Canonize Father Hamel? There's Cause For Pause

Already on the blogosphere there are calls for the canonization of Father Hamel, the French priest murdered by Islamic terrorists while saying Mass in his parish church.  Of course I understand that he was murdered by Islamic terrorists because they despise the Faith and that is a factor in the canonization process.  I don't believe that's an overriding factor and there may be other facts to consider.

From an account of a prayer service to honor Father Hamel comes the unsettling news that his church contributed land to local Muslims so that they could build a mosque.  The local mosque leader is mourning the priest who, in his words, "helped us to pray to allah".  Ponder that.

The first of the Ten Commandment is "I am the Lord your God.  You shall have no false gods before Me."  Yet this parish, quite probably with the connivance of Father Hamel, gave material and formal cooperation to the act of idolatry.  What else is "helping to pray to allah" if not formal and material cooperation with that mortal sin?

Some might think I'm judging Father Hamel.  However, isn't the rush to canonize him prematurely its own form of rash judgment?  I think there are two "takeaways".

First, let us continue to pray for his repose and cease the presumption of instant admittance to heaven.  We just don't know.  Why deny him the prayers and sacrifices needed to mitigate any possible purgatory?

Second, the western civilization simply must stop coddling these terrorists, as that French church did. Sadly but predictably, we heard bleating from the Pope, who "challenged" Poland to lay aside its well-founded concerns about opening their borders to potential terrorists.   Closer to home we heard Bishop Daniel Flores of Brownsville Texas likening deportation of illegal immigrants to abortion.  For him to claim that deportation of illegals, which is a moral action, is equivalent to an inherently immoral action shows a complete ignorance of Church moral teaching.  The coddling of these terrorists by Church hierarchy is nothing more than someone kissing the hand that stabs them in the back.  I regret that Father Hamel learned that the hard way.  Must more good people die before we wake up?

Is The Pope Hell-Bent On The Death Of Western Civilization?

I don't have to rehash the sad account of Father Jacques Hamel, the French priest who was murdered by Islamic terrorists.  He was beheaded while saying Mass in his parish Church.  I will point out that the French, over the past few years, have literally opened their borders indiscriminately to thousands of middle east "refugees", among them Islamic terrorists.

The pope commented on the murder as he was flying to Poland.  Yes, it is another plane interview with its own slew of inanities.  He correctly stated that it's a war, but then went on to opine that "all religions seek peace" and then started on a "war of interests, money" etc.  He is exactly incorrect when he said that the murder of Father Hamel had nothing to do with religion.  In fact, the two murderers were affiliated with the Islamic State and were engaged in Islamic rituals during the beheading.  In fact, terrorists consider beheading to be mandated by the quran.  Yet the pope tries to reduce the motivations for such barbarism to be "money and interests".  Consider how he reduces the motivations to materialistic advantage.  Is that not rather symptomatic of a progressive and even socialistic mindset?

Last week LifeSiteNews gave us a glimpse into a book written by Cardinal Burke.  He addresses a variety of topics in that book, including the encroachment of Islam.  He states - correctly so, I might add - that Islam is, because of its own creeds, inherently unable to coexist peacefully with other religions (think about that when you see those silly "coexist" bumper strips on cars).  He said that it's important to understand the differences between Islam and Christianity.  I might add that one key difference is, contrary to liberal pipe-dreams, Muslims worship a false idol, not the One True God.  He said that Islam, according to its own doctrine, must also become the state.  Look at Dearborn Michigan.  We need to wake up, both to Islam and the threats of unbridled and illegal immigration.

The LifeSiteNews piece also mentions the warnings of Cardinal Sarah uttered last year about the dangers of Islam.  In the wake of Father Hamel's murder, Cardinal Sarah issued another warning as he asked how many decapitations would it take for European leaders to realize the situation in which the West finds itself.

Other clergy are sounding the alarm as well.  Father George Rutler, a priest from the Hell's Kitchen area of New York City, wrote of the destructive influence of pacifism and called on the west to wake up.   Sadly some refuse to acknowledge the truth.  Following the progressive scripts to perfection, Bishop Daniel Flores of Brownsville TX likened the deportation of illegal immigrants to abortion.  In other words, he reduced the victims of abortion to political props to justify his progressive proclivities.  Conveniently he forgets that several of the 9/11 terrorists waltzed across the border like so many others.  How many more of these do we now have in the U.S.?

When will our bishops and yes, pope, man up and face the fact that Islam is opposed to Christianity and stop coddling it?

