From The Maturation Department: Does God Disobey Himself?

During the Easter Season, the weekday epistles are taken from the Acts of the Apostles while the Gospel reading is from the Gospel of John.  Two days ago we had the reading in which Peter and John were brought before the Sanhedrin and ordered to stop preaching.  The two apostles replied they'd obey God rather than man.  It is on that reading that the Pope based his homily for that Mass.

His theme was rather odd.  It was a push for "dialogue".  Ladies and gentlemen, if there's one thing God did not command the apostles to do, it was to engage in "dialog".  No.  They were commissioned by God to proclaim the Gospel, to baptize all and to teach them everything He commanded.  No pointless "back and forth" was ever required.  God never dialogued with anyone.  Oh, there were conversations, but not dialogue as with equals.  He taught, preached, commanded - but did not dialogue for He has no equal.

He then went on to say of the pharisees, "they had studied the history of the people, they had studied the prophecies, they had studied the law, they knew all about the theology of the people of Israel, the revelation of God, they knew everything, they were teachers".   No, they did not know everything.  In fact, Jesus Himself rebuked them for their lack of knowledge when He declared to them, "you err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God".  (Matthew 22:29)  I believe that once again we see the attempt to portray those who honor Sacred Tradition in honor as not much more than "stick in the mud" types who can be dismissed as those who don't "dialogue" with every silly fad that blows their way.

He uttered this rather odd statement: "The one who doesn't know to dialogue does not obey God."  The Bible and Sacred Tradition do a rather decent job in spelling out sins that offend God.  I'd wager that if anyone searched the entire Bible (any version!), the writings of Church doctors and other time-honored writings of the Church for any hint of "dialogue" as being a requirement of true Christianity, that not one mention would be found.

We see another curious phrase: "newness of God".  No such thing!  God is NOT "new" as He existed even before time began.  He is eternal.  News Flash!  "New" and "eternal" or NOT synonyms!  Is this a throw-back to the "god of surprises" excrement?  An attempt to induce mistrust in the Traditions and Teachings of Holy Mother Church?  Another "maturation" effort to brainwash us for the next sin-nod?  Louie Verrecchio has some excellent commentary; I refer you now to his post.

To sum up, the world is in desperate need of real shepherds who will preach God's word, teach His Commandments, administer the Sacraments of the Church.  We need no useless back-and-forth jabber-jawing as though those steeped in sin can somehow better the Church.  Should this dalliance with "dialogue" continue, I suspect that may be a cause in real wrath to come.

From The Ecumenicide Department - Is The Vatican Trying To Thrust On Us A One-World Religion Of Humanism?

I don't know what else to make of recent events.  Last summer the Holy Father proposed a 10-point plan for happiness: a plan that didn't once mention the word "God".  The SinNod that happened last October bore evidence of high church officials trying to compromise the Church's moral teachings regarding sexuality, marriage and family life.  He urged protestant Tony Palmer not to convert to Catholicism when the latter expressed that desire.  On Pentecost Sunday the Holy Father allowed a Muslim to utter idolatrous islamic "prayer" in the Vatican Gardens.

Today, during his visit to Turkey, Pope Francis went to the Blue Mosque and prayed in it with the Grand Mufti and did so while facing Mecca.  He then asked the Mufti to pray for him.  Knowing that the Mufti would do obeisance to a false idol, what benefit did he think he'd acquire from such idol worship?  Has he been listening too much to Cardinal McCarrick?  It is said that he wants "dialogue" to combat "fanaticism and fundamentalism".  Can he really be that naive?  Once again, the Church is about the business of saving souls, not combating "fanaticism and fundamentalism".  That means proclaiming the Gospel and the teachings of the Church, not praying to false idols.

In 1928 Pope Pius XI released his encyclical Mortalium Animos.  In it Pope Pius wrote about religious unity and the fact that true unity can only be obtained when the world converts to the one truth Roman Catholic Faith.  Until then, no Catholic is to engage in any pretense of a premature unity.  In that encyclical, it is clear that Pope Pius is condemning false unity with protestants.  These words still bind on us.  If they bind on us with regards to protestants, how much more do they do so with regards to those whose very quaran evinces hatred of Christians?

I for one look upon this incident in the Blue Mosque with much regret.

