Male and Female He Created them

In the beginning God created male and female, human, one being, one nature, but separate, different yet together.  An image of the Divine Trinity.  One Being, one nature yet entirely different. (Gen 2:23). This very real difference yet sameness of nature (male and female) is not reducible and cannot be denied or changed.  The differences yet the sameness are inscribed in the essence of both male and female. 

The principle of this difference between male and female is then tempered and strengthened and confirmed with free will to lead to a communion of body and spirit without reservation and without need to return to the womb for comfort.  The womb of the past is replaced by a new womb where male and female tie their bond to one another.   “This is why a man leaves his mother and father and cleave to his wife and they shall be as one flesh” (Gen 2:24).

Human beings have a nature perfectly attuned to complementarity without which there is disunity and dis-communion.

In a society like modern society which is fixated with over sexualised images and over sexualised language and innuendo, the call for deconstruction of marriage seems not unexpected because marriage means something else. It has deeper meanings, an external manifestation of an internal and eternal ecstasy. An overflow of love. So a society which does not see marriage in its deepest meaning must surely decline into something we witness today. 

Marriage in its original design was for male and female. God formed the Y chromosome (him) and  the X chromosome for her, and together they formed the XY “male and female He created them.”  However the XY is to be carried by the male so that he in his giving donates the son or daughter to each other. She on her behalf donates only what she has been given and that is her X chromosome but also the gift of carrying the joined XX (daughter) or XY (son) on their behalf.

Imagine he carries the gender she carries and delivers their fruit of that union.

As I ponder on the words “male and female He created them” I am always sent into deep thought.  We are told that God created Adam from the soil and then breathed into his nostrils His very breath, then God put Adam into a state of ecstasy or “deep sleep” and from Adam “made” Eve as companion for the man. Which means that Eve received her “God-ness” from “man?” In silence, where not even “Adam” may see the moment of “creation.” How?  From the same soil?  No. Woman is to be more refined so she can clearly “hear” the voice of “life” and respond. In the moment of “conjugal ecstasy,”  is the moment when God formed Eve for man. One like himself (human) but different who like him creates.  So that on His own He has desired to have leave open the way for His own “gift” to them, life to be received.  Creator God says that from deep within and alone Adam (man) is incomplete and on her own Eve (woman) is incomplete. 

What intricate mastery there is in this idea of creation?

And also how did God “Take out” from Adam the X chromosome to create Eve from it?  Enter the Holy Spirit.  We know that the Holy Spirit “Overshadowed Mary” who could only have within her X chromosome, so how did she deliver an XY (son) and not a (daughter) but she did miraculously conceive Jesus. Could the same Holy Spirit “overshadow” the X chromosome taken from Adam and birth Eve? The Holy Spirit, the spirit of Life created the first prototype and told them to continue his work by being fruitful and multiplying.

Is the sin of Adam and Eve against the Holy Spirit the Lord and Giver of life and that is why Jesus says that sin against the holy spirit cannot ever be forgiven because it is the Holy Spirit who “overshadows” creation to make it come into being? And rejection of what the Holy Spirit has brought into being is a rejection of the desire of the Father brought about by the Holy Spirit.
It is the Holy Spirit who says yes to the new idea and work of creation of God. It is the Holy Spirit who overshadows the x or y and enlivens these so that long before there is even a hint of conception a new creation has been knitted together by the overshadowing, which of course, means in secret and away from vision.
The theme of overshadowing or tabernacling is important because we encounter this right at the beginning of time, the beginning of all creation and throughout scriptures in cloud overshadowing Moses on Sinai, Cloud overshadowing the people of Israel as they travelled through desert, the Cloud overshadowing Jesus and Peter James and John on Tabor. And of course the overshadowing of Mary to conceive Jesus.
And this overshadowing and tabernacling in the form of a cloud or pillar of fire or quiet whisper, or hand which covers cavern on the mount in order to protect as the Lord passes by, the burning bush which bears the Lord without being consumed, is believed to be the Holy Spirit. The Shekinah. The Kabód, the Glory of Yahweh which created them male and female, at the spoken word.  the mysterious genders which makes them same but very different. This makes them have a need for one another and fulfil the words of God “it is not good that the man should be alone, I will make for him a helper fit for him.” (Gen. 2:18). And to fulfil the command to be “fruitful, multiply, fill the earth” (Gen. `:28). Man without woman, and woman without man cannot fulfil this command. Each alone is barren.

 

 

 

 

 

Documentary Humble Hope (sexual abuse of children)

 

 

 

Sexual abuse of children is endemic and serious. Present at the screening of Humble Hope were some of the victims who were interviewed for the documentary film. Some had family members who had lived with and supported the victims through their great suffering and were now present to accompany them along their journey. This documentary is important because it has brought together the various Christian denominations in acknowledging the enormity of the problem and the pain which this has caused its victims.  The Repentance ceremony brought tears to every viewing eye with its raw emotion. This ceremony was held on the  2015 National Day of Prayer and Fasting  in Parliament House in Canberra and  during the ceremony, leaders of various denominations including Catholic, Anglican, Salvation Army, and others  washed the feet of a former child victim of sexual abuse, now an adult, called Mark.  Mark, a victim who had been abused as a child whilst in religious institutional care.

This documentary utilizes the opinions of various experts, including psychologists, counsellors and social workers, authors, who deal with and who have experience with this phenomenon called sexual abuse of children. Each of the professionals bring their own understanding of the phenomenon, the damage that sexual abuse of children does, both to the child and later to the same child as an adult, and the possibilities of healing.

This documentary follows the lives of several victims as they tell their story of pain, shattered lives, self-harm, self-mutilation and life-sabotaging behaviours. The victims speak openly of the pain of not understanding why it happened to them. Why God allowed it to happen to them. Of being very lonely. Of hating themselves and their bodies, and of feeling they're not worth very much.

All expert speakers spoke of the need for healing and forgiveness, and indeed, the victims themselves had the understanding that forgiveness had to be worked into the healing process. Each of them had to work this healing in their own way. But always that it was a process.  Each had to find this healing in their own way and in their own time. Healing also had to have its own meaning for them.

This documentary is a must for all denominations and all churches. This can be a tool to help all people of good will to help tackle a most grotesque hidden enemy in our society.

Sexual abuse of children remains a last remaining taboo.  It has the potential to create a dissonance within the innermost being of  those we would call “normal” human beings, but because this is so it contributes to the hidden ness factor.

Humble Hope also introduces the topic of pornography and shows how pornography contributes to the violation of personal dignity, sexuality, the body.  It trivializes women, desensitises men and says that women and children are things.  Pornography is found in and deeply wounds what was once happy marriage and family and can be found proliferate.  Porn shows women and children as less than human whose social worth is zero and when there is porn, torture, and abuse can be seen as entertainment.

At the same time, any understanding of how sin works its deceitful evil is a help to us, and understanding how pornography works in the male mind is a powerful knowledge. Pornography and sexual abuse are sins which rob God of his glory in the gift of sex and sexuality. We have long known that sin takes hostages. We also know from studies in neuroscience that pornography hijacks the male brain.

Pornography always exploits women and children indeed any viewer and in this way is very insidious. Pornography sees the victims (child/girl/boy/woman/man/porn addict) as objects and so much dehumanised.

How does pornography dehumanise its victims? Human beings feel dehumanised when intimate parts of the body are used and abused. When intimacy is not held as sacred but used for the purpose of someone else’s voyeuristic pleasure.

