Pope Francis And Ecumenicide

Ecumenicide - any dialogue between Catholics and those of other faiths in which Catholics participate without the express purpose of converting those of other faiths to the Roman Catholic Church, that is, the One True Church.

I cannot claim credit for coining that term. I saw that on the facebook wall of Pat Archibald, one of the bloggers of Creative Minority Report.  It is a brilliant term and it is an accurate description of what politically correct Catholics do when they "dialog" with no intent of bringing others home to Rome.

Here is a curious and telling post from Rorate Caeli.  CMR commented on it too.  It seems that some Italian Pentecostals and Evangelicals held a round-table discussion on July 19th as they discussed "contemporary Catholicism".  In their statement, they list key differences between them and us; I urge you to read it.  While they obviously fail to accept that the errors behind the differences lie squarely on their shoulders, at least they acknowledge the significance of the differences and that these differences render impossible any real "ecumenical opening" with the Church.  On that score they understand that error needs to be addressed first before any talk of unity can occur, for unity must be based on the whole truth.

This past Monday the Pope went to Caserta and visited several Italian Pentecostals.  He made the statement that "the Holy Spirit is the source of diversity in the Church. This diversity is very rich and beautiful. But then the same Holy Spirit creates unity. And in this way the Church is one in diversity. To use a beautiful Gospel phrase that I love very much, reconciled diversity is the gift of the Holy Spirit."  Forgive me, but who can make sense out of this glop?  We're talking about breaks in the Body of Christ, breaks occurring due to heresy and dissidence from the One True Church.  That is not "rich and beautiful".  And as far as that "gospel phrase" goes, can anyone cite chapter-and-verse the phrase "reconciled diversity"?  I've read through the Bible several times and have never come across that one.

Here are some more relevant details.  Apparently the local bishop of Caserta was never advised of the pope's visit to his diocese.  The Holy Father also scheduled his visit on the Feast of St Anne, a saint held in high honor in that town.  Why would it have taken much persuasion to convince the Holy Father to celebrate a Mass in honor of the grandmother of Our Lord?  Considering both these facts, we see here on the part of the pope an apparent downplaying of the Catholic church in that town.

Most distressing, especially from the Chief Shepherd of the Church, is this statement:  "I’m not interested in converting Evangelicals to Catholicism. There are so many doctrines we will never agree on. Let’s be about showing the love of Jesus.”  If he, the Successor of Peter is not interested in conversions to Catholicism, he is not showing any "love of Jesus", but rather a feel-good, shallow counterfeit of the same.  Our Lord's commission to his Apostles was to baptize the nations and to "teach them all that I have commanded you".  He does them, and all the world, a gross disservice to dismiss Catholic truth as "doctrines we'll never agree on".  One of the Spiritual Works of Mercy is to "instruct the ignorant".  Did that happen?  All indications point to "no".

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is ECUMENICIDE.

Pope Francis And His Paparazzi

With the situation in the Gaza strip and the general abysmal state of the Church today, why do so many "catholic" news outlets choose to focus on trivial occurrences?  Take all the hubbub, for example, that occurred last week when the Holy Father took lunch in a Vatican cafeteria with some Vatican employees.  Ok, maybe it was worth a picture and a short blurb, but that's it.  Why did everyone feel impelled to beat the incident into the ground?  I can hear the protests now.

• Gee whiz!  It shows that the Pope is human!  Get real!  Do we really need to be shown he's human?  What else would we think he is?  A visitor from outer space?  Some prehistoric swamp monster?  And if one really asks that question, what does that question indicate about their concept of what it means "to be human"?

And now, ladies and gentlemen, comes this breaking and earth-shattering news!  You'd better be sitting down for this for otherwise you may not withstand the shock!  Ready?  Here goes!

Today the Holy Father went to (gasp!) visit his dentist!  And he walked!

Well whoppdidoo!  Big deal!  Assuming you haven't died from the shock - or boredom - as the case may be, don't you think it may be time to examine why our Catholic news outlets are focusing on things completely trivial and mundane?  Don't you wish they behaved like adult journalists and stopped behaving like giddy teeny-boppers who behave like voyeurs when it comes to gawking at the latest music idol?

If any of you are glomming onto this prattle, perhaps you need to ask yourselves why.

Good Bishop From Paraguay Being Thrown Under The Bus

Bishop Rogelio Livieres of the Diocese of Ciudad del Este in Paraguay has seen his priestly ordinations suspended pending the pope's decision about an alleged situation in that diocese.  It seems that a priest who had been serving in the diocese of Scranton PA and allegations arose of sexual misconduct.  It is alleged that then-Bishop Joseph Martino had the priest (Carlos Urrutigoity) transferred to Paraguay.  Bishop Livieres has defended Father Urrutigoity, stating that the allegations are unproven.

It should be pointed out that Bishop Livieres is a strong opponent of liberation theology and a strong proponent of the Latin Mass.  The number of vocations from his diocese exceeds those of the neighboring diocese.  It has also been said that Bishop Livieres took one of his fellow bishops to task owing to the latter's sexual misbehaviors.

So we have a bishop who has instilled real Catholic life into his diocese and who has not thrown a priest under the bus without due process.  For that, the long knives are pointed at him.  By the way - several years ago we had a similar situation in the United States - Scranton PA, to be precise.  The target of USCCB venom was Bishop Joseph Martino, mentioned earlier in this post.  To get some background, I'll link to my older website.  Scroll down till you see "A Real Bishop in Scranton PA".  This is no coincidence, in my opinion.  If Father Urrutigoity was involved in scandalous behavior, he's still entitled to due process and not just condemnation by innuendo.  Is the antipathy towards Father Urrutigoity, who was assisted by both Bishops Martino and Liveres, supposed to be a warning to any other bishop who may decided to remember he's Catholic and not a progressive "liberation theology" hack?

Latest Papal Interview - Preliminary Reports Of Another Disaster

My friend at "What Did the Pope Really Say" caught a link to a preliminary report of the interview that was to be released today.  This too, along with so many others, promises to be a disaster.  Here's a Reuter's blurb summarizing some papal remarks with the statement "communists are closet Christians".

Whether or not this summary is accurate will have to be seen in other accounts of the interview.  However, some quotes deserve immediate attention - and correction.  There is the incredible statement that "poverty is at the center of the Gospel".

Any Catholic child with a basic knowledge of his/her faith will know that the center of the Gospel is Jesus Christ.  Yes, the Gospel does entail service to the poor, but that is ancillary to the main focus of eternal salvation.  I might suggest that all who are snookered by that "social gospel" heresy take a look at Matthew 26:6-13.

I await further details with trepidation.

US Bishops, Please Stop Degrading The Church's Teachings For Federal Money!

I stated Tuesday that in the wake of Obama's executive order, the US hierarchy of the Church should finally wake up and immediately divest themselves of federal funds.  Others are sounding the same clarion call.  Read the Acton Institute blog; its president, Father Robert Sirico, aptly stated, "there is the threat that he who drinks the king's wine sings the king's song".  They bishops are certainly singing Obama's song loudly as they screech and shill for the de facto abolition of our southern borders.

The Acton article was offering commentary on Phil Lawler's piece about the dangers of relying on federal contracts.  I pray the bishops wake up and start refusing government money.  The conditions that come with that money amount to an effective prostituting of Church teaching on morality; that actually has been allowed to happen for way too long.  The bishops must stop this before it's too late and the Church's moral credibility is irretrievable.

