" PAST " DID NOT HEED MY OWN WARNING WHAT A BLAST THE 9TH APRIL, 2011 WAS!

Soon-to-arrive i PAD 2

What a blast! My 71st Birthday on the 9th has taken some recovering from . All it lacked was the presence of the Southern Dixons, but they were pretty swiftly on the phone, and a very generous Brother-in -Law Tony Hannon has already sent various appurtenances of an i PAD 2, with the iPAD itself to follow when the Apple dream factory thinks the appetite has been sufficiently excited! Add to that a super new Nikon camera from my dear wife . My head has been reeling for two days!So clutching my Kindle 3G  for security I have my eyes set firmly on the future - or I will have, once I have mastered all the new electronic wizardry!

In the meantime , it is back to earth with a thud ! The rain has been giving us a brief respite over the last day, and the morning is fine - so its out with auto mow grass and 71 or not, the 4 section lawn must be mowed before its length becomes unmanageable.

So, my very deepest thanks to all who helped me celebrate and did so, so very generously!

" PAST " YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED TOMORROW IS THE DAY!

 

 We will pick up the story in 1886

This little girl Louisa Wilson was born in Sydney on 5th September,1886, she married Edward Beckmann , German by birth but a proud Australian since 1904 the year they were married......on 1st March,1904. On 28th May 1905 she gave birth to her first child:

 

 

Elsie Georgina Beckmann. On 22nd March,1927 she married John Joseph Dixon at St. Joachim's Catholic Church Lidcombe . Her conversion to Catholicism repaired the damage done to the Beckmann and Dixon families by the apostate Father Martin Luther and King Henry VIII some 400 years earlier, and on 9 th April, 1940 she gave birth to her second child :

 

  Anthony John Dixon your scribe! Here I am seen in later months Alert but not Alarmed - you try looking alarmed after being woken up from a nice nap on the way to the doctor's for a check up ! But DEFINITELY interested in all that's going on! That's still the case!! And yes I'm looking forward to a Happy 71st Birthday tomorrow, including a family celebration with our son Matthew and his wife Cathryn and their dear children : Stephen, Josephine, Gabriel and Anastasia and phone lines running hot from the South. I was delighted this morning to receive in the mail a Birthday Card from Marist Brother Peter Salta ( Brother Albanus in better times) a great teacher and devout Religious.

So, there you are - so many significant events recalled on the one day! So many people for me to remember and be thankful for.

H.M.A.S. CANBERRA passing under the incomplete Sydney Harbour Bridge - 1930.

In happy times - H.M.A.S. CANBERRA "Dressed Overall"to mark some State occasion apparently firing a Saluting Gun. 

U.S.S. CANBERRA

A picture is said to be "worth a thousand words". The top picture showing H.M.A.S. CANBERRA (I) passing under the Sydney Harbour Bridge in the course of its construction, could easily provoke a thousand words to deal with the various streams of thought it calls forth. Thoughts of Progress and Disaster.

The completion of the Sydney Harbour Bridge some two years later , was to transform the life of the City of Sydney which lies behind H.M.A.S. CANBERRA in the picture which is looking South from Dawes Point on the North Shore of the Harbour. No more would train,trams,buses and cars transfer their passengers to ferries into the City and return to collect them in the evening, no more would the car ferry ( later to cruise the Harbour as the Showboat "Kalang"), ply its trade taking cars and trucks to and fro.The old Sydney would receive a second jolt, which, together with the first, the Underground Railway, would transform its life entirely.There was a strong sense that the Bridge had demonstrated the great achievements Australia was capable of once we shook off the gloom of the Great Depression.

H.M.A.S. CANBERRA  was one of two Kent Class Heavy Cruisers in the Royal Australian Navy, the other being H.M.A.S. AUSTRALIA.The two 10,000 ton vessels were built by John Brown & Sons on Clydebank and CANBERRA was only two years old when the photo was taken .The ships had been built under the restrictions of the Washington Naval Treaty which limited their armament and armour.

H.M.A.S. AUSTRALIA was refitted as the coming of war threatened and her armour at the waterline was increased. She survived the war. H.M.A.S. CANBERRA was not refitted due to budgetary restraints in the wake of the Great Depression.She did not survive even the early years of the war. On the night of 8/9 August, 1942 CANBERRA formed part of the Cruiser Screen protecting the Allied Amphibious Force supporting the landing on Guadalcanal. Ships of the Cruiser Screen had been continuously at Action Stations for nearly two days and fatigue resulting from this factor is thought to have played a part in what happened.

A superior Japanese Heavy Cruiser force with Destroyer Screen attacked during the night and, using the very advanced and fast steam powered heavy "Long Tom"torpedoes and maximum heavy armament fire, they quickly knocked CANBERRA out of action, and sank U.S.S.s  Quincy, Astoria and Vincennes . CANBERRA remained afloat but could not be saved.She became a hazard to navigation and had to be sunk. Ironically this took two hours to achieve. The Allied forces were forced to withdraw leaving the seaway to the Japanese, and abandoning the United States Marines on Guadalcanal. The Marines heroic fighting on the Island has become legendary. Some months later the Allies returned for good and the Marines were relieved.

In an extraordinary gesture which seems to have no parallel in world naval annals, the United States Navy, apparently at the decision of President Franklin D.Roosevelt, named one of its Baltimore Class Heavy Cruisers, U.S.S. CANBERRA. This must have been a decision encountering very strong opposition among traditionalists ( and most Navy folk ARE traditionalists around the world) - imagine the furore if it was decided to name a major ( or any) Australian warship H.M.A.S. WASHINGTON!  It was a grand tribute to the heroism and support of the men of the R.A.N. and the people of Australia. U.S.S. CANBERRA was one of the first ships converted to a Guided Missile Cruiser in the post war period. She gave long service and was frequently used on representative visits around the world. When she came to the end of her life , a second U.S.S. CANBERRA, a frigate, was commissioned.

