Archbishop Vigano Excommunicated

Today it was announced that Archbishop Vigano was excommunicated as a result of this "extrajudicial process" to which he was summoned and refused to go.  Vigano stated his belief that the decision to excommunicate him was already a done deal prior to his summons.  

This scenario is eerily reminiscent of the incident twelve years ago in my own parish regarding Father Marcel Guarnizo.   After Father refused Holy Communion to an out-and-proud lesbian, his faculties for the Archdiocese of Washington were removed.  He was called to the chancery for a discussion, but as he stated in his account of the debacle, the letter announcing his ouster was already sealed and on the desk of then Auxiliary Bishop Barry Knestout.  During that time I penned and posted an open letter to the Apostolic Nuncio regarding Guarnizo's situation.  That Nuncio was none other than Archbishop Vigano.

I reiterate my call to stand in support of Archbishop Vigano.  He is by no means the first to be excommunicated vindictively.  I speak of saints such as Athanasius, Joan of Arc, Columba, Mary MacKillop.

In researching this matter, I found others who were excommunicated for doubting the legitimacy of Francis' papacy.  I haven't had the time to research these cases in depth, but post these for your consideration.  On Christmas Eve, 2019, three hermits named Father Stephen de Kerdrel, Sister Colette Roberts and Brother Damon Kelly living in Scotland were excommunicated after accusing Pope Francis of heresy in an online statement.  So much for all this "mercy"!

In August 2020, Fr. Jeremy Leatherby, a priest of the Diocese of Sacramento, incurred an automatic excommunication for schism after refusing to recognize the legitimacy of Pope Francis, most notably substituting his name with that of his predecessor Pope Benedict XVI and omitting the name of Bishop Jaime Soto during the Eucharistic Prayer while offering Mass. 

Father Ramon Guidetti of the diocese of Livorno was excommunicated by his bishop Simone Giusti in January 2024 following a new year's eve address shared online in which he denounced Pope Francis as an anti-pope.

So it does not seem that Archbishop Vigano is alone.  He certainly isn't the first.  Will he be the last?  What about Cardinals Burke, Sarah, Muller?  Bishops Schneider and Strickland (with the latter already stripped of his diocese)?  Why him and not Martin, Rupnic, Stowe, etc?  Is this revenge on McCarrick's behalf?  So many questions are begging to be answered.

Meanwhile, this video should provide some food for thought.

Editor Of Catholic Virginian Apologies For Crass Cartoon - Well, Kinda!

From LifeSiteNews we read that Brian Olszewski, editor of the Catholic Virginian, uttered what can only be called a "cya" apology.  The Catholic Virginian is the official newspaper of the Diocese of Richmond.  The bishop there is Barry Knestout.  That name should be familiar to Catholics in the Archdiocese of Washington. 

In the Sept 6 edition of that paper, a very spiteful cartoon was published featuring a woman gloating over the COVID-related death of a man.  Here it is, on page 6.  Oh, by the way, should this pdf "disappear", I downloaded it as many other probably did.  It just reeks of progressive smugness and ugliness.  They most certainly do have an agenda of shilling for the Falsey narrative; more evidence is found on page 9 of this rag.  Someone should tell Ms Barbara Hughes that the exploitation of the bodies of murdered babies does NOT mean "love of God, self, neighbor".  The by-line indicates that she fancies herself to be a "spiritual guide".  If that thinly-disguised blasphemy is a sample of her "spiritual guidance", I think I'll pass for I seem to remember Our Lord warning against "the blind leading the blind".

Getting back to the cartoon, I understand that Olszewski issued an "apology" of sorts.  Here it is.  Notice that he acknowledges that he was slammed for that cartoon, as well he should have been.  He's sorry, alright.  But is he simply sorry that he caught flak?

But now let's address Bishop Knestout's responsibility in this matter.  In addition to being the publisher of the Catholic Virginian, he is the local bishop.  Will he accept Olszewski's "apology"?  If so, would he have done so if the cartoon had mocked another grouping of people, like practitioners of gay sex, for example?  If Knestout's history is any indicator, then he would have tossed Olszewski out on his ear with great alacrity and little ceremony.

To what history do I refer?  Let's go back 9.5 years, when Knestout was an auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Washington.  Saturday, Feb 25, 2012, Father Marcel Guarnizo presided at a funeral Mass.  He was compelled by his duty under Canon 915 to withhold Holy Communion to the daughter who was living in lesbian sin.  For his priestly fidelity, his faculties in the Archdiocese of Washington were revoked by Bishop Knestout.  See here and here for the account of Knestout's vindictiveness against a good priest while he refused to speak truth to someone in mortal sin.

By the way, doesn't Bishop Knestout read his own diocesan newspaper?  Why do we not hear of him being one of those who showed proper indignation at that cartoon?

