Habemus Papam

Today white smoke billowed from the chimney of the conclave, signaling the election of a new pope.  Shortly thereafter, Cardinal Robert Prevost was presented as Pope Leo XIV.  He is the first Augustinian and US native to be elected to the pontificate.

Prior to this, he was prefect for the Dicastery for Bishops.  That is to say he wielded great influence regarding the appointment of bishops.  Regrettably, he also played a key role in the removal of Bishop Joseph Strickland from the diocese of Tyler, TX.   He has made known his affinity to progressive causes such as the climate-change hoax, sympathy for George Floyd and unbridled border-crashing.

While this is troubling, it is not surprising.  Francis stacked the College of Cardinals.  Leo is said to have been highly favored by both Cardinal Cupich and Father James Martin.  On the positive side, when Leo stepped onto the balcony, he was dressed as a pope, unlike his immediate predecessor twelve years ago.  I for one am wary.

Cardinal Muller, a fairly solid prelate, warned that the election of a pope who didn't hold to tradition might well cause a schism.  If that comes to pass, it will be the infidelity to tradition that will be the cause of schism, for faithful Catholics must adhere to the Church's timeless teachings and Traditions, even if a reigning pontiff isn't.

Our Rosaries and prayers for Holy Mother Church must continue and increase.

God Bless Cardinal Muller And God Have Mercy On Cardinal Gregory

Cardinal Muller tells bishops to resist the destruction of the Latin Mass.  God bless this man for speaking out.  I regret, though, that some of the bishops are not so much timorous before Francis.  They are in full agreement and in league with Francis' obvious animosity towards the authentic teachings and traditions of the Church.  Many of these bishops implemented Traditionis Custodes with the utmost glee and alacrity.  I live in one such diocese - the Archdiocese of Washington, namely.  It is shepherded - until tomorrow - by Wilton Cardinal Gregory. Unless I am gravely mistaken, Robert Cardinal McElroy is cut from the same cloth as is Gregory.

Cardinal Gregory seems to have no problem with the codswallop featured below.

Granted, this wasn't an actual Mass.  However, before this "hip hop mess mass" premiered, Cardinal Gregory said Mass at an induction ceremony that honored the late Eunice and Sargent Shriver.  Guess what music was featured at that Mass?  Yep!  Hip-hop crap!  This article is unclear about whether or not any of this cast was performing the music.  I suppose we should be grateful that there was no break-dancing or moon-walking during the Mass.

So the reverence and dignity of the Traditional Latin Mass has to go, but this hip-hop drip-drop is just okee-dokee?

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.

Attacks On Tradition And Piety Continue Unabated

When I endured my little insult this past weekend, I wondered if it was due to a growing trend among establishment clergy: that is, clergy slavishly beholden to Francis and his now-obvious animus towards the Faith.  I believe it is.  Indeed, two more recent examples have come to all our attention.

In the Diocese of Westminster in England, Cardinal Nichols announced that no celebration of the Triduum in the Latin rite will be permitted.  Over the past several years, people had been coming from surrounding areas to celebrate Triduum as had been done for hundreds of years.  Nichols, in his letter, stated "I realize that this will disappoint some people, but I have to keep the wider picture in view."  This "wider picture" entails the systematic deconstruction of Sacred Tradition.  Lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivandi.  The "lex orandi" is under direct attack.

Closer to home in Texas, in the Archdiocese of San Antonio, the Sevigny family, a Catholic family of six, own and operate a ranch and retreat center that they call Sanctus Ranch.  Archbishop Garcia-Sillar issued, on January 30, a public letter to all Catholics in his diocese not to do business with the ranch.  He specifically forbade Catholic organizations not to utilize the ranch for retreats or other spiritual purposes.  I understand that Garcia-Sillar has that authority over Catholic organizations, but what right does he have to tell the ordinary person to conduct no business whatsoever with the ranch?  Clearly he has overstepped his bounds.  He also ordered organizations that had already signed contracts to explore ways to break the contracts.

Garcia-Sillar stated as a reason that there is an "unapproved chapel lacking canonical status", forgetting that he himself offered Mass there in the past.  Might the reason be that (gasp!) the Latin Mass is offered there?   Here is Garcia-Sillar's letter as it appears on the diocese's site.  Here is the response from Sanctus Ranch. 

Two prelates have recently spoken against this trend of progressive bishops to degrade and mock our Faith.  Bishop Joseph Strickland penned an open letter to all bishops, including Francis, exhorting them to "return to Christ and His way".  LifeSiteNews has the full text of his letter.

Cardinal Sarah  has voiced full support of the African bishops who are not going to implement Fiducia Supplicans.  That would be all African bishops, except those in South Africa.  He recently stated that Fiducia Supplicans MUST be resisted for it contains heresy that will undermine the Catholic faith.  Cardinal Muller said the same thing.

