Thursday, June 30, 2016

12 Steps to Surviving as a Catholic Family in a Heretical Wasteland by Bishop Schneider

·         Withdraw your children from school if they are encountering immoral danger in sex-ed.
·         Withdraw your family from a parish spreading error and attend a faithful parish, even if you have to travel far. 

As the battle for the very soul of the family and all its members intensifies around the world with the push for sexual anarchy veiled as “education,” the undermining of what is truly masculine and feminine in the name of “gender rights,” and the destruction of marriage masquerading as “equality,” a spiritual leader who has suffered under the terror of a communist regime has laid out a survival plan for Catholic parents who find themselves in a secular, relativistic, and hostile environment but who simply want to raise their children to become future citizens of heaven. 
Bishop Athanasius Schneider of Kazakhstan told LifeSiteNews in an exclusive interview earlier this month that Catholic parents must take seriously their “first duty” of raising their children in the faith if their children are to overcome the negative and even hostile influences that are pressing in from all sides and seeking to destroy. 
In a wide-ranging interview that covered his experience as a Catholic boy growing up under communism, his thoughts on what it means to be a Catholic family today, his thoughts on education, bad parishes and dioceses run by agenda-driven priests and bishops, as well as his views on how faithful laity should address concerns about Pope Francis, the bishop laid out twelve steps that he said Catholic parents must take to safeguard their families and their children. 
Bishop Schneider said that to survive in a heretical wasteland, Catholic parents must:
  1. See persecution as a grace from God for becoming purified and strengthened, not simply as something negative. 
  2. Become rooted yourself in the Catholic faith through study of the Catechism. ( 
  3. Protect your family’s integrity above all else.
  4. Catechize your children as your first duty.
  5. Pray with your children daily, such as litanies and the Rosary.
  6. Turn your home into a domestic church.
  7. In the absence of a priest and Sunday Mass, make a Spiritual Communion. (
  8. Withdraw your family from a parish spreading error and attend a faithful parish, even if you have to travel far. 
  9. Withdraw your children from school if they are encountering immoral danger in sex-ed.
  10. If you cannot withdraw your children, establish a coalition of parents to fight for that right.
  11. Fight for parental rights using available democratic tools.
  12. Be prepared for persecution in protecting your children (see first point).
The bishop said that being a Catholic “family” in the truest sense of the word is the key to survival. […]
Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s interview with LifeSiteNews

LifeSiteNews: Catholic families today are experiencing a type of persecution. How did your family deal with persecution while living under a communist regime?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: I would say that I had the privilege to live in a time of persecution of the faith and of the Church, because such persecution gives you a foundation for all your life. It is a grace. And therefore, in some way, I would not characterize the time of persecution always negatively. God uses these circumstances of persecution in several degrees for our [good], to purify our faith, to strengthen our faith. So, in this way, I would see the persecution [coming] from the modern society — as you [mentioned], against the family — also as a chance to be purified, to be strengthened. 
From my experience of the time of the persecution, the vital importance is the family, the integrity of the family, and that both parents are deeply rooted in the faith. This is then transmitted to the children. I would like to say that the children have to receive the faith with the milk of the mother. And then the first task of the parents is to transmit to the children the purity, the beauty, the integrity of the Catholic faith in a simple manner. 

First, I think that it is important that the mother or father themselves give the children in the family, in the house, the first catechism; not in the school or in the parish, but in the family. This does not exclude that there is still — in an additional way — the catechism in the parish, of course. But, first in the family. Secondly, that parents have to pray in their family with their children, daily. This was my experience. We prayed daily together. In the morning, and in the evening, but not so much, but at least we prayed together.

