In today's Vortex, Michael Voris clearly lays out the case that many cardinals are deliberately flouting the Church's authority to coddle those in sexual sin or those who profit from sexual sin. Missing from his analysis, though, is a forthright admission of why they are allowed to retain their red hats (what are they called?). More to the point, there is someone who is allowing them to continue their chicanery and perhaps is orchestrating it. I speak, of course, of Pope Francis.
To be fair, many of these cardinals started carrying on when the Pope's predecessors occupied his chair. After last October's sin-nod, though, it became quite clear that this current pontiff at least approves of their dissenting behavior - if he's not outright ordering it. I realize it is the policy of Church Militant TV not to criticize the pope's actions. That's their decision. I and many others hold a different opinion. We will call the spade a spade. I'll now analyze some statements of Voris' and point out some obvious papal connections. I'll go in order as they occur in the video.
Trying to claim that there is some "redeeming" value to homosexual acts
The use of contraception to be "responsible stewards of the earth"
The many anomalies of the sin-nod
Similarly, Cardinal Muller had some words of truth for his fellow German bishops, stating quite clearly that local bishops' conferences could not decide for themselves what constitutes dogma and discipline, stating that it was "an absolutely anti-Catholic idea that does not respect the Catholicity of the Church". He also stated that "the president of an episcopal conference is nothing more than a technical moderator" and that a country's dioceses are not subsidiaries of that country's episcopal conference. I recall that Pope Benedict XVI also made the point of stating that these conferences have no inherent authority in and of themselves. This only serves to strengthen my belief that these bishops' conferences are snakes in the grass and should be immediately dismantled.
I pray that the words of these two good cardinals are heeded and studied, as antidotes to the "maturation" that is being shoved down our throats to make us susceptible for more doctrinal poison that no doubt is planned for the sin-nod that will occur in October 2015.
A week or two ago I announced a talk given yesterday at Our Lady of Lourdes Church in Bethesda and sponsored by CanaVox. I attended and I'm happy to report that it was very well attended. They were going to have it in a class room but realized they had to have it in the Church itself (they did repose the Blessed Sacrament properly). It was recorded; when the video is available I'll post it.
In the Lourdes bulletin announcing this event, mention was made of Dolce and Gabanna. They are well-known fashion designers who also happen to be a gay couple. However, they had the clarity - and courage - to publicly acknowledge the necessity of true marriage. They caught a lot of flack from the gay community for their stance. Elton John has called for a boycott. I'd like to point out that this is the same Elton John who enthused over Pope Francis, calling for his immediate canonization. When that happened, many who wear rose-colored glasses waxed giddy about it, sighing that the pope was "reaching their hearts". Now I hope that at least in this regard, the rose-colored glasses are flung from their faces. I refer you now to the Lourdes bulletin as it describes the D&G-versus-John situation quite accurately; I think Ayatollah Elton is quite suitable. (By the way, dear ADW chancery! If this bulletin should "disappear", I'll just repost it with yet another blog post about any censorship. So please don't bother!)
At the talk yesterday was announced the next March for Marriage on April 25th. Please note that this is a Saturday; most of us who work should be able to make this one. Here are the details as they appear on the NOM site. Please be there. We must speak up for true marriage and the children who suffer because they lack one of their parents. Please spread the word through social media, email contacts, conversations, etc. So much is at stake.
On March 13, Pope Francis announced a "holy year of mercy". My friend at Harvesting the Fruit has some thoughts and I'll add my own. What is the pope's idea of "mercy"? Might this translation of his homily today provide a clue? It looks like a rather choppy translation done by "google translate" but from this Radio Vatican site, I gather that he's chiding those who "close the Church's doors". I don't know who he thinks would shun a sinner who wants to return to God; this sounds like one of his "straw man" arguments to me. What is meant by "come to mass on Sunday but stay there and do no more". I hope I'm wrong, but this sounds like a strange way of trying to justify distributing Holy Communion to those who may be in mortal sin. That is not mercy! Mercy must be sought and sought properly. For that there is the Sacrament of Confession, the real channel of mercy for those in serious sin (and all of us when you get right down to it).
But if we're really going to talk about "mercy", may I suggest some worthy recipients of that?
Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate and their Sister counterparts. Allow them to live their vocation and charisms unfettered
Patricia Jannuzzi, the New Jersey high school teacher who was fired - by a Catholic high school - for upholding Catholic morality on her facebook page.
If they receive some "mercy", bring it on! On the other hand, what they deserve is justice to right the immense wrongs done to them by their bishops.
From Zenit we read the Holy Father's general audience as he made mention of the Ordinary Synod to occur next October. In one of the lines he is quoted as saying, "All -- Pope, Cardinals, Bishops, priests, men and women religious, lay faithful – we are all called to pray for the Synod. There is need of this, not of gossip!" No doubt serious prayer to God is needed for this meeting, but what is meant by "gossip"??
I'm not going to pull punches! I've reason to believe that by "gossip" he is referring to the watchful eye that many of us bloggers have had, and by the light of scrutiny that we shone on the proceedings there. No doubt we were of assistance to stalwarts such as Cardinal Burke, Muller, Pell and others as they tried to stem the onslaught of rank modernism and yes, heresy, that otherwise would have gushed forth from the sin-nod last October. I'm certain that Kasper, Marx, Baldaserri and others chafed and squinted at the light we were shining in their eyes. Gentlemen, it is precisely because we are praying that we will continue to broadcast whatever comes forth next October.
