Wednesday, July 20, 2016

Applying Catholic Moral Theology To The Question Of Voting Or Not Voting

Ladies and gentlemen, the nominees of the two parties are now determined.  This will be a Trump vs Clinton contest.  I just now finished watching Cruz's speech at the GOP convention.  I voted for him and had hoped that he would be the nominee.  Enough other people voted differently so now it is Trump who will be opposing Hillary Clinton.

There is no gainsaying that Trump has his warts.  But now he is officially the GOP candidate and the only one who now stands between us and a Hillary presidency.  No one, with a straight face and who pays attention to the facts of history, can pretend that Trump is just as evil as Hillary.  I've written before regarding the intentions voiced by some good people to either 1) not vote at all in the presidential election or to 2) write in a "third-party" candidate.  Either option will have the obvious effect of reducing the hurdle that Clinton would have to overcome to seize the White House.  Please read from this anthology of posts.

In those posts I attempted to examine the question of voting versus not voting in the context of Catholic moral theology.  Below are quotes from both Father Peter West and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, both speaking in terms of Catholic teaching.  I found these on facebook, by the way.

From Father West:  "Voting for Donald‬ Trump is not doing evil in order to achieve a good end. Voting for him is not endorsement of everything he has said or done. Your vote is an exercise of power. If you exercise that power to limit evil you are doing something good. You are not doing something evil in order to achieve a good end. In Catholic moral theology a moral act must be evaluated according to the act itself, the intention and the circumstances. All three have to be either good or neutral. The act of voting is in itself good. If your intention is to limit evil, your intentions are good. The circumstances in this election is that a vote for Trump is the only way to stop the election of a corrupt, dishonest, pro-abortion, anti-family, extremely careless criminal. Voting for Donald Trump is therefore a good moral act because it limits evil insofar as it is possible at the moment."

From Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI): "According to the principles of Catholic morality, an action can be considered licit whose object and proximate effect consist in limiting an evil insofar as is possible. Thus, when one intervenes in a situation judged evil in order to correct it for the better, and when the action is not evil in itself, such an action should be considered not as a voluntary acceptance of the lesser evil but rather as the effective improvement of the existing situation, even though one remains aware that not all evil present is able to eliminated for the moment."

I believe these establish the case, from rigorous application of Catholic moral theology, that a vote for Trump will assist in limiting the evil of a Clinton presidency.  If some of my #nevertrump friends remain unconvinced, would you please establish your case with your own examination of the question that applies Catholic moral theology to the question?  Needless to say, "personal preference" and "gut feeling" is not going to cut the mustard.  The discharging of our civic responsibilities demand utilization of reason and intellect for they are very serious matters.

Monday, July 18, 2016

Personnel Is Policy - Cardinal Muller Removed From CDF

Today it was announced that Pope Francis has removed Cardinal Gerhard Muller from his position as Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.  He will take post as Archbishop of Mainz.  His replacement at the CDF?  Cardinal Christophe Schonborn of Vienna: yes, this one.  He is also the prelate that overrode one of his priests when the latter blocked an openly gay man from sitting on a parish council - just two months after Cardinal Wuerl ousted Father Guarnizo for likewise being a faithful priest.  See here for more of Schonborn's destructive antics.

We knew this was just a matter of time, didn't we?  Cardinal Muller has been one of the few remaining voices of sanity and orthodoxy in the Vatican, much to the chagrin of many of his fellows and perhaps even Pope Francis.  Read here for an account of the many times he, as Prefect of the CDF, spoke truth to the lunacy spewing forth from the Vatican.  More than a year ago I predicted that Muller might well find himself in progressive cross-hairs; that has come to pass.  Surprise!!

As they say, "personnel is policy".  With all the faithful prelates being ejected from positions of influence in the Vatican in favor of progressives and de facto heretics, can there linger any reasonable doubt regarding the policies of Pope Francis?

Correction - There is reason to hope that this change has not happened and that the reporting was premature.

Sunday, July 17, 2016

13 Million Rosaries

At Mass today and in our bulletins was promotion for a prayer campaign that in reality is nothing more than a repetition of the request of Our Lady of Fatima.  She asked us, nearly 100 years ago, to pray the Rosary daily for conversion and world piece.  With news of shootings of police and Islamic violence occurring on a daily basis, can anyone doubt that we need divine intervention?

More on this prayer campaign can be found at  Please commit to praying one Rosary daily and encourage family/friends to do the same.

Center For Medical Progress And Select Investigative Panel

David Daleiden's Center for Medical Progress released another video recently.  I'll post that below.  I also link to a press conference given a few days ago by the Select Investigative Panel, chaired by Rep. Marsha Blackburn.  We need to keep shining the light on those who would profit from baby-murder.  We must also get ourselves to the polls this November.  If the Democrats pick up House seats, the investigation could well be scuttled.