LifeSiteNews: How old were you when this happened?                  
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: I was about 12. It is very fresh in my memory. For example, when on Sundays, when there were no priests — we had sometimes some years when there were no priests because the priests were in the prisons — they came to us very secretly. I remember these secret visits of the priests. It was such a feast. But we had to be very quiet because it was all controlled by secret services. Therefore our parents said to us, ‘Be quiet, don't laugh, don't cry, don't shout.’ 
It was a very reverent situation when the priest came. First he made confession available to the people, all [of them], even sometimes all [throughout] the night. And then there was the Holy Mass so reverently [said]. It was really unforgettable. I remember these moments. 
We lived in a society where atheism, under the Communist regime, was spread in the public life, in the schools. But thanks to [the fact] that we were rooted in the family, in prayer and in the Faith, this did not infect us. We even had a lesson in the school, for example, with the title, ‘Scientific atheism.’ Our parents, as we were children, said it to us, ‘You hear these words in one ear and it should go out the other ear. Don't be attentive to this.’ And so, we obeyed our parents. Sometimes we had to be prudent not to make a provocation, to be prudent. 
I think this is today the main task for families: To establish a culture of domestic churches. 
The other aspect that my parents taught us children [is that outside the home, people] would know that we are Christians. [My parents would say,] ‘They know. And therefore, you have to behave yourself better than those who are unbelievers.’ Today we have to educate our children and the young people with this aspect.
LifeSiteNews: How did your family deal with not being able to attend Sunday mass?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: On Sundays, we gathered in the room, we knelt down — parents and we four children — and we prayed simple prayers such as the Rosary, litanies, and we made Spiritual Communion. And I am sure Our Lord visited our souls with the graces of Holy Communion.
LifeSiteNews: You mentioned the role of parents in educating their children. This is an important issue for parents in the West due to the onslaught of sex education in schools which is imposed upon children, whether parents like it or not. How should parents respond?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: Of course, [education] is the first duty of parents. When their children are taught in the school in an immoral way, they have to withdraw the children. This is their obligation. You cannot expose your children to an immoral danger. It is impossible. Catholic parents, in defending their children from this immorality, have to be even ready to suffer, yes, to suffer consequences. 
LifeSiteNews: What should parents do in countries where it is illegal for them to withdraw their children from school?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: This is a very delicate issue, but in this case the Catholic parents have to form a kind of league, an association — nationwide — [so that they can] be strong. [They must] have lawyers and defend themselves with the means of a democracy. I think it’s important to establish a coalition of parents in this specific aspect of sexual education to [secure] the right to withdraw their children.
LifeSiteNews: What should Catholic parents do when they encounter a priest in a parish, or even a bishop, with an agenda to advance teaching contrary to the faith?
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: The parents have to know very well their Catholic faith. They have to study very well the catechism, because the catechism is unchangeable – that is, the truths [found within the catechism]. [They have to] study the catechism of their parents and grandparents, which is very simple and clear. This is the voice of Christ and of the Church of all times. [They must do this] to be rooted very firmly in the Catholic faith. Then, when pastors or members of the hierarchy contradict the teaching of Christ, the teaching of the perpetual Magisterium of the Church, of the Catechism, you have to withdraw your children from these churches, and not to go to them, even if you have to travel 100 km [to a faithful church]. 
When we lived in the Soviet Union — thanks be to God in another place, in Estonia — there we had a Catholic Church and a priest 100 km [away]. And our parents said, ‘Oh, we are so lucky. It is so close to us. In 100 km, a church! We lived in [our town] many years without a priest and without mass. Now we have [to go only] 100 km. What a happiness.’
I think that in the Western world, in the United States, you will find a Church maybe closer than 100 km where there may be a good priest. So, avoid these churches [where error is preached]. [Such places] are destroying the faith of the people. These churches are destroying. We have to avoid them. [Such people] are traitors of the faith, even when they have the title of priest or bishop. 
LifeSiteNews: Should faithful Catholics, who love the pope and do not wish to harm the papacy, express themselves regarding concerns over statements made by Pope Francis that do not seem to line up with Catholic teaching. Or, would it be better for them to remain silent? 
Bishop Athanasius Schneider: In the Church, we are not living in a dictatorship. In a dictatorship, we do not have the courage to contradict the dictator. But when, in the Church, we arrive at a situation where faithful priests and bishops are fearful to say anything, like in a dictatorship, this is not Church. This is not the Church of dialogue, of collegiality, of family. No. In a family, there has to be the possibility of exchange your [views]. 
And sometimes, good parents even allow their children, when they are growing, express themselves. Why not? A good father will accept when his elder son says, ‘Father, this is not so correct.’ Sometimes it happens. 
And so, the Holy Father is our father. And when he says to these groups, ‘You must not speak all the time about these [things]’ you can say with all reverence, ‘Holy Father, this is an unjust accusation to us. We are unjustly accused. It is not the case that we speak every time, and all the time, about this. We don't speak on this all the time. We speak on the Gospel, we speak about family life, we speak about prayer. So, your judgment, it is unjust to us. Your accusation is unjust. And permit us, in some way, to defend ourselves, and hear our voice.’
SOURCE: Life Site News

