Catholic Standard Articles Reveal True Thrust Of The Current Pope.

Today I picked up the July 17th issue of the Catholic Standard (the official mouthpiece for the Archdiocese of Washington).  While disappointed at the amount of bilge that was contained therein, I was not surprised.

Let's go in order as the stuff appeared in the print edition.  On page 3 was the account of Cardinal McElroy receiving a pallium from Pope Leo XIV.  The online article is here.  Most of the article was a rehash of a homily that Leo gave on the occasion.  Some bloopers popped up.  He spoke of moving "beyond a tired and stagnant faith".  If he truly is serious about such movement, one key thing he could do is stop the insidious attempts to quash the Traditional Latin Mass.  I attend these regularly on Sundays.  The faith there can in no way be called "tired and stagnant".  Then towards the end, he spoke of the beatitudes as being equivalent to the goals of today's "social justice warriors".  No where did he mention that the beatitudes spoke of the repentance from sin and pursuit of personal holiness.

We then turn a few pages and see two articles that are basically screeds that shill for those border-crashers euphemistically called "undocumented immigrants".  They are found here and here.  The first is an interview with Cardinal McElroy while the second is penned by Auxiliary Bishop Menjivar.  Both articles share the same flaw, and I think this flaw has been repeated so often that, owing to its repetition, is actually a blatant sin against honesty.  I am talking, of course of the disingenuous refusal to differentiate immigrants who come here in accordance with our immigration laws versus those who deliberately violate our laws by sneaking across the border, coming under false pretenses, overstaying visas, etc.  All of us welcome those who arrive in accordance with our laws.  Decent people object to those who flout our laws, and lately, with the complicity of progressives, including those in the US Catholic hierarchy, are coming in by the thousands.  Hitherto, Catholic Charities have received millions in federal grants to "process" thousands of these people, many of whom are being sex-trafficked across the border.

I noticed towards the end of the interview article, McElroy couldn't help but put in a plug for one of his pet divergences from Sacred Tradition.  He of course shilled for "women deacons".  Bishop Menjivar, on the other hand, actually stated our case for us, albeit unwittingly.  The whole article is lacking in wit, but I digress.  Here is what he said, and you can read it for yourselves in the link provided.

"That’s right. From the very beginning of the United States, this country was pro-immigration; and one of the main complaints of the Founders was the English government forbidding the colonies from passing laws promoting migration and naturalization of people from countries other than England."

England disregarded our right to pass laws regarding immigration, rendering existing ones moot in practice.  Those crashing our borders are doing the exact same thing in disregarding our laws and our right to regulate immigration.  I might add that the moral guilt lies not only with the border-crashers,  but with people such as McElroy and Menjivar who hold our laws, and our law-keepers, in contempt.

But enough with immigration, for social justice has many facets.  In this same issue, we read that Pope Leo is praying for the "conversion" of certain people.  Who might be these people?  Are they those who embrace homosexuality and other perversions?  Are they those who facilitate the baby-slaughter known as abortion?  Nope!  Well then, just who are these depraved degenerates who stand in need of all this "conversion"?  Why, these are dastardly fiends who (I can scarcely bring myself to mention these horrid, scandalous words!) resist climate action!  Read it here!  

On Monday July 9, Leo celebrated a Mass "for the care of creation".  Yes, it is a new Mass that has been added to the Roman Missal.  Of course natural disasters are lamented for they supposedly "are in part created by the excesses of human beings with their lifestyle".  In other words, people are the big meanies who need to undergo the requisite guilt trips.  Most troubling, though, is this echo from Laudato Si: "we listen to the cry of the earth, we listen to the cry of the poor".  In other words, the planet is being made equal to human beings.  That is heresy.  We cannot assent to that under any circumstance.  We cannot say "amen" to any prayer containing that error, even if a pope were to put forth that prayer.  I did several posts in the past regarding the problem in which this pope seeks to embroil us.  Please read.   When Francis died and Leo was elected, I had hopes that there would be fidelity to Tradition again.  Those hopes are growing dim and once again, we must resist papal errors.

