Catholic Standard Articles Reveal True Thrust Of The Current Pope.

Today I picked up the July 17th issue of the Catholic Standard (the official mouthpiece for the Archdiocese of Washington).  While disappointed at the amount of bilge that was contained therein, I was not surprised.

Let's go in order as the stuff appeared in the print edition.  On page 3 was the account of Cardinal McElroy receiving a pallium from Pope Leo XIV.  The online article is here.  Most of the article was a rehash of a homily that Leo gave on the occasion.  Some bloopers popped up.  He spoke of moving "beyond a tired and stagnant faith".  If he truly is serious about such movement, one key thing he could do is stop the insidious attempts to quash the Traditional Latin Mass.  I attend these regularly on Sundays.  The faith there can in no way be called "tired and stagnant".  Then towards the end, he spoke of the beatitudes as being equivalent to the goals of today's "social justice warriors".  No where did he mention that the beatitudes spoke of the repentance from sin and pursuit of personal holiness.

We then turn a few pages and see two articles that are basically screeds that shill for those border-crashers euphemistically called "undocumented immigrants".  They are found here and here.  The first is an interview with Cardinal McElroy while the second is penned by Auxiliary Bishop Menjivar.  Both articles share the same flaw, and I think this flaw has been repeated so often that, owing to its repetition, is actually a blatant sin against honesty.  I am talking, of course of the disingenuous refusal to differentiate immigrants who come here in accordance with our immigration laws versus those who deliberately violate our laws by sneaking across the border, coming under false pretenses, overstaying visas, etc.  All of us welcome those who arrive in accordance with our laws.  Decent people object to those who flout our laws, and lately, with the complicity of progressives, including those in the US Catholic hierarchy, are coming in by the thousands.  Hitherto, Catholic Charities have received millions in federal grants to "process" thousands of these people, many of whom are being sex-trafficked across the border.

I noticed towards the end of the interview article, McElroy couldn't help but put in a plug for one of his pet divergences from Sacred Tradition.  He of course shilled for "women deacons".  Bishop Menjivar, on the other hand, actually stated our case for us, albeit unwittingly.  The whole article is lacking in wit, but I digress.  Here is what he said, and you can read it for yourselves in the link provided.

"That’s right. From the very beginning of the United States, this country was pro-immigration; and one of the main complaints of the Founders was the English government forbidding the colonies from passing laws promoting migration and naturalization of people from countries other than England."

England disregarded our right to pass laws regarding immigration, rendering existing ones moot in practice.  Those crashing our borders are doing the exact same thing in disregarding our laws and our right to regulate immigration.  I might add that the moral guilt lies not only with the border-crashers,  but with people such as McElroy and Menjivar who hold our laws, and our law-keepers, in contempt.

But enough with immigration, for social justice has many facets.  In this same issue, we read that Pope Leo is praying for the "conversion" of certain people.  Who might be these people?  Are they those who embrace homosexuality and other perversions?  Are they those who facilitate the baby-slaughter known as abortion?  Nope!  Well then, just who are these depraved degenerates who stand in need of all this "conversion"?  Why, these are dastardly fiends who (I can scarcely bring myself to mention these horrid, scandalous words!) resist climate action!  Read it here!  

On Monday July 9, Leo celebrated a Mass "for the care of creation".  Yes, it is a new Mass that has been added to the Roman Missal.  Of course natural disasters are lamented for they supposedly "are in part created by the excesses of human beings with their lifestyle".  In other words, people are the big meanies who need to undergo the requisite guilt trips.  Most troubling, though, is this echo from Laudato Si: "we listen to the cry of the earth, we listen to the cry of the poor".  In other words, the planet is being made equal to human beings.  That is heresy.  We cannot assent to that under any circumstance.  We cannot say "amen" to any prayer containing that error, even if a pope were to put forth that prayer.  I did several posts in the past regarding the problem in which this pope seeks to embroil us.  Please read.   When Francis died and Leo was elected, I had hopes that there would be fidelity to Tradition again.  Those hopes are growing dim and once again, we must resist papal errors.

Catholic Standard And Catholic Review Repeat Our Sunday Visitor Inaccuracies Regarding Bishop Strickland

Both the Catholic Standard and Catholic Review use the same article from Our Sunday Visitor as they relay the news of Bishop Strickland's ouster.  OSV acknowledges that the Vatican has not yet given any official reason for Strickland's ouster, but it does point out a tweet that Strickland wrote last May stating that the Pope is "undermining the deposit of faith". 

All Strickland did was call a spade a spade.  Let's look back at some of the antics coming forth from this Vatican, shall we?

• A few weeks ago, he signed a document that allows gays and transgender perverts to be godparents at baptism
• While Strickland was stripped of his diocese, the German bishops who declared their intention to "bless" gay unions remain untouched.
• There is the colossal pachamama debacle during which this filthy idol was worshipped in the Vatican Garden, in the pope's presence.  Later that week, he placed a pachamama plant on the altar during Mass - a direct violation of GIRM and an act of idolatry.
• There is that insidious footnote in Amoris Laetitia, stating that de facto adulterers may receive Holy Communion while continuing their mortally sinful lifestyles
• He declared the death penalty to be inherently evil, directly contradicting 2000 year old Church teaching. 

This list could go on and on, but these will suffice to demonstrate that yes indeed, the pope is undermining the deposit of faith.

