In homily notes for the feast of the Archangels Michael, Gabriel and Raphael the
Congregation for Clergy state that now more than ever Europe needs the protection, truth and healing brought by the Holy Archangels because of the threats from atheistic secularism and materialism.
‘The Angels invite us to rediscover that we, like them, continually receive our existence from God and that we are also called to stand before God. This is our communal identity and truth.’
The Archangel Michael’s role is to defend and protect God’s people from atheistic secularism:
‘He defends the cause of the only God against the presumption of the dragon. In every epoch the devil’s great temptation is to make man believe that God ought to disappear so that man can become great. The dragon not only accuses God, but also man as Satan is the one who ‘accuses them [our brothers] night and day before our God’ (Ap 12:10) The man who goes away from God does not become great but, on the contrary, he is deprived of his dignity and becomes insignificant. On the other hand, faith in God defends man, making him free, thus revealing his true greatness.’
The Congregation for Clergy remind Europeans of the importance of the Archangel Michael to our history, reminding us that, ’Today, more than ever, his powerful defence is necessary for us!’
‘St Michael’s other great assignment is to be the protector of God’s people (cfr. Dn 10, 13:21; 12:1) as where the glory God shines in His Church the envy of the Devil brakes out against it. Medieval Christians were very well aware of St Michael’s protective role and constructed beautiful Churches in his name. For example, the three Abbeys dedicated to St Michael: San Michele in Monte Sant’ Angelo Gargano, Sacra di San Michele in Torino (both in Italy) and Mont Saint Michael in France, which span Europe and are on a unique geographical axis that is 1000 M equidistant and orientated towards Jerusalem, testify to the ecclesial confidence in Michael’s protection for the whole of Europe.’
The Archangel Raphael’s role is to heal us from the blindness of self-sufficient materialism through bringing Christ’s healing light:
‘The Book of Tobias speaks of the healing of the blind. We touch upon how we are threatened by blindness to God today. There is the great danger that, when faced with all the material things we have and all that we are able to do, we become blind to God’s light. Healing the heart’s blindness, by announcing Christ, is the sublime work that we, together with St Raphael, have been entrusted. Only the experience of the regenerating presence of Christ, can make the new light shine in our sight and open up Heaven where the angels are ‘ascending and descending’ to serve and to praise God in communion between heaven and earth.’
The Archangel Gabriel, as the messenger of God’s incarnation, continually brings Christ to the world who seeks to enter into our lives:
‘The Lord stays tirelessly at the door of the world and of every heart continuing to knock: ‘Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if any one hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.’ (Rev 3:20) He knocks at the door, in order to ask for the liberty to open it. He, entering in us and living amongst us, desires that our lives have the breath of God and the amplitude of Heaven.’
The Congregation for Clergy concludes:
‘Today, in the Holy Archangels, heaven luminously shines forth and is opened once more for us as defence, protection and as the happy announcement of God’s presence like the healing light for our eyes. Let’s thank the Lord for the gift of these powerful friends and, together with Her who is the Queen of the Angels, invoke their celestial protection for our good and the good of the Church!’
Protect the Pope comment: One of the consequences of living in an assertive secular country is that Catholics feel reticent to talk about our belief in the presence and activity of angels. Protect the Pope believes that if Jesus and the Evangelists talked freely and openly about angels, then we should also be as open and free to talk about their importance to our lives.
The other reason why Catholics don’t talk about angels is that due to collapse of catechesis over the past 40 years many Catholics know next to nothing about the Church’s rich tradition around the existence and actions of angels.
Protect the Pope recommends that we begin today a resurgence in our devotion to the Archangels and angels through praying at least twice a day the prayer of protection to Archangel Michael and at least twice a day the traditional prayer to our Guardian Angels. It will change all our lives for the better.
ONS: A quarter of Britons have ‘no religion at all’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8794336/ONS-A-quarter-of-Britons-have-no-religion-at-all.html
Three Britons count themselves as Christian for every one non-believer, according to a major survey.
And nearly seven in ten said they were Christian, even if they never go to church.
Fewer than a quarter said they had no religion and only one in 12 follows another religion.