But maybe there really isn't inconsistency in Knestout's reactions to both these situations.  In the first incident, he retaliated against the defense of truth.  Last week he was willing to let an attack on the truth continue, and would have done so to this day had it not been for the public outrage and possible reduction in donation dollars.

I suggest that Richmond Catholics reduce their donations until real discipline is meted out to Olszewski and any one else who had a hand in this cartoon's publication.

Weigels's Sinful Suggestion To Play The Three Monkeys

First let me share with you a little gem that I read this past summer.

Now that you've taken a stroll through that diatribe, I'd like to point out a few things.  There is, of course, the socialistic kvelling about the "gap" between the wages of CEOs and their employees.  In the right-hand column she asks, "what will it take to bring executive pay under control?"  My reply to that would be another question: "under the control of whom or what?"  Well, you get the drift..

This thing reads like coursework from "socialism 101" or maybe the Pravda.  But it isn't, as you see in the top and the bottom.  I was at Maryland's eastern shore this past summer.  That area lies within the Diocese of Wilmington and the clip above is from the Diocese's official newspaper, The Dialog.  Moreover, you see at the bottom that this article came from the Catholic News Service, the official propaganda arm of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.  One would hope that a Catholic newspaper would be printing things designed to encourage use of the Sacraments or meditation on the Last Four Things: in other words, matters pertaining to our eternal salvation, for the salvation of souls is the Church's mission.  Sadly its dereliction of duty is not the exception, but the rule.

And that, George Weigel, is why we bloggers and - how did you so eloquently define us? - "hysteria-mongers and propagandists" must continue our work.  We have to counteract the communist codswallop (such as the Dialog piece above) and advise our fellow Catholics of the true dangers that threaten our Church, many of those dangers being inflicted by the current pontiff.

As another "case in point" regarding the absolute uselessness and even dishonesty of the "reliable Catholic news" that Weigel lovingly extols. recall the horrific way in which Father Marcel Guarnizo was treated at my parish almost eight years ago.  This was in the Archdiocese of Washington and much of the thuggery that he endured was at the hands of the DC chancery, then headed by Cardinal Wuerl.  Neither the Catholic Standard or Our Parish Times uttered one peep over that disgraceful incident, although in the secular outlets, it was broadcast world-wide.  The two Catholic publications in the area, by their silence, not only showed themselves to be utterly useless but patently dishonest as well. By the way - I understand that George Weigel resides in Montgomery County MD, within the Archdiocese of Washington.  I just tried to google anything that he might have written about the matter, but my search yielded nothing.  If any such work exists, please advise via the combox.  Otherwise, I might find such absence to be quite telling.

The LifeSiteNews piece gives a summary of Janet Smith's rebuttal of Weigel.  I think it is excellent, but I do have one minor disagreement with her.  She writes, "those who are excessively troubled by the relentless revelations should lmit themselves to reading only safe sources".  No.  For one thing, what constitutes "safe"?  Those sources that paint happy-clappy pictures of Church situations sin by dishonesty.  Moreover, I would challenge those "excessively troubled" to stop playing the wimp, to stiffen the spines, thicken the skins, harden the noses and just plain grow up.  We are the Chuirch Militant, not the Church Mellow nor the Church Miserable nor the Church Milquetoast.  We are to fight for the Church, not take flight and run.

Michigan Priest Denies Holy Communion To Flagrant, Arrogant Lesbian Judge - Action Needed Now

Father Scott Nolan of St Stephen parish in the Diocese of Grand Rapids (MI) denied Holy Communion to an openly lesbian judge.  The judge's name is Sara Smolenski and she is the chief judge of the Kent County District Court; she and her accomplice in perversion are pretending that they are "married" with the help of civil courts.  Fr. Nolan advised her in private that she was living a sinful lifestyle.  Still, she presented herself for Holy Communion. Father, in obedience to Canon 915, denied her Communion.  Immediately Smolenski took to mainstream media to pout about the matter and to gin up opposition to Father Nolan simply because the latter acted like an actual Catholic priest.

Long-time readers of this blog will realize why this story immediately caught my eye.  Over seven years ago in my own parish, just as Lent 2012 was getting underway, Father Guarnizo likewise denied Holy Communion to another flaming lesbian.  One just has to go into this blog's archives circa March 2012 to get an idea of the situation.  The mainstream media likewise jumped all over that story and it even caught international attention.  The two situations are similar in many respects, but differ in one key, striking manner.

Reading through Fr Guarnizo's story, one will see that the Archdiocese of Washington acted immediately to evict Fr Guarnizo from the Archdiocese.  I've no doubt that they would have suspended him as a priest, had it not been for the fact that he's incardinated in another diocese.  While the situation was unfolding, I thought that the chancery's actions were simply the result of cowardice and wanting to toady to the politically correct and powerful.  At the time, McCarrick was still a cardinal and bishop emeritus of the DC archdioecese, and Wuerl held the helm.  Over the past few years, we've come to understand that McCarrick was himself a serial gay predator and that Wuerl was covering for him.  Those revelations shine quite a different light on their attitude towards Fr Guarnizo.  I think they ousted him because his presence and actions seared their own sick and guilty consciences.