As for this October 31 address in question, LifeSiteNews diligently recorded the entire thing and published it for our reading.  Here it is.  Please read it.  Some reading the OSV article might get the erroneous impression that Strickland is calling the pope a "usurper".  In an interview with the Pillar Catholic, Strickland plainly states that such is not his view.  Rather, he was reading a letter from a friend to illustrate the confusion that this pope is undeniably causing.  He states that the pope is neglecting to clear up confusion by not answering the dubia and not issuing plain statements of belief.

Further on down the OSV article, we read that "the letter outright attacked Pope Francis' validity as the successor of St. Peter...Bishop Strickland said the letter's words were challenging but did not dispute the allegations."

I find great fault with the reporting of Our Sunday Visitor in this matter.  They utterly failed - whether by neglect or intent, I do not know - to take into account Strickland's subsequent exchange with the Pillar, during which Strickland acknowledges Francis's papacy.  OSV's sloppiness could lead the unsuspecting reader to believe that Strickland doubts the validity of Francis' papacy.  The OSV has a duty, in my opinion, to correct their reporting.  Moreover, The Catholic Standard and Catholic Review. have a duty to acknowledge their own sloppiness in their blind repetition of the OSV error without doing any "due diligence" verification themselves.

Here are more details about these matters from the Lepanto Institute.

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/  .

The Fake Sister Lucy - And Why It Matters

After the Fatima apparitions, the children said that Our Lady confided three secrets to them and that they were to be announced no later than 1960.  Moreover, the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart was supposed to be done by the pope as soon as possible but no later than 1960.  To date, neither has happened.  Ironically, Francis is the one who has come closest to fulfilling the consecration request in that he explicitly mention Russia by name, but he did not order the bishops to join him in the consecration (a number of them did, though, on their own initiative).

In the middle of the 20th century, Sister Lucia stated several times that Our Lady was displeased at the delay in fulfilling her requests.  Then, in the 1980s, after John Paul II consecrated the world - not mentioning Russia by name - to her Immaculate Heart, Sister Lucia was quoted as saying that this consecration fulfilled Our Lady's request.  That is, of course, a flat-out lie.  Our Lady was quite specific when she said that Russia must be consecrated.  She singled out Russia, and the consecration should have done the same.  I had always hypothesized that Sister Lucia was being misquoted by bad-actor bishops and that may indeed be the case.  Now that some are coming forth with evidence that the Lucy that we've been seeing for the past few decades may be an imposter, we can reasonably entertain the possibility that this bogus Lucy did claim that John Paul's consecration was according to Our Lady's stipulations.

Think of it.  This woman, if she was an imposter, was lying anyway.  Why would she have any compunctions regarding her false claim?  For that matter, her claim regarding the third secret is probably also a lie and we still aren't being told the full story, contrary to Our Lady's wishes.  I post three videos below and ask that you watch these closely.  I will have more commentary below them.

In the Lifesite clip, Dr Chojnowski mentioned (the real) Sister Lucy's insistence that the third secret be announced no later than 1960 or the time of her death.  However, in a 1993 interview, the imposter said that the secret was not to be released.  This is at the 29:03 mark of the video.

Not only do we have a clear contradiction, but perhaps we have here a motive for replacing Sister Lucy with an imposter.  During much of the 1950s, Pius XII was pope.  Aside from his own faulty consecration (he mentioned Russia but did not involve the bishops) he seemed ready to obey the Fatima message, meaning that he would have released the third secret in compliance with those deadlines.  I am now hypothesizing, but perhaps the real Sister Lucy passed away in the 1950s.  To prevent the pope from revealing the Third Secret, is it possible that the masons in the Vatican coughed up a scheme to present a phony Lucy so Pius would not believe it incumbent to reveal the Third Secret?

Perhaps several popes were deceived by her.  She was cloistered and not seen frequently.  Pope John XXIII still could not have been held blameless as 1960 happened during his pontificate.  Again, this is just a theory, but it sounds more humane than if the masons actually harmed the real Sister Lucy.

At any rate, it seems to be the case that what we have here is a brazen attempt to thwart the intentions of the Mother of God, and of Our Lord Himself.  If nothing else, it shows that the masons believe in the spiritual ramifications of the Fatima message; why else would they work so feverishly to thwart it?  And no, it wasn't just mere fear of insulting the Soviet Union.  They knew what they were doing - engaging in yet another attempt to undermine Holy Mother Church.

So how have they gotten by with this scam for so long?  There are a multiple of factors.

• Catholics today, even well-meaning Catholics, are simply ignorant of both Church teaching and Church history.  In this day and age, with the internet at our disposal, such ignorance is inexcusable.  I would recommend some serious reading and study.  For details about Fatima, read accounts dated 1950-ish or older.  Compare that with what the imposter said.
• Well-meaning Catholics are way too naïve regarding clergy and other leaders.  One would think that the sex scandals might have knocked off some rose-colored glasses but for too many, that has not been the case.  There is evil in the Church, even in the Vatican itself.  Wake up

Above all, pray and  frequently avail yourselves of the Sacraments.  Go to a Traditional Latin Mass if at all possible.  Pray your Rosaries daily and wear the brown scapular.  Practice the Five First Saturday devotions, as requested by Our Lady of Fatima.  Pray for a pope who will consecrate Russia exactly as she stipulated and who will reveal the Third Secret.  We are in a time of chastisement (in case you haven't noticed) and it will worsen, barring a direct intervention from God.  We don't have time to waste.

