And The Gobblygoop Continues...

Raymond Arroyo interviewed Cardinal Wuerl a few days ago.  Arroyo asked very straight-forward questions but did not receive replies in kind.  He put forth a herculean effort, but to no avail.  In the face of the verbal tap-dance from the Cardinal, Arroyo exercised much patience.  Please watch and you'll understand why the sin-nod will continue to undermine the faith of millions.

More Nonsense From The United States Hierarchy In Wake Of Sin-Nod

A few weeks ago we heard that the sin-nod fathers were batting around the idea of decentralizing the Church to place more authority in the hands of national conferences of Catholic bishops.  The world immediately realizes the ramifications for the German Catholics and I pointed out some similarly disastrous possibilities should the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops be imbued with undeserved authority.

Less than two weeks later we see evidence of damage that the USCCB will inflict.  Yesterday the USCCB put out a press release stating that Catholic and Lutheran leaders released a document entitled "Declaration on the Way: Church, Ministry and Eucharist".  I linked to the article and that in turn links to the statement.  It is a long tome.  These Catholics are operating under the delusion that doctrinal differences can be talked away.  What seems to be implicit in the notion of dialog is compromise.  That, of course is impossible.  The Roman Catholic Church has the fullness of truth because it comes from Jesus Christ.  We cannot compromise one iota of that for we cannot tamper with what Jesus has given us.  Yet such compromise is implicit throughout this document.

Yesterday I received news of another incident to occur this coming Monday.  With the sin-nod in the past, the progressives are focusing again on Laudato Si.  The Not-At-All Catholic Reporter announced that Cardinal Maradiaga will be featured at a panel discussion at Georgetown University.  Also featured in this panel will be John Podesta, former Obama official who is now chairing Hillary Clinton's campaign.  This dissent-fest will be moderated by John Carr.  Maradiaga's and Carr's names are hyperlinked for a reason; I've written about them in the past and if you follow the links you'll see why these men are dissenters if not outright heretics.  And yes, Maradiaga is one of the pope's top advisors; the pope has full responsibility for what he allows Maradiaga to utter.

Today I went to Mass at a parish that will remain unnamed.  In the bulletin I saw the above event being announced.  Knowing the priest to be faithful, I've no doubt that the announcement is in his bulletin only because its inclusion was dictated from "on high"; that is, orders came from the DC chancery and probably from the USCCB.  So yes, we are just beginning to see the progressives feeling their oats as a result of the sin-nod.  Those Catholics who are giddy simply because the "sin-nod wasn't all that bad" really need to remove your rose-colored glasses and start praying..

Sin-Nod Emboldens Dissenters In Archdiocese Of Washington

When I use the word "dissenter" I mean those who willfully deviate from the Traditions of the Catholic Church as handed down through the centuries.  Two striking examples were made disgustingly evident today.

The first came from Cardinal Wuerl, in the publication of two interviews he gave after the sin-nod ended.  One was given to America magazine (and expounded upon by Vox Cantoris), the other was published by Religion News Service.  I am not going into a comprehensive analysis of these interviews, else we'd be here for hours.  It's clear that he is feeling emboldened by this pontificate to flaunt his liberalism with aplomb and impunity.  Vox Cantoris does an excellent job with the America interview.  I will touch on a few points.

In the America article, he says (among other things), "no longer is the framework of the Church’s pastoral response the code of canon law."  Dr. Edward Peters, a canon lawyer, refuted the Cardinal's erroneous premise that canon law was ever the framework of the Church's pastoral stances.  He also points out how canon law is founded upon revelation, including the Gospels.  We can see that the cardinal is trying to paint a picture in which the Church simply had things wrong during all those previous centuries, but now, under this pontificate, a new day has dawned!  Halleluiah!  I'm sure the Cardinal is rejoicing at that silly thought, for canon law ceased to be any sort of reference for him some time ago.  Recall how he maltreated Father Guarnizo three years ago when the latter upheld Canon 915 in an archdiocesan parish (happens to be mine).

In the Religion News Service interview, we see the quote, “The frame of reference is now going to be: ‘What does the gospel really say here?’ That’s our first task.”  Really?   The gospels quote Jesus as saying "if you love me you will keep my commandments".  Jesus then commissioned the Church to teach His commandments to all.  The head-scratcher about Wuerl's comment is the word "now".  God's commands have always been the frame of reference for the Church.  Why the usage of this word "now"?  What meaning is that intended to convey?

Later on he says, "I’ve had priests say to me that the pope is really just affirming what most of us know in our hearts we are supposed to be doing anyway."  I'm sure that there are lots of archdiocesan priests who are also dissidents, who have off-kilter ideas of what they "are supposed to be doing".

That brings us to our second striking example.  I can easily imagine Father Peter Daly having such a chat with Cardinal Wuerl.  I've blogged on his progressivism in the past (see here and here).  He too gave an interview, this one to the Not-At-All Catholic Reporter.  He didn't touch on the sin-nod, but it is all too obvious that after the sin-nod, he is feeling his oats as he trumpets loudly his dissidence regarding homosexuality.  He praises the Obergefell ruling, as "making things better for our society".  He lauded the Maryland legislation legalizing same-sex #mowwidge, while most sensible Catholics strove to defeat it.

Get a load of this whopper of a quote.  "Same-sex marriage is a very conservative movement. Homosexual people who seek stable and committed relationships are implicitly declaring their opposition to promiscuous, violent, or exploitive sex. Like heterosexual couples they seek faithful relationships based on real love."  I scarcely know where to begin with this.  I think I have to start with the last sentence and work backwards, starting with the concept of "real love".  First and foremost, love must be founded on God's commands, and one of those commands forbids homosexual conduct.  Anything involving said activity is NOT love, pretenses notwithstanding.  For that reason, there is no way such a relationship can be considered stable, since there is no real foundation in God's order.  As far as it being "very conservative", I think many gays would take that remark as an insult.  Now consider he's a priest.  What kind of teaching about marriage did he receive in the seminary?

Now he admits his dissent and he arrogantly announces his intent to drag his parish into a spiritual and moral cesspool that may very well terminate in hell for some of his flock AND himself.  "As long as I am pastor here we will welcome and register everyone who shares our Catholic faith, including same-sex couples. After all, we register divorced and remarried people. We will educate their children in our religious education programs, and we welcome them as sponsors at baptism and confirmation. We open our ministries to them. We will allow them to teach religious education so long as they are respectful of the church teaching. (That we require of everyone.) We will encourage them to participate fully in the life of the church, including the Eucharist. We will treat everyone with respect and dignity. We will allow them the right of their own conscience."  If the parish is going to educate the children of these same-sex couples, just what do they intend to teach them about marriage and God's commands?  Will they teach the truth or some hell-oriented lie?  As far as being sponsors at baptism and confirmation, that is not an honorary role but one in which said sponsor must live out God's commands, including those pertaining to sexuality.  I could go on and on about all the errors in this paragraph, errors that are simply inexcusable for someone who calls himself "priest".