Amoris Laetitia Paves Way For Immoral Sex Ed At World Youth Day

I've written a bit about the document that I'll call Amoralis Lamentia in the past and I'll link to those posts now for some context.  A few weeks ago there was some buzz on the blogosphere about a protest addressed to the pope regarding the errors in AL.  Because the authors/signers were anonymous at the time and the content unknown, I did not think it prudent to jump on the bandwagon.  I simply had no idea what it entailed.

Now more is known, and One Peter Five has it, along with a link to the full document.  The document calls AL "a grave danger to Catholic faith and morals".  No truer words were spoken.  Both the document and cover letter are pdf files; they can be saved to your own machines.  I suggest you do so.  I suggest you read it very carefully, alongside the English translation of Amoralis Lamentia.  Pay close attention to the censures.  Understand that Pope Francis claims that AL is "sound doctrine".  Cardinal Schonborn takes the lunacy even further by stating that previous Catholic teaching must be read in light of Amoris Laetitia.  My!  Doesn't he have it backwards! It is AL that must conform to the Sacred Tradition of the Church, not vice versa.  I suspect the protest was written before Schonborn plopped this stinker, else it might have been listed in the censures.

In my first anthology of posts there is stated a theory that the synods were rigged to pave the way for this thing, and even the ouster of Pope Benedict XVI was done with this in mind.  The protest states that Amoralis Lamentia will pose a danger to Catholic morals.  This week, during World Youth Day, the young people attending that thing will have foisted upon them a most immoral sex education program, promulgated by Pontifical Council for the Family.  The president of that council is Msgr Paglia.  At the World Family Meeting in Philadelphia last year, he stated that gays would have the same status as others - to implement the Instrumentum Laboris on the Synod, a precursor to Amoralis Lamentia.

LifeSiteNews has more detail on this program.  While the program is held out as Church teaching, it does not touch on what constitutes sins against chastity.  The importance of parents is entirely neglected.  The language and videos used therein can be considered pornographic.  And of course it is being promulgated to implement Amoralis Lamentia.  As LSN points out, the very existence of this program runs counter to many papal teachings of the past.  But then again, we see how Schonborn sought to undermine Church tradtition by making it subordinate to Amoralis Lamentia.

I'd urge parents of young people who are attending this World Youth Day to be vigilant.  Ask questions.  Don't be passive in the face of this intrusion into your sphere of authority.  Be informed and be parents.  I'd make the same recommendation of those who are chaperoning groups attending this thing.  Be prepared to offer authentic Church teaching on this and other matters.

Texas Drops Charges Against Daleiden And Merritt

Prosecutors of the Harris County District Attorney's office dropped all charges against David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt, two investigators with Center for Medical Progress.  Recall that CMP conducted the undercover investigations of Planned Parenthood and several of their cronies and unearthed their bartering with body parts from aborted babies.  Daleiden and Merritt were respectively represented by the Thomas More Society and Liberty Council.  For more details see LifeSiteNews, Operation Rescue and Center for Medical Progress.

This development is indeed a boon for citizen journalism and the ongoing investigations of the sordid doings of Planned Parenthood.  It serves to put abortionists on notice that pro-life activists won't be intimidated by their scare tactics.  We will fight back.

Why Resist Examination Of Voting Through Catholic Moral Theology?

The post prior to this deals with the matter of examining this election in light of Catholic moral teaching.  A comment to that post seems to take exception to what I wrote.  One line stands out, citing "an erroneous use of Catholic doctrine to try and put pressure on people to vote for Trump".  Would it be an erroneous use of Catholic doctrine to pursuade people not to vote for Hillary?  This question of mine is not merely rhetorical, especially since Hillary has chosen a pro-abortion Catholic as her running mate and will be likely to snag the votes of many liberal Catholics as did Obama.

This election is not the first one in which "purer than thou" misguided Catholics have decided to shirk their civic duties and stay home, not accepting that the GOP candidates, while far from perfect, were many times more preferable to their rabidly anti-God Democratic opponents.  Long-time readers of this blog will recall that I attempted, during those times, to examine that stance, and voting in general, through the lens of Catholic moral theology.  I've no doubt that my attempts may well have contained some mistakes, but to the best of my knowledge, I was the only one who attempted such examination  - at least openly.

Common sense dictates that matters such as exercise of the voting right/responsibility are so weighty as to warrant such examination and discussion.  I realize that many clergy might be inclined to shy away from it for fear of jeopardizing that all-too-important "c3" status.  By the way: did we all pick up what Trump said about repealing that onorous Johnson amendment?

Therefore I was delighted to see Father West's post on facebook - the one I copied into my Wednesday post.  Father Guarnizo believes that Father West's logic was "atrocious" but cited no reasons for his assertion.  I for one find no problem with Father West's reasoning, and it seems other commenters agree.  I'm grateful to Father West for taking a stab at looking at this election through the lens of moral theology.

