From the site prayforgermantown.com we have the official press release announcing the official closure as of Wednesday. We also have another piece of news. Apparently there is acrimony between Carhart and the two former owners of the Germantown mill, Todd Stave and his sister Nancy Samuels. Carhart is suing the two siblings for custody of medical records pertaining to the women whose children were murdered at GRHS.
We believe that Carhart isn't giving up a lucrative baby-slaughter business so easily. He probably intends to set up shop in another Maryland location, most likely Montgomery County. Given his abysmal record at Germantown (10 ambulances, 1 maternal death) a reasonable person can surmise that those records might contain information that could be prejudicial to any attempts to get licenses and permits for a new practice. If you read the "defendants' answer" on the OR page, the siblings seem willing to release the records, provided that they are held harmless from any liability that might otherwise result from them.
We'll have to see how that suit pans out. Of course if Carhart resumes baby-slaughter in Maryland, we will be there as well.
Since Vatican II, Mass attendance has been on the decline. In fact, Catholic life in general has deteriorated, as those who claim a Catholic ancestry believe and live as, well, heathen. Their level of immorality is identical to the culture of death at large as they divorce, fornicate and abort their babies at the same rates.
There was a respite in the downturn, albeit brief. It was right after the 9/11 attacks. All of the sudden, people remembered that God existed. For a few weeks, the churches were quite crowded. However, by and large, our bishops didn't know how to respond - or maybe they didn't want to see real repentance and conversions for then they'd actually have to be attentive to their duties. I remember reading in the Catholic Standard about this return to churches when it was still in play. Cardinal McCarrick waxed absolutely giddy and silly about the full churches. Why? Well, because that meant the local church would have to buy more real estate and build more buildings. That was his focus. Meanwhile the church hierarchy was doing absolutely zilch about meeting the spiritual needs of those who were darkening church doors after being away for so long. I was quite exasperated at McCarrick's inane prattling, wondering why he didn't propose increased times for confession and remedial catechism for the returnees. Not encountering real Catholicism, the returnees soon stopped returning.
So having blown what was literally a God-given field for true evangelism, the hierarchy returned to its tried-and-failed tactics. They completely ignored the traditional means of evangelism, for those means would have entailed both fidelity to Sacred Tradition and incurring the displeasure of the world at large. If anything, we witnessed even greater banality from the hierarchy as they tried so desperately to earn the approval of the world, particularly young people. We witnessed priests and religious break-dancing, rap-singing, etc - all to imitate worldly fashions to trick young people into "liking us". There have been a few who have come to the Church, but by and large the world regards these pathetic farces with derision. Who can blame them?
There is hope, though. A growing number of Catholics who are concerned with the Church's problems are assessing honestly the Church's failures with the "new evangelism". They understand that the world will only respect Catholics (not necessarily like, but respect) who are in fact praying, believing and acting like Catholics in accordance with Tradition.
I recommend to your reading an article by Eric Sammons called "The Old Evangelization: Five Steps To Renew A Parish". In a nutshell, he hits the nail on the head. When Catholics pray and worship as Catholics in accord with Tradition stemming from the One True Faith, the world will take notice. Conversions will happen - but more importantly, God will be worshiped as He ordered.
What Eric said about the primacy of proper worship echoes the words of both Cardinal Sarah and Cardinal Burke. Only through authentic, proper worship will we and the world be receptive to the grace needed for evangelism and conversion.
Here is a blog piece written by Msgr Charles Pope called "Recovering The Gospel From The Notion Of Merely Happy Or Good News". In this piece he points out that both Jesus and John the Baptist preached the entire truth. They didn't cater to any "snowflake" wishes for "happy positive warm fuzzies". They preached the need for repentance from sin as being crucial to the process of conversion. Recall that in the Gospel of Mark, the first recorded word of Jesus is "repent". Jesus and the early preachers proclaimed the joy of the Gospel, but they also proclaimed the consequences of refusal of the Gospel and preference for sin. Some priests would do well to recall that when they are tempted to adopt some silly fad as a means of "evangelism".
Let's stop the cutesy gimmicks and return to the Traditions of Our Church. Converts will come then, as they did earlier.
Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia (yes,this Paglia) has praised the pope's mutilation of the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family, saying that its new focus on Amoralis Lamentia is a "revamping of pro-life efforts". Well, at least he's being honest. Oh by the way, Paglia is the chancellor of the new JP II Pontifical Theological Institute for Marriage and Family Sciences.
But the honesty did not continue. He let loose with this whopper: "The real revolution there happened under John Paul II, not Francis, which hasn’t really yet been understood. You have to remember that before Familiaris Consortio, it wasn’t that the divorced and remarried just couldn’t get Communion, it was they were practically excommunicated and expelled." That's simply not true. The divorced and remarried, although engaged in the mortal sin of adultery, were not excommunicated and/or expelled. To assert that they were is simply a lie.