Meriam Ibrahim, Family, Safe In Italy

Early today, Meriam Ibrahim, with husband Daniel Wani and children Martin and Maya arrived in Italy after being flown out of Sudan on an Italian government plane.  They had been staying at the American Embassy in Khartoum this past month.  It is reported that both the Vatican and the Italian government were instrumental in securing her reentry into the free world.  She and her family met briefly with Pope Francis today.  His Holiness thanked her for her "steadfast witness of faith."

She and her family will most likely fly to the United States within a few days.  We certainly pray that they will be welcomed at least as much as the illegal aliens appear to be.  I take the opportunity to rebuke the Obama cartel's appalling lack of action in this case (outside of some perfunctory protest and posturing).

Deo Gratias!

Father Snyder - Utterly Unqualified To Rebuke Faithful Catholics Who Oppose Illegal Immigration

Those of us who raise voices of concern regarding the influx of "children" (many of them young adults posing as kids) are engaging in "hate talk" - that is, according to Father Larry Snyder, head of Catholic Charities.  Father Snyder, precisely because he is head of Catholic Charities, lacks all moral credibility to rebuke us.  Oh he may try, and no one begrudges his First Amendment rights here, but the fact is that his rants carry not one iota of Magisterial import; in fact it may be quite the opposite.

Recall that yesterday I posted a video by Michael Hichborn of American Life League detailing all the ways that progressive "social justice" arms of the USCCB act to undermine Church moral teaching.  At the 3:22 mark, Hichborn starts an expose of Catholic Charites; at 4:17 he segues into an expose of Father Snyder himself and all the harm he's caused.  Hichborn alludes to a dossier that was composed about Father Snyder.  Here it is.

Lest anyone think that Catholic Charities is acting and speaking out of the goodness of their little hearts, consider the governmental funding that various Catholic Charities received for the express purpose of preparing for this de facto invasion.  I'll summarize the data from the article.

• CC of Galveston: $15.5 million from the HHS
• CC of Fort Worth: $350 thousand from DHS
• CC of Dallas: $823 thousand from DHS

Doing a little quick math, we see that the Catholic Charities offices in Texas received close to $17 million in grants.  Of course those grants ultimately came from the pockets of the US taxpayers - many of whom Father Snyder disingenuously accuses of engaging in "hate talk".  Perhaps he considers "hate talk" anything that might cause the flow of federal funds to stop?

Please share this far and wide.  Father Snyder has no moral credibility whatsoever.  His "hate talk" diatribe is worthy only of derision.  Pray for the man, though.  He needs it.

Reason # 5,289 To Boycott The CCHD Collection - Say #no2cchd

Aleteia published a piece today by Steve Weatherbe entitled "Bishops React to Obama's Executive Order on Hiring Discrimination".  The article offers commentary on the USCCB's reaction of July 21 to Obama's action.  It's worth noting that one of the two authors is Archbishop Lori of Baltimore - who just applied for a federal grant to finance his aiding and abetting of illegal aliens.

He too seems to see through the smoke and mirrors that the USCCB is throwing up in the wake of this order.  They know that the federal funding spigot is about to be closed.  He quotes a statement by Michael Sean Winters of the Not-At-All Catholic Reporter: "Call me foolish, but I find it astonishing that a statement signed by an archbishop and a bishop on behalf of other bishops fails to mention God, makes no reference to the Bible, and is so utterly devoid of pastoral sensibility. This is the work of a lawyer, not a bishop."

Ladies and gentlemen, I believe this is the first time that I find myself in agreement with Winters.  They are not acting as successors to the Apostles.  Another "case in point" many years ago was the so-called "child-protection policies" crafted to ostensibly deal with the clergy sex-abuse scandal.  In the one found on the Archdiocese of Washington's site, not one mention of the words "sin" and "repentance" could be found.  They act like politicians, lawyers, insurance agents, social workers - anything but Catholic bishops!

Weatherbe also points out the reaction of Father Larry Snyder, president of Catholic Charities.  Apparently, Father is quite pleased with the executive order as it stands.  Now bear in mind that 67% of Catholic Charities' budget is funded by the US government.  A reasonable person might assume that Fr. Snyder would be concerned that his funding would be significantly reduced.  But he's not!  Why could that be?  I can think of only two reasons:

1. Father Snyder is hopelessly naive in thinking that federal dollars don't come with strings, OR
2. Father Snyder has no intentions of running counter to the "directives" to admit actively gay people into Catholic Charities circles.  They pulled out of gay adoptions, but that was largely at the orders of individual bishops.  Who can forget the lobbying firm, owned by an openly gay man, that they retained in 2011?  I'm also posting a video below in which Sister Jeannine Grammick of New Ways praises Catholic Charities for being gay-friendly; regrettably, she's probably correct. 

Guess which of the two I think is most likely the case?  Do we think it will be different for Catholic Relief Services or the Catholic Campaign for Human Development?  I certainly don't: especially when they're playing "henchman" for the Obama cartel's Central American human trafficking.

Next month the Archdiocese of Washington will have a second collection for the "Catholic Communications and Human Development Campaign".  It'll be during the weekend of Aug 9 - 10.  This is the third year, I believe, that they combined the CCHD collection with that of the Catholic Communications Campaign so that the name of the CCHD collection could be disguised.  As a further step in the deception, the ADW moved the CCHD collection from November to August.  The CCHD collection had come under well-deserved scrutiny and probably shrunk as a result.  They can't fool us.

I am urging a boycott of the second collection during the weekend of August 9-10 in the Archdiocese of Washington.  It is the CCHD collection.  Those of you in other dioceses should check to see when your CCHD collection will occur and boycott that.  Most are still in November, but some diocese have moved the collection.  At any rate, just say #no2cchd.   Now the video.  It's from last year, but quite relevant today.

Is The Montgomery County Government Itching For Another Legal Spanking?

Almost three weeks ago, the Germantown Reproductive Health Services was visited for the fourth time by an ambulance - actually, two in this case.  As with the other cases, a botched abortion job occasioned the visits from the ambulances.

Operation Rescue obtained some heavily redacted tapes pertaining to the 911 call that summoned the ambulances there.  They also obtained some rather odd prohibitions on use of public records.  OR president Troy Newman believes that Montgomery County Council's actions are part and parcel of an attempt to cover up yet another botch-job by Leroy Carhart.  Knowing the composition of the Montgomery County Council, I believe Newman's suspicions to be very reasonable.  Newman has had a track record of successful use of similar recordings in the past.  The Council probably knows this and are trying to circle their wagons.

I truly hope that the Council sees the light of day and orders Michael Baltrotsky, Operations Supervisor of Montgomery County Fire and Rescue, to cease and desist any action against Newman.  I believe neither he nor the Council has any legals grounds on which to stand.  Given their most recent defeat with the pregnancy center law (costing the county quite a pretty penny), can they afford to have more egg on their faces - especially before the November elections?

Obama's LGBT Executive Order And The Bishops' Disingenuous Protests

Yesterday the Messiah Most Miserable issued a dictatorial fiat executive order stating that no federal contractor can "discriminate" in its personnel practices based on employees' gender identity and/or sexual orientation.  Churches and related organizations are NOT exempted.  The USCCB pitched a fit.  My question is, "would this order of Obama's had been a blip on their radar screens if they had been exempted?"  Given prior behaviors, I must opine that had Obama exempted churches, they wouldn't have given a rat's rump regarding the matter.

But since the USCCB and so many of the dioceses are officially on the federal dole for so much of their budgets (e.g., those huge grants to facilitate the Central American child-trafficking scheme), they are in a panic now that it appears that their gravy trains may be pulling into the station.

John Zmirak posted quite a cogent piece on Aleteia, to which I now link.  I'll post one key paragraph below.  I'll elaborate on emboldened phrases below.