Speaking of prayer, I understand that approximately 500 Catholic priests of England and Wales have petitioned the synod to stand firm for the perennial teaching on marriage. While I applaud these priests and am grateful for their efforts, I am a bit saddened, too. Why? Very simple! Why, in the name of heaven, would these priests believe that they need to ask bishops and cardinals to adhere to Catholic teaching? Shouldn't it be understood that it's second nature to prelates to do so? Yes, it should be understood, but that is not the case and these poor priests realize that. Case in point - they were rebuked for standing for Church teaching by a local prelate, Cardinal Vincent Nichols. Please read Damian Thompson's analysis of this action.
I just noticed something on Facebook. Apparently Cardinal Nichols is sympathetic to sodomite relationships. While he upheld marriage per se, he did not denounce the mortal sin of sodomy. Might this have had something to do with his snit against the faithful priests?
So once again we have a prelate chastising faithful Catholics under his charge for speaking and acting like - faithful Catholics! The number of these incidents, including the one I mentioned in Tuesday's post, is reaching epidemic proportions! I don't think the end is in sight! Again, we bloggers will shine the spotlight on these misdeeds of the clerics.
Many of us have heard of Patricia Jannuzzi, a theology teacher at Immaculata High School in Somerville NJ. She had posted on her private Facebook page, defending true marriage and exposing the gay agenda for what it is - part of a push to extinguish western civilization. Lepanto Institute saved her post, because the school demanded that she take it down before informing her that her contract would not be renewed. As you read the post, do you find in there anything that is at variance with Church teaching? Neither do I. So why did her school fire her?
A former student of hers stumbled across it. He was miffed to read it, as he himself is gay. He also is the nephew of Hollywood left-wing Susan Sarandon. So auntie got all the minions together and they started to blast the school - much like a similar bunch did to the Archdiocese of Washington three years ago when Father Guarnizo withheld Holy Communion to a flaming lesbian. And like the Archdiocese of Washington, they abandoned their Catholic principles and displayed all the spinal fortitude of jellyfish. The ease with which they cast aside their allegiance to the Teaching of Jesus Christ cause me to believe if such allegiance was really present; they were way too quick to evict from their midst a truly Catholic teacher who proclaimed true Catholic morality.
I'd suggest that we too make our displeasure known to the school and to do so repeatedly. I will say one thing for the gay cartel. They are tenacious and ready to drop everything and act for their beliefs, such as they are. We on the other hand tend to be too demure, reserved, deferential in the face of those who need to hear the truth from us and even to be rebuked by us. Here is the contact information for the school. Please utilize it, but there is also one more step.
Jesus Demonstrates "Acceptance"!
The school's site posted a horrid statement by the local bishop, Bishop Paul Bootkoski of the Diocese of Metuchen. I'll link to it as it appears on that diocesan site. It is one along the apostolic line of Judas. One line of his is that "the teacher's comments are disturbing and do not reflect the Church's teachings of acceptance". I can only say that this is heresy. The Church has never taught the acceptance of sinful behavior. Ms. Jannuzzi most certainly did articulate the Church's teaching regarding sodomy. Either the bishop is blissfully ignorant of basic moral teaching or some sugar daddies are threatening to cut off funds - or Sarandon sycophants are calling and saying mean things to hurt his feelings! Well, like Lepanto and others, we must all contact Bishop Bootkoski ourselves and set the record straight.
So that's one bishop who betrayed a faithful Catholic. Now onto another. On March 3rd in the state of Idaho, a Catholic state senator, Sheryl Nuxoll, boycotted an opening prayer at a senate session that was conducted by a Hindu. She correctly stated that hinduism is "a false faith with false gods". She wasn't the only one, by the way; there were two others. Rather than support her, or at least keep silence, Bishop Peter Christensen of the Diocese of Boise rushed to rebuke her Catholic witness, falsely claiming that Nuxoll did not "represent the opinions or teachings of the Roman Catholic Church." Oh, really? News flash! Hinduism is idolotry! Nuxoll is correct. As you can detect in Christenen's screed, his thinking is infected with the syndrome known as "ecumenicide". Here's contact information for that diocese; please call this treatment of Nuxoll into question.
Are you noticing a pattern? Not only do these bishops refuse to speak truth to dissidents, lest they offend some deep pockets or rile some loud leftists, but when faithful Catholics within their dioceses do act like Catholics, these bishops pile on them! Is it to keep those dollars flowing in, or the leftists from sneering at them, or is it something else? Do they resent the faithful Catholics for displaying the faith and courage that they refuse to display?
Today's Vortex addresses why Catholic bloggers will continue to shine the light on clerical misbehaviors - despite the whining and pouting of those who insist upon wearing rose-colored glasses in the face of clerical mischief. It is their evil, more than that of laity, that has so much potential to damage the church simply because of the authority they do wield. Indeed, untold numbers of souls have been led astray by nonsense from clerics. Witness the gays who now have reason to believe that their mortal sins are affirmed by Cardinal Dolan as a result of the St Patrick's day parade fiasco. And yes, witness the millions who now believe adulterers will be allowed to commit the sin of sacrilege with Holy Communion thanks to the grotesque relatio released by Pope Francis. Yes, I will continue to shine the light - despite the stubborn resistance of some to seeing the truth. One such individual is Jeff Mirus - more on that below the video.
