Archbishop Gregory Kissing Up To Biden

 Well, that didn't take long, did it?  There isn't yet certainty as to the outcome to the election, but Archbishop Gregory has already started bowing and scraping before Bumblin Biden.  Reuters reports that Gregory wants to seek "common ground" with Biden.  That shouldn't be too hard to find for they actually have quite a bit.  Gregory claims that they differ on abortion (by how much is anyone's guess) but judging from Gregory's already cozy associations with LGTB elements, he and Biden may well see eye to eye on those issues.  

Note in that video how Gregory aspires to be a "bridge-builder".  Now doesn't that term sound familiar?  The archbishop is in Rome at present, awaiting the bestowal of the cardinal's red hat that will be bestowed on him this coming Saturday.  While there, he openly stated that he plans to give Biden Holy Communion.  That is, he plans to violate Canon 915 and to formally and materially cooperate with Biden's mortal sin of receiving Holy Communion sacrilegiously.  That cooperation, of course, is its own mortal sin.

I know the Archdiocese of Washington keeps its beady little eyes on this blog, who would the designated silent troll please pass the message in the following video to your bosses?  Pray that it will do some good.  Thank you.

Pope Francis Erroneously Claims Bishops Can Allow Sacrilege Against Holy Communion

Yes, he actually said that yesterday during another of his inane in-flight press conferences.  Here it is from LifeSiteNews and from the Catholic News Service.  Bear in mind that the latter is the official news agency of the USCCB.  He basically confirmed the heresy of the German bishops and his own disgraceful advice to the Argentinian woman.

The teaching of the Church has been crystal clear throughout the centuries.  Only Catholics who are properly disposed (meaning being free from mortal sin and having performed the requisite fast) can receive Holy Communion, with the imminent danger of death allowing for some exceptions.  These requirements are linked to the truth that when one receives Holy Communion they are receiving Our Lord in Body, Blood, Soul, Divinity.  No bishop is allowed to change that.  Period.  What the pope is advocating is nothing short of sacrilege.

In the LSN article, at the bottom are some important comments by Cardinal Muller.  The whole notion of the Catholic Church is being undermined by her chief shepherd.  Since the Church is the primary means by which people can be put in touch with the graces, sacraments, teachings, etc that they need to attain eternal salvation, we can see that what the pope said yesterday will greatly increase the likelihood that many could find themselves deprived of salvation.  These errors must be resisted.

Are Some Traditional Catholics Becoming Wimpy And Sappy?

The Remnant is known as a bastion for faithful traditional Catholics and generally brooks no nonsense from clergy who shirk their sacerdotal duties.  Last week I came across this article in the electronic edition of the Remnant, and it has me scratching my head.  I link to it now and ask you to read it - and the comments.

In a nutshell, a priest in Brazil regularly offers the Traditional Mass.  In keeping with those rubrics, Holy Communion is offered to the faithful on their tongues as they kneel.  On Ash Wednesday an unruly man entered the church during Mass.  He was disruptive throughout.  The ushers did nothing and let him continue.

When the time came for Holy Communion, the man refused to receive on the tongue.  Father ended up acquiescing to his demand for Communion in the hand.  He refused to consume the Host and began to shout and act out more.  At this point the congregation restrained him; in the meantime the man crumbled the Host, with Fragments of Our Lord's Body strewn on the floor.  It appears in the article that Father was mortified and I trust that means he learned from his errors.

I wish I could say the same for the discussion moderator (employed by Remnant, I assume) and some of the commentors.  They were all too ready to excuse the dereliction of duty on the part of both the ushers and the priest.  Judging from the language that the moderator used, I believe the moderator is a woman.  I cannot imagine a man engaging in a "poor Father!" type of pity party. It's bad enough when women get caught up in such emotions that they won't deal with the root issues (and I'm a woman, by the way) but it's downright disgusting when men engage in such maudlin talk.

Below the jump break I'll give you some snippets from the comments: things you can find for yourselves.