Is The Church's Teachings On Contraception In Francis' Cross-Hairs?

While returning to Rome after his recent trip to Canada (a disaster in and of itself), Francis gave yet another lackluster plane interview.  The official transcript is on the Vatican website.   The question of concern is towards the bottom.  Even more concerning than the question is the answer.

In actuality, the question was one that would have been answered with a simple "yes" or "no", with "no" being the correct answer.  Francis never answered the question.  Rather, he segued into an overly wordy session of verbal diarrhea.  Read it for yourselves, as he blathers about "development of doctrine".  Somehow he manages to badmouth faithful Catholics who hold to the Church's timeless traditions.

Francis incorrectly invoked Saint Vincent of Lerins as the latter spoke of doctrine.  Catholic Answers has an excellent article that unpacks Francis' misquote of St. Vincent.  Please read it.  I need not rehash it here except to emphasize that doctrine, as it develops correctly, will always clarify truth.  Never will authentic development of Church doctrine lead to its contradiction.  Please recall that is what Francis did when he attempted to change Church teaching regarding the death penalty.  The Church had always recognized the death penalty to be a legitimate option to be used by civil governments in the restoration of justice.  Francis falsely stated that the death penalty is "intrinsically evil".  Not only is that false, it is rank heresy.

As I said in earlier posts, I think Francis used the death penalty matter as a trial balloon to see how much heresy the faithful were willing to swallow before coming to see that Francis might be an anti-pope.  At first glance, it appears that his gambit worked.  Now with him potentially rattling his saber against several papal documents condemning contraception, it appears that more are willing to consider the sad possibility that an anti-pope rules the Vatican.  How much more before faithful Catholics wake up?

Of Pachamamas And Western Grannys

Taylor Marshall asked some questions about Francis (I don't know if I can call him pope any longer) and his obvious sin against the First Commandment.  First he asked if Francis can be called "Vicar of Christ" after this stunt, for in participating in pagan rites, he and the cardinals in attendance most likely excommunicated themselves.  Second, he asks how he could ban the Traditional Latin Mass yet still allow pachamama and western-granny idolatries to abound.  I don't think they are contradictory at all.  Everything he's done has as an objective the deconstruction of the One True Faith.  In actuality, that can never happen simply because God Himself cannot be moved aside.

Don't mess with this
western Granny!

Afterwards, Francis headed back to Rome on a plane and gave another interview.  Yep!  Here we go again - another episode of high-altitude-induced verbal diahrea!  Apparently we who hold to Tradition have "dead faith".  If by that he means that we don't believe in these pachamamas, western grandmothers, four directions, climate change and the such, I'll wear that badge with honor.  This is the same interview where he attempted verbal tap-dances in response to a question about contraception.  I touched on this Wednesday.  In that example of the death penalty, he called evil what the church has always held to be a good.  Now with contraception, it appears that he is preparing to call an intrinsic evil a good.  All this is heresy.  God's teachings cannot change for God Himself is immutable. 

Perhaps that is why he dislikes Latin.  Latin is a dead language.  The meanings of its vocabulary cannot change.  Thus prayers offered in Latin mean exactly the same as they meant centuries ago.  Here is an excellent article on the subject.

We must not only pray, but resist.  Attend the Latin Mass.  Withhold donations where the Latin Mass is restricted.

The Traditional Latin Mass, And All The Church's Patrimony, Threaten The Pope And His Progressive Agendas

Let's recap events of the past few weeks - events that involved the attempts to quash the Mass of the Ages.  Cardinal Cupich effectively suppressed the Institute of Christ the King, evicting them from their Chicago church for which their congregation raised  $4 million  after a 2015 fire damaged it.  Meanwhile in Inverness IL, at Holy Family Catholic Community (site of the guitar blessing) a lay person gave the homily at Pentecost Mass and soon afterwards, the whole place erupted in dance music and blowing bubbles.  To date I have heard nothing of Cardinal Cupich bringing this bunch to heel.

He has no words of admonishment for Father Pfleger either, after this latest debacle of a mass.

A similar injustice happened in Benedict, MD after Cardinal Gregory's tyrannical edict;   Those attending the Traditional Latin Mass there raised $250k for renovations and decorations.  Now they will have to go elsewhere to attend the Latin Mass.

Any honest person can only surmise that those trying to suppress the Latin Mass are simply full of spite.  Yes, that includes the pope.  Read this and this to see how some faithful Catholics are calling out this obvious pettiness and hatred.  There is quite a succinct comment on social media regarding the fanaticism with which the pope is grinding his axe against the Traditional Latin Mass.  It reads:

Have you noticed how often, in the last 18 months, the pope’s off-the-cuff comments have focused on traditionalists? There are 50 grave problems in the Church that need major papal attention, and THIS is what smolders on his mind constantly? PF's priorities are clear in this: to heck with all those other problems. It’s the 1% traddies who need to be 'dealt with', not the 99% of dreadful masses, the 99% of heretical 'catholic' colleges, the 99% of degenerate bishops, etc. Even if traddies were wrong in loving Tradition, his inattention to the vastly larger problems is mind-boggling."

This obsessive and seemingly disproportionate campaign against the traditionalists is in fact perfectly logical. Pope Francis realizes that the only effective resistance to the modernist remake of Catholic doctrine, morals, and liturgy is coming from this zealous minority, who have shown every sign of growing numbers and influence. Remember, it is creative minorities who change the course of history, not the majority who float along with the spirit of the age.