Now what does all that mean for us lay Catholics?  Frankly, I live in a diocese that could easily see an attempt to "bless" mortally sinful relationships.  Will we have the presence of mind and courage to denounce these things, even to the point of protesting when and where they are occurring?

Why Fiducia Supplicans Is Spiritually Poisonous

Some otherwise faithful Catholics are obviously having difficulty accepting that the Vatican is so depraved that it has put out such a poisonous document.  They want to believe so badly that this pope is not so corrupt as to undermine the Church that they twist themselves into pretzels believing that there might be some redeeming quality to FS as to restore their faith in this papacy.  But therein lies their error.  They put too much faith in a sitting pope rather than in the Church's teachings and traditions as handed down through the centuries.

I will now relay some of the most frequent denial tactics that I've read on social media. Here is the text of Fiducia Supplicans.  By the way- please have the FS document open as you read this post.

"The priest gives a blessing to all people after Mass".  That is a general blessing to the congregation at large, not targeted to specific people, especially those designated because of sinful relationships.  It has always been ok to bless people and ask for God's guidance.  That begs the question of just why did the pope highlight those in "irregular relationships"?  And why is the word "irregular" used when the more truthful adjective is "sinful"?

"The theology of marriage isn't challenged"  Perhaps not overtly, but it is.  A blessing on a gay couple, even though it may not be "liturgical", does lend legitimacy to the relationship that makes those two people a "couple".   "Only individuals are being blessed, not the relationship".  Read the document.  It's right there in the title to Section 3 of the tome.

Those are two common attempts to deny the harm of FS.  Let's take another look at the thing, shall we?

Since my previous post on this topic, there have been a number of commentaries that have demonstrated the fatal flaws of Fiducia Supplicans.  I see no need for me to "reinvent the wheel as it were, so I will link to them and recommend all to your reading.  An important aside - I link to articles such as these so that you can draw your own conclusions and not just rely on my understandings of what the authors say.  We ALL have a duty, no matter our stations in life, to be informed of these matters.  Ignorance is not a morally acceptable option.

The first of these is an analysis by Cardinal Gerhard Muller.  He notes several troubling aspects of FS.  First, there is the attempt to introduce another type of "blessing".  Why?  Because the blessing already recognized by the Church demand agreement between the blessings and the Church's teachings.  Having this last sentence in mind, please pop over to the other browser window with FS open, and read paragraph 12 in its entirety.  You should be getting a sense of how insidious FS is, since it overtly calls for a new type of "blessing" that is not subjected to "too many moral prerequisites",  because they could "overshadow the unconditional power of God's love".  Absolute satanic nonsense!  The "moral prerequisites" are God's Commands.  His love and His commands stem from Him.  God does not have a split personality.

Muller goes on to say that sinful persons can be blessed, e.g., blessed to ask graces to turn from their sin.   However, paragraph 31 talks of blessing homosexual couples, not individuals.  An attempt to do that would be to cooperate in the mortal sin of homosexual conduct.  One cannot bless a couple without blessing what defines them as a couple - in this case, mortal sin.  That is both sacrilege and blasphemy.  Added to that is the guilt of cooperating with the mortal sin of sodomy.

Again, I urge you to read Cardinal Muller's entire piece.  But now we'll read what others have said.

The next article to consider was written by Father Thomas Weinandy and was published in First Things.  Father cleared up a misconception held by many.  Francis did not pen that tripe.  Rather, it came from Cardinal Victor Fernandez, aka Kissy Face, with Francis' approval.  Weinandy's main focus appears to be on paragraph 31, which is quite the poison pill amidst all that word salad.  Weinandy aptly calls it "jargon, sophistry and deceit".

In his last paragraph, Weinandy suggests the possibility that FS might have been well-intentioned.  Here I must disagree with Father.  The track records of both Francis and Kissy-Face testify against any possibility that this is well-intentioned.  It is a brazen attempt to cajole poorly-educated clergy into doing the indefensible - to normalize mortal sin in the Church's teachings.

Now let's look at what Eric Sammons says in Crisis Magazine.  He speaks a bit on the role of the pope in the Church and contrasts that with Francis' conduct.  In the writings of previous popes, their footnotes are drawn upon Scripture, doctrines, writings of their predecessors.  Not so for Francis.  Sammons states, and I think him correct, that approximately 65% of his references are his own previous teachings and/or writings.  He is his own source of teaching, in other words.

Paragraph 7 states that "the Holy Father's above-mentioned response invites us to broaden and enrich the meaning of blessings."  Sammons correctly points out that it is not the proper role of any pope to "broaden and enrich" anything.  Rather, the pope's responsibility is to teach and guard what has been handed down from the apostles.