Amoralis Lamentia Defenders Demonstrate The Necessity For The Dubia

Last Friday I alluded to facebook discussions in which I'm currently embroiled.  Many of the participants are of the mindset that: 1) no doing or saying of the pope can ever be subject to scrutiny and debate and (even more troubling) 2) if the current pontiff says anything then it must be blindly accepted regardless of the Teachings of the Church promulgated before the current papacy.

Such is the discussion regarding Amoris Laetitia.  On the one hand, they state that of course all must read AL in light of Church teaching.  Then in the next breath they say, "the pope is opening the doors for mercy", "the priest can act as a tribunal and proclaim a marriage dissolved", "not all situations fit into the rules", etc.  Doesn't that first one make you wonder just what "doors for mercy" have been closed these previous 2000 years of Church history?  Anyway, they are inadvertently providing clear evidence of why the dubia need to be answered.  They are infected with the very confusion that Cardinal Burke et al are trying to prevent - confusion that can actually lead to the damnation of immortal souls.  Below I post an interview given by Cardinal Arinze, during which he points out that no one may change Divine law.

The Pope IS Trying To Allow Unrepentant Adulterers To Receive Holy Communion

LifeSiteNews (and others) published letters from the pope in which he stated quite plainly that there was no other way to interpret Amoris Laetitia but to admit that it does call for adulterers to be admitted to Holy Communion.  See the two LifeSite posts here and here,   Vox Cantoris links to the Vatican sites.  I have written on AL, and have explained why I redubbed it "Amoralis Lamentia".

Here we see that the pope is attempting to allow divorced and remarried Catholics to receive Holy Communion without requiring that they repent and live as brother and sister, e.g. without requiring that they cease their adultery.  In doing so, he thumbs his nose at the teachings of Our Lord Himself for the sake of deadly sentimentality.  Deadly?  Yes, for he would affirm the adulterous couple as they continue in their mortal sins AND as they compound those sins with the sin of sacrilege - that of receiving Holy Communion unworthily.

One key charge of the Vicar of Christ is to safeguard the Deposit of Faith.  Right now this present pontiff seems intent on mutilating the Deposit to shreds beyond recognition.  Please take off the rose-colored glasses, pray and speak out.

God Of Surprises Inspires Sacrilegious Holy Communion

Yesterday I wrote how the "god of surprises" about which the pope blathers is really a false idol.  Now it seems this filthy idol is deluding Vatican clergy - possibly the pope - into allowing non-Catholics to receive Holy Communion.  This happened today after Lutherans were granted a papal audience.  Courtesy of One Peter Five, we have a report from Sandro Magister about the abomination that occurred earlier.  Yesterday another blogging colleague, Tenth Crusade, put up this piece detailing how the pope hemmed and hawed when asked by a Lutheran if she could receive Holy Communion,  Instead of the pope telling her the truth, he in fact gave veiled permission for her to commit a sacrilege.  At the time Tenth Crusade put up that post, this latest travesty had not yet occurred.

I'll now link to a post that appears in AKA Catholic (formerly Harvesting the Fruit of Vatican II) by Randy Engel.  It was she who wrote the book "Rite Of Sodomy" that helped expose the homosexual cabal within the ranks of Catholic clergy.  The post is entitled "Pope Francis: The Divinization Of Change, And The New World Order".  I'd certainly call this "god of surprises" an attempt to make a false deity out of change.  Now consider the word "change".  Ladies and gentlemen, God does not change.  He is immutable.  Whatever He was, He now is and ever will be.  He is eternal.  Likewise His Word and His laws are eternal, as they reflect His eternal, immutable will.  If anyone prattles about a "god" that changes, rest assured that "god" is a false idol.

I also have no doubt that a "new world order" is a main goal of the progressives within the Vatican.  I'd venture a guess that was a motive in allowing Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament to suffer sacrilege.  Among other things, it's a fairly blatant attempt to devalue Holy Mother Church in the minds of Catholics so that she is no longer seen as the One True Church but just as one religion among many (including non-Christian religions).  This is why so many progressives favor the empowerment of the United Nations to the point of compromising and even eliminating the sovereignty of individual nations.  The "global warming / climate change" schtick is another gimmick to coerce individuals to follow one-world mandates from some UN demagogue(s).