The loss of the CANBERRA left a gap in the Australian Fleet and this was filled by the gift of H.M.S. SHROPSHIRE a London Class Heavy Cruiser, which like the Kent Class, belonged to the County Class  design family.  King George VI had announced the gift saying that SHROPSHIRE would become the new H.M.A.S. CANBERRA. But then the exceptional tribute by the UNITED STATES was announced and it was thought best to retain the name she had.As H.M.A.S. SHROPSHIRE she served with distinction through the remainder of the Pacific War and proved to be a "lucky"ship - only five of her crew died during the war - one drowning and four accidents - none to enemy action. SHROPSHIRE was scrapped in 1949. I have clear personal memories of seeing her on Sydney Harbour on several occasions as a young boy.

I wonder how many other tranquil pictures can so readily conjure up so many memories? 

" PAST " SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM HAPPY ANNIVERSARY

 

POPE BENEDICT XVI

070707 The memorable date - in more ways than one - on which our beloved Holy Father signed the Motu Proprio  "SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM "  freeing the celebration of the Mass according to the 1962 Missal of Pope John XXIII, that is the traditional Latin Mass.

The Holy Father's intentions were several:
-to aid in the reintegration of Lefebvrists into the life of the Church
-to offer comfort to those already devoted to the Latin Mass, and
-to institute a gradual process whereby greater exposure to the ancient ritual would inspire greater reverence in the celebration of the Novus Ordo.

Three years on,  progress has been solid on all fronts. Though some Episcopal Conferences have, to put it mildly, dragged their feet, the progress has grown up around them. Perhaps the most unco-operative have been the French Bishops. Yet their own Mass attendance figures suggest that the number of people attending Sunday Masses in France is almost identical with the known numbers of people attending the Latin Mass. There are none so blind.....

Here in Australia, progress has been slow due to our preponderance of       "liberal "Bishops. However, even in their leading liberal See of Brisbane the one suburban church made available to the Latin Mass community, is jam - packed every Sunday whereas three years ago it was only two thirds full. In the orthodox Archdioceses of Sydney and Melbourne and Canberra-Goulburn the churches dedicated to the Latin Mass are very well attended.

An interesting characteristic of each of these congregations is the majority of young people regularly attending. The future looks brighter and brighter, and should only be enhanced by the retirement of several Bishops in the next twelve months. Interestingly, a majority of young priests ordained in Australia this year, celebrate Holy Mass according to both the older Extraordinary Form and the vernacular Novus Ordo.

" PAST " "THE KING'S SPEECH" MOVIE

KING GEORGE VI

The real Lionel Logue much more handsome than his actor representative.

"The King's Speech" has been critically acclaimed on both sides of the Atlantic.It brings to life the real life agony of Prince Albert Duke of York, who suffered a terrible stutter.

While the story commences in the U,K, in the appalling trial of a public speech before thousands, The Duke's troubles were well in evidence back in 1927 when duty brought him and his lovely wife to Australia for the opening of the then new ( now the Old) Parliament House. The Duke's entourage were well aware of his problem. When it became known that the Australian Government intended to film the entire proceedings a furore erupted. Urgent phone calls went through to the Australian Prime Minister insisting that this filming MUST NOT HAPPEN. 

The Prime Minister Stanley Bruce was taken aback, but insisted that the event was of such a historic nature that it MUST be filmed. Finally it was agreed that the filming of the actual opening would Stop whilst the Duke spoke, and resume thereafter.

The film shows the fundamental role of Australian speech therapist Lionel Logue in correcting the Duke and future King's problem.The real Lionel Logue was quite dashingly handsome as opposed to Geoffrey Rush the Actor. Nevertheless, Rush's performance is brilliant.

What comes out in the film is the VERY distant role of the Duke of York's parents King George V and Queen Mary in the raising of their children and the cruel treatment Prince Albert received at the hands of his Nanny who would deliberately get him into trouble and then administer the harsh punishment decreed for his "offence". There was no appeal to his parents who might have lived in another world.He was made to "correct"his natural left-handedness and to wear wooden splints to correct his knock knees. Pinched, abused physically and psychologically , it is little wonder that he came to stutter.

The parental neglect is highlighted in another film "The Lost Prince".Directed by the brilliant David Poliakoff it is a tour de force -each of his films is a joy to experience.It tells the story of King GeorgeV and Queen Mary's youngest son, Prince John who had the misfortune to be an epileptic. Of course this would never do for a member of the Royal Family. He was kept out of view , further and further out of view as he grew until his premature death. The real shame in this situation was not Prince John's, but his parents 'cold and un Christian attitude to their very own flesh and blood. No wonder Bertie ( the future George VI) and Johnnie were very close. That poor little disregarded innocent Prince was a victim of great parental neglect.The fact of that neglect only serves to underline the simultaneous abuse of Bertie himself.What horrors were perpetrated just out of the public gaze.

Don't miss "The King's Speech"and get hold of "The Lost Prince"on DVD ( or any David Poliakoff film - for a rare treat.)

And we wonder why Charles is such a muddle-headed wombat!

 

 

He was the most dazzling King of his time. Noted since his youth for his handsome good looks, athleticism and intellectual achievements, his court was the destination for the great achievers of his time. But, of late, things had begun to sour a little. Foreign adventures and his heavy gambling had left him cash-strapped. His wife had failed to produce a male heir, and his Chancellor , the Pope's Legate a Latere, Cardinal Thomas Wolsey had failed to secure from the Pope an Annulment of his marriage. This was particularly irritating because he did want a male heir, and his roving eye had fixed its attention on a very likely lass among his Queen's Ladies in Waiting : Ann Boleyn, He was of course King Henry VIII of England.

