose does not follow, then indeed, there cannot be the least shadow of true repentance, not even though such persons confess weekly. But alas! we see many such. And why? Because many think repentance consists simply in confession, and not in the amendment of their lives. Only those obtain pardon who are truly penitent, and perform all that is enjoined upon them in confession. It is well, therefore, to read and carefully act according to the following instructions.

The foundation of true repentance, interior and exterior (see the preceding pages), is the vivid knowledge of our sins. There are many who are unconscious of the most grievous sins in which they are buried; blinded by self-love they do not even regard them as sins, do not confess them, perform no penance for them and are consequently eternally lost. To prevent this great evil, the Council of Trent (Sess. XIV c.5) ordered a careful examination of conscience before confession, and afterwards to confess the sins which are discovered by that examination.
Why should we examine our conscience?
Because, as St. Ignatius says, no one can become fully aware of his own faults, unless God reveals them by a special light; we should, therefore, first of all, daily ask the Holy Ghost to enlighten us, and should then examine our thoughts, desires, words, actions, and omissions since our last valid confession and how often we have sinned in these respects. To know this, we should let our conscience, that is, the inner voice which tells us what is good and what is evil, speak freely, without flattering ourselves, or passing it by negligently. St. Charles Borromeo says, we should place before our eyes the Ten Commandments of God and carefully compare our life and our morals with them; it is well also to examine ourselves on the seven deadly sins, and remember the places and persons with whom we have been in contact, the duties of our state of life, the vices to which we are most inclined, the consequences that were, or might have been produced upon ourselves or others. At the same time, we should imagine ourselves standing before the judgment seat of God, and whatever would cause us fear there, whatever we could not answer for there, we should look upon as sins, be sorry for, and confess.
Is it a sin not to examine ourselves long and carefully?
Certainly it is a sin for those to examine their consciences carelessly, who live unfaithfully and in mortal sin, and who seldom confess, because they expose themselves frivolously to the danger of leaving out great sins, and consequently they make a sacrilegious confession, committing thereby a new and grievous sin.
Those who daily ask God for enlightenment and examine their conscience at least every evening before going to bed, will prepare themselves properly before approaching the tribunal of penance. "Behold, you have a book in which you write your daily expenses," says St. Chrysostom, "make a book of your conscience, also, and write there your daily sins. Before you go to bed, before sleep comes, take your book, that is, your conscience, and recall your sins, whether of thought, word, or deed. Say then to your soul: Again, O my soul, a day is spent, what have we done of evil or of good? If you have accomplished some good, be grateful to God; if evil, resolve to avoid it for the future. Shed tears in remembrance of your sins; ask forgiveness of God, and then let your body sleep."
"O man," cries St. Augustine, "why dost thou weep over the body whence the soul has departed, and not over the soul from which God has withdrawn?" The idolatrous Michas (Judg. 18:23-24) complained bitterly, because his idols were taken from him; Esau grieved greatly over the loss of his birthright and his father's blessing (Gen. 27:34). Should we not therefore, be filled with sorrow, when by our sins we have lost God and Heaven?
What is contrition, and how many kinds are there?
"Contrition is a hearty sorrow and detestation of our sins, with a firm purpose of sinning no more" (Conc. Trid., Sess. XIV, can. 4). If this grief and detestation comes from a temporal injury, shame or punishment, it is a natural sorrow; but if we are sorry for our sins, because by them we have offended God, and transgressed His holy law, it is a supernatural sorrow; this, again, is imperfect when fear of God's punishment is the motive; it is perfect, if we are sorry for our sins, because we have offended God, the supreme Lord and best of Fathers.
Is natural sorrow sufficient for a good confession?
It is not, because it proceeds not from a supernatural motive, but from the love or fear of the world. A mere natural sorrow for our sins worketh death (II Cor. 7:10). If one confess his sins having only a natural sorrow for them, he commits a sacrilege, because the most necessary part of the Sacrament of Penance is wanting.
What other qualities are necessary for a true contrition?
Contrition should be interior, proceeding from the heart and not merely from the lips; it must be universal, that is, it must extend to all the mortal sins which the sinner has committed; it must be sovereign, that is, he must be more sorry for having offended God, than for any temporal evil; it must be supernatural, that is, produced in the heart by supernatural motives; namely, because we have offended God, lost His grace, deserved hell, etc.
What kind of sorrow must we have in order to obtain forgiveness of our sins?
That sorrow which proceeds from a perfect love of God, and not from fear of temporal or eternal punishment. This perfect contrition would suffice for the forgiveness of sins, if in case of danger of death, there should be a great desire, but no opportunity to confess to a priest. But the Holy Catholic Church has declared (Conc. Trid., Sess. XIV, can. 4) the imperfect contrition which proceeds from the fear of eternal punishment to be sufficient for the valid reception of the holy Sacrament of Penance.
Who are those who have reason to fear they have aroused only a natural sorrow for their sins?
Those who care little about knowing what true sorrow is; those who often commit grievous sins, and do not amend their lives; for if true sorrow for sin had been excited in their hearts, with the firm purpose of amendment, the grace of God in this Sacrament would have strengthened the resolution, and enabled them to avoid sin, at least for a time. On account of their immediate relapse we justly doubt whether they have validly received the sacrament of penance and its sanctifying grace.
How can the sinner attain true sorrow?
The sinner can attain true sorrow by the grace of God and his own co-operation. That both are necessary is shown by the prophet Jeremias (Jer. 31:18-19), who prays: Convert me, O Lord, and I shall be converted: for Thou art the Lord, my God. For after Thou didst convert me, I did penance: and after Thou didst shew unto me, I struck my thigh (with sorrow). To which God replies: If thou wilt be converted, I will convert thee Jer. 15:19). We see, therefore, that the first and most essential means for producing this sorrow is the grace of God. It must begin and complete the work of conversion, but it will do this only when the sinner earnestly and faithfully co-operates. When God in whatever way has admonished the sinner that he should be converted, let him ardently implore God for the grace of a true conversion, invoke the intercession of the Mother of the Savior, his guardian angel, and like the holy penitents, David, Peter, and Magdalen, let him meditate upon the truth that God is a just judge, who hates sin, and will punish it in the eternal torments of hell. Having placed these truths vividly before his eyes, the sinner will reflect further whether by his sins he has not himself deserved this punishment, and if by the enlightenment of God he finds he has, he will also see the danger in which he stands, that if God should permit him to die impenitent, he would have to suffer forever in hell. This fear of eternal punishment urges the sinner to hope in God's mercy; for He wishes not the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live; again, our Redeemer says: I came to call the sinner to repentance, and, there is more joy in heaven over one sinner who does penance, than over ninety-nine just. He considers the patience of God towards him, the graces bestowed upon him during his sinful life; namely his creation, redemption, sanctification in baptism, and many others. He will now contemplate the beauty and perfection of God: "Who art Thou, 0 my God," he cries, "who art Thou who hast loved me with such an unspeakable love, and lovest me still, ungrateful, abominable sinner, that I am! What is all the beauty of this world of the angels and of the blessed spirits compared to Thine! Thou fountain of all beauty, of all goodness, of all that is amiable, Thou supreme majesty, Thou infinite abyss of love and mercy! I for one vain thought, a short, momentary pleasure, a small, mean gain, could forget, offend and despise Thee! Could I sell, could I forfeit heaven, and eternal joy with Thee! O, could I repair those crimes! Could I but wash them out with my tears, even with my blood?" Through such meditations the sinner, by the grace of God, will be easily moved to sorrow. Without such or similar reflections the formulas of sorrow as read from prayer books or recited by heart, are by no means acts of contrition.