Lastly he announces his intent to allow the sin of sacrilege to be committed against Our Lord Himself in the Blessed Sacrament.  For all the lip-service he bestows on "respect and dignity", why doesn't Daly direct a little of that to Jesus, whose priest he's supposed to be?

He is long-time pastor of St John Vianney parish in Prince Frederick MD.  His article makes evident that while he retains his post, those parishioners will find their immortal souls in grave danger of damnation - unless they learn and embrace the Faith despite his machinations.  Yet Cardinal Wuerl allows Daly to carry on because they are of the same mind.  Did I say "allow"?  Not only that, the Cardinal probably applauds this heretic priest.   Consider this; under Cardinal Wuerl this heretic is allowed to retain his pastorate while Father Guarnizo is expelled precisely because he was a faithful and orthodox priest.

Ladies and gentlemen, the sin-nod ended less than two weeks ago and already the spiritual poison is spewing forth.  Of course I do live in a diocese in which one of the sin-nod's chief rainmakers holds sway so we can expect some severely noxious bilge to make its presence known here.  It will have impact everywhere.  Please pray and frequent the sacraments.

More Sin-Nod Pollution Bubbling To The Surface

Too many otherwise intelligent Catholics are absolutely gloating over the outcome of the synod claiming "we won", often with snark and guffaws at those of us who take a more sober look at the proceedings.  One of those concerned Catholics is none other than Cardinal Burke.  In an interview with Edward Pentin, he opined that the final report was "misleading" and lacks clarity on indissolubility of marriage.  He is focusing on paragraphs 84-86.  I urge you to read the interview.

From Voice of the Family we hear concerns about paragraph 58.  Apparently the majority of the prelates there voted for its inclusion: a paragraph that rejects Church teaching that states that parents are the sole authority over children's education regarding sexual matters.  The article points out that this paragraph has on it the paw prints of the United Nations.  In league with Planned Parenthood and other progressive cabals, the UN seeks to usurp the role of parents in moral formation of children.  Paragraph 58 of the sin-nod-slop plays right into their hands.

We also have an editorial from LifeSiteNews pointing out that what is not present is a clear affirmation of Catholic teaching regarding homosexuality and the mortally sinful nature of homosexual acts.  The lack of reiteration of Catholic teaching does in fact send a message that the teaching is not binding on man as a dictate from God.

As we can all see, the fallout from the sin-nod is just starting to appear.  There will be more work done in examining the final report.  More importantly and more ominously, we will see within the next few months some insidious implementations of "the spirit of the synod" (I bet that phrase will enter progressive lexicons presently) in our dioceses and parishes.  This will vary according to the proclivities of local prelates.  In short, I expect the Archdiocese of Washington to continue its embrace of "social justice" crap while punishing priests who dare to uphold marriage and Holy Communion.

Stay tuned.  There will be more.

Center For Medical Progress Releases Eleventh Video

The 11th video from Center for Medical Progress is out.  As I listened to those women talk, I had to wonder if there were any tiny remnants of humanity within their psyches.  Listen to them discuss "removing lower extremities to grasp the spine", "getting intact calvariums (heads) is something to strive for", "livers and hearts are cute".  If any pro-choice person is reading and watching, take warning, for if you continue to support the murder of babies you will experience the death of your own conscience and humanity and eternal damnation should you die in this state.

One positive sign I saw was their obvious discomfort at the Texas political climate.  In that whole state, only eight abortion mills operate.  We have that many in Montgomery County MD.  The air down there must be so much cleaner and fresher than here.  We of course rejoice in the recent raids of Planned Parenthood mills in Texas by state officials.  Owing to the sin-nod I was unable to focus on that but I salute the state of Texas and Governor Greg Abbott.

Fellow Faithful Catholics, The Sin-Nod Was A Disaster

That so many faithful Catholics are grasping at straws right now can be readily understood.  For decades now we've seen the Teachings of Jesus Christ not only attacked by secular society but undermined from within by progressive clerics of the Judas mold.  While we've been fearing a massive plop of heresy to spew forth from the sin-nod, it hasn't happened to the degree to which we expected.  But therein may lie the danger, for where overt evil might be rejected precisely because it is recognizable, evil camouflaged in subtle and ambiguous language can more easily insinuate itself into the minds of those who are all too ready to embrace simplistic appearances of good.

Think of it.  Faithful Catholics are waxing jubilant and ready to break out the bubbly because a Catholic document wasn't chock full of overt heresy!  Moreover, they are calling upon others to don rose-colored glasses and join them in pollyanna-type fantasies.  Take a look at my blog roll to the right; you'll see some of them.  Now these sites are on my blog role precisely because I hold them in respect - but on this occasion they're swilling down some dangerous koolaid.

All that demonstrates is how far we've fallen as a Church, when we rejoice because a Church document "isn't that bad".  Ladies and gentlemen, consider that the matters that were discussed during the sin-nod should never have been on the table precisely because they were stated clearly by God and acknowledged by the Church two thousand years ago.  To add insult to injury, some of the votes were fairly close.  In a saner time, any deviation from God's revealed word would have been unanimously and unceremoniously rejected.

As I stated yesterday, Rorate has commenced some analysis of the relatio.  It bodes ill for the Church.  Moreover, I link now to a LifeSiteNews piece penned by Andrew Guernsey.  In it he points out the attempts to tinker with language that has been used by the Church to describe intrinsic evils.  Anyone with a smidgen of common sense knows that the manipulation of language is an attempt to manipulate the thought processes of the audience.  One of the "offending phrases" that the sin-nod culprits want to eliminate is the phrase "intrinsic evil".  As Guernsey points out, this puts into context the Pope's concluding address yesterday in which he openly disdained "language which is archaic or simply incomprehensible".

I'll post below a video in which Michael Matt gives more insight as to what happened these past few weeks.  I will ask that my fellow bloggers throw off their rose-colored glasses and realize that the battle is still underway.  The sin-nod laid the groundwork for progressives to soldier forward with their plans at deconstruction of the Church.  Look out for phrases such as "spirit of the synod".  Keep praying, stay vigilant, vocal, and active.

Pope's Closing Address For SinNod - Vindictive And Sloppy

Here is the text of the thing from the Vatican website.  Please read the entire thing.  I'll address salient points.