Sammon's piece deserves a close and careful read.  I need not rehash what he said, but he does do a great job in unpacking FS, illustrating its divergence from Tradition.

More on FS soon.

Cdl Gregory: "Tradition Dies A Slow Death, Sometimes A Bloody Death"

Yes, he actually said that during a question-and-answer session in which he participated at Catholic University of America yesterday.  The meeting was called "Celebrating Diversity".  You will probably see the irony of that in a few minutes.   It's a long meeting, but the area of our focus starts at the 1:05:00 mark, when he responds to a student's question.  I'll post the video now, with some more commentary to follow.

Watch his expressions how he talks.  At the 1:12:25, when he mentions how he saw the Tridentine Mass grow in the Washington archdiocese, his face gives the impression that he thinks the TLM is some plague or pestilence.

The exchange on that question was about to end, but at the 1:13:25 mark, he says "I want to add something", then plops a blooper.  He said that, "in many of the places where it grew, the Tridentine rite, it grew because priests promoted it."  That is flat out incorrect.  The laity are the ones who clamored for it.  Granted, there were no "listening sessions" at that time, but it was largely a lay effort.  Even if priests promoted it, I for one fail to see the problem with that.  Anyway, he almost accuses priests of "creating the need".  No, Your Eminence!  Priests do not "create needs".  They may recognize needs, but they don't create them.  Now the priest might present the Tridentine Mass and then the people understand just what they've been missing for so many years, and they want it.  We see that sort of realization happening in John 2:10, when Jesus turned water into wine.  That newly transformed wine was far superior to the one that ran out.

Immediately afterwards, we see the reason for his canard when he revealed, "I think the Holy Father is right to say 'deal with the priests'."   And that was the end of that screed.  Well, we see how good and holy priests are being dealt with, and some prelates too.  The names Strickland, Burke, Muller, Vigano and others come immediately to mind.

Now regarding that quip that is the title of this post, Nick Donnelly has a great observation on how real bishops should regard tradition, particularly sacred Tradition.  

Prelates Combatting The Sin-Nod On Sodomy

Rome breathed a little easier this past weekend as the flow of noxious hot hair known as the Synod on Synodality, aka the Sin-Nod for Sodomy drew to a close.  With that gab-fest's attendees all gung-ho about ridding the world of those evil fossil fuels, they headed home in their gas-guzzling private jets.

While most prelates are either complicit with the crimes and heresies promulgated at this sin-nod, or at least cowed into silent subservience, there are a few who still recall that they are Catholic and that their Sacraments of Holy Orders confers upon them solemn duties to uphold the Faith.  On August 22, Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, TX issued a pastoral letter to the Catholics in his diocese.  In it he reiterated basic Catholic teaching regarding life, marriage, sexuality, and the Sacraments.  He warned of attempts to subvert those teachings, especially as they would likely emanate from the sin-nod.  LifeSteNews has the full text of his letter.  The Vatican acknowledged Strickland's fidelity by foisting on him an "apostolic visitation".  They met with Francis and are considering asking Strickland for his resignation.  Strickland replied by stating that he would not voluntarily resigned, although he acknowledged Francis' authority to compel him to step down.  Cardinal Gerhard Muller publicly supported Strickland, saying that Strickland should not voluntarily resign.  Archbishop Vigano also praised Strickland for his pastoral letter, stating in a tweet that "that is the way a Successor to the Apostles speaks".

The aforementioned Cardinal Muller was at the sin-nod.  He was given little opportunity to speak although he had to sit through the drivel.  I hope that counted as time off his purgatory, but I digress.  Later he commented about the "heretics and globalists" at the sin-nod and reminded one and all that God cannot bless sin.  Given the topics of discussion at the sin-nod, we surmise that he was referring to the push to "bless" gay shack-ups.

Bishop Schneider was interviewed on the "gay-union" mess, calling it blasphemy.  See the interview here. The archbishop gave a brief history of his childhood, particularly as it was impacted by governmental persecution of Catholicism.  He also reiterated the possibility that we who celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass may find ourselves having to go underground, as it were. 

Schneider emphasized that any pope is not the owner of our Faith, but rather the servant of our Faith.  God allows the sort of trials (that we currently find in Francis) to purify our Faith.  That means that we must learn our Faith on our own, through trusted books and holy priests, such as those who offer the Traditional Latin Mass.  Schneider believes that after this trial (Francis' occupancy of the papal chair), a future pope will declare ex cathedra the truths of Faith and morality that are now under a Vatican-led attack.

I will attempt no further summary of the interview; rather, I suggest that you, the reader, watch it yourself.  Suffice it to say that there was much bile poured out at the Sin-nod on Sodomy.  I will also suggest that you procure Bishop Schneider's new catechim entitled "Credo".  It can be obtained from Sophia Press at https://sophiainstitute.com/  .