Nearly nine in ten over-65s are Christian. But even in the least religious age group, 25 to 34-year-olds, more than half – 55 per cent – profess Christianity.
Fifty-nine per cent of 16 to 24-year-olds and 60 per cent of under-16s said they were Christian.
Support for other religions breaks down as 4.4 per cent Muslim, 1.3 per cent Hindu, 0.7 per cent Sikh, 0.4 per cent Buddhist, 0.4 per cent Jewish, and 1.1 per cent who say they follow other religions.
Only 23 per cent of the population said they had no religion. Christian groups said the findings showed that State agencies which act as if Christianity was a minority hobby are wildly wrong.
Simon Calvert, of the Christian Institute think tank, said: ‘These figures must come as a shock to the BBC and the political class. It is about time that this reality, that people want to be identified as Christian, was reflected not only in the output of our major broadcasters but also in the policies of the Government.
‘Ministers are still barrelling along with enforcing civil partnerships in churches and redefining marriage. We can only hope that the reality will catch up with them and give them pause for thought.’
The Integrated Household Survey was put together from five ONS surveys which asked the same ‘core questions’ over a year.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2043045/Modern-Britain-70-claim-Christians-1-5-gay.html#ixzz1ZLJoSloC
The startling thing about the figures is that in a SINGLE YEAR non-religious people have increased and Christians declined in number by almost 3%! At that rate it will take little more than a generation for the number of people who describe themself as Christian to be a minority. If the figures were the other way round we would be completely justified in talking about an “unprecedented rise in belief”.
I admire your optimism, but don’t let it blind you to the fact that we have yet to see a reversal to the long standing and steady decline in both the depth and extent of belief.
Miracles do happen and a reversal might just be around the corner, but there is no evidence for that yet.
But take the +/- points in to consideration and the non religious may not have any growth at all.
Actually there may not be +/- points because this is a survey, not a poll.
Full results: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_227150.pdf
Non religious also does not mean atheist, you can be non religious and still believe in God or be spiritual.
A non-religious theist would belief in God just not believe that God has written a book. Not a particularly unusual set of beliefs I would have thought.
And how would they know who that God is? The problem with that philosophy is that you make God in to who you want God to be, it has no base. You decide what attributes and so on you think your God should have.
Many many non-religeous people are non-religious because the level of detail that religion proposes just makes it all seem implasable – I mean claims without evidence not only that angels exist but that we actually know their names will be seen as highly implausable by many many people! But those same non-religious people will not be atheists because they may well think, as I do, that there is (or at least might be) a power outside the universe that may well have started it all off. It is those who claim that they know exactly what god thinks on minor matters like the advantages of one kind of banking system over another or women’s hemlines or the specific roles of individual angels or the way in which an animal must be slaughtered who self-evidently have constructed something man-made. My philosophy doesn’t decide what attributes God has. It is your system and other “detailed” religions that arrogantly claim to know a whole list of detailed attributes.
The only way Catholics claim to know Angels…is because their existence was revealed to us in Holy Scripture and by Jesus Christ God made man. If you don’t accept this Divine Revelation….then you really can’t tell if angels exist. But many other Catholic teachings and doctrines can be arrived at by reason, natural law and common sense alone. These our atheist/secular culture seems to have ditched in favour of following their desires only. Not a healthy sign.
@Rob,
Cardinal Ratzinger before he was Pope said this:
“Isn’t it arrogant to speak of truth in matters of religion to the point of affirming that truth, the only truth, has been found in one’s own religion?”
“These people, it seems, are unable to dialogue; therefore, they cannot be taken seriously, because truth is not ‘possessed’ by anyone,” the cardinal added, outlining the thesis of relativism. “We can only be in search of truth. However, against this affirmation one can object: What search is this about, if one can never arrive at the goal?”
“Are these people really searching, or is it that they do not wish to find the truth, because what they will find should not be?” he continued.
“Naturally, truth cannot be a possession; before it, I must always be one of humble acceptance, of being conscious of my own risk and accepting knowledge as a gift, of which I am not worthy, of which I cannot be vainglorious as if it were an achievement of mine,” Cardinal Ratzinger clarified.
