"God bless us, every one!"

I'll take the complement and second the motion that questions are welcome and we're all in this together, learning as we go.

Oh...ha! I turned to this title, thinking it an article and hoping to learn soimething for myself. :-) The Church honors God's many gifts with special blessings, employing them (like holy water and blessed candles) in her most sacred rituals. Blessed salt is a sacramental which disposes us to make even better use of Grace. It was once used in the baptismal rite, and can still be blessed at the opening rite of mass. Salt is a preservative, by which recall Jesus' commission that we be "the salt of the earth," seasoning others with a savory (pun on the word salvific) Christianity. Blessed salt can be added when blessing holy water. I have used it in house blessings, prayerfully throwing a pinch here and there to ward off Satan's future attacks, as exorcists use this sacramental to protect souls from Satan's malice. And yes, I've used it on food, like when I'm coming down with a cold or taking just a pinch when I catch myself spiritually slacking. Salt is cited in the Bible as a source of blessing, as when the prophet Elisha threw salt into the poisoned springs of the town Jericho, declaring them then purified (2 Kings 2:19-21). I think it is superstitious NOT to take advantage of blessings. Parents would do well to bless their children when they're off to school and when they return; families would do well to bless themsleves with a holy water font in the home, to wear scapulars and blessed medals, and pray the rosary--what Padre Pio referred to as "the weapon". There's no reason I can think of not to use blessed salt respectfully, or any of the Church's sacramentals, as a way of bringing into focus God's desire that we become a source of purification and preservation for our neighbor's wellbeing.

Many "Catholiics" receiving who no longer believe, who practice birth control and don't go to confession, who vote for pro-abortion politicians excusing themselves, priest and bishops promoting homosexuality...unfortunately, this terrible instance of disregard for the Most Holy Eucharist is just the tip of the iceberg.

This is rather odd, and I fear, not very Catholic. The Church made several DOGMATIC assertions about Our Lady that show she is active in our lives, particularly the doctrine that clarified she is Mediatrix of all grace. A quick jaunt to "Mary, Mediatrix of All Grace" at Wiki shows the following: "as the Mother of God, it includes the understanding that she mediates the Divine Grace. In addition to Mediatrix, other titles are given to her in the Church: Advocate, Helper, Benefactress.[1] In a papal encyclical of 8 September 1894, Pope Leo XIII said: "The recourse we have to Mary in prayer follows upon the office she continuously fills by the side of the throne of God as Mediatrix of Divine grace."[2] The references are from a Papal document that dogmatically declared for all Catholics this title and role of Mary, namely, that she actively assits her Son in dispensing God's grace for our salvation. Which means she is active up to the very point that the last person is saved and the Pearly Gates no longer accepting souls. As for whether devotion to Our Lady or any of the saints detracts from our worship of Jesus/the Trinity as God, see this new podcast from Catholic Answers posted just this morning. https://www.catholic.com/audio/sp/does-devotion-to-mary-draw-us-away-from-jesus

Same here, though I love the Church's resources that are worth sharing.

Welcome. Phoenix! Prayers for prayers? You're on! And yes, it's pretty much turmoil and confusion for most people. Those who aren't adversely affected by the world may be living dreams which are destined to become nightmares.

Download it free here or you can pay $11 on Amazon for the paperback.

Taking delight in hating God's goodness. Here's an example: https://crusadergal.substack.com/p/making-holy-the-mutilated These Anglican women priests are offering blessings for transgender transitioning. The article continues: "If that wasn’t low enough, an entire custom liturgy has been invented, so that those who have decided to pretend to be the opposite sex can be celebrated publicly in the midst of an attempt at worshiping God. How one can claim to worship God at the same event where he denies the inherent nature of one of His children and encourages the mutilation thereof is beyond my understanding. That’s an incongruent act, unless it’s a different god that they’re worshiping." This seems to be another kind of sin against the Holy Spirit, if not all three Persons of the Trinity, rejecting God's goodness for one's own warped vision of creation that rejects the Creator's design. St. Thomas would have nothing good to say about these wicked women insulting God (as Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifier) for their own devious delight in the complex sin of transgenderism in deference to homosexuality.