Tuesday, June 28, 2016

The Hope of the Future: Uncontaminated Children

Let us preserve our children from all the corruption in the world. Let us fight against it in all its forms: gender “education” in schools, pornography on the Internet and movies, television, bad companies, occasions of sin, etc. Let us sow in them Christian principles, and endeavor to turn them into firm convictions so that they, in turn, pass them down to future generations. But remember that education without setting a good example becomes fruitless.

Children with strong convictions and love of God are the future. They are the ones who will restore everything in Christ. Whether we live to see it or not, God will triumph. Worse and more difficult times will come, but with God we are on the side that will conquer. Our Lady promised it: “In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph.”

Form your children so they become part of the army of conquerors!

Friday, June 24, 2016

Manly Chastity

It is extremely rare to find a woman who despises a man who wants to protect the innocence of a relationship. To prove the latter, I made the following question to one thousand girls: “If you were going too far with a boy and he gave you a kiss on your forehead and told you: ‘I think we should take it easy. I respect you too much to continue doing these things with you, and I want to fall in love with you for the right reasons’, would you find it attractive or not?

Almost one hundred percent of the girls – 995 – answered that they would find the boy even more attractive. One of the girls said: “that would mean he is thinking about the two of us and not just about himself.”

For both genders.
I made one last question to these same girls: “Some guys believe that being a virgin is embarrassing. How would you feel if a guy kept his virginity for you, who, in the future, will become his wife?” Once again, the answers overwhelmingly demonstrated the attractiveness of purity. Here are some of the answers provided:

- “He would be the kind of guy I would have to win before all the other billions of girls did it.”
- “Stop worrying about what people say. It means so much if you wait!”
- “That is passionate!”
- “It is ok to be a virgin. Actually most of the girls prefer it that way.”
- “It is very difficult for a guy to keep his virginity, and I love guys like that, who are not influenced by what other people think.”
- “He would be more manly than most of the other guys.”
- “They should not be embarrassed. I am not.”
- “His wife will be very lucky.”
- “Thank God for guys like them.”
- “There are many girls, like myself, who think it is silly when a guy is afraid of being a virgin. He should be proud of it!”
- “I would feel like a princess because that is the way I want to feel on my wedding night.”
- “I would love him even more!”
- “That is the most beautiful gift a man can give to his wife. It is the essence of being a man summed up in one single decision. He has promised her his whole being, including his body.”
- “Impressive! I would not feel I am with all his previous girlfriends.”
- “He will be able to respect you more if he respects himself.”

(J. Evert – Pure Manhood)

Monday, June 13, 2016

Prayer reminder for the thirteenth day of each month

We remind you that today, as every 13th day of each month, we will join together in prayer for five minutes, for the intentions that are explained in the following link:

Friday, June 10, 2016

Children Have Rights! They Are Not a Right, As It Is Claimed by Those Who Support the Laws That Promote Homosexuality

What part Do They Not Understand?


The legalization of the erroneously called homosexual “marriage” also involves the right to adopt by homosexual couples, as if it was a “right” for them*, as well as the teaching of the so called “gender ideology” in schools since the first grades, where from the earliest age children are being taught that men are not born men and women are not born women, but that everyone is entitled to freely choose their gender. And anyone who dares to question this absurd, unnatural and unscientific thesis will be ridiculed and labeled as “homophobic”, “intolerant” and “discriminator”, and must have their ideology modified, even against the will and criteria of their parents. Therefore, we should be aware that these laws affect the whole of the society and not just a small sector. Finally, the goal is to seek a new social pattern to promote homosexual practices and make a direct attack to the natural institution of the family, as it has always existed, since the origin of society, with the aims of perverting it.

Down below you will find the discourse given by a young man who was adopted as a child in which he explains the absurd claim of considering a “right” the fact that homosexuals are able to adopt.