What is at stake is not merely "liturgical preference" but the dogmatic structure of Catholicism, the historical-theological continuity of the Church, and the soundness of Christian morality. His tactical hits in all of these areas show that the ultimate aim is the transformation of the Catholic Faith into something quite, quite other than it has been.

That is why our opposition to his entire agenda, which has TC as its poster-child, must be inflexible, determined, and indefatigable, and why "obedience" must be tendered only to what is true and good, not to what is false and wicked.

Actually only the first paragraph is the viral comment.  The other paragraphs are the thoughts of Peter Kwasniewski.  So there is a broad attempt to tear down all Catholic worship and teaching - including morals.  Eric Sammons echoed similar theories.  The interview to which Sammons alluded can be found here.  By the way - notice what he said about "true doctrine progressing".  Now remember how the pope erroneously, and probably sinfully, condemned the death penalty as intrinsically evil?  I opined then that he was floating a trial balloon with that, to see how Catholics would react, given that many of them are themselves confused about the death penalty.  Apparently he was pleased enough with the results of that experiment to start broaching contraception.  If he does, by some Jesuitical verbal trickery, manage to hoodwink the faithful into thinking that contraception might be acceptable in some circumstances, we'll have deadly history repeating itself.  We'll be having the 1930 Lambeth Conference all over again and that could actually lead to the horrors of baby-slaughter being condoned by Church hierarchy. 

One would hope that would be enough for some timid souls in the hierarchy to declare Francis an imposter to the papacy.  Note that I am not a sedevacantist for I do not believe Benedict's "resignation" to have been properly performed.  My blogging colleague at Les Femmes posted on the situation in her home diocese of Arlington, site of one of the recent draconian attacks on the Faith.  She challenges her priests, as I do the priests in my own Archdiocese of Washington, where Cardinal Gregory has been chomping at the bit for his turn to beat down faithful Catholics.   

We laity have a responsibility to positively resist, too.  Prayer and fasting are necessary, but by no means sufficient.  Ora et labora.  I post below a note from another Arlington Catholic to the chancery.

One language the corrupt bishops understand and heed is money.  We must use ours to good advantage, and sometimes one must starve the beasts.  Not one more red cent to these wolves in shepherd's clothing.  It's high time we stop kissing the hands that slap us and rob our children of their patrimony.

Do These Pre-Conclave Meetings Invalidate Cdl Bergoglio's Election To The Papacy?

Yesterday an interview that the pope had was published by Telam and reported by thedialog.org.  The pope seems to have let the cat out of the bag, as it were.  He states that the havoc he wreaked his accomplishments to date are goals agreed upon with other cardinals at a pre-conclave meeting.  Let that sink in.  Goals for his papacy were set before the conclave happened that elected him pope.

So many questions arise regarding this pre-conclave meeting of cardinals.  Obviously it happened before Bergoglio was elected pope.

• Did it happen before or after Benedict XVI resigned?
• If before, did the attendees at that meeting deliberate how to secure Benedict's resignation?
• Did these cardinals agree that Bergoglio should be elected?
• If the answer to the preceding question was yes,
• Did they promise to vote for Bergoglio?
• Did they initiate plans to lobby other cardinals to vote for him?
• Were the cardinals at that meeting part of the St. Gallen mafia?

The answers to these questions might well have bearing on the validity of both Pope Benedict's resignation and Pope Francis' election.  Enough irregularities have been detected to call both into question.

Benedict XVI May Still Be Pope

Last week I posted a video from Taylor Marshall that offered commentary on Cardinal Robert Bellarmine's treatise on the deposition of a heretical pope.  The Cardinal is a Saint and Doctor of the Church.

Below I post a video of John-Henry Westen's interview with Dr. Edmund Mazza, a professor of Church history.  The topic of discussion is whether or not Cardinal Bergoglio's election to the papacy was valid.  More to that point, the question is whether or not Pope Benedict's resignation was valid.  There may be enough canonical anomalies to render it invalid, meaning that the real pope is Benedict XVI, not Francis.  We know that progressive prelates lobbied for Pope Francis, in possible violation of Canon Law.

Please consider these matters.  Moreover, please do NOT beg off your obligation to be informed about them.  We are lay people, yes, but no more can we content ourselves with just minding our own spiritual houses, as it were.  If this evil continues without YOU shining a light of truth on them, you may well be held culpable for your indifference to these matters.  No more of this "but we're only little lay people" cop-out.  No more can we blindly trust our prelates to tell us the unvarnished truth; in fact, that may never have been a morally valid option for us to take.

By the way, things may be falling apart for Francis in the Vatican.  Please continue to pray your daily Rosaries.

What Kind Of Vibrations?

Yesterday (Sunday Feb 6), Pope Francis gave an interview on a popular Italian TV talk show.  He asked viewers who don't pray to "send good thoughts, good vibes".  Five years ago, we heard the same sort of idolatrous talk from him, when he asked an atheist mayor to "send positive waves" and to a group of reporters to "send good vibrations..if they aren't believers".  

I said it in that post and I'll say it again.  This isn't harmless buffoonery in which the pope is engaging.  This "vibration" talk is part and parcel of New Age.  The pope was affirming those people in their idolatry and atheism.  He should have been calling those people away from those falsehoods into the truth of the Faith and the eternal life that Jesus offers via His Church.  Instead, they were encouraged to feed on their poisons.

