Memorial of St. Ubaldesca

St. Ubaldesca was born in Calcinaia, near Pisa, in 1136 and joined the Order of St. John of Jerusalem at the age of fifteen. She worked for fifty-five years in the infirmary attached to the monastery at Pisa, caring for her neighbour out of love of God. She died on 28 May 1206 and her body was taken back to Calcinaia where it is enshrined.

Prayer:

O God, pride of the humble lover of virginity, you called Saint Ubaldesca to the religious life in the Order of St. John of Jerusalem: grant that through her prayers and example we may rejoice in being humble and follow you, with pure minds. We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ your Son, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.
(From: The Missal with readings of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem of Rhodes, & of Malta, London 1997)

For more information on this remarkable saint visit Fr. Gerard's page at the South African Association of the SMOM

The George Bailey School of Economics

One of cinema's greatest directors, who also happened to be Catholic, was Frank Capra. While It's A Wonderful Life has been overplayed at Christmas time in recent years there is still a valuable lesson to be learned from the character of George Bailey.

The following article was written by Allan C. Carlson and published in The American Conservative.

What Would George Bailey Do?

Any plan to right the housing market should put families first.


by Allan C. Carlson

HENRY POTTER:
Have you put any real pressure on these people of yours to pay those mortgages?

PETER BAILEY: Times are bad, Mr. Potter. A lot of these people are out of work.

POTTER: Then foreclose!

BAILEY: I can’t do that. These families have children.

POTTER: They’re not my children.

BAILEY: But they’re somebody’s children, Mr. Potter.

POTTER: Are you running a business or a charity ward?

Mr. Potter’s questions from the 1946 film “It’s a Wonderful Life” now haunt American politics. The contemporary mortgage crisis has destabilized the American and global economies, imperiled great banking enterprises, and threatened hundreds of thousands of American households with the loss of their homes. Washington politicians on both sides of the aisle have in recent weeks essentially answered Mr. Potter’s final query, affirming the federal government’s role as “charity ward” of last resort, this time for both threatened homeowners and endangered financiers.

Regarding the former, the legislators’ actions might be viewed as more than a craven quest for votes. They could be understood as responding to an echo of another quote
from “It’s a Wonderful Life,” this time by Peter Bailey’s more famous son, George:

Just remember this, Mr. Potter, that this rabble you’re talking about …. they do most of the working and paying and living and dying in this community. Well, is it too much to have them work and pay and live and die in a couple of decent rooms and a bath?

Our own politicos shout “no!” while approving billions to refinance delinquent loans. (Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve uses public dollars to save Bear Stearns.)

During the 1930s and 1940s, filmland’s Bailey Building and Loan had built lovely suburban homes for struggling families and had weathered several financial crises, albeit always through private rather than public means. How would George Bailey, the fictional saint of the mortgage industry, view the current crisis and federal response?
Put another way: What would George Bailey do?

Some real history may help here. The classic Savings and Loan association portrayed in the film grew out of the “friendly society” tradition of 19th-century America. Often associated with ethnic groups—two of my great-grandfathers were founders of the Skandia Society serving Swedish immigrants in Des Moines, Iowa—these early mutual savings banks encouraged thrift and made loans to responsible and credit-worthy borrowers. Depositors and borrowers alike were members of the society, with voting and oversight rights. This ensured that those who took out loans were carefully scrutinized and personally monitored by the lenders.

Congress stabilized, and to some degree nationalized, the system through the Federal Home Loan Bank Act of 1932. This measure regularized the long-term, amortized
mortgage for home purchases, mobilized capital toward this end, and allowed Savings and Loans to pay higher interest than commercial banks on savings deposits. The chartering of the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) came in 1938, funneling still more money into the system. Tax reforms made the interest on home mortgages deductible, turning houses into a favored form of capital investment.

After World War II, the mortgage business soared. The Serviceman’s Readjustment Act of 1944 guaranteed VA home loans for veterans at up to 100 percent of the selling price. President Harry Truman told the National Conference on Family Life that “children and dogs are as necessary to the welfare of this country as is Wall Street and the railroads.” The sweeping Housing Act of 1949 committed the country to providing “a decent home … for every American family.” Federal Housing Administration loan guarantees also came into play. In 1949 alone, the industry recorded 1,466,000 housing starts, an unprecedented number.