Father Nolan is blessed to have the support of his bishop, Bishop David Walkowiak.  He released a statement saying that Father Nolan acted correctly.  He stated that while the Church accepts its members, that it expects of its members adherence to the Church's teachings.  He did so by quoting (of all things) Amoris Laetitia.

NEEDED ACTIONS

Here is the contact information for the parish.  Please call and/or email Father to express support.  You can bet your bottom dollar that the gay nazis are out in force against him, just as they drew their long knives against Father Guarnizo seven years ago.  Here is the diocese's contact information, along with their statement regarding Father Nolan.  Thank Bishop Walkowiak for supporting his priest.

In addition to voicing support for both Father Nolan and Bishop Walkowiak, there is other action that we as the Church Militant must take.  It seems that this broad Smolenski has had her long knives pointed at Father Nolan previously.  From LifeSiteNews we read that she tried to get Father ousted as chaplain for the Catholic Lawyers' Association of Western Michigan.  When those in mortal sin refuse to repent of said sins, they hate with a passion anyone who dares to suggest that they need to repent.  They think that by hurting the truth-tellers that they can justify their filth and perversion.  Witness how the murderers of St Stephen the First Martyr covered their ears as he spoke.

Here is the website for the district courthouse in which she sits as judge.  I for one think it highly unethical that she is using her public position as a platform from which she can launch her attacks against a Catholic priest who was acting according to his responsibilities.  Of course be polite but also be firm.  For her own good, we cannot allow her attacks to go on without any rebuke to her.

Let's Rebuke Cupich NOW!

This past Saturday I touched upon Cardinal Cupich and his malevolence to one of his priests who is actually acting to expunge evil from his parish.  The flag-burning did occur, with Father Kalchik's participation.  Apparently this symbol of sodomy was used by the late Cardinal Bernardin (surprise!).  It was hung so that it blocked the hand-carved Crucifix over the altar; see the PJ Media article for a depiction of the sacrilege.

I called for a phone and email blast of the Chicago chancery over the treatment that Cupich is inflicting on Father Kalchik.  Some replied that perhaps Cupich just didn't want a media spectacle.  To that I say, "too bad"!  Where is Cupich's concern about "spectacle" when Father Michael Pfleger acts up?  And is he really having cold feet because he doesn't want a spectacle, or is he just doing the bidding of his gay-mafia puppet masters and sugar daddies?  Should the Apostles have stopped preaching the gospel because of "spectacle"?  Read in Acts how Peter and John responded to very similar demands by the sanhedran.

Speaking of faithful priests persecuted by dissident bishops, I post now an interview that Father Marcel Guarnizo gave to HotAir.com. His segment starts in the middle of the clip so you can just move the button to the middle; where his picture appears is the beginning.  Father Guarnizo rightly states that the bishops are indeed the source of the problems AND that the laity must act to rectify the matter.  Yes, we must pray, but we must also act.  Too often faithful Catholics have been way too reticent when it comes to speaking out.  What is the source of that?  Timidity? False humility?  Whatever it is, we must overcome these obstacles, for if we don't, our prayer will be hamstrung, if not outright nullified.

With that in mind, we can start by protesting Cupich's draconian and vindictive treatment of Father Kalchik.  Here is the contact information for the Archdiocese of Chicago.  Call the first number 1-312-534-8200.  Then follow the "search by name" prompts for Cupich's office.  You will get his secretary.  Voice your displeasure politely but sternly.  The gay cartel have these campaigns down to an art and we must best them at that.  I called this afternoon, and I hope that many more will call.  Spread the word.

Bishop Knestout To Richmond

Bishop Barry Knestout, an auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Washington, has been chosen by Pope Francis to succeed Bishop Francis DiLorenzo as Bishop of Richmond.  The latter died this past August.  The online version of the Catholic Standard already has a write-up of this appointment.  In it is a congratulatory statement by Cardinal Wuerl, who talks of "our close association in ministry".  Well there certainly was close association.

Again I call to memory what happened in my own parish within the Archdiocese of Washington in Lent of 2012.  Father Marcel Guarnizo denied Holy Communion to an avowed lesbian and was promptly ejected from the Archdiocese of Washington.  There is no doubt that Cardinal Wuerl ordered that expulsion, with Bishop Knestout functioning as the proverbial hatchet man.  Of course I and many others raised an outcry against this blatant miscarriage of justice and lack of fidelity to Church teaching that was evinced by the chancery.  Four years later, when the pastor of a neighboring pastor fired his parish's sodomite music minister, Bishop Knestout supported that pastor.  Had he not had reason to anticipate our vigilance, who knows how he would have acted?