He also asserted that he won't "let anyone be more pro-life than me". Oh, dear! That will only allow those who are at best tepid on matters of intrinsic evils against life to join his strange little organization.
He indicates that this newly-bastardized organization will dwell on immigration, death penalty, etc etc. Doesn't that sound like "seamless garment" garbage to you? It does to me! Now wait a minute! From where else have we heard that the pro-life movement must assume "seamless garment" trappings? Yes! It has reared its ugly head in the U.S.! See here and here. How "coincidental" that we'd be hearing about "revamping the pro-life movement" from these two seemingly disparate sources. Maybe it is a coincidence - and then again, maybe not! I'd put nothing past these progressives.
PS: I used the phrase "seamless garment garbage" in the last paragraph. Moving forward, I believe I'll shorten it to "seamless garbage".
Both LifeSiteNews and One Peter Fivehave launched sites whereby faithful Catholics can sign petitions in support of the Filial Correction (Correctio Filialis) that was publicized this weekend. Any faithful Catholic with internet access can sign if they choose. Well, almost any faithful Catholic!
Those Catholics within the Vatican will not be able to see those sites. The Secretariat for Communications for the Holy See has blocked any computer within the Vatican from accessing these sites. We might have expected this kind of conduct from Red China behind its Great Wall, but the Vatican? Gee willickers! Isn't criticism supposed to be healthy? That's what Pope Francis said - a few years ago. How strange! To add to the strangeness, consider who was appointed a consultor for that office by the pope. Yes! Father James Martin! I suppose, though, we shouldn't be too surprised, given Martin's propensity to block anyone who contradicts his posts and tweets. The progressives are revealing their tyrannical colors!
On the first anniversary of the submission of the dubia to Pope Francis, the pope has abolished the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family and put in place another: the John Paul II Pontifical Theological Institute for Marriage and Family Sciences. Some things to note:
The founding president of the first was Cardinal Caffarra, one of the dubia cardinals who is just recently deceased.
We all know of the no-longer secret committee that has been established to "study" Humanae Vitae. This teaching of the Church is crystal-clear. We know this "studying" is simply a pretext so that it can be undermined and declared irrelevant.
However, we have now received word that 62 scholars, both clergy and laypeople, have issued a "Filial Correction of Pope Francis for the Propagation of Heresies". This is not the correction mentioned by Cardinal Burke; that would be a fraternal correction, issued by bishop to bishop. It is an important step in the process. Rorate Caeli has the full text of the document. It was actually sent to the pope last month. However, because he treated this in the same manner as he treated the dubia, it is now public. Additional commentary and analysis can be found here, here, and here.
We pray that this matter is resolved by the pope's issuance of corrections to Amoralis Lamentia, or even better, by rescinding the whole thing altogether.
The evidence for that is right here. This seems to be the week for us being called all sorts of names: "Catholic Cyber-Militia", "Cancerous Catholics", and now "Right Wing Nut". Not to worry! Rather than carry on like some little progressive snow-flake, I wear these monikers like badges of honor, but I digress.
They are referring to this post from a few weeks ago, in which I exposed Rehumanize International for being less than a stellar organization. It appears that Sarah Terzo's alleges that I "attacked" Rosemary Geraghty "on a personal level" because she is LGBT whereas I took issues with others over "opinions". I submit that Terzo's reading comprehension skills leave something to be desired. My remarks in the previous post state that her picture indicates "where she stands on the mortal sin of homosexual conduct". Now doesn't "where she stands" seem to smack of opinion? However, it's also clear in the comments on Terzo's post that yes indeed, Geraghty does engage in that mortally sinful conduct. "Conduct" and "opnion" are fair topics for discussion.
Notice though, how Terzo is trying to frame the matter as though I'm attacking Geraghty as a person. This speaks of a tendency of gays to derive their identities from their perversions. Why else do we see all these "gay pride" parades? Terzo does admit that reminders such as mine might "hurt a little". That's called the pricking of the conscience. They know deep down, whether or not they admit it to themselves, that their actions are wrong. On the other hand, I've no problem being called "right wing nut" for I know that I'm speaking the truth.
I also found this thing, again kvetching about my coverage of RI. Check out the comments on both posts. Aimee Murphy posted a few; bear in mind that she is the director of RI and a "contributor" to the New Pro-Life Movement. I ask my fellow pro-lifers if they really want to entangle themselves with this bunch.
Last week we saw how faithful Catholic activists were instrumental in keeping Father James Martin from polluting several Catholic locations with his heretical bile. Martin has taken to social media pages bemoaning the fact that some of us truly care about our faith and have the backbones to stand up to him. Others have joined Martin in bashing us. One publication went so far as to call us "Catholic Cyber Militia". I'm sure they thought of that as an insult, but I think I'll wear that one with just a smidgen of pride! :-)
Another who has waxed hysterical about us is Bishop Robert McElroy of the Diocese of San Diego. We've heard of him before now, haven't we? Anyway, he's decided that our concerns are "verbal violence" and "cancer"; see here and here.