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI - Dialogue Is No Substitute For Mission

On October 21, Archbishop Georg Ganswein, personal secretary to the Pope Emeritus, read aloud remarks written by the latter.  He reminded the people of Christ's direction to His apostles to "go make disciples of all nations".  He quite openly exposed the errors behind the phony concept of "dialogue", pointing out that "dialogue" is predicated on a fallacious assumption that "different religions are variants of one and the same reality".  "Dialogue" assumes that the "authentic truth about God is in the last analysis unreachable".

The Pope Emeritus emphasizes that "dialogue" is "lethal to faith".  Of course we can then conclude that it is inimical to the soul and will facilitate eternal damnation as opposed to the salvation that Jesus Christ wants for all souls.

I urge close reading of this address.  I particularly encourage our own local "emeritus", that is, Cardinal McCarrick to read this address; by repeated actions of his, especially in favor of islam, he may well be placing himself in a perilous place.

The USCCB's Corrosive And Deadly "Social Justice" Teachings With Their Poster Boy John Sweeney

Yesterday John Zmirak published an article called "The Myth Of Catholic Social Teaching".  I commend it to your reading.  He basically states that the Magisterium speaks infallibly on matters of faith and morals.  Some issues such as abortion and contraception involve the direct commission of mortal sin.  Those are intrinsic evils; no amount of debate is permissible.  We do not commit murder - period.

There is also the matter of care for the poor.  That is a charge laid upon us.  However, good people can disagree as to the best methods to implement such care.  Sometimes it's clear that those in high places of the Church are exercising faulty logic in their approaches to matters such as alleviating poverty, etc.  In those circumstances, we are not obliged to give obedience to those directives as they do not carry magisterial weight.  Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI said so himself when he attempted to have a letter delivered to a US bishops' meeting.  It said - in part - "not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion."

It is becoming all too clear that the USCCB advocates progressive positions on matters such as illegal immigration, self-defense rights, and even the atrocities being committed by Muslims in the Middle East.  I blogged on the muslim matter last week, chiding the USCCB for urging more useless "dialogue" with thugs.  I've no doubt that the USCCB dismisses my words.  Sadly, they probably also dismiss the words of Archbishop Emil Nona, the Chaldean Archbishop of Mosul.  He and four other Mosul bishops have been driven from their dioceses, along with countless thousands of their flocks.  He warns that what we see there could well be a harbinger of things to come in the western world - that means us, folks!  I will quote the archbishops's own words: "Your liberal and democratic principles are worth nothing here. You must consider again our reality in the Middle East, because you are welcoming in your countries an ever growing number of Muslims. Also you are in danger. You must take strong and courageous decisions, even at the cost of contradicting your principles.  You think all men are equal, but that is not true: Islam does not say that all men are equal. Your values are not their values.  If you do not understand this soon enough, you will become the victims of the enemy you have welcomed in your home."  King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has issued his own, very similar warning.

I think there are two things Archbishop Nona is trying to say.  First, the US bishops must stop their simpering and groveling pleas for "dialogue".  They are an abysmal waste of time at best and at worst, they serve to distract us when we should be preparing for real action to protect our families and our very culture.

Second, we must stop "welcoming them in our homes".  That means we must stop the floods of immigrants that pour across our borders.  Make no mistake about it; the bulk of illegals are young men, not helpless little waifs.  How many of these young men are muslim terrorists?  We don't know because there is no effective screening of those who cross the Rio Grande.  But again, we hear the USCCB telling us to "welcome the stranger".  Never mind that these "strangers" may well be murderers awaiting their orders from their muslim commanders.  By the way - there are reports that ISIS groups are in Mexico, planning an attack on the US with car bombs and the such.  USCCB, shall we "welcome those strangers"?

A gentleman named John Snyder posted an article on Crossmap a few days ago, taking the USCCB to task for their stance on gun control, given the threats of terrorism that are looming in the United States.  I quote one salient statement:  "USCCB should terminate its disgraceful support for the criminalization of private handgun possession. Such criminalization would eliminate the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves from criminals, including terrorists.  Catholic clergy should abandon pacifism and see reality for what it is. People need guns for protection. As Christ Our Lord proclaimed, 'The man without a sword must sell his cloak and buy one,' according to Luke 22:36"  Hear!  Hear!

So why, oh why, does the USCCB insist on parroting the Obamanista's talking points on illegal immigration, muslims and gun control?  In a word, follow the money, for the USCCB certainly does.  I wrote an article for Defend Life recently (look on page 7 of this link), detailing the obvious links between the USCCB shilling for porous borders and allowance of everyone crossing the Rio Grande.  The money trail was so blatant; they aren't even trying to hide it.