As far as using doctrine to pursue a Trump vote, might it simply be that the application of Catholic moral principles make the truly moral course of action to be as plain and clear as the nose on one's face?  Sometimes there is only one moral path to take, leaving no "wiggle room".  To those who balk at such a suggestion, I can only say "tough tiddly-winks".  The situation is what it is.  Deal with it.

For those #nevertrump folks who still insist on digging in their heels and denying reality, I now link to some food for thought by Gerard Nadal.  If this shoe fits, please amend that.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Personnel Is Policy - Cardinal Muller Removed From CDF

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

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

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

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

13 Million Rosaries

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

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

Center For Medical Progress And Select Investigative Panel

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Plea To The Pope

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

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

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

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

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

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

Eric Gajewski Interviews Michael Hichborn

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why I Will Never Again Sing Anything By David Haas

I was alerted to his problems by Eponymous Flower and Tantumblogo.  The latter had a picture of a facebook entry so I decided to look at Haas' facebook page myself.  Sure enough, it's full of gay-enabling and climate-change shilling crap.  See:

• https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=490613121134796&id=225649324297845  Notice how baby-slaughter isn't in that list of what he calls evils?
• https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=489113547951420&id=225649324297845
• https://www.facebook.com/225649324297845/photos/a.225784670950977.1073741831.225649324297845/483237241872384/?type=3&theater

Given his obvious sympathies for gay perverted sexuality, may we believe that he's the same David Haas who at one time was on the Board of Directors for the Long Island Gay Men's Chorus?

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

Michael Voris - Doubling Down On Denial Of Serious Papal Problems

Generally I've found Michael Voris and his Church Militant TV apostolate to be very informative and helpful through the years - particularly the Vortex series.  Regrettably though, he's evinced denial of the serious problems that Pope Francis continues to pose for the Faith.  When these episodes have presented themselves, I (and others) have seen it necessary to refute them for they are full of logical flaws.  Indeed, it is only the utilization of flawed logic that would cause one to deny evidence that repeatedly presents itself to the public.  If logical fallacies aren't the root causes of the denials, the latter might be engaged at the request of a donor.  It's one or the other; I don't know which.  At any rate, see here, here, here, here, here

As I did in most of those previous posts, I'm going to analyze the lack of logic posed in this Vortex.  I may not necessarily go in the same order as the script of this Vortex.

• In the first paragraph, Voris acknowledges the problematic and even harmful nature of the pope's repeated erroneous remarks.  As he states, a blind person can see the glaring problems.
• In the second paragraph, his train of thought starts to jump the rails.  He talks of this "industry of blasting the pope for his confusing conflicting statements".  Industry?  First, we are kept busy addressing the confusing statements, but that's because they issue from his mouth non-stop (especially when he's aboard planes).  Second, let's be clear that "addressing the confusing statements" is NOT equivalent to "blasting the pope".  I truly believe that a donor is feeding this script to Voris.  Then he talks of a notion that "everything that's wrong in the Church can be solved by the pope".  That's not a correct picture of the papacy at all.  He does have the sacred charge of safeguarding the deposit of faith.  Unfortunately these "conflicting statements" have had the effect of endangering the deposit of faith.  Is it too much to ask that the pope not pose a danger to the faith?

Pope Enables Progressive Bishop To Select Other Heterodox Clerics For Episcopal Ordination

Archbishop Blaise Cupich of Chicago ranks as one of the most progressive (if not heretical) bishops in the United States.  His disdain for Catholic morality is all-too-well known.  To wit:

• As bishop of Spokane Washington he forbade his priests from participating in the 40 Days for Life campaign.
• When the Supreme Court passed a ruling on "gay mowwidge", the statement he uttered was, at best, limp-wristed lip service to marriage.
• He issued a statement claiming that gun control and immigration are equal in importance to baby-slaughter.
• He advocates violations of Canon 915.

Despite all these serious and blatant shortcomings, the pope personally invited him to participate in the sin-nod, where he opined that de facto unrepentant adulterers could receive Holy Communion..  Now it seems that the pope is doubling down on promoting this man to high position in the Church. It was announced today that the pope has named Cupich to the Congregation for Bishops  Yes that is the same committee from which the pope ejected Cardinals Rigali and Burke and also placed Cardinal Wuerl.  LifeSiteNews and Church Militant TV both have additional commentaries.

Ladies and gentlemen, this pope knows what he is doing  He knows very well that Cupich will lobby to have clerics of his own low caliber ordained as bishops.  They will most likely offer poor leadership to their own flocks.