When intimacy and intimate parts of another’s body is used for illegitimate purposes. When sexuality becomes a means of tying knots in the psyche of another human being. This leads to the utter helplessness of dehumanisation.

Both the victim and perpetrator become dehumanised, and with each new level of perversion attained a new and more explicit level must be found and so that the addiction is ensured. More and more dehumanisation becomes accepted as the norm.

Sexual abuse and pornography renders the victim disabled. This, by the destruction of the victim’s innocence and the deep wounding of the spirit, and most importantly with these assaults on innocence result in the deep and deliberate assault and wounding of the spirit and belief that God has abandoned them.
Humble Hope a documentary about pain but also a documentary filled with humble hope.   A documentary which clearly shows the resilience of the human spirit.  

Anne Lastman

 

 

Post Abortion Syndrome.

Dear Friends it’s been said to me that I now speak less about PAS and more about sexual abuse of children within the family.
Perhaps others of my readership feel the same and so I thought I will deal with this here.
I have spoken, written, and counselled on abortion grief for many years. I’ve even written a book, many many articles written and published.   I face this grief daily and daily I learn a bit more and am confirmed in what I already know and do.
One such comment from a reader of my newsletter was “…but Anne post abortion pain is the most important pain in our day”

and I agree with this but I also have to respond to the reality that sexual abuse grief is as endemic and as proliferate as abortion grief. I encounter this in daily work.

I have read every study put out by various researchers into abortion grief, and yes I know all about, guilt, shame, fear, anxiety, suicide thinking, depression, substance abuse, alcohol abuse, panic attacks, fear of decision making, flash backs, relationship difficulties and a self-destructive desire. I know and have seen these almost every day since I began.  Indeed today I am able to identify someone who is not truly post abortive but a plant (yes these happen).
I have recently worked through something which no other researcher has yet mentioned, and this because the client herself spoke the words. “I’m angry, Anne, with my baby for coming to me. She knew I couldn’t manage, I couldn’t have a baby.  She knew I was afraid. Why did she make me make such a decision?  I didn’t want to make such a decision. I’ve always wanted a family and never believed in abortion.  So why did she come to me when I couldn’t manage so I had to make such a decision?  I feel evil for even thinking this way but I am angry because I know I shouldn’t have done it.  I want to blame her but I know I’m being irrational.” (Kate-once off so far)
These are words I have heard not once (similar others) but many times throughout the years.  An anger with the baby for implanting in her womb.  She and they know it’s irrational but feels this anger.  Why?  I have to ask the question and then try and work out the answer so I can help my client.
It’s all well and good to read research, and studies but unless we can come up with answers then we won’t be able to work out how to help.
I have to admit that years back when I first noticed this anger (and since then) it had me baffled.  Blaming a tiniest baby for implanting in its natural home?  Why? And over much thought and even waking up during the night and thinking about it, I’ve slowly come to some sort of answer. An answer that helps me to be able to apply strategies to help and overcome this pain.  At the core of abortion grief is soul pain.  And it’s the soul pain which needs to be addressed. We might even call it conscience pain. Conscience knowing of the wrong done. Blaming the other is a running away from the conscience pain.

The anger is not really at the child because she is grieving her infant deeply (otherwise she wouldn’t be seeking help from me or others) but at her failure to recognise the attachment and bonding which began at the moment when the baby reached his/her home, the womb.

A mother has it written in her being to welcome her child home, her home and not remove her child in violence like an intruder.  Indeed some feminists called it a “ parasite,” and her anger is the realisation that she also treated her baby like an intruder and had it  violently removed and in that decision which has gone against all which is her design she now (after abortion) is angry and desolate. 
The flippancy of some who say that “I had 3, 2, 5, etc. abortions and I’m ok” is just that. Flippancy. A self-protective device so as not to be angry about her decision.  A temporary and necessary blindness so as not to feel pain. A soul sedative.  Though in due course it must be acknowledged and addressed and sedative stopped.
Acknowledging the anger, helping her to feel that it’s an anger she needs to feel and express, many times if needs be,  but then to let it go is important. Acknowledging that the embryo implanted because first of all God said YES to this new perfect creation according to His design,  but at a rational level the soil in the garden was ready to receive the seed and so began the work of growth of new flower.

Acknowledging that her anger is directed at the baby because she is unable to think that she would naturally make such a decision. This needs exploration and time. What is behind this thinking? Why afraid of being punished.

Once this is acknowledged and spoken out loud and not in any way feeling judged or rejected because of her feeling this anger then in time the work of healing can really begin.

We speak about all the symptoms associated with abortion grief and perhaps even run off the list of known symptoms that we know and have read about many times but sometimes I believe that we have depended too much on the rational in order to receive acceptance by medical, health communities, and society, and failed to recognise what really, deeply, is the cause of the pain of the post abortive woman who mourns in a complicated manner.

For me the longer I am involved in this work (together with sexual abuse grief which has very similar symptoms and the same violence is committed) the more I am convinced that abortion grief occurs as a result of the disrupted and violated conscience or soul of woman. Her design is such that she always sacrifices for her planted flower which has sprouted from the perfect seed.

There is a knowing embedded in her which is absent from the man, though he too knows and feels the loss of a flower from the garden and mourns the end of a species (or generations that might have been).

I believe that today there is a knowledge that abortion causes deep grief in the woman and we know that there is a finding of 81% of women who had an abortion  are at higher risk of mental health problems of any type, compared to women who have not had an abortion. Over all mental health problems of women 10% are due to abortion (Coleman- Meta analysis 1995-2009). When we think even 10% of the global feminine population then we have much grief and are horrified at the loss of life.  And we can be assured it’s written in the design of woman because otherwise it would not be a global reaction but limited to an area. 

Whilst it’s good to read old studies and new studies, what I believe is necessary is to begin to insist that abortion grief is given the same attention as any other neonatal loss grief.  Indeed it has to be recognised as a neonatal death and not whispered about so that it remains silent.

What we need is the medical profession to recognise that behind depression, self-harm, addictions, etc. there might be a pain which a pill won’t fix. Questions need to be asked before writing prescriptions.
We have a need for the mental health professions not to be intimidated by the feminist movement, billionaires who give money to destroy life, politicians, who have given up on morality, counsellors who don’t allow their own pro-abortion understanding to try and validate the pain of the other.  We need psychiatry to acknowledge post abortion grief so that other mental health and general health practitioners listen.
 

 

We need universities who teach grief studies to teach prospective practitioners about abortion and the management of such grief, and we need programmes to manage such a different and complicated grief. We need rituals which human beings need to conclude life stories.  We need the DSM to acknowledge such grief. (Diagnostic and statistical Manual- of mental disorders).
I believe that after nearly 50 years of studies there are not too many who would say abortion doesn’t hurt (“my friend had an abortion 47 yrs. ago and she’s never got over it”-(Sally recently).  Abortion today is recognised as deeply wounding but what is not recognised or even not fought
against is the fact that the response to this grief is tainted by

politics and not by genuine concern for woman. 