Should we make an act of contrition before confession only?
We should make an act of contrition before confession, and not only then, but every evening after the examination of conscience; we should make one immediately after any fault committed, above all when in danger of death; for we know not when God will call us to judgment, or whether we shall then have the grace to receive the sacrament of Penance with proper preparation.
The purpose of amending our life is as necessary for the remission of sin, as contrition; for how could he obtain forgiveness from God, who has not the determination to sin no more? The will to sin cannot exist with the hatred of sin.
What is necessary for a firm purpose?
A firm purpose of amendment requires: the determination to avoid sin; to flee from all occasions that might bring the danger of sinning, all persons, places, societies in which we usually sin; bravely to fight against our evil inclinations and bad habits; to make use of all means prescribed by our confessor, or made known to us by God Himself; to repair the injustice we have done; to restore the good name of our neighbor, and to remove the scandal and enmity we have caused.
Who, then, have no true purpose of amendment?
Those who do not truly intend to leave the frivolous persons with whom they have associated, and committed sin; to remove the occasions of cursing, swearing, drunkenness, and secret sins, etc.; who have the intention to borrow or to contract debts which they know they cannot pay, or do not even care to pay; to squander the property of their wives and children, letting them suffer want; to frequent barrooms, or saloons, fight, gamble, indulge in vile, filthy conversations and detraction, murmur against spiritual and temporal superiors, throw away precious time, and bring, even compel others to do the same. The saloon-keepers, who for the sake of money allure such wretched people, keep them there, and what is still worse, help to intoxicate them, participate in their sins.
Confession is a contrite acknowledgment of our sins to a priest who is duly authorized, in order to obtain forgiveness. This acknowledgment of our sins is an important and necessary part of the holy Sacrament of Penance.
Even in the Old Law, a certain kind of confession was prescribed and connected with a sacrifice, called the sacrifice of Atonement; but the forgiveness of sins was effected only through faith in the coming Redeemer, towards whom this sacrifice pointed (Lev. 5:5-6; Num. 5:7; compare Mt. 3:6). In the new Law, Christ gave to the apostles and their successors, power to forgive, and to retain sins (Jn. 20:21-23), and in doing so made them judges. Without confession on the part of the sinner, they cannot act as judges, and do justice in regard to giving punishment and remedies (Conc. Trid., Sess. XIV can. 6), and as the sinner is but seldom able to make an act of perfect contrition, which obtains the forgiveness of sin without confession, it was necessary that the most merciful Lord, as the Roman Catechism says (de poen. 5. 36), through the means of confession to the priest, should provide in an easier manner for the common salvation of man. Confession, at the same time, is the best means of bringing man to a knowledge of his sins and of their malice. Therefore, even Adam was obliged to acknowledge his sins, and in the same way Cain was asked by God concerning his brother's murder, although God, the Omniscient, knew the sins of both. The desire to ease the troubled conscience, seems born in man. Thus David says of his crime: Because I was silent, my bones grew old, whilst I cried out all the day long (Ps. 31:3); and in the book of Proverbs it is said; He that hideth his sins, shall not prosper: but he that shall confess and forsake them, shall obtain mercy (Prov. 28:13). Constant experience in life verifies these words, and heretics could not entirely abolish private confession, though they rejected the Sacrament of Penance.
Is confession a human law, or a human invention?
No, confession was instituted by Christ Himself; for after His resurrection He appeared to His apostles and disciples, and said to them: Peace be with you! As the Father hath sent me, I also send you; that is, the same power to remit sin which the Father has given me, I give to you. When he had said this, he breathed on them, and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained (Jn.20:21-23; compare Mt. 18:18). In these words Christ evidently gave to the apostles and their successors the power to forgive and retain sins. This they can do only when the sins are confessed to them; and, therefore, Christ, when instituting the forgiveness of sins, instituted and connected with it the acknowledgment, that is, the confession of sins. This regulation of Christ was complied with by the first Christians in humility of heart, as is proved in the Acts of the Apostles, where we read: And many (referring to the Christians at Ephesus) of them that believed, came confessing and declaring their deeds (Acts 19:18). And the apostle James exhorts his own: Confess therefore your sins one to another: and pray one for another, that you may be saved (Jas. 5:16). The work founded by Christ must stand, as long as the world, and as the apostles and disciples of our Lord died, their successors necessarily continued the work, and received the same power from Christ. This is verified by the whole history of His Church. In the very beginning of Christianity, the faithful with great sorrow confessed to the priest all their transgressions, even the smallest and most secret, after which, they received absolution. "Let us be sincerely sorry as long as we live," says St. Clement of Rome, a disciple of St. Paul (Ep. 1. ad Cor.), "for all evil which we have committed in the flesh, for having once left the world, there will no longer be any confession and penance for us." Tertullian (217 A.D.) writes of those who hid their sins, being ashamed to confess them: "Can we also hide from the knowledge of God that which we conceal from a fellow creature" (Lib. de qcen. 5. 