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, August 6, 2023

Dear Jack -- About Confederate States, states, States, and STATES

 By Anna Von Reitz

Dear Jack.... 

How many times do I have to tell you that I don't accept any foreign titles, like "Mrs." or "Mrs. Riezinger" etc.?   My only Proper Person is a Lawful Person, not a Legal Person, and I want no further confusion about that fact. 

A "Confederate State" by definition is a "State of State" and always has been.  A State of State is a business organization that is either (1) owned and operated by a State, or, (2) contracted to provide the services of a State-of-State organization.  

At no time is a "Confederate State"  defined as a true State with physical borders and a living population. 

All "Confederate States" are "inchoate" or "incomplete" States due to their nature as business organizations set apart from the physical State. 

This is why they follow the nomenclature as "State of North Carolina" for example, which literally means "State belonging to or set apart from North Carolina".  

Even those Insular States like Puerto Rico that have land and soil, have not entered Statehood via the Northwest Ordinance, so their "Confederate States" -- for example, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico -- exist only on paper remain a "Possession of the United States". 

If you don't believe me, you are welcome to check the "Definitions" section of the Uniform Commercial Code, older Legal Dictionaries, Banking Dictionaries that cover Commercial jargon, American Jurisprudence (Second Edition), Benedict's Admiralty Law, and even the autobiography of Jefferson Davis and the numerous quotes of Abraham Lincoln concerning the Confederation, all of which serve to clarify exactly what "a" Confederation and a "Confederate State" is, and what the Confederation created by The Articles of Confederation ---- was. 

Your assertion that States of States precede States, and that States derive from states is, as usual, provably and logically wrong. 

The use of the styles: "states""States", and "STATES" is a Latin style convention.  

Again, I remind you that our official language is English.  But for the sake of the discussion, in Latin, the use of all small letters denotes the superior party, Upper Lower case denotes indentured servitude or public office, and the use of all capitals indicates a slave, a corporation, or a dead man's estate.

With that generalized explanation in place, you are prepared to learn why a "state" in Latin is superior to a "State" and a "State" is superior to a "STATE". 
In the Latin system, the "state" refers to the national soil jurisdiction formed by the contiguous counties in each physically-defined State all joined together, while "State" refers to the international jurisdiction defined by the land underlying the soil and is defined by the physical borders of each State land mass.  

Please note that because it underlies the soil, the land must be present and must be claimed prior to the soil, or the soil has nothing to rest upon.  

So the national jurisdiction of the soil depends on the international jurisdiction of the land, and both are inseparably joined. 

The realm of the States-of-States lies outside physicality in the jurisdiction of the air.  In the Latin system, the STATE is a Confederate State.  

Using English conventions, we just call it the State of North Carolina, Incorporated. 

Even in the days before the so-called Civil War, the unincorporated Confederate State-of-State was called, "The State of North Carolina".  

So when you say, "Confederation" you are talking about a consortium of businesses that are allied together.   

And when you refer to each Confederate State, you are referring to an inchoate, non-physical business that may simply be "corporate" or which may be "incorporated" --- but in any case, is a separate business entity quite apart from any State of the Union. 

So now that we finally know what we are talking about and know that "Confederate States" are not the same as "States" in nature or jurisdiction, we are ready to consider -- who or what was responsible for organizing, running, and overseeing these "Confederate States", that is, businesses providing government services for the States of the Union? 

The Federal Constitution issued in 1787 to the States of America answers that question. 

The original Union States (or in the Latin system, Union states) had been using the business name "States of America" since the 1770's.  The 1787 Federal Constitution refers to this "States of America" as the Subcontractor receiving the service contract. 

So, the original Union (not the Northern faction in the Civil War) operating as the States of America was the recipient of "The Constitution for the united States of America" and was the operator of the Federal Republic and the Union states (Latin nomenclature system) were the owners of the individual Confederate States (State of State businesses). 

Contrary to the idea most people have been given, the "more perfect union" referred to in The Articles of Confederation was obviously the States of America and the original Union of the Union states (Latin nomenclature system). 