Even most of the studies we read avoid mentioning the pain of the dying baby (late term).  Studies speak of pain of the woman and self-destructive behaviours and change of personality, but not the fundamental reason for this imprint of this pain. This is tended to with a prescription or platitudes.
The rational would have us try and explain the behaviours and changes in personality but not the wound on the essence of life.  Such an explanation is considered “religious,” and out of rigidity of belief.  The irony of this is that non-religious experience the same internal, unknown heart pain.   
We know that grief is the result of loss. Loss of love of someone or something important to our lives.  Grief speaks of the need to embed into memory the story of the one lost.  Grief ensures that one lost had a meaning and is never forgotten.  Knowing this, it’s so dishonest not to have available the knowledge about abortion grief and then the wherewithal to deal with the issue. Today loss of a pet and its grief is acknowledged, but not loss of one’s own baby.

I have spoken to medical profession, to counselling, and to other professionals but still abortion and its grief is a “forbidden” subject because of its political powerbase.

This is what needs to change.  This is what is not understood.  This is the insincerity and falsity which is attached to availability and legal abortion that it passes as concern for “reproductive health” when in fact it’s a lie which deeply damages women’s health. 

Anne

Part of my newsletter, Broken Branches, PO Box 6094, Vermont South, Victoria,  3133 Australia.    

 

 

 

Rights & Equality

 

Over the past 50-60 years the word “rights” has gathered so much momentum that today whenever there is a desire to change something the word which will send shivers through spine of legislators is “rights.” It’s my “right” to abort. It’s my “right,” to call myself male when I am biologically female. It’s my “right” for me to evolve into any of the prescribed hundreds of newly founded and named genders. It’s my “right” to have myself euthanized. It’s my “right”  to suicide if and when I want to and  if I can’t carry out my suicide then it’s my “right” to demand that someone does it  for me.  All of this because of my dignity and so I can die with dignity and so I can be who I am with dignity and so on and one and on.

On the rights issue is the reality that children lose their right to know surely and securely who their mother and father, and all their preceding generations are.   That they were not just placed in a gestational carrier, or artificial womb and then handed over to someone who ordered their “life” But have a mother who has carried them in her body beneath her heart, and a father who has engendered their life and to be protector.

Children have a right to a father who will model manliness for them.  To a son will be shown how to be a boy and then a man and to daughter the type of man she chooses for the future because her father was a wonderful role model. 

The transmission of life is written in the cells of each parent and they complement one another to give life, and this belongs in the human race to a man and a woman, irrespective of what “rights” are demanded.

Right to die when I say I want to die.  I also demand that another help me in my dying. Irrespective of the fact that the other has then to live with the fact that he/she did the pulling of the plug or helped with poisons administered and you died.

 

And what about those who are not ill but simply want to jump ship because it’s a bit hard.  Their desires must also be same as the others' who have the right to the demanded rights. 

 

Then there is the emerging new word is “equality” Ah yes!! The new word which has found favour with the light, green, different “rights” seeking mob.

" I demand to be recognised in my same sex “marriage” because otherwise my rights will be trampled on and I will be seen as different and I won’t be equal to everyone else.  It’s even my right to be seen as equal and to have my relationship accepted as equal as the rest of society.  I demand this right to equality. Even television commercials tell us that we are not equal until everyone is equal." 

 

It’s characteristic of a group of people which is blinded by tragedy which has befallen them. These people have created a new tower of babel. The confusion which these two new words, “rights” “equality” is causing is nothing new but a return to primitiveness.  Returned to re-create the voice of babel again.  This voice cannot be understood and a disconnection from life and vulnerability and loss of pure joy and even the certain knowing of definite rights and definite equality.

At the core of the tragedy which has befallen modern times is the rejection of God, which has then led to rejection of life first in the infants, and now demanded for the disabled, elderly, frail.   The loss of awe for life.  Those who would destroy life at every stage and for whatever reason have already lost the idea of “awesomeness” which is life.

Those who argue for cheap life have lost the sight and understanding of that mystery called life.

Marriage, sexuality, stability, complementarity,  all of which  are designed for life are in danger rendering children, who are the future, to be in grave danger and other vulnerable individuals also in danger.

 

 

 

 

Pope Francis

Flooding my email and post box are “end time” materials which I understand are to correct me on my stance regarding His Holiness Pope Francis, and these materials are to enlighten me.  I don’t like what is happening to His Holiness Pope Francis. In fact I hate it.  I think that this is why some of the tears of the Holy Mother. The confusion which has emerged as a result of   Benedict “retiring.” He returned the cross to Jesus and said it’s too heavy.   

I remember when he was elected, on the balcony he said “pray for me that I may not flee from the wolves”   Well he fled from the wolves.  Yet now he remains visibly around the Vatican making public comment and undermining Pope Francis. If he decided it was too hard he should have disappeared.   THERE WAS ONLY ONE “PETER” NOT TWO. Jesus gave the Keys of the Kingdom to “Peter” and said to him “I give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth is bound in heaven. Whatever you loose on earth is loosed in heaven” Mt 16:19.

Benedict changed the nature of the papacy.  He made it into a job just like any other job. Like any job where one can retire at 65-70 years of age.  Or if one doesn’t like ones job you quit or if your boss doesn’t like you he fires you.  A job.  Peter’s charism is NOT a job. It is the continuous spirit which governs and accompanies the Bride of Christ along the journey towards the kingdom and her groom Jesus.

St John Paull II remained Pope (Papá) Shepherd until the moment of his death and his flock waited with him till he died.  He didn’t abandon them and they didn’t abandon him. He was so close to his flock “he smelled like them” (words of Pope Francis). 
 
My friend Chris quoted to me the Blue Book Our Lady Speaks to her Beloved Priests and says he follows her: Perhaps he hasn’t read pages 276, 277 ‘This interior division is expressed by the tendency to leave to himself and to abandon, so to speak, the very Vicar of Jesus, the Pope, who is son particularly loved and enlightened by Me. My mother’s heart is wounded to see how the silence and neglect of my children often envelop the words and actions of the Holy Father, while he is increasingly struck and impeded by his adversaries.
Because of this interior division, his very ministry is not sufficiently supported and furthered by the whole church whom Jesus has wanted to be united about the successor of Peter.
My, motherly heart grieves to see how even some pastors refuse to let themselves be guided by his enlightening and trustworthy words.
The first way of being separated from the Pope is that of open rebellion (see the four cardinals and their open rebellion and taken hundreds of thousands with them which has nearly led the schism.)  But there is also another way, more subtle and dangerous.  It is that of proclaiming one’s unity openly but of dissenting from him interiorly, letting his teaching fall into a void and, in practice, doing the contrary of what he says.

What must you do? Become a hidden seed, ready even to die for the internal unity of the church.

And so I am leading you each day to a very great love for, and fidelity to the Pope and the Church united with him.”

Yes the smoke of satan has entered the church but not through Pope Francis, it entered long before that and it is Francis’ job to remove or clean out the smell of the smoke.  

It has been thrown at me Fatima and the third Secret   etc.  I don’t see it the way it’s interpreted and written, but I see the third secret and Our Lady’s horror, as something different.   I think the third secret which dares not be known is not about Amoris Laetitia, or communion to the so called “adulterers” or other sinners but it’s related to two popes, 2 Peters. Impossible.

