Some Logic-Challenged Progressives Stick Feet In Mouths

This happened last week at the rally in front of the Supreme Court as it prepared to hear Hobby Lobby's case.  Obamacare supporters were also there and Media Research Center interviewed them.  This would be humorous if not so scary.  Why scary?  Because these people vote!

Comparison of Auschwitz to the Abortion Holocaust

(Note: the piece below is written by my fellow front-liner and Catholic Media Coalition colleague, Jim Fritz)

What was Auschwitz? Built by the Nazis as both a concentration camp (prison) and death camp, Auschwitz was the largest of the Nazi camps and the most streamlined mass killing center ever created. It was at Auschwitz that 1.1 million people were murdered. The majority of the people killed in the Holocaust were Jews; however many Catholics and Catholic priests were also killed. The most famous Catholic priest was Maximilian Kolbe, a Polish priest who died as prisoner 16770 in Auschwitz on August 14, 1941. After a prisoner had escaped from the camp, another prisoner was scheduled for execution – a prisoner with a wife and children. Kolbe volunteered to take his place.

The concentration camp was actually opened in May 1940 and operated until January 1945, shortly before the war ended. Auschwitz, only 37 miles from Krakow, Poland, was the largest camp, but only one of many and included 45 sub-camps. It was the scene of medical experiments, and the home of Block 11 (a place of severe torture) and the Black Wall (a place of execution).

Auschwitz II was built approximately two miles away from Auschwitz I and was the primary killing center of the Auschwitz death camp. Auschwitz III was built as "housing" for the slave laborers at a synthetic rubber factory. The 45 other sub-camps also housed prisoners used for forced labor.

Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, anti-socials, criminals and prisoners of war were rounded up, stuffed into railroad cattle cars and sent to Auschwitz. When the trains stopped at Auschwitz ll, the newly arrived were told to and get off the train, leaving all their belongings on board, and gather on the railway platform known as "the ramp." Families who had disembarked together were quickly and brutally separated as an SS officer, usually a Nazi doctor, ordered each individual into one of two lines. Most women, children, older men, and those who looked unfit or unhealthy were ordered to the left; while most young men and others who looked strong enough to perform hard labor were sent to the right. Unbeknownst to the people in the two lines, the left line led to immediate death in the gas chambers, and people in the right line were imprisoned in the camp.

Once the selection process concluded, a select group of Auschwitz prisoners gathered up all the belongings, and these items (including clothing, eyeglasses, medicine, shoes, books, pictures, jewelry and prayer shawls) would periodically be bundled and shipped back to Germany (the spoils of war).

The people sent to the left line were never told they had been chosen for death. They were told that they were going to be sent to work but first must shower and be disinfected. The victims were ushered into an anteroom and told to remove all their clothing. Totally naked, these men, women and children were ushered into a large room which resembled a large shower room. After the doors closed, a Nazi would pour Zyklon-B pellets which turned into poison gas upon contact with air. The gas killed quickly.

Once everyone in the room was dead, special prisoners would air out the room and remove the bodies. The bodies were searched for gold and placed in the crematoria. Auschwitz ll had four main gas chambers, each with its own crematorium. Each gas chamber could incinerate about 6,000 people a day.

When the Allies overtook Germany and the war ended, I was a teenager. I would view newsreels showing these death camps before each movie. I saw pictures of the gas chambers and naked bodies stacked like piles of wood; the crematoriums and the tall smoke stacks. I saw the gold and other items extracted from the bodies before cremation. One soldier had a small lamp shade made from the tattooed skin of a victim. All of us who viewed these scenes wondered how a society could tolerate this.

The German population denied knowledge of this holocaust and to some extent, this may have been true as Jews and other victims boxed into traincars did not envision being gassed and cremated. However, the Germans were aware of the treatment of Jews and others. The Germans knew of the incarceration and evacuation of Jews in boxcars to labor camps, yet most did nothing to intervene.

There is an excellent pro-life flyer called “Sing a Little Louder” which recalls the holocaust and the reaction of the German people. It contains a story of an old man who approached pro-life activist Penny Lea after a speech. He told her he had lived in Germany during this time. He was a Christian and every week attended Sunday services. Like most people, he had heard what was happening to the Jews, but like most people he tried to distance himself from reality.

Railroad trains passed behind his small church, and each Sunday morning the parishioners could hear the whistle from a distance followed by the clacking of the train’s wheels as it passed by. The parishioners grimly realized the train was carrying Jews as cattle in those cars. They dreaded hearing the whistle and wheels because they knew the Jews would begin to cry out as they passed the church. It was terribly disturbing to them, but they felt there was nothing they could do to help these poor, miserable people.

They knew exactly what time the train would come by the church, at the same time they would be singing hymns. When they heard the whistle they sang as loudly as possible to drown out the screams.

The old man ended his story by confessing he still hears the train whistle and screams in his sleep. He asks God to forgive all of those who called themselves Christians yet did nothing to intervene.

How many Christians today are doing the same thing in regard to the Abortion Holocaust? The old man said, “It is happening all over again in America with abortion.” More babies are killed in one year in America than were killed in the entire history of Auschwitz.

Another similarity of abortion to Auschwitz is the recent disclosure of 15,000 aborted babies who were incinerated by a British hospital as a heating source. This report of babies burned to heat UK hospitals is a shocking wake up to how callous people are toward abortion It is comparable to the way the Nazi regime treated human life.

Now, I am no longer a teenager, but an old man myself and I engage in sidewalk counseling at an abortion facility in Hagerstown, Maryland. I often plead for people to come and witness in front of the facility. I ask them to do this by holding a sign, or praying or counseling. I see those from local churches walk by and look away. I see those who walk on the other side of the street to avoid us. At most, we get an answer such as, “I will pray for you.”

I think, “Yes, they will pray for us from the comfort of their pews or living rooms while the prayer warriors and counselors are out there for hour after hour in the bitter cold of winter, rain in spring and heat in summer.” Those who say, “I will pray for you” are ignoring the unheard cries of the babies being killed less than a block from their churches. They are ignoring the likelihood these woman going through the abortion will suffer from this for the rest of their lives through depression, breast cancer and even suicide. They will ignore the fact that two thirds of these women are forced into the abortion by boyfriends, husbands, parents or others. I wonder how they manage to distance themselves from reality. I sometimes wonder if they also sing a little louder.

Jim Fritz

Bishops - From Scandalous To Heroic

First, we'll get the scandals out of the way.  That way, this post can end on an upbeat note.

Rorate Caeli has broken the news that in Argentina, two lesbians will have their "daughter" baptized in the Cathedral of Cordova.  They received the authorization of Archbishop Carlos Nanez.  On that same day, the two lesbians will receive the Sacrament of Confirmation.

Ponder all this for a second.  The Sacrament of Confirmation confers grace to live out the Christian life in a more committed fashion.  The confirmandi vow to do so.  But their perverted lifestyles already render such vows an abysmal lie.  They are now in a state of mortal sin.  No sacramental grace can accrue to them and they most likely will be committing sacrilege by presenting themselves for Confirmation.  Regarding the baptism, one condition for baptism of children is that the parents promise to raise the child in the Faith.  They will, in fact, be raising the child to embrace the mortal sin of homosexual relations.  In other words, they may well be facilitators for that child's damnation, barring some intervention in that poor child's life.  Now consider that all this is occurring with the authorization, if not blessing, of Archbishop Nanez!  Is he a bishop or cowering politician??

The second piece of episcopal nonsense is brought to us courtesy of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (so what else is new?).  They are calling us to pray and fast - for what they consider to be immigration reform.  Of course that clarions call would be for a pet project of progressives - not for anything mundane like - I dunno - maybe the slaughter of 3,500 babies every day via abortion, the attacks on marriage, Obamacare being crammed down our throats..those sorts of boring things.