This housing boom had its own sociology. Nearly all the new VA- and FHA-insured loans went to young married couples starting their families. As the official Fannie Mae history of housing explains, federal mortgage programs “made home ownership available to many families who could never have considered it otherwise.” They allowed Americans to express their preference “for bringing up children in the ‘wholesome, clean-air’ environment of the suburbs.”

Importantly, calculations of mortgage eligibility during this era counted only a husband’s income. Underwriters saw young married women as potential dropouts from the labor market once they became pregnant. This policy also had the unintended effect of holding housing prices down. Americans responded to this favorable policy environment. Between 1945 and 1960, there was a 90-percent increase in the number of owner-occupied homes. The marriage rate climbed sharply, the fertility rate soared, and even the divorce rate fell steadily after 1946. By the early 1960s, the government’s pro-family housing policy could be judged a success. To be sure, there were problems: a broad national over-investment in housing, which retarded other forms of capital investment; a discouraging conformity in suburban housing design; and a design preference for the “companionate” model of marriage and home life, which abandoned the function-rich family. All the same, George Bailey would surely have been proud.

The housing and mortgage markets, however, began operating in weird new ways around 1970. A massive investment in housing continued, with total non-farm mortgage debt climbing from $358 billion in 1970 to $2.2 trillion by 1987, an after-inflation increase of 311 percent. The number of housing units climbed from 65 million to 90 million. Yet the number of young married couples (husband aged 25-34) in homes actually fell by 2 percent over these years. The number of child-rich households with six or more persons plunged by 57 percent.

What was happening? In short, the family-centered nature of the American housing boom had unraveled. Policy changes were part of the dynamic. Under feminist legal pressures, the “husband-only” income rule for determining the maximum of a family’s mortgage disappeared. A wife’s income must also be counted. Results included upward pressure on housing prices and a disincentive to be a stay-at-home mother. Housing officials exhibited new interest in providing shelter for nontraditional households, explaining that there was no longer a “standard family” guiding housing demand. They introduced easier eligibility standards, and the proportion of new FHA mortgages going to married-couple households with children fell sharply. Government publications stressed that houses were increasingly purchased with “resalability” rather than “livability” in mind. This meant that housing was now more a form of investment and a hedge against inflation than a refuge from the elements.

Housing analysts George Sternlieb and James Hughes pointed to an even stranger
development: while the number of distinct housing units climbed by 38 percent between 1970 and 1987, the average household size fell from 3.14 to 2.64 members, a decline of 16 percent. This meant that “the nation’s population is diffusing itself into an expanding supply network.” More darkly, they concluded that “the very decline in the size of household” may be “a consequence of the availability and costs of housing units generally.”

Translated from academese, this meant that America’s very success in building homes now perversely encouraged family breakup through separation and divorce. Direct and indirect subsidies also encouraged home ownership among singles by substituting government help for the economic gains, such as economies of scale, once
provided by marriage and family living. In addition, your friendly neighborhood Savings and Loan societies changed. In the late 1970s, they gained the ability to offer checking accounts and shed many state regulations. In 1980, Congress gave the “thrifts” power to make commercial loans, issue credit cards, and otherwise behave like regular banks. The result was disaster: a series of speculative loans and investments brought on the infamous Savings and Loan crisis of the 1986-95 period. Half of the nation’s savings and loans went out of business; taxpayers took over about $125 billion in bad debt. And George Bailey rolled over in his Hollywood grave. At great public cost, stability returned to the housing and mortgage markets by the later 1990s.

Our current crisis was a product of the new century, a fairly conventional speculative bubble involving legislators, regulators, lenders, great financial houses, and
borrowers in roughly equal culpability. Under the mantra that “housing prices in
America have never gone down,” modest eligibility standards for taking out
mortgages were essentially scrapped. Risk was “shared”—read hidden—by the
relatively new process of bundling mortgages for resale to investors. As housing prices soared, the rush to get into the game produced all the usual assurances from the financial talking heads, until the inevitable collapse.

So what would George Bailey do now? First of all, I think he would want to examine the sociology of the crisis. How many of the imperiled homebuyers are actually young families with children? These he would want to help. How many are singletons who used this speculative opportunity to jump onto the housing escalator? How many are empty-nesters who rode the bubble to move into a McMansion? How many are would-be investors looking for quick turnarounds in a rising market? There would be little sympathy for these latter cases, I suspect.