Mirus penned a piece recently, to which I link now. I'll unpack a few salient points - but not all for I don't have time for that.
Let's look at the second paragraph. Since you'll have it open in a separate browser window, I'll interject my comments in red throughout this copy. "Every few weeks (or perhaps every few days), Pope Francis says something that annoys or even appalls those who like their Catholicism neat and tidy. His "neat and tidy" quip is really quite condescending. That's a cheap shot, Mr. Mirus - for shame! At any rate, we prefer the faith being portrayed clearly and unambiguously, for the sake of poor souls who really do need the truth with no gimmicks for the sake of their eternal salvation. Pope Francis seems to enjoy not only shaking things up (which he has admitted) but speaking colloquially, and therefore with less theological and pastoral precision than might otherwise be the case. My readers know that I don’t think this is nearly as dangerous as many do, for those who are not oh-so-sophisticated to wade through sloppy presentations, the lack of theological precision can well damn them nor do I think Francis is attempting to push the Church in an unacceptable direction I cannot divine whether or not he's attempting to push the Church in a bad direction; regardless of his motives that is in fact what he's doing."
Let's look at this one. "I don’t think Francis thinks in the categories of left and right, liberal and conservative, that so many Western Catholics use as a kind of ecclesiastical shorthand to categorize conflicts over doctrine, liturgy and moral principles. Rather, I think Francis takes Catholic faith and morals for granted, And THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is a BIG problem on its own, when so many don't know the basics of faith and morals. Even bishops, as evinced by the nonsense from the Sin-Nod last October display ignorance of their faith. In their case I hope it's ignorance, lest they be culpable of serious sins but is really fed up with clericalism and formalism (call it systemic rigidity or riskless ministry) which prevents the Church (in her members) from being profoundly evangelical and constantly engaged in sacrificial service to those who are materially, morally and spiritually poor. This does lead to misunderstandings, but those misunderstandings are half due to our own inadequate categories of reflection So what does Mirus call it when so many, of diverse perspectives and levels of Catholic knowledge, glean the same messages from the Pope? When anyone attempts to communicate, he/she accepts the responsibility of communicating their message clearly. It just isn't acceptable to blame the recipients of the message for repeated failures to communicate clearly."
Here Mirus shows evidence of swallowing the "god of surprises" kool-aid. "In the challenge of love, God shows up with surprises…. So let yourselves be surprised by God: Don’t be afraid of surprises, afraid that they will shake you up. Don't you think that depends on the nature of the particular surprise in question? They make us insecure Really? Why should they? but they change the direction we are going in. True love makes you “burn life”, even at the risk of coming up empty-handed." Why this fetish regarding "surprises"? Are we aware that God is immutable? That His word doesn't change? When we come across anomalies and are surprised by the same, maybe - just maybe!- that sense of "surprise" is really a warning from our good sense to stay away from the source of alarm.
As I said earlier, I don't have time to unpack this entire mess from Mirus (at least not in this post). I will look at one last thing. "We have a standing joke in my household. When I express an opinion about Pope Francis, my wife asks: 'How long are you going to keep your head in the sand?'" I echo Mrs. Mirus' question, not only to Mr. Mirus but to all who refuse to take off their happy-clappy rose-colored glasses.
This coming Friday, March 27th at 7:30pm, a group of scholars and authors - all raised by same-sex couples - will be giving a presentation on the topic cited in this post's title. It will be held at Our Lady of Lourdes Church in Bethesda Maryland. See the flyer at the left for details.
These authors are currently in town and will be filing amicus curiae briefs on Thursday as the Supreme Court hears a case regarding this very topic. Recently, LifeSiteNews featured a letter by these authors to Dolce and Gabbana, gay fashion designers, for their defense of true marriage.
By the way - when speaking of this matter, I've used the term "traditional marriage". Henceforth I will use the term "true marriage" to describe the authentic lifelong union of one biological man and one biological woman. Any attempt to mutate the definition of marriage outside those parameters is both ridiculous and dishonest. There is "true marriage" and then there are various manners of cheap counterfeits.
The talk is being sponsored by CanaVox. Here is their website.
Ladies and gentlemen, despite his "jolly cheesehead" image, Dolan has shown that he has quite another side. Remember the flap about Father Justin Wylie at Holy Innocents Parish in New York City? He was thrown under the bus alright - but not solely for his care for the Traditional Latin Mass.
I'm posting a "Mic'd Up" below, dealing with all the slop that is coming from New York vis-a-vis Cardinal Dolan. Listen closely between the 28:00 and 37:05 marks. It seems that Father Wylie and a colleague discovered corruption at the Holy See's Permanent Observer Mission and Path To Peace Foundation being carried out by Msgr Chullikatt. They were preparing to blow the whistle on that when Cardinal Dolan brought the hammer down on Father Wylie, having him shipped back to Johannesburg and subsequently assigned to a very dangerous area there. Of course that's just a coincidence - right?
We know that several of the previous pontiffs have personally opposed the death penalty. Pope Saint John Paul II was one. He wrote about it in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae. However, he acknowledged that the state still had the right to legitimate use of the death penalty. He never tried to abolish it outright. He couldn't, for the legitimacy of the death penalty has been established Church teaching for the past 2,000 years. I will link to two blogging colleagues who wrote pieces in response to the erroneous efforts by a number of Catholic press outlets. One is by From Rome and the other from One Peter Five. In my post two weeks ago I also presented some Catholic truth on the matter. I think all this supports From Rome's premise, that it is a heresy to claim that capital punishment is wrong.