Thursday, July 14, 2016

In Light Of Recent Shootings, USCCB Still Refuses To Acknowledge Need To Proclaim Church Teachings Regarding Sanctity Of Life

In today's issue of the Catholic Standard, we see published a statement by the USCCB regarding the recent shootings that have occurred this past week.  It seems that they understand well the Alinskyian rule, "never let a crisis go to waste" for they turn their statement into a commercial for left-wing causes.  Here is the "meat of the matter", as it were.  "In the days ahead, we will look toward additional ways of nurturing an open, honest and civil dialogue on issues of race relations, restorative justice, mental health, economic opportunity, and addressing the question of pervasive gun violence."

"Restorative justice" is their code phrase for income redistribution.  "Addressing the question of pervasive gun violence" is their code phrase for infringement on our Second Amendment rights.

If they really want to engage in the area of "race relations", they might want to pay attention to words uttered by Cardinal Wilfrid Napier of South Africa who called for an apology for the number of black babies murdered via legalized abortion.  He is spot-on correct.  37% of the abortions in the U.S. are committed against black babies, yet blacks account for only 13% of the total U.S. population.  The Cardinal says this appears to be genocide.  I differ with him in saying that not only does it appear to be genocide, it in fact is genocide.  Why doesn't the "black lives matter" crowd give a damn about their own babies?  I daresay that when it comes to abortion, many of them actually cheer their own genocide.  But I digress since this post is addressing the incompetence of the USCCB.

Common sense tells us that no jibber-jabber about "race relations" will address the root causes - disrespect for life and the Author of Life.  If the bishops are really serious about restoring a respect for life, they will instruct their priests to preach about the evils of contraception.  They will insist upon obedience to Canon 915.  They will stop cowering before the gays and resume their duties to promulgate the teachings of Jesus Christ regarding marriage and family life.  Until that happens, we most likely will see violence escalate.

Pray for our clergy that they might live up to their dignity and duties afforded to them by the Sacrament of Holy Orders.

Wednesday, July 13, 2016

Plea To The Pope

Many thanks to LifeSiteNews for releasing this video presentation.  Here we see several respected Catholic and pro-life leaders throughout the world respectfully yet unambiguously asking the Pope to cease causing scandal and confusion and to live up to his sacred charge.  Several of them also beseech the Pope to withdraw Amoris Laetitia.  With no further ado, here is the full-length "Plea To The Pope".

Tuesday, July 12, 2016

Another "Tale Of Two Cardinals": Cardinal Nichols Undermines Cardinal Sarah's Call For Reforms At Mass

When I wrote last Wednesday of Cardinal Sarah's call for "reform of the reform", I mentioned that there would most likely be push-back from more liberal prelates.  I didn't realize how quickly that would occur.

First, please read the text of Cardinal Sarah's talk given at the "Sacra Liturgia UK Conference 2016", given in London on July 5.  Almost immediately after that talk was given, Cardinal Nichols, Bishop of Westminster, acted in defiance of the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and instructed his priests to continue facing the congregation during Mass.  This isn't the first time that Cardinal Nichols threw fellow clergy under the bus.  He scolded 500 of his priests when the latter expressed concerns over last autumn's sin-nod.  He also has condoned "gay civil unions".  Therefore, for him to harp about "exercising personal preference or taste" is a tad disingenuous.  The Remnant has a video of some "liturgy guidelines" that the Cardinal seems to find acceptable.

Now what will Nichols do about kneeling for the Consecration?  About 25-30 years ago, I made several trips to England and attended Mass there.  At that time they did NOT kneel for the Consecration.  In fact, many churches lacked kneelers.  He did not mention that in his screed but I suspect there will be little kneeling during the Consecration.

I don't think my own diocese will fare any better.  But if Cardinal Sarah's words are implemented elsewhere, that will be at least some improvement.

Monday, July 11, 2016

Eric Gajewski Interviews Michael Hichborn

Eric Gajewski of TradCatKnight interviewed Michael Hichborn of Lepanto Institute recently.  In the video below, Mike relates how he moved from his former position at American Life League to Lepanto.  He is quite correct in stating that we must work to eliminate the corruption that infests the Church.  I add that includes all corruption, even that which is found in the Vatican.  At the 37:00 mark they begin to discuss the corruption in the Church.  I do suggest listening to the entire thing -and of course, to keep praying the Rosary.

Sunday, July 10, 2016

What The Hell Is Going On At Church Militant TV???

Several of us have commented on the Vortex cited in my post yesterday.  We have found our comments removed.  My blogging colleague at Connecticut Catholic Corner is one of them - us.  Please read her account.  My one tiny disagreement with Julie is that I think the behavior of Church Militant personnel - particularly those on the comment page - portend something far more ominous.  Rather than "laugh and let it go" I think some of the stench there needs to be exposed, as many good people are contributing to CM's "premium" program.  They deserve to know what they are supporting.