To help threatened families with children, George Bailey would support private and public efforts that put them first in line for access to renegotiated and publicly guaranteed mortgages. “Households with dependent children” would serve as the defining criterion. He would also probably agree with guidelines recently offered by the Heritage Foundation, including:

All government-assisted refinancing should go only to homeowners who use that home as their primary residence. No help should be given to investors, speculators, owners of vacation homes, homebuilders, realtors, mortgage brokers, or bankers. Help should also be denied to anyone who lied or made misrepresentations on their original mortgage applications.

George Bailey would surely marvel at the stupidity and greed of our current crop of great financiers, who make Mr. Potter look like a genius—even a humanitarian. George Bailey knew truly good capitalists: his friend Sam Wainwright earned money through manufacturing useful products (including, yes, war materiel). He would shake his head, though, at Wall Street’s more recent “Masters of the Universe,” who claimed their vast personal incomes and stock options simply by piling onto the latest investment fad. He would want to see these sham geniuses and their boards of directors held personally liable to stockholders and investors. He would expect criminal fraud to be vigorously investigated as well.

I doubt, too, that George Bailey would support a quasi-public bailout of Bear Stearns or any other threatened financial giant. He would probably agree with many contemporary analysts that Bear Stearns has been an unusually nasty company without a shred of public-spiritedness. In its failure, it would merely have reaped what it had sown. Bailey would dismiss as preposterous claims that the fate of the American and world economies hinged on this rogue company’s survival.

Over the long haul, George Bailey would probably try to return the housing and mortgage industries to their real purpose: providing homes to families. He would support limiting the tax deduction on home-mortgage interest to one principal residence per family. He might even favor a cap on the amount that could be deducted, so that only good shelter—not princely luxury—enjoyed favored tax treatment. And he would probably redistribute tax benefits to families according to their number of dependent children, raising either the child tax credit or the per-capita deduction for children—or both.

As his father had noted, “These families have children.” That, I believe, would be George Bailey’s touchstone for reform.

______________________________________

Allan C. Carlson is president of The Howard Center for Family, Religion, & Society in Rockford, Illinois. His latest book is Third Ways.

The Eucharist Is The School of Charity

Pope Benedict addressing pilgrims on the feast of Corpus Christi stated that, "the Eucharist reveals the true beauty of Christianity," and is "the school of charity and solidarity that should make us more attentive to the many people who struggle to procure their daily bread. He who eats of the bread of Christ cannot remain indifferent before those, who also in our day, are deprived of their daily bread."

The Holy Father added that Christians are called to be attentive in concrete ways to the many who go without food.

"Dear brothers and sisters, let this feast of Corpus Domini be an occasion to grow in the in this concrete attention to our brothers, especially the poor."

"We obtain this grace from the Virgin Mary, from whom the Son of God took flesh and blood, as we repeat in a celebrated Eucharistic hymn, set to music by the one of the greatest composers, Ave verum corpus natum de Maria Virgine… Mary, who brought forth from her womb Jesus, who was the ‘tabernacle’ of living, imparts to us her own faith in the holy mystery of the Body and Blood of her divine Son, since he is truly the center of our lives."

Christian Mortification

In addition to prayer, an essential duty in our spiritual life is performing acts of mortification. As we passed from Lent to Easter and now into Ordinary time it is easy to relax in our spiritual duties by thinking that we "survived the penances of Lent" so now don't have to worry about it again until next year. Perhaps this attitude is one reason we fail to progress in our spiritual life? While the penitential aspect of our faith is more pronounced during Lent is not an excuse to ignore it the rest of the year. One of the most memorable moments of the Lourdes Pilgrimage was meditating on the stations of the cross. The Stations provide considerable themes for meditation. As we prepare to begin the year of St. Paul in June, let us remember that his constant teaching was "Christ Crucified."

Reflecting on Christ crucified will remind us to mortify ourselves. According to Cardinal Mercier, "the aim of Christian mortification is to counteract the evil influences which original sin continues to exert on our souls, ever after Baptism has regenerated them." He provides 10 simple steps we can follow to mortify our bodies according to the practice and examples of the saints.