                                     Cardinal Wolsey Archbishop of York

 

 

Several possibilities, which would address his problems seemed to fall into alignment.Their realisation, one after another, could be achieved if only Henry acted boldly enough. Firstly Wolsey must go as Chancellor, an Annulment of his marriage must be achieved and he must then marry Ann Boleyn. Then the question of money must be resolved.......

Wolsey was dismissed. He was to be imprisoned, but in transit he became ill and died, uttering on his death bed : "Would that I had served my God as well as I served my King!" This impertinence had to be borne since Wolsey had gone to render his final account. A new Chancellor was needed - someone King Henry could absolutely trust. There was only on man to fit the post, the best educated man in England - the Judge Sir Thomas More. He had been Henry's mentor in the King's youth.Henry knew him as a man of outstanding integrity. But this very integrity proved to be a stumbling block on the road to his appointment. Henry first questioned Thomas More as to his view on the matter of the validity of his marriage. More responded with great care that he could not support the King's position in the matter. After some to-ing and fro-ing Thomas More stood firm. Henry agreed to proceed with his appointment as long as he did not publicly oppose the King. This was agreed, and in October,1529 Sir Thomas More was sworn in as Lord Chancellor.

The annulment was still pursued, but when it finally became clear that it could not be obtained from the Pope, Henry cast about for an alternative course of action. He began a systematic bullying of the Bishops and clergy using the Law of Praemunire  - the Emperor's Ambassador Chapuys reported to his master that Praemunire was a Law that no-one in England understood because the King interpreted it in his own head and applied it to any case he chose! So fearful of him were the Bishops in Convocation, that on 11th February, 1531 he was able to bully them into according him the title "Supreme Head"of the Church in England "in so far as the law of Christ allows". ON and on went Henry's demands and he repeatedly went into Parliament - against all rights and usages -and harangued and bullied the Members, who did not easily give in, until at last so many blows had been dealt to the Church - financial and administrative, that the Bishops caved in. On 15th May, 1532 the Submission of the Bishops to the King was given. The short document made three undertakings - The Bishops gave up the right to initiate legislation in the Parliament unless the King permitted it; they agreed never to meet in Convocation without the King's prior consent;and lastly they agreed to a review of all Church laws by a Commission of 16 Laymen and 16 Clergy ALL appointed by the King.That same day, Sir Thomas More met the King at York Place near Westminster Hall and resigning, delivered up the Great Seal.

The Bishops having been so craven before the onslaught of the Royal Monster, it is little surprising that on 23rd May,1533,Archbishop Cranmer - himself a heretic - "granted" the King a purported annulment of his marriage.Ann Boleyn had already been carrying Henry's child since 1532 and he had secretly "married" her four months earlier on 25th January,1533 . In July, 1533 Pope Clement VII Excommunicated King Henry and the puppet Cranmer and declared the mock marriage to Boleyn null and void.

In 1534 Henry VIII forced the Parliament to pass the Act of Supremacy which made him in English Law the Head of the Church in England . Thus he severed the Church in England from its communion with the Catholic Church established by Christ. The stage was set for the solution to his financial problems, but events were pre-occupying.

Saint Thomas More

Saint John Fisher

 

 

In 1535, Sir Thomas More and the saintly Bishop John Fisher - who had held out against the King to his face , even when the Archbishop of Canterbury forged his signature to a document of consent in an effort to save him, were beheaded for Treason for refusing to acknowledge Henry's claimed Headship of the Church. Many others suffered the same fate. On 7th January, 1536 Henry's true wife and Queen, Katherine of Aragon, died. In May the same year his bigamous "wife"Ann Boleyn was arrested and imprisoned in the Tower of London.The following 17 days saw her charged with Treason, adultery and incest,executed and buried in an unmarked grave. Within 24 hours Henry VIII was betrothed to Jane Seymour, and 10 days later they were married.

" PAST " THE GALILEO MYTH PART II

POPE  URBAN  VIII

ST.ROBERT BELLARMINE

                               

                                                    

                                                               The Galileo Myth
… Continued from Foundation January 2008 p.12.

IT WAS NOT UNTIL FOUR YEARS LATER that trouble arose, the ecclesiastical authorities taking alarm at the persistence with which Galileo proclaimed the truth of the Copernican doctrine. That their opposition was grounded, as is constantly assumed, upon a fear lest men should be enlightened by the diffusion of scientific truth, it is obviously absurd to maintain. On the contrary, they were firmly convinced, with Bacon and others, that the new teaching was radically false and unscientific, while it is now truly admitted that Galileo himself had no sufficient proof of what he so vehemently advocated, and Professor Huxley after examining the case avowed his opinion that the opponents of Galileo “had rather the best of it”.

But what, more than all, raised alarm was anxiety for the credit of Sacred Scripture, the letter of which was then universally believed to be the supreme authority in matters of science, as in all others. When therefore it spoke of the sun staying his course at the prayer of Joshua, or the earth as being ever immovable, it was assumed that the doctrine of Copernicus and Galileo was anti-Scriptural; and therefore heretical. It is evident that, since the days of Copernicus himself, the Reformation controversy had done much to attach suspicion to novel interpretations of the Bible, which was not lessened by the endeavours of Galileo and his ally Foscarini to find positive arguments for Copernicanism in the inspired volume.

In these circumstances, Galileo, hearing that some had denounced his doctrine as anti-Scriptural, presented himself at Rome in December, 1615, and was courteously received. He was presently interrogated before the Inquisition, which after consultation declared the system he upheld to be scientifically false, and anti-Scriptural or heretical, and that he must renounce it. This he obediently did, promising to teach it no more. Then followed a decree of the Congregation of the Index dated 5 March 1616, prohibiting various heretical works to which were added any advocating the Copernican system. 