The Articles of Confederation were the Articles of Incorporation for the State-of-State (Confederate) businesses belonging to the Union States, so that they, similar to the State Members of the Federation of States, could act together in their mutual self-interest: that is, their "more perfect union". 

When the Confederation broke down for lack of quorum, that entire system broke down. It's been defunct for160 years. 

It can be restored via the Reconstruction but that can only be accomplished by the actual States, not the States of States. 


See this article and over 4300 others on Anna's website here:

To support this work look for the Donate button on this website. 

How do we use your donations?  Find out here.

My "Blood Oath" --- and Yours

 By Anna Von Reitz

I am so tired of hearing this clap-trap that I am a "Vatican Agent" when I have never worked for or with the Vatican in my life, and am not even a Catholic. 

This stems from the seven (7) years I spent giving Due Process to the Municipal United States Corporation Employees at the behest of their Employer, Pope Benedict XVI -- telling them what they were doing wrong and giving them the chance to correct before their Corporation was liquidated in 2015.   

This false allegation that I am a "Vatican Agent" comes from people who are so ignorant that they equate the Pope with the Vatican and the Vatican with the Church. 

Such people will never get it through their thick skulls that the Roman Catholic Church has a secular side to it, which impacts our daily lives in profound ways --it rules the Jurisdiction of the Air, including all the patents, copyrights, trademarks and corporations in the world. 

That's why I have recently sued for the liquidation of hundreds of criminal corporations under Ecclesiastical Law.  

Of course, back in 2006, we went to the Pope, because it was his CORPORATION and the crimes were occurring in his jurisdiction.  

So, I say, "Uh-duh." 

No, I am not like all the Patriot Geniuses out there who are calling me a "Vatican Agent" and criticizing me for taking the problem to those responsible for it, instead of helplessly chasing my tail and howling at the moon. Like they do. 

Our freedom was being infringed by a CORPORATION owned and operated by the Pope. 

Our whole country was being mis-administered and run into the ground by a CORPORATION owned and operated by the Pope.   

So who else would you talk to or work with to solve the problem?  

The Pope. 

All roads still lead to Rome for a reason.  That reason is that the Jurisdiction of the Air is ruled by the Pope and it includes all the corporations on Earth. 

I am similarly sick of hearing purported Christians talking about my Blood Oath and mistaking it for a blood oath taken to a Secret Society.  

My Blood Oath was the same Blood Oath all these hideously ignorant Christians have taken and continue to take every time they have Communion.  

Uh-duh, again.  

In the name of the True God, what does that Communion wine represent?  Blood. 

What do you think you are doing when you take Communion?  Taking a Blood Oath. 

In 90% of Christian Churches, the Congregation recites the Apostles' Creed -- reading the contract aloud -- before taking communion.  

The existence of a verbal contract places the action in the Jurisdiction of the Sea -- Satan's realm, and makes your affirmation of it a binding Oath. 

So what happens at Communion? 

You enter into a contract in which you consume the  "Blood" and take the Blood Oath to the effect that you believe and affirm every word of The Apostles' Creed.

You then receive the "consideration" on the contract, the Communion wine, and that consideration guarantees your what?  Your salvation. 

And what does "salvation" imply?  Again, it's a sea-term, salvage, that the Church applies. 

Your wrecked boat is going to be hauled to safe harbor in the grave and the Church is going to be paid handsomely for the labor and materials needed to do this work. 

And if you aren't rolling your eyes toward the ceiling by now, you certainly should be.  

It's the same language and rationale they use when they claim that your Mother's "birth canal" is part of the "Navigable Inland Waterways" where the British Monarch is your Trustee on "the High Seas and Navigable Inland Waterways".  

Why do you think they insist on calling physicians Medical Doc(k)tors?   So that you are "delivered to the Doc(k)".  And there is even a double-play on that. 

What does it mean in British legal terminology to be "delivered to the dock(et)?"  Ah, your cargo (body) is being delivered to the dock, where the Customs Clerk, aka, Bar Attorneys, are waiting to assess fees and determine your destination, most likely jail. 