I'll close this with a quote from Vatican I.  I pray that Pope Francis will remember that he is the Vicar of Christ and will never again allow Holy Communion to be received in a sacrilegious manner.

"The Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter so that, by his revelation, they might reveal new teaching, BUT so that, by his assistance, they might devoutly guard and faithfully set forth the revelation handed down through the Apostles, or in other words, the Deposit of the Faith." - Vatican Council I, Pastor Aeternus

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cardinal Burke: "I Shall Resist"

That was the reply that Cardinal Burke gave during an interview with a French television show.  The interview was, or will be aired sometime today.

The question was "If perchance the pope will persist in this direction (that is, allowing Holy Communion to be given to those in de facto adultery), what will you do?"

The excerpt from that interview is here.   My fellow blogger, Eye Witness, has more commentary plus a video of that interview.  The interview is conducted in Italian with French subtitles.  I recall enough French to be able to understand just what is being said here.

He immediately followed with, "I can do nothing else."  Ladies and gentlemen, if the pope does proceed in that direction (and if so, it will be via praxis as the pope cannot solemnly proclaim error), we laity must also adopt that stance.  What would that entail on a practical level?  Well, we hope we won't be put in a position where we must answer those questions.  If that happens, however, each and every one of us must be prepared to step out of our comfort zones, forfeit positions within our parish structures and suffer all manners of "white persecution".

In the meantime, let us continue to pray and to work for the purification of Holy Mother Church, along with our own souls.

Faithful Catholics Protest Outside As Gumbleton Commits Sacrilege Against The Mass

At a Dignity anniversary event at Detroit's Marygrove College (run by liberal IHM sisters) retired Bishop Gumbleton, in disobedience to Bishop Vigneron, presided at a "gay Mass".  No doubt numerous gays and their homophile enablers committed the mortal sin of receiving the Eucharist unworthily.  Bishop Gumbleton, by cooperating materially and formally with those mortal sins most likely laid some mortal sins to his own charge.  He failed to serve those in attendance in that Mass, owing to his horrible example.

ChurchMilitant.tv brings welcome news that this blasphemy was publicly protested on the Marygrove campus.  I post the video below.  Having engaged in similar efforts myself, I can only urge one and all to step out and make your voices heard as these sad situations are occurring.  Yes, it will be uncomfortable and will involve some confrontation - but so what?  We as Catholics are not called to be comfortable but to be signs of contradiction.  Moreover, as American citizens, our free speech rights are guaranteed under the US Constitution.  So while we have rights we also have responsibility to use those rights.  Let's get to work.

By the way: here are the links to which the video refers:

• http://www.marygrove.edu/home/who-we-are/office-of-the-president.html
• http://www.aod.org/our-archdiocese/contact-us/

Palm Sunday - Cdl Dolan Disobeys Canon 915

Pro-abortion "katholyc" Joe Biden attended Palm Sunday Mass at St Patrick's Cathedral.  Cardinal Dolan was the main celebrant.  At Communion time Biden strode right up to receive - under the Cardinal's eye.  From the Vortex clip we hear that Cardinal Dolan gave Biden a "shout-out" from the altar.  I agree with Voris that the "shout-out" itself was a disgusting "kiss-up" to Biden simply because the latter is famous and well-connected.  An aside - Cardinal Dolan might do well to read Paul's letters to the first bishop named Timothy and to study closely the admonitions against favoritism.

A few weeks ago, I opined that the distribution of Communion to Biden at Pope Francis' first Mass was most likely no fault of the distributing priest as the latter probably didn't recognize Biden.  I pointed out that the real problem is "state-side" and it manifested itself at St Patrick's last Sunday.  The cardinal most certainly recognized Biden (the wrong way, given the shout-out).  He had absolutely no excuse for disobedience to Canon 915.  Then they went for coffee afterwards.  I would be pleasantly surprised to learn that the Cardinal heard Biden's confession at  that time - but it would be a surprise.  There was some chatter during the papal elections that Dolan might be a candidate; clearly God saved His Church from the disaster his election would have been.