I'm calling upon my willfully naive friends to cease their denial regarding this pope.  Yes, others have made mistakes during their pontificates.  But when "mistakes" happen with alarming frequency, common sense dictates that these "mistakes" are deliberate.

Cardinal Sarah Calls For Ad Orientem And Other Reforms At Mass

Cardinal Robert Sarah, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, called upon bishops around the world to implement several reforms by Advent of this year, e.g., November 27th.  The First Sunday of Advent is the start of a new liturgical year.  See here and here.  The reforms are:

• The priest should face "ad orientem", meaning that he faces the tabernacle instead of the congregation.
• Communicants should kneel for Holy Communion.
• Kneeling at the Consecration.  In most U.S. dioceses, that already happens.  In some countries, like England, the congregation stands for the Canon.
• Curtailing usage of Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion

There are others.  The Cardinal states that he is initiating these measures at the request of the pope, for which the latter should be thanked.  If these changes are implemented I think that can only be beneficial to the Church at large.  Two years ago, Cardinal Burke explained that "there is a strict correlation between liturgical abuse and moral corruption".  The Mass is utterly crucial to the Catholic life; we need to worship God properly if we are to secure our own salvation and be effective in the culture wars in which we are now embroiled.

We know, of course, that there will be a concerted "push-back" from liberal and progressive parishes and dioceses.  We must prepare to engage them in battle.  If and how we'll do that remains to be seen.

On-The-Job Deathscort Training - The Art Of Hypocrisy

I present the video below as a public service to all aspiring deathscorts.  While I know that "training" is offered by the Washington Area Clinic Defense Task Force, such "training" is sketchy at best when it comes down to what will really be expected of you.  I've published some videos in which deathscorts have been engaged in acts that will be expected of you, training talks notwithstanding.  See here and here.

This past Saturday (July 2) a deathscort chided a pro-life person for "blocking".  The video below shows that the pro-life woman wasn't blocking anyone.  Then the deathscort immediately blocks her, interposing herself between the pro-life woman and the ladies getting out of the car.  Again, that's all on the video below.  She engaged in blocking behavior against the pro-life woman: the same behavior of which she accused the pro-life woman just a moment prior.

Somehow I suspect that those giving the "training" sessions for WACDTF will not broach this little aspect of the deathscort job.  But it exists, as the video (and others) demonstrate.  If any deathscort neophytes are reading this, they just might want to view this a few times.

What Price Are We Willing To Pay To Defend The Faith?

Two days ago an article was published by Sandro Magister indicating that the pope was exploring the possibility of opening Holy Communion to Protestants.  Of course that possibility does not exist unless one is talking of turning a blind eye to sacrilegious Holy Communion.  However since that was explicitly done in Amoris Laetitia (or more accurately, Amoralis Lamentia) in regards to unrepentant adulterers being admitted to Holy Communion, there's no reason to doubt that he just might be mulling that additional sacrilege in his mind.

So what would be next?  Would we see Jewish rabbis with yarmulkes and Buddhist monks in robes in line to receive Holy Communion?  How about Muslim imams?  They did, after all, utter prayers to their false idols in the Vatican gardens.  Perhaps we'll see wiccans and "church of satan" devotees receiving (hopefully not to blaspheme the Host later).  Why not?  It seems like anything goes these days.  Granted many of these would not receive as their own creeds would forbid it, but why would we even welcome the possibility?

Couple this now with an article that was published on the site that I call Crud.  As far as this particular article goes, I've no reason to question its factual accuracy, given other things that have spewed forth from the Vatican lately.  We "ultra-conservatives" and "pelagians" find many causes for concern, as any reader of this (and many other) blogs have noticed during the past few years.  He knows of our concerns for the Faith and the multitude of souls that will languish in hell if they don't receive the fullness of teaching and truth that Jesus literally died to have extended to them.  Yet he is dismissive of them.  That brings me to the points in the next paragraph.

Three months ago I put forth a suggestion that we lay Catholics might need to resist these insults to Our Lord.  I think we need to revisit this matter.  About fourteen years ago some Catholic men organized "ushers of the Eucharist" to physically prevent sacrilegious Holy Communion by gay activists.  I haven't heard from this group since, but I believe this concept bears some exploration and even implementation.  Too many progressives are quite comfortable in putting forth blasphemies and heresies, believing that we are too uncomfortable to confront them.  Only we can end that by stepping out of our comfort zones.  Will there be a price to pay for doing so?  Yes, but that won't be as costly as the price we'll pay if we let the progressives go unchallenged and without resistance.

Now.. Will we have the courage to do so, especially as we know it will be a long and arduous struggle?