South Sudan

Samuel Huntington’s civilizational fault line dividing Africa's Islamic north from the sub-Saharan south ran through one nation in particular: Sudan. But as of 2011, the region south of the fault line has become the nation of South Sudan. Although it is not a majority Christian nation, South Sudan has a Catholic president and boasts 80% of the untapped oil supply once owned by the Muslim north – an export which pays for 98% of South Sudan’s national budget and is the reason why Islamic Sudan’s currency is dropping in worth while inflation increases.

The departure of South Sudan, however, has given Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir the go-ahead to declare Sudan an Islamic state. With a new constitution in the works, Sudan’s laws will be rooted in Sharia law and enforced throughout the nation. This has left the Christians remaining in Sudan worried about a coming persecution and religious discrimination. Many Christians – and some Muslims – are now currently waging a rebellion in the boarding states of Blue Nile and South Kordofan (see map). Both South Kordofan and Blue Nile boarder South Sudan.

Writer Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi says this could lead to war:

In any event, it is clear that the events in the two border-states could well provoke a war between Sudan and its southern neighbor, with the former accusing the latter of orchestrating the rebels' activities. South Sudan denies this allegation, but may feel compelled to support the [rebels] in the near future should Khartoum's forces overwhelm the rebels and carry out mass killings on a similar scale to what happened in Darfur.

Given the demise of Gadhafi, Darfur itself may profit from arms coming across its boarder with Libya, and if a new rebellion breaks out there Sudan may be torn apart by economic and military woes in addition to ethnic divisions and the culture conflict of imposing Sharia law as the law of the land.

Understanding Patriarchy through Mary

Mary boasts the greatest status among all creatures for she is truly the Mother of God. But to this status, Mary says: Ecce, Fiat, and Magnificat. Rather than saying, “Behold, I am woman, hear me roar,” she says “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. Let it be done to me according to His word... My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord…” As the Ark of the New Covenant and Queen Mother of the Kingdom of God, Mary wields more power than any other woman ever created – yet power is not her pursuit. Mary seeks to follow the will of the Father, the rule of the Father. In other words, Mary supports patriarchy, a word which literally means the rule of the father.

This is why Mary must be hated by Satan and feminists.

But Mary also helps us better understand who God is and our part in salvation history. She did this in 431 when her Motherhood helped Christians recognize the singularity of Christ’s personhood. Today, however, there are many who mistakenly place Jesus and the Devil on an equal, if opposite, playing field as if Jesus and the Devil are two opposing forces of equal strength and power. But Jesus is the infinite and eternal Son of God while Satan is a mere creature whom Jesus could eliminate with the snap of His divine finger. It is really Mary who is the opposite of Satan. While Mary says, “I am the handmaid of the Lord,” Satan says, “I will not serve!” While Satan is the most powerful creature by nature, Mary is the most powerful creature by supernature (i.e. by being full of grace).

Sadly, the Hilary Clinton’s of today’s feminism would find themselves much more in agreement with the individualism and the will to power found in Satan rather than in the humility and submission of Mary to the will of the Father.

We must also not forget the unique relationship Mary has with each person of the Trinity, for in addition to being the Mother of the Son, she is also the daughter of the Father and the spouse of the Holy Spirit. Most importantly, we remember that these relations are gendered. Mary is mother, daughter, and spouse – and for those who like to think of the Holy Spirit as woman or neutered, we recall that Jesus declared the Holy Spirit a “he” and that the Holy Spirit’s work of bringing about the incarnation is very much a masculine act. Understanding this also helps us understand what theologians mean when they talk about Mary as the Icon of the Holy Spirit. The closeness of identity between Mary and the Spirit is only in the way that a wife and a husband share a close identity through their marital union.

There is a knee-jerk reaction to the word “patriarchy” today. But as we pray the “Our Father” and use “Father” when we address our priests this weekend, let us also recall Mary and remember that she is the most patriarchal of all Christians. Our society would crucify any who believed in patriarchy, but like Mary let us be bold enough to go to that cross where life is paradoxically found in doing the will of the Father amidst a culture of death.

Debunking Crusade Myths

Dr. Brendan McGuire gave a wonderful free series of lectures on the Crusades over at the Institute of Catholic Culture. In one part of his lecture, Dr. McGuire examines the reasons why crusaders went to war. The secularizing, anti-Catholic historians of the 19th century focused on the second son theory and the estates theory – both of which are still emphasized in pop-history literature, movies, and television documentaries. Dr. Jonathan Riley-Smith, the most prolific living historian on the crusades, and a Knight of Malta, debunked both theories through use of a historical method called prosopography (i.e. the study of history based on the creating of databases on individuals who participated in an event).