The short term impact of this on faithful Christians will certainly be unpleasant. Let’s assume that the leaders of the major Christian communions (Catholic, Orthodox and Evangelical) stand on principle.  Churches and charities that won’t collaborate will lose billions of dollars in federal funds that they had previously dispensed, channeling taxpayer money to serve the poor, recent immigrants, and others eligible for federal poverty aid. Groups such as Catholic Charities, some bishops’ migration offices, and others will see their budgets slashed. They will have to scale back their services, as the needy whom they had served get their needs met somewhere else -- by church groups which decide to play Judas, or outright secular agencies. The Christian groups that had relied on federal money to carry out their missions will have to look to their own church members for more donations, or their impact and clout will diminish.

• "Channeling taxpayer money".  This means, ladies and gentlemen, that through these "federal contracts" or "grants" or whatever you want to call them, the Church had been joining the state in dipping their grubby mits into the wallets of each and every one of us.  That is not charity; that is theft.  There is concern that the Church may be denied this "opportunity for money"; in reality, they will have removed from them an occasion of sin against the Seventh Commandment.
• "Catholic Charities..will see their budgets slashed."  I guess that means no more "needle exchange programs" as offered by Albany Catholic Charities or "Centennial Awards" being bestowed on the likes of Sister Carol Keehan or Fr. Theodore Hesburgh.  Read this link for more reasons why we should rejoice that Catholic Charities' budget might be slashed.
• "Christian groups..will have to look to their own church members for more donations."  Imagine that!  Christians being challenged to dig into their own pockets and fulfill their own Christian responsibilities.  In short, they'd be abiding (finally!) by the principle of subsidiarity.  That's how it should be done - not by clamoring for tax increases for everyone else.

If the Church is serious about being the Church of Jesus Christ and not some glorified social concerns agency, the bishops will immediately commence the process of weaning themselves from federal teats.  I suppose that means that Archbishop Lori would have to recant his recent request for a federal grant to bring illegal immigrants to the St Vincent Villa in Timonium.  What are the chances of that happening?  It may happen sooner than our bishops think - thanks be to God!

IRS Emails And Elijah Cummings

I'm no computer genius, but even I knew the malarkey about Lois Lerner's emails being lost was precisely that.  The so-called "loss" was blamed on an alleged "hard-drive crash" of her workstation computer.  Here's a little tid-bit for those unfamiliar with local area networks.  When emails enter and leave a work place, the ultimate origin and destination will be the individual's machine.  But the emails will travel through the office's various network servers.  Copies of all emails will be retained on those servers.  As most know, offices are required to keep archives of their emails.  Lerner's individual workstation may well have suffered a "hard-drive crash"; it doesn't matter.  Copies of those same emails will be retained at the server level.

I've been harping on that little fact on facebook for some time.  It now seems that light-bulbs are illuminating at long last, for an IRS official, Thomas Kane, admits that archive copies may still exist.

From another IRS email comes the news that MD Congressman Elijah Cummings may have requested or directed Lois Lerner to harass True the Vote and its founder, Catherine Engelbrecht.  It certainly might shed some light on Cummings' behavior during the investigative hearings.

Marylanders of the 7th Congressional District!  You have the opportunity this November to oust this man!  Seize it!

Thank You, Delegate Wade Kach! Archbishop Lori, You Should Be Ashamed!!

It appears that the Archdiocese of Baltimore is jumping on the bandwagon.  They want to place some of the illegal immigrants at St. Vincent Villa in Timonium - for a Federal grant, of course (I don't know the amount).

State Delegate Wade Kach penned a letter to the Archbishop, citing his concern about the serious communicable diseases that have been found among the illegals and the eventual cost to Baltimore and to the US.  Here he discusses his concerns with WBAL-1090 (listen to the embedded interview).  Moreover, he makes the point that Lori's actions make him complicit with Obama's flagrant violation of our nation's laws.  While Kach rightly advocates proper treatment of the immigrants, he also makes plain that they should be returned to their point of entry into this country and sent back.  Obama's usage of these kids as pawns (or fodder for child-trafficking) is itself a crime against humanity; Lori and so many of his brother bishops are playing the willing lackeys in this scheme.  That is unconscionable and must stop - that means you, Catholic prelates!

Maryland Bishops And Catholic Conference Join The Chorus Of Illegal Immigrant Panderers

Here's the garbage action alert that I received from the Maryland Catholic Conference a few days ago.


 Take Action 
Instead of going to school, playing with friends, and enjoying time with family, tens of thousands of children from Central America flee their homes embarking on a dangerous trek north to the United States.  At the same time, nearly 40,000 young mothers with children have also entered the U.S. and are being placed in detention centers. 
Many unaccompanied youth suffer a lack of educational and economic opportunities, and ultimately flee due to violence from organized criminal networks in their countries, which has increasingly stained and strained the fabric of their societies.  The breakdown of the family unit, caused by the absence of physical and economic security, has also caused children to find safe haven with family members in the United States.

Please raise your voice with this action alert to help protect these vulnerable children and mothers by contacting your U.S. senators and representative. For some background on the issue, read the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishop's  testimony before Congress. 

My blogging colleague A Washington DC Catholic must be on the same list.  Read the commentary on his piece.  These progressives do like to omit that teensy detail about the flagrant violation of our borders.

Naturally this week's Catholic Standard joined in the propaganda campaign.  It featured an article about the opening Mass (celebrated by Cardinal Wuerl) for the (so-called) National Migration Conference.  He made it a point to mention that most of us are descended from immigrants; what he decided to omit was that our immigrant ancestors obeyed the laws of their host country, complying with all requirement for immigrants at the time.  That is a far cry from what is happening now, and to try to draw some parallel between then and now is ridiculous, if not downright dishonest.

As expected, progressive CINO MD governor Martin O'Malley opined that any deportation of the kids would send them to "certain death"  (like the 90+ that are aborted every day in Maryland, Marty??).  However, several hours later, he told the Obama cartel that it should not send any of these kids to a former Army Reserve Center in Westminster MD.  The citizens in that conservative area of Maryland rallied and (with the assistance of Andy Harris) made plain to the governor that this would not be in the best interests of the citizens and their families.  For once, O'Malley saw the light of day.

That refusal of O'Malley's (a rumored presidential hopeful) must not only have been galling to the Obamanistas, but must have been most embarrassing to the left-wing-leaning Maryland bishops and the Maryland Catholic Conference.  Oh, to have been a fly on the wall at the MCC when they heard that news!  And to think that this kind of common sense was displayed in the liberal loony-bin known as Maryland!  Will miracles ever cease?

By the way - not all of these "kids" are kids.  Many of them are gang members and other adults posing as children.  Do our bishops care, or have all those HHS and DHS grants caused them to turn blind eyes to that fact?

Carhart-Affiliated Nurse's License Suspended

Last year I alerted folks to the presence of Lindsay Creekmore, a nurse working with Leroy Carhart since their days in Nebraska.  At that time, I noted that her Nebraska license was being investigated - a fact that should have precluded any employment in the State of Maryland.

Today Operation Rescue announced that the state of Nebraska has suspended her nursing license in that state owing to improper drug administration.  So for a while she cannot work in Nebraska.  I suggest my Maryland friends at Germantown keep an eye out for her in case she tries to work here again.

With All Due Respect, Michael Voris, You Cannot Put Lipstick On A Pig

Well, you can try, but you'll only engage in an exercise in futility.  In today's Vortex, he tries to chide those of us who are rightly concerned about the nonsense spewing forth from the Vatican.  Voris trips all over himself while so doing.  I'll elaborate before I post the video.