This coming Tuesday bishops from all over the country will be gathering at Nogales AZ to offer Mass for those immigrants who died while trying to enter the United States illegally.  In other news, we see that amnesty rallies will be occurring all over the country this coming weekend.  But of course the Mass and these rallies are totally unrelated; we know - we just know in the depths of our li'l naive hearts that there is no coordination going on between these progressive groups!  No-sir-eee!  Ahem!

Enough with the bad.  Now for some good news (for a change).

In July of 2011, Father Jerry Zawada, a Franciscan Friar in Milwaukee WI "concelebrated" a Mass.  The word "concelebrated" is in quotes for the other "celebrant" is a woman pretending to be "ordained" by some "woman priest" bunch.  The Vatican, specifically the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, has spoken.  Father Zawada is no longer permitted to function as a priest, and he must retire to a monastery run by his order to spend the remainder of his life in prayer and penance.  At this time, Zawada appears to be defiant.  It remains to see what further action will be necessary, but the Vatican is showing healthy resolve here.

More good news!  The Not-At-All Catholic Reporter snivvels reports that Oakland (CA) Bishop Michael Barber has changed the leadership of Holy Spirit Parish, which serves the campus of University of CA at Berkeley.  The poor little progressive "community" (you mean it isn't a parish?) is "angry and mystified".  While they all grab some hankies and shed some tears, let's look more closely, shall we?  It appears that the bishop wants "new direction" and some of this "community" don't understand.  Why, it has all these delightful little accouterments:

• LGTB groups (In other words, a gay "matchmaking" service)
• Dance ministry
• Taize prayer
• Just Faith
• membership in Berkeley Organizing Congregations for Action - a member of the Alinskyian PICO network 

All five of these are signs of a parish headed straight towards progressive hell.  God bless Bishop Barber for his courage in standing up to the progressive lemmings that are so prevalent in Berkeley.

And now for our last courageous bishop - at least for this post.  Madison (WI) Bishop Robert Morlino has reaffirmed canon law that states that at the Holy Thursday service, only men may have their feet washed by the priest (it is permissible to omit that washing altogether).  This is significant in light of the fact that Pope Francis himself broke that law when he washed the feet of some Muslim women during Holy Thursday services last year.  It was anticipated that the Pope's actions might spur similar disregard for Canon Law on the part of prelates and priests.  That appears not to be the case in Madison.

Those Danged Dastardly Translators!

Bad little Italian-to-English translators in the Vatican offices!  Naughty!   It's all their fault, those meanines!  We can blame everything on them - and no one else!  Oh, by the way - who'd like to buy some Florida swamp lands?

That seems to be the gist of today's Vortex, which is really a snippet of the Mic'd Up program from a few days ago.  It probably is the case that there are some underhanded operatives within the Vatican communications apparatus who would like to spread confusion and will do so by sabotaging the English translations of the Holy Father's utterances.  Be that as it may, two questions immediately pop into mind:

1. How is it that the two previous pontiffs (Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II) didn't have nearly as much trouble getting their messages accurately translated into English?  Oh, there was that condom fluff-up a few years ago, but that was such an obvious failed-hit-job that we never heard of such issues again.
2. It's been a year now, and if the Holy Father isn't aware of the difficulty in getting his message translated into English, he's deliberately naive OR he welcomes the confusion.  What other explanation is there for not taking immediate measures to correct the English-translation difficulties? 

Some things the folks are saying in this video are so obvious that I'm surprised they are oblivious to their meaning.  For instance, at 4:00, they remark how the term "civil union" has a different meaning in Europe than in the English-speaking world.  Be that as it may - why, oh why, did the English translators choose that phrase?  They must have known how it would be interpreted, right? 

Then, right after that at 4:22, John Thavis remarks that no prior pope ever gave an interview to a journalist.  Well, gee-willikers!  Is it possible that the previous popes were onto something or perhaps just a tad more careful in making their messages plainly understood by all?  That's why there was "careful vetting": to ensure that the teaching of the Church was accurately presented and not reduced to a bunch of mishmash.

I am embedding only the summary of the Mic'd Up.  Here is a link to the entire thing; the "Francis Effect" is only one of several topics discussed.  In this longer version, Voris makes a good suggestion, if only in a "tongue in cheek" manner.  He suggests that some individual(s) in the English-translating office be fired.  Good idea!  Again, I look askance on the delay in remedying that sorry state of affairs in the Vatican.

Tonight In DC - Planned Parenthood Blood Feast Picketed

Today at a blood feast put on by Planned Parenthood, Nancy Pelosi received their "Margaret Sanger Award".  They consider that award their "highest honor".  Arguably it is appropriate; Margaret Sanger was an unabashed eugenicist, wanting to rid the world of what she called "human weeds".  During her life, she had been known to confer with Nazi doctors and Ku Klux Klan groups.  Rey Flores of American Life League penned some choice words regarding this evening's debacle.

So tonight Pelosi, a "katholyc" whose political career has been one huge mockery and affront to her faith and Our Lord Jesus Christ, received her "thirty pieces of silver".  This occurred at the annual gala for Planned Parenthood.  Without a doubt this bash was funded in part through abortion revenues; this it is most accurate to refer to this Planned Parenthood as a blood feast.

Fortunately more than a few of them received some real food for thought as they arrived.  About 10 - 20 of us, led by Defend Life of Baltimore, stood outside the Wardman Park Marriott Hotel (at Woodley and Connecticut) holding signs and distributing leaflets to those who would accept.  We were there from 5-7pm this evening.

My!  It's amazing that a few little signs and flyers can get these pro-aborts worked into a blather!  I was standing on the sidewalk next to the driveway off Woodley.  Some hotel official had a snit.  He came over and told me that I couldn't hand the flyers to "hotel guests".  I politely but firmly reminded him that I was on the public sidewalk where I had a perfect right to hand flyers to whomever would accept them.  He retreated a little bit and decided to be my "babysitter", for lack of better word.  When friends joined me who had signs, they decided to bring police in.  The police suv just drove around and parked along the street.  I didn't realize that DC had gotten to be so murder-free that they could spare the time to glower at some middle-aged ladies standing on the sidewalk.  A few people took flyers.  Some flipped the bird.  Sadly, from some of the faces, it was clear that at least three of the women passing by had been victimized by abortion - perhaps at a Planned Parenthood mill.

Other pro-lifers were standing along Connecticut Avenue, heading into the south entrance of the hotel.  Some of them got into heated exchanges with passersby and blood-feast attendees.  I don't mind hearing about these for it was evident that some consciences were jolted awake from their stupors.

These Planned Parenthood attendees, and hopefully Pelosi herself, had a little something to render that meal just a tad bit less sumptuous than it might have been otherwise.  All of us will be going before God when we die; these folks will do so with blood on their hands.  They need to repent and amend their lives pronto.

MD's "Bathroom Bill" - Where, Oh Where, Is The Maryland Catholic Conference On This?

I've been getting email alerts from MD-Petitions, Help Save Maryland and others (politicians and individuals) who are tracking the process of Maryland's SB212/HB1265.  It has been dubbed the "bathroom bill" and is a statewide version of the bill that passed the Montgomery County Council several years ago.  I'm a woman and I believe this is an affront to my safety, which is being sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.  I'm glad that all these folks are alert and speaking out.  However, one organization's silence is deafening - an organization that ostensibly exists to promote the Catholic voice in legislative venues, particularly in Annapolis.  Which is that??  Why, it's...

The Maryland Catholic Conference

Look at their webpage.  Why isn't the Bathroom Bill smack-dab in the middle of their main page??  We see all sorts of advocacy for progressive positions such as minimum wage, "immigration reform", ya-da-ya-da.  I find their silence on the Bathroom Bill to be rather deafening.  Could it be that they just don't care?  Might it be that their silence is coerced or bought?  Why - oh why - hear we not one peep regarding this moral disaster that's about to be thrust on us?

And the Maryland Catholic Conference wonders why faithful Catholics don't take them seriously!