On January 13, 2013, Benoit Talleu, a 17 year old young man, was the speaker at the March for the Family organized by La Manif Pour Tous in Paris, France. He spoke on behalf of the Association for Adopted Children.

Here it is his discourse:
"Hello to all. My name is Benoît Talleu, I am 17 years old. I am from Vietnam but they adopted me as a baby.

My parents adopted seven children, and I am the oldest. I am in this fight against gay adoption, along with associations for adopted children, because I have seen how this discussion has unfolded. People talk about this as if the primary concern were not US -- the adopted children, ourselves.

If you ask what adoptees want, they will give you only one answer: one mother, one father!. The words "mommy and daddy" are the first words that an adoptee learns. Adoptions allow an orphan who has no parents to place a face on these words.

The orphan -- He dreams of his future parents. He imagines them. The desire comes from the depths of his being, this desire for a mother and a father. And it is the orphan that must be heeded first. We must state this with full clarity: An orphan NEEDS a father and a mother.

The difference here is between "needing" and "wanting." The orphan needs a mom and a dad. The couple "wants" a child. Between "needing" and "wanting," I leave it to you to choose.

Is adoption a way of offering a baby to parents who don't have any?

Adopting is not only for people who are sterile. It is not a NECESSITY that a couple be sterile to adopt. Adoption is not a remedy to make sterile people feel better. We are not a remedy. We are not medications! We are not here to make you feel better because of the natural agony you feel over having no child! We are not a prize for you, we are not a right for you! You engage in violence to speak of us as if you have a right, being us!

Our biological mothers had the courage to entrust us with an orphanage. That doesn't mean that we are objects. She may have been in a hopeless situation, perhaps there was no father around. She couldn't make it, but that is not an insult to us.

To give gay couples the "right" to us is a betrayal. It betrays our biological mother's trust and courage! The orphan needs a mother and father. That is not to denounce gay rights to adopt. It is merely to state a creed: All born of a man and a woman. All adopted by a man and a woman!

We hear people say, "living with a gay couple is better than staying in an orphanage." Hear what I say about such an assertion: That statement reeks of dishonesty. There are tens of thousands of hetero couples waiting to adopt us!

Others say: "a gay couple is better than nothing." That is shocking! That is homophobic! The best thing for a child is to have a mom and dad. I will not cease to repeat it.

To say that an orphan, because it is in an orphanage, does not deserve to have any mother, or does not deserve to have any father, is cruel! It is unjust! It is a denial of equality!

Insemination and surrogacy have been struck as provisions from the law for gay marriage and adoption. And I ask you -- what is bad for a child who comes from insemination and surrogacy, can be good for an adopted child? Yes, gay couples may be in love, I do not doubt that. But the needs of the baby in that orphanage will not change!

We hear, "Oh things have evolved. So many countries are okay with gay marriage." But I tell you -- we are a great nation. We are a great democracy. This bill for gay marriage is pure selfishness. The law must protect the weak, and not pander to the wishes of the strongest. Mothers and fathers exist for the children, not the other way around.

France is the nation where the rights of man were born. So we are also the nation for the rights of the child! We are not the nation where children are a right, we are a nation where children have rights!

Mr. President, I tell you now, that we are the ones who matter in all this -- by this I mean all orphans, all orphanages, all adopted children.

Thank you for mobilizing!

For us!

For our fathers and mothers!

For the family!”

*NOTE: Adoption is not a right, not even for heterosexuals, since there are marriages that do not qualify to become parents of an adopted child. As for homosexuals, they unreasonably claim to have a “right” to something that nature did not give to them, and use as an example the case of sterile parents. This is an exception to the rule, and if heterosexual couples cannot father children is always due to some particular impediment that, many times, can be fixed, without going against nature. Then, this comparison lacks of support and is absurd, because a homosexual is incapacitated to beget, - always and in every case – by nature. But today they pretend to violate even nature, seeking to impose the unique thought, and anyone who thinks differently will be charged with the worst crime they have invented: “homophoby”, an epithet they use on whoever disagrees with them in that homosexuality is a great “virtue”, even if the other party respects homosexuals, not because of their practices but because they are persons, too, who should be loved, as the commandments ordain us to do. Homosexuals and pro-homosexuals use all kinds of adjectives, such as “intolerant”, “discriminator”, and of course “homophobic”, on everyone who does not support their lifestyle and opposes to the spread and promotion of this practice, which is the ultimate target of all these “laws” that are intended to be imposed at all costs, that is why, once they are passed, as we have seen in other countries, they direct their look towards education, starting in preschool, where the tender minds of the children absorb everything without questioning it. Are we going to allow this for our children?