There you have it.  One consequence of the USCCB's wrong-headed stances on these issues will most likely be an increase of murders, if not outright terrorism - both because they favor unfettered admission through our borders AND the removal of our ability to defend ourselves and our loved ones.

"But that's merely conjecture!" some might say.  Fair enough, but it's reasonable to believe this to be a very solid probability.  AND we have evidence of current corrosion of faith and morals by USCCB-esque social teaching.  That evidence comes from the mouth of the corrosion victim himself - John Sweeney!

John Sweeney
Thank USCCB social teaching for this!

Sweeney was recently honored by the AFL-CIO for his union work.  The erstwhile head of both the AFL-CIO and SEIU, at that award function, credited "Catholic social teaching" for giving him the impetus for his work.  I've detailed a lot of his work here and here.  The second link details the two occasions in which I led pickets of Sweeney public events.  I know I gave you a lot to read, so I'll close with a picture showing the beneficial impact of "USCCB social teaching" on John Sweeney.

Recall what Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI said - there are areas regarding prudential judgment in which we can disagree with Church leaders.  Many times, particularly with the USCCB, we must oppose them outright.

A Handy Chart To Combat Ecumenicide With Muslims

Recall my post from last week.  Perhaps the picture/chart below will further illustrate why "dialogue" with allah-worshipers is at best, an exercise of futility.

Ecumenicide - USCCB Channels Neville Chamberlain

First a little history lesson.  Neville Chamberlain was Prime Minister of England during the late 1930s, immediately preceding Winston Churchill.  He and much of Europe watched as Hitler began annexing and conquering middle Europe.  Chamberlain earned notoriety for the Munich Accord that he struck with Hitler that basically threw Czechoslovakia under Hitler's bus.  Chamberlain thought that by this treachery disguised as "dialog", that there would be "peace in our time".  He was absolutely wrong, in spades.

The USCCB has a penchant for not learning from history - or at least not caring about the obvious lessons therein.  In the wake of American reporters being beheaded, Christians being crucified, babies beheaded, other minorities being buried alive and driven from their homes to certain death - all at the hands of Muslims - the USCCB wants to engage in Chamberlain-style "dialogue".  That is absolutely useless.  Are there more "moderate" Muslims?  We can answer that question by asking another: have we heard any "moderate" Muslim roundly denounce the barbarism of the more obviously radical Muslims?  The answer to the second question is the answer to the first.  I have heard of none.  Dialogue with these "moderates" is an absolute waste at best.  Perhaps the US bishops would do well to read this sermon by St. Bernard of Clairvaux as he called Christendom to arms for the Second Crusade.

Why are the bishops concerned about "dialogue"?  Why aren't they proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ, in all its fullness?  Perhaps if they focused only on their God-given mission, Christians would not be facing near extinction in many parts of the middle east.

UPDATE - I'm afraid the lunacy is getting worse. See this.

USCCB - "Talk Nice-Nice To The Thugs!"

Following in the less-than-intrepid steps of the Weeper of the House, the USCCB is urging "civility" and "dialogue" - with the very people in Washington who have no bones about their ambitions to wipe authentic Christianity from this nation's landscape.  Read Sister Mary Ann Walsh's pabulum here.

I posted a comment.  Somehow I don't think this post will be allowed to be part of all that charming "civil dialogue" so I'll just put it here.

Where, oh where, is the "civility" of the murder of babies?  How do we talk, with a straight face, about "dialogue" with those who engage in the tearing apart of babies limb by limb?  Read Mr Cristofferson's comment about the "integrity of relationship between a pregnant woman and her doctor".  Sorry, sir, but that "integrity" is misnamed if that woman has hired the "doctor" to murder her child.

The fact is we cannot dialog with evil.  It must be defeated decisively.  The bishops can start by unshackling their priests so that they can preach from the pulpit without fear of being called to the woodshed by their chanceries; that has happened several times in my diocese now.  We can start by insisting upon laws that will protect the innocent.  Dr Martin Luther King once said that he realized "laws can't make my white brother love me, but they can keep him from lynching me". 

Let's leave off the overly-conciliatory talks of "dialog".  If you haven't noticed, the Obama cartel is trying to destroy the Church.  Isn't it high time you removed your rose-colored glasses?  Develop the spine that God gave you and stand up like adults to these thugs - for their good as well as that of civilization.

(ht - Pewsitter)