The Church Militant link, at the bottom, gives the phone number to the bishop's office. Please call and let them know what you think. To the readers who have the misfortune to call him their bishop, you can assist him in a special way. Since he seems to think that anything that proceeds from us is "cancer", why, he must have the same misgivings about your donation dollars, right? Now you can assure him that no longer will you be foisting upon him your diseased lucre. Heavens! We wouldn't want him to catch conservative cooties from your contaminated contributions! Assure him that no longer will have have to worry about any monetary contagions from you. I'm sure he'll be most grateful. On a serious note, the language of money does seem to be one of the few to which they actually pay some attention. Let's not be afraid to speak it. Onward, Catholic Cyber Militia!!
My blogging colleague at Les Femmes has written of the treatment meted out to a good priest that she knows. Her post is here. Father Aitcheson, prior to his conversion to the Faith, was a member of the Ku Klux Klan. He repented of his sin of racism well before he entered seminary. Maria Santos Bier, a writer for the Washington Post, got wind of this and wrote a hit piece for the Post on Father. Of course the "compost" would lap it up in a heartbeat, for they got to tar a hated Catholic priest as a racist. Mary Ann correctly points out that Bier committed a mortal sin of detraction. For those confused about detraction, it is defined in Catholic moral theology as "the unjust damaging of another's good name by the revelation of some fault or crime of which that other is really guilty or at any rate is seriously believed to be guilty by the defamer".
So while good priests see their vocations seriously compromised owing to long-repented faults, flaming dissident priests are celebrated precisely because of their poisonous heresies.
Father James Martin has been in the news in Catholic media circles. Rightly ejected from Catholic speaking venues because of his promotion of sodomy, he has taken to whining and pouting all over social media. In the course of so doing, he continues to spew forth heresy. Consider this facebook post of his. It's a long screed, and the heresy appears in the very last sentence: "And the Holy Spirit knows what She is doing". Yes, you read that correctly. He refers to the Third Person in the Trinity in the feminine. In both Scripture and Tradition, all Three Persons of the Trinity have always been referred to in the masculine. Given Martin's sordid history of promoting sexual perversion, we know he was taking another jab at Christ's teachings, blaspheming the Holy Spirit in the process.
Father Martin is the sort of priest who is celebrated by the Washington Compost and other rags - because both Martin and the progressives hate Catholic morality. Mary Ann's piece suggests that Bier might be carrying on in the tradition of the traitorous Brutus; so is Father Martin.
Michael Hichborn, formerly of American Life League, runs a
site called Lepantoinstitute.org. It is a well-run site that is quite
informative and faithful to Catholic teaching. Recently he ran an article
regarding the attempts by John Carr to insinuate himself into the pro-life
movement. Recall that while he was at the United States Conference of
Catholic Bishops, Carr oversaw the office that was in charge of the Catholic
Campaign for Human Development. He did absolutely nothing to address the
scandals regarding that collection.
The main focus of this article is not John Carr. We
are looking at the attempts of others to couple the pro-life movement with the
now-discredited “seamless garment” theory that was championed by the late
Cardinal Joseph Bernardin. In his article, Hichborn made mention of a series
of articles found in the summer edition of Human Life Review. Here is the site for your perusal Many of the authors understand the perils of the
seamless garment theory under its many disguises. Among them, Ann
Hendershott, Kevin Williamson and Kristin Hawkins see the danger of diluting
our focus on ending baby-killing. On the other hand, there are people
like Aimee Murphy, director of Rehumanize International. I previously did
some research on this group and found them to be at serious variance with
Catholic moral teaching. Their “new media coordinator” supports
homosexual conduct and may herself be embroiled in that sin. Murphy
herself evinced racism as she supported the violent “Black Lives Matter” on her
But the seamless garment poses an even greater threat to the
authentic pro-life cause than mere dilution. In many, if not most, cases,
its adherents ascribe to “seamless garment” tenets moral authority that belongs
only to those matters to which the Church has placed special emphasis:
abortion, contraception, euthanasia, homosexual conduct, abuse of embryos.
Even worse, some “seamless garment” adherents will go so far as to
transgress against the Church’s teachings on the aforementioned intrinsic evils
in order to promote the progressive positions on lesser matters (such as
immigration or capital punishment). We’ll now expound on these threats.