It seems to be both: "taking delight" in "hating God's goodness." I've met some people who love to malign holiness. This seems to be the essence of blaspheming against the Holy Spirit. It perhaps helps to understand that a sin is defined by the action itself, the intention of the person and the circumstances in which both occur. It may also help to see what Aquinas goes on to specify what are the different sins against the Holy Spirit, which he addresses in the question following this one we have focused on. He says: "The sins of despair and presumption consist, not in disbelieving in God's justice and mercy, but in contemning them." Contemn isn't a word we use everyday, but it implies a vehement condemnation of a person or thing as worthy of scorn or contempt. In other words, we're looking at some of the most base emotions man can manifest against his Creator, such as to hold holy things like forgiveness of sin as vile and execrable (extremely bad). Such is the human heart! We can turn at a moment's notice away from God, but when we do so when hating things which could bring about our pardon or forgiveness--that is when we are guilty of removing the conditions under which we would want to be forgiven ourselves. This is a kind of presumption--or despair, depending on how you look at it--and that is what the Jews did in their offense against the Holy Spirit, by hating the forgiveness that could bring them mercy. We're talking pretty dark things, although I fear these evils are not uncommon today. If we but realize that by turning from God we reject his grace to help us to turn back to him, we'd be less inclined to invest ourselves in our pitiable love of evil and rejection of God's graces.

Impenitence seems to be the effect of "blaspheming against the Holy Spirit," but the sin itself is taking pleasure in committing sin for its own sake, as noted below. It is a vicious of hatred of God's goodness. The instance Jesus refers to is that the Jews attributed his forgiveness of sin (as God) to Satan. So malignant is their view of Our Lord, that they called his mercy a diabolic thing. Theirs was the delight of scorning God's goodness, and once you're in that state...how do you get out of it? Being a habitual vice, such a sinner ends life in either presumption or despair--but these are the consequence of that sin, and not the sin of loving the evil of hating God's goodness. There can be no greater evil, and for that, no greater punishment. Aquinas mentions malice several times when defining this sin. So vehement was the Jews' hatred of Jesus, that it closed their eyes that might otherwise see God working to save sinners. The sin is called blasphemy, which literally means "to injure the reputation" of another. Because of Our Lord's exalted esteem, the Jews' deliberate pleasure in maligning him through their hatred, are guilty of a gross irreverence against God. Aquinas says that the Jews blasphemed Jesus in his human nature by calling him a drunkard and a friend of sinners. But they blasphemed against the Holy Spirit by saying Jesus' forgiveness of sins (by the action of the Holy Spirit) was an act of Satan. So even if the Jews' failed to recognize Jesus as God in their ignorance, there was no excuse to claim that doing good (forgiving sin of all things!) is evil--such was their contempt for the Lord. I would say this simpler if I could, but it is a very complex situation and an extremely devious sin. Still, sifting through this answer should help you understand what the sin against the Holy Spirit is and why it is so malignant.

Indeed, God (please) bless us all! Aquinas nails what the sin against the Holy Spirit consists of. Doctrines and definitions don't change their essential truths; otherwise they'd not be true. But we all agree that sinners can and do repent, which, I suppose, is your point of bringing in Saint Pope JPII. And there's the rub. Will we sufficiently repent, any and all of us, in time? An atheist professor for my teaching credential program taught us that people usually die the way they live; to expect something different is just that--extraordinary. His point was that even unbelievers don't expect miracles when it comes to matters of salvation. One can always repent, but one is more likely not to do so when living with a firm disposition and outlook. Liberal friends just ignore me when I try to point out essential problems with their worldview. Of course, God alone knows our hearts and judges fairly and accordingly. But to carry about an habitual perspective that rejects God's mercy, as the Jews did whom Our Lord addressed...well, if his wake-up call wasn't received and attended to, it would have gone very badly for them. That's basically what any of us, including St. Thomas, can say regarding salvation.