Drat! There Goes That Excuse!

How many times over these past few decades have we sought the Church's assistance in speaking out against Catholic-in-name-only politicians who use their powerful positions to promote evils such as abortion, homosexual perversions and other moral evils?  We have seen, time after time, the hierarchy stonewalling our attempts to hold petition drives in Churches to combat gay marriage and other degradations of public morality.  Invariably they always held as an excuse the canard that the Johnson Amendment prohibited political activity on the part of 501(c)3 charities.  In reality, it only prohibited engagement in partisan politics, not ballot initiatives.

It was announced this week that this gag order has been lifted, and churches are now free to endorse political candidates.  The naive individual might think that Catholic clergy would now jump at the chance of endorsing pro-life candidates and those in favor of curtailing the gay agenda.  Alas, I have long been disavowed of such illusions, as I have come to understand that many clergy, including some in the highest echelons of power and influence, are actually just as much pro-abortion and pro-gay as are Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi.  Although a few still insist on hiding behind the "social justice" facade, a good number of them no longer make a secret of their heresies.  Hitherto they could hide behind the Johnson Amendment so as not to have to take pro-life positions to save face.  Now, however, the thought encapsulated in this post's title is the thought in many of their minds.

However, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops has risen to the occasion. They have said that the Church will remain mum on all political races.  So if pro-life candidate is running against pro-abort, they will simply zip their lips.  Of course, in that article, they give "reasons" that sound so..so..pastoral!  In other words, it's a lot of sanctimonious mumbo-jumbo.

So now we watch and see how consistent they are with their "mum's the word" script.  My guess is that they won't be, and we know how the Cupich-McElroy-Tobin et al crowd will try to run with it.  Pro-life candidates will continue to be treated as personae non grata at Catholic churches and there will be no campaigning for them on church property.  It's worth noting that one of the two times that I was threatened with arrest happened on a church parking lot for leafletting cars during an election cycle.  That will still happen, I surmise.

The good news is that other types of pro-life "C3s" now have the gags removed from their mouths.  Let's run with that.

On This Independence Day

Let us consider the condition of the United States of America through the eyes of God.  Once a God-fearing nation, at least on the lips if not hearts of most people, the US has largely degraded into a hedonistic cabal of intellectually and spiritually stunted people.  Yet a few embers of decency remain, as evidenced by the last presidential election.

Our Lord's promise, as stated in 2 Chronicles 7:14, state And my people, upon whom my name is called, being converted, shall make supplication to me, and seek out my face, and do penance for their most wicked ways: then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sins and will heal their land.  

That promise is clear and unambiguous.  So what do we do?  Firstly, go to Mass today, even if that means skipping the fireworks.  What better place to pray for our beleaguered nation?  Besides, today is First Friday.  Honor our Lord and His Sacred Heart, wounded for us, as individuals and nations.

FACE Going Down

Today the US House Judiciary Committee advanced a bill authored by Chip Roy (R-TX) to repeal the FACE Act.  It is simply called the FACE Act Repeal Act.  The vote was largely along party lines.  I believe it will now advance to the House floor.  In the Senate chamber, Mike Lee, (R-UT) has introduced the Senate companion bill.  We will need to keep an eye on this and be prepared to lobby for this, as the pro-abortion crowd are already throwing snits.

Recall last year that the activists known as the Garland Nine were imprisoned on account of "violation" of this insidious attack on pro-lifers and the babies.  They would still be languishing in prison today, had not Donald Trump retaken the White House.  Shortly after he was inaugurated, January 23 to be precise, he signed pardons for them and several other pro-life activists and set them free.  Several of them attended the March for Life a few days later.