• Look at the title: "The Most Misunderstood Pope In History".  Doesn't that make you want to ask why, in all the church's 2000-year history, Pope Francis has earned this title?  Please don't blame it on the internet and blogs, for they were in force during the pontificates of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI.  These two pontiffs never had too much trouble making themselves understood (efforts of left-wing media notwithstanding).
• From 1:03 on, we hear an apology (?) for the pope's "off-hand way of talking".  "Does he guard his words and consider that he should be much more circumspect in what he says and to whom?  Well, it's just clear that's not his style...That's who he is.  He has become the most ill-quoted and misrepresented pope in the history of the church".  Leaving aside (for the moment) the exaggeration in that last sentence, can we see "cause and effect" being made plain?  If anyone is careless in his speaking and with whom he speaks, he can expect all sorts of misquotes and misinterpretations to ensue.  These misquotes, etc are an expected result of sloppiness in communication.  That's true for anybody, as common sense dictates.  When the speaker holds a position of great responsibility, his/her moral responsibility for misunderstanding increases commensurately for greater is the damage that can be done.
• Let's elaborate on the "that's not his style" quip.  For now I'll consider Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, for they too dealt with hostile newsprint and electronic social media.  I'm quite certain that both men had their own "styles".  However, it seems to me that they never let their "styles" dominate their considerations in how best to communicate their message.  They were willing to lay their "styles" aside so that the truths that they were trying communicate would not be obfuscated by delivery styles.  They no doubt hoped to minimize any media distortion.
• At 1:26, he continues.  "Does he need to stop talking to so many people in such an off-handed fashion?  Well, that argument might be easily made, but face it, he's not gonna do that; that's not who he is."  We'll stop right there.  His "off-handed fashion of talking" is not an indelible feature of "who he is", any more than it would be for any of us.  What is now an indelible feature of "who he is" is that he is the Vicar of Christ.  He holds great responsibility.  Granted, not all - in fact, very few - of his words will bear the weight of Church teaching.  BUT many will place great stock in the most careless quip he utters.  Right or wrong, that's a fact; will His Holiness continue to cause scandal to them? 
• At 2:04 he mentions the interview (second one) with Scalfari and the subsequent "Vatican clarifications".  He opines that the list  of speculations is growing monotonous.  Be that as it may, please review the three previous "bullet points" for the most probable causes behind this malady.
• At 3:21 he states that "even the Vatican itself doesn't know what the Pope said and then has to run around to find out what he said, who he said it to, and put out all kinds of fires whipped up in part by Catholics".  The first part of that sentence may well be correct.  It does seem like internal communications in the Vatican are an abysmal disaster.  Why doesn't the Vatican know what he said?  Without that basic knowledge, how can adequate translations be prepared in any timely fashion?  It is that disheveled state of affairs that is the cause of "all kinds of fires", not the Catholics who dare to notice and state what is all too achingly obvious.
• At 3:40 he mentions the interview regarding "civil unions".  Noting the various definitions that different nations place on given terms, might it not have been prudent of His Holiness to at least alert his communication office so that they could have prepared appropriate and timely translations?  That might have helped prevent some of the hub-bub that Voris decried.

Moral of story?  Pray that the pope learn from these disasters and take responsibility for what issues forth from his mouth.  Real spiritual peril can result.

By the way - recall the first Scalfari interview?  You know, the one that really wasn't an interview for it had not been reviewed by the Vatican but still managed to be posted to the Vatican website?  It was pulled down in short order - but guess what?  After the subsequent interview a week or two ago, the first interview reappeared on the Vatican website.  Father Zuhlsdorf's blog has more detail - and today it came down again!  Is there any kind of coordination in that office?  I wrote a little ditty to (dis)honor this state of affairs; it can be sung to "The Hokey-Pokey".  I'll post it before the Vortex.

They put the interview in.

They pull the interview out.

They put the interview in,

And they spin it all about.

They spew Lombardi's nonsense

And they turn it inside out.

That's what it's all about!

Obama, Bishops And Child-Trafficking

My colleague at Les Femmes has noticed that this massive immigration of children from locales south has all the stench of child-trafficking.  Oh, many nefarious purposes can be served with this sudden influx of immigrants:

• Michael Voris pointed out that the Texas political landscape could be drastically altered
• This is a perfect implementation of the Cloward-Piven Strategy.
• The bishops think they might increase their numbers in the churches, although these immigrants have historically become secularized in the US.

On Saturday, I proposed the possibility that the bishops who accepted grants from the government to facilitate the massive immigration are now complicit in child-trafficking.  Perhaps it wasn't their intention but they cannot now ignore what is transpiring before their very eyes.  Because it is quite possible that they are blind to the child-trafficking because of the grants, I'll call the grants what they most likely are - bribes.

The bodies of small children have been found on the shores of the Rio Grande after drowing therein.  We also hear that parents of girls about to be shipped here give their daughters contraceptives - in case they're raped on their way to the US.  What kind of parents, or government would expose their children to that risk of violence?  What kind of bishop is complicit and silent in the face of the kind of travesty to which Mexico and the Central American countries are inflicting upon their own children?  A bribed bishop?  Readers, if any of you think that's impossible, please explain your reasoning.

Another blogging colleague at Connecticut Catholic Corner has this to say about the Pope's remarks on illegal immigration.  Spot on.

Carhart's Fifth Abortion Botch-Job In Germantown Results In Another Woman Taken Away By Ambulance

Almost two weeks ago in Germantown Maryland (July 2) an ambulance pulled up to Germantown Reproductive Health Services and took yet another injured woman to the hospital (presumably Shady Grove).  Since Carhart set up shop there and started murdering babies in the latter parts of their pregnancies, four ambulances have rolled into that parking lot to take women to get real medical help.  In reality, Carhart injured five women; the first, Jennifer Morbelli, was taken to the hospital after her family could not reach Carhart.  She subsequently died.

Operation Rescue has more details here, along with video.  You will note that this incident required the assistance of two ambulance crews.  OR suggests that the Maryland Board of Physicians be contacted and that we demand an honest investigation.  I concur, with a caveat.

In November, the entire State of Maryland government, from the governor on down, is up for election.  I'd suggest that all Maryland citizens of good will do all in their power to keep Anthony Brown from moving into the Statehouse after his boss Martin O'Malley leaves.  As long as the Democrat party of death holds the reins of power, there will be no honest investigation of these abortionists.  Why do we think Carhart set up shop in Maryland in the first place?  O'Malley, Brown and Joshua Sharfstein have been openly wined and dined by Maryland NARAL at their various fundraisers.  Should the Dems retain power, they will NOT upset their gravy-trains.  No success in cleaning up Germantown will occur until we see clean-up in Annapolis and in Montgomery County.

The Pope And Voris On The Immigration Situation

First I'll deal with what the Holy Father said - versus what some dream that he said.  Today he issued a message to an immigration colloquium happening in Mexico City.  He said, "I would also like to draw attention to the tens of thousands of children who migrate alone, unaccompanied, to escape poverty and violence: This is a category of migrants from Central America and Mexico itself who cross the border with the United States under extreme conditions and in pursuit of a hope that in most cases turns out to be vain. They are increasing day by day. This humanitarian emergency requires, as a first urgent measure, these children be welcomed and protected. These measures, however, will not be sufficient, unless they are accompanied by policies that inform people about the dangers of such a journey and, above all, that promote development in their countries of origin."

"These children be welcomed and protected".  By whom?  At first glance this could appear that the Holy Father is joining the chorus of southwestern US bishops who are clamoring for a de facto collapse of our national borders to our south.  But consider what is going on.  The Central American kids are being shuttled by Mexico, in hurried and unsafe manners, to the Rio Grande border.  The Holy Father today spoke to Mexican leaders, not US leaders.  Might he not have been chiding them for just shoving the Central American kids north instead of welcoming and protecting them?  He also spoke of "promoting development in their countries of origin".  This is a far cry from Cardinal Maradiaga's thinly-disguised rant that he and his president be allowed to ship their problematic children north rather than take up their own responsibilities towards their own citizens.