Poisons it is - spiritual poisons, that is, most likely straight from hell.  For if these people aren't praying to the One True God, to whom are they praying?  No, they aren't praying into the ether, for such prayers will most likely fall on diabolical ears.  Vibrations, indeed!  Why is not the Chief Shepherd of the Church leading them away from this thinly-disguised satanic activity to Our Lord, His Church, His Sacraments, etc?  These people desperately need solid bread, not snakes nor scorpions.  Pray for these people, and for the pope for he has much for which he must answer.

Taylor Marshall On Pope Francis' Eastern Europe Trip

Taylor Marshall, in the podcast below, examines various aspects of yet another abysmal plane interview given by Pope Francis on his return from eastern Europe.  As an aside, I'll highlight some new terms: "cootie-jab".  Marshall coined this and it just might bypass the obnoxious and ubiquitous "fact-checkers" of Facebook.  The second one is from someone commenting on the video on the you tube page.  He asked, "since Pope Francis supports the jab, can he be called Poke Francis"?  Hmmm... 

Why Did The Pope Go To Iraq?

 In regards to his recent trip to Iraq, Pope Francis was dismissive of those who said that in this trip, he flirted with heresy.  Well, truth be told, he's been making a career of flirting with heresy; this trip is not unique in that dismal respect.  Moreover, when the description of the purpose of religion (as he stated) given before muslim leaders doesn't even mention the word "God" but focuses on temporal matters, we can say that he's moved beyond flirtation.

On his return trip from Iraq to the Vatican, the pope gave an interview.  Like many of his previous plane interviews, it's a humdinger.  Catholic News Agency published the full text. Read the heretical nonsense in his own words.  He calls the Muslim leader Al-Sistani "a man of God".  What "god"?  He certainly doesn't worship the One True God as Catholics do.  Even he would admit that the Muslims worship a different being than do we Catholics.  It's worthwhile to consider the saint for whom the pope took his name.  St Francis visited the Muslims with the clear intent to convert them from their ways and have them come into the Church.  He wasn't successful, but neither did he call "a man of god" the leader who had martyered five Franciscans before Francis' arrival.

He then coined a new term "next-door saints", whom he defined as "men and women who live their faith, whatever it may be, with coherence".   So the Muslim suicide bombers are "next door saints"?  Whatever else they are, they are people who live their murderous creeds.  As we know, saints are those who have attained heaven, with some being put before us as examples of dedication to Our Lord and to His Church.  One is not a saint who does not acknowledge Jesus Christ as True God.

This jaunt was gob-smacked full of religious indifferentism plus a total focus on this secular world to the exclusion of the spiritual realm.  Nowhere in that interview did I see mention of Jesus Christ and His commands to lead peoples to conversion for their eternal salvation.  Not a peep was said about that.

Another reason to avoid donating to your dioceses is that a portion of that will go to the Vatican to finance gabfests such as this Iraqi session.  Not another penny to them.

Faithful Catholics Decrying The Hierarchy's Complicity In The Global Reset

In addition to Bishop Schneider, other Catholics have sounded the alarm regarding the de facto apostacy that has been made all too evident in light of today's pandemic.  Indeed, much of the hierarchy - including Pope Francis himself - seems to be in league with those who are using and who probably engineered the pandemic to bring about the reset touted by the World Economic Forum.

Archbishop Vigano released a public letter a few days ago that exposes some common underpinnings behind various happenings in the world and the Church.  He also makes no bones that the Vatican hierarchy, as well as many bishops, are in cahoots with the new world order.  He is quite right in calling the current Vatican structure a "den of thieves" with:

• the pope's current alliance with Netflix to shill for his new book.  This is the same Netflix that produced "Cuties" by exploiting and sexualizing little girls and produced a "comedy" that pictures Jesus as gay and Our Lady as a pothead.
• their push for the covid vaccines that use body parts from murdered babies
• running interference for anti-God political leaders

Rorate Caeli published a letter from a sister who must remain anonymous to protect her community from retaliation.  In it, Sister elaborates on the immorality of the compulsory mask mandates and its other harmful effects.  She rightly points out its dehumanizing effects and its basis in the loss of supernatural faith.

In this LifeSiteNews article, we see an interview with Father Chad Ripperger.  The three men are discussing the legitimacy of the current vaccines (or more accurately, the illegitimacy).  This truly is worth a listen as Father delves into traditional Catholic moral theology in his considerations of the topic.  One point that Father makes is that the use of fetal cells constitutes theft of their bodies.

To be honest, one has to be completely dishonest with him/herself if they don't accept that the election fraud and this covid hype isn't part and parcel of the attempt to get us to forget our dignity as God's children and the blessings that were part of the United States, in order to cajole us into swallowing this great reset. 

Background Story Of The Pachamama Dunking And Some Bizarre Catholic Reactions

Recall several months ago how the pachamama idols were worshipped in the Vatican, in full sight of the pope.  This happened not once but several times.  It even happened at the closing Mass of the synod, when Pope Francis accepted a pachamama plant and placed it on the altar.

We of course were delighted when the pachamama filth was tossed into the Tiber.  Some time later, one of the two dunkers came forward - Alexander Tschugguel of Austria.  He has since told his story and shared his traditional Catholic faith with many.  Recently he was in the news as one who suffered the covid-19 virus and who came out of it.