Ominous Yet Expected Answers To Dubia

Today, as the Sin-Nod on Sodomy approaches, Francis received a new set of dubia, another attempt to ask him to clarify his statements and actions.  This is signed by five cardinals.  The first two are the surviving two cardinals who issued the first set of dubia about seven years ago: Cardinal Burke and Cardinal Brandmuller.  They were joined by Cardinals Sarah, Zen, and Sandoval-Iniguoez.

Cardinal Burke, on his webpage, gives some critical background and information regarding the dubia, as well as its text.  Originally, five dubia were presented to Francis this past July.  Francis was rather prompt in issuing replies to them, unlike the ones from several years ago.  He did so, however, in such a way that allowed for, shall we say, "wiggle room".  Realizing the problem, the five cardinals reissued their dubia in August.  At that time, the questions were formulated so that a "yes" or "no" would be required to answer the questions.  After not receiving answers to the August dubia, the cardinals decided to make them public knowledge on October 2nd.  The full texts of the two sets of dubia, as well as the responses to the first set of dubia, are found on Burke's site.  

I should point out that the five cardinals received some key support.  Both Cardinal Muller and Bishop Scheider voiced their support for the dubia.  They praised the five cardinals for acting as true advisors to the pope and calling on him to answer the dubia.  While these dubia have not received formal answers as of this writing, recent actions seem to answer at least a few of them.  It is a case of "actions speak louder than words".

The five cardinals weren't the only ones to submit dubia to Francis.  In July, Cardinal Dominik Duka of Prague submitted ten dubia on behalf of the Czech Episcopal Conference.  These focused on the care of divorced/remarried Catholics in light of Amoris Laetitia.  Francis and Cardinal Victor "Kissy-Face" Fernandez replied that Amoris Laetitia does indeed allow those de facto adulterers to receive Holy Communion, thus committing sins of sacrilege.

During a pre-synod retreat, Father Timothy Radcliffe (where have we heard that name before?) gave an address of sorts.  He started by apologizing for his limitations.  What are these limitations that necessitated an apology?  Why, he's old, western, white and male!  Oh, the horror!  He commiserates with those who might feel "marginalized" - folks who might be divorced/remarried, in gay relationships, polygamous, etc".  Why, they "long for a renewed church in which they will feel fully at home, recognized, affirmed, and safe."  Doesn't that sound lovely?  A bastardized renewed church!  And what about that "affirmed" part?  Affirmed in mortal sin?  How will that assist the sinner as they stand before God's judgment seat?

Now recall Francis' answer to the first dubia regarding marriage, particularly, attempts by gays to simulate "marriage".  While Francis reiterated that marriage can only be between man and woman, he voiced the possibility of "blessing" gay shack-ups.   Full stop!  One cannot "bless" mortal sin.  Such an attempt would be its own sin.  Francis and many Catholics need to review the nine ways of cooperating in the sin of others, for that is what they are doing.

He's leaving it up to individual priests as to whether or not they should "bless" gay shack-ups.  So consider; he gives priests that illegitimate option, but comes down heavy-handed on them if they should celebrate the Latin Mass!  Does that make any sense?  Well, yes it does!  Both these actions are attempts to deconstruct the Church and undermine the teachings of God as revealed through His church.

Today is October 4.  This Sin-Nod on Sodomy is expected to go on all month.  Already it is proving to be a proverbial train wreck.  No doubt there will be more damage to come.

It Will Be A Sin-Nod For Sodomy If Cardinal Gregory's Words Are Any Indication

The dreaded anticipated "Synod on Synodality" will start next week and it promises to be a blight upon Holy Mother Church.  First, take a look at the complete list of delegates to this gab-fest, courtesy of the National Catholic Register.  Cardinal Gregory appears towards the bottom of the list, in the section entitled "members nominated by Pope Francis".  In other words, he holds no position in the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, but Francis wants him there anyway.  Others who are so esteemed (?) by Francis include Cardinal Cupich, Father James Martin, and Cardinal McElroy.  I see that Cardinal Muller is also in that list.  That list was created before Muller publicly supported Bishop Strickland, so we'll see what his fate there will be, but I digress.

Now look at this article, penned by Gregory, that appeared on page 5 of the September 14th issue of the Catholic Standard.  (Note: Should this link be "broken", please advise.  I have the printed version and would be more than happy to upload pictures of that.)  Pay close attention to the last sentence of the second paragraph.  You will see that Gregory, in his use of the term "sexual orientation", likens the intrinsically disordered orientation of same-sex and other perverted attraction to innate and benign characteristics such as ethnicity, language, etc.