1. With regard to food, restrict yourself as far as possible to simple
necessity.
2. Pray to God often, to help you by his grace as to not overstep the limits of necessity.
3. Take nothing between meals, unless out of necessity or for the sake of convenience.
4. Practice fasting and abstinence, but only under obedience and with discretion.
5. It is not forbidden to enjoy some bodily satisfaction, but do so with a pure intention, giving thanks to God.
6. Regulate your sleep. Set a strict hour for going to bed and waking up in the morning, avoiding the temptation to "lay around."
7. In general, take your rest only in so far as it is necessary; give yourself generously to work, taking care not to exhaust your body, but guard against indulging it.
8. If you suffer some slight indisposition, avoid being a nuisance to others through your bad mood; leave to your companions the task of complaining for you.
9. Guard against making the slightest illness a reason for dispensation or exemption from your daily schedule.
10. Accept with docility, endure humbly, patiently and with perseverance, the tiresome mortification called illness.

"it is necessary to die in order that God may live in us, for it is impossible to achieve the union of the soul with God by any means other than by mortification." St. Francis de Sales

Lourdes Pilgrimage

This past week I joined over 8000 fellow pilgrims with the Order of Malta from 41 countries, including over 1600 malades, on the SMOM's 50th annual pilgrimage to Lourdes. Whether you have been to Lourdes, are going, or are unable to go, there are some excellent resources to celebrate this Jubilee Year.

The official Lourdes website is Lourdes-France.org . There is also a special designated website for the 150th Anniversary Jubilee, Lourdes Jubilate! 2008. To save some time looking around these sites you can find webcams of the Grotto, the Rosary Basilica, the evening candlelight procession, and other video is available on the site. It isn't always current but is fun to watch.

You can also listen to a portion of the Ave Maria of Lourdes or chimes of the bells from the Basilica's.

Haitian Food Crisis (Updated)

A friend who linked to this post found more information on this story.

I was hungry and you gave me to eat…”

I received this letter today and if you are able I hope that you can help.

We send you an urgent plea for help. The people of Haiti are suffering starvation and a food crisis on a daily basis. Food prices continue to spiral out of reach, spiking as much as forty-five percent since 2006, and turning Haitian staples like beans, corn, and rice into closely guarded treasures.

A Dame of Malta, who leads Hope for Haiti, tells us:

“You may have read in numerous publications that Haitians are eating dirt. Yes, they mix dirt with oil and salt and shape them into circles and dry them in the sun. They sell for 5 cents; with the outrageous price of rice, this is what our brothers and sisters are left to eat.”

The American Association of the Order of Malta supports four major missions in Haiti. Each of the missions is in desperate need of funds to buy food for starving children, mothers and fathers, and elderly Haitians. These people depend upon us for a daily meal.

The four missions in Haiti associated with The American Association include:

Haitian Health Foundation
Hopital Sacre Coeur - Crudem
Hope for Haiti
Project Pierre Toussaint

Each of our missions will guarantee that 100% of the monies will go toward food to those in need. Please help this cause and send whatever you can; we will let you know how our Order has come to the aid of the Haitian families who depend upon us for survival from day-to-day during these very bad times.

Please send your donation to:
Order of Malta – American Association
P.O. Box 3420
Long Island City, NY 11103-0418

You can also go to the American Association website and donate online.

False Pacifists

I am posting this essay by Fr. McNabb entitled "On False Pacifism" as a rebuttal to many who claim a moral superiority over others and who with unjust harshness criticize our men and women serving us in the military. H/T to The ChesterBelloc Mandate

On False Pacifism
by Fr. Vincent McNabb, O.P.

Two errors, garbed as virtues, are at present threatening the course of European justice. One of these is false pity; the other, false pacifism. Now whereas we wish to speak at length of the latter, a word may dismiss the former.

False pity makes an appeal after this manner: "Be merciful even to your enemy. Overcome him if you will; but be not overcome by what is worst in him. Conquer, but do not copy him. In the hour of victory forget your enemy's frightfulness. Forget even that he is your enemy, and remember only that he is your brother.

"The errors latent in this appeal to the quality of mercy need hardly be dwelt upon, whilst one fatal quality swallows up the rest. The truth is that this gentle-toned pity is almost a superlative pride. It is so supremely self-conscious that in spite of the soil of Germany being still practically inviolate, it calmly foretells victory.

The false pacifism, which we other pacifists nowise confound with true pacifism, makes a brave show on platforms and on paper. It lends itself readily to the more moving kinds of address. It appeals to the noble-hearted. It unnerves heroes. It deceives even the elect. Seldom does it preach its evangel of peace without direct mention of Him around whose cradle angels sang of "Peace on earth to men. "It almost disarms criticism by beseeching Christian men to remember the Rock whence they were hewn and the Captain whose victory on the mount was won: Non occidendo sed moriendo, by dying, not by putting to death.