He stated today that the death penalty is "inadmissible, however serious the crime". Ladies and gentlemen, that is not Catholic doctrine - and thus not the teaching of Jesus Christ. Will this pope declare that his predecessors and many Doctors of the Church to be in error? He rails against "punishing one murder with another". His statement does not do justice to the definition of "murder" according to Catholic moral theology, as I explained in my March 6th post.
No pope can contradict the perennial teaching of Holy Mother Church - but that is precisely what Pope Francis did this morning! St Thomas Aquinas defines heresy as "a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith in Christ, corrupt its dogmas."
So does this blanket condemnation of capital punishment constitute heresy?
Two weeks ago I posted of a number of then-planned debacles committed by the Knights of Columbus. One of them occurred in Norfolk VA with the Knights council there featuring Terry McAullife as their parade's grand marshal. A group of faithful Virginia Catholics were there to rebuke him and the Knights (Note - "Rebuke the sinner" is the first Spiritual Work of Mercy).
They posted their video on youtube and I'll post that below. But first I'll advise of another remedial effort. As I've always believed, there are many good Knights who are distressed to see the errors among their ranks. One of them is Pete Barker, a Knight from a neighboring council in Virginia Beach. He is promoting a petition to have the errant Norfolk council, the Fr. Robert B. Kealey Council # 3548 be formally terminated and disbanded as a council of the Knights of Columbus. From the text of his petition, this parade fiasco is not the first for this council.
I signed the petition. I urge you all to sign it and circulate it to your own contacts. Here's the link. And now, the video.
Today's vortex quips that Cardinal Dolan might be vying for the title of "Most Gay-Friendly Prince of the Church". Well, if that's correct, I believe Dolan faces some stiff competition from the Archdiocese of Washington, given the way they've treated Father Guarnizo.
Below is a video depicting how Michael Voris and his cameraman were manhandled by thugs whom we can only presume to be on the payroll of the Archdiocese of New York. Surprised? Don't be! Last June I posted of his swift and draconian treatment of Father Justin Wylie who was offering Mass in the Extraordinary Form at Church of the Holy Innocents. He publicly called upon Cardinal Dolan to send priests to offer Mass in the Extraordinary Form. That was enough for Dolan to have Father Wylie whisked away to South Africa while he lodged complaints to the Holy See and the Archdiocese of Johannesburg.
So Cardinal Dolan pranced with gays while the latter were celebrating their mortal sins in a parade ostensibly to honor a Catholic saint. This was not the only dismal "first" for this parade. Another "first" involved the exclusion of a pro-life group. LifeNews informs us that the Children First Foundation had their parade application rejected. LifeSiteNews adds the detail that the parade organizers rejected the pro-life group so as not to take attention away from the gays! So there was a gay groups with its banners, but not one pro-life group! Who are the sugar-daddies that are pulling Dolan's puppet strings?
The Children First Foundation wasn't completely silenced. One Catholic Church, near the parade route (if not on it), allowed them to fly their banner in front of their historic church. What was the name of that church? Hint - look at the first paragraph! Yes - Holy Innocents! Here's praying that they don't suffer repercussions from the local chancery!
I now post the video. In it Voris states there will be ones to follow. I'll post as they become available.
March 7th was the 50th anniversary for Mass in the vernacular. Pope Francis celebrated the occasion in a Mass in Rome. Speaking of the "liturgical reforms" of the past 50 years, he said in his homily, "Let us thank the Lord for what he has done in his Church in these 50 years of liturgical reform. It was truly a courageous gesture for the Church to draw near to the people of God so that they are able to understand well what they are doing. This is important for us, to follow the Mass in this way. It is not possible to go backwards. We must always go forward. Always forward! And those who go backward are mistaken. Let us go forward on this path."
An important note: When I speak of "liturgical reforms" in quotes, I am NOT speaking of the Novus Ordo rite, as stipulated in real Vatican II documents. Rather, I refer to popular bastardizations of the same. Vatican II never mandated:
Use of the vernacular. Rather, they mentioned that Latin was to be held in high esteem and to be commonly used
Turning of altar towards the people
Removal of Communion rails
Distribution of Holy Communion in the hand rather than on the tongue
So what are some of the fruits of these bogus "liturgical reforms" for which we should be "thankful"?
Clown and balloon Masses
Mass attendance plummeting from 80% of Catholic to approximately 10%
Terrible seminary formation (although that might be up-swinging slightly)
Reception of Sacraments declining
Contraception and abortion being practiced by Catholics resulting in..
Reduced numbers of parishioners, resulting in disappearance of entire parishes
Religious orders vanishing due to lack of vocations
That list could go on and on; you get the point. Anyway, the logic in his statements is fundamentally flawed. "It is not possible to go backwards"? How about when the course on which one is embarked is wrong or even sinful? Isn't repentance and conversion all about changing course? By the way - USA Today confirms the growing popularity of the Latin Mass, that is, Mass in the Extraordinary Rite.
But I would suspect this talk of "moving forward" and "not possible to go backwards" is really part and parcel of the "maturation effort" that seems to have been put in place since the sin-nod ended last October.