This mention of "sexual orientation" is no accident, no Freudian slip.  Recall that when Gregory first come to Washington DC, he participated in a "Theology on Tap" session during which he sang the praises of Fortunate Families, a gay-coddling cabal.

Since then, Gregory has been relatively quiet regarding the gay agenda.  But now, on the cusp of this Sin-Nod for Sodomy, he's making noises as though he is once again shilling for sexual perversion.  This article was no blooper, no slip of the tongue.  It is a shot across the bow, a harbinger of things to come, particularly from this Sin-Nod.  And that is just what this gab-fest will: a nod towards the sins of sodomy and other perversions of not only morals but the One True Faith as well.

Please be praying your Rosaries and be studying the Faith on your own, for you'll get no real guidance, neither from the Vatican nor any of the chanceries from which these Sin-Nod delegates hail.  Also please do not contribute to any in-pew collection for Bishop's appeals nor for the Peter's Pence collections.  Direct any such donations to those organizations that uphold the Traditional Catholic teachings on faith and morals.

Cardinal Muller Stands With Bishop Strickland

In my previous post, the one just before this, I voiced a hope in the second paragraph that there would be other prelates besides Archbishop Vigano and Bishop Schneider who would publicly support Bishop Strickland.  Therefore I was pleased to see in LifeSiteNews that Cardinal Muller, former Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, voicing his support of Strickland and urging him not to resign.

Your Eminences and Your Excellencies, it is time to stand for Christ's teachings and to be counted as faithful prelates!

Why Infringement On Our Civil Rights Is More Deadly Than Corona

A few days ago, Kansas City Mayor Quintin Lucas ordered churches to turn over names and addresses of all those who attended their worship services.  Obviously that is an action that one might expect to find in Red China, but not in the United States.  Many good people thought the same thing too, when this news went viral.  Realizing he was not going to escape public scrutiny, the less-than-illustrious mayor backpedaled his order.  Similarly, we all heard the saga of Shelly Luther, the Dallas hair stylist who was sentenced to 7 days in jail for opening her salon.  It seems that she believed that she and her employees needed to work to feed their families.  Read the account of her trial before an Obama-appointed judge who ordered her to apologize.  She refused.  Governor Abbott ordered her released.  We hope some of that common sense prevails in Michigan, where a homeowner faces 93 days in jail for growing a vegetable garden in her yard.  How on earth a vegetable garden could ever spread any disease is beyond me.  I hope the woman sues.

Recently, US Attorney General Barr announced that it's time to roll back the draconian restrictions that have been placed on US citizens by state and local governments.  He stated quite clearly that "the Bill of Rights doesn't go away during a crisis".  In many ways he echoed the words that US Congressman Andy Harris spoke to us this past Saturday in Salisbury.

Some lawsuits against tin-horn governors, including my own, are in progress.  Tabernacle Baptist Church is suing Kentucky Governor Beshear for closing churches while allowing abortuaries to remain open.  A few days ago, Reopen MD, along with three state delegates, filed suit in the US District Courts to end Hogan's dictatorial escapades.  Embedded in this post is the text of the complaint.

We now read the news that Chicago pastors plan to reopen their churches, regardless of the dictates of the mayor.  Sadly, but not at all suprisingly, no Catholic clerics joined these courageous pastors.  I've outlined in previous posts some of the despicable antics of our prelates, no need to rehash that here.

Other prelates are speaking out.  In an interview, Cardinal Gerhardt Muller flat out said that no bishop has the right to ban public Masses.  Apparantly there have been some silly suggestions regarding the distribution of Holy Communion in plastic baggies.  Cardinal Sarah rebuked that nonsense squarely.

These two cardinals, along with other prelates and leading Catholics, have issued a warning to the world in light of the covid pandemic.  They see clearly that this is being used to insinuate a dangerous, one-world government that is all-encompassing and tyranical, and to destroy western civilization.  They state so quite clearly.  All should read it, especially those good pro-lifers who are all too willing to give our politicians a pass on their encroachments on our civil liberties.  This simplistic, passive stance towards the events of the past two weeks is very dangerous.  I've stated before that we've forgotten who we are as Catholics and as US citizens.

The various protests give hopeful signs that some are starting to wake up.  What faithful Catholics need to do is understand that many of our prelates are in cahoots in the attempt to establish this one world government, about which Cardinals Zen, Muller and others warn.  There is much more to world events than meets the eye.  We must pray to have our eyes opened and to have the courage and vision to do what needs to be done.

Starting The New Year With Slaps

Actually the incident happened yesterday, captured in video.  The pope was shaking many hands in the crowd beyond the barrier.  A woman, for whatever reason, would not let go of his hand and she could be heard saying something loudly.  Some speculation was that she was pleading for Chinese Catholics, whom Pope Francis threw under the bus to appease the communist government.