This appointment is no surprise.  Cardinal Wuerl is a member of the Vatican's Congregation for Bishops.  He most likely is assisting the pope in selection of progressive bishops to "stack the deck" as it were.  He certainly had an ideal candidate in Knestout; plus, what better way to reward an obviously loyal underling?

While such a move was inevitable, it still is lamentable.  The only silver lining to this cloud is that he is no longer here.  Pray for him, though, that he might realize his calling and be a faithful bishop.  While I regret his promotion, I'm not sorry to see him go.

Father Guarnizo And The Irish Referendum

This past June it was announced that the new Irish prime minister would be conducting a referendum on the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of Ireland, to be held in 2018.  This amendment, as it currently stands, enshrines protections for unborn children in Ireland.  The general weakening of the Catholic faith in Ireland and the finger-wagging of the anti-life UN (Useless Nincompoops) are two factors.

The Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child, along with other pro-life groups, are engaged in a battle to save not only countless Irish babies, but the vestiges of the Catholicism that at one time was so much a part of Ireland.  The Catholic faith is still manifest in Ireland's Constitution, but the removal of protection of Ireland's babies will also serve to eviscerate all law in Ireland.

A few weeks ago, Father Marcel Guarnizo addressed a gathering in Ireland and discussed many ramifications of this heinous attempt to insinuate abortion into Ireland.  Long-time readers of this blog will recognize Father Guarnizo as the priest who denied Holy Communion to a flagrant lesbian and who was excoriated by the progressive DC chancery.

The video is below.  As you listen at the 43:54 mark, note how he said that when Church officials accept money from the state, then they are tethered to the whims of that state.  It is entirely possible that he had in mind the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, who long ago sold out the faith for the money (our tax dollars by the way) bestowed on them by the feds.  Father also mentioned that national conferences hold no authority over bishops.  I wonder if those two truths voiced by Father were additional causes for his ouster from the Archdiocese of Washington 5.5 years ago.  This video contains much to ponder as we pray for Ireland and for our own nations.

Akita And Fatima Prophesies Playing Out Before Our Eyes

Our Lady of Akita warned that bishops would be pitted against bishops.  Again Our Lady of Fatima she prophesied that the final battle would revolve around the family.  Today we are seeing both these words bear fruit as we see the smoke of Satan issuing forth - with some of it coming from the pope.

Today Catholic Herald published details of an exchange between the pope and some Lutheran pilgrims from Finland.  He told them that "the intention of Martin Luther 500 years ago was to renew the Church, not divide her".  How he divines such an intention is beyond me.  Luther's rebellion spawned many wars, but that's not the worst of it.  His errors led countless millions into eternal damnation as souls cut themselves off from the One True Church.  Unless there is evidence of Luther's repentance and reversion to the Faith, we have reason to believe he's not in a good place.  His life is a lesson to us, true, but it is a lesson in the sorry effects of rebellion, disobedience and deliberate eschewing of the Sacraments.

That being said, why, oh why, is the Vatican commemorating Luther by having its post office issue stamps commemorating him?  Can it be because Luther, who was an ordained priest, jettisoned his vows of celibacy and married?   Well, if they really want to showcase people in Church history who have made mockeries of marriage, perhaps they should issue stamps commemorating King Henry VIII of England.  They could make several of him, showing him with different wives.  Maybe they'll want to go back to the time Christ walked the earth and have one commemorating Herod and Herodias.  Perhaps I shouldn't be saying these things because I might just give them ideas.

Meanwhile, dissident bishops are becoming more brazen.  We heard last week of the scandal being instituted by the bishops of Malta in permitting adulterers to receive Holy Communion to the detriment of their eternal well-being.  One of them, Bishop Mario Grech of the Diocese of Gozo, is compounding his disobedience, heaping disgrace upon his miter, by ordering his priests, under pain of suspension, to distribute Holy Communion to known adulterers.  This insult to Our Lord Himself has precedence, some of it stemming from my own parish almost five years ago.  Recall how the Archdiocese of Washington ejected Father Marcel Guarnizo when Father would not give Holy Communion to a flagrant lesbian.  I've no doubt that had Father Guarnizo been incardinated in this diocese, that he would have been suspended.

In contradiction of the bishops of Malta and in standing for the teachings of Jesus Christ, three bishops of Kazakhstan - including Bishop Athanasius Schneider - released a letter urging that we pray for Pope Francis to revoke "guidelines" such as those issued by the Maltese bishops.  The letter reiterates that God's teachings on marriage and the Eucharist are sacrosanct and immutable.

The bishops of Malta are again being quite flagrant - so flagrant that they cannot be ignored.  If the pope pretends not to notice, I believe we will know where he truly stands on these matters.

Who's On A Kamikaze Mission?

I link now to an article by Father Marcel Guarnizo that is published today on Townhall.com entitled "Donald Trump's Kamikaze Mission".  He's written before regarding his opposition to Trump.  I do want to remind my readers that it was Father Guarnizo who, four years ago at my parish in the Archdiocese of Washington, withheld Holy Communion to a practicing lesbian.