36). Origen ('1254), after speaking of baptism, says: "There is still a severer and more tedious way of obtaining remission of sin: when the sinner moistens his pillow with tears, and is not ashamed to confess his sins to the priest of the Lord" (Hom. 3 in Lev.). St. Cyprian ('1258) writes of those Christians who during the persecutions of his time, had not sinned by openly denying the faith: "Yet because they had but thought of doing so, they make a sorrowful and simple confession to God's priests" (Sib. de laps.). Basil (f 379) writes: "Necessarily the sins must be made plain to those to whom the power of the mysteries is confided, that is, to the priests" (In reg. brew 288). Many more testimonies could be brought from the earliest centuries of Christianity, which make it clear, that Christ Himself instituted confession, and that the faithful always availed themselves of it as a means of remission of sin. It would not have been possible for a human being, though he were the mightiest prince, to have imposed upon Catholic Christianity so hard an obligation as confession, without the special command of Christ the Son of God; nor could any one have invented it without the faithful at once revolting. It is also well known that, in the Oriental Churches which separated from the true Church in the earliest ages, private confession to a priest is yet valued as a divine institution. The Catholic institution of confession, with which, in the earliest centuries, there was even connected a public confession, before the whole congregation, for notorious sinners, is as old as the Church itself, as Pope Leo the Great (f 461) proves (Ep. 136); "The secret, auricular confession was introduced into the Church as early as the times of the apostles, or their immediate successors." It was instituted by Christ, the God-Man, and instituted for the purpose of enabling the apostles and the priests, their successors, to remit in the confessional the sins committed after baptism, if the sinner heartily regrets them, sincerely confesses, and renders satisfaction for them, or to retain them if he be unworthy of absolution. From this it is seen that the enemies of the Catholic Church oppose, in rejecting confession, the plain expression of the holy Scriptures, and of entire Christian antiquity, and that it is a detestable calumny to assert that confession is simply a human invention. The divine institution of confession always was and is a fountain of sweetest consolation for sinful man, and thousands have experienced that which is said by the Council of Trent (Sess. XIV can. 3, depart.): "The effect of this Sacrament is reconciliation with God, followed by peace, cheerfulness and consolation of the heart in those who worthily receive this Sacrament."
What will aid us to make confession easy?
The consideration of the manifold benefits arising from it; first, forgiveness of all, even the most grievous sins, remission of the guilt and eternal punishment; secondly, the certainty of having again been made a child of God; thirdly, the sweet consolation and desired peace of conscience; fourthly, the necessary remedies which a pious and prudent confessor will prescribe for the cure of the diseases of the soul; finally, the prayer and exhortation of the priest which will also add to the complete conversion of the sinner.
What should be done to participate in these benefits?
Besides that which has already been said of the examination of conscience, and especially of sorrow for sin, the confession must be sincere and open-hearted; that is, a correct and exact confession not only of all mortal sins, their kind, circumstances and number, without excuses, or veiling or lessening them, but also a faithful revelation of all other spiritual affairs, fears, doubts, and other wounds of the soul; for a wound which is not shown to the physician, cannot be healed. We should not seek those confessors who are only "mute dogs" (Is. 56:10), and give absolution without hesitation, but we should trust the direction of our souls to learned, pious, and zealous priests, and remain under their guidance, as in physical sickness we remain under the care of an experienced physician, and accept their words as if Christ Himself had spoken.
How should the false shame which prevents confession be overcome?
It should be remembered that the priest in the confessional is the representative of Christ, and that whoever lies to the confessor, seeks to deceive God Himself, who abominates a lie, and at the Last Day will publicly put such a liar to shame. The confessor takes the place of Christ, and after His example must be merciful to the sinner, if, a sinful man himself, he hopes to receive mercy and grace from God. At the same time, no confessor is allowed to reveal the slightest thing heard in confession, even should it cost him his life. It may be considered further that he who conceals a sin in confession, and thus obtains absolution by false pretenses, receives no remission, but, on the contrary, commits a new sin, "When man uncovers his sins, God covers them; when man conceals his sins, God reveals them," says St. Augustine. Man can be deceived, but not God, the Omniscient; and who is ashamed to show his wounds to the physician? Why should it be a cause of shame to throw out the poison of sin by a sincere confession? To sin only is shameful, to confess sin is not shameful. But if by all these reflections we are still unable to overcome ourselves so as to confess our sins to a certain confessor we may seek another in whom we have confidence.
Satisfaction is the diligent performance of all the works of penance imposed upon us by the confessor. With this, however, a true penitent will not be satisfied; for in our times, on account of the weakness and little zeal of Christians, a light penance is imposed that they may not be deterred from the reception of the holy Sacraments. To avoid relapsing into sin, one must do penance, and bring forth worthy fruits (Lk. 13:3), for God will only then give the grace to persevere. We satisfy God by fasting, prayer, almsdeeds, avoidance of the snares of the world, diffidence in ourselves, and especially by patient endurance of the afflictions and sufferings which He imposes upon us. Those who have committed sin must do penance in this life or submit to everlasting penance in the next.
Is the heretic right in asserting that man does not need to render satisfaction since Christ has rendered it complete on the cross?
He is entirely wrong. Christ on the cross did indeed render satisfaction for all the sins of the whole world, and man is not capable to atone for one single sin but it does not follow from this that man is not required to do something. To render satisfaction means to perform a duty which has been neglected. Instead of obeying God, the sinner by his sins disobeys Him. Satisfaction for disobedience requires perfect obedience from the sinner: but this, because of his weakness and corruption, no man is able to render therefore Christ rendered it for us by His perfect obedience even unto the death of the cross. But because Christ has been thus obedient for us, must we not be somewhat obedient also? or which is the same, because Christ for love of us has atoned for our sins by perfect obedience to His Heavenly Father, are we to do no penance for ourselves? It is precisely by this atonement made by Christ that we receive the power of rendering satisfaction. But for this we must, first of all, ask the grace, i.e., pray, to restrain our earthly desires, i.e., fast, and by means of active love (charity) make ourselves susceptible to this grace. St. Paul the Apostle, who calls himself the greatest of sinners, writes of himself: I now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh for his body, which is the Church (Col. 1:24); and to the Corinthians he writes: But I chastise my body and bring it into subjection: lest perhaps: when I have preached to others (meaning penance and conversion), I myself should become cast away (I Cor. 9:27). Christ Himself did not censure the Ninivites for their fasting and their penance in sackcloth and ashes, but gave them as an example (Mt. 12:41). In the Old Testament we find that even after remitting the sin, God imposed a punishment for it. Thus He let the child of king David die, as punishment for his adultery, even though He had forgiven the sin (II Kings 12:13, 14); thus Moses and Aaron, because they once distrusted God, were not permitted to enter the Promised Land (Num. 20:24; Deut. 34:4). According to this doctrine of the Bible, the Catholic Church teaches that there remains a temporal punishment which the sinner must expiate either in this world, or in the next, though on account of the infinite merits of Christ the guilt and eternal punishment of sin are taken away by absolution. In the earliest times of the Church certain works of penance were imposed, which were then very severe, and in the course of time, owing to the indolence of the faithful, were much moderated.