We faithful Catholics must intercede and offer reparation - but we must also do more than that.  We cannot pray for a specific intention if we ourselves aren't prepared to be the answer to that prayer.  Are we, the laity, willing to act?  That might mean withholding donations (and letting recipients know why).  It might mean picketing or leafleting church parking lots.  It might mean directly confronting the offending minister and/or katholyc.  Are we willing to step out of our comfort zones?  Perhaps God is not calling you to that, but if He were, would you be willing to obey?

Biden And Pelosi Sacrilege - What Will WE Do About It?

The news is all over the Catholic blogosphere that pro-abortion "katholycs" Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden received Holy Communion at the inaugural Mass today.  Many are understandably outraged, but I believe that their outrage is misdirected.  They are implying that this bodes ill for Pope Francis as he should have arranged to have Holy Communion denied to the two pro-aborts.

I believe the logistics of that scenario would have made it impossible for Pelosi and Biden to have been so denied.  Most of us Americans can recognize Biden and Pelosi as they are so prominent in US politics.  We fail to take into account that the two are not "household words" for people living in other countries.  They most likely would not be recognized by most of the European "man-on-the-street" people.  There is no reason to presume that a local priest distributing Communion at that Mass would have recognized Biden and Pelosi, let alone realize that Canon 915 should be applied to them.

So let us all take some deep breaths and count to ten.  This antic pulled by Pelosi and Biden is not some ominous indication of the course of Francis' papacy.  What it is, though, is a wake-up call to us laity that we need to step up to the plate.

What do I mean by that?  The fact is that we bloggers have been raising our voices about this atrocity until we're blue in the face.  Another fact is that we are largely being ignored.  What to do about that?  I have a suggestion and it's not a new one!

Almost ten years ago, when the Rainbow Sash crowd stated their intentions to make sacrilegious Holy Communions in the Archdiocese of St Paul (MN), a group of Catholic gentlemen, led by David Pence stood - knelt, actually - in the gap.  They called themselves "Ushers of the Eucharist".  You can read about them at the link.  That group is now inactive (to the best of my knowledge) but perhaps we should take up that mantle ourselves.  Wait!  I can hear the objections!

• "That might cause scandal!"  No, the scandal is already happening vis-a-vis the blatant sacrileges.
• "Tension during Mass?"  Better that than flagrant mortal sins during Mass

This could take many forms, such as the kneeling in the Sashers' path that the original group did, or walking besides them and pleading with them not to imperil their own souls with yet another mortal sin.  It's a pity that we have to contemplate such measures, but the bishops' adamant refusal to obey Canon 915 (and their punishment of priests who do obey that canon law) leave us with no choice.  Perhaps they will reconsider if they see that we ourselves are willing to step out of our "comfort zones" to keep the Eucharist from sacrilege.

Note: See American Life League's Canon 915 Project for information regarding specific bishops.

Cdl Burke To Irish Priests - Deny Holy Communion To Pro-Aborts

Cardinal Raymond Burke, prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, has weighed in on the debate over legalizing abortion that is now ongoing in the Irish government.  He said that Irish bishops could publicly reprimand pro-abortion politicians.  Moreover, he said that priests should exclude from Holy Communion those politicians who support abortion.  In doing so, he cited Canon 915.

Yoo-hoo!  Cardinals Wuerl, McCarrick, Dolan and O'Malley!  Please take note!  Cardinal Burke speaks to you as well!   There is no "pastoral option" to disobey Canon 915!  Got that???  Stop kissing up to the likes of John Kerry, Sister Carol Keehan, John Sweeney, Joe Biden, etc.  Man up!  Be the shepherds they desperately need because if you don't, they could well spend eternity in hell due to their public rebellion to God's laws.  Now where is the "pastoral option" in that????

The Archdiocese of Washington's Apology

So much error - so little time!  But I'll give it my best shot.  Before I do so, let me state that what I'm writing requires no advanced theology degree - just the common sense that God gave to a billy goat!  Here is the piece of slop so that you can read it for yourselves.