Thursday, June 9, 2016

The Remedy… Do Not Delay It. Later May Be Too Late

Just as water is necessary to wash the stains away, Confession is necessary to wash away and remove sins. God Himself established it, and since He deemed it convenient, we must obey Him. Moreover, is there any other remedy that is easier than the one God gave us? Let’s say, for example, that for every sin God had ordered us to give alms, how many people would find that oppressive or even impossible to comply with? Or, what if God had ordered us to fast instead of going to Confession? How many would not be able to or would not want to do it? What would happen if He had ordered us to make a long pilgrimage? How many, even with the best will, would be unable to make it? But that is not the case. For a sin to be forgiven, it is enough to make a Confession with one of His ministers (that the sinner can choose freely and secretly) with true repentance and purpose of amendment, regardless of the kind of sin or the number of times it was committed. If civil and human laws did the same, and in order to obtain forgiveness a person needed only to go to the judge and confess his crime, would there be prisons?

Confess well and frequently, every time you have the need to. Regular Confession is the way to salvation.

Tuesday, June 7, 2016

An Invaluable Inheritance


If you want to achieve a high level of holiness, have a great devotion to the most sweet Virgin Mary, because she is the safest, shortest and perfect path to get to Jesus.

Saturday, June 4, 2016


Euthanasia is a grave violation of the law of God, since it is the deliberate and morally unacceptable killing of a human person. This doctrine is based on the natural law and the written Word of God; it is transmitted by the Tradition of the Church and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. Euthanasia involves, according to circumstances, the malice inherent to suicide or homicide.

That said, both suicide and homicide are always morally unacceptable. The tradition of the Church has always rejected them and deemed them as seriously grave decisions. From an objective point of view, suicide is a severely immoral act, because it implies rejection towards self-love. It also rejects all the duties of justice and charity we have towards others, as well as the different congregations one belongs to and society in general. Euthanasia, at its deeper level, constitutes a rejection of God’s absolute sovereignty over life and death, proclaimed in the prayer of the ancient sage of Israel: “For you have dominion over life and death; you lead down to the gates of Hades and lead back.” (Wis. 13, 16).

Sharing the suicidal intentions of others and partaking in carrying them out by so-called “assisted suicide” means becoming a collaborator and sometimes even perpetrator of an injustice that is never justified, not even when it has been requested. Saint Augustine writes about it in a way that is surprisingly relevant today: "it is never licit to kill another: even if he should wish it, indeed if he request it because, hanging between life and death, he begs for help in freeing the soul struggling against the bonds of the body and longing to be released; nor is it licit even when a sick person is no longer able to live". Euthanasia, even if it is not motivated by the selfish desire of taking care of the existence of the sufferer, must always be regarded as false piety, indeed, as a perversion of piety. True compassion renders us supportive towards others’ pain, and it does not eliminate the person whose suffering is impossible to withstand. The practice of euthanasia becomes even more wicked when it is carried out by those (such as relatives) responsible for assisting the sufferer patiently and lovingly, or by those who due to their particular occupation should take care of the sick person, even during the most painful and difficult terminal situations.

Certainly, there is a moral obligation to healing ourselves and/or seeking treatment to achieve healing, but this obligation must be assessed according to the specific scenario, that is to say, analyzing if the treatments available are objectively proportioned with prospects of improvement. Renouncing to extraordinary or disproportionate means is not the same as euthanasia or suicide; rather it expresses total acceptance of the human condition before death.

Text of the encyclical Evangelium Vita

IMPORTANT REMARKS OF CATHOLICITY: At the moment the term “passive euthanasia” has gained popularity to indicate the philosophy of palliative medicine, which implies the non-use of intensive therapeutic treatments. We believe that it is not advisable to use this term as it might be thought that “passive” is similar to “active” (which is the suicide of the terminally ill patients or the homicidal decision of their relatives to kill them), and this could lead from the acceptance of the first to the subsequent approval of the second.