Two symbolic males as “father”.  This is a sign of gay movement achieving their desires at the very top.  Benedict either wittingly or unwittingly made this happen by resigning and another take his office (Ps 109:8 Acts 1:15-26).  As satan approached “Peter” (Benedict) he did not rebuke him but responded to the insinuation to quit. Thus leaving the chair of Moses, now the Chair of Peter, empty until another was found.  TWO POPES is the secret. Jesus appointed one Peter only and handed him the keys. There is a famous painting depicting this, not two.   Two priests in white bearing the name of Pope.  Our lady foresaw this.
The teachings of the church are guarded and protected by the magisterium and the chief interpreter” Peter” under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.  If this is not so then “the gates of hell have prevailed” (Mat 16:18) and Jesus is found to not have protected His Bride, and weaker than satan.
Throughout history there have been Holy Popes and unholy ones but none of the unholy popes wrote, or declared anything, any teachings, because these teachings are protected by the Holy Spirit and the not so good popes were too busy having a good time to bother writing anything for the flock. 

Neither has pope Francis taught error. He is bringing into the fold a whole vineyard (Mat 20:9) who have not been hired.  He is bringing in the 99 lost whilst leaving behind the 1 who is not in danger.  The good vigneron takes good care of all labourers even those who work one hour.

Today there are two “fathers” leading the household/kingdom and the politics of this vision are dangerous, and not pope Francis. He is not the cause of the division but another is.  The other has to go or there will not be stabilisation at a time when “marriage” or conjugal life is demanded to be changed and legitimised and is the greatest challenge to ever face society, and a time when life is devalued and declared negotiable.  During these times the Church is in a state of confusion by itself leading the visible change, with its, “2 Fathers.”

The teachings of “Peter” are protected by the Holy Spirit and ensured that this is so, however, the words of “apostles” are not so.  This is why the confusion. The influence of others is held true whilst “Peter” is being in contempt.  

 

 

Euthanasia

Euthanasia

 

Reading Jane Munro’s article in Newsweekly May 6, 2017 Rare win for the family at UN women’s commission,  the words which echoed strongly with me were “Language is vital to United Nations documents. Every word is scrutinised and carefully evaluated.”  Language of course is the thing which really separates us from the other created species.  Language is used to express oneself. Language is indeed vital to the human being.  Even the UN understands this.  Indeed so important is language that it is used to “normalise” anything we wish to have normalised.

 We saw this use of language and change of language and terms in the abortion issue, where timeless knowns like “baby” (image) to “cells” and “tissue”  even "foetus"(imageless) became and are now the norm  By changing language to one without image it became possible to convince society that abortion is acceptable because first trimester in utero child is only on a “bunch of cells.”  This later to lead to abortion to full term.  The slippery slope (even though some people do not like this term) was surely polished and ready to lead to more sliding by creating the new language.

This was preceded by justifying the need for contraception and the sexual revolution with new language used for this was not for the prevention of conception but nicely sanitised “birth control.” and now we reach the language of euthanasia. 

 Every talk, every paper I have read, every discussion on this topic expresses a language all of its own.  Sanitised language, “assisted suicide.” That word “assisted” so comforting to the one who is suiciding. Being assisted. Goodness that sounds good.

Euthanasia. No image here of “dignity” just the realisation that someone has suddenly gone forever. “Dosage delivery.” Hmmm what might this mean except helping someone take the prepared poisons which will ensure death. No images here. Yes we may even contrive the machinery for this "dosage delivery" so the dying one can do it alone "in privacy."  How comforting for those demanding euthanasia  to think a human being is left to die alone.  To enter into this final journey alone.

Language this marvellous aspect of the human which helps us understand and dialogue with one another is again being manipulated in order to achieve a desired effect, like the bunch of cells, (baby)  this, the intentional death of someone who is either desirous of this to happen or for the benefit of others.   

“Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick or dying persons.  It is morally unacceptable” CCC2277

Of course the reason given for the need for “assisted suicide” or euthanasia (yes there is a difference) is to alleviate the suffering of the dying or ill person.  However, suffering is a part of life. And yes suffering is difficult both for the sufferer and those who must stand by and watch, (the Gethsemane watch).  However this does not mean that we have the moral freedom to alleviate it at all costs.  When we contemplate euthanasia, or the “assisted suicide” mantra we must remember that there is a stealing involved and what is stolen is stolen from God.
Euthanasia and its enthusiasts attempt (and when successful, do) to usurp God’s authority over life and life.  This we saw from the beginning and still does not bode well.  

 

Anne Lastman

 

 

Creation

We were not present either at the first birth (some astronomical number of years ago) nor at the second birth (a mere 2000 years ago.) So for both instances we have to take others' word for what happened.   My understanding of Genesis and especially of the prehistory story chapters 1-3 is that it has both elements of history and of matter for/of faith. We know that the first chapters deal with God's "verbal" utterance, (His Word) that is, He speaks and what He speaks comes into being.   The first part of the creation story is the "cosmic" order which is "out there" but still within His being and Word. The second part is the more personal, intimate creation who is Ha Adam/Hawah (Adam/Eve). We also know that this part of history is the Oral tradition, that which has been passed down from generation to generation and with each succeeding generation adding their understanding of events of the past and between themselves and their God. And Accommodating the changes which befell the people. The Yahwist, Elohist, Deuteronomist and Priestly authors each wrote and accommodated their reality into the existing story of their forefathers. The last of these named authors, priestly, wrote during the exile into Babylon and they wrote during the time when the Mesopotamian myths (Enuma Elish) were being performed during special festivals.  This narrative and performances sought to tell the story that the world was created as a place of combat between Marduk and Ti'amat and Marduk gives birth to the universe out of what remains of Ti'amat.   The Priestly writings sought to re tell their story and show their people that God had indeed created the universe out of love and not out of remains of combat.  That the universe is not the result of a chance happening but it exists because Yahweh wills it with love and sustains it with love. Whilst we understand, because of the format, that the Priestly style of writing is of the liturgical genre, there is a cadence and order and symmetry to the whole of creation, which God then declares as "good" until the creation of the human being which he deems as "very good" because this creation is in the image and likeness of Himself. Of His Word.   Jesus spoke of having seen satan fall from the heavens (Lk10:18) so we accept that Lucifer/satan/adversary existed before the physical creation and that there was a chaos before the creation of the universe which led to the expulsion of a huge number of former angelic beings who had now apostatised.   It is implied in the first chapter of Genesis.   That he (Lucifer) would tempt the new creature "designed in the image and likeness of God" should not come as a surprise. This new creature would fill the vacant spaces left by the disobedient Lucifer and his followers. That the Son would enter Satan’s territory in the form of “man” and defeat him within his own ground is not surprising. God always stays with His creation.  He never abandons them.    That we were not there to see this event doesn’t make it less truthful or less real. It is part of our history both oral and written. Indeed, I was not there when they crucified my Lord (words of song sung at Easter) except in His Loins (every human being is made up of hundreds of trillions of cells,) and the human body of Jesus was also created thus, for me this means as man, with over three hundred trillion cells which represents a cell for “everyman” since creation, and His Heart as the heart of God the Son, and, so again we have to take the words given to us. How do we know that they are truthful, that the witnesses were truthful? (Or truth filled)? We don’t!! However we take what’s given to us, passed on to us and we try and make sense of the words, of the story.   We accept that when scriptures speak about Jesus Christ/God/Spirit they speak truth. Which we then interpret and have or listen for an echo of this in our own lives and societies.   Should we have an interest in what happened thousands and thousands years ago? Indeed we should because what happened thousands and eons years ago forms our own individual history.  Connects us to the lived and experienced history of man and woman.

 

 

Great Sadness and a Tragedy.

A Sad and tragic scene.

 

In a recent article on one of my daily newsfeeds a story was shown of abortion activists in Argentina carrying out a mock abortion outside the Catholic Cathedral of Tucuman.