At any rate, he can be seen striking the woman twice and then stomping away, with quite a scowl on his face.  While doing so, he exclaimed "Bitch!  Hands!  Hands!"  In today's Angelus address, he apologized for "yesterday's bad example".

A lot of people are trying to justify the pope's actions yesterday, stating that he's elderly and shouldn't be jostled about like that.  Assuming that's true, then why does he insist on glad-handing the public?  What happened to him also happened to his predecessors.  As I recall, Pope St. John Paul II was shot while doing that.  Thereafter he rode in the pope-mobile.  Additionally, where was his security detail while all this was transpiring?  I saw one push the woman back, but only after the pope was walking away.  Why were they passive throughout this incident?

Speaking of man-handling, let the video below jog some memories of the altar boy incident of several years ago.  Has this young man received his apology?



So many might deserve apologies:

• Franciscan Friars and Sisters of the Immaculate
• Cardinals Brandmuller, Burke, Muller
• Former Grand Master of the Order of Malta
• The woman whom he rebuked for "breeding like rabbits"
• Those whom he mocked as "rosary counters"

That list could go on and on.

At Mass today, Father urged us to pray our Rosaries at least once daily.  Amen!  2020 is already looking like it's going to be a bumpy ride!

The Best Defense Is A Good Offense

I suspect the title of this post summarizes the strategy that Pope Francis is employing in the wake of the impending heretical circus known as the Amazon Sin-Nod, scheduled for next month.  No doubt this hootenanny will be so chock-full of spiritual poison, designed to mutate the Faith beyond recognition, that the pope would love nothing more than for us to dissect and analyze the mess.  He knows in so doing, that we would disarm at least some of the bombs that will be flying from that sin-nod, so he is trying his darndest to scold us into silence.

How else do you account for these gaffes?

• On the plane yesterday, he stated that "dissent from American Catholic conservatives would not lead to a schism in the church".  Oh, there is so much to unpack in that article.  We who are "rigid" (that is, we who hold to the Traditions of the Church), well, "there are problems" and we have to be "accompanied with tenderness".  What will cause schism is any disobedience to Tradition, such as pretending to ordain women, pantheism, admittance of those in mortal sin to Holy Communion.  Does he know that is coming down the road, hence his attempt to shift blame for rupture to faithful Catholics?  He said he was willing to listen to critics and make necessary corrections, but meanwhile the dubia still sit on his desk, utterly disdained.
• Cardinal Gerhard Muller, former head of doctrine for the Vatican, has raised concerns regarding the direction in which the pope is leading the Church.  The pope, ever willing to listen to correction (per the previous bullet point) responded by saying that the Cardinal "has good intentions but is like a child".  The condescension is palpable. 
• Let's not forget that the pope "is honored when Americans attack him".  So to criticize a person's actions is to attack him personally?  He knows better than that.  He simply is trying to vilify concerned Catholics who do not turn a blind eye to the obvious.  But a note to those who criticize this blog.  According to the pope, you should no longer accuse me of not honoring him, for he himself said that I honor him!  So, there!

I'm now going to post a screen shot from a Facebook post that Msgr Charles Pope wrote regarding these little jibes from the pope.  It's an open letter to the pope.

Regarding Father's last sentence, we're tired of it too but we must realize this is par for the course.  What the pope is doing is simply "advance damage control" as it were.  I think the idea is to shame us into shutting up if, and when, the real dissidence and heresies ooze out of the Amazon Sin-Nod and elsewhere.  I for one will not fall for that.

A Sin-Nod Circus Starts This Week

What might that be?  Why, it's the so-called summit entitled "Protection of Minors in the Church".  In light of McCarrick's dismissal from the clerical state - and the reasons for it - you can see the problem right away in the title of gab-fest.  Approximately 80% of the victims are young men over the age of 14.  They are not little children.

Hilary White, on her blog, posted a video in which Edward Pentin and another ask a panel of clerics, including Cardinal Cupich, about the focus of this summit.  They make the point that most of the victims are past puberty and that many of the victims are seminarians.  They, in a word, challenge the focus, opining that there should be at least some time devoted to their predation.  Cupich et al do quite a job tap-dancing around the question.  Basically, they tell Pentin that the focus is on the protection of children and that is that.  At the very least, I'd hope that Cupich et al understand that the Catholics in the pews are not going to be fooled by this upcoming dog-and-pony show.

The pope has designated Cupich to be the head honcho of this thing.  As this LifeSiteNews piece reminds us, Cupich is the one who dismissed Archbishop Vigano's testimony about then-Cardinal McCarrick's predation on young men, stating that the church wasn't going to "go down that rabbit hole".  Cupich now has many eggs on his face as the events of last week have vindicated Vigano.  Cardinal Muller, in commenting on the sin-nod, quoted the statistics cited in my first paragraph, stating that "anyone who ignores the facts does not want to solve the problem".   Indeed they don't for they are trying to put on an concerned facade while not acknowledging that the victims of the perversions of their buddies, or even themselves, are young men.