We all recall that disastrous interim relatio that came out midway into the sin-nod last October. It is important to remind ourselves that far from being unaware of this horrid document, that Pope Francis knew of its contents and approved of its release. At the conclusion of this sin-nod, the pope said we had a "year to mature" before next October's sin-nod. That remark seemed to be the signal for the progressives in Church hierarchy to bombard us all with "maturation efforts". I had to develop the "maturation department" on this blog to keep track of it. We know that there will be more "maturation" efforts during these next few months. By the way - speaking of "bombardment", realize that it is a tactic of psychological warfare; read this and see how relevant it is to all this "maturation".
One of the latest examples is an effort by Gary Cutting, a philosophy professor at Notre Dame and obviously a protege of the late Fr Hesburgh. A quote from the Cardinal Newman Society indicates that Cutting finds the teachings of Our Lord Jesus Christ to be "philosophically untenable and theologically unnecessary". I sure hope he repents before he has that conversation before Our Lord, but I digress. To be fair to Cutting, what he said is just a step or two beyond the dissident plop that was the interim relatio.
Edward Pentin is a British journalist (and faithful Catholic) who did much to shine the light on some chicanery last October. A few days ago he published a piece that explains why the selection of attendees at the next synod may be an attempt to stack the attendance with those of dissident leanings. We certainly know that Cardinal Burke won't be in attendance this time.
While the Pope cannot formally declare error (lest he be an anti-pope), we do know that grave harm can be done in the name of being "pastoral". All indications are that this is a key motive behind all the nonsense oozing from progressive quarters in the Church. We will keep the spotlight on the cockroaches. We will continue to pray - and maybe discontinue donations. I'm sure there will be updates.
Pray that Our Lord will forgive the blasphemies and carousing that not only will happen that day but in some cases will be celebrated by princes of the Church. Pray that this Saint will once again drive the deadly serpents of immorality and atheism from Ireland and the world for that matter.
As Hillary Clinton's email woes were unfolding all over the internet, I had my suspicions as to the origins of this news. Mind you, I do suspect that indeed she bungled her responsibilities there but the timing of the news break - and Obama's seeming nonchalance - was rather telling. Coupled with the common knowledge that there's not much love lost between the Obamas and Clintons, I had reason to suspect that this news broke with the assistance of the Messiah Most Miserable.
Now it turns out that my suspicions have substance! The New York Post has details, alleging resentment at the snubbing that Obama got from Democratic candidates during the 2014 elections. Valerie Jarrett appears to be more of the mastermind than Obama himself, but there seems to be an attempt to sabotage Hillary's run for the White House in 2016.
Now here's the "close to home" part. Jarrett has been allegedly courting two other Democrats to run against Hillary. One of them is Elizabeth Warren; I suspected she was a favorite. But the other took me a bit by surprise - former Maryland governor Martin O'Malley! We know what a bang-up job he did in Maryland, don't we? Rain tax, illegal immigrants everywhere, jobs not everywhere, gay "marriage" and of course, a corrupt legal environment assuring Leroy Carhart unfettered baby-killing opportunities. Frankly I don't know why they'd consider O'Malley, since his less-than-stellar time in the State House led to the election of a Republican governor (otherwise almost impossible in Maryland).
If O'Malley runs, it will be most telling to watch the reactions of local Catholic prelates. Here's hoping they don't gush over "the opportunity for another Catholic in the White House" for that CINO would only trash the One True Church and her Faith and Morals.
Yesterday's post brought news that the Knights of Columbus removed themselves from the now-defiled Boston St Patrick's Day Parade. They might learn a thing or two from Immaculate Heart of Mary School; they had pulled out of the parade after 20 years of participation in it, rightly understanding that their participation now would cause scandal to their students.
The school is run by the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary - both brothers and sisters. I invite you to peruse their site. They seem to be orders that are truly devoted to Jesus Christ and His Church. The Sisters produced a video regarding the parade debacle. They are singing a song that is a knock-off of the Irish folk song "Leaving of Liverpool". They call it "Leaving of Boston". I'll post their lyrics before the video. Enjoy and thank God for these courageous religious. Pray to St. Patrick that as he once drove the snakes from Ireland that he would drive the serpents of progressivism from the Church.
Fare thee well, Saint Patrick’s Day Parade, South Boston, fare thee well! We are standing for our Catholic Faith, And the Saint that we love so well.
Chorus: So, fare thee well, the time has come, We will now defend one so great as he. It’s not the leaving of Boston that grieves me, But Saint Patrick when I think of thee.
We have marched there for over twenty years, “Keep the Faith” did we proudly display, And though the foes of God may try, They will never take this Faith away! - Chorus
Remember, Holy Youth, how long ago, You brought the Faith to Erin’s shore. Through the strength and the might of the Trinity, Bring the Irish back to Christ once more! - Chorus
In this Vortex, Michael Voris rightly decries the accommodation of Church leaders to the immoral and anti-God standards of this world. It's apparent from the video that at the time of its creation, Church Militant had not yet received word that the Boston KofC council pulled out of the now-defiled Boston St Patrick's Day parade. Their press release is here. While the council did the right thing, no one can gainsay that they did so willingly. They got caught with their hand in the cookie jar and they hate it. I hope it's because many good Knights threatened to withdraw membership and their membership dues. I have more discussion below the video.
