Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 270
» Latest member: Norma the Frenchwoman
» Forum threads: 6,399
» Forum posts: 11,961

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 302 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 300 Guest(s)
Bing, Google

Latest Threads
Holy Mass in Illinois - N...
Forum: November 2024
Last Post: Stone
Today, 08:15 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 48
Purgatory Explained by th...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
Today, 08:07 AM
» Replies: 7
» Views: 272
Fr. Ruiz Sermons: FOR LUK...
Forum: Fr. Ruiz's Sermons November 2024
Last Post: Deus Vult
Yesterday, 01:10 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 77
Ruiz Sermons: 22nd Sun af...
Forum: Fr. Ruiz's Sermons November 2024
Last Post: Deus Vult
Yesterday, 01:04 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 76
Fr. Ruiz Sermons: 2024 11...
Forum: Fr. Ruiz's Sermons November 2024
Last Post: Deus Vult
Yesterday, 12:56 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 57
Fr. Ruiz Sermons: Feast o...
Forum: Fr. Ruiz's Sermons November 2024
Last Post: Deus Vult
Yesterday, 12:51 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 52
Pope Francis makes person...
Forum: Pope Francis
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:37 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 82
Pius XII’s Fatima vision ...
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
11-05-2024, 06:55 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 97
A Masonic Echo in Dignita...
Forum: Pope Francis
Last Post: Stone
11-05-2024, 06:13 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 118
After Fifty Years, Archbi...
Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
Last Post: Stone
11-05-2024, 05:56 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 95

 
  G. K. Chesterton: The Circular Argument
Posted by: Stone - 12-31-2021, 08:39 AM - Forum: Articles by Catholic authors - No Replies

The Circular Argument
Written By G.K. Chesterton

[Image: Capture.png]
Illustration by Theodore Schluenderfritz. G.K.'s Weekly, August 1, 1925


The argument underlying most of the arguments of our critics against our ideal is a sort of argument in a circle. It is very necessary to understand and yet it is not very easy to explain. It is like the old oriental symbol of a snake with its tail in its mouth; the occult and mystical image upon which whiting are sometimes made to model themselves. One would think that such a symbol was a simple matter; but in fact it is like the Figure in the Carpet of which Henry James wrote; a thing really recurrent and regular but at the first glance bewildering and even invisible. It is not always easy to trace the pattern of the carpet, even if it be a pattern of self-devouring snakes. It is not always easy to follow the large returning curve in what appears a chaos of intersecting lines. But we for our part are sorry when snakes bite their own tails. We are sorry for the snake and we are sorry for the tail. We weep over the reptile who has such an unsatisfactory meal. We also weep over the tail which has such an unsatisfactory time. And we shall try to explain the point, although it is difficult and may even be dull.

The point is this. When we describe our ideal, our opponents always deride and reject it because it is an ideal; which means in their language a dream. When we denounce existing conditions or current proposals, they ask us what is the use of denunciation which could only lead to destruction; which in their language means to mere negation. We say, for instance, that the only tolerable ideal for a man is that of a free man; and the only tolerable ideal of a free man is that of a man free over a fairly wide area to choose and to create. We say that while this ideal is nowhere ideally realised, it can be really realised. We say there was more of it in a free craftsman than in a modern mechanic; more of it in a farmer's wife doing as she liked with her own herbs and cordials than in a factory girl doing as she is told by a capitalist combine. We do not desire to produce this precise example of this precise state of things. We do not limit the craftsman to carving gargoyles; we do not force the critic to drink cowslip wine. We give these things as examples of the various ways in which a healthy humanity has attempted to approach this ideal, rather than the other ideals. But when we describe the ideal in such general and ideal terms, we are accused of describing a legendary Arcadia or a mythical Golden Age. We are asked why we should profess to be propounding a social solution like that of Mr. Sidney Webb or Mr. Henry Ford, when in fact we are only describing a Land of Heart's Desire like Mr. W.B. Yeats.

In a word, they say we waste time in describing an unattainable dignity and independence. Very well; let us merely note that complaint and keep it clearly in mind. It will come round again, like the serpent's tail. So, on the other hand, they complain of our complaints. They say that the industrial system, like its alleged author, is not so black as it is painted. They say we paint it blacker than it is; and that this (under the circumstances) is a mere waste of blacking. They suggest that it is mere pessimism to insist that things are indefensible when they are really indestructible. They say we are merely throwing away dirty water before we can get clean. Or rather they say we are merely analysing the animalculae in the dirty water, while we do not even venture to throw it away. Why, it is asked, do we waste so many words in making men discontented with conditions with which they are forced to be content? Why do we talk of a thing as an intolerable slavery when we know that it must for a time be tolerated? We say that the rule of mere rich men is far more shameful and benighted than the rule of any king or squire, of any priests or princess. We say there has never been a tyranny pressing so closely upon man as this tyranny of trade gone mad. Individual rulers have done much worse things to individual subjects. But in the matter of the daily bread and the breath of life, the ruler has never been so powerful, the subject has never been so impotent. We say that a hatred of this condition is not a question of a sociological theory, but a question of a sense of honour. And we are asked why we put it with so much heat; why we think it worth while to appeal to such hatred. It is all futile; because nothing can really be done. That is their argument; and again we only ask that it should be realised and remembered. We denounce what we cannot destroy. Therefore we are a pack of idiots.

Let us make a note of the fact; and proceed. Now what follows in practice is this. We are eventually, and very rightly, asked to give some sort of account of how we should set to work. As a matter of fact, we are very much more prepared to go into detail about definite and practical proposals than most of the literary men who have been counted legitimate critics and even reforming influences. Still, we are not parliamentary lawyers and have never pretended to be industrial experts. We can, in the ordinary sense of human speech, suggest a number of things that could be done. They range from things that could be done tomorrow, like turning down a side street to a small shop, to things that are not likely to be done even a hundred years hence, though they could easily have been done six hundred years ago; such as putting a man in prison for making a corner in wheat. We think these proposals practical; but it is not their practicality that is the point here. It is the way in which our critics prove them unpractical. Their argument always amounts to this, in one form or another. You cannot thus reverse the trend of the time and alter the mind of the society. It would mean an effort that men will not make, a sacrifice they cannot be expected to make, a crisis they will not face, a paradox they will not entertain. You cannot get the mob of a modern town to boycott the biggest and best advertised shop. You cannot get a plunging and pleasure-seeking crowd to hunt out the hole and corner homes of a lost liberty or a dying self-respect. Similarly, you cannot make medieval laws against trusts and tricks of the trade; or if you made them you could not enforce them. Your legal campaign would break down; your Anti-Trust law would be checkmated and evaded; your lawyers would be bribed; your witnesses would be brow-beaten; the mob would be turned against you in the end. In short, the real argument against us is just that. We cannot make our cause really practical because we cannot make it really popular. The modern mind is set in its weary ruts. There will not be a change of mind without a change of heart; and we cannot effect it. Perhaps; but at least you cannot logically blame us because we try.