As I mentioned a few days ago, the southwestern bishops may have more than humanitarian interests in the immigration of these children, having received millions in Federal grants over the years in preparation for their cooperation.  Michael Voris has a take on this that I didn't consider, particularly as it relates to changing the political landscape of Texas.  Here is today's Vortex.

Another Papal Interview - A Planned Debacle?

Remember last October when Pope Francis granted that interview with Eugenio Scalfari of La Repubblica?  That's when he let loose with less-than-papacy-worthy comments such as:

• "Proselytism is solemn nonsense". 
• "Everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them."

I need not elaborate (I would hope) on why these statements are problematic if not downright heretical.  I did elaborate on some reactions and "damage-control efforts" here and here.

One might have hoped that the Holy Father would have learned not to give interviews at all, let alone to Eugenio Scalfari.  Alas, such was not to be!  In fact, we may have reason to believe that the resulting chaos was intended.

Last week saw another interview - with more lunatic quotes.  In this conversation (not recorded again, by the way), the Pope allegedly estimated that 2% of priests are pedophiles. That's 1 priest out of every 50 priests; I'd call that a bit of exaggeration to say the least.  He also stated that there was "room for maneuver" when it comes to priestly celibacy, going so far as to use the term "problem of celibacy".

Immediately Father Federico Lombardi, Director of the Holy See's Press Office, went into "damage control" mode - much as he did last autumn after the first fiasco interview.  Here's his statement, published in Zenit.  Just as he did last year, Lombardi attributes the indignation about the off-kilter papal remarks to words that "cannot be attributed to the pope".  He ended his statement with this about quotations: "Is this an omission or explicit recognition that this is an attempt to manipulate some naive readers?"

Father Lombardi sounded quite indignant.  I might be inclined to believe him - if this all wasn't a repeat performance of the first interview and its subsequent damage-control.  When this interview with Scalfari happened last week, both the pope and Fr Lombardi knew what to expect.  I'm coming to believe that they wanted this subsequent hub-bub to occur, so that tradition-defying statements could be issued, with responsibility for those statements being attributed to a "straw-man" - in this case, Scalfari.  The only other possibility is that the Holy Father, the Director of the Holy See's Press Office and others are incorrigible dunces who refuse to learn from their mistakes.

There is a saying: "Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me."  That statement is very relevant, in two respects.

1. Either it refers to the Holy Father and his underlings in the Vatican who are (seemingly) falling for the wiles of the Scalfaris of the world.  OR
2. It refers to the Catholic populace at large, who are being asked/cajoled/browbeat into believing that the Vatican is simply an "innocent victim" rather than cunning manipulators of the trust of the Catholic faithful.

Pope Francis is the Holy Father.  We must pray for him.  In order to do so, we must look at situations with rose-colored glasses removed.  We must have no hesitancy in facing what is plain as day.  Of course (I speak particularly to my fellow bloggers), we must not be silent.

Catholic Bloggers, We May NOT Surrender To Francis-Funk!

Two months ago, I put up a post to exhort my fellow bloggers not to throw up their hands in the face of the pandemonium emanating from the Vatican.  Please review it.

I am not the only one to notice the malaise that has recently manifested itself in the Catholic blogging community.  The ones I'll cite below are observations of Catholic British bloggers.  They write on the heels of the de facto quashing of their (and my) fellow blogger who authored "Protect the Pope".  The blogger is a deacon who was stifled by his bishop for standing for Catholic tradition.  As an ordained deacon, he is bound by obedience to his bishop.  Most of us, being lay, are not so constrained - or shackled and gagged as the case may be.

Father Ray Blake of England, four months after the stifling of Protect the Pope, put up a piece asking "Where Have All The Bloggers Gone?"  His concluding sentence troubles me. I quote, "Most Catholics but especially clergy want to be loyal to the Pope in order to maintain the unity of the Church.  Today that loyalty is perhaps best expressed through silence".  William Oddie of CatholicHerald.UK, elaborating on Father Blake's piece, seems to agree with him.  He admits that much of the silence has been caused by the uncertainty from the Vatican and the subsequent discouragement felt by Catholic bloggers.  I encourage you to read both pieces and their accompanying comments.

With the notion that "loyalty is expressed through silence", I take strenuous exception.  Think about it.  What message is communicated when we are encouraged to be silent about the Pope in order to be loyal to him?  That itself is rather uncomplimentary of the pope; silence often communicates its own message rather unmistakably.  Would Father Blake et al ever dream that silence about Pope Benedict XVI and his writings would have been a proper expression of loyalty to him?  If not, what's the difference?

Let me take a minute to explain why I will continue to point out gaffes emanating from papal interviews and the Vatican.  Not every utterance of the Holy Father constitutes Church teaching - certainly not the interviews, off-the-cuff remarks, etc.  There are those Catholics, particularly converts, who might have the idea that everything the Pope says/does is representative of Church teaching.  Now think back to Holy Thursday, when Pope Francis broke Canon law to wash women's feet.  One person was understandably confused.  She reasoned that if Church law could be broken with impunity on Holy Thursday, why should anyone hold Church teaching about contraception in any higher regard?  I came out point blank and stated that the pope is a human being and what he did was a violation of Church law; I don't know his reasons and I don't really care.  He erred.  What else could I tell her?  Anything else - including silence - would have been a blatant lie to her face.  She deserved better than that; she deserved the truth.  I did not make the pope look bad in so doing; he did that by himself.  Later I will post on the ridiculous notion of the Pope going to preach at an evangelical church - with no intention of preaching the fullness of truth to them.  Don't they deserve better than that?  My fellow bloggers, if you come across a fellow Catholic with similar questions looking for answers, will you wallow in your on dejection and just shrug your shoulders and walk away in silence from that hurting person?

Another blogger named Mundabor proposes that "Now, More Than Ever, It Is The Right Time To Blog".  He's right.  This is no time to surrender to despondency, discouragement and even cynicism.  Too many bloggers have been doing precisely that, I regret to say.  Just during the past few weeks I pulled from my blog roll (right side bar) two Catholic blogs that had been essentially abandoned by their owners (one for over a year); will I have to purge more?

Fellow Catholic Bloggers!  This is no time to go wimpy-wobbly against our blogging apostolates!   I think I remember one of the comments on the other two blogs, written by a Catholic blogger.  He/she wrote that they didn't blog because their heart wasn't in it after the election of Francis.  To that I reply, "So what?  Blog and speak anyway!  You don't feel like it?  What difference does that make?  Shake off your doldrums and start hitting your keyboards again - now!"

Additional Information Regarding Illegal Immigration - Including REAL Church Teaching

Yesterday I raised a number of questions about the sudden increase in the number of children being sent from Mexico and points south of there to the United States.  I had suggested that perhaps the children were seized from their parents.  Another possibility might be that Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala and other countries are emptying their orphanages and juvenile detention centers and literally dumping their problems and responsibilities into our laps.

Read about the deal cut between Mexico and Guatemala.  They call it the Southern Border Program to Improve Passage.  It sounds so nice and official, doesn't it?  Unlike the US today, Mexico takes its border control responsibilities seriously - particularly to its south.  However, Mexico is cutting its immigrants a break, provided that their ultimate destination is the United States via our porous southern border.  People coming into Mexico will receive a "Regional Visitor's Card", allowing them to stay in Mexico for up to 3 days - enough time for them to make their way to the northern border.  Of course other countries such as Honduras and El Salvador will be sending their migrants through Mexico, too.  Wanna bet that the Obama regime is in on the scheme?