But the noble blunder into which these pacifists have fallen can be seen only by those who have the power of grasping, as the Scholastics would say, certain simple distinctions. Their first duty is to see the distinction between common virtue and heroic virtue. It was the Greek thinkers and heroes who first detected and proclaimed this simple distinction. Plato and Aristotle, who knew Greeks, divided them into normal Greeks and hero Greeks. The average man, whether Greek or barbarian, can risk his life in order to save his life ; in other words, he can be brave in self-defence. Only a hero will risk his own life to save another's ; that is, only a hero can meet death bravely that others may live.

This distinction between common virtue and heroic virtue passes into the classical Christian distinction between the commandments and the counsels. Until a man under-stands these two, and the difference between them, he has not understood Christianity; and until a man understands Christianity, how can he judge of Europe in this year of our Lord nineteen hundred and fifteen?

This, then, is the distinction between commandments and counsels. A command is something that all must do. A counsel is something that none need do, but some will do. Thus unto everyone it is commanded: "Thou shalt not steal." All are forbidden to take what is not their own ; and are commanded to give back what is not their own if they have taken it. But the Master has given a counsel : " Sell all thou hast." This is more than a command ; not, indeed, more in obligation, but more in hardship and nobility. It suggests that the higher way, the way, not over the earth, but through the air, is to those rare souls who have grasped the principle that "a man's riches consists less in the multitude of his possessions than in the fewness of his wants.

"Thus everyone is under the command : "Thou shalt not kill." By virtue of this a man may not take human life. Yet if another attempts his life he may defend himself by slaying the other. The average man, if attacked by another, could not be bound to forgo all self-defence by force. Yet if a man for some noble motive did allow himself to be slain instead of slaying his foe, he would be giving an example of heroic virtue. But too much stress cannot be laid upon the sound ethical principle that " No one is bound to heroic virtue." The attitude of the Society of Friends towards war is undeniably a noble one ; or it would be noble were it wise. But since it insists that everyone shall exercise the heroic virtue of non-resistance by force it lacks that touch of mercy which would make it kindred to mankind.

A last and most necessary distinction is between "meum" and "tuum" that is, between our power over our own rights and our power over the rights of others. A man may quite lawfully give his purse up to the first stranger who asks it of him. But a postman who would give up a purse he was bound to deliver would be condemned for neglect of duty.

In the same way an individual on the banks of the Meuse might resign his rights against trespass by allowing German troops to pass through his garden. But if that individual is a Belgian soldier, whose duty it is to defend the rights of his fellow-countrymen, then to allow German soldiers to pass through the garden would be a traitorous neglect of duty. Far from being heroic virtue, it would be the cowardice of treachery.

It is not a little strange that the men who so persistently preach heroic virtue in the matter of the commandment : "Thou shalt not kill" do not preach it in the far easier commandment : "Thou shalt not steal."As we know, the commandment : "Thou shalt not kill" is the chief safeguard in a civilization that is dominantly military, whereas the commandment : "Thou shalt not steal" is the chief safeguard in a civilization that is dominantly commercial.

Now, the counsel to defend no rights even the rights of others, or our own transcendent right to live by an appeal to physical force is the absolute or heroic in the commandment against killing. But the absolute or heroic in the commandment against stealing is : "Sell all thou hast and give to the poor."How few there are to urge this absolute amongst the men who look on war as a crime ! Peace has its frightfulness no less than war. Mammon is a more sanguinary god than Mars. When men plead that Mars is red-handed and should not be adored, it may be well to remind them, amidst their financial operations, that their counsels of perfection would be more effective if they themselves followed them in the lesser sphere of self-emptied riches.

Navy SEAL Michael Monsoor's Supreme Act of Chivalry

My previous post was on a talk by Fr. Chavez called Summoning Men to Lay Down Their Lives. For most of us this will be more on a spiritual level, making daily sacrifices and placing the needs of our neighbor before our own. While the history of our Order is filled with examples of knights sacrificing their lives for their brethern few of us will have to make this decision today. But there will always be occasions where people make this ultimate sacrifice and yesterday President Bush awarded Navy SEAL Michael Monsoor the Medal of Honor for his heroic act of giving his life for that of his neighbor.
The details that earned him the award are below but I think one point is worth highlighting. He was a Catholic, attended Mass and was named after St. Michael the Archangel and it was on St. Michael's feast day, September 29th, that he lay down his life for two of his comrades.