The Cards Are Called

By Anna Von Reitz

We've had some real rats as Presidents.  Gangsta quality guys.  Robber barons. Even pukes like Slick Willie.  There are no --- repeat, no, none, zero, zip, nada --- choir boys in the ranks of the Presidents.  Number one, they can't be Candide and get that far, and number two, if they were all sweet and cuddly and a box of rocks, they'd make terrible Presidents. 
The trick most of them employ is to: (1) look good; (2) say whatever people want to hear (Obama is an excellent example of this); and (3) follow the political maxim of "do whatever you want, so long as you don't get caught".   
This means that in addition to not being Choir Members, most Presidents are tremendous hypocrites.  Not all, but most of them, don't believe in or care about anything but money and power and how best to benefit themselves and their pals at the public trough.  
That's why when someone like Trump comes in without a ticket, it upsets the whole DC Beltway Carnival. 
Trump is not a Choir Boy, either.  
The difference is that he is a really astute business man. And he's not nearly the world-class hypocrite that most US Presidents have been.  
He actually sees --- and values --- the power and potential and beauty of America.  He knows in his own terms what the "American Dream" is.  
That's the truth about Donald Trump, as proven in the pudding he has served up over the last four years.  
By their fruits you shall know them.
The American Dream runs counter to the Democrat Dream of controlling the work force via Labor Union bosses just like the Overseers on their beloved plantations. 
Most people don't realize it, but the modern Democratic Party was birthed by largely German Communists who came here after the 1848 Worker's Rebellion and settled in my home state of Wisconsin.  They were joined by the "traditional" Southern Democrats who were the remainders of the Southern elitists leftover after the Civil War.  This unlikely marriage of what superficially appears to be radically different partners wasn't so strange after all.  
It turns out that the Communists have a lot in common with the traditional Southern Democrats, though for wildly different reasons.  Both groups are elitist. Both believe in deceit and that lying is an acceptable means to an end. Both readily adopt to either/or thinking patterns and use "pillar" to "post" control systems to divide and conquer.  Both groups are hypocrites.  Both believe in subjugation of the inferior masses -- while spieling the exact opposite message from both sides of their mouths. 
Just so we are clear, I don't venerate either political party and I did not start my life despising the Democratic Party.  Far from it.  
I grew up in hardscrabble Black River Falls, Wisconsin, in a working class farm family and almost everyone I knew who bothered to vote --- was a Democrat.  I considered myself a Democrat at one time and I continue to embrace many of the broad-minded egalitarian principles that the Democrats pretend to champion.  
That's the problem.  
They pretend to champion all these high ideals of caring about communities and working class people and sharing with the less fortunate and education for all ---and, as it turns out, the Democratic Party doesn't actually care about any of those things. The Democratic Party is ruled by thugs with connections to big crime syndicates and populated with staffers and wannabes too stupid to notice that all the rhetoric is fake. 
Stone cold fake.  And on purpose.  
I had to learn that the hard way, by pouring through piles and piles of voting records on major issues and pieces of legislation that have been severely damaging to working class people and people of color.  
I've got a tip for you -- in every case I examined, and that ran a gamut from the Civil War to 1973, Democrats created the evil legislation, spoke loud and long against it, and then, by wild margins, voted FOR it.  In every single case. 
I remember kicking back in my chair and staring at the ceiling of my college dorm room, feeling like I had been slapped up the side of the head.  It was like the time I kept track of the "nightly news" stories for content and discovered that I was being fed a steady diet of stories about death and sex, and virtually nothing of use or benefit to me or anyone else. 
So I turned off the Democratic Party like I turned off the Nightly News. 
Back then, with all my youthful idealism intact,  I thought Democratic politicians believed in the stuff they talked about.  
It's only when you look at actual voting records-- at what the Democrats do, rather than what they say-- that the brutal truth shoves firmly into view.  
This also explains why -- despite having super majorities for entire decades --  the slave-like, destructive welfare state has burgeoned into a huge population of people who are literally entrapped by the welfare system. 
Entrapped, dependent, believing that there isn't enough of anything --- not enough money, not enough food, not enough of anything --- and that the only way to get more is to push for more welfare spending and more welfare programs. 
It never occurs to them that they are being kept poor and dependent and miserable on purpose.  And by the very people they believe are their champions.    
Most people forget or miss the point that the government is in the business of providing services and that having a large captive population totally dependent on such services adds up to big profits for them and big meal tickets for bureaucrats---- and large dependent voting blocks for scumbag politicians who deliberately create poverty and break families and stifle job opportunities so that they have a big captive population to serve. 
Thus, Black and Hispanic and other Minority voters put these rats into office year after year, decade after decade, vainly hoping for change and a better life, and never once realizing that their purported champions are the ones doing them the damage and keeping them down. 
Like other Americans, Minority Voters don't check voting records and don't know the history of the Democratic Party.  They don't read the horrible damaging legislation proposed by Democrats, then repudiated by Democrats, and then, quietly voted for ---- all by Democrats.   
"Keep them hungry and keep them stupid." is the unofficial motto of the Democratic Party at the highest levels.  Believe me, because I have been there in my younger days and no matter what they say or pretend, I would never go back again.  
Don't believe me?  Go look at the actual voting records on key topics.  
Enfranchisement ---as in Dairy Queen enfranchisement.  Electoral votes (actual voting rights) for women and people of color.  Municipal corporations.  Taxes. Abuse of Social Security funds.  CPS.  Land ownership.  Marriage "licensing" laws. The Buck Act.  And why in the Hell didn't they recognize the "Natural and Unalienable Rights" of colored people, instead of pulling yet another sleight of hand and offering "Civil Rights" instead? 
If you are a rat, born to the breed, then you would find it deliciously amusing, just how easily misled and stupid American voters have been, and how many generations of us have taken politicians at their word and never checked their actual voting records and actual performance. 
Let's finally get to FDR, the King Rat of them all.
I am going to quote the guts of Executive Order 2039 which created the perpetual private trusts on March 6, 1933  --- the very same day that the Conference of [Territorial ] State [of State] Governors "pledged"  their "states and the citizenry thereof" as collateral for loans from the Municipal Government. 