According to the second son theory, titles and wealth went down to the firstborn son and thus the poorer knights of Europe would leave for the riches of foreign lands. In actuality, this theory is simply 17th-18th century European colonialism anachronistically projected into the medieval past. Riley-Smith, using a computer-driven database of medieval charters, discovered that the vast majority of crusaders in the First Crusade were wealthy land owners who had to expend 4-5 years’ worth of annual income up front in order to fund their part of the crusade. Now for an economy with reduced monetary system, liquid assets had to come through selling off titles or land. A surviving crusader who returned home would thus have very little to return to.

The estates theory seemed to correct the problem of the second son theory by stating that crusaders never intended to return home. They would instead carve out large, new kingdoms for themselves in the Holy Land. But this theory suffers from an even greater problem: 99% of surviving crusaders returned home. In fact, the true day-to-day defense of the Holy Land would turn more and more to the military orders of the Hospitaller Knights and the Knights Templar. But if crusaders did not fight for wealth or land, what did they fight for? They fought not merely for the personal spiritual benefits of indulgences, but also because their German blood boiled at the thought of the humiliation imposed on Christianity in the Holy Land and across formerly Christian lands. It was the same German warrior spirit, tempered and directed by faith, that forged both the nations as well as the great crusades.

Traditional versus Secular Culture

Until the sexual revolution of the 1960s, America was a traditional culture and its character expressed the natural outgrowth of Greek thought, Roman law, Christian faith, and the German warrior. The secularization which has engulfed our nation since the sexual revolution has replaced Greek thought with sophistry, Roman law with the enthronement of self, the Christian faith with atheism, and the German warrior with the pacifist.

Cultural assimilation of immigrants may have been a difficult process in the 19th and early 20th centuries, but the American culture which immigrants discovered was light years closer to theirs than American culture today – and this is because immigrants of a hundred years ago left one traditional culture and came to another. Here, marriage was protected, divorce shunned, men worked, fought, and sacrificed, and children obeyed their parents. Secular culture, with its focus on radical individualism, fails to be a culture – for a culture is something that unites a people. If a civilization is a “culture writ large,” how can a secular pseudo-culture ever be a civilization?

This is the problem of “the West” – a title which is as geographically disoriented as the spiritually disoriented people it claims to represent. We have an identity crisis, a loss of soul. Perhaps America needs immigrants now more than ever; not to work in our factories but rather to remind us of what culture really is. As the European nations peer over the edge of debt ruin and depopulation, they stand to become the new bastions of immigrants who say “yes” to children and “no” to credit cards: the Muslims. If America allows secularists on the Right and the Left to continue to steer our path and tell our story, we shall awake to find that our diseased civilization has become a corpse.

Dr. Pence's Marian Femininity Series

Below you will find a six-part video series on Marian Femininity presented by Dr. David Pence:

Red Tails

It's been nearly a decade since Mel Gibson's We Were Soldiers - which means it's been nearly a decade since a good war movie has hit the screens. But while we're waiting for Mel's next epic, a movie chronicling a pious Jewish man and his sons' war of independence from Hellenizing Greeks, Lucasfilm of Star Wars fame is bringing us an inspiring new film that looks to stand side-by-side with Glory.

The movie is called Red Tails.

Set during the Second World War, Red Tails tells the story of the Tuskeegee Airman, an all-black fighter wing which has been sent in to defend American bombers over the skies of Europe. While Red Tails is a story of men fighting for their nation, it is also an icon of masculine protective groups. For these pilots, victory is not tallied by the number downed enemy fighters but rather by the number of protected bombers and allied airmen.

Red Tails hits theaters on January 20th, but in the meantime you can watch a preview here:

The Dioceses of Emperor Diocletian

Diocletian, the Roman Emperor to end Rome’s third century crisis in imperial succession, is known best by Catholics for the launching last great persecution of Christians before Constantine’s so-called Edict of Milan in 313 AD. His administrative reforms, however, would have far reaching impact. For example, the tetrarchy (rule of four), which Diocletian instituted for smoother imperial succession, introduced a new east-west dichotomy which persists to this day.