In this decree no mention is made of Galileo, or of any of his works. Neither is the name of the Pope introduced, though there is no doubt that he fully approved the decision, having presided at the session of the Inquisition, wherein the matter was discussed and decided. It must not be forgotten that, while there was as yet no sufficient proof of the Copernican system, no objection was made to its being taught as an hypothesis which explained all phenomena in a simpler manner than the Ptolemaic, and might for all practical purposes be adopted by astronomers. What was objected to was the assertion that Copernicanism was in fact true, “which appears to contradict Scripture”. It is clear, moreover, that the authors of the judgment themselves did not consider it to be absolutely final and irreversible, for Cardinal Bellarmine, the most influential member of the Sacred College, writing to Foscarini, after urging that he and Galileo should be content to show that their system explains all celestial phenomena -- an unexceptional proposition, and one sufficient for all practical purposes -- but should not categorically assert what seemed to contradict the Bible, thus continued:

I say that if a real proof be found that the sun is fixed and does not revolve round the earth, but the earth round the sun, then it will be necessary, very carefully, to proceed to the explanation of the passages of Scripture which appear to be contrary, and we should rather say that we have misunderstood these than pronounce that to be false which is demonstrated.

Galileo seems, says von Gebler, to have treated the decree of the Inquisition pretty coolly, speaking with satisfaction of the trifling changes prescribed in the work of Copernicus. He left Rome, however, with the evident intention of violating the promise extracted from him. Nevertheless, when in 1624 he again visited Rome, he met with what is rightly described as “a noble and generous reception”. The pope now reigning, Urban VIII, had, as Cardinal Barberini, been his friend and had opposed his condemnation in 1616. He conferred on his visitor a pension, to which as a foreigner in Rome Galileo had no claim, and which, says Brewster, must be regarded as an endowment of Science itself. But to Galileo’s disappointment Urban would not annul the former judgment of the Inquisition.

After his return to Florence, Galileo set himself to compose the work which revived and aggravated all former animosities, namely a dialogue in which a Ptolemist is utterly routed and confounded by two Copernicans. This was published in 1632, and, being plainly inconsistent with his former promise, was taken by the Roman authorities as a direct challenge. He was therefore again cited before the Inquisition, and again failed to display the courage of his opinions, declaring that since his former trial in 1616 he had never held the Copernican theory. Such a declaration, naturally was not taken very seriously, and in spite of it he was condemned as “vehemently suspected of heresy” to incarceration at the pleasure of the tribunal and to recite the Seven Penitential Psalms once a week for three years.

As his Protestant biographer, von Gebler, tells us, “One glance at the truest historical source for the famous trial, would convince any one that Galileo spent altogether twenty-two days in the buildings of the Holy Office (i.e. the Inquisition), and even then not in a prison cell with barred windows, but in the handsome and commodious apartment of an official of the Inquisition.” For the rest, he was allowed to use as his places of confinement the houses of friends, always comfortable and usually luxurious. It is wholly untrue that he was -- as is constantly stated -- either tortured or blinded by his persecutors -- though in 1637, five years before his death, he became totally blind -- or that he was refused burial in consecrated ground. On the contrary, although the pope (Urban VIII) did not allow a monument to be erected over his tomb, he sent his special blessing to the dying man, who was interred not only in consecrated ground, but within the church of Santa Croce at Florence.

This in brief, is the history of this famous “conflict between ecclesiastical authority and science”, to which special theological importance has been attached in connection with the question of papal infallibility. Can it be said that either Paul V or Urban VIII so committed himself to the doctrine of geocentricism as to impose it upon the Church as an article of faith, and so to teach as pope what is now acknowledged to be untrue? 

 

That both these pontiffs were convinced anti-Copernicans cannot be doubted, nor that they believed the Copernican system to be unscriptural and desired its suppression. The question is, however, whether either of them condemned the doctrine ex cathedra. This, it is clear, they never did. As to the decree of 1616, we have seen that it was issued by the Congregation of the Index, which can raise no difficulty in regard of infallibility, this tribunal absolutely lacking the power to make a dogmatic decree. Nor is the case altered by the fact that the pope approved the Congregation’s decision in forma communi, that is to say, to the extent needful for the purpose intended, namely to prohibit the circulation of writings which were judged harmful. The pope and his assessors may have been wrong in such a judgment, but this does not alter the character of the administrative pronouncement. Nor does it convert it into a decree ex cathedra.

As to the second trial in 1633, this was concerned not so much with the doctrine as with the person of Galileo, and his manifest breach of contract in not abstaining from the active propaganda of Copernican doctrines. The administrative sentence, passed upon him in consequence, clearly implied a condemnation of Copernicanism, but it made no formal decree on the subject, and did not receive the pope’s signature.

Galileo was convicted once for teaching as true something he could not prove, which seemed to impugn Sacred Scripture; he was convicted again for defying his original sentence.

Science was not on trial, but Galileo, and he failed to prove his assertions and again, victim of his own argumentative bombast, he failed a second time. He was never mistreated - indeed treated in a deferential manner. The Church - and Churchmen -  continued its previous and ongoing support of genuine science.

The pity for Galileo was that he was right but he didn’t know how to prove it, and that his personality traits led him into truly unscientific and unnecessary conflicts.



These articles compiled with reference to the CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA and other sources first appeared in the January and February 2008 issues of FOUNDATION.

" PAST " THE GALILEO MYTH PART I

 

GALILEO GALILEI

The Galileo Myth


GALILEO. Born at Pisa, 15 February 1564; died 8 January 1642.



The boy Galileo Galilei, at an early age manifested his aptitude for mathematical and mechanical pursuits and his native genius speedily placed him in the very first rank of natural philosophers.