Now the first real steps have been taken to overturn FACE.  Planned Parenthood, while not completely defunded yet, has had its governmental spigot crimped.  Other positive developments are here.  Two takeaways:

1. Keep praying, particularly the Rosary.  Then keep active and watchful.  Trump's election affords us a window of opportunity that we dare not blow.  
2. Elections have consequences.  While many have finally awakened from the "never-Trump" stupor, some still arrogantly persist in it.  We must work with what we have.  Had enough of us stayed home on election day because we had no canonized saint running for office, the Garland Nine and others would still be in jail and Planned Parenthood would still be siphoning our tax dollars to slaughter babies.  Let's not blow the opportunity that God, in His mercy, has given us.

Update On The Charlotte Situation

Today I saw this announcement on Facebook

In a word, cockroaches hate the light.  Anyone who tells you to be quiet about these matters and "just pray" is most likely being a mouthpiece of the devil, even if unwittingly.

We will keep on shining the light on them and exposing them.  Of course we must always be praying for our Church, particularly by being faithful to the Sacraments and the daily Rosary.

Resume

Bishop Martin Launches Trial-Balloon Attack Against The Traditional Latin Mass

By now all have heard of the letter from the Bishop of Charlotte, Bishop Michael Martin, addressed to his priests that would effectively drive the Mass of the Ages from his diocese.  Rorate Caeli published the letter on their site; if you click on this link, the letter will open in another window on your computer.

I read the letter.  It is not only an act of disobedience to  Quo Primum, issued by Pope St Pius V, but also to the Vatican II document on the liturgy called Sacrosanctum Concilium, even though Martin pays it copious lip service throughout his screed.  He also claims adherence to the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, issued in 2002 by the International Committee on English in the Liturgy and distributed by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.  Such adherence is rather selective, shall we say.

In summary, Martin's letter is a combination of rank dissidence and a plain old temper tantrum.  Most of my blogging colleagues have observed that the provisions against the Tradtional Latin Mass are both petulant and draconian.  After reading it myself, I agree.  

However, I suspect that Martin et al intended us to perceive that.  I understand that Martin has backpeddled on that, claiming that it was merely a draft that "leaked".  I put the word "leaked" in quotes because I suspect we were supposed to think that the "leak" was not desired on their part when in reality it was.  I think this "leaked" letter was a trial balloon.  They wanted to see how we reacted to it. 

The recently-deceased Francis tried the trial-balloon strategy in the past with his unauthorized "declaration" that the death penalty is "inadmissible".  He attempted to insinuate the idea that Church teaching could be changed.  For those of a faith life compromised by liberalism, it worked.

The trial-balloon gambit has another goal.  Martin's letter detailed a scorched-earth stance towards the Latin Mass.  After the outcry that is still occurring, they very quickly withdrew the letter. That withdrawal was so quick, in my opinion, to warrant some suspicion.   The progressives might wait a while, but then try another tactic.  They will likely hope that we won't be nearly as alarmed as we are now about the letter, since the scope of this tactic won't seem to us to be as threatening as was the letter.  Then, again waiting a while, another ever-so-slight restriction will be placed on the TLM.  Now the question is, will we be alert to such subtleties? 

Even if Martin's letter is simply a ruse, I think it's helpful to see just how far it deviates from the Faith.  The fact that such pig-slop can ooze from a Catholic chancery is an abysmal disgrace.  I spent quite a few hours going over it and comparing it with the documents that I cited in the first paragraph.  So many errors, so little time!  I won't have the time to elaborate on each one but will highlight some key ones.  The reader of this post may wish to open the documents that I cited above, to have them handy in different windows as I refer to them.  I find it quite humorous to note Martin's request from his letter: "I ask all of us to reacquaint ourselves with Sacrosanctum Concilium, the “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy,” which is of utmost importance and from which so much of the Church’s liturgical life flows."  He should do the same.