Ultimately, they take the joke even further, because all that can be further stretched to mean that you are delivered to the Dock-ette, the Temple Prostitute representing the Great Whore in the Babylonian religion. 

Do you get the joke now?  Are you laughing, or just going, "Ouch!" 

Even the very Elect will be fooled. 

But don't think that my "Blood Oath" was ever anything different than yours, if you consider yourself a "Christian" ----and thank the True God who sees the heart and intention and doesn't judge us because we are fools. 


See this article and over 4300 others on Anna's website here:

To support this work look for the Donate button on this website. 

How do we use your donations?  Find out here.

United States History Versus American History

 By Anna Von Reitz

Dear Adam and Many Others,Too: 

My heart goes out to you and everyone else struggling their way forward and looking for the truth. 

The quickest and easiest way to get acquainted with the functions and traditions of the State Assemblies is to look for an old (more than 100 years old) High School or College level  "American History" or "American Government"  book that covers structure of State government. 

When I was a girl, we had separate history classes, one for US History and one for American History.  People knew that these were two separate subjects, and there were two separate books.  

In the years since then, the American History books have been quietly removed from the shelves and from the curriculum of the public schools, which results in our pervasive ignorance about our actual American Government.  

The old people have forgotten and the young people never knew. 

Even as I was going through public school, circa 1965, the books were being changed.  My graduating class in 1974 was the last graduating class to have both American History and United States History classes. 

Jimmy Carter's illegal meddling in local schools via the Federal Department of Education and coercive use of Federal Grants to reward compliant School Districts (that word again -- any time you see "district" as in District of Columbia, pay attention) resulted in American History books either disappearing or being rewritten in a deceptive way. 

For example, in US History books the "three branches of government" were described exclusively in terms of the Federal Government and we were told that the branches of the Federal Government were the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch, and the Judicial Branch.  

Fair enough?  Everyone heard that?  

But in the American History books the "three branches of government" were described as Federal, State, and Local Government.  

If you never read American History, you wouldn't have a clue that there is a different meaning attached to "three branches of government". 

Another example-- in the United States History books, we read that military districts were set up as the organizational units of the earliest Federal Government administered by the Second Continental Congress. 

In the American History books, we read that  British Land Law provided the template for the administration of the Colonies and later guided the adoption of the County and State Government System in which the soil jurisdiction was controlled by the Local County Government, and the international land jurisdiction was controlled by the State Government. 

Both bits of information are highly informative, whether viewed from the standpoint of United States History or from the standpoint of American History, but as you can begin to appreciate, the loss of half our history has crippled our understanding of how things are supposed to work. 

In United States History, the "assemblies" referenced are all (military) District Assemblies.  

In American History, the Assemblies are State Assemblies. 

In United States History, the Confederate States (States of States) are spoken of in the same breath as the actual States of the Union, and "the Confederate States of America" means the government headed by Jefferson Davis during the Civil War.   

In American History, the Confederate States (States of States)  are called States of America whether from the North or the South, and there is a clear difference between States and Confederate States-of-States. The phrase "the Confederate States of America" means the various States-of-States organizations operating as a group, not the government headed up by Jefferson Davis in the Civil War. 

You can begin to see how our failure to study American History in public schools has truncated our view.  

It makes total sense that the Confederation formed in 1781 under The Articles of Confederation was called the States of America, and so, each member of the States of America Confederation was called "The State of New York", "The State of Florida" and so on.  When the Southern members split off and called themselves "The Confederate States of America" --- it isn't just a name picked out of a hat.  

There is an entire context to the name "The Confederate States of America" that you miss, if you don't read American History and are limited to the United States History version.  

It's the same way throughout, talking about the same or similar things, like looking at the same object using two different lenses. 

In United States History, the words "State National" refer to the people of each State of the Union and it's clear we, Americans, acquire our nationality from our States.  We are Wisconsinites and Californians and New Yorkers... 

In American History, the similar words "state national" means any American from any of the States of the Union who doesn't work for the government or hold a government office, that is, "state national" means a member of the General Public. 