“If I have been given the truth, I must consider it as a responsibility, which also presupposes service to others,” he explained. “Faith also affirms that the unlikeness between what is known by us and reality itself is infinitely greater than the likeness.”
“Isn’t it arrogant to say that God cannot give us the gift of truth?” he asked. “Is it not contempt for God to say that we have been born blind and that truth is not our concern?”
“Real arrogance” consists in “wanting to take God’s place and to determine who we are, what we do, what we want to make of ourselves and of the world,” the cardinal continued.
Therefore, “the only thing that we can do is to recognize with humility that we are unworthy messengers who do not proclaim ourselves, but who speak with holy fear of what is not ours, but of what comes from God,” he added.
“Only in this way is the missionary task intelligible, which cannot mean spiritual colonialism, the submission of others to my culture and ideas,” the cardinal emphasized. “In the first place, the mission calls for preparation for martyrdom, a willingness to lose oneself for the love of truth and of one’s neighbor.
“Only in this way is the mission credible. Truth cannot and must not have any other weapon than itself.”
My European Part:
Heiliger Erzengel Michael,
beschirme uns im Kampfe, beschütze uns gegen die Bosheit
und die Nachstellungen des bösen Feindes.
Ihm möge Gott gebieten, so flehen wir inständig.
Du aber, Fürst der himmlischen Heerscharen,
wollest den Satan und die anderen bösen Geister,
die zum Verderben der Seelen in der Welt umhergehen, mit
Gottes Kraft in die Hölle hinabstossen.
Amen.
Remember that the default position in the UK is cultural; CofE for hatch, match & dispatch; god bless the Queen. Fog in the channel, Europe cut off.
…and nowt could be more British than an Angel named after the manufacture of sensible cardies and interview suits.
Made in Italy…:)
Seems like the Church is beginning to square up to Secularism in Europe now. Great. The secular forces have had their own unopposed way for too long now….and what havoc and what a fool’s paradise they have brought.
Let the battle commence. St Michael and all the Angels….please pray for us.
Actually I think that should be…..St Michael and all the Angels, protect us in this battle.
Surely religion has had it’s way for too long i.e. 2000 years. Secularism is just saying that one viewpoint e.g. Christianity shouldn’t have a privileged position in society – is that so contentious? One can surely be Christian *and* secularist?
” One can surely be Christian *and* secularist?”
yes and many people are (quite possibly the majoriy of folk in this country are at least broadly Christain and at least Broadly secularist).
Secularism is not good for society. Secularists want to drive God out of society. Secularism means to exclude God from human affairs, Some people embrace secularism because they think it removes the religious differences among people, I think most secularists see religion as irrational, you have also had secular totalitarians such as Hitler, Stalin, Mao, they wanted to get rid of religious beliefs and institutions. Secularists say religion should be kept private, but this fails because religious people want to defend their stances with real basis. Another problem with secularists is their claim they corner on rationality and science when this is far from the truth.
Separating Church state is adequate, separating religion and politics is not. You can not justify basic political commitments on scientific rationality.
Steve…..Christianity cannot be forced. But if a majority wants Christianity as the state religion….then so be it. Secularism having rejected Christianity, is baseless….and is leading to the death of Western Civilisation. So we must prepare for what is to come after its untimely death….probably by the end of this century.
“. But if a majority wants Christianity as the state religion….then so be it.”
fair enough, but identifying yourself as “Christian” to a pollster is not the same as consenting to Christianity being the state religion.
And then of course which brand of Christianity should be the state religion. What if public opinion wants “a protestant parliment for a protestant people”? I seem to have heard that slogan before ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Protestant_Parliament_for_a_Protestant_People ) – didn’t exactly product a sucessful socirty did it?
I would say secularist/atheist society is probably the least successful of all societies….and the shortest lived.
I think the Danes, Swedes and Norwegians would beg to disagree with you. They are the least religious countries in Europe,and yet they have the lowest levels of crime and the highest levels of social equality and fairness. Compare that with the United States, with its high rates of church membership and openly-religious politicians claiming to stand for Christian values, but it has far higher rates of crime, poverty, childhood mortality and children who have no medical care.
I know where I’d rather live.