He became a fierce controversialist, who, not content with refuting adversaries, was bent upon confounding them. Moreover, he wielded an exceedingly able pen, and unsparingly ridiculed and exasperated his opponents. Undoubtedly he thus did much to bring upon himself the troubles for which he is now chiefly remembered. As Sir David Brewster ("Martyrs of Science") says: “The boldness, may we not say the recklessness, with which Galileo insisted on making proselytes of his enemies, served but to alienate them from the truth.”

The Aristotelians would not accept even facts in contradiction of their master’s dicta. They held that these were best learned by authority, especially by that of Aristotle, who was supposed to have spoken the last word upon all such matters, and upon whom many erroneous conclusions had been fathered in the course of time.

Though, as has been said, it is by his astronomical discoveries that he is most widely remembered, it is not these that constitute Galileo's most substantial title to fame. In this connection, his greatest achievement was undoubtedly his virtual invention of the telescope. He succeeded in constructing a telescope which magnified three times, its magnifying power being soon increased to thirty-two. This instrument being provided and turned towards the heavens, the discoveries, which have made Galileo famous, were bound at once to follow, though undoubtedly he was quick to grasp their full significance. The moon was shown not to be, as the old astronomy taught, a smooth and perfect sphere, of different nature to the earth, but to possess hills and valleys and other features resembling those of our own globe. The planet Jupiter was found to have satellites, thus displaying a solar system in miniature, and supporting the doctrine of Copernicus.

Father Nicolaus Copernicus

 

Galileo had already abandoned the old Ptolemaic astronomy for the Copernican. But, as he confessed in a letter to Kepler in 1597, he had refrained from making himself its advocate, lest like Copernicus himself, he should be overwhelmed with ridicule. His telescopic discoveries, the significance of which he immediately perceived, induced him at once to lay aside all reserve and come forward as the avowed and strenuous champion of Copernicanism. They were also the cause of his lamentable controversy with ecclesiastical authority, which raises questions of graver import than any others connected with his name. It is necessary, therefore, to understand clearly his exact position in this regard.

It is undeniable that the proofs which Galileo adduced in support of the heliocentric system of Copernicus, as against the geocentric of Ptolemy and the ancients, were far from conclusive, and failed to convince such men as Tycho Brahé (who, however, did not live to see the telescope) and Lord Bacon, who to the end remained an unbeliever. The proof from the phenomenon of the tides, to which Galileo appealed to establish the rotation of the earth on its axis, is now universally recognized as a grave error, and he treated with scorn Kepler’s suggestion, foreshadowing Newton’s establishment of the true doctrine, that a certain occult influence of the moon was in some way responsible.

In spite of all deficiency in his arguments, Galileo, profoundly assured of the truth of his cause, set himself with his habitual vehemence to convince others, and so contributed in no small degree to create the troubles which greatly embittered the latter part of his life.

It is in the first place constantly assumed, especially at the present day, that the opposition which Copernicanism encountered at the hands of ecclesiastical authority was prompted by hatred of science and a desire to keep the minds of men in the darkness of ignorance. To suppose that any body of men could deliberately adopt such a course is ridiculous, especially a body which, with whatever defects of method, had for so long been the only one which concerned itself with science at all.

According to a popular notion, the point upon which beyond all others, churchmen were determined to insist, was the geocentric system of astronomy. Nevertheless, it was a Churchman,  Father Nicholas Copernicus, who first advanced the contrary doctrine that the sun and not the earth is the centre of our system, around which our planet revolves, rotating on its own axis. His great work, “De Revolutionibus orblure coelestium”, was published at the earnest solicitation of two distinguished Churchmen, Cardinal Schömberg and Tiedemann Giese, Bishop of Culm. It was dedicated by permission to Pope Paul III in order, as Copernicus explained, that it might be thus protected from the attacks which it was sure to encounter on the part of the “mathematicians” (i.e. philosophers) for its apparent contradiction of the evidence of our senses, and even of common sense.

POPE PAUL III

 He added that he made no account of objections which might be brought by ignorant wiseacres on Scriptural grounds. Indeed, for nearly three-quarters of a century, no such difficulties were raised on the Catholic side, although Luther and Melanchthon condemned the work of Copernicus in unmeasured terms. Neither Paul III, nor any of the nine popes who followed him, nor the Roman Congregations raised any alarm, and, as has been seen, Galileo himself in 1597, speaking of the risks he might run by an advocacy of Copernicanism, mentioned ridicule only and said nothing of persecution. Even when he had made his famous discoveries, no change occurred in this respect. On the contrary, coming to Rome in 1611, he was received in triumph; all the world, clerical and lay, flocked to see him, and, setting up his telescope in the Quirinal Garden belonging to Cardinal Bandim, he exhibited the sunspots and other objects to an admiring throng.

" PAST " SERVING WITH THE ANGELS TREASURES SACRED AND PROFANE BURIED AND FORGOTTEN

 

POPE PIUS XI   CLEAR THINKING    NO NONSENSE

Serving With the Angels


IT IS INTERESTING how many treasures both sacred and profane get buried and forgotten with the passage of time - tilling the soil in Ireland reveals a Mass kit buried for safety (its priestly owner perhaps executed before he could return for it), a vast hoard of Roman coins recovered at the bottom of the excavation of an English well (if only the barbarian attackers had known) or a Papal Encyclical buried in the subsequent documentation of World War II and the Second Vatican Council “churchquake”. But the dust has settled and the advent of the computer database is shining light on some gems.

Eighty years ago the great Pope Pius XI issued the crystal clear gem of an encyclical "Mortalium Animos" on fostering true religious unity.

Strangely it is not referred to in the Catechism of the Catholic Church or in the Second Vatican Council documents. It seems then ironical that it was last officially referred to by Blessed Pope John XXIII in his very first encyclical  "Ad Petri Cathedram" (To the Chair of Peter) in which he announced the Council ... “this unity, Venerable Brethren and beloved sons, must be solid, firm and sure, not transient, uncertain or unstable. Though there is no such unity in other Christian communities, all who look carefully can see that it is present in the Catholic Church.” (with footnote reference to "Mortalium Animos").