Some of the articles made mention of a group that dubs
itself the “The New Pro-life Movement” – rather pretentious, that! Its
site is thenewprolifemovement.com . Right on its homepage we
see a problem. John Cavanaugh-O’Keefe was a highly-respected
pro-life leader approximately 25 years ago. He helped spearhead the
clinic rescue aspect of the movement. Recently, some seamless garment pet
causes – in his case, amnesty for illegal immigrants – clouded his perspective
to the extent that he supported the unapologetically pro-abortion Hillary
Clinton during the last presidential election. I won’t go into the evils
of that or this article would take up the entire magazine. Look at the
“contributors” page. One of the other contributors is Rebecca Bratten
Weiss. Rather than go into another lengthy explanation, I refer you to
this piece by LifeSiteNews.
Let’s look at its “organizations we support” page. We
see listed “Obria Medical Clinics”. Going to that site, we see their page
on abortion. While they don’t speak glowingly of abortion, they think that it could be “the
right choice” for someone. What??? They seem to be fine with
contraception. Another supported organization is “All Our Lives”.
Not only is it “informed” by the “consistent life ethic”, but also “the
reproductive justice movement”. They advocate for gay rights.
This “new pro-life movement” organization is not unique in
having serious moral problems. We’ve always known that those enamored
with the “seamless garment” have flirted either with mortal sins themselves or
have allied themselves with others embroiled in those sins. An example of
that was brought to my attention during the controversies over DACA. A
friend of mine, perhaps in an attempt to justify amnesty for Illegal aliens,
posted an article about a priest in Georgia, Fr. Rey Pineda, who is himself an illegal alien. To bring his “plight” to national attention, he relayed
his story to Senator Dick Durbin, who then took it to the Senate floor last
November. Of course Durbin did this while advocating for illegal
amnesty. Dick Durbin’s name recently came up during Senate judicial
hearings, when he and Senator Dianne Feinstein grilled judicial nominee Amy
Coney Barrett regarding her Catholic faith, mocking her in the process.
So on the one hand, Dick Durbin (a “Catholic” who has always been pro-abortion)
takes up Fr. Pineda’s case for his own end, but on the other hand he openly
takes aim at a judicial nominee for living out her Catholic faith.
Pineda, a priest, lent moral credibility to a politician who displays
anti-Catholic bigotry in order to facilitate his own sinful disregard for his
host nation’s laws. This is just another instance of moral compromise
when Catholics get entangled in the seamless garment embrace of progressive
The gains that the pro-life movement has made in recent
years have been due in large measure to the movement’s laser-like focus on
defending innocent life and the sanctity of marriage. We are soon coming
up on the centennial anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun that culminated Our
Lady of Fatima’s appearances to the three children. During these
apparitions, she warned the children that the leading cause of souls going to
hell was sins of the flesh. Let us focus on eradicating these sins and
not allow other matters disguising themselves as “social justice issues” to
distract us and even seduce us to sin.
Two months ago I posted that Jesuit heretic Father James Martin was scheduled to be the keynote speaker at a symposium being conducted by Washington Theological College. In that post, you'll see that commenter "kiwiinamerica" lamented that Martin would probably never be disinvited. At the time, his/her doubts were well-founded. He/she can now rejoice for now Martin is disinvited, thanks be to God.
Left-wing rags are wailing and bemoaning Martin's well-deserved comeuppance. Take a look at this whiny pout from the Not-At-All-Catholic Reporter. They interviewed Martin, who puts the blame on "far-right church websites such as Church Militant, LifeSiteNews and the blog run by Father Zuhlsdorf". Of course those sites also include many other blogs run by faithful Catholics - such as this one. I'll have more to say on this point later in the post.
Church Militant has some more details. Not only was Martin dumped from the Theological College event, but he was also axed as a speaker for a gala to be held by the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre. In that situation, their leadership faced backlash from outraged knights. Martin himself snivels and pouts about the cancellations on his facebook and twitter pages.
Despite the "poor widdle me" tripe that Martin exudes on his pages, the record tells the story of his attempt to normalize the mortal sin of sodomy. In this clip he actually calls for "reverence" of sinful situations. Note that his gay friend, who thinks he's "married" to his accomplice in sin, is the chair of the theology department at Fordham University. Both he and Martin, unless they repent and confess their sins, will be accountable for leading many young souls down a path to perdition. For clarification on that point, I now link to a piece by Msgr Charles Pope that summarizes Christ's teachings on homosexual conduct.
When I wrote my piece two months ago, I too didn't think there was much chance that Martin would be disinvited from the symposium, seeing how he enjoys the favor of both Pope Francis and Cardinal Wuerl. In retrospect I believe there were several factors, and some lessons we can learn in combating similar threats to Church integrity that will present themselves in the future. I'll list them in "bullet" format.
Prayer for God's protection Nothing of this sort can happen without God's grace. We must continue to pray. Frequent the sacraments and pray the Rosary daily. Mention these threats by name when you pray.