Why don’t you move there then if it is so great?
What you are saying is pretty much what was claimed by Gregory Paul in a study in 2005: http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/pdf/2005-11.pdf
Those claims were scrutinized by Gary F. Jenson of Vanderbilt University: http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/pdf/2006-7.pdf
Excerpt:
‘For example, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, and seven other nations have higher burglary rates than the United States (based on Interpol and United Nations data). The United States ranks ninth in cirrhosis death rates with at least four of the secular nations, including Japan, Denmark, France, and Germany exhibiting higher rates. The United States ranks thirteenth in suicide rates, seventh in estimates of daily consumption of narcotic drugs (Interpol estimates), and fourteenth in estimates of net annual alcohol consumption (Interpol estimates).’
And by Gerson Moreno-Riano et al. from Cederville University also criticized Paul’s findings: http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2006/2006-1.html
I don’t think the Scandinavian countries are a secular haven on Earth. Sweden as an example: Violence among Swedish girls has increased 50% since 1984 (http://www.thelocal.se/33704/20110511/) there are three gun crimes a day in Sweden (http://www.thelocal.se/2032/20050906/), which is a lot to people or a country with a small population, gun smuggling on the rise in Sweden (http://www.thelocal.se/33984/20110525/) methamphetamine use common (http://www.thelocal.se/18104/20090310/), suicide rate among young people increasing and violence increasing (http://www.thelocal.se/18444/20090325/), criminal gangs (http://www.thelocal.se/18164/20090312/), hhealth fears for swedish youth (http://www.thelocal.se/3211/20060307/), increasing sauicide rate among Swedish women and increase among men (http://www.thelocal.se/8687/20071004/) etc.
It is no utopia just because it is more secular, it has the same problems as other countries.
The United States has its problems just like other countries but I don’t see how this linked to Christianity, do you expect a society to be perfect just because there are high among of Christians? It is mainly the Churches and the Church charities that are helping those in poverty, providing healthcare insurance to those desperate.
Well I beg to disagree with the Danes Swedes and Norweigans. They don’t produce enough children….and we all know why!!….so they must import adults from elsewhere. So while the Danes etc are ageing and dying demographically….they are being replaced by others generally religious others.
I think the US is a more vibrant nation actually….although it too is dying…as it is Christian in name only. No Christian nation has legalised abortion. Sorry….but the West is only living off past Christian momentum….when that’s gone…so will it be gone.
Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio; contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium. Imperet illi Deus, supplices deprecamur: tuque, Princeps militiae caelestis, Satanam aliosque spiritus malignos, qui ad perditionem animarum pervagantur in mundo, divina virtute in infernum detrude.
Holy Michael Archangel, defend us in the day of battle; be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray: and do thou, Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God thrust down to hell Satan and all wicked spirits who wander through the world for the ruin of souls.
Sadly the abilty to render Latin prayers into English accurately and yet make them memorable seems to have been lost. Lord knows what the old ICEL would have made of the Salve Regina.
Haha this is a parody site right? Cool, though you need to be a little funnier or else some people might think you’re being serious. You could make the angel stuff hilarious with a bit more work. Angels healing blindness haha brilliant
Tony….with the economic crisis and much else that is going to descend upon the West….thanks to the incompetence of those who think they know it all and don’t believe in angels…..you are going to wish you had a guardian angel….which of course you do. Pride comes before the fall and all that.
No, tony, it’s a Catholic site which presumes a modicum of intelligence and critical faculties from those who post on it, not a forum for puerile (in the literal sense of the word, since you write like a 12-year-old) trolls.
Ioannes – can I respectfully remind you that Jesus asks us to turn to other cheek. And wouldn’t you say that intelligence and critical faculties have no place in a faith-based discussion about the powers of Archangels?
No, BJ, I wouldn’t. Fides et ratio. Turning the other cheek applies to those who attack you. It doesn’t mean that people can’t be rebuked, which I recall Jesus spent a lot of time doing.
Let’s be honest -I see plenty of fides, but absolutely no evidence of ratio on here my friend.
No son, its deadly serious. Enjoy.