The between the wars Pan Christian ecumenical movement which Pius XI so decisively addressed, re-surfaced in the post-war period and in various ways. It tended to colour the post-Conciliar ecumenical project. In the late 1960s, 1970s and 1980s ecumenical fever brought on a great deal of irrational hopes, activity and talk. But in the 1990s and this century, the fever has subsided, leaving some confused, others lost, and the majority exchanging knowing looks as one might when an errant relative comes to his/her senses. The accelerating decay of the Anglican “Communion” and the libertarian excesses of the Uniting Church are only two examples of the shock therapy administered to Catholic ecumenical zealots.

But 80 years ago the Pope who - in 1930 with "Casti Connubii "exposed the intellectual fraud of the Anglican decision allowing for the practice of contraception and - in "Mit Brennender Sorge" ("With burning sorrow") in 1937 (smuggled into the Third Reich by a priest on bicycle) blasted the pathetic claims of superiority of race and nation and again in 1937, with "Divini Redemptoris", revealed the perversity of Communism - with clarity and powerful reasoning and the deftness of a scalpel-wielding surgeon exposed the perils of and the reality of the false ecumenicism we have in recent decades suffered - and against whose “false irenicism” John Paul the Great repeatedly warned.

"Mortalium Animos" merits consideration in greater detail in due course.
Pope Pius XI pray for us.

 “Acolyte”
Copyright. This article first appeared in the January 2008 issue of FOUNDATION.

" PAST " SERVING WITH THE ANGELS REFLECTIONS ON THE EDITOR'S TASK

 

Each month Acolyte is confronted with the spectacle of the large table at which the Editor labours to produce Foundation. It is not always an edifying spectacle for those who value order. But it enables me to see the wide variety of materials considered and then selected or rejected, whether for lack of space or perhaps lack of relationship to a theme either naturally evolving. or being developed, in a particular issue.

I watch him striving to avoid Foundation becoming yet another vitriolic chronicle of errors such as some other newsletters have become, as well as some Internet websites. It can’t be easy, because he is so much concerned to see right done. But he says that he tries to accentuate the positive as often as possible, for the edification of his readers – to build up rather than just tear down.

During the American Civil War the renowned Confederate General Robert E. Lee said that victories as such were not important unless they denied the Union some freedom to act. He realised that the Union’s greater preponderance of forces meant that enough victories (engagements in which Confederate casualties were less than Union casualties) that left the Union forces still in place would ultimately consume the whole Confederate Army and leave a very substantial Union Army to force a Confederate surrender.

There is a loose analogy here in considering that minor percentage of Catholics strongly and actively committed to the fullness of orthodoxy in the practice of their Faith. If they become bitter and twisted ( contrary to their professed “orthodoxy”: “By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love one for another”.)(Jn.13:35) even their practical effectiveness is diminished – alienating those they might have convinced. And then the field would ultimately be won by error which the vast preponderance of the faithful, uninstructed in most parishes and schools these last 40 years, will not be able to recognise. This would allow much of the Church to drift off to “South Brisbane”.

So I watch the Editor’s efforts to make an effective contribution, not merely to “score points” but in a small way to contribute to the health of the Church, to arm others to join in the effort by trying to carefully choose what to challenge & what to promote.

Robert E Lee has other lessons for us. Before the great Battle of Gettysburg, which he lost, he said on several occasions “It is all in God’s hands.” But after the defeat he rode out to meet his retreating , defeated army repeatedly exclaiming “It is all my fault.” Both assertions are true and they are neatly paired in the saying that “we should act as if everything depends on us, whilst recognising that everything depends on God”. Ultimately everything depends on God, but we are the agents through whom He daily works in the ordinary course of events. So, in a very real sense “it is all (our) fault”. We must do our part diligently and constantly act to build up His Kingdom.

Pray for the Editor that his efforts will always be in accord with God’s will.

— “Acolyte”

" PAST " NEW PREFECT CONGREGATION FOR BISHOPS

CARDINAL MARC OUELLET

 The Holy See has announced that the Holy Father has accepted the resignation of Cardinal Re as Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops and has appointed Cardinal Marc Ouellet until now Archbishop of Ottawa as the new Prefect of the Congregation.

This brings to an end intense speculation that had Cardinal George Pell as the likely appointee, and accords with later suggestions that significant figures in the Curia had sought to block that appointment, putting abroad stories about Cardinal Pell's ill health - stories clearly given the lie by his appearance and activity.

The record of the Canadian Church has been a sorry one for many years past. It would be surprising if a major player in that field emerged with a contrary record. Only the Holy Father can know what other factors were at work in arriving at this decision.

" NEW " NOT ENOUGH KNOWLEDGE TO DO THE NEWS JUSTICE

Not quite "OUT WITH THE OLD"

 

This  week's historic announcement of the AUKAS Pact with the United Kingdom and the United States of America, should be widely applauded.

 

From an Australian point of view, it's advantages are manifold, from the U.K. point of view they are also manifold and from the United States point of view they are opportune. Not many months ago nothing of the sort was envisaged. The naked threats by the Chinese Communist Party's CHINA (" Prepare for War"Emperor {actually First Secretary and Premier} Xi Jin Ping "for life"  instructed the Party's Army, Navy and Air Force) and thus shocked the World. For years we had been consoling ourselves with the idea that the CCP's CHINA would gradually become "nice" and civilised as its people became better off under the the quasi capitalism adopted by the previous Premier Deng Jao Ping.