Social media Martin himself alluded to that as he blamed "far right sites" for stopping his appearances. Please watch not only the sites he mentioned but smaller sites as well. Often it is the smaller sites that will carry news pertaining to their localities; these also deserve the attention of faithful Catholics local to those areas. The mainstream media (including diocesan publications and faux-katholic liberal rags) are not reliable sources of information. Of course when you see topics such as these, pass them along your own social sites and email lists.
Action It is critical that when we are notified of these situations, that we not only pray but we must act as well. Such action will include:
Phone calls Martin specifically blamed phone calls to Theological College as a primary cause for his ejection from the symposium. If you called to protest his planned appearance, you share the credit just as much as any one of us bloggers.
Boycotts I'd suspect that many callers to CU made plain that if Martin did appear, that they'd never contribute anymore to them. Sometimes money talks louder than Catholic duty, so let's not be reticent about using that language.
Protests/pickets One of my facebook friends, when she learned of the cancellation, remarked that she now "had the day off". She was planning to protest the appearance. Even the possibility of a protest is a strong deterrent to misbehavior.
Make no mistake about this. The Theological College did not cancel Martin because they suddenly remembered that they were Catholics. Far from it. Take a look at their announcement below; they make plain why they earned the nickname "theological closet". They cancelled because we behaved like the Church Militant (not the site) that we are. Let's take heart from this and remember, for these situations will crop up again - although they might crop up with less frequency now.
In three cities in the U.S. today - namely, Alexandria VA, Detroit MI, and Albuquerque NM, pro-life activists went into local death mills and offered red roses to mothers who were about to have their babies murdered. When confronted by police, they refused to leave and were arrested. I believe all have been released. Moreover, three babies were saved.
I link now to the LifeSiteNews article detailing the Red Rose Rescue effort. Please watch the video; the bottom video is the account of activity at the Alexandria mill; I've worked besides several of the people in various pro-life activism efforts. Below is a video posted by Monica Miglorino Miller, who was at the Detroit rescue. I echo her call at the end, that we would all rededicate ourselves to acting to bring about a Culture of Life.
As faithful Catholics know, the pope has a lamentable habit of insulting us precisely because we are faithful Catholics. Not at all surprisingly, one big slur he hurls at us is that we are "pharisees" because we acknowledge that God's laws are as immutable as He is, and that they are to be obeyed by everyone in their entirety. Of course that is not the essence of being a "pharisee". What does that term mean?
I link to Mark 7:1-13. The key phrase is in verse 13: "making void the word of God by your own tradition, which you have given forth". I believe that sums up what it means to engage in pharisetical behavior: to create man-made precepts and to ascribe to them the status equal to that of God's own laws.
"Seamless garment" adherents do precisely that. They regard their progressive causes - most notably illegal immigration amnesty, climate-change junk-science, and the abolition of the death penalty - with the same level of concern as they might regaard contraception, homosexual behavior, abortion. Did I say "same level"? In most cases the progressive causes are deemed worthy of more attention and effort than those matters that are truly intrinsic evils. Moreover, I believe I've amply stated the case why these so-called "seamless garment" advocacies may well be sins in and of themselves: see here, here, here.
Within the past few days we've seen the progressive-controlled USCCB go ballistic because one of their pet causes is being dealt some well-needed blows and because Steve Bannon spoke truth to the liberal-pandering of the nation's bishops. We have also seen hysterical cries for "climate-change" deniers to be jailed simply for disagreeing with progressive tyrants. Toronto Catholic Witness advises us of a Franciscan friar who a) advocates criminalization of "climate change deniers" and b) advocating for gay rights. By the way, as TCW makes plain, this friar is the quintessential pharisee: trashing God's moral teachings and substituting junk-science precepts. He is not alone. Many join him in earning that title; faithful Catholics who love Our Lord and His Traditions are not among that number.
Did you think that last word was going to be "consciences"? Don't be silly! That last word is really "coffers". Steve Bannon might not have realized it, but he spoke the only language that the US bishops seem to heed: the language of $ka-ching$. A video of Bannon's interview is found here. When queried by Charlie Rose about Cardinal Dolan's displeasure with President Trump's actions on DACA, Bannon correctly responds that the USCCB's stance on DACA is not doctrine - progressive pretenses notwithstanding (I hold that it is the USCCB that stands in sinowing to its facilitation of illegal immigration). Moreover, Bannon is correct that the bishops have an economic interest in illegal immigration. However, he seems to limit that interest to the filling of church pews. In reality, it goes much further for the Church hierarchy receives federal grants for the "processing" of aliens, and the amounts of those grants is proportional to the number of immigrants.
Cardinal Dolan, when he heard of Bannon's interview, got his knickers in a royal knot. Breitbart has the low-down on that. Dolan quoted Bannon as saying that the only reason they (bishops) care about illegals is for economic reasons. You can see it in the first few paragraphs of the linked piece. The title states that "Dolan bears false witness". Well yes, but I think it's more than that. I think Cardinal Dolan uttered a quintessential Freudian slip. I've no bones opining that $$$ is a prime motivating factor in their shilling for illegal immigration.