My prayer was:
“Saint Raphael please hear my prayer and grant me the power to see. My sight has been failing for ten years now and I would love to see my faithful dog Shep one more time because he is old and will die soon. Please hear my prayer. Your humble servant”
and just three days later my eyes were strong enough to see Shep’s faithful old face looking up at me. All I can say is, contrast that with my secularist neighbour whose dog was also sick. That dog died yesterday in terrible pain. Proof enough for me of God’s power and mercy.
I don’t get it. Why don’t these Archangels heal and protect everyone, not just those who pray to them?
Because….only those who believe in Angels them pray to them. Also….Angels are engaged in battle with demons and the forces of evil. Laugh if you must….but then think of some of the most evil atrocities of the past 100 years where evil was and is the dominant force….and then you will want to pray too.
Ask and you shall receive said Christ. But you must ask ie pray. In this way you show your participation…and which side you choose.
ah, so is that the deal? The angels only cure those who pray to them? So the child who doesn’t know how to pray dies unless he can find someone to pray for him. I guess that does explain the Holocaust at least.
God helps everybody….and knows everybody’s situtation. But we are still encouraged to pray to God for help. That is why Christ (God Himself) told us in no uncertain terms that nobody should stop the children from coming to Him. So I’m sure you will do all in your power to make sure that the children are told of and about Jesus Christ….their God and Saviour. In this way they can turn to Him when they need Him. Yes?!
As for the Holocaust…it was caused by man’s evil….and turning away from Christ. Sounds familiar?!
Ah well. I’m looking at the mockers as potential death bed / mortally dangerous situation converts.
I’ve seen the staunchest deniers of God scream for Him during times of trouble.
Terrified solidiers scream for their mummies. That is not proof that their mothers are neccessarily alive.
Are you serious? For their mothers? I have three sons, I don’t think any one of them would scream for mom during battle.
@Karla
Just because Stalin an Mao wanted to eliminate religion does not mean that modern secularists do. Modern secularists are merely advocating a level playing field for everyone. All should be free to practice their religion whatever that may be without hinderence but without unearned privilage either. If someone wants to bring their religious values to the government table that is also acceptable provided that they are prepared to stand for election and not bypass the democratic process as the bishops who sit in the UK House of Lords have done.
Hitler, on the other hand, was a Catholic and was not in favour of eliminating religion from the public sphere at all.
But then Stonyground….on what moral basis are the laws of a secular land decided?! Is it on the whims of the majority?! A bit like Nazi Germany then!
Hitler might have been baptized a Catholic, not unusual for someone born in Austria in 1889, but saw the Catholic Church in particular, and Christianity in general as being antipathetical to National Socialism. The so-called ‘churches question’ was a constant headache for the Nazi authorities who tried to peddle their own ‘folk’ cult (elements of this can still be found in the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games, some of which was invented by Goebbels in 1936.) Stalin was actually a seminary student before he embraced atheistic Marxism.
There is nothing wrong with the separation of Church and State, as found for example in the US Constitution. The Church has been persecuted in the past by ‘secularist’ governments, e.g. Bismarck’s Kulturkampf and the Third French Republic, and in the latter example the State was openly hostile to the religion of the majority. The arguments of many modern secularists are too often stridently polemic, unbalanced and contemptuous of history. Worse still, European governments, including our own, seem determined to impose a new secular morality which is in some cases diametrically opposed to the moral consensus which prevailed until the last couple of decades (call it Judaeo-Christian if you like.) Words and their meanings are corrupted by officialdom in a frankly Orwellian fashion, and debate is stifled because the expression of contrary opinions, however well-substantiated and well-argued, might possibly cause offence to someone or other. Common-sense and proportionality are thrown to the winds as innocent remarks are seized on by politically-correct busybodies. Secularists would do well to take a long, hard look at all this and then ask themselves: What would Voltaire have had to say about it?
Quite so, Stonyground. And Hitler learned his hatred of the Jews from none other than the Catholic Church, which had persecuted the Jews as Christ-killers for centuries. It wasn’t until the Second Vatican Council, a full 20 years after the Holocaust, that the Catholic church stopped blaming the Jews for the death of Jesus.