A few days ago, in an interview with Taylor Marshall, the two men discussed these events.  In the course of the conversation, they revealed Marshall's role in the pachamama dunking, as one who financed Tschugguel's air fare back and forth between Rome and Vienna.

Perhaps covid-19 has infected some Catholic brains, but I learned of this largely through some Catholics who took umbrage at Marshall's role in the deed, implying that he was merely playing the publicity hound throughout the matter.  They even cast those aspersions on Tschugguel himself, going so far as to say he faked his corona affliction for publicity.

My first reaction to reading the details of the incident was, "so what?"  How did that garner such vituperation?  I have some questions for these detractors:

• How do they think that Tschugguel flew back and forth between the two cities?  Do they think he and his friend just levitated through the air, or maybe bilocated as some mystics throughout the centuries did?  News flash!  Air fare costs money!  Marshall put up his own funds.  How dare some impugn Marshall's motives for so doing?  If you don't think he deserves some respect for so doing, well, that's on you.  However, by what stretch of logic do you villify him for his actions?
• I detect just a slight note of shame underlying the wags and naysayers for their own cowardice and lack of initiative.  It's all too easy to say that those who do get off their butts to do something are not acting in good faith, for somehow that makes their own torpidity not look so bad.  To be honest, I've been on the receiving end of such nonsense myself.

I'm not inclined to link to the prattlings of these malcontents right now, for I don't want to increase their hit counts.  I might have to do that in the future, if this problem persists.  I remind such individuals that contumely and calumny are sins.

Meanwhile, I will now post the interview below.  The discussion of the pachamama incident begins at the 1:06:00 mark.  They also remind us of that meeting scheduled for May at the 1:13:40 mark.  I do hope that the corona situation causes that planned debacle to at least be postponed, as it has for so many other filthy events in Baltimore (see here and here).

Amazon Synod Begins October 6

The Amazon Sin-Nod draws near, and Pope Francis appears to be finalizing his preparations.  Part and parcel of those preparations is the announcement that the pope restored to ministry a priest/theologian who was suspended because of his gay advocacy.  In actuality, Father James Alison, a British Dominican, was restored approximately two years ago.  He was obviously asked to keep the restoration secret and it is only on the cusp of the synodal disaster that looms, that Alison again holds himself out as a priest in good standing.  There is no evidence that he recanted his advocacy nor had any other indication of repentance.  He identifies as a "gay priest".

It is also widely noised abroad that today the pope granted a 30-minute interview with pervert-enabling and general-all-around dissident Fr James Martin.  Martin, of course, works in the Vatican's communication office.  So the pope can palaver with Martin for 30 minutes, yet not grant a meeting with the two surviving dubia cardinals to address their pressing concerns regarding the Church's direction?  Perhaps in this interview the pope did indeed answer their questions.  In fact, those questions have been long ago answered.

But good faithful Catholics are also making preparations for the looming disaster.  From LifeSiteNews we read of a prayer demonstration that occurred a few days ago, featuring Catholic leaders - many of whom plan to stay during the duration of the mess.  Cardinal Burke (one of the dubia cardinals) continues to sound the alarm regarding both the Amazon mess and the German sham-synod.

I will post two videos that bear watching.  Both deal with the synod.  In the second, Father does a very decent job in summarizing key errors and heresies in the Instrumentum Laboris.  Please take the time to listen to these.  More importantly, take the time each day for a Rosary to stave off the planned damage to the Catholic Church.

Pope Francis, The One-World-Government Shill

Pope Francis, several weeks ago, stated plainly that he wants to see an end to national sovereignty and the establishment of a world-wide government.  In practical terms, that would mean ascribing authority to the United Nations to encroach upon national governments as the latter tries to address the interests of its citizens.  He used the progressive talking points of both climate change and massive, unbridled immigration as excuses to bring about a globalist monstrosity.  If the pope has his way, we in the US and elsewhere would have unbridled baby-slaughter shoved down our throats.

A week or two after that at the Rome Life Forum, Cardinal Burke flat out contradicted the pope regarding one-world government, rightly calling it "not just and legitimate" and noting that one-world government would be by definition totalitarian.  Moreover, he pointed out that patriotism is an extension of the Fourth Commandment, as is limiting Muslim immigration.

Cardinal Sarah also offered correction to positions espoused by the pope and others.  Last month, he pointed out that the call for unfettered immigration is "a false exegesis to use the word of God to promote migration.  God never wanted these heartbreaks."  He was stating that defending migration is a misinterpretation of Gospels by priests and bishops "bewitched" by political and social issues.  I might also point out that the direction of the "bewitching" exclusively tends toward the direction of progressive and anti-God proponents, and that the "misinterpretation" is quite deliberate and thus malicious.

Thankfully more people are waking up to the perils of a one-world government.  The member countries of the European Union held elections this week, with conservatives gaining significant ground in Europe.  Also see here and here.   Immediately the pope whined about the election results, blaming "intolerance" and "racism".  Gee!  Why does that sound familiar?  Shades of November 2016!  Harping on the same theme, the pope, during an interview, compared the wall along our southern border to the Berlin Wall.  I suppose it didn't dawn on him that our wall is to keep out border crashers while the Berlin Wall served to imprison people within the east part of the city.  He then said he didn't understand "this new culture of defending territory by building a wall".  Is he serious?  Is he truly that ignorant of world history?  Perhaps he should take a look at that structure that surrounds Vatican City!  Walls like this have existed for centuries!