At least you cannot say that people do not hate plutocracy enough to destroy it; and then blame us for asking them to look at it enough to hate it. At least and at last, you may begin to have some notion of why we do think it worth while to attempt to make the ideal inspiring as an ideal and the reality intolerable because it is a reality. At last our critics can find the answer to the question which they asked first; which they have possibly already forgotten. This is why it is worth while to insist on the merely moral beauty of simplicity and sanity. This is why it is worth while to emphasise the mere repulsiveness of corruption and servility. We do not say that we can do it; but we do say it would be worth doing. We do not say that we can be eloquent enough to persuade degenerate Christians of what even the heathens understood; the glory of the household gods and the closeness of the hearth to the altar. But if we preserve the protest of that human tradition, heathen and Christian, men may arise who can sing and speak of it as did the great poets of heroic times. We do not say we can find words foul enough to describe modern wealth, and all that world of bullying and bribing and fawning which vulgar plutocracy offers us as a final home. But the resources of civilisation are not exhausted; and somebody with a richer reserve of bad language may find fitting terms, for it yet.

But the point is that it is not illogical, but strictly logical, that we should appeal to the abstractions which our critics deplore, because the actualities are as our critics describe. It is they who are arguing in a circle, when they complain of our merely describing desirable things; and then go on to complain that they cannot be realised unless they are shown to be desirable. It is they who are arguing in a circle, when they object to our denouncing things as detestable; and then object again because it is idle to denounce them until we can get people to detest them. The thing they insist would have to be done is exactly the thing which we, in our humble way, are trying to do. It is to get people to desire the one thing and to detest the other. That is why we describe the virtues of peasants who we know cannot be exactly copied. That is why we describe the corruption of profiteers who we know will never be really punished. We are doing what our own opponents say would be the only practical preliminary. And when we do it, they call us unpractical.

Print this item

  95.58% of the #Omicron cases in Germany are fully vaccinated
Posted by: Stone - 12-30-2021, 04:53 PM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular] - Replies (1)

Print this item

  Latest COVID Restrictions Based On What Govt 'Thought People Would Tolerate'
Posted by: Stone - 12-30-2021, 04:50 PM - Forum: Socialism & Communism - No Replies

CDC Director Admits Latest COVID Restrictions Based On What Government "Thought People Would Be Able To Tolerate"


ZH | THURSDAY, DEC 30, 2021
Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

CDC Director Rochelle Walensky admitted Wednesday that the agency’s latest guidance on COVID was based on what the government perceived people would accept.

Appearing on CNN, Walensky addressed the fact that the CDC suddenly updated its guidelines after Joe Biden declared that “there is no federal solution” to the virus.

Restrictions including quarantine times were lessened from ten days to five.

It really had a lot to do with what we thought people would be able to tolerate,” Walensky starkly admitted.

She added, “We really want to make sure we have guidance in this moment where we were going to have a lot of disease that could be adhered to, that people were willing to adhere to, and that spoke to specifically when people were maximally infectious. So it really spoke to both behaviors and to what people were able to do.”

Watch:


Walensky’s comments dovetail with those of Anthony Fauci, who yesterday (after two years of isolating everyone) admitted that isolation is ‘not good for society.’

Rumble Video: Fauci admits that isolation is not good for society

Elsewhere in her interview, Walensky said that the government is considering opening booster shots for 12 to 15 year olds, urging “the first thing to note is to get your children vaccinated.”

“I know that the companies and manufactures are working towards data for under five year olds. That will not be in the months ahead, but we’re working to get there soon,” the CDC head added.

Full interview for context:

Print this item

  Dickens’ ‘A Christmas Carol’ is a marvelous conversion tale best explained by GK Chesterton
Posted by: Stone - 12-30-2021, 04:32 PM - Forum: General Commentary - No Replies

Dickens’ ‘A Christmas Carol’ is a marvelous conversion tale best explained by GK Chesterton
The moment of Scrooge’s conversion is legendary, and is the closest depiction I have ever read of what happens in a man’s soul 
when he accepts the logical justice of damnation and undeserved privilege to repent.

[Image: Scrooge-810x500.jpg]
Scrooge and the Ghost of Christmas Present look through a window at the Crachet family around the hearth.


Fri Dec 24, 2021
(LifeSiteNews) – Without a doubt, we have all read, heard, or watched a rendition of A Christmas Carol, the classic English novella by Charles Dickens (1812-1870). Whether from a cartoon, a play, a Hollywood production, or by reading a children’s version of the story, we can all call to mind the story about the Ghosts of Christmas Past, Present, and Future. Our common parlance in all the of English-speaking world knows exactly what is meant when someone is labeled a ‘Scrooge.’

Popular authors who seek to transmit the ‘true meaning of Christmas’ in their works are often only able to imitate a Dickens-esque motif wherein a miser comes to find the true meaning of the Christian celebration through some sort of interior conversion. The famous Dr. Seuss story The Grinch Who Stole Christmas is perhaps nothing more than a whimsical rendition of the theme set out by the great English author a century prior.

It might seem a bit of a stretch to some, but I believe the argument could be made that we see shades of Dickens in the classic film It’s a Wonderful Life. Themes of childhood trauma, greed and financial obsession, and inevitable conversion brought on by a preternatural visitor who helps the protagonist see the real “reason for the season,” are paramount in both stories. In addition, the depths of human despair and the brink of nihilistic suicidal ideation are palpable as we watch George Bailey see a glimpse of life without his existence, just as we see Ebenezer Scrooge perceive the veritable contempt that so many have for him.