"It was about bearing witness to everyone that, for the Church, the Gospel continues to be a vital source of eternal newness, against all those who would indoctrinate it in dead stones to be hurled at others."  A few things pop into mind:

• The phrase "eternal newness" is an oxymoron, for eternity by definition is neither old nor new.  It is beyond the bounds of time.  The truths of God revealed thousands of years ago continue to be the truths of God for they were uttered by the eternal God.
• "Indoctrinate" what?  Is this just sloppy translation?  How does one "indoctrinate the Gospel into stone"?  This is nonsensical
• Just who are these evil boogeymen that are hurling "dead stones" at people? And why, oh why, does the pope refer to the Gospel as "dead stones"?  Again, if there's a better translation, please advise the Vatican for I'm looking at their own website.

"It was about trying to open up broader horizons, rising above conspiracy theories and blinkered viewpoints, so as to defend and spread the freedom of the children of God, and to transmit the beauty of Christian Newness, at times encrusted in a language which is archaic or simply incomprehensible."

• There's that "newness" word again.  "Newness" is irrelevant when talking of God's timeless truths.
• "Conspiracy theories and blinkered viewpoints!"  Now here's where the "lovable" mask drops off and we see the real vindictiveness.  Of course some of that venom is aimed at Catholic bloggers such as Yours Truly.  But I believe faithful prelates who vocally called out the obvious rigging of the sin-nod are in the cross-hairs: prelates such as Cardinal Sarah, Archbishop Gadecki, Bishop Schneider, the thirteen cardinals who signed the letter, those who wrote "Remaining In The Truth Of Christ" and "Preferential Option For The Family", and others.  Voice of the Family just released a piece asking the pope to address the crisis of trust; do you think this "conspiracy theory" slur will help?
• What is meant by "language which is archaic"?  If Latin, may I remind us all of why Latin is used?  It is used precisely because it is a dead language; that is, the meanings of its grammar and vocabulary will not "evolve" with time.  Latin has worked well for the Church for 2000 years; there's no reason to pretend that it isn't sufficient now.  I realize that may not fit in with this "newness" fad, but so what?
• Let's look at the "incomprehensible" part.  Another reason why certain language may seem "incomprehensible" to certain individuals is precisely because they don't want to understand it; they don't like the demands it places on them and their behaviors.  Any parent who's raised children will understand the concept.  The answer is NOT to change the language but to continue to proclaim the teaching and insist on obedience for the eternal salvation of these recalcitrant individuals.

"We have also seen that what seems normal for a bishop on one continent, is considered strange and almost scandalous for a bishop from another; what is considered a violation of a right in one society is an evident and inviolable rule in another; what for some is freedom of conscience is for others simply confusion."

• Examples?
• God's truths are not only eternal, they are omnipresent.  That is, they apply everywhere and equally.  Marriage, being between one biologically born man and one biologically born woman, is one such truth.

"The Synod experience also made us better realize that the true defenders of doctrine are not those who uphold its letter, but its spirit; not ideas but people; not formulae but the gratuitousness of God’s love and forgiveness."

• "true defenders of doctrine are not those who uphold its letter, but its spirit".  No.  Enough of these false dichotomies.  When it comes to God's word, "letter" and "spirit" CANNOT be held in opposition to one another for they both emanate from the same God.  One does not uphold any "spirit" of God's word without upholding every single solitary letter of it.  Got that???

There are more problems with this but I think you get the gist.  The Relatio is out already, but so far only in Italian (again, why not Latin?).  Rorate has some of that translated and even that small snippet is fraught with serious problems, not the least is the "wiggle room" being implied regarding the matter of adulterers receiving Holy Communion while still in sin.  At best, it sounds like a time bomb that will explode at the most inopportune time.  Please pray; frequent the Sacraments, pray the Rosary, wear the scapulars.  We are in for some difficult times as Catholics.

The Church Must Be A-Changing!

Today while the sin-nod is in its last days (Deo Gratias!) the pope delivered a homily at Mass.  I've got to believe that it's part of the ongoing #maturation.  In short, he opined that Catholics must read the "signs of the times" and change with them.  Of course he threw out a parenthetic remark about staying within the bounds of truth, but that means we're getting praxis-vs-dogma gobblygoop.  I pray that this is not a harbinger of the final product of the sin-nod, but wouldn't be surprised if it is.

As I read it, I thought to myself, "he'd be channeling his inner Bob Dylan, except that Dylan's still alive"!   With that thought came inspiration for the jingle that I just now threw together.  If I say so myself, it sums up both the sin-nod and today's homily.  Those of you who remember the 1960s might find yourselves singing it to Dylan's tune.  In (dis)honor of the sin-nod, I present (drums and trumpets please, and yes a patent is pending)

THE CHURCH MUST BE A-CHANGING

Come gather you bishops, cardinals and priests

Come gather all of liberal stripe

Time to promulgate progressive tripe

At all faithful Catholics we’re going to snipe

Under the cover of false mercy hype

For the Church must be a-changing.

Come quickly Baldiserri, Rosica, Marx

Durocher, Lombardi, Kasper and Wuerl

Let our heretical colors unfurl

On Holy Communion we’ll heap sacrilege

From saints and Church fathers we’ll burn that bridge

For the Church must be a-changing.

Gadecki and Sarah, keep your mouths closed

By Sarah and Pell we won’t be opposed

Because they rebuke us we hold them as dopes

Part of the crowd who just don’t like the pope

Our sins we won’t confess ‘cause we must make a mess

For the Church must be a-changing.

Failed Papacy And Questionable Vortex

In today's Vortex Michael Voris discusses the latest talk of the papacy of Francis being "failed".  Apparently some leftists are lodging that complaint as they were hoping for radical changes of doctrine and practice, particularly in matters of sexual ethics.  That hasn't happened - at least not at a pace according to their liking.  I'm not so sure that their frustration is due to the pope as much as it might be to faithful Catholics "shining the light on cockroaches".

There's no doubt that Pope Francis did encourage such progressive thinking due to his extemporaneous interviews and disregard of papal traditions.  No one can gainsay that, not even Michael Voris.  However, today Voris goes through great mental and logical contortions to absolve the pope of any responsibility for this mess.  This is not the first time that Voris has made such vain attempts; I rebutted them at the time and now I'll have to do so again.