That said, I'm frankly taken aback at Father's characterizations of Trump: "clinical", "narcissistic", "needs a therapist", etc.  I admit they are opinions shared by many, but they are merely that: opinions.  I've yet to hear of any body-count associated with Trump as we hear of Hillary's (which seems to be in a state of growth these days).

He put forth the following analogy in an attempt to illustrate the choices of Hillary versus Trump that now face us.  "If someone at a dinner gathering requires a ride home and the only two available drivers are both drunk, the moral determination is clearly not to try and determine who is less intoxicated, and assign that poor fellow to do the driving. All that is required is to be aware that neither can drive and therefore you must not give the responsibility to either one."  The analogy is quite faulty.  In the dinner case, the rider has the option of not accepting a ride from either one of them.  We as a nation have no such option.  Either Trump or Hillary will go to the White House.  We as a nation will have one of the two drivers and no one else.  We either choose which one it will be, or the choice will be made for us by those who do bother to go to the polls.

Later he makes the following statement: "Morally I submit, only one determination is necessary: Is a candidate fit, qualified for the office of president of the United States? I argue it is unreasonable (and therefore immoral), to cast a vote for anyone blatantly unfit for the office. It matters little who is more unqualified."  That last sentence is incorrect.  Elections are about choices.  That means the voter weighs one candidate versus another, comparing their strengths and weaknesses of one to those of the other.  It really does matter who is more qualified or unqualified, particularly when one or the other will win.

The article was released today.  It could very well have been submitted to Townhall before the WikiLeaks revelations came out that told us just what Hillary and company intend for faithful Catholics.  I cannot believe that Father would blithely ignore this development.  At any rate, I haven't the time to rehash arguments that I've been making about this election for months now.  Please go back and read those posts for memory refreshers.

From The Flighty Interview Department: Pope Says Christians Should Apologize To Gays For Not Coddling Them

Two days ago, Cardinal Reinhard Marx, one of the pope's nine closest advisers, claimed that the Church must apologize to gays because "we've done a lot to marginalize them".  He said that up "until recently, the Church has been very negative about gay people".  Did Marx intend to refute St. Peter Damian, himself a bishop as well as Doctor of the Church, when the latter combated the mortal sin of homosexual conduct in the ranks of the clergy?  Marx has been rather brazen about his attempts to "normalize" that mortal sin.

Yesterday as he was returning to Rome via plane, the pope gave another disastrous interview - by far not his first, but quite likely his worst to date.  When asked about Marx's remarks a day or so earlier, he echoed Marx as he stated that the Church as to say it's "sorry to the gay person" for "discrimination".  Not so. Anyone who engages in mortal sin, particularly unrepented and repeated mortal sin, marginalizes himself and discriminates against himself - in the worst way.  He/she deliberately cuts him/herself off from sanctifying grace and places him/herself in the position of being damned to hell forever.  Only by repentance and the Sacrament of Confession can that person find him/herself back in the friendship of God and in the communion of believers.  Or does the pope suggest that St. Paul should have apologized to that wayward Christian about whom we read in 1 Corinthians 5:1-13?

If there's anything for which the Church should be "apologizing" to gays, perhaps that shortcoming would be the refusal of so many clergy to preach to them that unless they repent they will most likely go to hell.  Perhaps it would be for the coddling of their mortal sin, causing false comfort and complacency as they careen towards eternal perdition.  Four years ago, when Father Marcel Guarnizo was thrown under the bus by the Archdiocese of Washington for denying Holy Communion to a lesbian, Bishop Knestout apologized to her.  For that, I truly believe that Knestout really owes her another, different apology.  He should apologize to her for coddling her mortal sin and for not displaying true pastoral solicitude in his refusal to call her to repentance.  Sadly that won't happen at this time for it seems that the pope has just confirmed Knestout in his cowardly statement to the lesbian.

If this is what the pope calls being "pastoral", we now have a problem of wolves dressed in shepherds' clothing.

Father Guarnizo On Troublesome Rubio Donors

Father Marcel Guarnizo has released an article in today's issue of Townhall.com, entitled "The Rubio-Singer Molotov Cocktail For Conservatives".  He details the donations made to the Rubio campaign by one Paul Singer, founder and CEO of Elliott Management Corporation.  As you read Father's article and the links, you'll get an idea of what Singer's true agenda is: the furtherance of the gay agenda.  It does appear that Singer has spread his "influence" far and wide.   Sill, as the old adage goes, "he who has the gold, rules".

Please read and circulate this.

Father Marcel Guarnizo On The Presidential Race

Father Marcel Guarnizo, about whom I've written in the past, recently published some thoughts regarding the presidential race this year.  We do need a president who will respect and uphold the US Constitution and not just give it lip service.  For the record, I will be voting for Cruz during Maryland's primaries in April.