Let's pay some attention to the section of his letter entitled "The Latin Language".  His very first sentence is "One of the desires expressed by the Second Vatican Council was to embrace the vernacular language in our liturgies as an intelligible vessel through which the faithful may better comprehend the mysteries of the faith."  Oh, really?  Let's go to paragraph 36 of Sacrosanctum Concilium: "Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites. These two statements seem rather contradictory, don't you think?  Even if you read the rest of the paragraph, you see that the vernacular is only permitted in certain parts, and that Latin is never eliminated.  

In the next paragraph of the letter we read: "I cannot comprehend why a vocal minority of the faithful who themselves admit to not understanding Latin would advocate a revival of the Latin language within our diocese, rendering the liturgy unintelligible for all but a few of our people. Moreover, as a diocese that is comprised of so many immigrants, we would be imposing on them an even greater burden. Not only are they trying to learn English and assimilate into our culture, but then they have another language imposed upon them that is foreign."  Then the next paragraph: "However, there are several places that are introducing Latin Mass responses, Latin Ordinary chants, Latin antiphons, and even the Memorial Acclamation and Our Father. Latin polyphony and motets are being sung at the Offertory and during the distribution of Holy Communion."

The first sentence in his quote is simply a petulant whining.  Simply because he "cannot comprehend" the desire to retain our Latin patrimony doesn't mean that the use of Latin in Mass is without merit.  By the way, read the entire section.  In the first paragraph he states the imporance of "sensitivity on the part of pastoral leaders."  How is he displaying that by dismissively calling attendees of the Traditional Latin Mass "a vocal minority"?

I'd also like to evaluate what he wrote in light of paragraph 41 from the GIRM: "All other things being equal, Gregorian chant holds pride of place because it is proper to the Roman Liturgy. Other types of sacred music, in particular polyphony, are in no way excluded, provided that they correspond to the spirit of the liturgical action and that they foster the participation of all the faithful.  Since faithful from different countries come together ever more frequently, it is fitting that they know how to sing together at least some parts of the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin, especially the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer, set to the simpler melodies."  So Martin should take note that the presence of Latin in the Mass may be beneficial to immigrants.  Many of those immigrants are Spanish speakers.  Spanish, as many know, is a language directly descended from Latin.

In the section called "Cross-Pollination of the Liturgical Rites" we read: "While every priest is required by Canon Law to make prayerful and suitable preparation and thanksgiving before and after Mass, the vesting prayers are no longer part of the Roman Missal."  So what?  The priest vests in the sacristy out of sight of the people, so why does Martin see a problem here?  Is he simply trying to downplay the need for piety on the part of the priest?

Further down, Martin balks at the recitation of the prayer to St. Michael: "After the dismissal, there are some churches that have reintroduced the communal recitation of the Prayer of St. Michael the Archangel. This prayer is no longer prescribed in the Novus Ordo Missae. While the intention to defeat the power of Satan and other evil spirits is commendable, its recitation at the end of Mass can lead to the unfortunate doubt that the Eucharistic liturgy is somehow insufficient to bring about the scattering of evil and motivation to do good."  The original introduction of the prayer to St. Michael (and other prayers) was done at the explicit order of Pope Leo XIII.  Would Martin dared to speak so derisively to him and dismissed Leo's care for souls?

I may well continue my expose of this letter and its all-too-many errors later.  This situation is still ongoing so further discussion will be relevant.  I invite my readers to do their own examinations and relay their own observations in the comment box.  I regret that you probably won't have to work too hard to find some.

By the way..  If you'd like to read an excellent book on the Mass, I'd suggest "The Catholic Mass: Steps to Restore the Centrality of God in the Liturgy" by Bishop Athanasius Schneider.  I got it from Sophia Press, but it might be available elsewhere, too.