Yesterday the pope got in on the act. Of course the blather happened on a plane (mathematical equation alert! plane+pope+reporters=insults+heresies+blasphemies). He went so far as to cast doubt on the president's pro-life beliefs because of his termination of DACA. Whatever happened to "who am I to judge?" Does that apply only to those flaunting mortal sins of sodomy? But I digress.
The pope said of Trump, "he presents himself as a pro-life man. If he is a good pro-lifer, he should understand that the family is the cradle of life and you must defend its unity." A goodly number of pro-life leaders replied to that statement as they came to Trump's defense. I might add one more key thing. If the pope is pro-life, he will do all he can to protect and promote the encyclical Humanae Vitae. He can start by dismantling that commission that was assembled to "study", that is, weaken this key encyclical. Humanae Vitae must stand. Contraception, an intrinsic evil, must be seen for what it is: a satanic instrument of death and destruction. The pope casting doubts on the president's pro-life credentials? Never did I think I'd see the day when I trust the White House more than the Vatican, but now that has come to pass.
Magnum Principium is the name of the Motu Propitio released by Pope Francis today. It will take effect October 1, 2017. Rorate Caeli has an excellent analysis so I don't need to reinvent that wheel. In essence though, this papal directive will ascribe to local bishops' conferences the authority to amend liturgical texts and actions based on local proclivities. Now just think of the wide range of differences that exist with the conferences' varying interpretations of Amoralis Lamentia; also consider that in the case of AL, the interpretations that most widely diverge from Sacred Tradition are the ones validated by this pope.
One Peter Five has an analysis, too. In that one, this MP is contrasted to Quo Primum by Pope St. Pius V. The latter was written to unify the liturgies of all the Church into one text and format.
I can only surmise that this Motu Propitio is just the latest deliberated step in the progressives' ultimate goal to undermine the papacy. Recall that Our Lord called Peter "the rock on which I'll build my church". If the rock should crack that would seriously compromise the integrity of the Church. Our Lord promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against the church, but He never promised that the church would be unscathed. In fact, while the Church would survive (in one fashion or another) it could be so battered as to be unable to attend to millions of souls.
Another troubling aspect of potential liturgy-tampering may be found in the phrase "lex orandi lex credendi lex vivandi". In other words, as you pray you believe, and as you believe you live.
UPDATE - Another phrase to describe the anticipated results of this motu is Liturgical Anarchy.
From time to time I do not receive my copy of the Catholic Standard in the mail, and I strongly suspect that's by design. As soon as I pick up a copy from a church lobby I see the reason why my delivery was sabotogued. That happened today; it only took about 20 seconds to deduce the reason. First some background.
On page 9 of the Standard's print copy, and here online, we read that the choir from Saint Columba Church in Oxon Hill sang backup for Manilow when he performed at MGM National Harbor Theater on July 24 & 25. Apparently when he goes to his different venues to perform, he invites local choirs to sing with him.
Several choir members gave reasons why they thought this idea was so wonderful: "bring awareness of the church", "something out there bigger than they are". In striking hands with someone who is in fact living in objective mortal sin, they render moot all the lofty ideals that they enunciated. Would it not have been better for them to decline the invitation politely by stating that their partnership with him would have signaled to the world tacit approval of his deviant lifestyle? Might not preference for Christ's moral teachings over fleeting fame have been more of a powerful witness to the Church?
Instead this choir disgraced themselves for a mere moment of fame. The Standard is likewise to be ashamed of itself (once again) for crowing giddily about this moral compromise of this choir. I cannot imagine either this choir nor the Standard taking such stances had it been a white supremist outfit asking for the choir's singing abilities at some event of their's. They would have been indignant at the idea, and rightly so. So why the compromise in regards to Manilow?
If a parent steals something and gives it to his/her child, is the child penalized when he/she is compelled to return the stolen goods or make other reparation? Common sense - and Catholic moral theology answer "no", for the child should never have come into the possession of the goods in the first place. Let's add another dimension. Say the child receives the contraband as a minor, then becomes aware of the theft when he reaches the age of majority. Is he/she required to make restitution? Again, the answer is yes, for he/she may not knowingly accept benefit from the commission of sin. Should they do so, they themselves become guilty of cooperation with the sin of their parents. I link now to a post that I created several months ago; therein is a video that explains the nine ways in which a person can become an accessory to the sin of another, thus incurring guilt for his own sin. Bear all this in mind as you read the account below.
We all know that President Trump has decided to undo the patently unconstitutional stunt initiated by the Messiah Most Miserable known as DACA (Deferred Action for Child Arrivals). Compare the screed spewed from the USCCB to the statements issued by both the White House and the Department of Homeland Security. While those impacted are children of illegal immigrants, it is important to note that they are now adults as opposed to non-emancipated minors. They are now responsible for their own lives. If they haven't taken measures to correct their own immigration status, they have no one to blame for the consequences but themselves.