But the Vatican isn't only being bested on the political front.  Several leaders of nationalist bents are displaying and honoring their Catholic heritages.  The presidents of Brazil and Italy have both consecrated their nations to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  Recall that Our Lady of Fatima requested that Russia be consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  To date, the popes (not just Francis) have refused to do so.

Let us pray that more and more Catholics wake up and rediscover the One True Faith, for now it seems that the pope and the Vatican have forgotten it.  Pray that they too will return to the Faith.

Sex Summit - Swan Song Of This Papacy?

At the end of the sex-summit farce, Pope Francis laid out an 8-point plan for the Church to conduct an "all-out battle" against sex abuse of minors (young men and seminarians remain unmentioned so that they can be considered fair game for that good-ole-boy chicken hawk association of pervert clerics).  The 8 points are listed in this National Catholic Register piece.  Notice that there is nothing indicating that homosexuals should be removed from the clerical state, as they should be.  There isn't even any mention of prevention of their entry into seminary.  In fact, the word "homosexual" doesn't occur one in this so-called "plan".  Why is there no mention of the fact that the homosexual inclination is intrinsically disordered?

Here's a short, simple answer.  This summit was not at all about addressing the scandal of clerics raping boys and young men.  It was all about deflecting our anger and indignation away from the real problem: predation upon young men by powerful clerics, with the main culprit being Theodore McCarrick.  Even the Washington Post picked up on the duplicitous nature of the pope's closing address, noting how the whole summit was a dance around the living room elephant known as McCarrick.

Yes, the pope and cronies were covering for McCarrick alright, and not only because he was a ruthless predator.  There is ample reason to believe he was a communist plant.  He played a pivotal role in brokering that Vatican-Red China deal that essentially threw faithful Catholics in that country to the communist wolves.  It appears that he also was a ghost writer of the Land O Lakes statement that allowed progressive poison to destroy Catholic higher education.

Realizing that the results of this summit were, for all intents and purposes, non-existent,  Michael Hichborn of Lepanto Institute crafted an open letter to Pope Francis that lays out some steps that the pope must take if his moral voice is to be restored.  I signed it and urge you to do the same, and to promulgate this letter in your own circles of fellow Catholics.  We simply must make our voices heard for we've been silent too long, and some still insist on persisting in silence and apathy.

Many Catholics are coming to the belief that Francis' papacy has been irreparably compromised to the point of being ineffective.  I wrote last week of a prayerful protest that happened in Rome just before the summit began.  It was organized by Professor Roberto de Mattei and attended by Michael Matt of the Remnant.  The two men met in an interview and discussed many things.  I post it now for your review.

The Sex Scandal And The Papacy

The sex-summit dog-and-pony show in Rome ended a few days ago.  As anticipated by those with two brain cells firing in syncopation, this thing was a farce conducted with the intention to fool people into thinking that the pope and high-ranking prelates are serious about sex abuse by the clergy.  Oh, they're serious, all right!  Serious about protecting it for their own perverted pleasures, it would seem.

Natacha Jaitt, an Argentine media celebrity, accused Gustavo Vera of trafficking children for sexual exploitation.  Vera is a close friend of Pope Francis'.  She was set to testify against Vera in a few weeks - but was found dead this past Saturday.  Her family is calling her death murder.  I post below an interview that she conducted with an Argentine blogger who was doing his own investigation.  He alleges that Vera shipped children to the Vatican "for the Pope and his accomplices".  Let that sink in.  If it's true, the implications are horrendous - but would explain why the pope and his buddies were so quick to poo-poo the idea that homosexuality is a factor in the clerical sex abuse situation.  I will post that interview below, but this post will continue below that.  I understand that the man being interviewed is now missing.



Was this sex-summit a feeble attempt to mollify us, the Great Unwashed, so that we would stop poking into their perversions?   Is this why Vatican personnel are bad-mouthing the two surviving dubia cardinals?  Even Cardinal Marx can't avoid acknowledging the existence of a homosexual cabal in the Vatican; he acknowledges also that evidence has been destroyed.  Was Vera, close friend of Pope Francis, sending young boys to the Vatican to be preyed upon by the wolves in shepherds' clothing?

I now post a video of a discussion between Taylor Marshall, Michael Voris and a third gentleman whose name I didn't catch.  They discuss the question of whether or not Pope Francis should resign.  I am increasingly becoming convinced that Francis could be an anti-pope, with Benedict XVI still the true pope.  There have been indications that Benedict's resignation was, at least in part, coerced, rendering it invalid.  Given the additional information that we now have regarding the St Gallen Mafia, I've no reason to doubt that they would have exerted pressure on Benedict to tender a rather strange resignation.


As the gentlemen said, please keep praying your Rosaries.

Pope Francis: McCarrick's Atrocities Not That Bad

You might recall from the November USCCB meeting this past November that not only did the pope forbid action on the episcopal sex abuse crisis, but the convened bishops voted against asking the Vatican to share its documents pertaining to disgraced Bishop McCarrick.  Think about it.  At the beginning of the meeting, at least some bishops moved to take action on the sex abuse crisis.  Towards the end, they voted to continue the de facto cover-up for McCarrick.  Doesn't that seem like a drastic change in their stances?  What - or who - was behind such an extreme swing in collective attitudes?