Another good example is his introduction of the diocese.

The dioceses were established as part of Emperor Diocletian’s broader provincial reforms. In order to keep provincial governors from gaining too much power, which could once again plunge the Empire into another civil war, Diocletian doubled the number of Roman provinces from 50 to 100. But in order administer all 100 provinces efficiently, Diocletian grouped the provinces into twelve dioceses (see map). Unbeknownst to Diocletian, the term diocese would one day be used to describe the territory of a local church under a bishop, who is himself a successor to one of the twelve Apostles.

As imperial power began to collapse in “the West” after 476, the Church began to step in to fill the vacuum of stability – and it was natural for her to continue using the term diocese, even if the seven westernmost dioceses established by Diocletian would be broken up into smaller and smaller units. Nevertheless, with a bishop at the head of each diocese, the Church in the middle ages began to see herself as the rightful leader of both ecclesial and secular affairs rather than an interim caretaker during years of political and economic instability.

Perhaps it was providential that the anti-Christian Diocletian would establish the first twelve dioceses, but we must also remember that it was providential that many God-fearing men would establish the nations.

The heavens are telling the glory of God

"The heavens are telling the glory of God; and the firmament proclaims his handiwork."

-Psalm 19:1, King David

Review: The Enemy At Home

The Essays of Orate Fratres now includes my new review of Dinesh D'Souza's book The Enemy at Home. In the book he offers a much broader understanding of Islam and the events before and after 9/11. D'Souza's thesis is that radical Islam seeks to destroy us because of our decadance, not our democracy.

From the Review:

While Dinesh D’Souza is best known for going head-to-head with atheists in public debates, this Catholic scholar from India, also has a knack for connecting faith to global affairs, foreign policy, and cultural reform on the domestic front. Indeed D’Souza’s book, The Enemy at Home, struck a cord among liberals and conservatives alike, calling out the secularists and making the case that our own moral depravity, sponsored by the secular Left, was the root cause of 9/11. D’Souza argues that conservatives have missed a perfect opportunity to link the culture war with the war on terror – that radical Muslims do not hate democracy, free markets, or new technology, but rather our permissive culture. Contrary to the Left, no Middle Easterner believes America is seeking a new hegemonic, territory-based imperialism. What struck fear into bin Laden was the new “cultural imperialism” of the radical Left which poses an existential threat to Islam.

You can click here for more.

Happy Feast of St. Nicholas

Did you know that the first gift jolly old St. Nick was best known for was his fist? Yes, it was St. Nicholas the bishop who got to land a solid punch into the jaw of Arius at the Council of Nicaea in 325. While Arius was busy spouting his heresy to the Council, St. Nicholas just couldn’t take it any longer. The bishops at the council actually locked him up – but after the miraculous intercession of both Jesus and Mary, St. Nicholas was brought back.

If you’re not familiar with the story – or you’d like to know what that miracle was – check out this blog post and read on. And if that doesn’t grab you, perhaps the introduction to the post will:

When President Teddy Roosevelt was a college student, he taught a Sunday School class for elementary school children. During this time, Roosevelt awarded a dollar to a boy in his Sunday School class for beating the snot out of a bully who tormented little girls. "You did exactly right," said Roosevelt with pride.

In the meantime, enjoy the picture above of St. Nicholas pointing out his right fist as Arius flails his hands in the air.

Cultural Imperialism

In the book The Enemy at Home, author and debater Dinesh D’Souza speaks of what he calls the “cultural imperialism” of the secular left. In other words, America does not seek to conquer Middle Eastern countries with military might but rather with its cultural depravity. The true imperialists are thus the secular leftists, not the traditional conservatives. Or as D’Souza would say, when “bin Laden calls America a Crusader state, he means that America is on a vicious international campaign to impose its atheist system of government and its pagan values on Muslims.”

President Obama and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, both extreme advocates of the secular left, have offered us a case-in-point today. The U.S. has decided to use foreign aid to promote “gay rights” in nations with traditional cultures and taboos. D’Souza would not be surprised at this newest act of cultural imperialism. It is an act which will embolden the enemy, winning over more traditional Muslims into the radical camp. What’s worse is that this act is bad foreign policy done to win cheap political points back home while trampling over the cultures of others. It is ethnocentrism at its worst.

But this also highlights a failed portion of the Bush administration.