Before I commence, I'd like to extend an invitation to those others who have also found their comments deleted by the moderator of that page.  You may post your comments here - provided, of course, that they are respectful and in accordance with the Magisterium of the Church.

One hardly knows where to begin so I'll start with the little scolding tossed in my face by the moderator.  If one goes to that comment page, you can find this original posting. (Note - if these pictures are too small, just click on them and larger images will appear in their own windows.)

First, I notice that the moderator has adopted the same condescending attitude towards faithful Catholics evinced on one of the first Vortexes in which Voris castigated his colleagues for questioning the doings and sayings of Pope Francis.  In reading this, one might think their readership is comprised of delicate snowflakes similar to those on college campuses who scurried for "safe places" after seeing Trump's name chalked on sidewalks.

Ironically the condescension is applied to Festus, for for according to the moderator, he wouldn't have "succumbed to the temptation to respond".  Is the moderator saying that Festus does not have the intellectual and spiritual fortitude to control himself?  Well, given what Festus wrote on my last post, I can see from where the moderator draws his/her apprehensions, but that is the responsibility of Festus.  By the way, I don't see any similar scolding directed to Festus.  Does anyone else?

But there are some other comments that make me wonder whether or not Festus might be a CM insider.  Here's one:

Why, oh why, would Festus "have to say that"?  Where does that come from????

Here's another.  As I read this, it appears that Festus speaks rather authoritatively regarding the Download and its features and purposes.  I could very well be incorrect about this, but Festus appears to be quite familiar with the Download; his tone speaks of someone who is "in the know".

As I said earlier, my comments on that vortex were deleted.  Ostensibly what can get comments deleted are if they contain criticisms of the pope.  Apparently that's not the only criteria for deletion.  I can only suppose deletion can happen simply due to the caprices of the moderator.  How else do we explain the following?

Here is a discussion during which Festus trash-talked LifeSiteNews, Voice of the Family, Rorate Caeli.  You'll notice in the middle of this picture a notation advising that a comment was deleted.  It was mine.  I have my deleted comment posted below the discussion.

You'll notice that my comment had no mention whatsoever of the pope.  Therefore it cannot be said that the comment was in anyway critical of the pope.  So why was it removed?  Is it because I called out Festus for his slander of the other sites?  For the record, I believe that LifeSiteNews and Voice of the Family did a yeoman's job of unpacking the messes known as Laudato Si and Amoris Laetetia.  But getting back to why my comment was removed, and not Festus' slanderous one, is it because I rightly rebuked their buddy?

There's more where all that came from, but I don't want this post to get too long.  I'll close this one with a comment that Festus sent to me last evening.  I alluded to it this morning as I replied to what Festus left on my post last evening.  Here it is...
"Is that what you told the Nuncio when he tried to navigate your blog to get the details together?
No, you didn't even do him that courtesy - you just gave in a link to your home page and suggest that he trawl through your blog to find the relevant details. Presumably while doing that he found what you were saying about the Pope. Have you considered tha t perhaps you and your blogger friends might have had something to do with what happened the priest?  As you say it was "after" you and your blogger friends pubished dirt and no doubt publically castigating those who issued an apology to Ms Johnson that more serious charges were raised.  When I do a search on key words blogger does not allow me to control the order in which the posts appear"Do you know what that is? That is a bad workman blaming his tools.  I don't need to discredit you. Your sloppy blog is more than adequate for that job."

Does this sound like a rational person engaging in calm and reasonable discourse or the rantings of someone who has some very serious issues?  But this is the person that the CM Moderator allows to puke all over their comment page while deleting the comments of others offering cogent thoughts (and I reiterate my invitation to them).  I pray that he is not affiliated with Church Militant TV.

As I've said before, I respect CM's right to exercise their own policies in the governance of their apostolate.  However, when they display disrespect for our policies in the governance of our apostolates, then they must be called out.  Whether or not this is the last such post that I'll write is largely up to them.

Saturday, July 9, 2016

Why I Will Never Again Sing Anything By David Haas

I was alerted to his problems by Eponymous Flower and Tantumblogo.  The latter had a picture of a facebook entry so I decided to look at Haas' facebook page myself.  Sure enough, it's full of gay-enabling and climate-change shilling crap.  See:
Given his obvious sympathies for gay perverted sexuality, may we believe that he's the same David Haas who at one time was on the Board of Directors for the Long Island Gay Men's Chorus?

Perhaps some choir directors don't know these details about Haas, although he makes no secret of them on the facebook page.  Perhaps they should do some "due-diligence" work on song authors before they use their pieces and lend credibility to their dissidence and heresies.