"....the Secretary of the Treasury, with the approval of the President and under such regulations as he may prescribe, is authorized and empowered (a) to permit any or all of such banking institutions to perform any or all of the usual banking functions, (b) to direct, require or permit the issuance of clearing house certificates or other evidences of claims against assets of banking institutions, and (c) to authorize and direct the creation in such banking institutions of special trust accounts for the receipt of new deposits which shall be subject to withdrawal on demand without any restriction or limitation and shall be kept separately in cash or on deposit in Federal Reserve Banks or invested-in obligations of the United States." 
So, what are we really witnessing here?  
At the Conference of Governor's meeting taking place that same day, FDR got the rats to "pledge" all the Territorial "citizenry" as collateral backing loans from the Pope.   
The same day, "clearing house certificates" were allowed to be issued for "new deposits". 
He's talking about birth certificates and the "new deposits" were American babies being deliberately misidentified as "United States Citizens" and used as literal bank collateral to fund the bankruptcy reorganization of "the" United States of America, Inc. 
The Pope and the then-King are consolidating their operations on our shores, moving to run both sides of their Papist Commonwealth-Roman Municipal scheme under one consolidated governmental services corporation --- and all at our expense.  
Think of it.  You are the Pope and you are in the business of providing "governmental services".  You have two levels of the American government under your control, one directly, and one indirectly.  Well, of course, you want to reduce your costs and expand your services---and profits--- by doubling them up and expanding the range of services on offer. 
So you hire, on our behalf of course,  two guys to do the job of one, profit yourself from the labor of both, and charge the clueless American public for it.
Just go on the internet and do a search for something that should be simple --- like "Alaska Department of Natural Resources".  What you will find is a multitude of such entities listed, all with slightly different names, different addresses, etc.  

There's the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, the State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources, the Alaska DNR, and so on.  
Now, you may think that these are all the same and all part of the same government, but they aren't.  What you are seeing is the duplication for profit scheme in action---- a Territorial DNR, a Municipal DNR, a Regional (UN) DNR, a State Trust DNR....... and so it goes, the "government services" proliferating like a rapidly growing cancer.  
And stupid people clamoring for more.
And of course, the "Legislatures" which are just elected Boards of Directors for these governmental services corporations, have no motive to stop it, so long as they can charge you for it and profit themselves at your expense.   
Having created a completely redundant second or third or fourth set of workers, you can then use all the extra help for political and other profit making purposes.  
The final details of the 1933 take-over transition were finished four years later in 1937 with the signing of The Declaration of Interdependence of the Governments in The United States. 
At least they had enough class back then to admit that they were "in" The United States.  
I happen to have and to have securely archived an original signed copy of this document implementing Corporate Feudalism---which was handwritten on over-sized sheets of rag paper in India ink, like something from the Middle Ages.
Please notice that the main Issuer and Purveyor of the bonds related to FDR's Executive Order 2039 action was the Depository Trust Company (DTC) and that the underlying holding company in possession of the "deposits" --- i.e., Birth Certificate Applications, was Cede and Company --- all managed by the newly created Vatican Government (est. 1929). 
Also notice that from FDR's side of the "New [Undisclosed] Deal" his profits from selling you into slavery and confiscating all your assets were poured into the Federal Reserve Banks and that "special trust accounts" were established in the names of all the "new deposits". 
This is where "YOU" came in, along with the all the undisclosed escrow accounts siphoning off your money, the value of your labor, and your natural resources--- including your children. 
When we started tracking it, the money trail led from DTC to the Vatican Bank (the Pope gets his share first) and then to the Bank of Canada (the Queen's "Commonwealth" share) and having been laundered through both these banks, the filthy loot of the Slave Traders comes back to the Mellon Bank (the share of the American traitors and their "progeny" --- mostly members of The Pilgrim Society) -----and finally, the remainder lands in the Federal Reserve Banks closest to wherever the victims were born.  
All the lucre raised from selling "me" that was left after the scumbags took their shares is sitting in the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, under a CUSIP/AUTOTRIS "Social Security Number" and an account labeled: RIEZINGER, ANNA MARIA. 
Please note that the habit of using all capital letters without hyphens between the words is known as "DOG LATIN" --- a venal script amounting to gibberish that was applied by the Roman Emperor Justinian to identify and defraud "tribal members" who were illiterate.  
This slave operation has been going on a long, long time, but it is time for it to end, and for the outraged world to throw off the yoke of men who at best could be called criminals--- and also the institutions which have betrayed the trust and Good Faith of billions of people.  
And there, right smack dab in the middle of the cradle of this stinking and reprehensible modern day enslavement and racketeering scheme, sits Pope Frances.  
There are only two possibilities: (1) Frances is the Chosen One of the evil and rightfully suppressed "Holy Roman Empire" and he was, as is rumored, put in power by means of murder and blackmail; (2) Frances is the loyal Jesuit "Bag Man" for Pope Benedict XVI, who has taken a powder from public view, similar to Prince Philip who retired from public life two days after receiving $950 trillion dollars worth of "Life Force Value Annuities" belonging to us and the Canadians. 
This is how, when, where, and by whom we were all secretively betrayed and the reason that we all have been treated as slaves and sucked dry by our public servants; and this is how slavery has been maintained in the modern world, right here in the land of the free and the home of the brave, since 1933. 
This was done to us by FDR and the Democratic Party, which deserves to be outlawed as a crime syndicate--- up front, here and now, for sure.  
I still have friends and family members who are Democrats and Catholics, both, and I love them dearly.  If they knew what has been going on in their Party and their Church, they would be as sickened as I am.
They couldn't imagine such evil and deceit, lurking just underneath the surface of their government, their political party, and most of all, their church.  
But the evidence is in, and the cards are called. 
Yes, Julia,  there were Republicans in the dog pile, too. 
Teddy Roosevelt, FDR's Cousin, was an absolute  promoter of the whole scheme, and a skilled and devious actor. His career was launched by the Robber Barons. He oversaw the First Bankruptcy of the Scottish Interloper doing business as The United States of America, Inc. and he established the foundations for the Federal Reserve System and did far more damage to this country than ten atom bombs----and he was a Republican. 
But he was also a Roosevelt. 
So we had Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, doing the set up, and we have FDR, a Democrat, doing the take down.  
Among all the Players who have contributed to this seething cauldron of corruption--- the name "Roosevelt" needs to be etched in stone. 
Rothschild means "Red Shield" and Roosevelt means "Red Field".  
Go figure. 
These men were so arrogant, so evil --- and so diabolically brilliant  --- that they literally believed that the rest of us would never be able to figure it out. 
Yet, there it is, all neatly dissected, decoded, and presented in a single paragraph of a single Executive Order issued back in 1933.  
Let's outlaw the Democratic Party as a crime syndicate.  And then let's abolish the Political Party System and the Federal Reserve System, too.  
Lets make a clean sweep and all go home to America, where we don't have political parties, don't buy and sell babies as "new deposits", and are sick to death of all of this crap. 