During Bush’s eight years in office, he had the chance to build up an alliance between traditional Americans and traditional Muslims. Had he worked to create a deeper alliance between the values voters and the foreign policy hawks, Bush could have set in motion events leading to the free and traditional Islamic nations. As it stands now, the Arab Spring may turn into an Arab Winter. The secular leftists running our nation will do whatever it takes to secularize the Middle East – but this will only help radicalize the nations and forge an even deeper animosity between us. Sadly, Bush’s legacy may have been to leave Obama holding a military apparatus with which to promote the advance of the secular left.

Coming Soon: A Review of The Enemy at Home

African Economics and Civilizations

The Wall Street Journal had an interesting map of Africa (see below) late last month which Thomas Barnett commented on in his blog. As he notes, Africa has more nations per square mile than any other continent – which can make life difficult for Africa’s landlocked nations. To help with the economic situations confronting different regions, the map shows three economic blocs or networks established to connect the inside of the continent with the coast – and the world beyond that.

Needless to say, this map should be overlaid with a civilizational map of the continent (see above). In such a map we see what Samuel Huntington would call a civilizational fault line running east-west across the north-central stretch of the continent and then running south along the east coast. When we compare the two maps we see that the Islamic north cuts right through the “Economic Community of West African States" and creeps into the newer economic bloc on the east coast.

Given this civilizational fault line, where eruptions break out between Christians and Muslims, it should not surprise us that the southernmost economic network has encompassed the same number of nations as the slightly older West African bloc and could continue expanding to include the budding eastern coastal bloc. As time passes, it’s safe to say that the African Christian south will form more cohesive ties along the civilizational fault line running across the continent.

The Euro and the Nations

Back in 1860 as the United States was entering the Civil War, the southern states formed a Confederacy in which each state was in essence its own nation. States’ rights is what drove the South into secession and it was states’ rights that helped defeat the Confederacy. Why? Because each state, seeing itself as an independent nation, refused to centralize power in Richmond and instead focused on its own interests. Monies and troops were withheld, rail gauges changed throughout the South (making transnational troop transport difficult and inefficient), and each state had its own currency.

Which brings me to the Euro.

Europe began introducing the Euro back in 1999, in a sense forging one massive economic power consisting of multiple nations. We see in the 1860s, however, that the Southern Confederacy failed in large part because it wanted to be a confederacy of eleven separate nations. America tried this with the Articles of Confederation but moved to the current Constitution because a Confederacy was simply too weak for a nation stretching from coast to coast. If Europe is to remain a continent of separate nations, it must allow each nation to retain a national currency. The potential failure of the Euro will mean the survival of the European nations. The two cannot coexist.

UPDATE: The chief financial officer of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development now says there are only seven working days left to prevent the collapse of the Euro. National sovereignty is the new wall standing in front of the Euro's survival, for European nations using the Euro are looking at a massive bailout by Germany - in which case the Germans will be able to influence the future economic decisions made the debtor nations. As it stands, the strong national identities of Europe may prevent the German bailout, thus bringing the Euro closer to collapse.

That is unless the United States offers its own bail out. Let's hope not.

New Mary Video

The videos for Dr. Pence's six-part series on Marian femininity versus modern feminism is coming closer to completion with the addition of part five! To view the fifth segment of the series, simply click 'play' on the video below.



If you're new to Orate Fratres, follow this link to a previous post which includes links to the past videos (including a previous series on the all-male priesthood).

And if you just can't wait for part six to arrive, here's a video I just made on the Hail Mary in chant:

The World According to Tom Barnett

The PowerPoint will never be the same after Thomas P.M. Barnett. In the time following 9/11, Barnett began using his presentation, or brief, called The World According to Tom Barnett, to get across his idea of the "big picture" and the role America should play in the twenty-first century.

His thesis was simple: take a world map, draw a circle around the areas where violence occurs on a regular basis and then ask, why? His answer is connectivity. As the nations become further globalized, wars are found within what Barnett calls the non-integrating gap. The world according to Tom Barnett sees the United States playing a key role in shrinking the gap.

Now I originally saw the brief on C-SPAN in 2003 and I remember being so impressed that I recorded it when it was replayed later that evening. Barnett's theory may not be fully correct, but he joins men like Samuel Huntington in seeing the world through the eyes of a map and a story that explains it.

Catholics are in need of their own macrohistorical metanarrative - but watching Barnett's brief is a great way to see how effective we can be if we use a map and tell a story. It's worth checking out.