You see?  Very similar vocabularies, similar words, but different context. 

In United States History, the word  "Assembly" refers to the (military) District Assembly and the Districts send representatives to their State-of -State Legislature, like the State of California Legislature. 

In American History, the word "Assembly" refers to the State Assembly composed of the General Assembly of the people living within the borders of the State.  In the American system, each State Assembly is the Legislature for the physically defined State of the Union.  

The best way to learn all this stuff is the way we learned it -- two separate text books, one United States History and one American History. 

Of course, there are Primary Source documents underlying all of this and it's easy to get confused once you dive into the archives, but if you stick to the old textbooks they have it pretty well separated out and by reading both, you will be able to observe the differences.  

In United States History, one State-of-State is pretty much a cookie cutter of any other State-of-State (because they are all franchises of the same Parent Corporation, like Dairy Queen franchises) and the laws of one such State-of-State are adopted in all the others. 

In American History, each State is enclosed by its borders and its laws are uniquely its own and do not extend to any other State of the Union.  

In United States History, the Courts are extremely limited to Federal topics and regulatory authorities and, of course, Military Tribunals; the words "Common Law" refer to Military Common Law, which nowadays means the Universal Code of Military Justice.  All their courts operate within Judicial Districts. 

In American History, the Courts are Courts of General Jurisdiction, and though each Court only holds jurisdiction within specific physical areas -- County Courts in each County, State Courts in each State, Federal Courts within the borders of this country--- their powers are wide-ranging, and unique. The words "Common Law" refer to American Common Law.  

I've just given you an idea -- a taste -- of the differences between United States History and American History, and what you are missing as a result of not studying American History in public school. 

You can thank the Great Traitor, Jimmy Carter.  

So when you come to me and say, where are you getting all this? Prove it....  how do you know?  

I was lucky enough to be born in Wisconsin almost seventy years ago and I was also lucky to have a Grandmother who was 75 when I was born, a very bright woman who lived another ten years and who made it her business to teach me about my country and American History.  

I had the advantage of reading both United States and American History, in tandem, in school.  

I "know" these things the same way I can add and subtract, and so should you --- all of you.  

And the best way I can think of for you to check out the information for yourselves, is to go find an old American History textbook and start reading. 

After all the obfuscation and impersonation and lies you've been told, I don't blame you for wanting to check out the information I've given you -- but at the same time, we can't all just stand around while everyone else educates themselves and gets up to speed.  

If we did that, we'd have to stop the presses and all progress every time another confused fellow-American walked through the door, and that would cost the very precious time we have to accomplish the work of the actual State Assemblies. 

So I will make an appeal to you -- I am a long way past needing a good textbook of American History and Government, so when you find one that you like and that makes everything clear for you, come back and recommend it and let me try to work out a copyright agreement with the publisher to reprint it or let us reprint it. 

There are millions of Americans who don't know their own history, and other than word of mouth and Primary Source citations from people like me, what we really need is a good textbook we can hand out. 


See this article and over 4300 others on Anna's website here:

To support this work look for the Donate button on this website. 

How do we use your donations?  Find out here.

Public International Alert for State Assemblies

 By Anna Von Reitz

The unpleasant truth is that the Civil War was never ended by any peace process, so the Northern Army simply settled in and occupied our country. 

You can look all day for many days on end, and all you will find are the documents surrendering Lee's Army, and three public proclamations (establishing a contract) by President Andrew Johnson declaring "peace on the land".  

You can see that the Army of Occupation and later Presidents didn't honor that contract. 

What then transpired was a roll call of evils, most of which required the Army of Occupation to impersonate us -- that is, to pretend to be us, in order to control us.  

They substituted British Territorial State-of-State organizations for our American State-of-State businesses.  

They substituted their military districts for our counties and held "District Assemblies" from then until now.  

They substituted their corporation elections for our public elections. 

The British Government took full advantage of this situation and has worked under a Cloak of Secrecy about this ever since. 

So how did the British Camel get its nose into our tent again?  