We also hear that on Friday some Central American leaders pressed Vice President Biden to "improve migrant rights".  One might wonder why Biden didn't retort that these countries should be addressing their national ills that would impel their citizens to leave their countries.  But again, Biden is in on the scheme.  One of these (so-called) Central American "leaders" was Jorge Ramon Hernandez, president of Honduras.  He threatened to continue the rapid influx of Honduran children "unless immigration reform" happens.  That's nonsensical.  Suppose the US "reformed" immigration to his liking; does that mean he'd stop sending Honduran children?  But wait!  Let's leave that irony aside for the time being!  Didn't we just read of another Honduran leader trying to cajole the US into accepting Honduran children - "problem children" to be precise?  Read yesterday's post!  That other Honduran leader, closely echoing his president (and NOT Church teaching) is Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga.  They're spouting the same talking points, hoping we won't notice.

As far as Church teaching goes on the matter of immigration, might not the Summa Theologica of St Thomas Aquinas have something to say on the matter?  Here is the second part of the first part of his work; scroll to Article 3.  John Horvat has commentary on it.  Time prohibits me from going into a full analysis.  Suffice it to say that the Angelic Doctor clearly states that a nation has the right and responsibility to control who gets to enter into the nation and if/how immigrants assimilate into that nation.  St Thomas states that the nation's leaders have a responsibility to secure the best interests of the nation and its citizens.

Getting back to the massive shipment of Central American children to the US, one must wonder if the USCCB is being complicit in what may be a child-trafficking scheme.  With the millions of grants they've received these past two years, do they care?

Regarding Illegal Immigration, Here Are Questions The Liberals And USCCB Refuse To Answer

I'm going to follow up on yesterday's posting with some observations and questions - mostly questions, for there seem to be many questions that aren't being asked.  Who know?  Perhaps these questions are being actively stifled.  Well, I'll ask them (in no particular order) and hope that this serves to wake some folks up.

Today I received my newsletter from Help Save Maryland, a conservative organization in Maryland.  They in turn reprinted a National Review article, called "The Moral Crisis On Our Southern Border" by Victor Davis Hanson.  He rightly points out that the bulk of these children are not Mexican; rather, they hail from Central America.  Since Mexico (ironically) has much tougher immigration policies than does the United States, how can it be that these children were not turned away at Mexico's southern border?  Did Mexico admit them because they wanted them shipped to the United States?  If so, for what purpose(s)?

Hanson asks some questions that bear review, and I'll "copy-and-paste".  What sort of callous parents simply send their children as pawns northward without escort, in selfish hopes of soon winning for themselves either remittances or eventual passage to the U.S? What sort of government allows its vulnerable youth to pack up and leave, without taking any responsibility for such mass flight?

These questions deserve answers, as do the following questions that arise because of Hanson's.

• There are thousands of kids coming across.  Did their parents willingly send their children abroad, or were they pressured to do so?  I have difficulty believing that thousands of parents could be so roguish and callous as to just send them away on a train.  Could it be that those children were seized from their parents?
• Assuming that the kids were indeed sent ahead of their parents to be tools for their own immigration to the US, what tracking mechanisms (if any) were put in place so that these parents could eventually find their children?  The whole procedure seems so hodge-podge (at least north of the border) that I don't see how any reunion would be possible.
• Regarding the de facto abandonment of these children by their parents OR the seizure of the children from their parents, why do we hear nary a peep from Catholic bishops on either side of the Rio Grande regarding this practice?  When it comes to deportation, the US bishops are among the first to pitch royal snit-fits about "disrupting the unity of families".  Now that the families are being shattered south of the border in the process of the kids coming here, where, oh where, is that noble indignation of the bishops?  Why do we hear crickets on that score from the USCCB?

Rush Limbaugh pointed out a few days ago that the mobilization of all these kids was no spontaneous event; there had to be a considerable amount of organization to pull it off.  I bet even Limbaugh did not know how much the Church establishment was part and parcel of all that coordination.  Father Z reprinted news that he in turn obtained from Liberty News.  As early as 2010, dioceses along the Mexican border received grants from both Health and Human Services and Department of Homeland Security for the express purposes of preparing them to receive this increased influx of illegal immigrants.  So when you hear of border dioceses "opening their doors", etc, realize that a large part of all this "generosity" is your tax dollars at work.  The chairman of the USCCB's Committee on Migration, Bishop Eusebio Elizondo, told attendees of the conference last week that "it is not because we have a political agenda..it is something we are impelled to do".  Yes, I'd imagine that millions of dollars in DHS and HHS grants would be quite "impelling".  As for "political agendas", how else will the Democrats buy enough voters to keep them in power?

At that same Migration Conference held last week, Cardinal Oscar Andres Rodriguez Maradiaga, president of Caritas International, gave yet another pitch at trying to inflict a guilt-trip on good people wanting to defend their borders.  His failure to do so was overshadowed by his inaccurate knowledge of world history.  He stated, "Can you imagine if St Paul tried to get into Europe nowadays? Rather than being welcomed with unusual kindness he would probably be classed as an undocumented migrant and sent back home."  Your Eminence, most of the western world at that time, including Europe, was part and parcel of the Roman Empire - and Paul was a Roman citizen.  Under no circumstances would he have been considered an immigrant, let alone illegal.  Earlier he made a similar (and common) gaffe about Jesus "living as a migrant".  He is referring to the Holy Family's flight into Egypt.  I point out that at that time, both Egypt and Israel had been subsumed into the Roman Empire.  So here we see yet again more conflation of Scripture and world history on the part of these progressives.

In that same speech he made a startling admission (probably inadvertently).  "Many of these children are from my own country, Honduras. They flee gangs who want to induct them into a life where they will surely die a violent death at a young age."  Your Eminence, before you come to the US to chide us for defending our country from a swell of immigrants that we cannot assimilate, you and your brother Honduran bishops would do well to address the problems in your own country that seem to be making life in Honduras miserable.  You will not be addressing the issues in Honduras by shipping them north of the Rio Grande!

By the way - the House of Representatives has nixed Obama's $3.7 billion "emergency request".  Will that dry up the DHS and HHS grants to the churches?  We hope!

Pelosi And USCCB Make Buffoons Of Themselves Over The Illegal Alien Situation

With the rather "sudden" influx of young children being put on buses and being shipped to the US - rendering them illegal immigrants, the USCCB is once again doing obeisance to their progressive sugar-daddies by getting behind Obama's request for nearly $4 billion to (ahem!) address this problem.  They are being lauded and cheered in this foolishness by none other than Nancy Pelosi.

She has taken the occasion to wax lyrical about the "eloquence of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops" in their discussions about the influx.  Pssst!  Hey Nancy!  A couple of points!

1. They ceased calling themselves the "National Conference of Catholic Bishops" several decades ago!  They are now the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops!  Got that?
2. You certainly had no fond words to say when they were actually acting like Catholic bishops in decrying abortion and the contraception mandate!  Your fondness for their eloquence seems to be attuned to whether they are going lockstep with the Cloward-Piven strategy versus the Magisterium!

As far as these busloads of kids coming in, has it dawned on these USCCB types - and their brother bishops south of the Rio Grande - that they should be rebuking their parents for just shoving their children away from them?  Has it dawned on them that they should be urging these parents to (wait for it!) raise their own children?