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".

Priests Who Obey Canon 915 Put Gay-Pandering Chanceries To Shame And They Lash Back With Vengeance

In a case very reminiscent to the situation that happened in my own parish in February 2012, a priest of the Diocese of Baton Rouge denied Holy Communion to a man who is living in #mowwidge last week.  As in the case of Father Guarnizo who denied Holy Communion to a flagrant lesbian, he too was tossed under the bus by his local bishop.  There was a write-up in a local paper about the matter; Father Z does an excellent job of dissecting the journalistic goop.

Church Militant TV has an article on the matter.  In the article it is alleged that the Archdiocese of New Orleans issued an apology to the sodomite although it has not released a statement.  Unfortunately it is established fact that the Diocese of Baton Rouge did reprimand Father Mark Beard's obedience to Canon 915.  Again this hearkens back to what happened in the Archdiocese of Washington three years ago, as chronicled in the first hyperlink.

From the statements about the apologies, I gather that the Diocese of Baton Rouge is within the deanery of the Archdiocese of New Orleans.  Church Militant TV reported that the Archdiocese of New Orleans has quite a gay-infestation problem of its own.  They have screen shots of the page explicitly condoning gay sex.  CMTV reports that the site was recently taken down.  However, that occurred only after several Catholic sites correctly stated that the New Orleans page overtly condoned mortal sin.  The archdiocesan spokesperson said "an unauthorized individual" posted the material, but answered no questions as to the fate of this alleged scapegoat.  I wonder, too, how long had the material been there.  Are we to believe that not one single person in that entire archdiocese knew about that problem and did not raise their voice?  I'm sure at least one person did - and was summarily dismissed.  They took it down only because they were embarrassed into doing so.  Their unauthorized person should be fired, as should be the spokesperson of the Diocese of Baton Rouge; if they oppose Catholic moral teaching, they've no business earning their livings off the Church.

Today's Vortex touches on this matter.

Missing The Mark On The Definition Of Marriage

Father Marcel Guarnizo recently released an article detailing his thoughts on Obergefell v Hodges in particular and why many good Catholics are losing the battle in part due to faulty understanding of what constitutes marriage.  I won't rehash Father's article on this post, but urge all to study it as it appears on the Pewsitter site.  Reverend Franklin Graham also offered his own reflections on marriage. The tweets by Graham were written before the ruling was announced but they still are relevant as they hearken back to marriage as God ordained it when He created Adam and Eve.  These two men do understand the issues at play here and sound the clarion call to recall the true definitions of marriage as a divinely ordained institution.

In contrast are some very pathetic instances of dissembling of clergymen before the onslaughts of the gay-nazis.  For some, they are quite blatant about their approval of mortal sin.  Others seem to display mere cowardice and/or stupidity; hopefully that display is not merely a smoke screen to camouflage their own approval of depravity.

• On Fox News a few days ago, their in-house Catholic commentator, Father Jonathan Morris uttered sheer nonsense when he said that county clerks could issue marriage licenses to sodomites without incurring sin themselves.  If signing a marriage license for a sinful situation is not formal and material cooperation with mortal sin, what is?  Father Morris has a sister, a lesbian, who is in a #mowwidge relationship.
• Father Guarnizo pointed out the error in making the procreation of children a focus during the Supreme Court arguments.  Some clergy have gotten even sloppier, framing the issue as merely one of religious freedom.  In other words, they are more concerned with threats to their own liberties (and yes, they are real threats), than they are about the inherent offense to God.  Take for example this statement from an Alabama priest.
• Then we have this disgusting situation from Fordham University, a Jesuit institution in New York.  "Jesuit" and "New York" are indeed harbingers of disaster.  The chair of the theology department entered into a #mowwidge with his sodomite accomplice.  Rather than fire him, the school administration has extended to him and his "husband" the typical wedding wishes.  The sodomites conducted their #mowwidge in an Episcopal Church where the sodomite accomplice is a (sit down!) youth minister!  I'm sure Georgetown University is jealous of Fordham, but I digress.

We have so much gay rot in the Church it's no wonder why we can't withstand the assaults from without.  Before we address the culture at large, we have so much house-cleaning to do first.

Father Marcel Guarnizo On The Gay-Nazi Persecution Of Christians

Today CNSNews published an article written by Father Marcel Guarnizo entitled "Radical Homosexuals Want To Have Their Ideological Cake And Make You Eat It Too".  In this article Father does an excellent job in explaining why participation in morally questionable activities is not to be confused with routine business transactions.  He rebukes GOP presidential hopefuls for falling all over themselves in kowtowing to gay voters.  While he focuses on Marco Rubio, he might just as well have included Mike Huckabee.