 

Now, it became obvious as the mask fell away, that nothing of the kind had happened . Rather, the West has been very cynically duped. The truth had been revealed by President Trump ,elected in 2016, he shone the light on the facts - facts vested interests had conspired to ignore. China had been abusing every concession made to it, especially membership of the World Trade Organisation. But China herself, flushed with the hubris of the Emperor Xi, and the ancient delusions of itself as "the Middle Kingdom" became ever more boldly bellicose and belligerent. The World was treated with video clips of the Emperor parading past lengthy hordes of missile launchers and rigid parades of thousands of servicemen passing him as their great leader. As if this were not enough, other video clips showed the CCP's Navy proceeding in review at sea, featuring it's new Aircraft Carrier.

Xi

 
To bring matters to a head, in 2020 in its Immunology Research Centre in Wuhan, there appears to have been a major development the COVID 19 Virus and by some means it came to get out of the Centre and into the Wuhan community. By swift action the Emperor Xi isolated Wuhan and the Virus never reached Beijing. As the Wuhan death toll grew, he initiated an inquiry and for two weeks after the inquiry, he continued to FORBID travel from Wuhan within CHINA but allowed Wuhan travellers to spread around the World. Whether this was because of incompetence or malice, observers may judge. The results were catastrophic, thanks to the World Health Organisation which is headed by the CCP's favoured candidate Director General Tedros a committed Communist from Somalia. He declared the outbreak a "PANDEMIC". - this had catastrophic economic effects around the globe, especially in the compliant capitalistic economies of the West. This was all following prior binding agreements under the auspices of the WHO which had not been invoked before. CHINA, seeing herself, and having become in effect , the factory of the world , seemed to be the only beneficiary. Strange.

The Essential AUSTRALIAN PERSPECTIVE 

Although two of them rated almost no coverage in the Media , both Australian and international, three factors drove the Australian decision:

1. The Chinese Communist threat - the "Great Leader "of Communist China had recently on several occasions instructed his Armed Forces quite openly to "prepare for war". At the same time he had increased his Air Force's overflights of Taiwanese air space in a most aggressive fashion, whilst having his Navy carry out invasion landing exercises in adjoining territories. This cam e on top of the most belligerent and aggressive trade actions against Australia as regards our coal, barley, wine, and other items which have constituted a major element in our two way trade. The reason for this trade war was Australia's action in trying to secure an objective investigation into the origins of the CCP(Wuhan) Virus. The Great Leader was evidently upset that anyone, least of all "the Australians" should seek the truth. The CCP's propaganda machinery had moved in the most hostile manner to attack Australia with vituperation and lies.

2. Srategic . Nuclear powered submarines - especially those under consideration by Australia are  never re-fuelled in their 35 years lifetime and they can operate at about three times the speed of diesel-electric submarines even when submerged. For Australia, which suffers from what the great Professor Geoffrey Blainey termed "the tyranny of distance". This is a manifest advantage.It means that the submarines can transit to their patrol station far more swiftly and remain there indefinitely ( subject to being replenished with food). It also means that we require fewer submarines easing the manning burden, and compensating for the increased unit acquisition cost.

3.Tactical . The greater submerged speed means that after launching its weapons - which will include long range underwater launched missiles, the submarine can rapidly clear the launch location and with every minute rapidly multiply the difficulties of any one trying to locate it. Its vastly increased submerged speed also enhances its submarine attack capabilities.

Although these facts are the driving realities, especially the second and third,they are largely  ignored by the media because they lack the entertainment value of the political developments. The "offended" French and now German parties ignore them because they highlight how inadequate the French handling of the matter was.The first is ignored lest we should offend the Chinese Communists.

A French Perspective

When the opportunity to consider the Australian submarine requirement arose, the French were happy to be involved  - a chance to give "one in the eye" to the British with whom Australia's Royal Australian Navy had associations dating back to it's foundation. The recent overthrow of the Government of Mr Tony Abbott by that of Malcolm ("I'm a multi-millionaire and the smartest man in any room I enter) Turnbull, threw the submarine issue into turmoil. There had been a German- French - Japanese competition nearing completion , and it had been accepted wisdom that Mr.Abbott had favoured the Japanese. Mr.Turnbull as it turned out favoured "le style Francaise" and so it was decided.

MACRON NOT HAPPY

 

But, as time went by, the French proposal, become contract, had evolved and evolved and its cost soared and soared more than doubling from some $40 Billion AUD to $ 90 Billions and counting. In the meantime Mr.Turnbull himself came to be more than the conservative Liberal? National Party coalition could stomach. The former Treasurer Scott Morrison took command. The submarine issue was overwhelmed by a Federal Election, Major Bushfires, the Virus Panic and all the while it came to be seen as a major and festering problem. Then the hubris of the Chinese Communist Party's "Leader for Life" Xi Jin Ping led to a global realisation that we of the free world, were confronted by a bellicose , blustering tyrant who threatened the whole world. In a quite remarkable performance he managed to put offside, the United States, Japan, India, Australia, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaya  the Middle Eastern countries (except the pariah Iran) Russia, the E.U. and much of Africa. In a surprising development, internal political rumblings in Mr.Morrison's Government had brought to the Defence portfolio, Mr. Peter Dutton - a dour no nonsense man of great determination. He evidently took one look at the China developments, the submarine fiasco, and set about what some would call in another context a "great reset".

 

PETER DUTTON

 

 
The French had apparently taken the view that the deterioration in Australia's strategic position would not affect their proposal , as it was after all "only the Australians". Quite a mistake. Perhaps at their senior levels they were pre-occupied with the French Presidential Elections now approaching rapidly ( First Round to be held in April, 2022). Whatever the case may be, no one evidently considered the possibility of "the Australians" cancelling the contract for the submarines and what electoral effect that might produce. Suddenly "one in the eye" for the British would become "one in the eye for the French - more specifically for M.Le President - Emmanuel Macron.  He has not of late been wearing his "happy" face. 