Another aspect that is under-analyzed is that, if euthanasia were to be approved, the life of the sufferers may be left in the hands of selfish relatives who could deem more convenient to eliminate the ill by “legally” killing them, so to avoid having to take care of the patient or to prevent expenses, or maybe even to receive an inheritance sooner. Thus, a patient kept incommunicado would be subject to other people’s decisions (relatives, doctors or public hospitals and clinics that wish to avoid expenses). If euthanasia is adopted it will not have clear limits, rather, sooner or later, it will be used against the will of the sufferer to be able to kill him, taking care of the legal formalities of the case. How many crimes will be perpetrated, even of non-terminal patients, under the “merciful” cover-up of euthanasia as an alibi and a justification?

That is why Dr. Beatriz A. Lima makes the following statement: “After so many efforts made for developing and defending a legal system that protects all the rights of the person, after so many fights in favor of man and his liberty, losing the battle would be unforgivable, because in addition to impairing human dignity, euthanasia creates a terribly frightful distrust. It destroys social solidarity, trust between doctor and patient and solidarity among the family. It destroys everything that should be an environment of humanization. It is clear that no one can favor suffering, pain or extending the agony with the so-called dysthanasia, but choosing death for oneself or others, without taking into consideration all the treatments, medicines and spiritual assistance available, implies an easy, fast and rushed exit. It means giving up, it is a form of intolerance against the feeble, regardless of how noble and altruistic reasons we may be given. It is similar to the siren call.”

To sum up: We are only the depositories of our lives, NOT owners. Life is the most precious gift of God. Only He can decide when it is our time to enter in eternal life. We must render account to God of this invaluable gift He has given to us. The human being must not misuse or abuse it, nor end it in the time and manner he chooses to do it.

Thursday, June 2, 2016

The Parable of The Wedding Feast

Necessity of the Wedding Garment (on the Eucharist)

Disciple – Father, could you please explain to me the Parable of the Marriage Feast, and what happened to the man who was not wearing the wedding garment?

Master – Gladly. Listen, carefully.

The Gospel tells us that a king made a marriage for his son and wanted to celebrate it with a solemn ceremony, and prepared a great dinner for the occasion, inviting his relatives and friends.

Many neglected and went their ways. In view of this, the king said to his servants to go into the highways and call to the marriage as many as they found.

The marriage was filled with guests and the king went in to see the guests, and he saw there a man who had not on a wedding garment. And he said to him: “Friend, how camest thou in hither not having on a wedding garment?Then the king said to the waiters: “Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the exterior darkness.

D. – Father, what is the meaning of the wedding garment that the poor wretched was not wearing, and why did they cast him to the darkness, if he was poor?

M. – This feast represents the Eucharist, that is, Holy Communion. The king that makes the feast to celebrate the wedding of his son, is the Eternal Father, the sun is Jesus Christ, who married our human nature. The guests are all men on earth.

This means that God has created us for Heaven, and that is why He invites everyone to go through the path of faith, charity, penance and Sacraments, but there are many who refuse to believe: they are the faithless; others offer excuses or pretexts; these are the sinners who put off their conversion; finally, others attend the feast, but without wearing a wedding garment; they are the sacrilegious (Editor’s note: for example, those who live as public sinners without converting, those who live together without being married, etc., who being in mortal sin receive Communion), represented in that wretched who has removed from the feast, bound and cast in the darkness.

D. – But, why did they force him to go to the feast?

M. – When he saw he was not worthy, he should have rejected the invitation and offer an excuse, or ask for forgiveness before entering.

It is very clear; if someone receives Communion in a state of mortal sin is in the same conditions of that poor wretched, and therefore in danger of being judged and condemned.

Besides, God Himself said it, through the Apostle Saint Paul: “He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himself.”…

Woe unto the soul in mortal sin that receives Holy Communion from the hands of the priest!... It will be a deadly poison to her.

On the contrary, blessed he who feeds on this Bread of Life, with a clean heart through an honest contrition and a good Confession; he shall receive blessings and graces, and Holy communion will be the pledge of the future glory.

D. –Are there many who receive Communion without wearing a wedding garment, that is, in mortal sin?

M. – Who can know the number? The truth is that, unfortunately, they abound, and in all social classes.

Fr. José Luis Chiavarino