First, I'm under no illusion that Bishop Knestout is solely responsible for this.  I wouldn't be surprised if this was written (or at least inspired) by someone else who then asked Bishop Knestout to put his name to it.  At the very least, Cardinal Wuerl would have at least reviewed and approved this before it was published.

My understanding of the purpose of the Requiem Mass is that it is held to commend the soul of the deceased to God's mercy and to perhaps lessen any time in Purgatory.  A secondary purpose is to encourage all in attendance to consider their final end - to remind them that they need to prepare now for their judgment before God's throne, as none of us knows the hour of our passing.  No where in that "apology" do we see mention of these essential purposes of the Requiem Mass.  Instead, we read of "comfort from the Church", "celebration of your mother's life" and "fond remembrance".  At best, these are ancillary to the proper consideration of the Last Things and for prayers for the deceased.

By her own doing, Father Guarnizo was made very aware of the precarious state of Ms. Johnson's soul.  She unambiguously declared before Father that she was living in a state of mortal sin - one that posed imminent danger of hell to her immortal soul.  Given the nature of the Mass that was about to take place, Father Guarnizo would have been incredibly remiss in his true priestly duties had he pretended that Ms. Johnson's situation was not as grave as it really was (probably still is).  Yet this apology suggests that is what Father should have done for the sake of mere sentimentality.  While Bishop Knestout disingenuously accuses Father Guarnizo of not being "pastoral", it is he (and the ghost writer of the apology) who display their true lack of pastoral sense in suggesting to Father, and to all the readers, that the proper thing to do would have been to ignore the dreadful peril of hell to which Ms Johnson was subjecting herself by her lifestyle.

The final paragraph voices hope for "healing and reconciliation with the Church".  I echo that hope, but realize that such healing and reconciliation will only occur if Ms. Johnson repents of the disordered lesbian lifestyle and avails herself of the Sacrament of Confession.  Nowhere in this "apology" do I see any entreaty for Ms. Johnson to make a good confession, and to do so soon.  Without the Sacrament of Penance, such a wish for "healing and reconciliation" is a siren call to a false and eternally deadly "comfort".  In voicing this baseless false comfort, the bishop is acting as a blind shepherd leading the blind sheep.  Father Guarnizo is the only cleric in this matter who has pointed the way to true healing and reconciliation - and for that he has been slapped down by the very people who should be supporting him.

This "apology" is an insult not only to Father Guarnizo, but to all good Catholics who strive to live by the Church's authentic teachings.  It is Father Guarnizo who deserves a real apology from the chancery.

Archdiocese Of Washington Displays Its Cowardice

Here are some offerings of the "lamebrain mainstream" media regarding the funeral incident last Saturday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-archdiocese-denying-communion-to-lesbian-at-funeral-was-against-policy/2012/02/28/gIQAlIxVgR_story.html

http://www.wusa9.com/news/article/193305/158/Gaithersburg-Priest-Involved-In-Funeral-Controversy

By the way - as you listen to that second one, notice two things.  At the 00:45 mark, you'll hear that "Father Guarnizo apparently learned that Barbara was involved in a romantic relationship with another woman.."  Conveniently omitted was how Father came to learn of this.  Just before the ceremony, in the sacristy, Barbara walked in as Father was vesting.  She introduced herself and "her lover" (yes, her words).  They did not give him opportunity to speak with them about Church policies for reception of Communion.  However, as is standard practice during weddings and funerals (for the  benefit of non-Catholics in attendance), he did announce the Church's requirements - making plain that the gay relationship disqualified them from such reception.

At the 00:58 mark, it is announced that she is a "lifelong Catholic and former Catholic school teacher".  It defies all common sense to pretend that she didn't know that she was ineligible to receive Holy Communion under her freely-chosen circumstances.  