See this article and over 2100 others on Anna's website here:

To support this work look for the PayPal buttons on this website. 

How do we use your donations?  Find out here. 

Two Important Articles Possible shooting war coming over gun rights and confiscation.

Read these two articles. Do NOT miss this.

And from the Mental Militia:

Heavy Handed Gun Confiscation Looms In Virginia

Fake Democrats Incite Patriotic Public Angst
Newly Elected House, Senate, and Govenor Shock The People of Virginia
An Update for
The Mental Militia

Heavy Handed Gun Confiscation Looms In Virginia

Some Sheriffs Rebel; Counties and Towns Declare 2A Sanctuary Status

State government vows to force compliance with blatant infringement of Second Amendment and Militia clauses in main body of Constitution.

by Elias Alias December 22 2019 Eureka Montana
There is a lot of talk this year, 2019 AD, about the insanity erupting in the newly elected Governor’s office and legislature of the Commonwealth of Virginia.  It would seem that a bunch of statist-minded progressive Marxists posing as Democrats have by hook and crook taken over the government of Virginia. In their glee of achieving the impossible, they have seized the idea of gun confiscation in a truly treasonous fashion, and are threatening to use the Commonwealth’s guard units to enforce the gun confiscation.
I called them “statist-minded progressive Marxists posing as Democrats” because we all know that people who think the way *they* do cannot possibly be real Democrats. Real Democrats would honor the Constitution for the united States of America as the highest law of the land. And real Democrats would know that *that* Constitution not only embodies our treasured Bill of Rights (which guarantees that we the people have our State Militia and fully protected rights to keep and bear arms), but also makes mention of the “Militia of the several States” in three places within the main body of the Constitution. Quoting —
Militia Clauses
Article I, Section 8, Clauses 15 & 16:
[The Congress shall have Power To…]
Clause 15: [ ] “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;”
Clause 16: [ ] “To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;”
Article II, Section 2, Clause 1:
“The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States…”
See? Those passages would be as important to a real Democrat as anything else found in the document which created the Federal government. But the lily-white fake Democrat Governor of Virginia seems to have a mental block about grokking the quite plain English in those passages from the Constitution. In the Age of Literacy, Governor Northam has obviously ignored the Constitution to which he swore an Oath, or is so mind-damaged by electro-magnetic pollution emanating from his cell phone, smart meter, GMO foods, vaccines, and chemicals sprayed over his skies, that he simply cannot put two and two together. He is therefore a “fake Democrat”. I mean, if he were not sufficiently mind-damaged by his toxic environment, he would at least understand Thomas Jefferson’s version of the 2nd Amendment, which was ratified by the States, which reads —
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Apparently, many newbies in the Virginia legislature are also mind-damaged or consciously seditious. It is beginning to appear as if they are deliberately seeking to replace the Constitution with something more akin to the socialists’ wet dream called “Agenda 21”, and to do so, they have invented a false face to present to their constituents while posing as Democrats. Hiding behind that false face, they and the Governor are hopeful of ripping our Constitution to shreds.
It’s like they’ve believed their deception so intensely that they don’t even know how far out of touch with Democratic principles they really are. As T. S. Eliot would have put it, [my paraphrase]
“There shall be time, time to prepare a face to meet the faces one shall meet.”
It’s like this band of psychotic politicians are putting on their public face along with their coats and ties and rolling though all the canned quips and crafted scripts of their invisible leaders’ narrative like little mentally-controlled robots repeating verbatim their religiously memorized rhetoric for how to take control over the populace in their respective jurisdictions. It is like they literally believe their own lies while expecting and accepting their paychecks from the population they target.
I understand that such thinking as I am describing here may strike some as being unrealistic. Surely no American would ever stoop to such tyrannical motives. Yet “mind-damage” and/or intentional subversion/sedition is the best explanation I can come up with for their collective idiocy. They are self-destructing and it seems they want to accelerate that destruction. If the reader wishes to add to my understanding, please do – I’m happy to learn more about how any real American can gain political office and immediately announce that he is going to collect up the public’s most popular personal firearms. Yet that is just what the Governor and Legislature of Virginia have announced as one of their goals in the upcoming legislative session.
As Ted Dunlap of the Bitterroot Bugle in western Montana put it,
“The population centers elected Democratic majorities in both the state house and senate along with a Democrat governor. Immediately after the election results were in one of the losers winners announced their plan to implement confiscation of all AR-15 rifles in the state.
“He forgot that a whole lot of Virginians live there.”
The Virginia legislature and Governor have blundered and the blowback may become more than merely “interesting”. As Mr. Dunlap noted, they “forgot that a whole lot of Virginians live there”.
Dr. Edward Vieira, Jr., brought forth something which I had not heard about. It’s called, loosely, the “blackface-Northam scandal“.  Dr. Vieira mused to me that this is a great opportunity for President Trump. Here is how he put it — “Actually, standing up for Virginians could help Trump decidedly with his “base.”
I agree with Dr. Vieira. The President hopefully will make time to stop the blatant violation of Virginia citizens’ rights and let the Governor know that the Constitution must be honored. Dr. Vieira feels that the “black-face KKK photo embarrassment of Governor Northam’s racism is a great starting place for our President to focus. Dr. Vieira’s mention of that sent me searching and quickly I found a very interesting photograph in an article at the USA Today website.