Silence When Prelates Misbehave Is Its Own Sin

In 2021, Dr Peter Kwasniewski wrote a small but powerful and much-needed book called True Obedience In The Church.  It is published by Sophia Institute Press.  No doubt the egregious misdeeds of the late Francis was impetus for its writing, since many sincere but unaware Catholics were led to follow him in his heresies, thinking that they were obliged to obey the pope in every way.

In his book, Dr. Kwasniewski laid forth the proper theology behind the concept of obedience, making plain that we are required to obey our prelates only to the extent that they act in concert with the Teachings of the Church as they have always existed.  The pope is charged with preserving Church Tradition, and is no more permitted to tinker with it than are the laity.  Indeed, Kwasniewski says correctly that we are forbidden to follow our leaders into error.  For example, no prelate can order a priest in his diocese to "bless" two gays and their perverted relationship.  They are not to conduct idol worship, such as that occurred with the pachamama idolatry in the Vatican Gardens.  I need not go into more detail, or I would be typing all night.

In his book, he quoted St Thomas Aquinas who said, "unjust laws are acts of violence rather than laws...Wherefore they do not bind in conscience".  He then went on to say that Francis' attempts to stifle the Traditional Latin Mass fall under the category of "unjust laws" and need not, or I should say, may not be obeyed.  Traditiones Custodes is a direct violation of Quo Primum, a papal bull issued by Pope Saint Pius V in 1570 that established the Traditional Latin Mass as the true Mass, one that can never be abrogated.

Following the logic set forth by Aquinas, Kwasniewski also pointed out that those priests and bishops who were canceled on account of fidelity to Tradition are by no means bound to act as though their priestly ministries are stifled.  Because these priests acted in accord with Tradition, any punishment meted to them in retaliation is illicit and has no claim of obedience.  They are still priests in good standing with God and deserve out support.  They may not have use of churches in which to administer Sacraments, but can certainly do so away from diocesan property, say for example, in private homes.

At this time, we have a new pontiff - Leo XIV.  He's only been pope for a few weeks so we don't know what the future will hold.  We hope and pray that he reverses the damage wreaked by Francis.  If he does, though, we will still have many aberrant bishops with which to deal: McElroy, Cupich, Tobin, etc.  We will have to be vigilant and be ready to resist them when they misbehave.

Many of the young priests being freshly ordained today are more traditionally-minded than were the priests ordained just a generation ago.  I'd like to propose a model for them to examine.  He was a priest of the Old Testament, and an account of his priestly zeal is given in Numbers 25:6-13.  I will reproduce it from the Douay-Rheims version.

Douay-Rheims   DR + LV   Latin Vulgate   Summa   Catechism Douay-Rheims Bible < prev Book of Numbers next > < prev Chapter 25 next > 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 The people fall into fornication and idolatry; for which twenty-four thousand are slain. The zeal of Phinees.  1 And Israel at that time abode in Settim, and the people committed fornication with the daughters of Moab,  2 Who called them to their sacrifices. And they ate of them, and adored their gods.  3 And Israel was initiated to Beelphegor: upon which the Lord being angry,  4 Said to Moses: Take all the princes of the people, and hang them up on gibbets against the sun: that my fury may be turned away from Israel.  5 And Moses said to the judges of Israel: Let every man kill his neighbours, that have been initiated to Beelphegor. [3] "Initiated to Beelphegor": That is, they took to the worship of Beelphegor, an obscene idol of the Moabites, and were consecrated, as it were, to him.  6 And behold one of the children of Israel went in before his brethren to a harlot of Madian, in the sight of Moses, and of all the children of Israel, who were weeping before the door of the tabernacle.  7 And when Phinees the son of Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest saw it, he rose up from the midst; of the multitude, and taking a dagger,  8 Went in after the Israelite into the brothel house, and thrust both of them through together, to wit, the man and the woman in the genital parts. And the scourge ceased from the children of Israel:  9 And there were slain four and twenty thousand men.  10 And the Lord said to Moses:  11 Phinees the son of Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest, hath turned away my wrath from the children of Israel: because he was moved with my zeal against them, that I myself might not destroy the children of Israel in my zeal.  12 Therefore say to him: Behold I give him the peace of my covenant,  13 And the covenant of the priesthood for ever shall be both to him and his seed, because he hath been zealous for his God, and hath made atonement for the wickedness of the children of Israel.