That last sentence is the key reason why I refer to this upcoming debacle as a sin-nod.  They seek to keep the chickens available as prey for the chicken hawks.  Recall that at the most recent USCCB meeting, a vote on action against these sex predators was taken off the table by Cupich, ostensibly to wait for the outcome of this staged cover-up of the real problem.  Now we see why, from their warped perspectives, they wanted that vote put off; they want to make certain that young men, including seminarians, are still fair game for perverted clerical lusts.

How long, oh Lord, how long?

Masonic Underpinnings Of Human Fraternity Idolatry Document

Cardinal Gerhard Muller first made mention of this when he expressed dismay over the Masons' praise of the pope's fascination with "fraternity".  He stated quite frankly and directly that "a universal religion does not exist".  He's absolutely correct.  There is the Catholic Church, the One True Church.  All others, while they may adhere to varying segments of truth, do not possess it in its fullness.  They do not possess the sacraments, unity with the Chair of Peter and were not instituted by Jesus Christ to lead people to salvation - as was the Catholic Church.

Michael Matt, in the video that appears at the bottom of this post, makes similar points regarding the heresy that Francis committed when he signed the "Human Fraternity Document".  Before we look at that, I'd like to examine the Offertory Song for today's Mass.  I would not sing it.  When I looked at the verses, I couldn't help but notice the environmental idolatry in the piece of the song that bewailed the "slashing and burning and paving".  I also noticed that the word "God" was mentioned once - that's it!  The rest of the song focused only on earthly life - not on anything of eternal consequence.

I decided to research the author (Adam Tice).  I found that he is a Mennonite.  His twitter page reveals that his music is indeed focused on earthly life and not on eternal salvation.  I don't know enough about Mennonite thought to know whether or not he's in keeping with their beliefs, but it doesn't matter.  The music, as it is, is not fit for Catholic consumption.  Mind you, I've seen far worse, but it is what it is.  Here it is to the right.

Now please pay close attention to what Matt has to say.  He makes a compelling case for the understanding that the heresy committed last week was a logical outcome of the "spirit of Vatican II".  I remember that mess in Fatima 33 years ago.  Pope John Paul II's kissing of the Koran was inexcusable.  So too is the prattling about the "new world order".  That is masonic talk.  We saw a glaring example of that with Francis last week.  At my church today we saw a small, barely noticeable example there.  Probably these small, seemingly insignificant examples abound, and they are so small that we don't notice them and they slip into our thinking without us being aware of their influence.  In addition to the prayer suggested by Matt, we need to keep our ears and eyes wide open.

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.

Progressive Prelates Use Their Sacerdotal Authority As Weapons Against The Faithful

It seemed to me that Cardinal Muller still retained some concept of "sensus fidelium", but this account from GloriaTV disavows me of such notions.  Apparently he claims that a Catholic can conclude that his/her marriage before the Church is invalid with no canonical proof whatsoever.  In other words, he/she is his/her own judge in that matter, and the Church affirms this subjective evaluation.

We also received word from Church Militant TV that a faithful Catholic in Canada is finally being allowed onto her parish's property after being banned for over a year.  Her request that the parish announce the right to kneel for communion was met with slander from both the pastor and the parish secretary, with the apparent complicity of the local archdiocese.  Only after light was shone on the situation was the woman allowed onto her church property and to receive the sacraments.

These two stories seem unrelated, don't they?  Oh, they are very much related!  These are accounts of prelates who have no regard for the sacraments and the proper administration of the same.  On the one hand, you have a cardinal voicing approval for adulterous Catholics to pretend that they can receive Holy Communion.  On the other hand, a pastor vindictively - and in violation of canon law - denies the sacraments to a Catholic in good standing who simply asked to kneel at communion.

So here are two points we can glean from all this:

• Dissent from the Teachings of Jesus Christ - progressive prelates are just hunky-dorry with it and the subsequent sacrilege against the Sacraments.  
• Upholding the Teachings of Jesus Christ, especially in the face of the negligence and derision of prelates.  The bishops and clergy will meet such fidelity with resentment and even hatred, going so far as to punish the faithful by withholding sacraments which is itself a direct violation of Canon Law, specifically Canon 843

Progressive prelates, being compromised in their faith, administer the sacraments on basis of their own whims, caprices and even malice.  In doing so, they only add to the pile of sins that they already carry.  Unless they repent - and for many the clock is ticking loudly - their eternal salvation is in grave doubt.