They were never far away.  After the Revolution, as part of the peace process, they obtained certain concessions.  Brits were allowed to stay in this country and keep their private property under the terms of The Residence Act.  

The British Territorial Government got juicy contracts to provide governmental services, especially military services. 

The British King remained our Trustee on the High Seas and Navigable Inland Waterways. 

This same British Territorial Government headquartered in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (look it up if you don't believe me) fought with the Northern States-of-States in the Civil War, and took over owing to the bankruptcy of those organizations in 1863. 

So now, instead of an American controlled Army of Occupation, we've had to contend with a British Territorial Army of Occupation. 

It has been this way ever since.  

This is how "President" George Herbert Walker Bush and Henry Kissinger and General Colin Powell could all accept an office and titles and emoluments from a foreign government and serve as Knights of Her Royal Highness Elizabeth II.  

We do have the possibility of up-ending all this by restoring and Reconstructing our American Government, but only if we hold tight, know what is going on, and remember who we are and how things are supposed to work. 

As the only lawful Civilian Government of this country, the U.S. Army is supposed to answer to us, not to the British Monarch and not to their own whim.  

They are supposed to protect us and not interfere in our government--- but the fact is that they don't want to give up control and they are interfering. 

They want to continue their illegal and immoral occupation of our country and they want to continue to treat us, their Employers, as a "conquered people".  

If so, we are only conquered by our own ignorance.

Right now, we have the British Territorial Army personnel known as U.S. Citizens hard at work trying to commandeer our fledgling American State Assemblies, coming through our doors, pretending to be us, with the express object of taking control of our Assemblies.  

All of a sudden, we have these guys from their "National Assembly" organization,  horning in and spreading vicious rumors about me personally and pretending to join our Assemblies in good faith.  

It's another British Substitution Scheme.  

The same process they employed to substitute their States-of-States for ours and to set up and run their District Assemblies as if they were our State Assemblies is being employed to try to take over our State Assemblies.  

So now, I am instructing all the State Assemblies to close their doors to non-member participation and to watch their membership roles carefully. Non-members can observe, but not take part in floor discussions or votes of any kind.  

There is little doubt that these embedded enemies of our country have already infiltrated our organizations to some extent, in order to observe our operations. 

In addition to British Sleeper Cells trying to commandeer what we've built, we have British Territorial organizations in open competition in a few States.  

In Oregon, we have Ron Vrooman's group, calling itself the Oregon Statewide Jural Assembly, and pretending to be an American Jural Assembly.  

We know that isn't true, because American Jural Assemblies are drawn from the General Assembly membership of our State Assemblies.  They don't exist as "independent" vigilante groups like Ron's. 

In Missouri, we've had an unfortunate incident in which the Coordinator was seduced into this same idea that The Missouri Assembly was functioning as a Jural Assembly and not a General Assembly.  Only a handful of The Missouri Assembly members were properly papered up, and when the Recording Secretaries discovered this, they were castigated for demanding correction.  

What is absolutely crucial at this juncture is for Americans to have a firm sense of who they are and know the warning signs. 

The Impersonators will seem very similar to us. They will use deceptively similar terms.  

For example, they will talk about "the Common Law" by which they will mean Military Common Law, not American Common Law. 

In the same spirit, they will talk about "Grand Juries" but they will be talking about Grand Juries of U.S. Citizens convened as Military Tribunals of the District Government, not Grand Juries convened by the people of this country. 

They will talk a great deal about "the Constitution" by which they will mean The Constitution of the United States of America --- their own Territorial Constitution which is their meal ticket.  

They will play upon the common indoctrination and embrace and express the idea that Americans live under "the" Constitution, but in fact, only Public Employees live under any Constitution.  

It's their job to obey the limits of the Federal Constitutions and it's our job to enforce the limits of the Constitutions --- there's a difference involved. 

They are acting as Employees and viewing their Constitution as their employment contract; we are acting as Employers, and demanding that they obey the terms of their service contract. 

They will also talk about "democracy" and promote democratic ideas, like "majority rule", even to the point of allowing majorities to infringe on the most basic rights of individuals.  