This protest on what is now known as International Women’s Day, was meant to highlight the fact that Argentina still has laws which are prolife.

It had, accompanying this protest, one of the most grotesque image I’ve ever seen in relation to abortion.

This protest depicted the Blessed Virgin Mary aborting baby Jesus.  The young female was dressed in what we know is clothing which the Mother of Jesus wears in our images of her and what appears to be a Rosary round her neck.

The simulation of the abortion (together with mock blood everywhere and inference of violence) and the laughter and mockery of those surrounding her left me with a feeling of hopelessness and helplessness.

T he supposed “woman” sat with legs spread and a couple of “abortionists” pulling out and dismembering an imitation baby from her private parts. Foetal parts and blood were plainly visible all over ground.

Whilst this horror was happening there appeared laughter and photos or videotaping being taken, this of the baby Jesus being dismembered.

If you have computer here is the link but I must warn you that it is graphic and really awful and painful.

http://www.lifenews.com/2017/03/15/abortion-activists-kill-baby-jesus-in-graphic-abortion-on-virgin-mary-

The reason I bring this to your attention is because we have some seriously sick young people in our midst and I grieve for the future of humanity if these are the kind of people leading humanity into the future.  Even as I write this my whole body shakes.  I dread the idea of post abortive girl/woman seeing this, usually after their abortion, and their reaction to what their abortion really means.

As I have said in the past on many occasions, for most people the word abortion is a word there is no image in mind. It’s only after the fact when regret and pain manifest that they go looking on the internet and come across many images which exacerbate their feelings of grief and pain.

And I continue to ask what has happened to remove the feminine from these young women?  What happened to so grotesquely change their design?  How are these women to “mother” in the future? Can they be trusted to mother?

 

I’m left in deep sorrow.

 

Into her hands He entrusted the Future

Anne Lastman (2017)


I would like to write about something which I think is really important. In fact I got into a “serious and at times angry” discussion with this topic during the Christmas break.

I was talking to a really good friend (really prolife) and we came to an impasse over “the law” regarding abortion. Whilst I absolutely, completely, totally believe that we have some of the worst abortion laws in the world, and whilst we must try and reverse that 2008 law we have here in Victoria, Australia, and try to stop further of these laws throughout Australia. This law which in fact permits abortion to birth, even just prior to birth, so something definitely needs to be done about this. I couldn’t agree with my friend entirely about abortion and the Law.

Why? Because the Law will not protect the child for most of the time.  Occasionally perhaps, but Law can be manipulated.  What our laws says is not that the baby isn’t a human being or that it is too small to be seen as a human being but it says more than this. It says that a child has no protection at all because it is thought that if a child cannot breathe or take care of itself then it isn’t a human child and therefore doesn’t deserve the protection of the law, as even the worst of criminals are given.
This of course says further, that those disabled who need help to breathe to take care of themselves are also not human. A new infant is unable to take care of itself so therefore not human.  Where on earth have we descended to!

These types of laws say that an in utero baby is at the mercy of the bigger one involved (mother/father/ others) resulting in the child having absolutely no voice, rights, meaning as a human being. This reasoning is very flawed so the argument is fallacious and should be utterly destroyed. This is what that 2008 law says. I am reminded of the “dog in the manager attitude” I cannot have you so nobody else can. This 2008 (Victoria, Australia) law gives permission and enshrines permission for this to happen. Not implies but legally states this that a child can be legally killed. Because even if a woman cannot keep the child then it is possible (without the need to kill it) to give birth to it and adopt the baby out to someone who has desperately wanted a baby and can’t have one, rather than demand its cruel death. This is the death of another human being. If this baby was killed out of the womb the murderer would be charged with infanticide but in the womb it’s called “choice of the woman.” So perhaps this is an area where “law” can be of particular use and benefit, for the possible protection for the baby.

However, and I guess I am always interested in the “however” I don’t believe that “the law” will change anything. If we are lucky (as pro-lifers) we might be able to rescue a baby destined for death using “the law” as reason for not aborting. However, again, it is not with the law with which we can make an all‐out attack against abortion. The law is another prong to the attack but I don’t see it as a huge help in stopping or even reducing abortions.

Remember, until recently, we have had abortion laws which at the time said that abortion was a crime. It was against the law, it really should not have occurred but we all know that “the law” was never adhered to or applied. “The police should be made to enforce the law” (said my friend) ensure the law is exercised and not ignored. As it was in the past never enforced. None of us know of any doctor, nurse or woman who was jailed because of carrying out an abortion. (Perhaps that American abortionist (Kermit Gosnells serving life sentence, who butchered both women and babies is an exception) whilst the law was set in statutes it was never respected or anyone had recourse to it here in Australia.  Ways around it were found. Police turning a blind eye to the reality of what was going on in certain buildings, in certain hospitals, even in private places.

A letter written by a mental health professional which said that this abortion was required for the mental well‐being of the patient, even though he or she was not seen by the mental health professional before or after, etc. “The law” was there but it was never used to bring into question the purveyors of such dastardly thing called abortion.

So the way I see things is that while a law needs to be in place even as a backup it is NOT the law which will change the abortion culture. It’s an addendum, yes, but of itself in won’t change a culture of death. What will change this death culture? The way I see it, it is that we need to change the way we see and understand and protect women because society and women themselves have forgotten why she has been designed in a particular way. But before this, we need to understand that there is probably not a family in our human relationships which has not in some way been touched by abortion.

We need to start from this thought of earth’s population of approximately 7.5. Billion (7,500.000, 000.000, I think it’s the right number of noughts) every family somehow has been touched by or knows of the violent death of an in utero child intentionally carried out.
So what? You might say. Well I would answer that the abortion carried out on the woman and the demand by the father for the child has contributed to the change in the culture we all live in and are part of. Why life has become cheap. Why demands for other changes of the “norm” are being made. Why children are confused about who they are.

Between the wars experienced in 20th century and visually brought into living rooms, the meteoric rise of really violent movies and games, the disrespect for woman and man and sexuality via the medium of pornography, contraception and its developed mentality and the need/want/desire of women to work outside of the home, has led to babies and children becoming an optional extra, dispensable, without consideration for the emotional after effects of this developed death culture and society.

Every woman (millions of them) and man who has had an abortion is changed forever. Irrespective of the voices which say otherwise. Every woman who has undergone an abortion has had her design corrupted.

Every woman who has undergone an abortion, whether willingly or unwillingly, has registered in her inner being the reality of the violent death of her child. The violent death of part of her own being. Of having gone against her very design. Her raison d’etre.
Woman was never designed to carry cartloads, build houses, ships, aeroplanes, skyscrapers, Cathedrals or even lead a herd of cattle, even though she is capable of doing all of those things. These are external to herself. After all she is his (man’s) “helper” Yes she can do all the functional work he can.

However, her best work is something which he cannot do. Something for which her body was specifically designed. For which her emotional makeup was designed (a new mother’s breast will start leaking milk just before her baby awakes, there is an anticipation, a knowing her child will soon wake and want her to feed).   She is very much attuned to her baby. She has an intuition which is reserved for her child alone from conception and for the child’s whole of life.
A mother has a connection to her child for her entire life. She knows when all is not right with her child because her body feels it. She can’t explain it but she knows. A mother always knows when she is needed and once a mother, her own self and beliefs intrinsically change.