Cardinal Burke's Interview Two Months Ago - Truth With Clarity

Two months ago, Cardinal Burke gave an interview for a Polish magazine - naturally published in Polish.  LifeSiteNews has obtained an English translation of it.  In this interview, Cardinal Burke has outlined with clarity Christian truths as they impact our culture at large.

I urge careful attention to be paid to questions 7 and 10 - and most especially # 10.  Consider that in light of the HHS contraception mandate cases being heard by the US Supreme Court; oral arguments commenced today.

Today came the news that something called the "National Coalition of American Nuns" has sided with the Obamanistas and support the contraception mandate, throwing their fellow Catholics under the bus.  Of course, what also went under the bus are their religious vows.  Perhaps they should study question 7 in the Burke interview.

Judie Brown of American Life League and Rush Limbaugh weighed in on the interview as well.

Another Papal Homily Head-Scratcher

Yesterday, during a homily, Pope Francis had some things to say about humility and salvation.  Unfortunately I see only the excerpts as published by the Catholic News Agency.  The puzzling statement is this: "Jesus tells us: ‘if you do not put yourself on the margins, if you don’t feel what it is to be an outcast, you will not obtain salvation.'"  Biblical citation, please?

What is this with "margins" and "feel what it's like to be an outcast"?  I thought the idea was to recognize that I'm a sinner in constant need of His mercy, to repent of my sins and to obey His will.  Now maybe that does entail "feeling what it's like to be an outcast", but I think at best that speaks of an inappropriate reliance on superficial circumstances.  It shouldn't matter what I feel, one way or the other.  God's law is objective - that is, having no basis in the caprices of human emotions and experiences.  Oftentimes being a serious Christian will put us on the outskirts of contemporary culture, as Cardinal Burke aptly noticed, but again that's a superficial side-effect (at most) to following Jesus Christ, not a key indicator of sanctity.  For instance, I would imagine that a cold-blooded mass-murderer might feel him/herself to be a bit of an outcast; but no one with two working brain cells would opine that his/her "outcast" status is any indication that he/she is on the road to salvation - no, quite the opposite!

I'd love to see the entire homily, if a complete text is available.

Barbarism At New Lows In England

The picture at the left is that of an oven/crematorium in the Nazi death camp at Dachau.  Hundreds of thousands of prisoners were executed, and then their remains were incinerated in these ovens.  After the fall of the Nazis at the end of World War II, civilized people thought they'd seen an end to that oh-so-efficient barbarism of the Nazis.  Not so.

England was one of the countries that helped liberate many from the Nazis who had taken over Germany.  The United States was too.  Did our fathers and grandfathers have any inkling that less than 100 years later, such callousness and brutality would be found in their beloved homelands?

Today much of England is aghast at the revelation that ten of their National Health Service hospitals have been burning the bodies of babies who were miscarried and murdered via abortion .  In most cases, they were considered "clinical waste".  In a move that would have done any Nazi proud, some have burned the babies in "waste-to-energy" plants to warm the hospitals.

To their credit, the UK Department of Health has ordered an immediate ban on the burning of babies.  However, over 15 thousand babies were so treated; their parents were given little say in the matter and often treated callously.

Such is the coarsening effects of abortion.  The lives of tiny babies are treated as nothing, so why should any special regard be afforded their tiny corpses?  We've certainly seen that here.  Every pro-life activist has been aware that the late George Tiller, notorious late-term abortionist, had his own incinerators in which he burned the bodies of his tiny murder victims.  I've no doubt that Leroy Carhart would have set up some incinerators in Germantown were it not for the environmentalists (In the case of the latter, the broken clock is right at least twice a day).  On the other hand, the Nazi-esque gnomes in Annapolis just might try to "make some arrangements" for him in that regard.

That the National Health Service is in an uproar gives me hope that England's national conscience isn't completely deadened by abortion.  There might still be the slightest chance that western civilization can be salvaged - but only if people, en masse, repent before God and turn their lives and their countries around.

More Banalizing Of Lent In The Archdiocese Of Washington - This Time Over Guns

In today's bulletin from St. John Neumann in Gaithersburg, MD, page 4 bottom-left, we see an advertisement for a "Lenten Gun Violence Prevention program".  It's supposed to be held at St. Francis of Assisi church on Thursday April 3rd.  Oddly enough, I do not see it on St Francis' online bulletin (as of this afternoon).

This has all the hallmarks of being a push for gun control under sanctimonious trappings.  Let's visit "Heeding God's Call" website, shall we?   Here we have their "litany of commitment".  After a bunch of yammer that purportedly mourns the victims of violence and sympathizes with their families, we get into the meat of the thing.
Leader: Now is the time to end the senseless killing of our boys and our girls, our men and
our women.
People: Now is the time.
Leader: Now is the time to cease the profligate sale of assault weapons and all multiple
firing guns, weapons meant only for murder

Where, oh where, do we read in this lovely litany about appropriate punishments for those who engage in violence, regardless of tools used?  How about, "Now is the time to sentence violent criminals to life with hard labor and without parole and perks?"  Did I just overlook that part?

On page 6 of this document, this "covenant of commitment", they lament the culture they lament the "unrestricted proliferation of guns in our communities".  Under what rocks have they been hiding for the past few decades?  Gun control and regulations have burgeoned, making onerous the purchase of firearms for good citizens.  Moving on down, they lament the eight children killed every day (supposedly) by guns.  Nary a peep is said about the thirty-four hundred children murdered by abortion daily.  There is a key cause of other manners of violence.  That has led to a coarsening of morality, a devaluation of life in the minds of too many.

Lisa Delity of Heeding God's Call will be one of those leading the event at St. Francis of Assisi.   In 1994 she lost a brother, Michael Miller (FBI agent) to a murderer wielding a gun.  The write-up for Mr. Miller is found on the FBI page.  It states that the man who murdered him and other law enforcement officers, Bennie Lee Lawson, was already a suspect in a triple murder.  Why was he not behind bars?  Might that lack of detainment have been part of the problem?  So he got a gun.  Here's a news flash for bleeding hearts everywhere.  Criminals break laws - even (surprise!) gun control laws!  Lawson himself died during that 1994 shootout.

Delity, in 2008, issued a statement lamenting gun violence - and capital punishment.  I'm sure the irony escapes her.  At any rate, Lawson is not going to be able to murder any more people.  It already sounds like he had six to his charge - and no "gun registration" would have stopped that.

Rabbi Sue Levi Ewell is on Heeding's Coordinating Committee.  She's also an unabashed lesbian.  Then there's Rabbi Linda Holtzman (part of Heeding's Executive Committee), who is/was a member of something called Rabbis for Obama.  These two gals certainly aren't "heeding God's call" when it comes to His Laws on marriage, sexuality and life.  Their moral credibility is zilch.  And they help lead a group that pontificates about guns?  These "rabbis" are two reasons why "Heeding God's Call" will not be taken seriously by faithful Catholics.

Then there's Bishop Kermit Newkirk.  One of his other hats is that of leader of Philadelphians Organized to Witness, Empower and Rebuild (POWER).  That bunch is a branch of the Alinskyian PICO network.  We knew we'd find at least one of these "community-organizing" types lurking around.  Another "Heeding" director, Bishop Dwayne Royster, is also with POWER.

They also have a penchant for having "prayer vigils" outside of gun shops.  That's like having "prayer vigils" outside of car dealerships to curb deaths by reckless driving.  Such tactics do nothing to address the real issue - the violent criminals who use guns and any other weapon to wreck violence.  They insist on dancing around that "elephant in the living room" called the revolving prison door.  By the way - I wonder how many of them have "prayer vigils" outside of abortion mills, where real murder occurs?  Don't worry!  I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer.

Any organizations that allows lesbians, obamaphiles and Alinskyian devotees into its leadership ranks has nothing to contribute to any Catholic's faith and morals.  When Catholic "social justice" groups give them an audience, they lend credibility to the groups' dissidents and deviants.  That is unacceptable.