In Frank Capra’s motion-picture masterpiece and in Charles Dickens’ literary classic, the profundity of sadness at certain points is almost too much. Our hearts ache along with the characters as we simultaneously despise them to a degree that might only be matched by how much we come to pity their tragic lot.


Enter Chesterton

G.K. Chesterton (1874-1936), the famous English writer and convert to the Faith, wrote a biography of Dickens that T.S. Eliot said was the “best on that author that has ever been written.” This is high praise coming from a highly praise-worthy source. It would be a mistake for us to consider the biography that Chesterton published in 1906 as part of post-modern biographical literature. So often in our day, biographies are written mostly like elongated encyclopedia entries wherein the focus is on the minutia of historical factoids. This is not to say that great attention to detail is not sometimes extremely relevant and helpful, but it was not Chesterton’s style — not at all.

Anyone familiar with G.K. Chesterton’s works will know very well that in each book, chapter, and even phrase, there is a story told that gives us a glimpse of the exuberance that filled his mind on the very idea considered. When Chesterton wrote biographies, he was not always focused on the empirical facts of a man’s life as the primary means of knowing a man; instead, he took the reader on a journey into the meaning of what meant most to the person about whom he wrote.

When he published St. Francis of Assisi, for example, he went beyond what other biographers had done before him and brought us into the romance that St. Francis had with God’s creation, void of any ‘earth-worship’ nonsense that so many tragically associate with the Seraphic Father. One passage in his biography encapsulates the man in a way that only a Chestertonian prose could accomplish:

Quote:“Now for St. Francis nothing was ever in the background. We might say that his mind had no background, except perhaps that divine darkness out of which the divine love had called up every colored creature one by one. He saw everything as dramatic, distinct from its setting, not all of a piece like a picture but in action like a play. A bird went by him like an arrow; something with a story and a purpose, though it was a purpose of life and not a purpose of death. A bush could stop him like a brigand; and indeed he was as ready to welcome the brigand as the bush.”

In St Thomas Aquinas: The Dumb Ox, we find ourselves falling in love with the magnificent mind of the Angelic Doctor, in a way that only a 20th-century fun-loving English author could accomplish. One quote comes to mind that portrays the child-like wonder behind the great theologian’s contemplation of God: “I can hardly conceive of any educated man believing in God at all without believing that God contains in Himself every perfection including eternal joy; and does not require the solar system to entertain Him like a circus.”


Chesterton’s biography of Dickens

Chesterton wrote about Dickens before he tackled the stories of great saints. Leafing through the pages written about the progenitor of the most well-known Christmas story of the past 200 years is like being guided through a reliquary by a holy man, who has true devotion to each saint represented. It is obvious when reading the Dickens biography that Chesterton had something of an encyclopedic memory of his works — littering his phrases with timely references from any of Dickens’ works with ease. 

It is certain that Chesterton had comprehended Dickens’ style as if it were his own. There is a moment in A Christmas Carol when Ebenezer Scrooge arrives home for that fateful night of his preternatural sojourn with the ghosts that haunted his conscience. Scrooge happens upon the most mundane of things, a door-knocker, but sees something so real that it must not be real at all. Dickens masterfully describes the moment in the following manner:

Quote:“Now, it is a fact, that there was nothing at all particular about the knocker on the door, except that it was very large. It is also a fact, that Scrooge had seen it, night and morning, during his whole residence in that place; also that Scrooge had as little of what is called fancy about him as any man in the city of London, even including — which is a bold word — the corporation, aldermen, and livery… Scrooge, having his key in the lock of the door, saw in the knocker, without its undergoing any intermediate process of change — not a knocker, but Marley’s face. Marley’s face. It was not in impenetrable shadow as the other objects in the yard were, but had a dismal light about it, like a bad lobster in a dark cellar. It was not angry or ferocious, but looked at Scrooge as Marley used to look: with ghostly spectacles turned up on its ghostly forehead… and its livid color, made it horrible; but its horror seemed to be in spite of the face and beyond its control, rather than a part of its own expression.”

There is a certain dread that creeps up the reader’s spine when entering into that eerie scene, and the uncanny nature of such an impossible event piques curiosity for a realm of things heretofore invisible. Chesterton describes the texture of the moment perfectly:

Quote:“There are details in the Dickens descriptions — a window, or a railing, or the keyhole of a door — which he endows with demoniac life. The things seem more actual than things really are. Indeed, that degree of realism does not exist in reality; it is the unbearable realism of a dream. And this kind of realism can only be gained by walking dreamily in a place; it cannot be gained by walking observantly.”


Could there be a more accurate way of describing that dreadful moment in Scrooge’s journey than how Chesterton describes the hyper-realism of Dickens? If my experience is any barometer, I believe I can say that there is a transportation to another literary world that takes place when following Scrooge to his home that night. It is that sort of moment that feels as mundane as buttering toast, almost unconscious, only to be interrupted by a textured shadow that fills the corner of your eye; a figure that disappears when you try and focus, but was definitely real. 

In Dickens’ personal life, he was something of a tragic man, and his battle with his Christian conscience was something that he could never avoid. I dare not speak ill of the dead in the way that modern writers love to do — bashing the character flaws of every man who represents an older and wiser way — but it is true that he struggled with personal demons, like all of us. His Christian faith was not orthodox, and he toyed with agnostic and materialist conceptions of religion, but his psychology was as Christian as England once was.

It would be too simplistic to say that Scrooge was Dickens, or that Dickens wrote Scrooge to consciously project himself, but it is a fact of literature that every good author includes a piece of his soul in his work; it is unavoidable. Bad writers are capable of leaving themselves out of their work, like the Hollywood foot soldiers who crank out vapid blockbusters that have as much depth as the computer software that creates the graphics for the film. Dickens was too honest, he was too great, he was too real not to offer his own conscience as a central theme in his work.


Dickens and the spirit of Christmas

There is something about Christmas, even more than Easter, that ‘baptizes’ the secular world, even if just for a night. Please don’t misunderstand what I mean — the gloominess of Good Friday and the levity of Easter Sunday are palpable — but on the night of Christ’s Birth, there is a triumphant expectation that accelerates when little children spring forth from their beds on that following morning of Christian Mirth.