Phineas was a young man at the time.  I cannot discern whether or not he was old enough to have exercised priestly functions.  At any rate, the Israelites were being punished for engaging in sexual relations with idolatrous people.  He saw a well-placed Israelite strut into a tent with a foreign woman.  In fact, the whole multitude saw it.  Notice that Moses and Eleazar saw it too, and apparently did nothing.  Phineas did.  He did not wait for Moses or Eleazar to instruct him; he just acted.  He did not fear reprisal, for he was acting on God's revealed will.

The Lord Himself told Moses that he was pleased with Phineas, and that the actions of the latter caused God to cease His punishment of the people.  Somehow I think that God was also chiding Moses for not acting himself against the wicked Israelite.

Our priests need to act as priests, knowing that aberrant bishops cannot legitimately order them not to be faithful to the Traditions of the Church.

Lay people, we are not off the hook.  If anything, we are more able to speak truth to power, as we are under no vows of obedience.  We must be ready to speak up and yes, to pay the price for so doing.  That means that friends will avoid and shun us.  It probably means we'll be expelled from parish committees, CCD and RCIA programs, etc.  We'll have to support priests under attack and perhaps allow our homes to be sites for Traditional Latin Masses.  As for the last part, it was widely done after the bishops quashed the Latin Mass in the 1970s.

Now a word to those lay people who are parents of priests and vowed religious.  Many of you have assumed silence for fear that your children will suffer reprisals.  That strategy is futile on your part.  Some of you have been politically active in the past and have also been pro life activists.  That means that your children already have targets on their backs.  Your silence and "staying under the radar" will avail them not one damned thing.  In fact, by remaining silent, you are providing an abysmal example of how not to speak against the evil that is in their midst.  Rest assured, that unless progressive prelates are removed and the climate in the Vatican improves, your children will - not if, but will - suffer cancelation as has other faithful priests and bishops.  Some have even been put in fear for their lives; that is not out of the question.  Just within the Archdiocese of Washington, I am aware of four priests that have been "cancelled", because they have preached God's truth against homosexual conduct.  Given the stench of perversion that has wafted through the halls of the DC chancery in the past 20+ years,  is anyone surprised?  At any rate, parents, your beleaguered will need your example of courage and boldness, not one of silence and "hunkering down". 

However, hearken back to the words of Dr. Kwasniewski as mentioned in the first part of this post.  These cancelations are unjust and thus illicit.  They hold no weight morally, and none under canon law.  They are still priests, able to perform - just not on property under archdiocesan control.  Parents and friend of potentially targeted priests, bear that in mind and be emboldened to speak for the Church and her God.

Habemus Papam

Today white smoke billowed from the chimney of the conclave, signaling the election of a new pope.  Shortly thereafter, Cardinal Robert Prevost was presented as Pope Leo XIV.  He is the first Augustinian and US native to be elected to the pontificate.

Prior to this, he was prefect for the Dicastery for Bishops.  That is to say he wielded great influence regarding the appointment of bishops.  Regrettably, he also played a key role in the removal of Bishop Joseph Strickland from the diocese of Tyler, TX.   He has made known his affinity to progressive causes such as the climate-change hoax, sympathy for George Floyd and unbridled border-crashing.

While this is troubling, it is not surprising.  Francis stacked the College of Cardinals.  Leo is said to have been highly favored by both Cardinal Cupich and Father James Martin.  On the positive side, when Leo stepped onto the balcony, he was dressed as a pope, unlike his immediate predecessor twelve years ago.  I for one am wary.