Good Bishops Forced To Mop Up Messes Caused By Vatican Misspeak

Archbishop Kaigama of Nigeria, in defending the Church's teaching on the nature of marriage, had to point out that he was NOT contradicting Pope Francis in light of the latter's infamous "who am I to judge?" quip.

Also regarding marriage, specifically in regards to divorce and remarriage, we see in this interview Cardinal Burke (Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura) taking some issue with remarks made by Cardinal Kasper.

Writing Letters For The Papal Trash Can

I continue to hold Michael Voris in great respect for the service that he has done - and continues to do - in bringing Catholic scandals to light.  As we all know, light and fresh air are often the best medicine for festering boils, provided they are first lanced to release the pus and poison.

With that in mind, I view with great alarm his Vortexes of the past few days.  Blogs such as this exist to bring scandals to light so that they can be rectified.  It matters not the source of these scandals; to cover up and ignore hindrances to the Faith because they emanate from the Vatican and even the unguarded words of the present Holy Father only allows the poison to spread.  I've said before that I respect the decision that Voris has made for his apostolate.  I regret that respect is not reciprocated, as Vortex continues to lump us together with sedevacantists.  I not only regret such condescension; I must denounce it in the strongest terms, hoping for an apology or at least a clarification.

In the Vortex from Tuesday, Voris insists that we must keep our concerns and questions private and that we should write letters as opposed to voicing them electronically.  As many others have said, we have learned at the local diocesan level that letters don't work.  They get placed in that circular bin known as the waste basket.  And no, it doesn't matter diddly-squat if you write "personal and confidential" on the envelope.

Well, there is ONE exception to that rule and I know relate to you THE MIRACLE OF THE MIRACULOUSLY FOUND LETTER!   Here's what happened.  About twenty years ago, I wrote to the DC chancery about a certain matter which I must keep private.  I was rather new at this sort of activism, but perhaps the Holy Spirit was whispering to me.  And what might He have been saying?  "Send the letter via Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested!"  And I obeyed.   A month passed and I received no reply.  So I called the chancery and reported that I had not received a reply.  The woman very politely informed me that they had no record of receiving my letter.  I replied how I sent it, and that I had received that little green card.   I didn't have it with me at the time, so I told her I'd call her the next day and let her know who signed for it.  I promptly forgot about it, but less than a week later - lo and behold (cue "angelic choir" miracle-music) - I received a reply to the letter that had one been lost!  What a miracle!  Now the reply did the most minimum lip service to the matters I broached, but that sure taught me a lesson about how little they really regard us and what we have to say.

In this Vortex, lapses in logic abound.  At about 2:56, Voris remarks that St Thomas More would never have waged a Facebook war with the pope.  Of course the internet didn't exist back then.  Now Voris might have in mind some sedevantists and/or progressives taking to electronic media to vent their spleens.  Others of us are using these electronic means to raise voices of reason and caution.  And it must be said that the Vatican itself is utilizing the internet (whether successfully or clumsily) to promulgate its message.  The internet is a medium to all; to suggest that faithful Catholics limit themselves to communication techniques that are antiquated is beyond ridiculous.

At 5:25 he remarks about the "amount of words spilled by Catholics..writing things for the whole world to read.."  In saying this he ignores the obvious point that we "write these things" about papal gaffes precisely because they have already been promulgated through the internet - much of it with Vatican approval.  Else, how would we have learned about them?  To address "private" letters about globally known matters is an inadequate response to the problems raised by the papal gaffes.  Of course these letters would never reach the intended party anyway.  Many, when they suggest this course of action, have Matthew 18:15 in the back of their minds and they misinterpret it.  A careful reading of this makes plain that Our Lord is talking of private quarrels, matters about which people other than the quarreling parties would have no knowledge.  He was not talking of the exchange of ideas in a public square.

After giving to us the mailing address and other helpful hints, Voris says (of these hypothetical letters) "it will get to him" at 6:13.  Who does he think he's kidding???  "Get to him"??  Anybody with two brain cells knows that any letter will get handled/mishandled by layers of Vatican bureaucracy.  What??? Does the Pope have time to read thousands of "personal letters" that arrive from all over the world on a daily basis?

What is it that is driving Voris to insult our intelligence in this fashion?  There's more to this than meets the eye.  Unless Voris issues a clarification soon, acknowledging the differences between the writings of faithful Catholics (who will remain with Holy Mother Church) versus sedevacantists, I must assume that other forces and entities are at work here.

Let me link now to an article written by the late Dr. William Marra regarding papal critiques.  Again, this blog has and won't challenge the internal policies of Church Militant TV.  We object to, and denounce the de facto slander being leveled against us because we follow the advice of Dr. Marra, St Thomas Aquinas and others.

The "letter-writing" Vortex is below.

Other Blogs/Sites On The Popewars

First, let me make plain that the term "popewars" was coined by Michael Voris (at least he's the first to use it, to my knowledge).  Many other faithful and orthodox sites seem to take exception to being labeled as de facto sedevacantists.  Here is a sampling:

• LMS Chairman
• Mundabor  and one more
• That The Bones You Have Crushed May Thrill
• Creative Minority Report
• Tenth Crusade and one more

To date, Michael Voris has failed (or refuses) to differentiate between: 1) sedevacantists who have de facto exited the Church (albeit "stage right") and 2) faithful Catholics who voice concerns over papal gaffes precisely because we love the Church.  Until that happens, he will cripple his own apostolate.  Again, if Church Militant TV has adopted a policy of not speaking on papal mistakes of words/actions, that is entirely their prerogative.  We object only to his de facto denigration of our own chosen directions.

Are We Purveyers Of "Ecclesiastical Porn"???

Some of us hoped that the next Vortex would clarify doubts regarding whom Church Militant TV intended when they issued their opinion why any criticism of the Pope is wrong.  Well, it appears that Michael Voris has.  First, I do think he has done a tremendous service in exposing so much corruption in the Church hierarchy.  Second, I don't doubt him when he says that Church Militant is being attacked by some for not openly making concerns known to the Holy Father regarding questionable actions.  Third, I am indeed saddened  that any vitriolic messages would be sent to them for their policy.  Fourth, I can also believe him when he says that some who take issue with the Pope's words go on to mock his person; I too consider that to be wrong.

As readers of this blog know, I have in no way denigrated the Holy Father personally nor disrespected the office of the Papacy when I've made criticisms regarding objectively questionable words/acts.  I also have not lobbed one criticism to Church Militant TV for their chosen policy and I certainly haven't sent any vitriol their way (in fact, I have not sent one email to them).  My grievance with Church Militant TV is that they have seen fit to chide those of us who do believe it incumbent upon us to raise some red flags.  They have made no distinction between those who do tear at the Papacy and those of us who question the Pope precisely because we do love Holy Mother Church.  Many of us have raised the point of such distinctions numerous times; it is all over the blogosphere.  Again in today's Vortex no such distinction is being recognized, although Church Militant TV cannot claim ignorance regarding our concerns.  Is it not reasonable to assume that the distinction is being omitted precisely because Church Militant TV is lumping us all together?  I hope to be proven wrong on this matter.

After the jump break, I will post the video, with my minute-by-minute rebuttal afterwards.

St Patrick's Day

To clear up common misperceptions..

Wrong!  Proper respect for St Patrick means no leprechauns, no green food dye, no "kiss me I'm Irish" crap and above all, no abuse of alcohol nor relaxation of Lenten disciplines.

Now to honor this saint,

More Input Regarding Objection To Papal Missteps

A Catholic blogger (in England, I believe) named Mundabor had something to say regarding the Vortex's fit at those of us who object to some of the Pope's words and actions.  Please read.

Terry Carroll of Church Militant TV replied.  Mundabor posted the comment and his own rebuttal.  Please read.  I think Mundabor did an excellent job in bringing the conversation back to the central issue.  That is, if CMTV chooses not to address Pope Francis' blunders, that is completely up to them.  What troubles us is when they liken us (who do speak up) to those who hate the Church.  That is unacceptable.