• At 3:50, Voris states that the pope's "own media people have been a disaster, failing him on every score".  Well then, why does the pope retain them?  It's been well over a year now and still the pope hasn't cleaned out that communication office of his.  Some opine that the pope desires that aura of confusion; that opinion has basis.
• At 4:40, speaking about the pope's "gang of nine" closest advisers, he says "a general is only as good as his first officers".  True enough.  The responsible general knows this and will ensure that he is surrounded by competent men.  Instead, the pope picked men like Maradiaga and Kasper.  Can he possibly claim ignorance of their proclivities?  No - not given the length of time he spent as bishop and cardinal himself.
• Following that, at 4:52, Voris goes into the pope's "governing style" saying that the pope surrounds himself with people whom he personally likes and avoids those whom he doesn't.  That is NOT just a mere preference of style, but the epitome of irresponsibility.  When one is about the serious task of governance - in this case the shepherding of millions of souls for their eternal salvation, they must select their assistants based on their assistants' abilities and vision in carrying out the mission - not based on trivialities such as personal likes and affinities.   We might expect children to do the latter, not vicars of Christ.
• At 5:25, Voris says of the pope, "many of those around him who are decidedly progressive and heterodox on various points may be actually using him        Being "used" or putting up the appearance of being used?  Are we really supposed to believe that the pope is such a dear, sweet, naive little bumpkin as to allow himself to be used?  C'mon!  How long has he been bishop and cardinal before going to the Vatican?  He's been "around the block" too many times for us to buy this "being used" poppycock!  He's a big boy now!  He owns the mess he's creating!  In the words on that plaque in President Truman's office, "the buck stops here"!  As much as Voris disdains criticism of the pope, does he realize how patronizing and condescending he sounds towards the pope?
• The following is the crux of Voris' presentation so I'll break out of the bullets now

At 6:00 he says of those evil boogeymen controlling the pope (they exist, but they don't control the pope - he has full culpability here) that they are trying to paint those of us who ask questions as "enemies of the pope".  That probably is the case; an example is the stunt that Cardinal Wuerl tried to pull a few days ago.  Then Voris's train of thought jumps the track when he says "to slam the pope" would play into their hands.

• I've said this several times before when Voris tried to scold those of us who criticize the pope's words and actions.  To raise these valid points is NOT equivalent to "slamming the pope".
• I suspect Wuerl et al are trying to silence us and to inhibit our questioning by implying that we "just don't like this pope".  Is it Voris who is playing into their hands by rehashing his call from several months ago for us to shut up?

One of his closing statements was that due to the machinations of the progressives, the pope has "little maneuvering room".  What difference does that make?  Why cannot the pope just do his job and promulgate the Teachings of Jesus Christ and give the results of that fidelity into the hands of God?  Why is that so complicated?  No doubt it would take courage but that is his responsibility.

The title of the Vortex video is "Failed Papacy".  I don't know about that.  I do know that up till now, this papacy has been one friggin disaster: from clown-nose selfies to "who am I to judge" to muslims praying to "allah" in the Vatican to telling adulterers they can receive Holy Communion - I could go on and on with this.  But after next week he will still be pope.  What will he do with the rest of his papacy?  This is cause for prayer for us, that he will make something of his papacy and do something for Christ's hurting and bruised Church.  Now the video..

Kasperites Refuted By St Thomas Aquinas

Michael Hichborn of Lepanto Institute put up a piece that refuted some serious errors that were embraced by Elizabeth Scalia.  Some might recognize her as the Patheos blogger "Anchoress".  Recently she assumed the position of editor of Aleteia.  In her piece she argues for Holy Communion for adulterers and sodomites.  I recommend you read both.  A note regarding Patheos; that network pays its site owners based upon the number of clicks that their sites receive.  Since Scalia's piece is found on the Aleteia site I don't think she'll be compensated for the viewing of her errors; else I could not have linked to it in good conscience.

Please read Hichborn's piece closely; it is excellent and there is one key reason why that's so.  Hichborn addresses the arguments that Scalia proposes and demonstrates how they've been refuted centuries ago by St. Thomas Aquinas.  As such, the words of the Angelic Doctor are most applicable to the canards being raised now at the sin-nod and by many other such proponents.  Cardinal Wuerl may wish to study them and to revisit his attitudes towards Canon 915 and the injustice that he perpetrated three years ago against Father Marcel Guarnizo.  Those of us who remember the ever-relevant Baltimore Catechism will appreciate this diagram that sums up some salient points.

In yesterday's post I linked to a LifeSiteNews interview with Cardinal Arinze.  His Eminence expounded on the obligation that each one of us has to properly form and inform our consciences in conformity with Catholic teaching.  Voice of the Family today released a piece that delves into that matter and how that relates to the need to receive Holy Communion in a worthy state.

LifeSiteNews interviewed Bishop Athanasius Schneider last week.  He stated quite plainly that those Kasperites who yap and yammer about admitting mortal sinners to Holy Communion are "following the spirit and language of Satan".  The good bishop is not afraid to call out his errant brothers by name.  God bless him and the other faithful prelates.  Pray for them because you can bet the progressives in the Vatican and elsewhere have the long knives aimed at them.

They "Just Don't Like The Pope"

More prelates are taking stands against the venom pouring from the sin-nod.

• Bishop Krzysztof Bialasik, Polish missionary to Bolivia, denounced abortion and "gender ideology" and lamented that the sin-nod did not address these matters.
• Archbishop Zbigniew Stankiewicz, on behalf of the Latvian Bishops' Conference, denounced the idea of Holy Communion for unrepentant adulterers and sodomites.
• Again we hear from Cardinal Pell as he rejects "continental Catholicism".
• Archbishop Gadecki has again denounced the none-too-subtle attempt by "sin-nod fathers" to dilute Catholic doctrine.
• Cardinal Jorge Urosa defended teaching on the Holy Eucharist, reminding all that the prodigal son was embraced by his father only after he returned home.
• Cardinal Burke stated that if being "fundamentalist" meant upholding Church teaching, then he was happy to be so, for that teaching will save souls.  Imagine that!  A Prince of the Church concerned with the mission that Christ gave to His Church, to save souls!  These days, that's a rarity.



SinNod's Moral
Theologian

• Cardinal Arinze reminded us all that those in objectively sinful situations cannot receive Holy Communion in good conscience.

God bless these prelates (and others) who are standing up to the obvious attempt to exploit the synod for heretical purposes.  Dare I suspect that Cardinal Wuerl would count them in the number of those who "just don't like this pope"?  By the way; who taught the "conscience reigns supreme" crowd their moral theology?  Jiminy Cricket?

Cardinal Wuerl Is Complaining About Us

That actually is a good thing.  He isn't playing the aloof stoic any longer.  If he's trying to poo-poo us, we must be having some beneficial effect.  He gave an interview to America magazine (that should say a lot right there) from which Joan Desmond of National Catholic Register draws.  I won't pick the whole thing apart, but will focus a bit one one very telling tidbit, a "Freudian slip", if you will.  Read the following.

"Pope Francis is calling for a church that, to my mind, is much more in contact with the Gospel, with the living out of the Gospel. Not just the articulation of the Gospel, the voicing of the Gospel, the proclaiming of the Gospel, but the personal living of it, and that seems to be what is the most attractive part of this pope, why so many people find him inviting, who so many people follow him, why so many people are coming back to the practice of the faith."