I don’t think that is true, because if you see the interviews that historians did with Nazis, the Nazis interviewed views are rooted in biology not historical prejudices, example:
“S. became a missionary for this biomedical vision… As for anti-Semitic attitudes and actions, he insisted that ‘the racial question… [and] resentment of the Jewish race… had nothing to do with medieval anti-Semitism…’ That is, it was all a matter of scientific biology and of community.”
(The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide by Robert Lifton :130)
Hitler’s hatred of Jews was racial….and he also hated Jesus Christ as He was Jewish too. Hatred of Jews is very common among atheists, as anyone who has spent any time Youtube will see.
I do wish that those who are ignorant of history would refrain from making sweeping historical generalizations. They are easy enough to refute by reference to the facts, but it is tiresome continually to do so, and no doubt futile since there are a large number of people who would never allow anything as inconvenient as the truth to penetrate the carapace of their prejudice.
Yes secularists say that but their ultimnate aim is to make religion purely private. A level playing field in what areas are secularists so concerned about that is unequal?
Then why do Hitler’s private collected opinions show he was anti religious? Hitler was excommunicated in 1933 along with other Nazis. The Nazis stopped celebrating Christmas, Clergy regarded as troublemakers were ordered not to preach, many were imprisoned, many were murdered. Churches were under Gestapo surveillance, the Nazis closed religious schools, dismissed civil servants who wee practicing Christians, confiscated Church property, censored religious newspapers.
‘SpeSalvi23
September 30,2011 at 7:25 pm ·Reply
Ah well. I’m looking at the mockers as potential death bed / mortally dangerous situation converts.
I’ve seen the staunchest deniers of God scream for Him during times of trouble.’
‘Impetuous youth’ would have been just as trite without the slightly grisly old person overtones Spe.
But touching on your observation, this could as easily be explained as those in distress falling back on the ‘certainties’ of tradition. It could be god, it could be the great cucumber in the sky.
Confused does make some very fair points.
‘Karla
September 30,2011 at 4:34 pm
And how would they know who that God is? The problem with that philosophy is that you make God in to who you want God to be,it has no base. You decide what attributes and so on you think your God should have.’
Now there’s a pertinent question.
First we had a Catholic King who attacked and persecuted protestant christians
Then we had an Anglican King who attacked and persecuted protestant and catholic christians
Later a Protestant King came to power and he attacked and persecuted Anglicans and Catholic Christians.
I guess we are better with a king that does not demand his particular religion be imposed on everyone.
@ Ciguapa
The idea of ‘cuius regio, eius religio’ was a 16th century concept designed to prevent religious civil war in Germany. The experience of the 20th century shows that modern states are quite capable of imposing a paticular ideology, by force if necessary. The concern of many people nowadays is that Western governments, using a raft of often badly-drafted ‘equality’ legislation and insidious media pressure, seem intent on imposing an ideology which is in some ways more dogmatic and less open to reason than many religious belief systems.
‘The idea of ‘cuius regio,eius religio’was a 16th century concept designed to prevent religious civil war in Germany. The experience of the 20th century shows that modern states are quite capable of imposing a paticular ideology,by force if necessary. The concern of many people nowadays is that Western governments,using a raft of often badly-drafted ‘equality’legislation and insidious media pressure,seem intent on imposing an ideology which is in some ways more dogmatic and less open to reason than many religious belief systems.’
Historic states did the same. Medieval and Tudor/Stuart England has plenty of examples of the state [King]imposing his will on the church. Of course ‘the church’ was a landowning power too, headed by a foreign [easy card to play] landowning power.
Am I right in thinking that the US system is based on the concept of an ‘elected king’?
I should also have pointed out that the King of Northumbria made it pretty plain to his people that they’d be ‘well advised’ to be christians when he did. Politics & religion eh?
or no King at all.
@ ms catholic state
“Hatred of Jews is very common among atheists, as anyone who has spent any time Youtube will see.”
So, you base your evidence of what atheists think on what you have dug up on YouTube. You really do need to go out and meet some real people more often, you know. I could point you to lots and lots of videos showing the Westboro Baptists hating just about everybody in the world (bar their own in-bred family, of course). But would you consider them to be representative of what christians think? I very much doubt it.