To illustrate that our stance is appropriate, I link to a LifeSiteNews article posted back in October when problems were becoming too evident.

I still hold Church Militant TV in respect for the yeoman's work that they have done in exposing so much chicanery by progressive elements in Church hierarchy.  I hope and pray that a clarification will soon be issued by them.

Los Angeles Religious Ed Congress - Surprising Us All With New Lows

A few days ago, Michael Voris did an expose on the dissent-ridden Los Angeles Religious Education Congress (using the term "religious education" lightly).  He detailed many of the past problems with this annual dissent-fest.  I post his video below, but scroll below it.

This was produced BEFORE the latest disaster congress.  Little could he have expected this joke of a Mass.  Put on ostensibly for American Indians, it is a complete adulteration of the mass with pagan rituals and yes, concepts of God.  NEWS FLASH!  God is NOT a grand-father!  We do NOT pray to "north, south, east or west".  I'm currently watching this thing now so I'm sure there are more liturgical abuses to come.  Now the "mass" that I'm posting below happened Saturday evening.  I understand there might have been a similar debacle on Friday evening called an "urban fusion mass".  I'll be watching that, too.  Stay tuned.

Vortex: Giving Some Misstatements A Pass??

In 99% of his videos, Michael Voris is spot on with the Vortex "where lies and falsehoods are trapped and exposed".  However, he seems to be giving some misstatements a pass if they issue forth from Pope Francis.  Not only that, but he continues to chide those of us who call out inanities and distortions, regardless of source.  Logical fallacies abound in this and I'll try to unpack as best as I can.

First, he seems to think that the only ones noticing the miscues of Pope Francis are "extreme left" and "extreme right".  That's simply not true; every now and then Voris intimates that he himself has noticed them (See 2:58-3:03, 3:10-3:13, 4:30).  In artificially dividing them into two camps of either progressive liberals or sedevacantists without acknowledging any honorable motives on the part of us who also see the problems, he demonizes us.

He correctly states the reactions of "the right" and "the left".  The "right" (and he seems to be lumping faithful Catholics and sedevacantists together) are displeased with various misstatements on the part of the Holy Father.  He rightly says that these same misstatements cause jubilation on the part of the "left".  Then he says "both camps are wrong".  Does it not dawn on Voris that they are reacting to the very same misstatements?  Both camps are having their typical reactions precisely because they have the same understanding of the Holy Father's pronouncements.  And just why, oh why, do these folks of widely differing perspectives read Pope Francis in the same manner?  Is it logical to assume that all these vastly differing people have identical perspectives on the Holy Father?  Or does the cause for such "interpretation" lie in the message itself?

So poor Pope Francis is just so misunderstood (see 5:50)?  Funny!  As I said in a previous post, I don't recall the previous two pontiffs having such a difficult time making their messages plainly understood.  In fact, the left hated these two men precisely because there was no hint of ambiguity (or nuance as Cdl Dolan calls it) to their words.  They also knew better than to give interviews.  Now why does this Pope continue to give interviews, after all the debacles that have resulted in this first year alone?  That's a fair question and I offer it for consideration.

At 3:48-4:15, Voris launches into those on "the right", stating that all in this group attack the Holy Father as a person.  That's simply not true.  In artificially lumping people into two categories, Voris seems to be accusing those of us voicing concern over the Holy Father's imprudent utterances and who pray for the pope and plead with him to do what it takes to ensure that no obstacles to the Faith arises from his pronouncements.  The Holy Father has had a year now to get the proper Vatican staff in place and yet the gaffes continue to emanate from the Vatican.  It is not an "attack on the Pope" to state plainly that this buck stops at his desk.  I don't know about these emails to which Voris alludes; I trust what he says is the case - but that is no cause to demonize us all.  And yes, he does so precisely because he doesn't acknowledge that those of us who take issue with the Holy Father's pronouncements may have the good of the Church at heart.

Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia.  That is the truth - and therein lies a key problem.  If billions of people are hearing garbled messages from the Pope, they will understandably believe that the teachings of Jesus Christ are likewise incomprehensible.  We know that there are different levels of papal pronouncements and that interviews don't rise to the level of pronouncements at all.  Still that is the image that an uncatechized world sees.  I join with thousands of other faithful Catholics in loudly urging the Holy Father to tidy up his presentation and pointing out to him the havoc he wrecks by his careless utterances.  If Michael Voris cares not to join us in this effort, I've no problem with that.  I do take issue with Vortexes such as this that undermine our message.

Three Admirable Bishops

Archbishop John Nienstedt of the Archdiocese of Minneapolis/St Paul has been exonerated of charges of sexual abuse.  The local district attorney determined that there was "insufficient evidence" to corroborate the charges leveled against him.   He had stepped down during the investigation but will now resume duties.

Bishop Robert Vasa of the Diocese of Santa Rosa defended a presentation given by a former gay porn star who is now Catholic.  Joseph Sciambra spoke the truth quite plainly when he declared that homosexual acts are "aberrations of nature".  He's right and Bishop Vasa is correct to defend him.

In England, Bishop Philip Egan of the Diocese of Portsmouth, in an interview said that it is an act of mercy to deny Holy Communion to those supporting abortion and sodomy.  In his words,  "It is done with the hope and prayer that that person can be wooed back into full communion with the Church.  Nobody is forced to be Catholic. We’re called by Christ and He’s chosen us, it’s a free choice. We live under the word of God. It’s not my truth, its God’s truth. One would hope that in that case it would encourage someone to come back to seek communion with the Lord with the truth and say I’m sorry I got lost.”

Pray for these bishops and pray that more of their brothers will follow their examples.

Two Disgusting Episcopal Kiss-Ups To Obama

First, let's look at the Diocese of San Bernardino in California (ht Creative Minority Report).  Bishop Gerald Barnes issued a letter on March 11 to Catholics in his diocese.  In a nutshell, he urged the uninsured in his diocese to purchase Obamacare.  Because he is aware that Obamacare contains within it mandatory abortion and contraception funding and coverage, the bishop was urging Catholics in his diocese to violate their Catholic consciences and to violate Catholic moral teaching.  A key sentence:  The Affordable Care Act is now part of civil law and as faithful citizens we are obligated to follow it.

No, Your Excellency!  You have it precisely ass-backwards!  As Catholics, we are obliged to disobey any "civil law" that runs contrary to Catholic moral principles.  One can only wonder what carrot is being dangled in front of Bishop Barnes' face to induce him to browbeat good Catholics to capitulate to the Messiah Most Miserable.

Speaking of "capitulation to the Messiah Most Miserable" let's look at the second kiss-up.  This time it's the USCCB doing the groveling (they almost have this down to a science).  Archbishop Kurtz, current president of the USCCB, along with Bishop Pates commended Obama and John Kerry for "initiative to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict".  Frankly I'm not sure what good they've done, but that's not the point of this post.  The two bishops wax lyrical about "achieving peace", turning willfully blind eyes to the fact that both Obama and Kerry are two of the biggest war-mongers alive.  The war is abortion, with a casualty rate of over 3000 babies every day murdered in the US alone.  When the bishops start developing a laser-like focus on that moral evil, they just might regain their credibility and do some actual good to achieving peace and more importantly, to saving souls.

Pray for our shepherds - and cry out when they err publicly.

Some Church Bishops Should Knock Off With The Interviews!!

In today's Vortex, Michael Voris addresses the many televised gaffes uttered by His Eminence, Timothy Cardinal Dolan.  Every word that Voris says about Dolan's sorry performance and the abysmal way he has conducted himself in public is spot-on.  I add only one key item.

EVERY WORD SAID BY VORIS IS APPLICABLE TO POPE FRANCIS!!

Let's cease the pussy-footing, shall we?  The world-wide Catholic Church is in desperate need of clarity.  Thanks to His Holiness's rather odd statements, many believe that those living in mortal sin can receive Holy Communion, that in fact some deadly sins (such as sodomy) are in fact "tolerable", etc.  Think of the thousands who are allowed to wander away due to the lack of crystal clear guidance from the Chief Shepherd.