This "much more in contact with the Gospel" bit is, uh..intriguing!  "Much more" in comparison with what, pray tell?  "Much more" than:

• The Fathers and Doctors of the Church who helped crystalize and expound the teachings of Our Lord?
• Those missionaries who spread the Faith to pagans, often at the cost of martyrdom?
• Those parents of today who sacrifice to teach their children at home lest they lose their Faith in public and yes, diocesan schools?
• Those Christians who suffer for upholding the teachings of Jesus Christ in the face of opposition? Kim Davis, Linda Gibbons and (pay attention, Your Eminence!) Father Marcel Guarnizo are among that number.

My heavens!  How bereft we Catholics have been during these last 20 centuries of "contact with the Gospel"!  Now we have a pope whom many "find inviting"!  Yes indeedee!  Just ask Elton John!  As far as having lots of followers, that is no measure of anything.  Read John 6.  Many people followed Jesus - until He taught of the nature of the Eucharist.  Then they up and left.  Jesus kept proclaiming the truth of Who He is.  These truths of the Church are eternal and immutable, regardless of the number of "followers".   I will make no statement whatsoever regarding the pope's personal "living of the gospel", be it "yay" or "nay".  I wonder how the Cardinal dares to do so.

He also said that those who question the synodal process "just don't like this pope".  I suppose that would include his brother Cardinals Pell, Burke and now Arinze?  See here and here.

I do consider this braying by Cardinal Wuerl to be a good sign.  We bloggers must be doing something right to arouse their ire and to cause them to squint their eyes at the light of truth.  Let's keep it up.

Sin-Nod Proposal To Insinuate Moral Relativism In The Church

There are indications that Pope Francis may be entertaining ideas to slough off some papal authority to local bishops' conferences.  Under the proposal, these conferences would be empowered to deal with moral matters such as homsexuality and divorce as well as some doctrinal matters.  Voice of the Family has a fairly extensive analysis of the problem.

Both Cardinals Muller and Burke rightly condemn this idea as a violation of the very notion of a universal Church and an admittance of moral relativism.  Ladies and gentlemen, the Catholic Church is custodian of the Teachings of Jesus Christ.  These teachings are as immutable and eternal as the God who promulgated them.  They don't change from place to place, era to era.  What this crackpot idea would do is to create situations where the Church in one place would falsely teach that homosexuality is morally acceptable while another would hold onto Christ's teachings.  It would in fact formalize schisms (yes, that's plural) within the Church.

Readers of this blog are well aware of the many problems caused by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.  I needn't rehash them here; just put the name in the search box at the top left.  Now can you just imagine the unmitigated disasters that would be spewing forth from that cabal if they were granted doctrinal authority?  The Church in the United States would be crippled beyond recognition.

Let us pray that the Church survives the remaining days of this sin-nod.

Sin-Nod Slop Oozed Into My Parish Mass This Morning Via Two Zingers

I'll deal with the more insidious zinger first.  As the name of this blog suggests, I am located in the Archdiocese of Washington and the archbishop is Cardinal Donald Wuerl.  As this Church Militant article (and so many of my own posts) states, he is decidedly on the progressive side.  The video makes mention of a priest being disciplined for upholding Canon 915 back in 2012.  Regular readers of this blog will immediately realize that the priest is Father Marcel Guarnizo and it was at my parish where Father Guarnizo attempted to prevent sacrilege.  For some refresher on that situation and the heinous treatment meted out to Father Guarnizo under the direction of Cardinal Wuerl, please click on the archives to the right and read the posts from late Feb 2012 through March 2012.

Presently Cardinal Wuerl is in Rome as one of the synod fathers.  No one doubts that he is lending his hand to the Kasper-Marx-Cupich crowd.  Recall the blasphemies suggested by both Marx and Cupich.  Both prelates are openly calling for the Church to dissent from the teachings of Christ Himself with regards to adultery, sodomy and contraception, and to allow those engaging in these mortally sinful acts to receive Holy Communion.  Hold that thought as I relate what happened a few hours ago at Mass.

One of the prayers during the "Prayers of the Faithful" was for families.  I don't have the text verbatum but still the words were clear: "For families during this time of the synod as they are under attack from addiction, immigration, deportation and poverty".  Leaving aside (for the moment) the open embrace of left-wing positions on lesser issues, do you notice what's missing from that list of malevolent forces that attack our families?  Yes - those sins against family and life that are always intrinsically evil.  I'll list them below:

• Abortion.  That should be included in that list, as abortion is literally an attack on a most helpless babies by members of his/her own family.
• Homosexual conduct.  Those engaged in such sins make a mockery of families.  Two of the same gender who "play house" together are NOT families, wicked and inane civil laws notwithstanding.  We pity and pray for the children embroiled in these situations as they are denied the mother and the father that they need and deserve.
• Contraception.  Usage of these substances distorts the meaning of true marital love and is the most reliable predictor of divorce.

Yet these evils were not included in the list of forces that tear families apart.  Thinking back on the sin-nod, it's not difficult to realize why they were deliberately omitted from that list.  These are the very behaviors that Marx et al want to legitimatize by use of the sin-nod, and he most likely has an ally in Cardinal Wuerl.  Looking at the matter from the progressive viewpoint, how could Wuerl's chancery mandate or even allow them to be included when the progressives at the sin-nod are trying to "mainstream" them into Church life?

I realize that this omission during the prayer may seem like a minor little thing, but it is precisely by these "minor little things" that they hope to change the mindsets of Catholics in the pew.  That's how these little "zingers" work; the less noticed they are, the more effective they are.  This questionable prayer is NOT the only "zinger" that happened in today's 9:30 AM Mass at St John Neumann in Gaithersburg MD.  Let's look at "zinger #2".

Satan In The Sin-Nod

Cardinal Marx Outright Shills For Holy Communion For Adulterers And Sodomites

Such was the gist of his "intervention" this past Wednesday. To complete the heretical slop, he also stated that contraception within marriage should be liberalized "to make more room for conscience".  In other words, the clear teachings of Jesus Christ are to be subordinated to the demands of warped consciences.  I saw this news on Church Militant's site and left the following comment.  It is self-explanatory, but knowing CM's reluctance to criticize the doings and sayings of Pope Francis, here's hoping that the comment remains and that they start acknowledging the proverbial "elephant in the living room".   The comment is "If Marx is allowed to remain in his various Church-related roles after this proposal of immorality and heresy, we need to acknowledge that Pope Francis approves of Marx's antics and perhaps even is applauding them.  Let us cease this fear of stating these simple truths, shall we?"

Meanwhile, the bishops from Poland and Africa are having nothing to do with Marx's antics.  Toronto Catholic Witness relates that Archbishop Gadecki refutes the idea of "being pastoral" and he has spoken in the name of all the Polish bishops.  Michael Hichborn of Lepanto Institute asks why such matters of settled doctrine are even being discussed and then answers the question; they are being discussed because Marx et al want to unsettle these doctrines.