Even those who have fallen away from the Faith allow themselves to be Christians, if just for a few hours each December, as there is no greater song that the human heart can sing in thanksgiving for all that has been given, than a Christmas carol. There are a select few who actively work against this inescapable yearning, and they find themselves miserable. There is no sadder or more darkened soul than the man who spends Christmas alone in defiance of the joy that is offered him; if only he let his tears of gratitude flow down his cheeks with the musicality of that Angelic Visitation to the Shepherds.

Scrooge is one of those men. This reality is depicted soon after he passes through the preternatural initiation of the ghostly door-knocker, while he sits in front of a fire that gives him no warmth. “It was a very low fire indeed; nothing on such a bitter night. He was obliged to sit close to it, and brood over it, before he could extract the least sensation of warmth from such a handful of fuel.”

Dickens then projects his struggle with God in the proceeding phrases:
Quote:“The fireplace was an old one, built by some Dutch merchant long ago, and paved all round with quaint Dutch tiles, designed to illustrate the Scriptures. There were Cains and Abels, Pharaoh’s daughters, Queens of Sheba, Angelic messengers descending through the air on clouds like feather-beds, Abrahams, Belshazzars, Apostles putting off to sea in butter-boats, hundreds of figures to attract his thoughts…” 

The Biblical imagery that brought Scrooge’s mind to higher and holier things was interrupted by the ghost that depicted his greatest sin: “… and yet that face of Marley, seven years dead, came like the ancient Prophet’s rod, and swallowed up the whole. If each smooth tile had been a blank at first, with power to shape some picture on its surface from the disjointed fragments of his thoughts, there would have been a copy of old Marley’s head on every one.” 

The Saints of Holy Writ offer the story of salvation and repentance, but the demons in Scrooge’s conscience lust for his attention and despair.

Chesterton offers a most succinct view into the religious atmosphere and struggle that plagued Dickens in the first chapter of his biography:
Quote:“But the strength of religion was that it did not care for Cromwell; did not care for him, that is, any more than for anybody else. He and his footman were equally welcomed to warm places in the hospitality of hell. It has often been said, very truly, that religion is the thing that makes the ordinary man feel extraordinary; it is an equally important truth that religion is the thing that makes the extraordinary man feel ordinary.”

Dickens was an ‘extraordinary’ man who came from very ordinary beginnings, going from relative poverty to the height of English literary celebrity. He amassed considerable wealth as well. Scrooge was of course also wealthy and great in the material sense, if we consider money to be a sign of greatness. But any man who sits alone with his conscience knows that the heaviness of his sins outweighs any accumulation of currency. 


Dickens the mythologist

It would be a mistake to portray the journey that Scrooge takes with the phantoms as representative of Christian doctrine, or even as plain theological musings. As Chesterton writes,
Quote:“Dickens was a mythologist rather than a novelist; he was the last of the mythologists, and perhaps the greatest. He did not always manage to make his characters men, but he always managed, at the least, to make them gods.”


Mythology is a misunderstood term by so many, as the word ‘myth’ is commonly used to describe anything that is false. In addition, we are rightly weary of pagan religious relics such as mythological books that promote a bent religion. However, we might say that mythology cannot be defined so narrow as a ‘genre’ but is instead a mood of literature. There is an ineffable mystery about our sojourn between Heaven and hell, and often there are things that can only be described with fantasy that are in some way more real than real.

In Christendom, this mood of mythology was purified and became folklore, or fairy-stories. La Fontaine baptized Aesop’s fables, giving the characters the complexity of Christian moral theology, and thereby improving on the calculated naturalism of the ancient lessons. Legends about witches that frightened little children in the heart of winter were replaced by fits of make-believe played by parents with their children on the Eve of Christ’s Birth about a man named Father Christmas who exists in an eternal state of Christmas joy and generosity.

England at the time of Dickens was going through a century of moral despair and progress. The old religion had been lost, first with the tragedy of King Henry VIII, and then with the continual splintering of Christian sects that became tiresome in their efforts to rebrand the Gospel. The horrors of chattel slavery were brought to light by William Wilberforce in parliament, and there was a level of drunkenness so rampant amongst the population that a national effort in the reform of manners was necessary to right the intoxicated nation.

Perhaps it was only an organic English mythology, written by a troubled English soul and inspired by the light of Christmas, that could speak to England at the time.

The journey that Scrooge takes with the mythical spirits through time and eternity is too much to discuss in detail in this piece. It reads like a breathless tale all contained in a lasting moment that is too full to comprehend; “a kind of philanthropic dream, an enjoyable nightmare, in which the scenes shift bewilderingly and seem as miscellaneous as the pictures in a scrap-book, but in which there is one constant state of the soul, a state of rowdy benediction,” says Chesterton. 


Conclusion: Chesterton on Scrooge’s conversion

The moment of Scrooge’s conversion is of course legendary, and is the closest depiction I have ever read of what happens in a man’s soul when he accepts the logical justice of damnation and undeserved privilege to repent. I could not describe the culmination of A Christmas Carol any better than the author who knew him best: 

Quote:“The beauty and the real blessing of the story do not lie in the mechanical plot of it, the repentance of Scrooge, probable or improbable; they lie in the great furnace of real happiness that glows through Scrooge and everything around him; that great furnace, the heart of Dickens. Whether the Christmas visions would or would not convert Scrooge, they convert us. Whether or not the visions were evoked by real Spirits of the Past, Present, and Future, they were evoked by that truly exalted order of angels who are correctly called High Spirits. They are impelled and sustained by a quality which our contemporary artists ignore or almost deny, but which in a life decently lived is as normal and attainable as sleep, positive, passionate, conscious joy. The story sings from end to end like a happy man going home; and, like a happy and good man, when it cannot sing it yells. It is lyric and exclamatory, from the first exclamatory words of it. It is strictly a Christmas carol.”

Print this item

  Propers for the Feast of the Circumcision [Octave Day of Christmas] - January 1st
Posted by: Stone - 12-29-2021, 10:57 AM - Forum: Christmas - No Replies

Propers for the Feast of the Circumcision [Octave Day of Christmas] - January 1st
Taken from here.