In a previous post, I posted the entirety of that last interview of Dolan's.  In it Dolan implies that he is merely following the Holy Father's lead.  In all fairness to His Eminence, I can see where he truly might believe that, given the garbled mess that has issued forth from the Vatican during this past year.

Therefore I expand upon Voris' plea to include His Holiness.  If you truly care for your flocks as befitting a shepherd, cease the media and impromptu interviews and teach, with clarity, the Faith and Morals of the Church founded by Jesus Christ Himself.

)

Is Pope Francis Equivocating On The Mortal Sin Of Homsexual Relations, Or...

Or is that merely wishful thinking on the part of some Cardinals??

I'm baffled by this article.  I truly hope this is more twisting of the Holy Father's words.  However, the progressive media can twist his words only as far as the words themselves are susceptible to such manipulation.  With the possible exception of the condom remark, I never heard Pope Benedict's words bandied about; that's because his words were crystal clear and thus did not lend themselves to distortion.

According to that article, His Holiness wants to stop condemning same-sex unions and instead "study them" - per Cardinal Dolan.  So we would should not condemn that sin, should not perform the Spiritual Works of Mercy such as "rebuke the sinner" and "instruct the ignorant", thus imperiling the souls of many?  Let's do a little word-substitution here.  Instead of "same-sex unions" let's say "child rape".  How about drunkedness?  Should we be silent and just "study" these too?  Really???

Operation Rice Bowl - Leave That Bowl Empty

We're well into Lent.  Many of us have seen in our church lobbies the ubiquitous "Operation Rice Bowls" - the cardboard contraptions into which we're asked to deposit our money for eventual donation to Catholic Relief Services.  However, we have seen in the the past two years that Catholic Relief Services has funneled large parts of its funds to those who foster abortion and contraceptives.  We've even learned of CRS employees directly participating in the promotion of these mortal sins.  Catholic Relief Services, like the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, is under the direct control of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.  The ills that the CCHD funds locally are the same ones that the CRS funds internationally.

Please do NOT drop one penny into those boxes.  Instead, why not give your donations to a local crisis pregnancy center or directly to a soup kitchen?  Your money will be put to moral and efficient use that way.

"Recovering" Catholics

In Friday's Vortex, Michael Voris uses this term to describe Catholics who have either: 1) left the Church to join a conservative Protestant denomination or 2) abandoned all practice of faith althogether, embracing atheism.

The term is a misnomer.  Those who have left the One True Faith "recover" nothing.  They are in dire need of truly recovering their appreciation of the Sacraments and Teachings of the Faith.

Voris is correct about the two camps being very different.  In the first camp are actually some very stalwart pro-life people.  My prayer is that they'll "connect some dots" to understand that it's the Roman Catholic Church that has the fullness of teaching on these matters; our teaching on contraception comes to mind.

In the other camp are several pro-choice clinic escorts; they are actually rather proud of having left the Faith and of cementing their apostasy with their formal and material cooperation with the mortal sin of abortion.  I remember one such fellow gloating at me, then joking as to whether or not it was possible to be "fully recovered".  I replied that hell is full of people who are there precisely because they are "fully recovered".  He had nothing more to say.

We need to pray for these lost souls that they truly recover before it's too late.

Some VERY Different Bishops

I relate below some recent incidents regarding three US bishops: one disgraceful and the other two causes for rejoicing.  I'll start with the bad news first.

Sit down, please.  Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York praised a college football star for coming out as gay.  You read that correctly.  Michael Sam of the University of Missouri football team announced he was gay.  This is Cardinal Dolan's response: "Good for him.  I would have no sense of judgment on him. God bless ya. I don't think, look, the same Bible that tells us, that teaches us well about the virtues of chastity and the virtue of fidelity and marriage also tells us not to judge people. So I would say, 'Bravo.'"

We do understand that Cdl Dolan is congratulating the young man for celebrating his mortal sin?  He claims to have "no sense of judgment".  Yes he does - only the "good for him" is a positive judgment on this young man's road to eternal perdition.  He will bear responsibility for Sam's soul if he doesn't remember he's a bishop.  But enough of him.

Bishop Michael Barber of the Diocese of Oakland (CA) dismissed two dissident priests from Newman Hall.  One of them is openly gay.  This diocese, being in California, is heavily infested with homophiles.  They are in a snit.  Let's pray and thank the good bishop for beginning the purging process in his newly assigned diocese.

A little north of that in the Archdiocese of Portland, Archbishop Alexander Sample announced that his archdiocese would join the coalition to oppose same-sex "marriage".  There is a ballot initiative afoot to that effect.  You will notice that the article to which I linked has a decidedly progressive slant.  Again, thanks and prayers are in order.  Recall that four years ago, when Archbishop Sample was Bishop of Marquette, he asked wildly-dissident Bishop Thomas Gumbleton not to speak in his diocese.  Sample cited Gumbleton's erroneous positions on homosexuality and women's "ordination" as reasons.

Announcing The "Did He Really Say That?" Department

Regrettably Pope Francis' "off-the-cuff" remarks convey ideas that are not too terribly helpful.  I cannot divine what he really intended, and perhaps that is irrelevant anyway.

In an address to Italian priests yesterday to start off Lent, he elaborated on what he believes the priesthood should be in order to meet the needs of people.  One remark he made caused me to raise my eyebrows: "Ascetic priests do not help the Church."

Really?  That's quite a blanket statement.  Right away, St. John Vianney, also known as the Cure of Ars, comes to mind.  The fastings and sleep deprivations he undertook would cause many of today's soft and flabby generation to faint and cower.  Yet people came from all over France so that he could hear their confessions.  When he first arrived in Ars, the place was quite the moral cesspool.  Within a few years, many conversions there turned that place around dramatically.  Many of the people who came to Ars experienced dramatic conversions (he could read hearts).

Even other priests came to him.  Often they would tell him that they were troubled about the lack of fruit in their own priestly ministries.  He challenged them to increase their own penances and fastings if they wanted to see greater fruitfulness in their priesthoods.  It bears mentioning that the Cure of Ars is regarded as the patron saint of parish priests.

He did make one statement that "mercy involves not being too rigid nor too lax".  But right afterwards he lit right back into those deemed "rigid"; nowhere did I see any admonishment towards those priests who do go easy on themselves.  Curious.  What's not said is just as important as what is said, considering context.

My Lenten suggestion of a few days ago stands.  And I pray that we all have a blessed Lent.

UPDATE - A Facebook friend alerted me to this article from Father Zuhlsdorf, shedding some additional light on the Holy Father's remarks.  Please read it.

Montgomery County CPC Gag Law Killed In Its Entirety

I remember the deliberations over this in 2009 (I blogged on it then).  It was unconstitutional and it was clear that the majority of the Montgomery County Council were simply doing the bidding of their sugar-daddies and money bags.  This move was literally out of a NARAL playbook (and I have a copy of it, too!).

Comes now the news (from LifeNews) that a federal court today put the final kibosh on it.  The ruling notes that the bill was an affront against the First Amendment.

Congratulations and thanks to the Centro Tepeyak Pregnancy Center, along with Alliance Defending Freedom.  They were the lead plaintiff in this case and they - and all of us - prevailed.  Of course this can only have good ramifications for other localities that are fighting this NARAL-spawned poison.

Pope Francis Jokes About Seventh Commandment Violation

According to his own account earlier today (see here and here), he removed the crucifix from a Rosary that was in the casket of his fellow priest.  For the sake of non-Catholics reading this blog, let me explain a little of Catholic burial customs.  We have viewings (or wakes) as do most Christian denominations.  When the deceased is placed in his/her coffin, their hands are folded over their midriffs as though they are in slumber.  A Rosary is placed in their hands, intertwined with their fingers.  Often the Rosary is a favorite of the deceased's, or holds meaning to the deceased's relatives.