I became aware of this account of a "dreamer priest", Father Rey Pineda, through a facebook friend of mine. As I read this account, I detected no trace of him trying to rectify his status. He went to school in Georgia and then discerned a vocation; "he felt God was calling him to be a priest but his spiritual path was blocked. He was a dreamer". Excuse me, but isn't part of priestly preparation to remove moral impediments from one's life? He knew he was here in disobedience to legitimate national laws: laws that have basis in Section 2241 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Now recall the video that I mentioned in the first paragraph, and count the ways that Father Pineda actively cooperates with the sin that his parents committed:
Consent - That is evident in the absence of any steps to correct his status.
Defense of evil done No where does he express regret for the flouting of U.S. law.
Partaking as a "dreamer". If his seminary formation was facilitated by the dream act, then his priestly formation would be an ironic act of cooperating with sin. I hope that's not the case
Other ways that he might be cooperating with the sin of evading US immigration laws would be counsel, provocation, praise. We cannot say "silence" is a chosen means of such cooperation, for he is quite strident in his crowing about his sin.
So his deportation would be a loss to his flock? Really? Who would really seek him out in the confessional, knowing he doesn't give a whit about legitimate civic law? We Catholics are called to obedience to such laws and not only when convenient. The sacrament itself would be efficacious since it doesn't depend on the worthiness of the minister, but his counsel might be suspect.
One troubling aspect about the hierarchy's embrace of progressive positions is that church authorities too often strike hands with politicians who foment the Culture of Death. Father Pineda did precisely that by his partnering rabidly pro-abortion Dick Durbin. Thanks to Pineda's own celebration of his sin, he lent to Durbin a credibility that the latter simply doesn't deserve. By the way - this is the same Dick Durbin who questioned the Catholic faith of an Appeals Court Nominee. Got that? Durbin is very supportive of the Catholic faith of a potential puppet, but takes a dim view of the Catholic faith of a Trump nominee. That's whom Pineda - this shill for illegal immigration - helped to legitimize.
Let's get back to DACA and illegal immigration in general. If you haven't yet, please read the linked press releases of the USCCB, White House, and DHS. If you noticed the USCCB waxing hysterical, you are quite correct. I won't rehash it all, but the USCCB and Catholic Charities are funded by the feds. Part of that funding has to do with the number of immigrants - including illegal - that they process. The amount of funding is based on headcount! Yes! If the number of illegal immigrants in this country declines, so too does the amount of funding that the Church hierarchy receives. Maybe the USCCB's overly-vaunted concern for "the strangers we must welcome" is not completely altruistic.
DACA as promulgated by Obama was patently unconstitutional. Congress needs to act on this matter, and act first and foremost for the citizens whom they represent - who voted for them and who pay their salaries.
As mentioned last week, the Germantown Reproductive Health Services and its sister abortuary, Prince Georges Reproductive Health Services, have been sold. Both mills committed baby-slaughter for the last time last week. On Monday, September 4 (Labor Day) at 9:30 am, a group of us gathered for thanksgiving prayer outside the office park where GRHS was formerly located.
Because Maryland is still an abortionist's dream location, owing to the horrid political climate, we've no doubt that Carhart and/or Charlie Browne will try to set up shop elsewhere in Maryland. For updates, please check www.prayforgermantown.com. The clip of our prayer time is below.
One such critter is Father James Martin, author of the misnamed "Building Bridges". That screed is nothing more than a lame attempt to normalize the mortal sin of homosexual perversion. Happily Father Martin has been and is being rebuked by fellow clergy. Cardinal Robert Sarah, in a piece published in the Wall Street Journal, reminded him that "those who speak on behalf of the Church must be faithful to the unchanging teachings of Christ" (italics mine).
Pssst! Father Martin! The Catholic Church has always had the best bridge for those living in perversion to come back to the Church! It's called the Sacrament of Confession! You cannot improve on that!
Archbishop Chaput spoke similar words in his regular column in the newspaper of the Philadelphia archdiocese. In that column Chaput reminds Martin (and all of us) that "the church is not simply about unity - as valuable as that is - but about unity in God's love rooted in truth."
The archbishop's words were enough to arouse the ire of Father Thomas Rosica. It doesn't take too much to get his dander up. I could spend an hour unpacking the errors in this latest of Rosica's rants, but I don't want him monopolizing my time. You might recall that Father Rosica actually attempted to sue one of my blogging colleagues at Vox Cantoris for calling him out on various heresies; his Vatican superiors put the kibosh on that stunt. However, Rosica, in that column, took the occasion to lambast faithful Catholic bloggers as "the dark, dysfunctional side of the Catholic blogosphere...erecting high, impenetrable walls and noisy echo chambers of monologue.” With respect to his badmouthing of us bloggers, maybe someone should remind him that "to use clerical status, episcopal authority, or other forms of leadership to dismiss, disparage or slam the efforts of those who simply want to reach those on the peripheries is not befitting of shepherds, pastors or servants of the Lord. It has nothing to do with the Gospel! It is not who we are!" Now who originally uttered those words?? Hmm...!