He might also have included the disgraceful conduct of Knights of Columbus Council 934 in Madison, Indiana.  This past Saturday, as thousands of us participated in the March for Marriage, they allowed two lesbians to use their ballroom for their "wedding reception".  If this sounds familiar, it's because I and others sounded the alarm regarding this matter several months ago.  ChurchMilitant.com now informs us that the Indiana State Council, in a meeting this weekend, refused to address the issue and to deliberate how future scandals could be averted.

To refresh memories, three years ago at St. John Neumann Church (my parish), Father Guarnizo withheld Holy Communion from a flagrant lesbian.  For that the Archdiocese of Washington, in their typical cowardly fashion, kicked Father to the curb and expelled him from the Archdiocese.  Read here.  Father has experienced first-hand the venom of the gay-nazis, aided and abetted by cowards and/or gay sympathizers within the chancery.

We do need to demand of our leaders, current or future, clerical or secular, that they grow backbones and stand firmly against the gay-nazi juggernaut underway.

Archbishop Cordileone Under Attack - Will Pope Francis Support Him After Letting The LCWR Run Amok?

Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, prelate of San Francisco, has made heroic efforts to cleanse the progressive rot inside Catholic schools and other structures in his archdiocese that have been allowed to fester for way too long.  The link above documents that, and the opposition that he has had to withstand.  It should be mentioned that some of that opposition has come from local governments, who ignore the real intent of the First Amendment's prohibition against governmental interference with the free exercise of religious beliefs.

Some ignorant and/or disobedient Catholics have taken out an ad to publish an open letter to Pope Francis.  They are petitioning the Pope to remove Cordileone and replace him with a progressive to their own likening.  Their main beef seems to be the archbishop's insistence that teachers in the Catholic schools there conduct themselves in manners that conform with Catholic moral teaching.  Imagine that!  Asking Catholic teachers to behave like - Catholics!  Who-da thunk it?  All they do is display their own desperate need for real Catholic education.

Now think this through!  Can you imagine these same parents lambasting an Islamic school for insisting that its teachers live by Muslim doctrines?  No!  It defies common sense!  But common sense means nothing to those whose consciences cannot bear the truth of God because their own lives are lived in disobedience to God.  I believe this is a key reason why these dissidents are gnashing their teeth at Archbishop Cordileone.  This move to marginalize the archbishop and other faithful Catholics in their own schools and churches is part of a move to relegate us to the status of "niggers of the new age".

According to some reports, many of the signers of this letter are wealthy and influential.  Well, whoop-dee-doo!  In this attack against the Archbishop, these individuals place their own immortal souls in jeopardy, and their so-called "wealth and influence" won't do diddly-squat if they die unrepentant.

Some have opined that this letter is a gesture that won't have any impact on the Pope.  In a saner time I could have joined in that optimism.  However, two events give me "cause for pause".

1. There is the abysmal treatment meted out to Father Marcel Guarnizo three years ago at my own parish when Father withheld Holy Communion to a flagrant lesbian.  Cardinal Wuerl had him thrown under the bus when the gay community started yipping and yapping.  Whether or not the chancery silently agreed with the gays or they simply cowed before them I cannot tell.  The entire chancery failed miserably in behaving like true followers of Jesus Christ.  If the DC chancery wimped out then, might the nuncio wimp out now?
2. There is today's news that the Vatican is ending its review and reform of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious.  The attempt to reform the LCWR was undertaken by Pope Benedict XVI, and long overdue for the LCWR has long been a cesspool of dissent and spiritual poison.  Now we hear that Pope Francis thinks all is well and good and that LCWR business can resume as before!  If that be the case with the LCWR, might there be similar attitudes displayed against the Archdiocese of San Francisco?   Note: Vox Cantoris points out that this travesty was committed on Pope Benedict's birthday.  Did the pope just slap his predecessor in the face?

Please consider signing a petition to support the Archbishop.  This petition is an initiative of LifeSiteNews.   Of course please pray and speak out.  Thank you.

Words Of Truth From Father Marcel Guarnizo And Michael Hichborn

A month after last October's sin-nod ended, a conference occurred in Ireland to address the moral ills that are looming on the horizon for Ireland.  We in the U.S. are further down that spiral of death than are the Irish - at present.  While that conference was going on, Father gave an interview to Kathy Sinnot; I posted it at that time and now link again to it.

I now link to a lecture that Father gave during that conference.  In that lecture he elaborated on the themes that he briefly touched in the interview.  In that he makes the point quite clearly why the legalization of both abortion the perversion of marriage by gay activists is a clear threat to our civilization, not to mention the salvation of souls.  Please listen to the entire talk; it's well worth the time investment.

One point he made is that social justice, as currently promoted by progressives within the church, will never suffice to serve civilization.  Much of "social justice" is focused on this world only with little thought given to the next; it is the next world that will last into eternity not this so it's only logical to conclude that the progressives have their priorities exactly ass-backwards.  Perhaps I'll go so far as to say that some of the progressive masterminds are deliberately obfuscating our future beyond this world for they stand in hatred of God Himself.