It is that cross that Pope Francis surreptitiously removed.  In his own words, "And immediately there came to mind the thief we all have inside ourselves and while I arranged the flowers I took the cross and with just a bit of force I removed it.  And in that moment I looked at him and I said 'Give me half your mercy.'"

Coming from the Vicar of Christ, this is incredible.  "Thou shalt not steal" remains the Seventh Commandment, binding on us all.  There is also the matter of the Spiritual Work of Mercy known as "burying the dead".  Whatever else that Work of Mercy means, it doesn't mean helping oneself to personal effects of the deceased and absconding with them for one's personal use/enjoyment.

Particularly scandalous is the nonchalance with which he spoke of his - yes, I'll say the word - crime.  He showed the cross to those in attendance this morning.  Instead of contrition for indulging "the thief we all have inside ourselves" he seemed to affirm his own "inner thief" with a wink-chuckle-wink air.  He is the Holy Father.  Should we all emulate that example?  If so, why stop at "the thief we all have inside ourselves"?  Why not indulge "the murderer we all have inside ourselves"?

The victim of Father Jorge Bergoglio's sticky fingers was himself a well-known confessor.  Perhaps that Sacrament is needed, along with the return of the cross to the deceased's relatives.

Another Papal Interview Ushering A New Debacle?

The Catholic News Agency published the English-translated transcript of the interview that Pope Francis had with Corriere Della Sera earlier today.  The questions seem to be only loosely related to each other.  What has raised the eyebrows of many in the blogosphere and elsewhere is this exchange:

"(CDS) Many nations have regulated civil unions. Is it a path that the Church can understand? But up to what point?"

"(PF) Marriage is between a man and a woman. Secular states want to justify civil unions to regulate different situations of cohabitation, pushed by the demand to regulate economic aspects between persons, such as ensuring health care. It is about pacts of cohabitating of various natures, of which I wouldn’t know how to list the different ways. One needs to see the different cases and evaluate them in their variety." (end snippet)

The real head-scratcher for me is the last sentence.  "Evaluate them"??  Anybody with two brain neurons that fire in syncopation understands what is meant by the term "civil union".  Whether heterosexual or homosexual, the crux of these unions is sexual relations outside of marriage.  We are talking of acts that are, objectively speaking, mortal sins.  Any "evaluation" of these is a fait-accompli in light of the Sixth Commandment.  Ladies and gentlemen, this is not rocket science.  Under no circumstances can the Church support, or even just tolerate, these situations for they will endanger the souls of those embroiled in these situations and cause great scandal for countless others who will be swayed by the bad example.   Here are true words of wisdom from Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI detailing why homosexual unions can never be tolerated, much less recognized by the Church.

LifesiteNews has an analysis of this interview.  It calls this response of the Pope's "carefully guarded".  Perhaps this is a question that required only a plain, simple answer.  Of course the question was worded disingenuously.  His Holiness could have taken the question "is it a path the Church can understand?" and restated it to say "when will the nations understand the path that Jesus Christ, through His Church, has indicated to be the only path?"  Instead, we get convoluted gobblygook where a simple, truthful response would have brought crystalline clarity.

Dare I suggest that His Holiness give up these interviews for Lent?

Leroy Carhart Causes Another Woman To Be Hospitalized At His Germantown Death Center

Yesterday pro-life activists in Germantown MD saw an ambulance pull in front of Germantown Reproductive Health Center.  Apparently the woman sustained "life-threatening complications".  Operation Rescue broke the story so I refer you to their page for further details.

Let me point out that this is the fourth woman that was endangered and hospitalized as a result of "reproductive health" at this Germantown facility in the past thirteen months.  In the first incident, Jennifer Morbelli died.  After the third incident, I passed out a flyer to other occupants of the Germantown Executive Center complex.  That was last November.  In that flyer I quipped that at the rate Carhart was going, the complex should have a reserved parking space for an ambulance in front of the abortuary.  Looking back I realize that was not just a smart-ass comment; it was a prophesy.

I'll also point out that for all the women that Carhart is sending to the hospital, he himself has no privileges in any Maryland hospital.  His whole career in Maryland has been spectacularly chequered, starting with falsified license applications, unlicensed personnel working for him, citations for deficiencies, etc.  These things might suffice to halt the practice of doctors in other fields, but in Maryland, where the politicians are in the hip pockets of NARAL, blind eyes behold not the glaring anomalies in Germantown.

We, particularly those of us in Maryland, must stand up and demand action.  Shine the light on this mess.  Please share this post.  Go onto Facebook, Twitter and other social media and alert your acquaintances to this travesty.  The mainstream media won't so it's up to us.  Above all, pray that this man be put out of his murder-business and come to repentance.  He's not a young man and is running out of time before he must meet his Maker.

Dr. Taylor Marshall On The Fisher More College Situation

Dr. Taylor Marshall, former Chancellor at Fisher More College, has broken silence on the matter and revealed many details that show Fisher More College to be a plight-ridden school due to incompetence and dissidence on the part of its president, Dr. Michael King.  Dr. Marshall has posted his statement on his Facebook page and I now link to it https://www.facebook.com/DrTaylorMarshall/posts/400180263452671

He alludes to "a public repudiation of Vatican II and the Ordinary Form of Mass in April 2013".  I believe he is referring to this address given by Dr. John Dudley; here is the pdf.  I've only gotten through page 12 and can attest to the disdain for the Ordinary Form contained therein.  How a valid Mass "does not provide the same level of graces" as another valid Mass when the same Sacrament is present is a bit of a stretch, to say the least.  If this is the kind of teaching championed by Dr. King, the financial bunglings were the least of his problems.

Getting back to Dr. Marshall's article, he states that Dr. King did not allow the Ordinary Form of Mass on campus and enlisted suspended priests to say the TLM.  He also states that King hired "trad resistance" faculty; if the new hires were of the same ilk as Dr. Dudley, Dr. Marshall is correct.

So there was gross financial mismanagement, dissidence from Vatican II and disrespect for the Ordinary Form of Mass.  Based on the words of both Dr. Marshall and Dr. Dudley, I must assume that to be the case.  I now link to some questions that Pat Archibald publicly asks of the bishop, as some of those questions came to mind as I was reading what Dr. Marshall said.  The main question is how the banning of the Traditional Latin Mass from the campus is supposed to address the financial and doctrinal misbehaviors of Dr. King.  It would seem that any remedy, if it is to be effective, must address the specific issues at hand.  The banning of the Traditional Latin Mass does not answer Dr. King's disdain of the Ordinary Form.  I do gather that Dr. King still retains his position as president of Fisher More College.   I have not heard whether or not Dr. Dudley is still on the faculty; at this time the FMC website is moving at a snail's pace so I cannot tell if that's the case.  If these men are at least part of the problem with FMC, why do they remain while the Traditional Latin Mass is being given the heave-ho?

Again, I ask, if there are problems, why aren't the specific problems being addressed?  The bishop's letter only spoke of the ban on the Traditional Latin Mass.  Nowhere in it is mentioned any of the problems listed in Dr. Marshall's article.  I for one fail to see how banning the Traditional Latin Mass will cure any financial difficulties there.  It will only impinge upon the few students who still remain at FMC.

More On The Situation At Fisher More College

Since I wrote the post this morning, some new information has surfaced.  Such information causes me to reconsider a statement that I made in the earlier post: "There is also no doubt that there is malevolence towards the Traditional Latin Mass, either by the bishop himself or someone within his chancery."  In fact, there may well be doubt as to their reasons.  Right now, as things are coming to light, we don't know one way or the other.

A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics put up a post about the situation.  As their name suggests, they are geographically much closer to the situation than am I.  There is talk of a heavy-handed approach to administration taken by Fisher More President Michael King and use of suspended priests in offering the Traditional Latin Mass on campus.  Dr. Taylor Marshall worked there for a while but had to leave due to the situation; he has promised to shed some light on the matter shortly.  Father John Zuhlsdorf also put up a piece regarding his impressions.