They don't understand that our American Government is not and never has been a democracy.  

These interlopers can appear to be very patriotic and pro-American, but in fact, they are confused about what American is.  They were never taught. 

And they don't want to learn. 

They just want to continue bulling their way through life with the assumptions they were given in Public School.  

They have a mentality of willful ignorance. 

Somehow, somewhere, I must hope that I have gotten my message through to enough thinking Americans so that you can sort things out for yourselves.  

1. We are being occupied by a British Territorial-controlled U.S. Army staffed by U.S. Citizens. 

2. These U.S. Citizens think that they are acting as Americans when they are not. 

3. So our country is under occupation by what merely appears to be our own military and is in fact a British Territorial Expeditionary Force. 

4. These U.S. Citizens are coming into our State Assemblies with malice aforethought to commandeer them. 

5. This is part of a command and control strategy using substitution schemes that has been in place ever since the Civil War. 

6. They have substituted their States-of-States for ours, their incorporated "Counties of"  for our Counties, their District Assemblies for our State Assemblies, and now they are trying to commandeer our operations again by substituting their U.S. Citizens as members of our State Assemblies.  

7. All State Assemblies are hereby alerted and advised to close their doors to this kind of interference and infiltration.  

U.S. Citizens must be allowed to record their birthright political status, but as long as they work for or identify with the Federal Government (military or civil service) they cannot be allowed to disrupt our State Assemblies. 

This is because they have a built-in conflict of interest and allegiance to a foreign government. 

Licensed professionals have a similar built-in conflict of interest and are subject to coercion from the King's Government. 

A word to the wise should be sufficient. 


See this article and over 4300 others on Anna's website here:

To support this work look for the Donate button on this website. 

How do we use your donations?  Find out here.

Derek Johnson - Did Trump & The Military Put Together A 7 Year Plan?, Is The Plan Operational?

Tenth Sunday After Pentecost

Rev. Fr. Leonard Goffine's

The Church's Year

 At the Introit of the Mass pray with the Church for God's help to guard us against our enemies:

INTROIT When I cried to the Lord, he heard my voice, from them that draw near to me, and he humbled them, who is before all ages, and remains forever. Cast thy care upon the Lord, and he shall sustain thee. (Ps. LIV.) Hear, O God, my prayer, and despise not my supplication; be attentive to me, and hear me. 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 O God, who dost manifest Thine almighty. power above all in showing pardon and pity: multiply upon us Thy mercy, that we running forward to the attainment of Thy promises, may be made partakers of Thy heavenly treasures. 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. XII. 2-11 .) Brethren, You know that when you were heathens; you went to dumb idols according as, you were led. Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man, speaking by the Spirit of God, saith. Anathema to Jesus. And no man can say: the Lord Jesus, but by the Holy Ghost. Now there are diversities of graces, but the same Spirit; and there are diversities of ministries, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but the same God, who worketh all in all. And the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man unto profit. To one, indeed, by the Spirit, is given the word of wisdom: and to another, the word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit: to another, faith in one Spirit: to another, the working of miracles: to another, prophecy: to another, the discerning, of spirits: to another, divers kinds of tongues: to another, of speeches. But all these things one and the same Spirit worketh, dividing to every one according as he will.

EXPLANATION The apostle here reminds the Corinthians of the great grace they received from God in their conversion, and urges them to be grateful for it; for while heathens, they cursed Jesus, but being now brought to the knowledge of the Spirit of God, they possess Christ as their Lord and Redeemer who can be known and professed only by the enlightenment of the Holy , Ghost. The holy Spirit works in different ways, conferring His graces on whom He wills; to one He gives wisdom to understand the great truths of Christianity; to another the gift of healing the sick; to another the gift of miracles and of prophecy; to another the gift of discerning spirits, to know if one is governed by the Spirit of God, or of the world, Satan and the flesh; to another the gift of tongues. The extraordinary gifts, namely, those of working miracles, and of prophesying &c. became rarer as the faith spread, whereas the gifts which sanctify man will always remain the same.,

[See Instruction on the gifts of the Holy Ghosts Pentecost.]