She can no longer think as a woman does before pregnancy and childbirth. This because a mother’s work of creation is united with God’s work. She is a branch of the vine in His vineyard “every branch that does bear fruit he prunes to make it bear even more” (Jn. 15:1). She is the branch which continues to bear more fruit.

And He is constantly intuitive towards His child His “helper” and helps her also be intuitive towards her child because they work together to bring forth a new creation.
She has a knowledge that she has been attached to a greater vine of grandeur, and the abortion is like a vandal or thief who has slyly snuck in and broken her little twig. The little shoot which she tenderly fed from her own self. Her own body.

Her design is such that her body is able to understand the moment of conception. Her body responds to the changes, and I’m sorry to say this but the male/spouse/partner cannot ever feel the changes because his body is designed different. He is designed to be “external,” to be out there to be the protector of her and their little “shoot.” He is there for strong things.

Her body is designed for “internal” things for inner knowing and understanding and nurturing and feeding and hearing, whilst his is designed to spark the new “twig” and then protect it. This is why it is always understood that men and women are very equal but very different. Alone neither can create, together they make a future. They are designed for particular understandings and labours. One the outer and one the inner. One without the other cannot exist. Each depends on the other for life. She draws life invisibly from him and returns it in a more visible and beautiful way, a baby made from their very essences.

Why have I laboured so much on this explanation? Because unless somehow we begin to slowly bring “woman” to understand her design and to love her design and take back her design then abortion will always be a normal as we have in the last 30‐50 years made it a
normal. Abortion will be “the answer” (in difficulties) because the woman has not understood
her value, her design, her partnership in the ongoing work in creation.

She has lost the vision and unless somehow we resurrect this vision no amount of laws will do anything to change the idea that abortion (death of a baby, a twig,  a shoot, a future) is only a small thing and then a return back to normal and to building castles.

I have heard these words thousands of times and thousands of times I have needed to explain that once there is a conception there cannot ever be a return to being a being a “maiden” there cannot ever be a return to being pre pregnant or feeling like a pre pregnant woman.

Once there is a conception even if the conception is for short time her design has been permanently changed and the thoughts about “baby of my womb” will never leave her. Even into old age when the memory of the loss actually becomes stronger. 

My precious friend who led to this discussion, next question to me was “what about those women, girls who don’t feel anything about the baby in her womb? And women who after birth can’t bond with their baby, or even women who kill their babies after birth. What about them?” what about their design? And these are good questions because all of these things actually do happen. We read about them daily in our newsfeeds, and my answer to her and here is that wherever there are these things occurring then there has been a disconnection with her own feminine self. A distancing has occurred which has left her flailing and lost to her own self.

Something has occurred which changed negatively her design. Some deep wound from which her feminine being escaped to avoid the pain and she has not ever found her way back. This is when help is deeply needed. To feel nothing for the child she is taking to be killed says to me that there has been a total disengagement so that she can proceed with what she believes she needs/has to do. This is her self‐protection against her own emotional meltdown (which of course happens later). The answer to the question of why there is at times is no bonding with one’s own child, the answer is similar. Her feminine has withdrawn so as not to become attached and be hurt. In her being there is a hint of a memory of pain as child. Of deeply un understood loss. Of loving someone so much (Mum/ Dad/other) and love not returned or perceived as not returned or gone.  Perhaps her own loss or perhaps another.

But for this mum there is a memory of pain of a child and possibly abandonment. And for the question why do some mothers murder their own children, this again has memory of pain linked to it. A memory of fear, dread, distortedness. disassociation, woundedness. A disconnection.  An abandonment and even a long endured rage. Perhaps even a jealousy. A pain so deep that her own feminine essence has gone into recess not responding or recognising her feminine being.
Perhaps even a revenge against lost love of lost feminine. This, I say, because woman’s design is such that it is to be drawn towards her infant, and indeed other infants, So when there is such an aberration then the feminine has been deeply wounded, deeply buried, even absent through never having learned, identified or known about herself as feminine. Cold detached parenting ensures cold, absent, detached feminine and thus distance from her own feminine.

Not the physical or intellectual or even perhaps some aspect of the emotional but her feminine has been deeply wounded. So wounded that she does not know how to be the feminine of her design.  She does not recognise her design. She is aghast at what she has created (her child). It’s outside of her own feminine understanding. It is alien to her. It frightens her and she wants to run from it and destroy it. This is why we at time read some horror stories about mothers killing their own children, and we are saddened and even horrified by them.

God doesn’t make mistakes in his designs, however human beings can corrupt the design. Children are designed to learn incrementally, that is, little by little, age correct, and by age correct I mean when something cannot be understood because cognitively the child is too immature for such information.   It cannot be learned at this time, so when there is a negative interruption of the natural learning sequence   an imprint of this negatively disastrous event/events are the consequences.
I started this discussion with “the law” and abortion and my understanding of abortion and why “the law” won’t really do much though it’s imperative to ensure that laws are in place to safeguard where and if possible. Indeed as part of a many pronged effort.

As I said earlier, I believe we (prolifers and people of goodwill) need to re‐educate, re tell the story of woman, to re‐educate, re tell the story of woman and help her believe that her own personal story is so magnificent as a woman. Not as a mechanical woman. Not as a woman called to do all the male tasks but as a woman who understands her design and the importance of that design. She has been entrusted with the enfleshing of love.

God has entrusted the future into her hands, into her care and for that to have happened he must have designed her with the capability of doing this work. Which is to love like He has loved and from that love to flow out another and continuous love. He trusted her. Every woman has a womb (no male has this). Every woman has built in her body the way to feed her child with nourishment she has made herself and which cannot ever be bought (no male can do this except through a bottle). This should bring woman to her knees in great awe. Not as a manager of a building site but that she can make the nourishment for her child from her very body.   Awesome.

In her book The Eternal Woman Gertrude Von Le Fort writes about motherhood “to be a mother, to feel maternally, means to turn especially to the helpless, to incline lovingly and helpfully to every small and weak thing upon the earth.” (p78). Finally, those of us who work in this prolife vineyard we need to work together to help “woman” relearn who she is. The media, the feminist movement, the funded people, the hugely funded abortion industry have done a big work of confusing “her.” Of having blinded her to who she really is.
Von Le Fort has further to say “those who devote their loving attention to these victims of our decadent society know that the wound created in their souls is so deep that only God’s grace can heal it” p 78).

We who work in this vineyard (pro‐lifers in whatever way) know that the soul of woman is deeply wounded post abortion and some work to save the baby and save the mother, and some work to heal the soul of the woman after the fact. (People like me) knowing and understanding this fact of different wound and pain.

We each in our own charisms have many on our newsletter lists we need to begin with these contacts and help them to then speak words of encouragement to those we know need to know and understand who they really are. Help those who are feeling sick unto death (Jn11:4). Our priests, pastors, bishops, even Pope, Rabbis, need to speak to women and help them understand their magnificence.

Not the necessity to be employed to make up quotas of males and female staff members, but to help in the understanding of “male” and “female” in their original design. Abortion, is the last and cruellest attack against the woman and society. Society goes the way the woman goes. Woman deeply confused and lost and wounded, society confused, lost and wounded.
The way of the family which is nursed and cherished and nurtured by woman is a visible image of society and the Church. Woman wounded, family wounded, church wounded.