‘I am deeply sorry’: Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam apologizes for yearbook photo with blackface, KKK costumes

From that article —
WASHINGTON – Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam apologized on Friday after acknowledging he was one of the two people in racist a [sic] photo that appeared in his medical school yearbook, showing a man dressed in blackface and another person wearing a Ku Klux Klan robe and hood. 
And further down that article is this doozy —
“The revelation of the yearbook photo comes at a particularly partisan time in Virginia. The state has been battling over a Democratic-led bill that would loosen restrictions on late-term abortions, allowing a woman to get an abortion well into the third trimester if the mother was physically or mentally at risk. 
This week the bill failed to be voted out of committee but the uproar hasn’t stopped.
On Wednesday, Northam voiced support for the bill, telling local radio station WTOP that third-trimester abortions were rare. 
When asked whether the bill would allow a mother to abort a pregnancy even if she was about to, or in the early stages of giving birth, Northam said yes and explained how it would be handled.”
See? The guy is a statist-minded socialist posing as a Democrat. He not only flunked the issue of racism, but also the issue of murdering unborn babies even in the third trimester. And to cap those off, he’s also pushing the gun confiscation agenda. The blowback is exploding swiftly, widely across the State. Examples are in many headlines, so let’s sample just a few here. Check these out, and if you want more, just search online for “Virginia Gun Confiscation, Governor, Legislature”.
Here is a “Tip of the Spear” article —

Tazewell County Forms Militia in Response to New Virginia Gun Laws

by Jim Grant – December 06, 2019
and another —
Rebel Yell Rings Out as USMC Major Warns Virginians Are Close to Tipping Point
and another —

Warning to LET: “Stop reporting on Virginia militia or your editors will be charged as felons.”

Posted by  | Dec 19, 2019: (Law Enforcement Today staff )(Salute Cyrellys)


In collecting my thoughts, I see several problems for the Democrat machine. On the national level, the Democrats have really stepped in it with this “impeachment” thing.  We have in America a “Left” and a “Right”, and an “In-between” segment which will show up at the voting polls. But the Left and Right and In-between segments, all totaled in numbers, do not make up even one half of the American voting-age population. That’s right. More voting-aged Americans do not vote than do vote. The non-voters outnumber all voters, but any of them may, at any given time, find some reason to vote, or to promote some candidate going into an election. I am wondering if the impeachment has caused a perception within the public mind of Trump being something like the “under-dog”. Many Americans have traditionally bet on the “underdog” in a race or game or sport. I wonder if there might be a movement within the public to adopt this President as an underdog worthy of helping, worthy of getting their vote.  The reason I wonder about that has to do with a Gallup (see footnote #1) analysis of Trump’s approval rating which is up 6 percent since the impeachment process got under way.  In the first half of October 2019 Trump’s approval rating was 39% percent. First half of December 2019 his rating is 45%. A six point rise in two months is very significant.
A trial in the Senate will likely raise that 45% rating yet higher, and at the same time attract new voter registrations from among the usually non-voting masses as well. But a Senate trial could also, possibly, expose testimony about the Bidens in Ukraine during the Obama administration, which would be a massive disaster for the Bidens and the Democrat Party in general.  I say, “massive”, because of the information White House attorney Rudy Guiliani has just brought back from Ukraine. Senate trial or no Senate trial, that info is going to sting the Bidens (and others in the Obama administration) in serious ways, including possible criminal charges. (#2) Fox News predicted that with this article —
So that is in the mix at national level. Add to that the fiasco into which the Governor and Legislature of Virginia have now blundered with their fantastic idea to collect up everyone’s AR-15 rifles, which are the largest-selling single item rifle in the booming gun market. (The fake democrats are now considering changing that to simply forcing everyone who owns an “assault rifle” to register it.) As we’ve seen above and all over the Internet, lots of Americans are suddenly aware that Virginia may indeed be a “test case” to gage HUMINT on the Human Terrain for control over the Human Domain, (or whatever), and that if the gun grab is successful then all other States would be targeted in much the same manner, with the final objective being the total disarmament of the American people. Lots of non-voting Americans are aware of that scenario and would register their resistance in various ways. What is going on in Virginia right now is a mushrooming of the number of Counties and Municipalities which have passed “Second Amendment Sanctuary” resolutions. At present time, according to National Review,  (#3), there are 93 County, Municipalities, and Cities across Virginia which have declared their intent to refuse to enforce unconstitutional new gun laws.
But it’s not just Virginia. A new militia movement is spreading like electricity in the air. Militias are popping up all over the place, and growing in memberships. Here is one headline on that —