Tenth Sunday After PentecostGOSPEL (Luke XDII. 9-14.) At that time, Jesus spoke this parable to some who trusted in themselves as just, and despised others. Two men went up into the Temple to pray: the one a Pharisee, and the other a Publican. The Pharisee standing, prayed thus with himself: O God, I give thee thanks that I am not as the rest of men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, as also is this Publican. I fast twice in the week; I give tithes of all that I possess. And the Publican standing afar off, would not so much as lift up his eyes towards heaven, but struck his breast, saying: O God, be merciful to me a sinner. I say to you: this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: because every one that exalteth himself shall be humbled, and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

Why did Christ make use of' this parable of the Pharisee and the Publican?

To teach us never proudly to condemn or despise a man, even though he should appear impious, for we may be deceived like the Pharisee who despised the Publican, whom he considered a great sinner, while, in reality, the man was justified before God on account of his repentant spirit.

What should we do before entering a Church?

We should reflect that we are going into the house of God, should therefore think what we are about to say to Him, and what we wish to ask of Him. That we may make ourselves less unworthy to be heard, we should humble ourselves as did Abraham, (Gen. XVIII. 27.) remembering that we are dust and ashes, and on account of our sins unworthy o appear before the eyes of God, much less to address Him , for He listens to the prayers of the humble only, (Ps. CI, 18.) and gives them His grace, while He resists the proud. (James IV. 6.)

Was the Pharisee's prayer acceptable to God?

No, for it was no prayer, but boasting and ostentation; he praised himself, and enumerated his apparent good works. But in despising others and judging them rashly he sinned grievously instead of meriting God's grace.

Was the Publican's prayer acceptable to God?

Yes, for though short, it was humble and contrite. He stood afar off, as if to acknowledge himself unworthy of the presence of God and intercourse with men. He stood with downcast eyes, thus showing that he considered himself because of his sins unworthy to look towards heaven, even confessed himself a sinner, and struck his breast to punish, as St. Augustine says, the sins which he had committed in his heart: This is why we strike our breast at certain times during Mass, for by this we acknowledge ourselves miserable sinners, and that we are sorry for our sins.


We should learn from this gospel that God looks upon the humble and exalts them, but is far from the proud. (Ps. CXXXVII. 6.) The Pharisee went to the temple entirely wrapt up in himself, and the good works which he thought he had performed, but returned empty and hated by God; the Publican, on the contrary, appearing before God as a public but penitent sinner, returned justified. Truly,. an humble sinner is better in the sight of God than a proud just man!

He who glories in his own good works, or performs them to please men, or to win their praise, loses his merit in the eyes of the most High, for Christ says: Take heed that you do not your justice before men, to be seen by them: otherwise you shall not have a reward of your Father who is in heaven. (Matt. VI. 1.)

In order that we may learn to despise vain glory, these doctrines should be well borne in mind. We should consider that it will happen to those who seek after vain glory, as to the man who, made many toilsome journeys on land and sea in order to accumulate wealth, and had no sooner acquired it than he was shipwrecked, and lost all. Thus the ambitious man avariciously seeking glory and honor will find, when dying, that the merit which he might have had for his good works, is now lost to him, because he did not labor for the honor of God. To prevent such an evil, strive at the commencement of every good work which you undertake, to turn your heart to God by a good intention.

But that you may plainly recognize this vice, which generally keeps itself concealed, and that you may avoid it, know that pride is an inordinate love of ostentation, and an immoderate desire to surpass others in honor and praise. The proud man goes beyond himself, so to speak, makes far more of himself than he really is, and, like the Pharisee, despises others; the humble man, on the contrary, has a low estimate of himself, looks upon himself as nothing and, like the Publican, despises no one but himself, and thus is pleasing in the sight of God.

ASPIRATION O God, who hearest the prayers of the humble, but dost resist the proud, I earnestly beseech Thee to give me an humble heart, that I may imitate, the humility of Thy only begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and thereby merit to be exalted with Him in heaven.