I for one think it's rather telling how all this seems to be happening in a coordinated fashion.  How did all these Mexican children come to be on those buses?  There are thousands of them; the collection and shipping of the kids to the US took some effort, and not just on the part of "desperate parents".  Of course the USCCB seems to be cheering on the influx - almost as on cue.  Are these kids meant to be the vanguard for their parents, so that they can join them (and become Democrat voters)?  I mentioned briefly the Cloward-Piven Strategy.  I'd suggest all read up on it, for we are seeing it being implemented right now.

Father Marcel Guarnizo: We Must Defend Life And Family Openly

Father Marcel Guarnizo (yes, the same who was expelled from the Archdiocese of Washington because he withheld Holy Communion from a practicing lesbian two years ago) gave an interview to Zenit that was released today.  Father is now working with the World Congress of Families and is focusing on training Catholic leaders in central and eastern Europe.

In this interview, Father expressed hope that he sees in Russia and other eastern countries that have suffered under tyranny for much of the twentieth century.  He believes that signs of vitality that he sees there might offer some hope for western Europe and the United States of America, both writhing in the throes of the culture of death and the resulting demographic winter.

Let's take Father's words to heart.  Everyone of us - particularly the ordained - has a responsibility to speak out in defense of faith and life.

Louisiana Supreme Court Orders Priest To Violate Confessional Seal

In the Diocese of Baton Rouge, LA - 5 years ago - a 12-yr old girl allegedly went to Confession and reported to the priest, Fr. Jeff Bayhi, that she was being sexually abused.  She reported that he counseled that she remain silent on the matter.

The parents filed suit against Fr. Bayhi and the Diocese of Baton Rouge and are trying to compel Father Bayhi to comment about what the girl said in confession.  In other words, they're demanding that he violate the Seal of Confession.  The LA Supreme Court is joining in the demand.

Ladies and gentlemen, a priest may never - under any circumstances - divulge what he heard in the Confessional.  If he dares to do so, he incurs automatic excommunication, imperiling his own immortal soul.  This is nothing more than an attempt to marginalize Catholics as they freely live out their faith.

The Diocese of Baton Rouge has issued their statement.  They intend to take this matter to the Supreme Court, if necessary.  For now, I'd suggest an immediate cessation to the "face-to-face" option that is currently available in parishes.  That was a lousy idea from the get-go.

Saint John Nepomucene, pray for us.

Seeking Unity With Evangelicals - But On What Basis?

Today Charismanews published a piece detailing a meeting that Pope Francis had with some evangelical leaders - among them Kenneth Copeland.  If I understand properly, the Holy Father recorded a greeting, telecast to several of the leaders' congregations, in which he expressed a "desire that Christians would become family and not be divided".  Ladies and gentlemen, let's "cut to the chase", shall we?  There is only one way that can happen, and that is if these congregations, from the pastors on down, convert to the Roman Catholic Faith - the One True Church.  Only in the Roman Catholic Church can they find the fullness of Christ's teachings and the Sacraments that He instituted.  I realize that most of them were born into their respective denominations and have little culpability for schism, but they still must "cross the Tiber" as it were.

According to James Robison (one of the evangelical leaders in attendance), the Holy Father "challenged Catholics never try to control the Holy Spirit but yield to Him".  We Catholics understand what that means, but do the evangelical leaders have that same understanding - particularly Kenneth Copeland and John Arnott?

Copeland is a huge promoter of a vary dangerous spiritual practice known under various names: slain in the spirit, resting in the spirit, drunk in the spirit, Toronto blessing (owing to Arnott's contribution to it), soaking prayer, holy laughter (I'm sure there are others).  I've seen this with my own eyes - several times.  Before the reform of the Mother of God Community in the mid 1990s, the practice was becoming commonplace there before Cardinal Hickey definitively forbade it.  I myself never joined in for I could sense the spiritual danger in submitting to an experience that had basis in neither Holy Scripture nor the Tradition of the Catholic Church.

Below I post a video of one such "holy laughter" session featuring Kenneth Copeland.  In the beginning, the late Kenneth Hagin is leading the meeting (when he can stand up without babbling, that is).  Toward the middle Copeland can be seen next to him as they're both sprawled on the floor - I believe he's wearing a white jacket and red shirt.  Here is the write-up from where I got the video.  The author's observations closely correlate to my own from almost 20 years ago.  The behaviors of the various people are quite identical to what I saw in MOG before Cardinal Hickey's intervention.  I'd like to point out that I later did some research into this phenomenon and discovered some reason for my own instinctive revulsion; the practice is heretical and is steeped in eastern religious and even occultic practices.

Does it sound like I'm digressing from the Pope's meeting to Copeland's heresies?  Not really.  If we don't understand that without a solid, explicitly-stated basis in the Fullness of truth that can be found in the Roman Catholic Church, practices such as the "slain in the spirit" stuff can seduce the unwary - as it did so many of my friends.  Now the video.

Why Did Pope Francis Make A Joke Out Of The Creation Of Eve?

I've said it before and I'll say it now.  The Holy Father's attempts at spontaneous interviews often yield disastrous results.  He gave an interview to Il Messagero, and the reporter seems to have been a feminist.  She was implying that there's misogyny in the Church.  He attempted to reply in the form of a joke: "the fact is that woman was taken from a rib..(laughes)... I'm kidding, that's a joke."

Really?  The Genesis account of the creation of man and woman is a joke?  Since when is Holy Scripture a joke?  There has been some discussion about the creation of the universe and other animal species, but the Church has always taught that Adam and Eve were real people who were created immediately by God and infused with souls.  See Humani Generis by Pope Pius XII.   Pope Francis' lame attempt at humor (presuming it's that innocent) undermines the teaching of the Church in that matter.  I only hope and pray that he did not deny the Genesis account of the creation of Adam and Eve.

When Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio accepted the papal election last year, he accepted a calling that is his 24/7/365.  There is no "punching the clock", as it were.  In the eyes of so many, every deed and utterance is taken as God's holy will for the Church.  Most of his deeds and utterances will not happen ex cathedra but he will bear immense responsibility for any scandal caused by any carelessness.

These interviews should cease immediately.  What we are seeing is a key reason why his predecessors never granted these.  Why does he not learn from their wise practices?

Thomas Rowan, Former Standard Editor - Requiscat In Pace

From this week's Catholic Standard I learned that Tom Rowan, former editor of the Catholic Standard (he preceded Mark Zimmerman) passed away last Sunday.  He retired from the Standard in 1991 - approximately 23 years ago.  Zimmerman extolled the praises of Rowan.  It is a rare occasion when I agree with Zimmerman, but this is one such occasion.  Perhaps Zimmerman can learn a bit if he rereads his own words.

Zimmerman rightly points out that Rowan had no bones about "fearlessly taking on a cast of villains that included the ACLU, Washington Post, Catholic pro-abortion politicians" and "lambasting rogue theologians".  Indeed I remember some of those columns; he wasn't afraid to speak the truth.  He wasn't afraid to hear it either, as the Standard featured a "letters to the editor" column.  Sadly, that important component of journalistic professionalism seemed to have disappeared when he left the Standard.

Soon after Rowan's retirement, Cardinal Hickey retired and then-Archbishop McCarrick took the helm at the Archdiocese of Washington.  Far from being one to "lambast rogue theologians", McCarrick openly rubbed elbows and struck hands with them, going so far as to sign the Land O' Lakes Statement that openly welcomed heresy on Catholic college campuses in the US.  As far as CINO pro-abortion politicians and others go?  As this post states, I've led numerous pickets of events where Cardinal McCarrick honored Ted Kennedy, John Sweeney, etc.