We've had de facto schism for some time now.  This sin-nod may well formalize that reality.

Cupich's Dissidence At SinNod - Another Reason To Sign The Canon 212 Petition

I and other faithful Catholic bloggers have written copiously about the many travesties perpetrated by Archbishop Cupich of Chicago.  Recall that he is now at the sin-nod, at the express direction of Pope Francis.  Some may have wondered how the Pope could have named Cupich to the sin-nod in light of his flawed moral compass.  I don't; in fact I believe the pope knew full well Cupich's proclivities and that was the reason he brought Cupich to the sin-nod.

We are now hearing that Cupich is using his new-found bully pulpit to finagle the admittance to Holy Communion those embroiled in flagrant mortal sins: adulterers and sodomites, to be precise.  These would be people currently and unabashedly continuing in their sinful situations, not those who have repented and made good Confessions.

LifeSiteNews and Voice of the Family recorded an interview given by Cupich in which he outlines his diabolical proposal.  Let's look at a few salient points.

• Those adulterers and sodomites who feel marginalized do so because they have marginalized themselves by their embrace of mortal sin.  Let us thank God for these "feelings" as they might be the impetus that these people need to repent.  Let us pray that they do repent soon before they're marginalized for all eternity.
• "Conscience is inviolable"?  No - not if it moves in contradiction to the teachings of Jesus Christ.  Everyone of us - adulterers and sodomites included - have the solemn duty to form and inform our conscience in conformity with the Church.

Church Militant TV has added commentary.  I'll be candid.  Unless he's a complete dunderhead, the pope knew precisely what Cupich's pet causes were before he appointed Cupich to the see of Chicago and invited him to participate in the sin-nod.  He didn't seek out Cupich despite his leanings; he sought Cupic because of his leanings.

They are trying to use the sin-nod to "mainstream" the gay lifestyle into acceptable Church practices, and allowing sodomites to come to Holy Communion would be a major step for them.  Unfortunately it would also be a major step towards hell, for receiving Holy Communion in a state of mortal sin is its own mortal sin.  Austin Ruse wrote a piece on the way that high Vatican official maltreated Kim Davis.  They seem to harbor malevolence towards anyone who stands in the way of these goals or who exposes their malfeasances by virtue of their own proper conduct - thus their utter contempt for Kim Davis, a courageous lady who puts these Vatican officials to shame.

This sin-nod is, at best, an abysmal joke.  Please consider signing this petition.

Time To End The SinNod Charade

At the sin-nod, some faithful prelates have been speaking forthrightly about the satanic manipulation of the sin-nod that seems to be the aim of Vatican authorities, including the pope.  Archbishop Tomash Peta of Astana likened the language of the Instrumentum Laboris to "the smoke of Satan".  He spoke particularly of attempts to liberalize Holy Communion for those in adultery and to normalize sodomite acts.  Cardinal Robert Sarah of Guinea also expressed concern at the obvious manipulation of the sin-nod.

LifeSiteNews interviewed Cardinal Burke recently.  Recall that he attended last year's sin-nod.  On account of the marginalization that he suffered at the hands of the pope, he is not part of this on-going sin-nod.  In that interview, Burke addressed the sin-nod proposal that local bishops decide for their own diocese whether or not they will allow sodomites and/or adulterers to receive Holy Communion.  He if that were to happen the Church would compromise her character of being universal.

While I applaud these prelates (and others speaking out), I fear their words fall on deaf, indifferent and even hostile ears within the Vatican.  They can speak all they want, but the sin-nod honchos are going to have their way, I suspect.  Many of us believe that if the good bishops cannot improve things at the sin-nod, it may well behoove them to walk out of the sin-nod rather than dignify the charade with their presence.  A walk-out would send the message that they will not allow "pastoral" slop to be issued in their name.  A group called Canon 212 Society has put together a petition asking the faithful prelates to consider a walkout should the sin-nod honchos prove to be absolutely incorrigible.   I have signed it and urge you to sign it as well, at this link.  After you sign, please share it far and wide.

Remedial Catechism Classes Needed For Some SinNod Fathers

Those in desperate need of such instruction include Fathers Lombardi and Rosica.  From Vatican Insider we read talk that, had I uttered this in first grade, would have caused me to flunk religion class and brought scoldings from the Sisters who taught at Notre Dame in Baltimore.  That was way before the place became a feminazi cesspool, but I digress.

Get a load of this pig-vomit: “The teachings of the Church and Catholic theology on issues relating to marriage and the sacraments are not absolutely steadfast".  One might think this was prattle emanating from some left-wing nutso professor at Berkeley, but this spewed forth from the mouth of Father Lombardi, director of the Vatican Press Office.  Does anyone still wish to pretend that the pope bears no responsibility?  He owns this mess.

I believe this SinNod still has quite some time to do serious damage.  It's already off to a roaring start.

SinNod - Red Flags Raised But Ignored By Puppet-Masters

News broke today of a letter crafted and signed by thirteen Cardinals expressing concern at the heavy-handed tactics being displayed by the SinNod honchos (Baldiserri and Rosica, for example).  Sandro Magister received it and released it.  Rorate Caeli has the full text; please read it.  Notice this line: "A number of fathers feel the new process seems designed to facilitate predetermined results on important disputed questions".  Two days ago I pointed out that there is an obvious push to achieve a specific agenda.  While some readers might dismiss my statement is "conspiracy theory" nonsense, what might they think now, with prelates voicing the same concerns?

Voice of the Family reports that some of the signers of the letter denied signing the letter and/or the accuracy of the letter as published.  But others are stating that the concerns voiced in the letter are valid.  At any rate, Cardinal Pell hand-delivered it to the Pope and it was promptly ignored.  However, the statement stands in the open and serves as witness that there is strife at the SinNod.  Given the position of Kasper and his ilk, we should hope that there is indeed strife and that their agenda won't be adopted without valiant opposition.

Speaking of opposition, it does seem that Baldiserri et al are looking to quash it as they would an insect.  LifeSiteNews informs us that the press credentials of Father Nicholas Gregoris were revoked (after him having served 15 years as a correspondent) because after he dared to challenge a bishop who said that the question of Holy Communion for adulterers was still open.

In general, there's lots happening at the SinNod, much of it nefarious.  One Peter Five has a handy synopsis that you might find helpful.  He calls it "highlights"; it could just as well be called "lowlights".  Also, we know who the moderators and reporters are for the circuli minori (small groups) of the SinNod.  In one of them this morning, the question was raised about masonic influence in the SinNod.  I think that question to be quite astute.