Cardinal Muller, a fairly solid prelate, warned that the election of a pope who didn't hold to tradition might well cause a schism.  If that comes to pass, it will be the infidelity to tradition that will be the cause of schism, for faithful Catholics must adhere to the Church's timeless teachings and Traditions, even if a reigning pontiff isn't.

Our Rosaries and prayers for Holy Mother Church must continue and increase.

The Conclave Is In Session

Saint John Eudes once stated that evil clergy are a manifestation of God's punishments upon His people.  I don't have time to enumerate the ways in which we, as a Church, more than merited such chastisement, save only to say that multiple infidelities occurred way before Vatican II occurred.

Francis' less-than-illustrious papacy has drawn to a close, but this is no time to breathe a sigh of relief.  Recall that he stacked the College of Cardinals with like-minded individuals.  It will take a miracle for a faithful and capable Catholic pontiff to be elected.  God can, if He is willing, work such a miracle.  

Are you praying for such a miracle?  The salvation of millions, perhaps some in your own families, depend on it.  At the very least, be offering your daily Rosaries for this intention.

His Eminence Cardinal Burke composed the following prayer.  True, the novena period is past, but this still is an excellent prayer that one can use.

The Church Is At A Crossroads

In the early phases of Francis' papacy, my morning offerings to Our Lord included the typical intentions, including "for the intentions of the Holy Father".  As time progressed, I started to wake up to his real intentions, but that awakening was gradual.  I soon amended my Morning Offering to "for the legitimate intentions of the Holy Father", thinking that the pope was a mixed bag.

My eyes continued opening as Francis' misdeeds multiplied.  The papal intention in my Morning Offering reflected my growing awareness, so I started praying "for the conversion of the Holy Father".  The malevolence behind his actions became all too apparent so my final change to the Morning Offering was for "a truly Catholic and capable pope".  Obviously that still included the possibility of his conversion, but my main concern was more for the souls of millions of Catholics and others worldwide, who were being led astray by this man.  If he wasn't going to be converted, then I prayed that he be replaced, and quickly.

Three days ago, the first phase of his replacement happened.  While I pray for God's mercy on him, I pray all the more that the souls he led astray would receive God's mercy if they died in the confusion that was fomented by Francis.  For those who are still on this side of the grave, I pray that any errors foisted upon them by Francis and his various cronies be corrected in their eyes.

A few days ago, the Grand Masonic Lodge of Italy eulogized Francis, saying that his work was "deeply resonant with the principles of Freemasonry".   Its "grand master" specifically cited Francis' encyclical Fratelli Tutti as elevating three masonic ideals of "fraternity, equality, and liberty".  The student of history will recognize these three words as being the motto of the French revolutionaries who wielded their guillotines with great ferocity, but I digress. 

New Way Ministries carries an article composed of the praises heaped upon Francis by prominent "gay Catholics".  That phrase in is quotes for they are Catholics living in mortal sin, endangering not only their own souls, but those whom they falsely profess to "love".  They cite the ways that Francis sought to mainstream their various perversions into Catholic circles.

So we have both freemasons and sexual perverts citing ways in which Francis promoted their dubious causes.  Sadly, they are correct.  Francis used his position in the Vatican to insinuate these spiritual poisons into Catholic circles, inducing confused souls into embracing these errors.  Some may have died in those resultant mortal sins, meaning that Francis jeopardized their eternal salvation.

To those who insist that we not "speak ill of the dead" and other such rot, STOP THAT NOW!  We must speak objective truth, no matter how "inconvenient" or "mean" it may seem.  We must call out the errors so that those flirting with the errors might see them for what the are, and reverse course.

Right now, we need to be praying that a pope be selected who is not only personally holy, but also one who is knowledgeable about Catholic doctrine, and who has the wisdom, strength and courage to deal with the threats to Holy Mother Church, especially those threats that lurk within the ranks of the prelates and the halls of the Vatican and chanceries throughout the world.