But even Cupich and Wuerl were taking their queues from higher-ups.  The main higher-up appears to be Pope Francis himself.  Church Militant has discovered that the Vatican's so-called "investigation" into McCarrick's crimes of perversion is turning into a smear campaign against his former victims, now accusers.  They are actually trying to say that because 1) the boy may have been 16 at the time and not a minor and 2) the sex may have been "consensual", that somehow McCarrick's culpability and guilt may be mitigated.

Of course that theory is shot full of holes.  If you look at the Church Militant link, you'll notice another link at "Taylor Marshall".  It is to a video wherein Marshall interviews James Grein, who was molested by McCarrick starting at age 11.  Was the Vatican referring to yet another boy?  Even if so, that makes not one whit of diffference.  The Vatican, in its statement, seems intent on conflating civil law with moral and Church law.  It is the latter two laws, both higher than the first, that is the Vatican's only concern.

Some are expressing shock, and rightly so; I'm not sure about their reasons.  They state correctly that McCarrick took a vow of celibacy, but celibacy has nothing to do with these crimes.  The laity do not take vows of celibacy, but still the actions that McCarrick took are mortally sinful for them as well.  Homosexual acts are mortal sins, whether committed by lay or celibates.  As far as consensual, I would wager that a cleric holds much sway over a young person, particulary a vulnerable person.  Any solicitation to sin would be coercive in that context.  If the victim were female, no one would contest that statutory rape occurred.  Why the contest in this case?  Answer - to deflect culpability from McCarrick.  The lengths to which the Vatican is going to defend McCarrick indicate that 1) they don't want any continuing investigation to be directed at them, and/or 2) McCarrick has a lot of dirt on them and is forcing this ludicrous attempt.

But the Vatican is also doing all it can to have themselves held harmless.  The Catholic Standard published an article that essentially tried to shift moral responsibility for the pope's delay order onto the bishops themselves,  In other words, the Standard is in cahoots with the cover-up.  Nice try, guys, but no cigar!  Yes, the US bishops have plenty of guilt owing to their ongoing coverup attempts, but much blame for this mess lies with the Vatican and Pope Francis himself.

By the way - I mentioned Taylor Marshall's interview with James Grein.  Please take the time to watch the entire thing.  It is very informative regarding McCarrick's early years, as he got his start in undermining the Church.

Please be discussing these matters with your friends at Church.  Please make sure not to contribute to any archdiocesan collections, particularly those headed by dissident bishops.  Now we must also urge boycotts of the Peter's Pence collections.  Simply contribute directly to worthwhile charities and the more tradition-minded religious orders.

Corruption Is Shedding Its Disguises

More and more we are seeing corroboration of the words of St. John Chrysotom: "The road to hell is paved with the bones of priests and monks, and the skulls of bishops are the lamp posts that light the path."

Archbishop Mark Coleridge of the Archdiocese of Brisbane (Austrilia) tweeted a few days ago as a reply to Jesus being "consultant or king", that "not too sure that I want or have him as either".  It sure sounds like apostasy to me.  I found it rather hard to believe, but unless his twitter account was hacked, the evidence is there to see.  I found the exchange on twitter and post it below.  Click the tweet to see Coleridge's reply.

"Most people want Jesus as a consultant rather than a King” @timkellernyc

— Daniel Ang (@DanielAngRC) October 7, 2018

As you can see from the comments, several people have asked him for clarification and have received no response.  I myself just posted an email to the diocesan website and encourage all to do the same.  If we just reply to the tweet and his account is indeed hacked, he'll never get the message.  If, however, I fail to receive any reply to my inquiry, well, that indeed will be a reply.

During a recent interview, Cardinal Cupich said it's "not our policy" to deny Holy Communion to those in sodomite #mowwidge.  In other words, it's his policy to thumb his nose at Canon law and the Tradition of the Church. It's also his policy to persecute faithful priests in his diocese, such as Fathers Paul Kalchik and Frank Phillips.  Speaking of faithful priests in the Chicago area, Cupich was asked in that same interview about Bishop Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield, a suffragan diocese of the Chicago metropolitan.  Paprocki made clear that his diocese would obey Canon 915.  We can imagine that Cupich is already doing all in his power to make Paprocki's life as miserable as possible.

Please recall that last summer a drug-and-sodomy orgy was busted by police inside the apartments belonging to Cardinal Francesco Coccopalmerio.  It turns out that "cocaine-cocco" was present at the orgy.  One can only imagine his level of participation in the party "activities".  Apparently the police told him to leave before they started arresting people.  Why they didn't arrest him too is its own tale of corruption, I suppose.  Vatican sources say that Pope Francis knew of "cocco's" presence at that party.  Might that be the reason why the police let him off?

Speaking of the pope, Church Militant has learned that the Vatican is attempting to rig its "investigation" of Archbishop McCarrick.  Their aim is to ascribe as much responsibility as possible to the now-deceased Pope John Paul II.  Neat, huh?  Stick it to someone who can no longer defend themselves.  But hey!  They've rigged synod reports now, haven't they?  They've distorted them to make it appear that the bishops unanimously agree that it's time to go soft on perversion, Holy Communion for sodomites and adulterers, etc.  After all that, they've no hesitation in putting on a sham investigation to deflect attention from the corruption that still festers inside the Vatican.