Michael Hichborn of Lepanto Institute published a piece today entitled "The Robe Of Christ" that in part dwells on this very topic of "social justice" perverting the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  Serving the temporal needs of others is important, but even that is ancillary to the Gospel and our call to obey Him and His Church in matters of faith and morals.

With that in mind, I was saddened (but not surprised) to learn that this coming Good Friday, the pope plans to turn the Way of the Cross commemoration into a screed against the death penalty.  I've blogged before why I believe such a stance is rank heresy.  The Lepanto piece cited in my previous paragraph touches upon the matter as well.  Now I read on a blog somewhere (I can't remember which, but the blogger made a fantastic point) that the attempt of progressives to link the Crucifixion with the death penalty may well speak volumes about their attitudes toward the Crucifixion.  I think it's quite possible that they have no concern for eternal life and the salvation of their souls.  Given such warped perspectives, it's no wonder that they'd hold the Cross of Christ in disdain.  God have mercy on them.

Both Father Guarnizo and Michael Hichborn, in their respective pieces, suggested prayer to Our Lady for her intercession.  Let's do that.

Just Who Is Silencing The Church's Voice?

Almost two weeks ago I noted the peculiar definition of "dissent" as coined by Cardinal Wuerl in a blog post that he wrote.  He hopes to warp the meaning of the word to convey "one who disagrees with the pope because he does not agree with them and therefore follow their position".  Yes, I agree the structure of that sentence is awkward but it isn't mine.  The structure is twisted because of the attempt to twist the meaning of the word "dissent".

Because almost everyone with a brain understood him to imply that Cardinal Burke is a "dissenter" (according to his odd definition of that word), he felt impelled to go into "damage control" mode.  Often, though, "damage control" winds up causing more damage.  America magazine interviewed him.  (Hint: For examples of "dissent" as the word is classically defined, just read an issue or two of that rag!  But I digress!)  As my friend at the Tenth Crusade noted, the Cardinal does a "Fred Astaire", or at least he attempts it.

Here's a rather telling statement from him, regarding the sin-nod (in response to the first question).  "In the closing hour of that daylong discussion, I noted in my brief intervention that obviously there is no challenge to the teaching of the church on the indissolubility of marriage. I also pointed out that many participants distinguish between the doctrine on marriage and the pastoral practice of reception of Communion for those divorced and remarried."  (Italics mine)   May I assume from this that in addition to Cardinal Burke being a "dissenter", that Cardinal Gerhard Muller also fits Wuerl's definition of that word?  Cardinal Muller did state, "Each division between ‘theory’ and ‘practice’ of the faith would be a reflection of a subtle Christological ‘heresy."  What Cardinal Muller said is very true.  Those "many participants that Cardinal Wuerl mentioned are dabbling in heresy.  Enough of that for now.

Three days ago, Cardinal Wuerl posted another piece on his blog.  This one is entitled, "Silencing The Church's Voice".  In it he voices this complaint: "But today there is a new challenge. Some who reject the Church’s teaching – who choose to live by another set of values – not only find the voice of Christian values annoying, they would like to see it silenced or at least muted. Thus we have a whole new upside down version of words like 'discrimination,' 'freedom' and 'human rights,' and laws to enforce the new meaning."  While these words are true enough, they ring ironic and I daresay hypocritical in light of his treatment of Father Marcel Guarnizo three years ago.  I now present an anthology of posts I did as that incident and its fallout were unfolding at the time.  To reiterate: Father Guarnizo withheld Holy Communion to a flagrantly practicing lesbian.  This woman and her cohort raised a ruckus, whereupon the Archdiocese of Washington immediately surrendered to the gay community and threw Father Guarnizo under the bus.  In this scenario it was Cardinal Wuerl who played the part of the one "silencing and muting the voice of Christian values".  If he truly is serious about what he wrote three days ago, he might want to revisit his conduct (along with Bishop Knestout) of three years ago for his actions against Father Guarnizo can only have emboldened those who seek to stifle Christian morality in our culture today.

Another cleric who tried to silence the "voice of Christian values" is Father Thomas Rosica.  You might recall that he threatened to sue David Domet, the blogger behind Vox Cantoris because he had been shining the light on Father Rosica's misconduct.  After other faithful Catholics (and bloggers) got wind of it, we caused that light to be glaring.  Father Rosica caught a glimmer of that light (or he was instructed by higher-ups to stand down) and backpedaled on his legal threat.

Along with prayer, we'll have to continue to speak out.  If we shine the light on these folks relentlessly, we can at least mitigate the damage if not eliminate it altogether.

Father Marcel Guarnizo On Legalized "Gay Marriage"

Recently Father Marcel Guarnizo was interviewed by Celtic Connections.  In this interview he discusses the legalization of so-called "gay marriage" in many European countries and the devastating effects that this perversion of marriage is having on children, families and the entire culture.  The recording is here and well worth a listen.  Please share this.