[Image: ?u=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_DAM...f=1&nofb=1]



Except for the ALLELUIA, these Propers are identical to Christmas Daytime

Introit • Score • Puer natus
Gradual • Score • Viderunt
Alleluia • Score • Multifarie olim Deus
Offertory • Score • Tui sunt caeli
Communion • Score • Viderunt

Print this item

  Propers for the Sunday within the Octave of Christmas
Posted by: Stone - 12-29-2021, 10:50 AM - Forum: Christmas - No Replies

Propers for the Sunday within the Octave of Christmas
Taken from here.


[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ebayimg.com%2Fimages%...f=1&nofb=1]


Introit • Score • Dum medium silentium
Gradual • Score • Speciosus forma
Alleluia • Score • Dominus regnavit decorem induit
Offertory • Score • Deus enim firmavit
Communion • Score • Tolle Puerum et Matrem ejus

Print this item

  Plastic Waste from Increased Testing will be Enormous
Posted by: Stone - 12-29-2021, 10:36 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular] - No Replies

Print this item

  FDA to decide on booster shots for 12-15 year olds in coming days to weeks
Posted by: Stone - 12-29-2021, 10:34 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular] - No Replies

Print this item

  Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine: Please pray for Mrs. Kathleen Donelly
Posted by: Stone - 12-29-2021, 09:30 AM - Forum: Appeals for Prayer - No Replies

[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.pinimg.com%2Foriginal...f=1&nofb=1]

Requiem aeternam dona eis Domine, et lux perpetua luceat eis. Requiescat in pace. Amen.


In your charity, please pray for the soul of Mrs. Kathleen Donelly who passed away on December 29th from cancer at age 91.
Some of you may recall that Mrs. Donelly ran the Cor Mariae website. Many of us remember her fighting spirit in the early days of the Resistance. 
Kathleen had a great love of the Faith and in these times of great confusion,
we must pray very much for our fellow Catholics and remain humbly attached to the true Faith without compromise. 

May her soul and the souls of all the faithful departed rest in peace.  Amen.


✠ ✠ ✠


The De Profundis  - Psalm 129

Out of the depths I have cried unto Thee, O Lord; Lord, hear my voice.
Let Thine ears be attentive to the voice of my supplication.
If Thou, O Lord, shalt mark our iniquities: O Lord, who can abide it?
For with Thee there is mercy: and by reason of Thy law I have waited on Thee, O Lord.
My soul hath waited on His word: my soul hath hoped in the Lord.
From the morning watch even unto night: let Israel hope in the Lord.
For with the Lord there is mercy: and with Him is plenteous redemption.
And He shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities.

Eternal rest grant unto him O Lord And let perpetual light shine upon him.

Print this item

  Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: About the “Responsa ad Dubia” of Traditionis Custodes
Posted by: Stone - 12-29-2021, 09:04 AM - Forum: Archbishop Viganò - No Replies

About the “Responsa ad Dubia” of Traditionis Custodes
by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
December 28, 2021


[Image: Capture.png]

Video of the Archbishop on Rumble here.

Transcript below [computer translated from the Italian]

Vos estis qui justificatis vos coram hominibus:
Deus autem novit corda vestra:
quia quod hominibus altum est,
abominatio est ante Deum. Lk 16, 15




In reading the Responsa ad Dubia recently published by the Congregation for Divine Worship, one wonders at what lowest levels the Roman Curia could have descended, for having to indulge Bergoglio with such servility, in a cruel and ruthless war against the most docile and faithful part of the Church. Never, in the last decades of very serious crisis in the Church, has ecclesiastical authority shown itself so determined and severe: it has not done so with the heretical theologians who infest the pontifical universities and seminaries; he did not do it with fornicating clerics and prelates; it did not do so in exemplary punishing the scandals of bishops and cardinals. But against the faithful, priests and religious who ask only to be able to celebrate the Tridentine Mass, no mercy, no mercy, no inclusiveness. All brothers?

Never before under this "pontificate" has the abuse of power by the authorities been perceptible, not even when two thousand years of lex orandi were immolated by Paul VI on the altar of Vatican II, imposing on the Church a rite as equivocal as it is hypocritical . That imposition, which was accompanied by the prohibition of celebrating in the ancient rite and the persecution of dissenters, had at least the alibi of the illusion that a change would perhaps have revived the fortunes of Catholicism in the face of an increasingly secularized world. Today, after fifty years of huge disasters and fourteen years of Summorum Pontificum, that labile justification is not only no longer valid, but is disavowed in its inconsistency by the evidence of the facts. Everything that the Council has brought back has proved harmful, it has emptied churches, seminaries and convents, it has destroyed ecclesiastical and religious vocations, has drained all spiritual, cultural and civil impetus of Catholics, has humiliated the Church of Christ and confined it to the margins of society, making it pathetic in its clumsy attempt to please the world.

And vice versa, since Benedict XVI tried to heal that vulnus by recognizing full rights to the traditional liturgy, the communities linked to the Mass of Saint Pius V have multiplied, the seminaries of the Ecclesia Dei institutes have grown, vocations have increased, the frequency of the faithful increased, the spiritual life of many young people and many families has found an unexpected impetus. It humiliated the Church of Christ and confined it to the margins of society, making it pathetic in its clumsy attempt to please the world. 

What lesson should have been drawn from this "experience of Tradition" invoked at the time also by Msgr. Marcel Lefebvre? The most obvious and at the same time simpler: what God has given to the Church is destined for success, and what man adds to it collapses miserably. A soul not blinded by ideological fury would have admitted the mistake made, trying to repair the damage and rebuild what had in the meantime been destroyed, to restore what had been abandoned. But this requires humility, a supernatural gaze and a trust in the provident intervention of God. This also requires the awareness on the part of the Pastors that they are administrators of the Lord's goods, and not masters: they have no right either to alienate his goods, nor to hide them or replace them with their own inventions; they must limit themselves to guarding them and making them available to the faithful, sine glossa, and with the constant thought of having to answer before God for every ewe and every lamb of His flock. The Apostle warns: "Hic jam quæritur inter dispensatóres, ut fidélis quis inveniátur" (I Cor 4: 2), "what is required of administrators is that they be faithful".