Then of course there's the disappearance of the Standard's "letters to the editor" column.  It happened at the time Cardinal McCarrick made known his disdain for Canon 915.  I have it on inside information that the decision to halt the column was made in reaction to the hundreds, if not thousands, of angry letters pouring in to denounce the Cardinal's position; mine was one of them.  That cessation of the "letters to the editor" column was a key impetus to the start of this blog.

As I ponder Mr. Rowan's passing, I wonder if he would have stood still for such muzzling of truth at the newspaper to which he devoted 40 years of his life had he not retired.  Whatever, much integrity of the Standard left with him.

Priorities Before The Festivities Of The Fourth

Before we celebrate our once-great nation, we need to take an honest assessment of it.  If you've read this blog and others like it - and have been paying attention to current events - you'll realize that the United States of America is undergoing serious decay on all fronts.  The deterioration has been primarily spiritual and moral as we've forgotten and even disdained our Christian roots and the Lord Jesus Christ.  The decay naturally spread into economic and military aspects of our nation.

Our responsibility as Christians is to pray and work for repentance of all.  Only then dare we entertain any hope of abating this rapid deterioration of our country - and western civilization, for that matter.

As well as being Independence Day, today is First Friday.  Have you gone to Mass yet?  If not, I'd suggest looking on the internet for a First Friday Mass that you can attend.  Our Lord gave to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque very specific promises to those who receive Holy Communion on nine consecutive First Fridays; can we not agree that in this day and age that these graces are desperately needed?

Also, tomorrow is First Saturday.  Our Lady of Fatima made additional promises to those who make reparation for sins and blasphemies of others.  Please read this brief account.  Again, do we not see that our poor world needs all the graces that our poor actions can procure for it?  Those of you away on a nice holiday weekend - please go to Mass tomorrow as well.  Everything else can wait.

I'll end this by quoting 2 Chronicles 7:14 (from the Douay-Rheims version): "And my people, upon whom my name is called, being converted, shall make supplication to me, and seek out my face, and do penance for their most wicked ways: then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sins and will heal their land."

Who are "my people"?  That's us, folks!  The responsibility is laid squarely on our shoulders.  Let's move.

Carhart's Indiana Abortuary Among Three Mills Closed This Week

Operation Rescue announced the happy news that three places where children were being murdered are now defunct.  One of them is a baby-killing center where Leroy Carhart worked one day per week.  The place in Indianapolis where Carhart worked was called Affiliated Women's Services and was owned by Lois Bennett.  It seems she owed about $20,000 in county taxes; the place was seized and will be sold at auction so that some of those taxes can be recouped.  It also appears that the Medical Licensing Board of Indiana was investigating the mill over questions related to patient safety.

Operation Rescue broached the Indiana officials about those matters and the latter at least seemed to address them with professionalism and impartiality.  They also broached the State of Maryland regarding Carhart after he sent his third Maryland victim to a hospital (one of them a fatality).  However, the Maryland State government, with the de facto abortuary employees that inhabit high offices in Maryland, have largely turned a blind eye to Carhart's many deficiencies.

Ladies and gentlemen - particularly Maryland citizens - this is why the upcoming election in November is so critical. (Reminder - Faithful Catholics of MD/DC Inc is not a 501c3 charity.  We can make any political statement that we wish).  We need to clean house in Maryland - that means Anthony Brown cannot be allowed to move into the State House; vote for Larry Hogan for governor.  We need to eject the NARAL puppets - including Joshua Sharfstein - from the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and other related state agencies.  We also need to rid county-level governments - particularly Montgomery County and Baltimore City - of the NARAL lackeys who wasted taxpayer dollars to try to stymie the First Amendment rights of pro-life pregnancy centers.  Only then do we stand half a chance of abating the slaughter within the State of Maryland.  I'll have more on the elections later.

I rejoice at the closure of Carhart's Indiana mill.  I only regret that this might mean he'll spend more time in Germantown killing babies.

Apostate Bishops And Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants

When waffling/politician bishops stick their noses into issues such as immigration, gun-control, minimum wage, etc they often find themselves in squalid associations with pro-abortion politicians.  Perhaps "find themselves in" is not an accurate phrase.  The phrase "actively seek out" probably describes their mindsets much more accurately - particularly if they hanker after the perks that come with rubbing elbows with the worldly rich and powerful who flout God's laws.

Such was the case last Friday with Cardinal Dolan, as he teamed up with rabidly pro-abortion and pro-sodomite Chuck Schumer to shill for amnesty for illegal immigrants.  Ignore the obviously left-wing bias of the Irish Central as you read the account of their joint photo-op at the Statue of Liberty.  Notice one key concept in one statement of Cardinal Dolan's; it's a concept that seems to have gone over his head.  Here's the statement.  "I would not be here if my great-grandfather Patrick Dolan was turned away in 1852.
I'm a pastor and every great religion welcomes the immigrant. It is fundamental and moral.."

Like Cardinal Dolan, I am primarily of Irish descent.  I would imagine his great-grandfather arrived here by way of Ellis Island, as did most of my ancestors.  My ancestors arrived at Ellis Island, respecting the laws of their new host nation and quite prepared to comply with immigration policies at that time; I presume that was the case with the Cardinal's great-grandfather.  They did not come skulking across the border for they knew such actions were inherently criminal and immoral.

To the right I have posted a very helpful chart to explain to Dolan and his progressive donors friends just exactly why we oppose amnesty for those here illegally.  I don't think they care; in fact, they do their utmost to obfuscate the issues to make people of common sense out to be hateful xenophobes (as exemplified in the Irish Central article).  More and more people are waking up; see this account of citizens of a southern California town who didn't want their hometown used as a haven for busloads of these people.

There's no doubt in my mind that these progressives simply see illegal aliens as those who will be dependent on them for everything - and who will vote them into power.  Nancy Pelosi has been shilling for amnesty for some time now, although not as fervently as she shilled for Obamacare and unrestrained baby-murder.  Recently Sarah Palin demonstrated her ability to pin Pelosi down, stating that Pelosi is more interested in illegal aliens than in unborn children.

I wonder if the latter statement can be said of Cardinal Dolan and so many of the progressive "social justice" USCCB-types within the Catholic hierarchy?  Given the amount of effort spent on each issue, I'd have to opine "YES".

Apostate Bishops - Key Factor In Today's Crisis In The Catholic Church

Why did Cardinal Dolan allow St. Francis of Assisi to conduct their "pre-pride mass" while sending a faithful priest packing?  Why did Cardinal Wuerl have Father Guarnizo ousted from the Archdiocese of Washington while apologizing to lesbians who didn't have their mortal sin validated at St. John Neumann Church?  The list of questions could go on and on.   Please watch.

Vortex Expose On St. Francis Of Assisi In NYC - What Will Cardinal Dolan Do???

I believe we already know the answer to the above question.  Regular readers of this blog will recognize this sodomite enclave as I have mentioned it in writing about Holy Innocents Parish and Father Wylie.

Cardinal Dolan will look the other way and let the gay-enablers at St Francis do as they please.  He either doesn't care or finds himself in sympathy with the sin of sodomy.  Otherwise, he'd act.  Whatever else we can say of his abysmal treatment of Father Wylie, Dolan acted with resolve and alacrity; he can move when he wants to!  He doesn't care to do so here.  Just think - Dolan was a past president of the USCCB.

No Roman Catholic Church, No Jesus

In today's Vortex, Michael Voris is offering commentary on an address given by Pope Francis this past Wednesday.  Father Zuhlsdorf also offered some commentary.  There's no gainsaying that only the Roman Catholic Church has the fullness of God's revelation and the sacraments.  I thank His Holiness for stating that quite clearly.  I would only wish he could have been so clear when it came to that debacle in the Vatican Gardens a few weeks ago.