The Apostolic Doctor

St. Lawrence of Brindisi was named Julius Caesar by his father - but little did his father know how close his son would live up to the name, albiet as a priest weilding a crucifix rather than a sword. One online writer puts it this way:

Imagine if you were a commander facing a well-armed enemy of 80,000 foot and calvary and your troops were outnumbered four to one. You’ve had several skirmishes with the foe, but the big battle would be in a day or two. This gives you time to evaluate the situation, make a strategic retreat, negotiate terms, or do battle. You have a chaplain reputed to be a saint and he works miracles. You know the man and you believe that his reputation is well deserved. When you ask his advice he tells you to prepare for battle and trust God and His holy mother.

This is what happened that October day in 1601 in Hungary, just twenty-three years after the Moslems were defeated in the Mediterranean Sea in the Battle of Lepanto. The saint rallied the troops and led the charge into the enemy lines. Bullets, arrows, and canon balls flew all around him as he held the crucifix on high. One of the bullets miraculously got lodged in his hair. Scimitars were being swung at him from every direction but never did a blade even graze his flesh. Five horses fell wounded beneath him as he galloped back and forth urging the brave warriors to fight on for the victory would be theirs. It was far from an easy victory, but at the end of the day the Turks were routed; they would be back again, and defeated again, eighty years later, at the gates of Vienna. Among those who fought for the empire and Christendom in this battle were bands of German Lutherans. Many of these converted after witnessing the heroism of Father Lawrence and the divine protection so visibly allotted to him. The Moslems were convinced that they were defeated by a “Christian magician.”

St. Lawrence was not only a great warrior and leader, he was also a linguist, diplomat, mystic, and miracle-worker. He was also equally dedicated to the Virgin Mary and his priestly duties. Though his Masses tended to last three hours, a particular Christmas Mass continued for sixteen hours and he was even known to levitate at the altar. Most importantly for us, St. Lawrence is also a Doctor of the Church (bearing the title: "The Apostolic Doctor").

Now there are four kinds of male personalities: the priest, the laborer, the scholar, and the warrior. Sadly, it is very uncommon to find a great priest-scholar who is also a great warrior. Indeed pacifism - the opposite position of the warrior - is a constant temptation among the priestly personality. But when the men and officers in Hungary looked at St. Lawrence, they knew a man they could rightly call "Father".

In this way, St. Lawrence should be the model for every man of a priest-scholar personality.

The Roots of Modernism

Dr. William Marshner has once again given an excellent FREE audio series through the Institute of Catholic Culture. While an earlier post describes the background of Dr. Marshner and his last talk (on the Council of Trent), his new three-part series examines the Roots of Modernism. This may seem to be a topic which many are familiar with, but Dr. Marshner addresses the matter by giving a historical narrative and philosophical critique of the various schools of modernist thought and their adherents. It is definitely worth checking out.

For further study, Dr. Marshner recommends reading a great book by Maurice Mandelbaum called History, Man, & Reason: A Study in 19th Century Thought.

Extension, Comprehension, and Generalizations

In logic, terms become the smallest building blocks of arguments. A term is any word or phrase that denotes a commonly known concept. Now by connecting two terms in a proper declarative sentence, one can form a proposition – and through the assertion of two or more true propositions, one can reason their way to a logical conclusion.

Obviously terms should be used clearly and unambiguously – but they should also be understood in themselves in two ways: by their extension and their comprehension (or intension). The chief difference between the two is that extension is quantitative while comprehension (or intension) is qualitative. Extension thus means the ability to count out all the objects in the world that are denoted by the term. For example, the extension of the term “All United States citizens” refers to all the 300+ million people who are members of the U.S. Now the comprehension (or intension) is qualitative because it forms the logical definition of the term, including the term's attributes, features, or qualities. In other words, extension is concrete while intension is abstract.

This logical dichotomy, which originates with the ancient Greeks, is one helpful way of sorting out the problem of political correctness when it comes to matters of gender. In his logic textbook, Socratic Logic, Dr. Peter Kreeft states:

…so many people today… immediately and thoughtlessly reject all “generalizations” like “men are more aggressive than women” as “stereotypes.” They are confusing comprehension and extension. They are misinterpreting a statement about comprehension as if as if it were one about extension, and that is why they think that the fact that Mrs. X is more aggressive than Mr. X disproves the statement that “men are more aggressive than women.” They cannot or will not rise to the original statement’s level of abstraction and argue with it on its own level. The statement is not about all the individuals that have the nature of male and the nature of female, but about those natures in abstraction from the individuals that have them. Those who reject all rationalizations because they can find some exceptions to them are thinking only on the concrete sense level of extension, not on the abstract conceptual level of comprehension; they are operating like cameras (sense experience) plus computers (calculating the quantities of extension), but not like human minds (understanding essences, natures, “whats”).