The Responsa in Dubia are consistent with Traditionis custodes, and make clear the subversive nature of this "pontificate", in which the supreme power of the Church is usurped to obtain a purpose diametrically opposed to that for which Our Lord has established the Sacred as authority. Pastori and His Vicar on earth. An indocile and rebellious power to the One who instituted it and legitimizes it, a power that believes itself to be fide solutus, so to speak, according to an intrinsically revolutionary and therefore heretical principle. Let us not forget: the Revolution claims for itself a power that is justified by the mere fact of being revolutionary, subversive, conspiratorial and antithetical to the legitimate power it intends to overthrow; and that as soon as it reaches institutional roles it is exercised with tyrannical authoritarianism,

Allow me to point out a parallel between two apparently disconnected situations. As in the presence of the pandemic, effective treatments are denied, with the imposition of a useless, indeed harmful and even lethal "vaccine"; thus the Tridentine Holy Mass, true medicine of the soul in a moment of very serious moral pestilence, is culpably denied to the faithful, replacing it with the Novus Ordo. Physicians fail in their duty, even in the presence of therapies, and impose both the sick and the healthy an experimental serum, and insist on administering it despite the evidence of total ineffectiveness and adverse effects. Similarly, priests, doctors of the soul, betray their mandate, even in the presence of an infallible drug tested for over two thousand years, and they go to great lengths to prevent those who have experienced its efficacy from using it to heal from sin. In the first case, the body's immune defenses are weakened or canceled to create chronically ill patients at the mercy of the pharmaceutical companies; in the second case the immune defenses of the soul are compromised by a worldly mentality and by the cancellation of the supernatural and transcendent dimension, so as to leave the souls defenseless in the face of the attacks of the devil. And this is valid as a response to those who claim to face the religious crisis without considering the social and political crisis in parallel, because it is precisely this duplicity of attack that makes it so terrible and that reveals its only criminal mind.

In the first case, the body's immune defenses are weakened or canceled to create chronically ill patients at the mercy of the pharmaceutical companies; in the second case the immune defenses of the soul are compromised by a worldly mentality and by the cancellation of the supernatural and transcendent dimension, so as to leave the souls defenseless in the face of the attacks of the devil. And this is valid as a response to those who claim to face the religious crisis without considering the social and political crisis in parallel, because it is precisely this duplicity of attack that makes it so terrible and that reveals its only criminal mind. In the first case, the body's immune defenses are weakened or canceled to create chronically ill patients at the mercy of the pharmaceutical companies; in the second case the immune defenses of the soul are compromised by a worldly mentality and by the cancellation of the supernatural and transcendent dimension, so as to leave the souls defenseless in the face of the attacks of the devil. And this is valid as a response to those who claim to face the religious crisis without considering the social and political crisis in parallel, because it is precisely this duplicity of attack that makes it so terrible and that reveals its only criminal mind. in the second case the immune defenses of the soul are compromised by a worldly mentality and by the cancellation of the supernatural and transcendent dimension, so as to leave the souls defenseless in the face of the attacks of the devil. And this is valid as a response to those who claim to face the religious crisis without considering the social and political crisis in parallel, because it is precisely this duplicity of attack that makes it so terrible and that reveals its only criminal mind. in the second case the immune defenses of the soul are compromised by a worldly mentality and by the cancellation of the supernatural and transcendent dimension, so as to leave the souls defenseless in the face of the attacks of the devil. And this is valid as a response to those who claim to face the religious crisis without considering the social and political crisis in parallel, because it is precisely this duplicity of attack that makes it so terrible and that reveals its only criminal mind.

I do not want to enter into the merits of the delusions of the Responsa: it is enough to know the ratio legis to reject Traditionis custodes as an ideological and biased document, drawn up by vindictive and intolerant people, full of ambitions and gross canonical errors, with the intention of prohibiting a rite canonized by two thousand years of saints and popes and impose a spurious one, copied by the Lutherans and patched up by the modernists, which in fifty years has caused a huge disaster to the ecclesial body and which, precisely because of its devastating effectiveness, must not know a derogation. There is not only guilt: there is also malice and the double betrayal of the divine Legislator and the faithful.

Bishops, priests, religious and laity find themselves once again having to make a choice of field: either with the Catholic Church and its two-thousand-year-old and immutable doctrine, or with the Conciliar and Bergoglian Church, with its errors and its secularized rites. And this happens in a paradoxical situation in which the Catholic Church and its counterfeiting coincide in the same Hierarchy, to which the faithful feel they must obey as an expression of God's authority and at the same time they must disobey as a traitor and rebel.

Of course, it is not easy to disobey the tyrant: his reactions are ruthless and cruel; but far worse persecutions were those that Catholics had to suffer over the centuries who found themselves having to face Arianism, iconoclasm, Lutheran heresy, Anglican schism, Cromwell's Puritanism, the Masonic secularism of France and Mexico, Soviet communism, Spain, Cambodia, China ... How many martyred, imprisoned, exiled bishops and priests. How many religious massacred, how many churches desecrated, how many altars destroyed. And all this why? Because the Holy Ministers did not want to give up the most precious treasure that Our Lord has given us: the Holy Mass. The Mass which He taught the Apostles to celebrate, which the Apostles passed on to their Successors, which the Popes have guarded and restored and which has always been at the center of the infernal hatred of the enemies of Christ and the Church.

To think that that Holy Mass, for which the missionaries sent to Protestant lands or the priests prisoners of the gulags risked their lives, is now prohibited by the Holy See is a cause of pain and scandal, as well as an offense to the Martyrs that that Mass have defended until the last breath. But these things can only be understood by those who believe, those who love, those who hope. Only to those who live by God. as well as an offense to the martyrs that that Mass defended to the last breath. But these things can only be understood by those who believe, those who love, those who hope. Only to those who live by God. as well as an offense to the martyrs that that Mass defended to the last breath. But these things can only be understood by those who believe, those who love, those who hope. Only to those who live by God.

Those who limit themselves to expressing reservations or criticisms of Traditionis custodes and the Responsa fall into the trap of the adversary, because they recognize the legitimacy of an illegitimate and invalid law, desired and promulgated to humiliate the Church and its faithful, to spite the "traditionalists" who dare nothing less than to oppose heterodox doctrines condemned up to Vatican II, which it made its own and today become the cipher of the Bergoglian pontificate. Traditionis custodes and Responsa must simply be ignored, returned to the sender. They must be ignored because there is a clear desire to punish Catholics who have remained faithful, to disperse them, to make them disappear.