October 31 2017 - A Day Of Great Evil

No, I do not refer to Halloween or the satanic/occultic evils that attend this day.  I'm referring to some thing that is actually far more insidious and inimical to the One True Faith.  I'm referring to ecumenicide assuming new depths of depravity.

Today the Pope was scheduled to be in Sweden to celebrate the 500th anniversary of Martin Luther's mortal sins of heresy and schism.  One would think that the Chief Shepherd of the Church would in fact call to repentance these wayward individuals.  Alas, that is not so.  He cooperated with their sin by praising it and celebrating it.

Many, including Catholics, have a false image of Martin Luther as being a courageous visionary who dared to swim against the tide in loyalty to Jesus Christ.  History - real history - tells a different tale.  I won't have time to delve into every detail, but will point out some highlights from the sources to which I'll link below.

• In The Catholic Thing we read "Lamenting Luther's Reformation".  We get a glimpse of a rather aimless but self-centered young man who found himself in religious life.  He preached the error of sola scriptura while mutilating the Bible, ripping out seven books in the process.  He had quite a foul mouth and was quite anti-Semitic.
• St. Dominic's Media published "The 38 Most Ridiculous Things Martin Luther Ever Wrote".  Each quote is followed by its source.  He openly approved of adultery (probably deemed most convenient by Henry VIII).   He said that Jews deserve to be hanged.  He accused Jesus Christ of committing adultery - a most serious blasphemy.
• National Catholic Register published "Who Was The Real Martin Luther?"  This work details how Luther's machinations were responsible for 130,000 deaths immediately following his rebellion.  Of course millions more died over the centuries between then and now.

Now in addition to the statue of Martin Luther that pollutes the Vatican, the Vatican announced today that it will issue a commemorative stamp featuring Luther and one of his collaborators at the foot of the Crucifix.  It might have been more appropriate to show those malefactors as being among the soldiers who nailed Jesus to the Cross.

Not all Catholics are swallowing this ecumenicide poison.  Cardinal Muller, in response to the ludicrous blasphemy by the secretary of the Italian Episcopal Conference that "the reformation..was an event of the Holy Spirit", contradicted him directly.  The Eponymous Flower gave a report of Catholics protesting outside an ecumenicide debacle put on by the Grand Rapids (MI) Diocese.  That sacrilege was no doubt inspired by the scandal promulgated by the Vatican.

In Brussels, Belgium a similar sacrilege occurred in the Cathedral of St. Michael and St Gudula.  Several young Catholics linked arms and prayed the Rosary (in French, of course), to offer reparation for the sins being committed therein.  I submit to you that sooner or later (maybe sooner than we think) we may be called upon to emulate their actions.  Their actions are very similar to the actions of some Argentine Catholics who linked arms and prayed the Rosary as their Cathedral was threatened with vandalism (pay special attention to the second video).  In both cases courageous Catholics stood firm against sacrilege.  Let's study and learn from them, and pray the Rosary daily and call out error for what it is.

Muller And Sarah Raining On Progressives' Parades

A few days ago I highlighted some articles regarding the escalating animosity towards Cardinal Sarah, starting with the pope.  Others were just released within the past few days - see here and here.  Those promoting the evil rot within the Vatican lash out in anger against those prelates - like Sarah - who stand firm for the teachings of Christ.  Their ire is even more inflamed because apparently Cardinal Sarah stands a decent chance of being the next pope.  In the midst of all the attempts to bring him down, he remains unflappable because he serves Jesus Christ, not some worldly fads.

As mentioned before, Cardinal Muller preceded Cardinal Sarah in being fodder for progressive vultures within the Church.  Now that Muller is outside the Vatican, he does seem to be speaking more freely in defense of the Church.  Yesterday he openly rebuked the secretary general of the Italian Episcopal Conference for stating that the protestant rebellion was a "work of the Holy Spirit".  Of course that statement by Bishop Galantino is bald-faced blasphemy, for in making that statement, he claimed that the Third Person of the Trinity committed mortal sin.  Recall that Cardinal Muller was basically ejected from his position by the pope.  The silver lining in that cloud is that the pope no longer has any threat to hold over Muller's head so the latter probably senses little reason to tip-toe on eggshells.  He has found his voice again.

Please pray for our prelates, especially that the faithful ones hold firm.

Long Knives Aimed At Cardinal Sarah's Back

First Cardinal Burke - then Cardinal Muller.  Then all the faithful members of the Pontifical Academy for Life are unceremoniously sacked. 

Most recently he has attracted papal ire as he merely asserted that authority for liturgical translations still resided in Rome.  We are One Church, are we not?  See here and here.  Pope Francis isn't bothering to disguise his tactics of isolating and then humiliating the few faithful prelates that remain in Rome.  Cardinal Sarah is just the latest.  Please pray your Rosaries, that these good prelates will hold firm.