Second #protestpp Event Held In Silver Spring MD On Oct 10 2015

As happened approximately six weeks ago, pro-life activists throughout the country protested at local Planned Parenthood centers to rebuke their murders of babies and sale of the corpses of their victims.  Thus 85 or so activists gathered at the Silver Spring Planned Parenthood yesterday morning.  We heard from Drew Belsky of LifeSiteNews and Dr. Michael Crone of George Mason University.  While their topics were slightly different, both men reminded us that while the immediate objective may be the defunding of Planned Parenthood, we must continue to make it our ultimate aim to stop the murder of babies altogether.

I recorded the event yesterday, capturing both talks.  The video is below.

Sin-Nod: A Thinly-Veiled Attempt To Cram The Gay Agenda Down Catholic Throats?

Within these past few days we have seen "synod fathers" acts as apologists for sodomy.  ChurchMilitant.TV reports that an Austrialian archbishop favors "less condemnatory language" with regards to the mortal sins of sodomy and adultery.  One wonders if he would like to edit several of the epistles of St Paul that are found in the Bible for they clearly state that those engaging in such sins will suffer hell fire if they die unrepentant.

LifeSiteNews published an article by Phil Lawler regarding the obvious attempt to rig the sin-nod, an attempt that many of us have noticed..  I urge you to read it.  Note two things:

• Much of this strong-arming is being done by Cardinal Baldiserri, secretary of the synod.  Recall that there is a reason that I dubbed him "Book-Thief Baldi".  Hold that thought as you ponder this revelation: that of homosexual propaganda being distributed at the sin-nod with authorization of higher-ups. (ht - Toronto Catholic Witness)  This is confirmed by Archbishop Gadecki.  So the sin-nod honchos (Baldiserri included) resort to theft to prevent circulation of Remaining In The Truth of Christ, a book authored by several prelates that champions the teaching of Jesus Christ, but they allow distribution of tripe that justifies homosexual conduct.  Those engaging in such distribution find themselves in the unenviable position of cooperating with mortal sin and that is its own mortal sin, by the way.
• In Lawler's last paragraph, we read, "The Pope ultimately controls the process. The Pope will ultimately control the product."  True enough; he does.  But considering what was revealed about the "shadow synod", along with all the other little meetings that have been occurring at the Vatican, might this rigging be part and parcel of an attempt to insinuate the proceeds of the "shadow synod" into Church life?   The procedural changes that Lawler noted would make it difficult for faithful prelates to discern whether or not any final documents were truly representative of their deliberations.

I'm going to venture a guess and I think it's one shared by many.  The so-called "synod reports" are already drafted, and they will "change pastoral practice" to allow for the admittance to Holy Communion those living in de facto adultery AND to "mainstream" sodomite shack-up situations into Church society.  This sin-nod will only serve to lend an aura of legitimacy to the de facto heresy that probably has already been concocted by this "shadow synod", to be foisted on unsuspecting Catholics.  Could that be why Cardinal Reinhard Marx appears to be a bundle of joy and giggles now (as reported by One Peter Five, despite past hints of going into schism?  If that is the case - and I hope and pray that I'm incorrect - the Pope will fully own such a travesty.

In light of my hypothesis, other news makes sense as we consider the strategy of progressives to normalize homosexuality within the Church.  Voice of the Family has informed us that gay-coddling Cardinal Vincent Nichols will be moderating one of the English-speaking small groups at the sin-nod.  Of course he will have much discretion as to what is included in the report for that group.  We also hear from Church Militant that a priest in the diocese of Oakland CA gave a homily at Mass telling his parishioners that "being gay is not sinful".  To make matters even more scandalous, the homily was published in the official diocesan newspaper.  Clearly these events are part of the #maturation process to brainwash us to submit to the gay agenda.

Let us continue to pray and to shine the light of truth on cockroaches.

Sin-Nod Going Downhill Fast

Lepanto Institute published a piece today regarding the designs that Freemasonry has had on the Church, to destroy her by corrupting her morally.  I believe we are now seeing how far they've made inroads into the Church hierarchy, filling it with homosexuals and other dissidents.

Already we are hearing at this sin-nod talk of:

• Allowing "female deacons"
• Doctrine being an "open question"
• Father Rosica putting forth polygamy as "making sense to consider"

As Rorate says, the sin-nod is degrading to a freak show.

There is some positive "push-back" to the crap that is pouring forth from the sin-nod.  Some bishops, mainly from Africa and Poland, are standing firm.  Archbishop Gadecki of Poland has denounced the "Kasper proposal" and the "gender ideology" being promoted at the sin-nod (and elsewhere).   Regarding my second bullet point, Michael Voris reports that the bishop who made that crack was openly and loudly confronted by a priest for "confusing the faithful" and not knowing the Faith themselves.  Good for that priest!

Two Views Of Thomas Merton: Jesuit Versus Jesuit

We know how one Jesuit gushed over Father Thomas Merton two weeks ago, calling him "a source of spiritual inspiration and guide for many people".  I speak, of course, of Pope Francis' address to the US Congress during his trip here.

The other Jesuit is the late Servant of God Father John Hardon.  A video was made of his analysis of Merton and I share it below.

And So The Sin-Nod Begins

Michael Voris of ChurchMilitant.TV is covering the sin-nod as it progresses.  Today's Vortex is the first installment (I believe).  In it he mentions that a goal that many progressives have for it is the normalization of homosexuality in the Church.  That is a reasonable hypothesis.  I also point out that many of us believe that this sin-nod is rigged and that it merely serves as a front to insinuate progressive documents to change "pastoral practice" in the Church.  We know that Our Lord will not allow solemnly-proclaimed dogma to change, but the change of practice can have very similar effects and most likely with devastating consequences.

Voice of the Family is the organization to which Voris alludes that produced the expose of the sin-nod's Instrumentum Laboris.  During last year's debacle, they were one of several leading voices for truth and sanity there.  They would be worthwhile to follow as this thing unfolds.

Voris made mention of Msgr Krzysztof Charamsa, who has worked since 2003 at the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith and has also taught theology at various pontifical universities.  He recently "came out as gay", that is, he announced and wallowed in his mortal sin of sodomy.  He did this in a press conference with his accomplice in mortal sin.  Here is a brief account of that mess, along with the announcement of Father Federico Lombardi that Chramsa was dismissed.  But take note of Lombardi's words.  Charamsa was publicly rebuked not because of his sins against nature, chastity and his priestly vows, but because his announcement "on the eve of the synod appears very serious and irresponsible".  In other words, he's simply being spanked for embarrassing all the other homophiles in the Vatican, possibly tipping their hands.

Two years ago, Father Dariusz Oko published an expose of the gay-mafia within the Vatican.  He recently gave an interview concerning the Chramsa matter (ht- Toronto Catholic Witness).  He seems to state that Charamsa is just one part of the "lavendar mafia" within the Vatican.  I think he's right.  Now today's Vortex.