I am dismayed at the servility of so many Cardinals and Bishops, who to please Bergoglio trample on the rights of God and of the souls entrusted to them and who take credit for showing their aversion to the "pre-conciliar" Liturgy, considering themselves deserving of public commendation and Vatican approval. The Lord's words are addressed to them: "You think yourselves righteous before men, but God knows your hearts: what is exalted among men is detestable before God" (Lk 16:15).

The coherent and courageous response to a tyrannical gesture of the ecclesiastical authority must be resistance and disobedience to an inadmissible order. Resigning oneself to accepting this umpteenth oppression means adding another precedent to the long series of abuses tolerated up to now, and with one's servile obedience making oneself responsible for maintaining a power as an end in itself.

It is necessary that the Bishops, Successors of the Apostles, exercise their own sacred authority, in obedience and fidelity to the Head of the Mystical Body, to put an end to this ecclesiastical coup that took place before our eyes. This is required by the honor of the Papacy, today exposed to discredit and humiliation by the one who occupies the Throne of Peter. The good of souls requires it, whose salvation is the supreme lex of the Church. The glory of God requires it, with respect to which no compromise is tolerable.

The Polish Archbishop Msgr. Jan Paweł Lenga said that it is time for a Catholic counter-revolution if we do not want to see the Church sink under the heresies and vices of mercenaries and traitors. The promise of the Non prævalebunt does not exclude in the least, rather it asks and demands firm and courageous action not only on the part of the Bishops and priests, but also of the laity, who are treated as subjects like never before, despite the fatuous appeals to the actuosa participatio to their role in the Church. Let's take note: clericalism has reached its peak under the "pontificate" of those who hypocritically do nothing but stigmatize it.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop

Print this item

  Mary the Cause of Our Joy! - November - December 2021
Posted by: Stone - 12-28-2021, 09:44 PM - Forum: Mary, the Cause of Our Joy! - Replies (1)

[Image: Capture.png]


To view in your browser, click HERE. To download, click HERE.

Print this item

  Coventry Carol - For the Feast of the Holy Innocents
Posted by: Stone - 12-28-2021, 11:26 AM - Forum: Christmas - No Replies

A Brief History of the Coventry Carol
Taken from here

The Coventry Carol, surprisingly, is not a Christmas carol at all. It is actually a part of the Feast of the Holy Innocents, celebrated December 28th, commemorating the massacre of the young children of Bethlehem ordered by King Herod in an attempt to eliminate the Messiah. The song is supposed to be rooted in one of the Coventry Corpus Christi plays which was the “Pageant of the Shearmen and Tailors,” (one of a cycle of medieval mystery plays where local people performed theatrical productions based on Bible stories). Basically, this song is a lament, women singing a last lullaby for their murdered children.  It is lovely, sorrowful, and haunting.  Another interpretation has it as Mary’s lament for the future fate of her newborn Son.  It seems a strange song for a festive time, but brings home part of the deeper meaning of the holiday for me.

The origins of the Coventry Carol as we know it are not clear.  The play was performed in the 15th century for Queen Margaret of England in 1456 and for Henry VII in 1492.  It may go back as far as 1392.  The lyrics known today are attributed to Robert Croo 1534 (based on early 19th century copies of a manuscript that was destroyed in 1875), and the music to an unknown composer in 1591.  There are conflicting references for this song, but it is known to have been performed and popular in the 16th century in some form, and are still popular today. 



The Coventry Carol

Lullay, thou little tiny Child,
By-bye lully, lullay.
Lullay, thou little tiny Child,
By-bye lully, lullay.

O sisters too, how may we do
For to preserve this day,
This poor Youngling for whom we sing
By-bye lully, lullay.

Herod the King, in his raging,
Charged he hath this day;
His men of might, in his own sight,
All children young, to slay.

Then woe is me, poor Child, for Thee,
And ever mourn and say;
For Thy parting nor say nor sing,
By-bye lully, lullay.



Print this item

  Fauci Admits Mandates Are "Just A Mechanism" To Get More People Vaccinated
Posted by: Stone - 12-28-2021, 09:55 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular] - No Replies

Fauci Admits Mandates Are "Just A Mechanism" To Get More People Vaccinated

[Image: IMG_8624-1.jpg?itok=Afrmn20D]

ZH | DEC 28, 2021
Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,

In an appearance Sunday Anthony Fauci admitted that vaccine mandates are merely a “mechanism” to coerce more Americans to take shots.

Appearing on ABC Sunday, Fauci noted “A vaccine requirement for a person getting on the plane is just another level of getting people to have a mechanism that would spur them to get vaccinated.”

The comments came as part of a discussion on applying vaccine mandates to air travel.

Far from following any ‘science’, Fauci admitted that “anything that could get people more vaccinated would be welcome.”

Watch:


In a follow up appearance Monday on CNN, Fauci admitted that vaccine mandates to fly is likely not going to happen, (because there is no science to it).

“Everything that comes up as a possibility we put it on the table and we consider it,” Fauci declared, adding “That does not mean that it is likely to happen. Right now I don’t think people should expect that we are going to have a requirement in domestic flights for people to be vaccinated.”

“It’s on the table, and we consider it, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. I doubt if we are going to see something like that in the reasonably foreseeable future” Fauci added.

Watch:


Meanwhile, not content with cancelling Christmas… again, in another CNN interview, Fauci told Americans not to go to or host any new years parties where the vaccination status of any attendees is unknown.

“When you’re talking about a New Year’s Eve party with 30, 40, 50 people celebrating…stay away from that this year. There will be other years to do that, but not this year,” Fauci said.

Print this item

  COVID Antiviral Pills Cause Life-Threatening Reactions With Many Common Meds
Posted by: Stone - 12-28-2021, 08:37 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular] - No Replies

COVID Antiviral Pills Cause Life-Threatening Reactions With Many Common Meds


ZH |  DEC 28, 2021


Last week, the FDA authorized two much-hyped antiviral treatments for COVID (just in time for Christmas): Merck's Molnupiravir and Pfizer's Paxlovid.