I can only respond with the thoughts of St. Thomas Aquinas, who argues to the contrary of your starting point and conclusion. In his Summa Theologiae, Second part of the second part, question 14, the angelic doctor tells us that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is a specific sin of malice to which a sinner can be held accountable. As usual, he offers distinctions in his answer, in which he differs from St. Augustine, who thought malice was a sin against the Holy Spirit himself, the source of the remission of sin (which seems to be what this article here begins and ends in saying, a sin of final impenitence). But St. Thomas corrects this misunderstanding by clarifying what our Lord actually said. I quote: Nor did Our Lord say this to the Jews, as though they had sinned against the Holy Ghost, since they were not yet guilty of final impenitence, but He warned them, lest by similar utterances they should come to sin against the Holy Ghost: and it is in this sense that we are to understand Mark 3:29-30, where after Our Lord had said: "But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost," etc. the Evangelist adds, "because they said: He hath an unclean spirit." Clearly, Jesus was not addressing the sin of final impenitence to the Jews who had not yet been complicit in such a sin. Rather, St. Thomas clarifies that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit entails taking pleasure in committing sin for its own sake. He refers to it as a "vicious habit" of hatred of God's goodness in forgiving sins. This is not the same as presumption and despair but it leads to those further sins by removing what might otherwise help the sinner to repent of his hatred of the Holy Spirit's goodness in forgiving sin. Again, I quote St. Thomas here: The Jews who Jesus accused of committing an unpardonable sin... "blasphemed against the Holy Ghost, when they ascribed to the prince of devils those works which Christ did by the power of His own Divine Nature and by the operation of the Holy Ghost." The unpardonable sin was the malice of the Jews who ascribed to God the works of Satan. Such forethought was deliberate and intentional, although terribly mistaken, but the hatred of the Jews would not be pardoned because they themselves did not deem themselves in need of forgiveness. Maybe, one can hope, that upon realizing their plight, they did repent and convert. But in the meantime, St. Thomas explicitly notes he is not referring to some apocalyptic sin yet to be committed; for he agrees with Augustine that final impenitence can be committed not only through words but extends to thoughts and actions as well. Part of the "un-pardon-ability" of this specific sin which despises God as the source of good--something only Satan and his spawn would do--is that it is a disposition to which one is habitually inclined as a way of thinking and living. It may take a bit of diving into Aquinas' thought to understand that by vice and virtue he means a habitual inclination towards evil or good, which is part of the horror of sin in the first place, namely, that it becomes entrenched in one's heart as a value and way of life. The Jews who rejected forgiveness of sin did so as a way of thinking and living; they wholeheartedly rejected that a person would need the Lord's forgiveness or that one could accept such forgiveness. Funny, because that is exactly what our Lord accused them of failing to do.

For saint of the day, there's the Vatican website. https://www.vaticannews.va/en/saints.html For news that impacts Catholic culture, I turn to this site (where I found the information on this indulgence): https://www.catholicculture.org/ A liturgical calendar for every day of the year in the U.S. can be found here: https://www.usccb.org/committees/divine-worship/liturgical-calendar There's even a generic calendar of indulgences: https://ihmcc.org/pdfs/Indulgences.pdf I just ran across a new indulgence happening on Aug. 1: https://catholicismpure.wordpress.com/2010/08/01/a-gift-from-heaven-the-portiuncula-indulgence/

That's the spirit! Years and years ago, Jesus had just five loaves of bread and two fish, but he made it into enough to feed a whole crowd. The world is starving for grace, and through posts and websites and prayers like these, those hungry for truth and joy can be fed and even nourished!

I remember hearing about this oath in the seminary, and later as a priest, but in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, we were never asked to make these promises. A lot of evil and unnecessary suffering could have been allayed had we done so. Then again, I can hear my mother in the background telling me: we get the kind of leaders we pray for.

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle." --George Washington, Farewelll Adress, 1796

Interesting questions. Funny, I hadn't thought much about mindfulness, so thanks for reminding me. :-) I do recall a book before that era which was influential for me: Think and Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill. Back when I was a teen I wanted to be rich; since then I've learned to want to be holy. Thinking, being aware...what was that popular book long ago? Yes, Handbook to Higher Consciousness...I haven't thought about that book for a long time as well, but Mr. Hill points out that "thoughts are things," over and over, like a drum beat in all sorts of ways, so that one begins to realize: indeed, what I mind really matters. Keeping things in consciousness maintains them sharply in focus as matters to be desired. So whether it's monetary or spiritual happiness one seeks, meditating and seeking assistance from one's higher power--if i may be so mundane in my expression--mindfulness can be effective increasing desire that until one attains that desire. My assessment at the moment (because I've not given it much thought) is that mindfulness is a good thing, or at least neutral; of course, like anything, it can be abused, such that one becomes anxiously scrupulous over attaining his or her desires to the detriment of all else. Even then, mindfulness wouldn't be bad in itself, because if God is your desire, that is exactly what the Catholic faith prompts believers to pursue. As for Quietism, that was a spirituality that overemphasized pacifism, to the point that one would surrender mindfulness or willfulness in hopes of having the divine take over. Ultimately, I see that as a cop out to cooperate with God in appropriating salvation won by Our Savior.

Nice! With Catholicism, there's always something to do or ponder. Never a dull moment!

Don't be discouraged, Ed. You're a Street Warrior the Church depends on to get the Word out. Just think of the bounteous souls you and your gang will bring with you to the pearly gates.