As militia formed by police, veterans in Virginia explodes, so are others across America

Posted by  | Dec 18, 2019
(Quoting from that article)
Virginia – While Virginia is turning into a whole different kind of “battleground state”, we’re receiving messages from people in Washington, Oregon, Arizona, New Mexico, and California saying their own militias are exploding in numbers.
The Internet is aflame with such articles, and the consciousness of resistance to unlawful “laws” passed by deluded statist-minded socialists posing falsely as Democrats is swelling like high-tide. But there is a sane, sensitive, and intelligent bottom line in all of it. That is achieved once one familiarizes oneself with the Constitutional writings of Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr.  Dr. Vieira’s landing page at The Mental Militia is a good place to find access to all of his books, including three outstanding tomes on the lawful requirement that our States indeed do have their militia.
Scroll down that page to see a link for purchasing his book titled “Thirteen Words“. Get that book and read it right away, and if you really want to do something to help our country, get extra copies to send to law makers in your State.  Truly, Virginia’s Governor needs a copy, so if you’re in Virginia, please do buy a copy for him. And while you’re at it, apparently you should buy a copy for the idiotic Attorney General of Virginia, who just two days ago (December 20, 2019) made headlines by denouncing the sanctuary resolutions of more than ninety municipalities, cities, and Counties and explaining why they have no standing within the court system of Virginia.

Va. AG Herring says state’s gun ‘sanctuaries’ won’t be above likely new laws

Read that one HERE
From that article:
Gun rights supporters anticipate new gun laws in the new year, as does [AG] Herring, and he said cities or counties calling themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries will still be required to enforce the new laws.
Wow. Add the Attorney General to the list of statist-minded socialists posing as Democrats. So the government in Virginia seems to be packed with statists who will quote law upon law in their efforts to avoid upholding the highest law of the land. Look at two paragraphs in an article posted by Ammoland
“Del. Jay Jones, D-Norfolk, said a legal opinion could help clear up confusion on an issue that has ‘become a flashpoint across our state.’”
“The bills passed by the General Assembly and signed into law by the governor are binding for our entire Commonwealth and its citizens,” Jones complained in his letter to [AG] Herring. “The legal precedent we would set by allowing communities to selectively ignore those laws at will is alarming and indicative of the same mindset that nearly one hundred and fifty years ago led this country to dissolve into a civil war.”
In other words, if the State tells a County or City or Municipality that it must collect citizens’ guns in complete violation of the higher law (the U.S. Constitution), and the County or City or Municipality does not voluntarily obey that illegal law, then the State’s option is to force the confiscation of guns anyway and the court
In other words, if the State tells a County or City or Municipality that it must collect citizens’ guns in complete violation of the higher law (the U.S. Constitution), and the County or City or Municipality does not voluntarily obey that illegal law, then the State’s option is to force the confiscation of guns anyway and the court system is already of a mindset to criminalize anyone who does not obey the unconstitutional “law”. It seems to me like the “system” in Virginia’s government is united in its treason and is looking forward to testing any hard-headed resistance by gun owners who are shouting that the highest law of the land must be obeyed by lawmakers within States. The Bill of Rights exists, has authority over all States in compact, and clearly outlaws the very sort of laws the Governor and Legislature and Judiciary are hell-bent on imposing.
But as we see by now, this story can (and undoubtedly shall) go on and on. so let’s pause it here and see what this coming week brings. It could be more than just mildly interesting, Christmas notwithstanding. I will close with this passage from a little pamphlet available at Sheriff Mack’s “Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association” (CSPOA). The pamphlet is titled “The Victory For State Sovereignty” and contains passages from the 1997 Supreme Court decision in Mack/Printz v USA, in which Sheriffs Printz of Montana and Sheriff Mack of Arizona won their challenge of the Brady Law under the Clinton administration. The following passage is from the majority opinion written by Justice Scalia.
“It is incontestable that the Constitution established a system of “dual sovereignty”…. Although the States surrendered many of their powers to the new Federal Government, they retained “a residuary and inviolable sovereignty”…. Residual state sovereignty was also implicit, of course, in the Constitution’s conferral upon Congress of not all governmental powers, but only discrete, enumerated ones. Article 1, Section 8, which implication was rendered express by the Tenth Amendment’s assertion that “[t]he powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”. The Framers’ experience under the Articles of Confederation had persuaded them that using the States as the instruments of federal governance was both ineffectual and provocative of federal state conflict. The Framers rejected the concept of a central government that would act upon and through the States, and instead designed a system in which the state and federal governments would exercise concurrent authority over the people. The great innovation of this design was that our citizens would have two political capacities, one state and one federal, each protected from incursion by the other” – “a legal system unprecedented in form and design, establishing two orders of government, each with its own direct relationship, its own privity, its own set of mutual rights and obligations to the people who sustain it and are governed by it.”… The Constitution thus contemplates that a State’s government will represent and remain accountable to its own citizens. As Madison expressed it: “[T]he local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.” ….This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty.”
Having read that passage and fully understand the principle of “dual sovereignty” in which the citizen has two protections at law, a national and State protection simultaneously, I now an urgent note suggested to me by Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr.,  himself — We must get this to the attention of President Trump. President Trump has the lawful authority to subdue the treasonous betrayal of the Constitution by Virginia’s Governor and Legislature. If anyone reading this knows how to get this to President Trump’s attention, please – PLEASE! – do so quickly. By taking a stand for the Constitution in the aftermath of the insane Democrat impeachment, President Trump would strengthen his support base, and could get his approval ratings up another five points or more. But it needs to happen quickly. The 2020 legislative session for Virginia will start in just a couple of weeks. Thank You!
2 -Bombshells: Giuliani uncovers trove of Ukrainian documents, evidence indicating ‘Biden money-laundering’ and ‘perjury’ (Video) (and do watch that 2-minute video)

The Mental Militia
"Innocence In The Crosshairs"