Nominalism – which is commonly found in our colleges and drilled into the minds of the politically correct – denies any reality of essences or natures and thus it declares that there are only individuals, only particulars; no universals. Accordingly there is no male and female nature, nor any human nature – only equal individuals with equal rights. Nominalism is thus a key source of radical egalitarianism and individualism.

But on the side of common sense Aristotelian reason, it is precisely because we can know essences or natures that we can say that (for example) effeminacy in males is a vice, not a virtue, nor an amoral reality, because it is contrary to the masculine nature. Cameras and computers, to use Kreeft’s analogy, cannot know natures because they are not minds – but we do have God-given minds, so let’s use them instead of speeding up a process of devolution in the name of rights and political correctness.

G.K. Chesterton would say that it is the exception that proves the rule. This is precisely because he knew the difference between extension and intension. Natures or essences are unchanging – but our society is bent on trying to “disprove the rule” (i.e. the nature) through the promotion of the unnatural. This is all the more reason for Catholics (both lay and clergy) to faithfully live out a rich sacramental and liturgical life. In the world we are bombarded with self-defeating nominalism, but in the liturgy we can find the truth and reality of male and female expressed tangibly.

Review: Fr. Barron’s Catholicism (Episode One)

As promised by the trailer (which I included in an earlier post), the show delivers breathtaking imagery from around the Catholic world while offering some down-to-earth language along with an overly-intellectual approach to Catholicism. As was suspected, there are plenty of times when one can feel free to hit the mute button and simply be amazed at the visuals alone. Some examples of this include seeing Fr. Baron praying in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and the end sequence involving the election of Pope Benedict XVI.

If Catholicism suffers from anything, it is not so much from bad theology as from the fear of offending anyone. This is bad philosophy. We see this within the first two minutes of the first episode when the title appears: Amazed and Afraid: Jesus Both God and Human. Here we see the traditional description “God and Man” is changed to “God and Human” in order to reflect our politically correct, gender-neutral culture. Anything which may not sit well is skirted around. If, for example, society gets offended by the all-male priesthood, then Catholicism will just pass it by and move on to another more acceptable topic instead of addressing it head-on. Along these lines, the twelve Apostles are no longer described as twelve men but rather as twelve people.

With the exception of the Pope, the role of the Apostles – and thus their successors, the bishops – is also downplayed. Fr. Barron tells us that the very first mission of the Christ was to gather the twelve tribes of Israel. But he describes this gathering solely as Jesus’ policy to associate with sinners. Jesus is thus the model of tolerance and acceptance. No mention is given of the twelve Apostles, the image par excellence of the gathering of the twelve tribes of Israel. Also suspiciously absent is the Devil. When Christ comes as a warrior, Fr. Barron tells us it is to fight against human selfishness, hatred, and violence. Whatever happened to the promise of Genesis 3:15? Wasn’t the serpent’s head to be crushed?

As of episode one, Catholicism may leave some people – especially our grandparents – scratching their heads over some missing elements of the Catholic faith left out or strangely described by the very intellectual Fr. Barron. The episode does, however, deliver very sound Christology while presenting the viewer with a challenge: to accept Christ or not. The visuals are the strongest element to the show. In the end, the sacramental nature of the faith means some things just cannot be hidden or confused. Sometimes beauty makes truth more accessible than the most erudite theologian.

New Mary Video

Followers of Orate Frates may have watched the videos on the left side of the blog page. If not, please do so. The audio comes from Dr. Pence on two different topics: the all-male priesthood and Marian femininity.

The new video is actually Part 4 of the Marian series - with two more on the way.



If you'd like to watch the previous videos, use the links below to view them:

The All-Male Priesthood (Part 1)
The All-Male Priesthood (Part 2)
The All-Male Priesthood (Part 3)
The All-Male Priesthood (Part 4)

Marian Femininity (Part 1)
Marian Femininity (Part 2)
Marian Femininity (Part 3)