Voris insinuated that Church leaders, e.g., Dolan, are simply dupes of the worldly powers-that-be. I for one don't believe they are that innocent. They did not attain their positions by being dunces. They knew what they wanted and used some considerable smarts to attain it. Their "jolly-bumpkin" demeanor is simply an act. They know they're undermining the faith and betraying their God. They love their cushy situations more than the souls in their charge - and maybe their own. Pray for them that they truly convert.
Let us now turn our attentions to this US News article, that talks of the Pope's shakeup of Vatican personnel. At one time, many Catholics seemed to think that the Pope was just a lovable guy who wouldn't harm a fly, what with his clown-nose and all. Save for a few pollyannas who persist in wearing rose-colored glasses with respect to the pope, that "aw-shucks!" image has been, well, shucked by the pope himself. The US News article, in its left-wing way, is quite up front about the "madness behind the method" at the Vatican.
All kinds of Catholic left-wing hacks are quoted. One of them is John Carr, former head of the USCCB social justice division. He remarked that "personnel is policy". I don't agree with Carr on most things, but on this point he is spot-on correct. Commenting on changes regarding American bishops is another progressive, John Gehring of Faith in Publc Life. He says, "you are going to see some of these Francis bishops really start to change not just the image of the church but the substance of the church and the direction moving ahead." As you can see from this unabashed declaration, the progressives, emboldened by Pope Francis, are no longer couching their agendas in nuanced language. "Change the substance"? What is the "substance" of the church if not her identity as the Mystical Body of Christ entrusted by Him to save souls by proclaiming His eternal and immutable Truths? While the pope cannot solemnly proclaim error, much deliberate damage can be done under the guise of being "pastoral".
The article talks of changes at the Congregation for Bishops. Cardinals Raymond Burke and Justin Rigali were removed from that college. Burke is a champion of orthodoxy. In their places he installed Cardinal Wuerl and reaffirmed Cardinal Levada - not champions of orthodoxy. A third left-winger is cited: Michael Sean Winters, dissident hack at the Not-At-All Catholic Reporter. Says Winters, "instead of two culture warriors and one non-culture warrior, you have two non-culture warriors as the Americans on that congregation". These are strange times when I find myself agreeing with these progressives, but it's only because they are "letting down their hair" and admitting who they really are. When we look at the sick, demented worldly culture that now infests western civilization, is it not evident that we need culture warriors? Both Wuerl and Levada, like Dolan, openly facilitate the infestation of Holy Mother Church with the poison of secular culture. And no, they aren't simply being wimps. Witness the draconian treatment meted out to Father Guarnizo at the behest of Cardinal Wuerl and his underlings at the DC chancery. They moved with great alacrity and purpose as they threw Father Guarnizo under the bus - draconian, but not wimpy.
The article goes on to state how the Pope ushered in Blaise Cupich as Archbishop of Chicago. Lauding Cupich's "more civil tone on divisive topics like same-sex marriage and birth control", the author somehow forgets to mention that while Bishop of Spokane, he forbade his priests to participate in the 40 Days for Life campaign. Apparently the pope also played a direct role in the placement of Robert McElroy as Bishop of San Diego. My blogging colleague at A Blog For Dallas Area Catholics reports on McElroy's dissidence.
Please read the entire US News article. We must keep our eyes open and prayers forthcoming.
Yes, I put the word "popes" in plural, for they - from Paul VI onward - have wafted freely of the false idol of pseudo-ecumenism. Why is this ecumenism false? Simply put, it's a sanctimonious disguise for the heresy of religious indifferentism. It operates under the unspoken and erroneous assumption that all religions are equally beneficial. For this I'll now use the more accurate term "ecumenicide".
As you watch the video below, think of Ezekiel 8, as the prophesies about the abomination in the temple are announced. Might this video be displaying a manifestation of this prophesy's fulfillment? I think that to be a reasonable hypothesis since we see:
Talk of a "new world order" (12:38)
A statue of Buddha on a Catholic altar (22:30). In front of the Tabernacle!
Hindus invoking their plethora of false deities in another Catholic sanctuary (23:00).
Other sundry idolatries occurring in Catholic venues and being placed on a par with Catholic worship and devotion
The video is long but well worth the time to view it. Below the video I have discussion of yet another profanation of the Vatican, one that occurred this past week. I can see this will be a long post so I'll now insert the jump break. So..
I too have shared this concern, and a key cause for the sluggishness of progress can be laid at the embrace - by pro-life people - of contraception. Witness the debacle of the Manhattan Declaration. I refused to sign it for it danced all around the key issue of contraception. Let's face it. Before Roe v Wade there was Griswold v Connecticut and the 1930 Lambeth Conference. We failed, and still fail, to heed the words of Humanae Vitae. Only when we cease compromise on contraception will the Culture of Life have any chance to take hold and grow.
It is interesting to note how many Protestants came to the Roman Catholic faith because of their involvement in pro-life work. No doubt they worked through the issues and recognized that the Roman Catholic Church was the only one with a relatively strong stance against contraceptives. Pro-life leaders who converted to Catholicism include: Lila Rose, Randall Terry, Norma McCorvy, Bryan Kemper, the late Bernard Nathanson. I'm sure there are others.
The leadership of the Knights of Columbus seem to have lost any moral sense whatsoever. Two months ago I alerted one and all to the scandal of an Indiana council renting out their ballroom to lesbians for their so-called "wedding reception". While I provided contact information for all of you to use in voicing your opposition to this travesty, the debacle is still scheduled to occur next month to the best of my knowledge.