This is the President's speech and Medal of Honor citation:

The Medal of Honor is America's highest decoration for military valor. Over the years, many who have received the medal have given their lives in the action that earned it. The name of Petty Officer Michael Anthony Monsoor will now be among them. In September 2006, Michael laid down his life for his brothers in arms. Today, we remember the life of this faithful Navy SEAL. And on behalf of a grateful nation, we will present Michael Monsoor's family with the Medal of Honor that he earned.....Previous Medal of Honor recipients, thank you for joining us.I appreciate Chaplain Burt; Navy SEALS -- the finest warriors on the face of the Earth; the Monsoor family, and everybody else.The Medal of Honor is awarded for an act of such courage that no one could rightly be expected to undertake it. Yet those who knew Michael Monsoor were not surprised when he did. This son of Orange County, California, grew up in a family where helping others was a way of life. Mike's father was a Marine; his mother a social worker. Together, they raised their four children to understand the meaning of service and sacrifice.From a very early age, Mike showed the strength of his own convictions. Apparently going to kindergarten wasn't one of them. Mike had no complaints after the first week of school -- until someone broke the news to him that he had to go back the next week. (Laughter.) Many mornings, Mike refused to put on the nice clothes for school. Instead, he insisted on wearing mismatched outfits. Mike's mother soon discovered there was no stopping the determined young boy from mixing plaids and stripes. And years later, there would be no stopping an even more determined young man from donning a uniform of Navy Blue.In some ways, Mike was an unlikely candidate for the Navy. He suffered from terrible asthma as a child. On some nights, his coughing fits would land him in the hospital. But Mike would not lie low for long. He strengthened his lungs by racing his siblings in the swimming pool. He worked to wean himself off his inhaler. He built himself into a superb athlete -- excelling from sports like football to snowboarding.After enlisting in the Navy, he began preparing for the ultimate test of physical endurance: SEAL training. Less than a third of those who begin this training become SEALs. But Mike would not be denied a spot. In September 2004, he earned the right to wear the Navy SEAL trident.The newly minted frogman became a beloved member of the SEAL team community. His teammates liked to laugh about the way his shiny Corvette would leave everybody in the dust. But deep down, they always knew Mike would never leave anybody behind when it counted. He earned their confidence with his attention to detail and quiet work ethic. One of Mike's officers remembers an instructor once asking after an intense training session, "What's the deal with the Monsoor guy? He just says, 'Roger that,' to everything."When Mike deployed with his team to Ramadi in the spring of 2006, he brought that attitude with him. Because he served as both a heavy machine gunner and a communications operator, he often had a double load of equipment -- sometimes more than a hundred pounds worth. But under the glare of the hot desert sun, he never lost his cool.At the time, Ramadi was in the clutches of al Qaeda terrorists and insurgents. Together, the SEALs and the Army 1st Battalion of the 506 Infantry Regiment took the offense against the enemy. The SEALs carried out a broad range of special operations -- including providing sniper cover in tough urban conditions, and conducting raids against terrorists and insurgents. Overall, Mike's platoon came under enemy attack during 75 percent of their missions. And in most of these engagements, Mike was out front defending his brothers. In May 2006, Mike and another SEAL ran into the line of fire to save a wounded teammate. With bullets flying all around them, Mike returned fire with one hand while helping pull the injured man to safety with the other. In a dream about the incident months later, the wounded SEAL envisioned Mike coming to the rescue with wings on his shoulders.On Saint Michael's Day -- September 29, 2006 -- Michael Monsoor would make the ultimate sacrifice. Mike and two teammates had taken position on the outcropping of a rooftop when an insurgent grenade bounced off Mike's chest and landed on the roof. Mike had a clear chance to escape, but he realized that the other two SEALs did not. In that terrible moment, he had two options -- to save himself, or to save his friends. For Mike, this was no choice at all. He threw himself onto the grenade, and absorbed the blast with his body. One of the survivors puts it this way: "Mikey looked death in the face that day and said, 'You cannot take my brothers. I will go in their stead.'"Perhaps the greatest tribute to Mike's life is the way different service members all across the world responded to his death. Army soldiers in Ramadi hosted a memorial service for the valiant man who had fought beside them. Iraqi Army scouts -- whom Mike helped train -- lowered their flag, and sent it to his parents. Nearly every SEAL on the West Coast turned out for Mike's funeral in California. As the SEALs filed past the casket, they removed their golden tridents from their uniforms, pressed them onto the walls of the coffin. The procession went on nearly half an hour. And when it was all over, the simple wooden coffin had become a gold-plated memorial to a hero who will never be forgotten.For his valor, Michael Monsoor becomes the fourth Medal of Honor recipient in the war on terror. Like the three men who came before him, Mike left us far too early. But time will not diminish his legacy. We see his legacy in the SEALs whose lives he saved. We see his legacy in the city of Ramadi, which has gone from one of the most dangerous places in Iraq to one of the most safest. We see his legacy in the family that stands before us filled with grief, but also with everlasting pride.Mr. and Mrs. Monsoor: America owes you a debt that can never be repaid. This nation will always cherish the memory of your son. We will not let his life go in vain. And this nation will always honor the sacrifice he made. May God comfort you. May God bless America.Come on up. And now George and Sally Monsoor will be here -- a Military Aide will read the citation.The citation is read:The President of the United States, in the name of the Congress, takes pride in presenting the Medal of Honor, posthumously, to Master At Arms Second Class, Sea, Air and Land, Michael A. Monsoor, United States Navy. For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while serving as Automatic Weapons Gunner for Naval Special Warfare Task Group Arabian Peninsula, in support of Operation IRAQI FREEDOM on 29 September 2006.As a member of a combined SEAL and Iraqi Army sniper overwatch element, tasked with providing early warning and stand-off protection from a rooftop in an insurgent-held sector of Ar Ramadi, Iraq, Petty Officer Monsoor distinguished himself by his exceptional bravery in the face of grave danger. In the early morning, insurgents prepared to execute a coordinated attack by reconnoitering the area around the element's position. Element snipers thwarted the enemy's initial attempt by eliminating two insurgents. The enemy continued to assault the element, engaging them with a rocket-propelled grenade and small arms fire. As enemy activity increased, Petty Officer Monsoor took position with his machine gun between two teammates on an outcropping of the roof. While the SEALs vigilantly watched for enemy activity, an insurgent threw a hand grenade from an unseen location, which bounced off Petty Officer Monsoor's chest and landed in front of him. Although only he could have escaped the blast, Petty Officer Monsoor chose instead to protect his teammates. Instantly and without regard for his own safety, he threw himself onto the grenade to absorb the force of the explosion with his body, saving the lives of his two teammates. By his undaunted courage, fighting spirit, and unwavering devotion to duty in the face of certain death, Petty Officer Monsoor gallantly gave his life for his country, thereby reflecting great credit upon himself and upholding the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.