Professor Josef Seifert is another faithful Catholic who has taken issue with Amoralis Lamentia. I related a few days ago how he (and many others) were expelled from the Pontifical Council for Life to make room for dissenters. We now learn that he was fired from his position at the International Academy of Philosophy in Granada by the local Archbishop Martinez Fernandez. Seifert rightly pointed out that if unrepentant adulterers and sodomites were seen as justified, then the same could happen for anyone else embroiled in any intrinsic moral evil. He called AL a "theological atomic bomb". That was enough to get him sacked. I suspect that if Seifert advocated for more perversion, he might have been offered tenure.
Moral of the story? When one advocates for rank disobedience to God's moral laws, today's Vatican rewards them with prominent positions. When one defends the timeless teachings of Jesus Christ, the current hierarchy, headed by Pope Francis, plunges the long knives in their back. The persecution is real and is becoming ever more stark; be watchful and praying.
On Facebook I noticed that some pro-life friends of mine, highly respected, "liked" an outfit called Rehumanize International. If you go to that page, you'll see that they oppose abortion, euthanasia, and other intrinsic evils. They also oppose capital punishment and nuclear armament, which are not intrinsic evils. Ladies and gentlemen, when both categories are mish-mashed together in one list, my "seamless garment" red flags start flying. Therefore I did some research. Regrettably my suspicions about RI's moral base are confirmed. Notice that there are intrinsic, anti-life evils that they don't list: contraception, homosexual lifestyle, attacks on marriage and family.
This proclamation is occasioned by the devastation wrought by Hurricane Harvey in Texas and Louisiana. No sane person can gainsay the need for prayer, not only for relief for the hurricane victims but for the grace of national repentance on account of this nation's profound spiritual and moral decay.
Tomorrow is Sept 3 and Sunday, the day of the week that the Third Commandment binds us to keep holy by attending Mass. While there - particularly during the Prayers of the Faithful - let's lift up our nation, and do so again as we pray our Rosaries.
Hurricane Harvey first made landfall as a Category 4 storm near Rockport, Texas, on the evening of August 25, 2017. The storm has since devastated communities in both Texas and Louisiana, claiming many lives, inflicting countless injuries, destroying or damaging tens of thousands of homes, and causing billions of dollars in damage. The entire Nation grieves with Texas and Louisiana. We are deeply grateful for those performing acts of service, and we pray for healing and comfort for those in need.
Americans have always come to the aid of their fellow countrymen -- friend helping friend, neighbor helping neighbor, and stranger helping stranger -- and we vow to do so in response to Hurricane Harvey. From the beginning of our Nation, Americans have joined together in prayer during times of great need, to ask for God's blessings and guidance. This tradition dates to June 12, 1775, when the Continental Congress proclaimed a day of prayer following the Battles of Lexington and Concord, and April 30, 1789, when President George Washington, during the Nation's first Presidential inauguration, asked Americans to pray for God's protection and favor.
When we look across Texas and Louisiana, we see the American spirit of service embodied by countless men and women. Brave first responders have rescued those stranded in drowning cars and rising water. Families have given food and shelter to those in need. Houses of worship have organized efforts to clean up communities and repair damaged homes. Individuals of every background are striving for the same goal -- to aid and comfort people facing devastating losses. As Americans, we know that no challenge is too great for us to overcome.
As response and recovery efforts continue, and as Americans provide much needed relief to the people of Texas and Louisiana, we are reminded of Scripture's promise that "God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble." Melania and I are grateful to everyone devoting time, effort, and resources to the ongoing response, recovery, and rebuilding efforts. We invite all Americans to join us as we continue to pray for those who have lost family members or friends, and for those who are suffering in this time of crisis.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim September 3, 2017, as a National Day of Prayer for the Victims of Hurricane Harvey and for our National Response and Recovery Efforts. We give thanks for the generosity and goodness of all those who have responded to the needs of their fellow Americans. I urge Americans of all faiths and religious traditions and backgrounds to offer prayers today for all those harmed by Hurricane Harvey, including people who have lost family members or been injured, those who have lost homes or other property, and our first responders, law enforcement officers, military personnel, and medical professionals leading the response and recovery efforts. Each of us, in our own way, may call upon our God for strength and comfort during this difficult time. I call on all Americans and houses of worship throughout the Nation to join in one voice of prayer, as we seek to uplift one another and assist those suffering from the consequences of this terrible storm.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this first day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand seventeen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-second.