Many of you are aware that the next St Patrick's Day parade in New York City will feature a gay group - first time ever that a St Patrick's Day parade will celebrate the mortal sin of sodomy. To add even more shame to this event, Cardinal Timothy Dolan will be Grand Marshallfor this orgy-parade.
Following Dolan's scandalous example, organizers of Boston's St Patrick's Day parade decided that they too would allow a gay group to march in it. One Catholic school, Immaculate Heart of Mary School in Stillwater, MA, upon learning of the gay group's inclusion in the parade, pulled out of the parade. Although they've participated for 25 years, they rightly understand the scandal to which their students would be exposes. I for one commend this school administration for their stance. Happily the school children themselves understand the reason that they will not be in the parade.
However, the Massachusetts State Council of the Knights of Columbus, who never marched in the parade before, has announced that it will join the parade along with the gay group. As you read this coverage by the Catholic Action League of Massachusetts, you might understand their theory that they are joining this year to give the appearance that this parade remains respectable when it no longer is. It's quite remarkable that school children have more moral sense than does an organization of ostensibly Catholic men. The link above has contact information for your use in lodging a protest.
Today I learned of yet another scandal involving the Knights and St Patrick's Day parades. This one originates from Norfolk VA. From my friend at Les Femmes we read that Council 3548 runs a St. Patrick's Day parade and this one is scheduled for March 14th. The person whom they selected to be Grand Marshall is rabid pro-abort Terry McAuliffe. Read the Les Femmes article for a full history of the debacle and the courageous stance taken by the local pastor. Here is a link to that local St Patrick's day parade. In addition to the contact info on that page, here is contact information for local KofC officials for your use in lodging protests.
VIRGINIA KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS STATE OFFICERS:
State Deputy, Stephen
Burnley, home, 703-971-4598, cell, 703-927-6074 - statedeputy@vakofc.org
State Chaplain, Most Rev. Paul Loverde, Bishop of
Arlington, office, 703-841-2500.
In these three scenarios, it would appear that decisions were made by relatively few Knights who occupy leadership roles. Many of the "rank and file" probably do not approve - and may well be unaware - of these matters. We are grateful for them and now ask them to take action to insist that their brother Knights act in a manner worthy of Father McGiveney and the Church.
The National Catholic Register, a normally sensible publication, has linked arms with some not-so-sensible publications (America and National Catholic Reporter) and partook of their kool-aid. They have glommed onto the push to end capital punishment. I've blogged before about the consequences of embracing positions that are not in accordance with Catholic tradition. In one of those posts I put forth my reasons for believing that the push to end capital punishment is a slap in the face to God Himself.
The Register article features one quote of Bishop Thomas Wenski of Miami: "The use of the death penalty devalues human life and diminishes respect for human dignity. We bishops continue to say: We cannot teach killing is wrong by killing."
We'll unpack the last sentence, for therein lies some confusion. The Fifth Commandment prohibits murder, not killing. Owing to poor translations from the Hebrew, we do have some confusion. "Murder" and "killing" are not the same. Murder is defined as "the deliberate taking of innocent human life". While all murder involves killing, the converse does not hold. There is, for example, the killing that must sometimes happen in the course of self-defense; no sane person will call that "murder". Therefore I'd say to Bishop Wenski that it is not "killing" that is wrong per se, but "murder". Moreover, the "killing" done by capital punishment is done after due process of justice whereby the condemned is adjudicated not innocent, but guilty of capital crimes.
Further down into the article, Cardinal O'Malley called capital punishment "institutionalized practice of violence". Here again we have a problem with the defining of terms. Violence is defined by Catholic moral theology as "the unjust use of force". In this case, "force" and "violence" are being confused by the Cardinal. After the due process of justice as mentioned above, the use of deadly force in capital punishment is not "unjust".
A blogging colleague, Veneremurcernui at A Blog for Dallas Are Catholics has his post on this matter. In it he had video of a homily on the topic. I post that below. We pray for the salvation of those condemned. We pray also for the 3500 babies murdered each day via abortion, for whereas the condemned criminals can avail themselves of the sacraments, the innocent babies haven't that advantage.
Almost two weeks ago I noted the peculiar definition of "dissent" as coined by Cardinal Wuerl in a blog post that he wrote. He hopes to warp the meaning of the word to convey "one who disagrees with the pope because he does not agree with them and therefore follow their position". Yes, I agree the structure of that sentence is awkward but it isn't mine. The structure is twisted because of the attempt to twist the meaning of the word "dissent".
Because almost everyone with a brain understood him to imply that Cardinal Burke is a "dissenter" (according to his odd definition of that word), he felt impelled to go into "damage control" mode. Often, though, "damage control" winds up causing more damage. America magazine interviewed him. (Hint: For examples of "dissent" as the word is classically defined, just read an issue or two of that rag! But I digress!) As my friend at the Tenth Crusade noted, the Cardinal does a "Fred Astaire", or at least he attempts it.
Here's a rather telling statement from him, regarding the sin-nod (in response to the first question). "In the closing hour of that daylong discussion, I noted in my brief intervention that obviously there is no challenge to the teaching of the church on the indissolubility of marriage. I also pointed out that many participants distinguish between the doctrine on marriage and the pastoral practice of reception of Communion for those divorced and remarried." (Italics mine) May I assume from this that in addition to Cardinal Burke being a "dissenter", that Cardinal Gerhard Muller also fits Wuerl's definition of that word? Cardinal Muller did state, "Each division between ‘theory’ and ‘practice’ of the faith would be a reflection of a subtle Christological ‘heresy." What Cardinal Muller said is very true. Those "many participants that Cardinal Wuerl mentioned are dabbling in heresy. Enough of that for now.