Almost immediately after the first data were released, critics were questioning the drugs' safety profile. But now that the first courses of these "miracle" drugs are finding their way into patients' bloodstreams, the mainstream media apparently now feels it's safe to share some of these criticisms with the public.

To wit, NBC News reports that these medications will require "careful monitoring" by prescribing doctors. This could create problems and make doctors more reluctant to prescribe the meds as the omicron-driven winter wave "pummels" America's supposedly creaking health-care system.

Quote:As the omicron surge pummels a pandemic-weary nation, the first antiviral pills for Covid-19 promise desperately needed protection for people at risk of severe disease. However, many people prescribed Pfizer’s or Merck’s new medications will require careful monitoring by doctors and pharmacists, and the antivirals may not be safe for everyone, experts caution.

As a reminder, the FDA only authorized Paxlovid - the Pfizer drug - to treat "mild to moderate" COVID in people as young as 12 who have underlying conditions that raise the risk of hospitalization and death.

Unfortunately, both Pfizer's and Merck's drugs come with some serious drawbacks, the biggest being that they can cause life-threatening reactions with widely used medications like statins - taken by people with high blood pressure - blood thinners, and even some antidepressants.

What's more, the FDA doesn't recommend Paxlovid for people who have severe liver and kidney disease.

The Merck drug hasn't even been approved because the experts are worried about potential side effects. Because of this, the FDA has restricted its use to adults, and only in scenarios in which other authorized treatments, including monoclonal antibodies produced by Regeneron and others, are inaccessible or are not "clinically appropriate."

Here's a more detailed explanation of how the Pfizer drug works, and why it might be hazardous for some (courtesy of NBC News):

Quote:The Paxlovid cocktail consists of two tablets of the antiviral nirmatrelvir and one tablet of ritonavir, a drug that has long been used as what is known as a boosting agent in HIV regimens. Ritonavir suppresses a key liver enzyme called CYP3A, which metabolizes many medications, including nirmatrelvir. In the case of Paxlovid treatment, ritonavir slows the body’s breakdown of the active antiviral and helps it remain at a therapeutic level for longer.

The boosting effect was likely to have been crucial in driving Paxlovid’s high effectiveness in clinical trials.

When Paxlovid is paired with other medications that are also metabolized by the CYP3A enzyme, the chief worry is that the ritonavir component may boost the co-administered drugs to toxic levels.

One expert chimed in to warn that these interactions involving Paxlovid are "not trivial".

Quote:"Some of these potential interactions are not trivial, and some pairings have to be avoided altogether," said Peter Anderson, a professor of pharmaceutical sciences at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus. "Some are probably easily managed. But some we’re going to have to be very careful about."

Supplies of Paxlovid and Molnupiravir are scarce - for now, at least. But the production line is roaring and the two competitors say they hope to produce millions of courses of each medication during the coming year.

We have a question: if a patient dies from an interaction involving a COVID antiviral and their blood pressure medication, would that still be counted as a COVID death?

Print this item

  CDC Makes Major Changes To Covid Isolation Recos, Treats Unboosted As Unvaxxed For Quarantines
Posted by: Stone - 12-28-2021, 08:18 AM - Forum: Pandemic 2020 [Secular] - Replies (1)

CDC Makes Major Changes To Covid Isolation Recos, Treats Unboosted As Unvaxxed For Quarantines


ZH |  DEC 27, 2021


And so, the "scientific" goal posts move again.

With even Biden this close to admitting defeat over covid, admitting today that "there is no Federal solution" before quietly getting out of Dodge, the CDC announced late on Monday that is slashing its previous self-isolation recommended period in half, and telling people who have Covid-19 to isolate themselves from others for 5 days if they aren’t experiencing symptoms, down from 10 days previously.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also said in a statement Monday that following the 5-day isolation period, people with Covid-19 should wear a mask for 5 days when they are around other people. The new guidance supplants previous recommendations that said people who have tested positive for the virus should isolate for 10 days.

While Omicron has been documented to be far more mild than prior versions of covid, cases are still expected to surge in the U.S. following the holidays, threatening confusion and chaos among who are infected or exposed to the virus. The shorter isolation and quarantine periods will allow people to return to work or school sooner than previously permitted.

The CDC said in its statement that the shift in guidance was motivated by scienceTM showing the majority of coronavirus transmission occurs early in the course of the illness, in the first day or two before the onset of symptoms and the two to three days that follow.

The CDC also updated its recommended quarantine period for people who have been exposed to Covid-19. For those who are unvaccinated or who are eligible for a booster shot but haven’t yet received one, the agency recommends a five-day quarantine, followed by strict use of a mask for five more days despite copious research demonstrating that masks have little impact on virus spread, and despite the fact that the cities with the most aggressive mask requirements have emerged as the biggest covid epicenters.


If a five-day quarantine isn’t feasible, an exposed person should wear a well-fitting mask, such as an N95, at all times when around others for 10 days after exposure, the CDC recommended.

Meanwhile, individuals who have received a booster shot don’t need to quarantine following an exposure, but should wear a mask for 10 days, the CDC said. If symptoms occur, individuals should quarantine until a negative test confirms that they don’t have Covid-19. Then again, if symptoms occur after taking a booster shot, perhaps it is time to realize that something is very wrong with the "expert" recommendations...

In other words, in a remarkable departure meant to stigmatize not just the unvaxxed but those without a booster shot, vaccinated but unboosted people are will now treated as "unvaccinated" when it comes to close contact quarantines. This, as a social worker noted on Twitter....

Quote:"would wreak havoc on school attendance for unboosted kids and teachers!  I can't emphasize enough how this would totally derail the school year. All unboosted teachers would miss 5 days of school EVERY TIME one of their students test positive. And 12-15 year olds who are >6mo out from their 2nd dose aren't even booster eligible!"

[Image: covid%20recos.jpg?itok=ae8E7Z3N]

According to Bloomberg, the new guidance "could entice more Americans to seek another dose of a vaccine", although with millions of "breakthrough" cases amid residual concerns about vaccine side-effects, it's unclear just how the billionaire's media empire came to this profound conclusion. Just under one-third of fully vaccinated people in the U.S. have received a booster, according to the CDC. We don't expect this number to rise substantially.

Print this item