Oregon Community College Shootings - Another Important Aspect To Consider

First, let's all pray for the repose of those killed in the mass murder last week.  It is no secret that this gunman Chris Mercer, targeted Christians.  He queried his victims before he shot them; the Christians were shot in the head while non-Christians were shot in the legs.  That aspect was curiously absent from Obama's remarks after the shooting.  Had the victims been shot because they were anything but Christian, Obama would have denounced the hate-crime aspect of the murders.  But it is not Obama's screed that I want to address at this time, loathsome as it was.

As I understand the accounts, most or all of the mayhem happened in two classrooms, with goodly numbers of people in each of these, and Mercer acted by himself.  I'll ask this question point-blank.  Out of all those people, why did only one individual, Army veteran Chris Mintz, think to charge at Mercer?  Again, consider that Mercer was by himself while there were many potential victims.  How could it not have occurred to them, especially after he began shooting people one by one, that they'd all at least be wounded if they remained passive?  Did not one of them have the presence of mind to rally the others to rush at Mercer and disarm him before more bloodshed occurred?

I think we can lay some of the blame for that on our educational system and progressive culture.  For quite some time now, modern public education has been in the business of turning our children into stupified, passive sheeple who are incapable of thinking outside of the "victim box" into which the NEA has dictated our children must place themselves.  Indeed, students who dared to think outside the "sheeple box" often found themselves punished for so doing.  For example:

• Last week in California, a high school student saw a blind student being bullied by another teen.  He punched the bully to the ground and tended to the blind student.  For his heroic actions, the school suspended the good samaratan.
• See this account for punishment meted out to two other students for assisting others.

Then there are the public-education nitwits who are afflicted with vapors at the mere thought of children even thinking about guns.  See this and this and this for three such accounts.  I, a citizen of Maryland, am ashamed that all these occurred in my home state.  I bring up these to show how public school students are being taught to shun the idea of self-reliance for their own safety, and punished if they don't accept the pabulum being force-fed to them.

Those Oregon victims who professed their Christianity were shot out of hatred for the faith.  But I daresay many of them were shot because they didn't lift a finger to defend themselves and other students.  Yes, I know that they may have been shot if they would have attempted such self-defense, but that obviously happened anyway.  Had they taken the actions that Mintz took I suspect many lives would have been saved - including Mercer's.

Again, I fault our education system for their obvious failures to mentally equip young people to be proactive about self-defense.  Perhaps for the Christians, their pastors may want to reevaluate how they balance the teaching of "turn the other cheek" with morally legitimate self-defense.  As I understand Christ's admonition, "turn the other cheek" does not mean acquiescence to a madman intent on harming many others besides oneself.  I don't think it's any coincidence that Mintz is a military veteran.  He received training that would have undone some of the progressive mental damage that so many young people endure these days. 

Public education is turning our young people into passive sheeple who learn to depend on the government for everything, including their safety.  We need to counteract that, and the parents and pastors must step up to the plate and teach our young (and ourselves) how to be proactive and tough (in the proper way) to take charge and deal proactively with our surroundings.

Two Interviews Tell Quite The Tale

Two days ago we heard news about the pope' interview with Kim Davis while he was in town last week.  It turns out he had another interview of a very different kind.  A former student of the pope's, Yayo Grassi, met with him.  This student, a male, brought along with him his accomplice in the mortal sin of sodomy, as well as his mother.  LifeSiteNews has more details along with video.  The video shows the pope embracing his former student and warmly shaking the other sodomite's hand.  The mother of the student appears overcome with emotion.  I wonder what it can be, given her son is living in mortal sin?  All are speaking in Italian I believe.  Does anyone have a decent  idea of the conversation?

The pope is the chief shepherd of souls.  Nowhere do I see any exhortation of the pope to the two men that they must separate lest they risk damnation and an eternity in hell.  This interview was scandalous, and those most scandalized were the two gays, as well as all others who either participate in, or support that evil.  It is they who stand to literally lose their souls owing to the lack of spiritual mercy being shown them.  Let us remember that the first Spiritual Work of Mercy is to "rebuke the sinner".

Now we hear news that the Vatican has shifted into "damage control mode" over the interview,   Father Rosica has acknowledged that the interview had "negative impact" while Father Lombardi said the meeting should not be considered a show of support.  But wait a minute!  These two Vatican officials weren't speaking of the Grassi interview, but rather the one with Kim Davis.  In fact, Father Lombardi went so far as to say, "The only real audience granted by the Pope at the Nunciature was with one of his former students and his family (Grassi)".  See this LifeSiteNews piece for details.

Let's unpack this, shall we?  After news broke of the Davis meeting, all the progressives waxed huffy about it, expressing   Well, my goodness!  The Vatican progressives can't have any of that going on now, can they?  That goes double due to the sin-nod that will commence next week.  So they immediately had to start groveling before their puppet-masters and sugar-daddies and claim that the Davis interview is fake while the Grassi one was the real deal.  Got that?  Good!

This gives us more of a picture of what kind of circus this sin-nod will be.  Pray!

The Rigging Of A Synod

At the sin-nod last year, we were treated to a circus of subterfuge and insinuation of heresy under the guise of "being pastoral".  Recall how Cardinal Pell pounded his fist on a table and demanded of the sin-nod father that they "stop manipulating this synod".  Even at that, the "fathers" still slipped in gay-friendly statements that were explicitly voted out by those in attendance.

Since then, we've seen:

• Episode after episode of the gay agenda being coddled at Catholic events - including this most recent papal visit to the United States
• Petitions begging the Pope to uphold Catholic teaching regarding marriage and family - as though a Vicar of Christ should require such petitions to fulfill his God-given mission
• The German Catholic Conference uttering statements that sound like they're ready to go schismatic should the gay agenda not be openly embraced by the Church
• Various meetings and "secret synods" quietly conducted in order to plot the mechanics of insinuating the gay agenda into Catholic practice, if not teaching

In light of these facts and the revelations found in Edward Pentin's book on the rigging of the extraordinary synod, why should we doubt the revelations that Rorate Caeli made public today?  Apparently there will be a secret "parallel synod", comprised mainly of Jesuits.  The article is coy about the "Argentine" but since I'm not one to play games, let's say out loud that this "Argentine" is none other than Pope Francis.  It is that cabal that will be producing documents to further the gay agenda and so-called "annulment reform".  This so-called "Ordinary Synod" will only be a front - puppets, if you will - for this other group.

Edward Pentin revealed that tomorrow "procedural changes" to the conduct of the synod will be announced.  These changes will most likely facilitate the doings of this "secret synod" and stymie any efforts that Cardinal Pell, the African contingent and other faithful prelates might make to prevent heresy from oozing forth from this upcoming "sin-nod".

Right now it looks like all we can do is pray and continue to shine the light on the skulduggery that appears to be underfoot at the Vatican now.