I know that Father Guarnizo went to the chancery offices and explained what had happened.  You can see a summary of that embodied in my previous post.  None of that seemed to matter to the chancery officials - many of them turn a blind eye themselves when the Pelosi-and-Biden types strut up for Communion.  They cringe at the thought of the slightest criticism from the mainstream media, and their courage collapses like a house of cards if the liberal media so much as looks cross-eyed at them.  

Thus we see that Bishop Barry Knestout, Vicar General of the Archdiocese, threw Father Guarnizo under the bus by issuing this groveling "apology" to Ms Johnson.  In the second paragraph, the bishop claims that Ms Johnson did not experience "kindness" and "charity" from Father Guarnizo.  I beg to differ - and that difference hinges on what constitutes "kindness and charity".  It would NOT have been "kind" of Father Guarnizo to facilitate for Ms. Johnson the mortal sin of sacrilegious Holy Communion.  And just what did Bishop Knestout think would have been the "pastorally sensitive" thing to do?   Canon 915 lays it right out there.  This apology is not only an attempt to appease those who embrace dissidence from Church teachings, but is also an attempt to justify the archdiocese's own fecklessness in the face of their obligations to obey Canon 915.  The yap and yammer about "pastoral sensitivity" is mere smoke and mirrors to excuse their own disobedience to Church law.

I understand that there is talk of transferring Father Guarnizo elsewhere or even asking him to leave the archdiocese.  Barbara Johnson made plain her intention to have Father Guarnizo removed from parish life in this diocese.  I regret to say that the Feckless Ones within the DC chancery will leap to do her bidding in that regard.  But there might be a miracle.  Let us pray that someone in the DC pastoral center finds a backbone and realizes that his Sacrament of Ordination really means service to Jesus Christ even to martyrdom.  Perhaps they'll take some inspiration from Father Guarnizo.

Let us pray for all involved - particularly Barbara Johnson.  As much as the chancery has thrown Fr Guarnizo under the bus, it is she who has received the greatest disservice from the Archdiocese of Washington.

Please contact the Archdiocese.  Let them know that you take a dim view of their behavior.  If you haven't made a pledge yet to the Cardinal's Appeal, you might want to hold off on that for a while.

DC Chancery Shows Disdain For Good Priest Who Follows God's Laws

In doing so, the DC Chancery also displays (once again) Canon Law and the eternal salvation of souls.  My fellow blogger "a Washington DC Catholic" alerted me to the statement issued by Archdiocese of Washington regarding Father Guarnizo's actions this past Saturday.  Please refer to his blog post for the statement and for the text of Canon 915.

This will be long, so I'll put the jump break here.

Canon 915 - Alive In The Archdiocese Of Washington!

On Sunday morning, I noticed that a post I had written about five months ago had quite a few comments posted to it, many of them rather nasty.  I thought it curious since the post was rather old.  Upon further investigation I discovered why.

The post featured a talk given by Father Marcel Guarnizo, parochial vicar of St John Neumann in Gaithersburg, MD.  This past Saturday, Father did a funeral Mass for a deceased parishioner.  In attendance was her daughter who is an open lesbian.  On account of her ongoing mortally sinful lifestyle, Father refused Holy Communion to her, as is his obligation not only under Canon 915 but to prevent her from committing another mortal sin, that of sacrilegious Holy Communion.

Many of the pro-gay-rights community got in a royal snit about Father's actions.  You can see the comments that I allowed to be published.  Some of them show the hysterical, sputtering self-righteous and self-deluded rage that afflicts those who sympathize with deadly sin.  They hold up their self-customized images of "Jesus" and have hissies because Father decided to be the priest he was ordained to be and to give witness to the real Jesus who is The Way, The Truth and The Life.

Pray for these poor deluded souls, as they imperil their own immortal souls by giving allegiance to perversions and their own false ideas of God.  Then go to the parish website and thank both Father Guarnizo and the pastor, Father LaHood.  You may rest assured that the pro-gays are spewing forth their vomit and bile into the email boxes.   Please copy on that email chancery@adw.org as well.  Many in that office are, frankly, rather wimpy when it comes to doing their duties.  Perhaps Father's good example will provide the right encouragement.