Three days ago, Cardinal Wuerl posted another piece on his blog. This one is entitled, "Silencing The Church's Voice". In it he voices this complaint: "But today there is a new challenge. Some who reject the Church’s teaching – who choose to live by another set of values – not only find the voice of Christian values annoying, they would like to see it silenced or at least muted. Thus we have a whole new upside down version of words like 'discrimination,' 'freedom' and 'human rights,' and laws to enforce the new meaning." While these words are true enough, they ring ironic and I daresay hypocritical in light of his treatment of Father Marcel Guarnizo three years ago. I now present an anthology of posts I did as that incident and its fallout were unfolding at the time. To reiterate: Father Guarnizo withheld Holy Communion to a flagrantly practicing lesbian. This woman and her cohort raised a ruckus, whereupon the Archdiocese of Washington immediately surrendered to the gay community and threw Father Guarnizo under the bus. In this scenario it was Cardinal Wuerl who played the part of the one "silencing and muting the voice of Christian values". If he truly is serious about what he wrote three days ago, he might want to revisit his conduct (along with Bishop Knestout) of three years ago for his actions against Father Guarnizo can only have emboldened those who seek to stifle Christian morality in our culture today.
Another cleric who tried to silence the "voice of Christian values" is Father Thomas Rosica. You might recall that he threatened to sue David Domet, the blogger behind Vox Cantoris because he had been shining the light on Father Rosica's misconduct. After other faithful Catholics (and bloggers) got wind of it, we caused that light to be glaring. Father Rosica caught a glimmer of that light (or he was instructed by higher-ups to stand down) and backpedaled on his legal threat.
Along with prayer, we'll have to continue to speak out. If we shine the light on these folks relentlessly, we can at least mitigate the damage if not eliminate it altogether.
The March 4th edition of Mic'd Up deals with the latest CRS scandal unearthed by the Lepanto Institute; I blogged on this last night. In the beginning of the episode, Michael Voris makes a key point (at the 1:30 mark) that can easily be overlooked. He states that the government funnels billions of dollars towards the "social justice" agencies of the Church who then distribute the money to progressive organizations that are decidedly anti-God and anti-life. In other words, the Church is a conduit for federal misappropriation of the tax dollars of the American people. The progressives in the Church get to keep a portion of those funds for their own pet projects and cushy lifestyles, as part of this "sweetheart deal". Boys and girls, can we all say "money laundering"?
By the way - I believe that Catholic Charities also derives much of its budget from the tax dollars of American citizens. In essence, we already contribute involuntarily to Catholic Charities and CRS. I refuse to give them (along with the Catholic Campaign for Human Development) one penny voluntarily.
I will post the video below. I'd also like to point out that Lepanto's report has thrown the CRS into a damage-control hissy-snit. Here it is, along with the analysis by Lepanto.
Those of us who attend St. John Neumann Church in Gaithersburg, MD might recall seeing the flyer to the right inside their bulletins as they left. It is advertising an event designed to promote the "Operation Rice Bowl" program that has been a staple in many parishes during the Lenten season. I'd strongly suspect that an attendee at this dinner will not hear the full story regarding CRS. I've blogged about the many issues of the CRS so I shouldn't be shocked at the revelations below.
Today the Lepanto Institute released the results of a months-long investigation of the Catholic Relief Service's distribution of contraceptives and abortifacients in Kenya. They conducted their investigation with the help of the Population Research Institute. In short, CRS received two grants from the President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) totaling almost $4 million; with that money, CRS has taken a lead role in the distribution and promotion of condoms, sex education, contraceptives and aborifacients. As evidenced from my other posts, this is by no means the first time that CRS has been caught with its hands in the contraceptive "cookie jar". I do believe this is the first time that CRS has been caught accepting governmental assistance in their cover-up actions.
Barbara Mikulski, long-time US Senator from Maryland, has announced her retirement. She will not seek reelection when her term expires in 2016.
During her time in the Senate she has played the quintessential "katholyc in name only", supporting the murder of babies in the womb as well as the promulgation of the gay perverted lifestyle. Let us pray that during her retirement, she may realize the immense damage that her progressivism has led her to inflict on this country. Perhaps then she'll make a good Confession and restore her soul to healt.
On Friday I touched upon the death of the notorious Father Theodore Hesburgh, long-time president of the University of Notre Dame. The main thing he presided over while in his post was the destruction of Catholic education there and in many other places - not to mention the confusion and likely damnation of the souls of Notre Dame's students.
Regrettably but not too surprisingly, his death has garnered him accolades from the usual suspects. Chief among them is Cardinal Dolan, giving the usual happy-clappy crap. I've blogged about his gaffes many times. One theme of this bloviation is Hesburgh's "priestly touch". What is this "priestly touch" in Dolan's estimation? Who knows? When Dolan defines God as "him, her, whatever you want", I suppose this "priestly touch" can be "whatever you want", even if that "whatever" is the Land O' Lakes Statement.
Below is a Vortex summary. Pray for Father Hesburgh.