Woman confused, children confused and a hatred of parents, authority, love. Again into her hands He entrusted the future. A future which can either be healthy and beautiful or slowly self‐destroying.
It won’t be easy and it is not an “instant coffee” project. It may take several generations but someone said something about journey starting with first step. We need to set out on this first step. Together we set out to heal woman, and with that humanity will also be healed because the heart of humanity (woman) is again whole. It’s not divided in grief looking and weeping like Rachael for lost children and the lost generations. (Jer. 32:15, Mt 2:18).

The focus of our awareness becomes the reality of our world said Niels Bohr (Nobel Prize winner) in 1927, and Niels Werner Heisenberg (Physicists) in The Copenhagen Experiment.
Our awareness now is limited and disjointed and unsure and unclear, and we, as pro‐lifers, will not be able to tackle and defeat this aberration called abortion unless we focus on changing this awareness to a culture of life and love and generosity. This we must do because those who demand abortion are focused, prepared, clear, funded and secure in their beliefs, so they ensure that their beliefs become the reality. We must also work with the same clear determined focus of healing, restoring woman to her beautiful design and in the meantime trying to save her and saving babies. Indeed saving babies and their mothers who will grieve after the event or if not grieve run and hide from grief through the medium of the loss of her feminine self and self-destructive behaviours.

Why run from grief? Because there is pain,  guilt, shame, regret  and the knowledge that at the core of her being that her malaise and grief continues in order  to hold the life story of the other (baby) in existence and in life. Grief can be a redeeming emotion. The knowledge that her baby was created to belong to the human family and has a place in life. So grieving maintains the life story of the child not here in existence but here in memory. Even those who profess not to feel anything about their abortion, in fact do feel and remember because even years after the event they still remember, date, time, place, gestation.

They still may be able to say “it hasn’t affected me” but indeed it has, because they still
remember and in this way maintain a connection with their baby. This is the reason why woman grieves because the life story of the other, her baby, has been destroyed and with her participation.
The new awakening and re telling of the story cannot be spoken and heard unless this story speaks of life, and we need to remember that no new story telling can be heard easily by the generations which have been nourished by the spirit of death. So the new narrators must speak first to the heart of woman who is the heart of humanity and speak in the language of the heart. The language that the woman was meant to speak and the language embedded in her being. Embedded in the mystery which is part of the team called male and female.

Divorce Remarriage and the Eucharist

 

 

The New Testament describes how things happened and how the Spirit led the Church and reflected on the events which occurred (Dei Verbum 12).  We believe that the writings of the New Testament are inspired and a true witness to the life, teachings, death and Resurrection of Jesus the Christ, born in Nazareth just over 2000 years ago.
The governance of the Church He founded is ensured  by Jesus who promised at His departure that the Spirit would be sent and He would teach and confirm all that He (Jesus) had said,  and the Spirit would protect the Church from error so that the “gates of Hell would not prevail against it.”
(Mt: 16-19).

 Jesus indeed prepared his group of disheartened and even traumatised disciples by sharing a final meal with them. A meal in which He announced a  “New Covenant’ (Jn 13:34) and they were to continue this memorial meal till the end of time, that is, His return. “After giving thanks, he broke the bread and said: ‘This means my body which is given in your behalf. Keep doing this in remembrance of me." (1 Cor:11:24)  A means of remembrance.  An anamnesis. An anamnesis which means a past event, made present, real and continuous. It’s “Type” being the Passover of the Hebrew people, the longest continuous celebration in history. 

The Eucharistic celebration for the believers in Jesus was/is to be the event celebrated through time which brings the “meal” in its authenticity to each person and at each celebration in each time, society and century.   So that every time this Eucharistic or thanksgiving meal is celebrated He is again present in their midst, his word “this is by Body this is my Blood, do this in memorial to me” crosses space and time and makes Jesus present to the person receiving it in any age, or being part of this Eucharistic celebration just as present if he/she was present at that final meal with Him and his apostles. He is still breaking bread throughout time with us.

Why did Jesus tie breaking of bread and eating for salvation? because it was in the eating “but of the tree of knowledge of good evil you are not to eat; for, on the day you eat, you will die)” (Gn2:17) that sin of disobedience and “eating which was forbidden in that moment” entered into the human being, and Jesus in His incarnation came to reverse all that which had and has followed.  Now Jesus the God/Man reverses this curse using the same medium as that which caused the sin, that is, eating, a universal necessity. “unless you eat of my flesh and drink of my blood you have no life in you” or “whoever eats of my flesh and drinks of my blood has eternal life and I will raise him up on the last day” (Jn 6:54) Jesus leaves for all time the mandate to eat of His Flesh and drink of His blood in order to have eternal Life with Him where before eternal life had been lost.  Further, he reverses the curse of Genesis 9 “But you shall not eat flesh with its life its blood" (Gen9:4) "For the life of the flesh is in the blood...for it is the blood that makes atonement. The sacrifice of shedding his blood made reparation for the sin of death by having “life in you” Seen even in the story of the death of Abel (whose blood cried out to God) for reparation. (Gen4:11-12)

For the life of the flesh is in the blood, (Gn 9:4-7) and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood which makes atonement by the life. Jesus left behind both flesh and blood as atonement for all sins of generations. Flesh and blood died thus leading to death of body and spirit, now flesh and blood lead to life.  And through flesh and blood he left behind for atonement a renewed friendship with God. The sin was so great that only God (Gen.chapter 15) could repair the damage done. Through His son this was done.

Yet it would appear that Jesus was asking the disciples to do something that they were forbidden by their Jewish faith to do.  “Eat flesh with blood”. Here he is telling them to do the thing they believed they were not to do and on that day many of his followers walked sadly away (Jn 6:30, Jn 6:66, Jn 6:59-71).It was one of those sayings that could not be understood. A dark saying.

The answer to the eating of flesh and drinking of His blood was the way to reverse the sin of the first man and woman who did eat unto themselves and all the future generations, death, even after having been warned that this would happen.   In the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood Jesus begins a new creation. (The first born Col. 1:15)  Not destroying the first creation but finding a way to renew them in a universal manner (eating) and the restoration of the relationship between man and his creator.

Why eat and drink? Because Jesus is able through the Spirit to transform a universal action, eating, into life giving and saving nourishment.  Different nourishment than daily food for bodily sustenance, but a nourishment for the soul which had been wounded and disfigured by the eating of what should not have been eaten. (Gn2:17). Eucharist or soul nourishment is as life-giving as was the ruach after the creation of man (breath) and now a renewal nourishment leading to reconciliation and eternity.

It’s a loving act/gift and promise he has given and left behind in time to nourish those who would walk through all ages until his return.  His presence always and every moment amongst the human being created in His own image and likeness (Gen 1:27) until his return. Again walking, talking and sitting in fellowship with him.

St Paul and the authors of the early testaments wrote and discerned that this is the food for the journey, for those starving, for those who cannot heal because of the lack of nourishment. 
The Eucharist is the food of the very “presence” of the Lord amongst the brethren. His way of being in their mist. The visible face of the Father.  Those broken, those marginalised, those outside of the “righteous ones’ who appear to have no need of this food for they already consider themselves holy (Lord I’m better than this poor man, Lk 18:9-14). But for those who are and have been starved, and have need for the food He offers.  They are already fed (by the word) but those who have been starved have a need of this particular nourishment for recovery of soul health.
  .
Jesus’ table fellowship with outcasts and sinners is well documented and it is also documented that some of his friends and enemies were outraged and horrified that he would associate with, and share table with, such known sinners (tax collectors, prostitutes, sinners, adulterers) and this by a  supposed teacher and supposed Holy man (Mk2:16-17) Matt:11:19, Lk 15:1-2, 19:18). Jesus sat at table both with the righteous ones and sinners alike.  His presence was for all.