The Quest for Masculine Identity

I saw a Fr. Philip Chavez interviewed the other night and was impressed by what he had to say. He is a young priest of the Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity (SOLT) which is also the Society that Fr. Corapi belongs to. You can listen to an excellent talk of his titled Summoning Men to Lay Down Their Lives. at his website. Here is a little bio of his mission,

After several years of study and pastoral work, assiduously addressing family issues, my superiors have encouraged me to establish an outreach to men in order to address the complex challenges and difficulties they often face in growing humanly and spiritually in the present age.

The degree of disillusionment I've encountered in men who are striving to reach simple human happiness and spiritual peace is great. Sustaining a healthy life's balance is frequently challenging for males given the far-reaching effects of developmental conflicts, lack of male mentoring, emasculating formative experiences, and cultural influences that beset them. Men often find themselves isolated, profoundly dissatisfied, unfulfilled, and desperately seeking answers.

At the present, I am embarking on a more intense outreach to men -- particularly by way of seminars and parish missions -- toward their advancement in genuine masculine identity and character integration. Among the many objectives, I strive to call men toward their natural duty to mentor younger men and adolescents, inspire then to sacrificially honor their commitments, coach them to assemble and work in small teams, and summon them to defend their family, Church and society. All my work finds its basis upon sound theological and human principles, so that men may experience the longing of the Psalmist: "Strengthen me with a perfect spirit" (Ps 50:14).

Paschal Vigil At St. John's in London

Even though it is already a few weeks ago I found photos of the Paschal vigil held at St. John's Church of the Order of Malta in London at the website of Traditional Catholic. Click here to view the pictures.