In order to avoid questioning about the adequacy of his following of the situation, and, reflecting his pique, M.Le President recalled his Ambassadors to Australia and to the United States - but not the U.K. .The latter might have reacted with their customary world-weary attitude to this olde worlde diplomatic game. Besides it might have caused unnecessary irritation within the EU. There are still "fish being fried" there. And why give the British the satisfaction of showing how far "we" had failed in wooing away their Australian "clients". 

This was not the first time the French had "put their foot in the R.A.N. door" . In the mid '70s they had provided the plans for the Fleet Replenishment ship H.M.A.S. SUCCESS which was built at Cockatoo Island Dockyard in Sydney. Early in the piece, the Australians were shocked to find that the "package" of plans they had bought DID NOT include plans for the plumbing of the ship! The French explained that they did not prepare plans for such things. ("These Australians!). Three decades on when "SUCCESS" was to be replaced it was perhaps not surprising that the requirement was agreed with Spain's Navantia - this time for two ships for our growing Navy.

So , the Ambassadors did their bit, saying al the right things to please M Le President. And then yesterday the French Government was able to announce a contract for electric trains to the State of Victoria valued at AUD 300 Millions.

And today the French Government was able to state that the submarine contract affair would NOT have  any bearing on Australia's continuing negotiation of a Free Trade Agreement with the EU. The storm in the diplomatic teacup was subsiding.

But of course M. Le President's posturing and pique was grist for the media mills. 

 

The British Perspective

Prime Minister Boris Johnson like any good Brit, no doubt loved the chance to give the French "one in the eye" especially when that young upstart Macron was trying to poach one of the Anglophone family ( if we can really include those ...... colonials in that group.) More importantly, he hoped to be able to wed the Australians to the  Brits.' new "ASTUTE" Class submarine replacement (now in development even though "ASTUTE" Class construction is still nearing completion.) This no doubt led to his surprising agreement to leave the Paris Climate Accords "off the table" when completing  his recent Free Trade Agreement with Australia only a few weeks ago. It will be interesting to see if the EU negotiators are as accommodating in the continuing Free Trade negotiations with Australia.  The Australians for their part will no doubt be hewing close to the line that "Trade is trade" and "Climate Policy is something else".

 

The United States Perspective

In the current U.S. Administration, it is difficult to tell who is running the show. President Biden gives varying impressions at varying times. Most times he seems to be "off his meds" : tired - even thoroughly exhausted mentally, at other times a little too much hyped up ( as at the UN yesterday - despite the occasional slurred word,  his emphatic delivery seemed often somewhat excessive as if he had slightly over-dosed on the steroids. It was interesting to watch his minders in the middle of the chamber looking on anxiously.

MACRON AND BIDEN

 

 Commentary in the USA has been mixed as regards the AUKUS Pact.The Left emphasising the discomfiture of "our oldest ally (France) " the Right, more generally favourable, but both sides keen to play down somewhat the anti-China rationale everyone knows is at the heart of the matter.

Mr.Biden ( or his speech writers) was/were keen to mollify their EU partners and soft-pedal the Chinese issue in his UN address. Surprisingly, he was followed after a few hours by Xi Jin Ping himself - rather than some lesser being as had been formally arranged . Xi's address was moderate in tone with no more than a couple of sly digs at the West/USA  - all in all surprisingly moderate in tone and "jackboots" carefully out of sight.

 

The Chinese Perspective

 

The cause of all the strife is of course,the behaviour of Xi Jin Ping. He seems at last to have come under heavy pressure from within the CCP to lower his rhetoric somewhat. Hence his moderate  but unexpected UN appearance.  The AUKUS pact announcement seems to have come as a surprise to the Chinese Communists. Coming as it did , on top of Japan's announcement that it would stand by TAIWAN, and its several gestures toward TAIWAN's status as an independent nation  were surprising to the Chinese Communists. Coupled with Freedom of Navigation exercises by the Royal Navy, the Japanese Navy and Royal Australian navy and the United States Navy, the message seems to have finally gotten through to the CCP that Xi Jin Ping has overplayed his hand - entirely.

We may yet see some concrete demonstration of just how much weight the CCP puts behind the term "for life".

 

Meanwhile Back in Australia...

 

The Government has already announced its intention to carry out a Life of Type extension programme on its existing COLLINS Class diesel-electric submarines to ensure that we do not face a gap between the normal end of the COLLINS Class lifespan and the likely arrival of the first of the new subs in 2040. But as we have seen , surprise developments are becoming less surprising, The location at which this work is to be carried out appears likely to be W.A.  As a job creator, the project will be highly sensitive politically.

" PAST " enKINDLED

 

A knock at the door on Friday, the UPS Man hands me a light weight box , and I am catapulted into the outer regions of the electronic "envelope"!!

Thanks to the amazing generosity of my daughter Justine, and her husband Paul, I am now the proud and enthusiastic owner of a KINDLE 3G E-Reader. Stunning ! Imagine carrying around an item the size of a small format Paperback, capable of containing 3,500 books and able to facilitate search within any one or all of them, that remembers what page you are up to in the ones you are reading etc., etc.

Needless to say I am immeasurably grateful, and impatient to extend the library to facilitate my reading and reference work for my Blogs and FOUNDATION.One of my early coups has been to load Whiston's Complete Works of Flavius Josephus for about $5-00 - the paperback of one of his works costs $ 34 !
Let me know if I get boring about Kindle - but the possibilities! Already I am re-reading in the Kindle Edition "The Passion and Death of Our Lord Jesus Christ"by Archbishop Alban Goodier S.J. and reading for the first time the Autobiography of Ulysses S. Grant- just as terrific a read as my Brother-in -Law Tony Hannon said it is!