Why this preamble?

Because I am greatly disturbed and saddened by the behaviours of certain Catholics who have in recent times almost caused a schism in the Church, and their total humiliating disrespect for the Holy Father, Pope Francis, and total disrespect for the “Chair of Peter.”  Disrespect for the “holder of the keys of the Kingdom” (Mt 16:19).Disrespect for the office of the Papacy.  There has been an all-out vendetta against the Pope forgetting that “where Peter is there is the Church”   ostensibly because of the so-called “Chapter 8” and one footnote (351) in Amoris Laetitia a document 355 pages long, in which he is accused of changing church doctrine. He even says in the beginning of this exhortation (p 12) that it should not be read “in a rushed reading of the text” and suggests that each chapter be read “patiently and carefully” This beautiful exhortation has been changed into a “chapter 8” furore instead of a very beautiful document on love and family, and indeed his Holiness says that chapter 8 should make readers feel challenged.  

Chapter 8 speaks of looking at a huge vineyard (divorced and remarried) where these couples are encouraged to understand why and how the sacrament of marriage can enrich their new marriage or new vows of love and, that they can be, much more sustained by the grace of Christ in their marriage by the possibility of “participating fully in the life of the church” (AL p 240.).  His attempt to streamline the annulment process is not an attempt to change church doctrine but to encourage those who would wish to reconcile with the Church to seek the necessary helps to achieve this. 

Further, he states ‘those who think that this is equivalent to a catholic divorce are mistaken. Marriage is indissoluble when it is a sacrament. And this the Church cannot change.  It is doctrine. “It is an indissoluble sacrament” (AL p 68). Further, “a lukewarm attitude, and kind of relativism or undue reticence in proposing the ideal (my italics) would be a lack of fidelity to the Gospel. To show understanding in the face of exceptional situations never implies dimming the light of the fuller ideal, or proposing less than what Jesus offers to human beings” (P 240.) The ideal is always to be understood, announced and preached.

This Pope invites Pastors to become involved with these abandoned individuals and lost to the church because of a difficult situation, and indeed who are not “living the ideal” and to help them to slowly understand and desire to come to the ideal. “Jesus wants a church attentive to the goodness which the Holy Spirit sows in the midst of human weakness, a Mother who, while clearly expressing her objective teaching always does what good she can even if in the process her shoes get soiled.” (Chap. 8 AL)   He is saying to Pastors get involved, see how you can help this wounded vineyard. Help them reach the understanding of the full ideal (Sacrament of marriage) always bearing in mind that pain exists and to be mindful of the pain. Be merciful as God is merciful. 

It’s important to remember that no one divorces because they have nothing better to do.  There are always painful reasons including, serious domestic violence, emotional and physical abuse, and other painful experiences which lead to divorce.  And Mother Church is hurting for these wounded ones.  And these critics not caring or thinking about the emotional disenfranchisement they are committing against these wounded ones.  And so these “experts” and their collection of followers continue to divide the Church and wound more deeply those already wounded.
Jesus sat at table with prostitutes. Jesus allowed himself to be touched by prostitutes. A woman freed of seven devils was on her way to touch him and anoint him in death. Jesus also sat with those righteous who would not wash his feet, (but a great sinner washed them with her tears and wiped them with her hair. (Lk 7:44)

This Holy Father, Pope Francis, has gone after a massive vineyard abandoned and lost to the Church, by laws, and the righteous, and he is being hounded and humiliated by dissenters fuelled by some so called “true catholic” with a Facebook page read by millions and a Cardinal (Judas who was concerned over waste of money Jn 12:4) and some theologians who haven’t heard the sound of their voices for a long time.  These are damaging the church and flock almost beyond repair, and “Peter” is publically rebuked. Indeed so much so that his Council of 9 and head of CDF His eminence Cardinal Müller   had to come out publically to say that they support the Pope and  that the his post synodal exhortation Amoris Letitia does not contravene or change church doctrine.  

I want to suggest something else to these  “defenders of the faith” including the Facebook instigator  and his followers who daily trolls the net to find negative stories about Pope Francis  “what happens to those priests, nuns, religious who have left the Catholic Church, were laicized  and married and brought up families? Are they banned from the Eucharist also? Remembering that their first covenant, their first love was with the church and with the Lord as spouse.

We are told that Bishops and priests should love the church like Christ loves the Church, as a husband loves his wife. For the priest his covenant of Holy Orders  leaves an indelible sacramental mark on the soul (like Baptism) but even so he may not exercise his priestly ministry after laicisation except  in extreme circumstances e.g. dying person, he is still “married” to  his church though daily he may not exercise his priestly duties.

How does the priest love his Church? Just like Christ loves his bride and is willing to die for her. St Paul who is mentioned and used as precedent also says the same of marriage: the husband is to love his wife as Christ loves the church and be ready to sacrifice himself for her. So a priest or religious who is no longer a “sacramental bride/groom” may also not remarry another or it is also adultery. 

This is the mystery of love that it is meant to be a union for life for husband and wife and priest and his own spiritual bride.  For the man and woman it is a physical union for the priest/religious it is a spiritual eternal union. Both the human and the priestly vocation is a ministry of love and both are covenants of marriage. When a marriage fails it’s sad, when a religious ministry fails (priest, nuns, brothers, celibate ministries) it’s sad, but why is it that a former priest, religious can remarry in the physical union and receive Eucharist but when a human being finds happiness after usually much suffering and ill treatment, emotional torment and sometimes torture and violence, they are banned from the table of the of Lord?

God is a communion of three who live in harmony and love, and ideally this is what both human and spiritual marriage is meant to be.  One flesh. One union, harmonious. This is the ideal.   However this is not always the situation.   The priest when he becomes a priest, at consecration, also becomes one flesh with the Lord (at consecration, this is my body) and “marries” the Church, His bride. But at times this union also fails.  Just as when human marriages are entered into with good intentions but at times impediments make them eventually unworkable.

St Paul who is quoted ad nauseam by those who are determined to harm “Peter”  says that the great mystery is reflected in Christian spouses: the relationship established by Christ with the Church who is His bride.(Eph 5:21-33) This is their relationship.  Bride and groom. United in marriage. Never to separate and if this does happen, our learned commentators say that these cannot be part of the body of Christ or sit at His table? He who sat mostly with sinners and outcasts and the anawim and chose to be with them.  He the Lord of the Eucharist is told that those who are broken cannot sit with him. No attempt made to be brought into the fold?

To those who would destroy the church,( LifeSiteNews Mar 18 Canon Lawyers and theologians to hold conference on deposing the Pope) spend time reflecting upon this other “broken marriage” (laicised priests and religious) and the ramifications of the priest returning the cross to Jesus because it became too heavy, surely they should be excluded too?  If not why not?

And above all please stop trying to destroy the Church the body of Christ and Peter who is guided by the Holy Spirit and this is the promise made to “Peter” by Jesus Himself.

“Therefore we said, “Let us now build an altar, not for burnt offering, nor for sacrifice, but to be a witness between us and you, and between the generations after us, that we do perform the service of the lord in His presence with our burnt offerings and sacrifices and offerings of wellbeing: so that your children may never say to our children in time to come, “you have no portion in the Lord.”  (Jos. 22:26-28).