Fisher More College is in dire straits; there are only about 30 students left (not sure if that's total or just "on campus").  One of the main attractions for Catholic students was the ability to attend the Traditional Latin Mass on campus.  That was removed when Bishop Olson banned that Mass from campus.  Barring a miracle, this will be the death knell for that school.

I will post updates as they come my way.

Fort Worth Bishop Unlawfully Bans Traditional Latin Mass At Fisher More College

Reverend Michael Olson, who was installed as Bishop of the Diocese of Fort Worth has, as one of his first actions, banned the Traditional Latin Mass from being offered at Fisher More College (ht Rorate Caeli).

There is no doubt that such a move flies in the face of the Apostolic letter issued July 7, 2007 by Pope Benedict XVI.  There is also no doubt that there is malevolence towards the Traditional Latin Mass, either by the bishop himself or someone within his chancery.  To the right are copies of: Bishop Olson's letter to the President of Fisher More College (Dr. Michael King), unlawfully banning the TLM from the campus and a copy of a letter from the Canon Law Centre explaining why the bishop's actions fly in the face of church law.

Consider this, as you read the bishop's letter.  It was dated late February, less than one month after he was installed as bishop.  How, in less than one month's time, could he possibly divine that such a move was "necessary for the soul" of Dr. King?  That's sanctimonious nonsense.

I suspect the draconian treatment being meted out to the Franciscans of the Immaculate (see here and here) has only emboldened those who, for whatever reason, hold the Extraordinary Form in disdain.  Bishop Olson's actions should remove all doubt of that.

Here is the contact information (scroll to the bottom) for Bishop Olson.  Please write and/or email and or phone his office.  He needs to hear from many of us.  Please be respectful of his office, but also be firm regarding the dictates of Pope Benedict XVI's letter.

Those of you within the Diocese of Fort Worth, if your concerns aren't being met with the respect they deserve, consider a boycott of diocesan appeals until such time they are met.

Why Does CMTV Urge Us To Blindfold And Gag Ourselves?

First, as you read the following, I ask that you keep the post from Friday in mind.

Last week ChurchMilitantTV (fronted by Michael Voris) replied to some alleged criticisms from other well-respected Catholics.  The latter allegedly criticized Voris for not taking public issue with Pope Francis for missteps and blunders during this first year of his papacy.  The other leaders are Chris Ferrara and John Vennari.  I say their criticisms of Voris are alleged because the Church Militant article linked to no source for them.

Louie Verrecchio, on behalf of Vennari and Ferrara, issued a rebuttal to Voris in the form of a spoof of the Vortex episodes.  I respect Michael Voris highly, and as regular readers know I post almost all the Vortexes in this blog.  However I must concur with Verrecchio on this occasion.  I post the two documents now, urging study of both of them:

• Church Militant statement: http://www.churchmilitant.tv/faq/papalcriticism.php
• Verrecchio reply: http://www.cfnews.org/page88/files/751b83874a7bdfab126e65e854b51207-193.html

To be honest, I think the CMTV statement is so full of logical flaws as to be rather nonsensical.  I'll point out some of them, and I won't necessarily go in order of the document flow.

I read the articles that it cites.  While they do take exception with objectively questionable things that were done and said by the Holy Father, nowhere do I perceive personal attacks on the Holy Father or his papacy per se.  I wish to point out that "voiced disagreements with the merits of Pope Francis' actions" and "attacks on the pope" are NOT equivalent.  I take a dim view of the obfuscation of that difference.

The author of that CMTV piece (and it may not be Voris!) goes on to say that "it is our judgment that most Catholics should not read these articles".  I beg his pardon, but who does he think he is?  He's entitled to his opinion of these pieces - so let others form their own.  Here are two of the pieces:

•  http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/90-quo-vadis-franciscus
•  http://www.cfnews.org/page88/files/065837621bedf51d45b91a5e75699ef5-174.html

These, and a piece written by my friend at the Tenth Crusade (also touching on this exchange) begin to list our concerns with Pope Francis.  It bears mentioning again that no one is taking issue with any solemn pronouncements by His Holiness.  Regarding lower-level matters, though, we must raise alarms when we see them, for some will regard his actions as having the weight of solemn declarations.  I'd also like to call to mind my blog piece from Friday (to which I linked at the top of this piece).  In it is cited the example of St. Paul confronting St. Peter's erroneous behavior; Peter was the first Pope.

Moving on, we read this head-scratcher.  "Assume, for the sake of argument, that everything one learns from ecclesiastical porn sites and articles is true. Every claim, every allegation, is true. Bad news all around for the Church. Question: how are you a better Catholic for knowing all this, and what is the proper Catholic response?"  First, I take exception to CMTV describing Ferarra's and Venneri's works as "ecclesiastical porn".  Now let's reply to the questions.  First, we are better Catholics for knowing the complete "lay of the land".  We know precisely for what we should pray and we contemplate what action would be advantageous to correct poor situations.  Second, the proper Catholic response is never willful ignorance; that itself may constitute sin against prudence.

I'm going to take a "leap in evaluation" and try to glean the thrust of the following paragraphs of the CMTV tome in one sentence: "We know the Church is in crisis; the proper Catholic response is to focus solely on our personal holiness - nothing else."  If that is the case, CMTV is incorrect on this matter.

Here's another series of incredible sentences from the CMTV piece: "While we greatly admire and are the beneficiaries of the work of those on whose shoulders we stand in the work to help restore the Catholic Church to its authentic glory, we can neither support nor encourage their ongoing, unnecessary and harmful attacks on the Church and the Holy Father. Most Catholics are not even aware of the many disconcerting words and deeds of Pope Francis and his predecessors. Most Catholics have no idea that there were ecumenical events at Assisi or that Pope John Paul II kissed the Koran. Most Catholics, including most bishops and priests, don’t even know that there is a crisis in the Church today. They do know, however, that the Pope is the head of the Catholic Church and, presumably, the guardian and protector of Catholic orthodoxy. Who benefits from attacks on the Rock on whom Our Lord established His Church (Matt 16:18)?"

Unpacking this might require its own post, but I'll give it a try in this one post.  We'll do this "bullet-style".

• At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I'll state once again that "voiced disagreements with the merits of Pope Francis' actions" and "attacks on the pope/church" are NOT equivalent.  CMTV, please stop the disingenuous blurring of that difference.
• This paragraph couples the wide-spread ignorance of the crisis in the Church with knowing that the pope is head of the church.  It seems to be accepting, if not condoning, this ignorance.  However, that is a far cry from the message conveyed in a previous Vortex episode in which Voris completely denounced the mental oblivion of the Catholic in the pew regarding the real crisis.
• Can another question be asked?  How about "who benefits from Catholics being kept in the dark regarding ills within the Vatican?"

This post could go on and on, but I'll close it now where the CMTV closes their's - with commentary on Genesis 9:18-27.  CMTV rightly praises the actions of Sem and Japheth.  Does it dawn on the CMTV author (I don't think it's Voris himself), that the two honorable sons would not have known their father needed their ministration had it not been for the tattling (call it "ecclesiastical porn") of their errant brother?  Cham's motives aside, he did alert his brothers to a dire situation, which they then addressed and corrected. Else, Noe might have died of exposure (drunkedness increases the risk of hypothermia).  Similarly, we need to sound the alarm over anomalies that we see in Church life, regardless of their source, so that appropriate actions can be taken.

Actually, there's another more fitting close.  I started this post by citing a Dominican Doctor of the Church - St Thomas Aquinas.  I'll close it with a quote from another Dominican Doctor of the Church - St Catherine of Siena: "We've had enough of exhortations to be silent! Cry out with a hundred thousand tongues. I see that the world is rotten because of silence!"

Our Church is rotten.  We must have the courage and holiness to confront the rot where it occurs.  This blog will remain part of that choir of "a hundred thousand tongues".  We need more, not less, such tongues.

Pray For Vocations!

Cute alert!