In the epistle of this day the Apostle St. Paul speaks of the different gifts of the Holy Ghost which He distributes as He pleases. These extraordinary graces which the apostle mentions, are not necessary for salvation. But the Church teaches, that the grace of the Holy Ghost is
necessary for salvation, because without it we could neither properly believe, nor faithfully observe the commandments of God. For the holy religion of Jesus teaches, and experience confirms, that since the fall of our first parents we are weak and miserable, and of ourselves, and by our own strength, we cannot know or perform the good necessary for our salvation. We need a higher aid, a higher, assistance, and this assistance is called grace.

What, then, is grace?

Grace is an inward, supernatural gift which God through finite goodness, and in consideration of Christ's merits, ants us to enable us to work out our salvation.

Grace is a gift, that is, a present, a favor, a benefit. t is an inward and supernatural gift; an inward gift, Because it is bestowed upon man's soul to distinguish it tom external gifts and benefits of God, such as: food, clothing, health; grace is a supernatural gift, because it is above nature. In creating our souls God gives us a certain degree of light which enables us to think, reflect, judge, to acquire more or less knowledge: this is called natural light. In the same way He gives our souls the power in some measure to overcome sensual, vicious inclinations; this power is called natural power (virtue). To this natural light and power must be added a higher light and a higher power, if 'man would be sanctified and saved. This higher light and higher power is grace. It is, therefore, called a supernatural gift, because it surpasses the natural power of man, and produces in his understanding and in his will wholesome effects, which he could not produce without it. For example, divine faith, divine love is a supernatural gift or grace of God, because man of his own power could never receive as certain God's revelations and His incomprehensible mysteries with so great a joy and so firm a conviction, and could never love God above all things and for His own sake, unless God assisted him by His grace.

God grants us grace also through pure benevolence without our assistance, without our having any right to it; He grants it without cost, and to whom He pleases; but He gives it in consideration of the infinite merits of Christ Jesus, in consideration of Christ's death on the cross, and of the infinite price of our redemption. Finally, grace is a gift of God, by which to work out our salvation, ,that is, it is only by the grace of God that we can perform meritorious works which aid us in reaching heaven. Without grace it is impossible for us to perform any good action, even to have a good thought by which to gain heaven.

From this it follows that with the grace of God we can accomplish all things necessary for our salvation, fulfil all the commandments of God, but without it we can do nothing meritorious. God gives His grace to all, and if the wicked perish, it is because they do not cooperate with its divine promptings.

How is grace divided?

Into two kinds, actual and sanctifying grace.

Actual grace is God's assistance which we always need to accomplish a good work, to avoid sin which we are in danger of committing, or that grace which urges us on to good, and assists us in accomplishing it; for it is God, says the Apostle Paul, (Phil. II. 13.) who worketh in you both to will and to accomplish. If a good work is to be performed by us, God must enlighten our mind that we may properly know the good and distinguish it from evil; He must rouse our will and urge it on to do the known good and to avoid the evil; He must also uphold our will and increase our strength that what we wish to do, we may really accomplish.

This actual grace is, therefore, necessary for the just, that they may always remain in sanctifying grace, and accomplish good works; it is necessary for the shiner that he may reach the state of sanctifying grace.

What is sanctifying grace?

It is the great benefit which God bestows upon us, when He sanctifies and justifies us; in other words: sanctifying grace is the love of God, given to us by the Holy Ghost, which love dwells in us and whose temple we become, or it is the advent and abiding of God in our hearts, as promised in the words of Jesus: If any one love me he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will make our abode with him. (John XVI. 23.)

He who possesses sanctifying grace, possesses the greatest treasure that a man can have on earth. For what can be more precious than to be beautiful in the sight of God, acceptable to Him, and united with Him! He who possesses this grace, carries within himself the supernatural image of God, he is a child of God, and has a right to the inheritance of heaven.

How is this sanctifying grace lost?

It is lost by every mortal sin, and can only be regained by a complete return to God, by true repentance and amendment. The loss of sanctifying grace is a far greater injury than the loss of all earthly possessions. How, terrible, then, is mortal sin which deprives us of this treasure!