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

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

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

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

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

Cardinal Marx Outright Shills For Holy Communion For Adulterers And Sodomites

Such was the gist of his "intervention" this past Wednesday. To complete the heretical slop, he also stated that contraception within marriage should be liberalized "to make more room for conscience".  In other words, the clear teachings of Jesus Christ are to be subordinated to the demands of warped consciences.  I saw this news on Church Militant's site and left the following comment.  It is self-explanatory, but knowing CM's reluctance to criticize the doings and sayings of Pope Francis, here's hoping that the comment remains and that they start acknowledging the proverbial "elephant in the living room".   The comment is "If Marx is allowed to remain in his various Church-related roles after this proposal of immorality and heresy, we need to acknowledge that Pope Francis approves of Marx's antics and perhaps even is applauding them.  Let us cease this fear of stating these simple truths, shall we?"

Meanwhile, the bishops from Poland and Africa are having nothing to do with Marx's antics.  Toronto Catholic Witness relates that Archbishop Gadecki refutes the idea of "being pastoral" and he has spoken in the name of all the Polish bishops.  Michael Hichborn of Lepanto Institute asks why such matters of settled doctrine are even being discussed and then answers the question; they are being discussed because Marx et al want to unsettle these doctrines.

We've had de facto schism for some time now.  This sin-nod may well formalize that reality.

Cardinal Sins - And Their Papal Enabler

In today's Vortex, Michael Voris clearly lays out the case that many cardinals are deliberately flouting the Church's authority to coddle those in sexual sin or those who profit from sexual sin.  Missing from his analysis, though, is a forthright admission of why they are allowed to retain their red hats (what are they called?).  More to the point, there is someone who is allowing them to continue their chicanery and perhaps is orchestrating it.  I speak, of course, of Pope Francis.

To be fair, many of these cardinals started carrying on when the Pope's predecessors occupied his chair.  After last October's sin-nod, though, it became quite clear that this current pontiff at least approves of their dissenting behavior - if he's not outright ordering it.  I realize it is the policy of Church Militant TV not to criticize the pope's actions.  That's their decision.  I and many others hold a different opinion.  We will call the spade a spade.  I'll now analyze some statements of Voris' and point out some obvious papal connections.  I'll go in order as they occur in the video.

Don't Let Papal Visit Distract You From Next Month's Synod

The preparations for the pope's imminent visit are developing into quite a "dog-and-pony" show, with all the tee shirts, caps, cardboard cut-outs, etc.  Lots of excitement is afoot - so much so that many are becoming oblivious to the storm that is about to erupt at the Ordinary Synod of the Family this coming October.

Some of us are raising the alarm.  Ladies and gentlemen, there is real possibility - if not probability - for schism to result from this synod.  This tocsin is also being sounded by Cardinals.  Cardinal Reinhard Marx is on record of favoring the distribution of Holy Communion to divorced and remarried Catholics who have not obtained proper annulments.  Bear in mind that this heretical position is being espoused by the president of the German Catholic Conference and member of Pope Francis' "gang of nine".

Thankfully Marx is being opposed directly by two faithful Cardinals.  Cardinal Robert Sarah, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, called Marx's words "heresy and dangerous schizophrenia".  He made his remarks as he released his book "God Or Nothing - A Conversation About Faith".  His book was presented by Cardinal Gerhard Mueller, who explicitly warned of a schism owing to the antics of German bishops.

There's also heresy from Belgium.  Bishop Johan Bonny (where have we heard that name before?), recently voiced opposition not only to Humanae Vitae, but to natural law itself.  Consider that this heretic will be a sin-nod "father", as well as Bishop Cupich.

As I said, too many well-meaning folks are waxing giddy over the pope's visit.  We need to remain sober and at prayer for the future of the Church and salvation of millions.  I now post a video that suggests this pitting of clerics against each other might well be a fulfillment of the prophesy of Our Lady of Akita.  It also voices many other warnings and alarms regarding the upcoming sin-nod.

Sin-Nod Slop Oozed Into My Parish Mass This Morning Via Two Zingers

I'll deal with the more insidious zinger first.  As the name of this blog suggests, I am located in the Archdiocese of Washington and the archbishop is Cardinal Donald Wuerl.  As this Church Militant article (and so many of my own posts) states, he is decidedly on the progressive side.  The video makes mention of a priest being disciplined for upholding Canon 915 back in 2012.  Regular readers of this blog will immediately realize that the priest is Father Marcel Guarnizo and it was at my parish where Father Guarnizo attempted to prevent sacrilege.  For some refresher on that situation and the heinous treatment meted out to Father Guarnizo under the direction of Cardinal Wuerl, please click on the archives to the right and read the posts from late Feb 2012 through March 2012.

Presently Cardinal Wuerl is in Rome as one of the synod fathers.  No one doubts that he is lending his hand to the Kasper-Marx-Cupich crowd.  Recall the blasphemies suggested by both Marx and Cupich.  Both prelates are openly calling for the Church to dissent from the teachings of Christ Himself with regards to adultery, sodomy and contraception, and to allow those engaging in these mortally sinful acts to receive Holy Communion.  Hold that thought as I relate what happened a few hours ago at Mass.

One of the prayers during the "Prayers of the Faithful" was for families.  I don't have the text verbatum but still the words were clear: "For families during this time of the synod as they are under attack from addiction, immigration, deportation and poverty".  Leaving aside (for the moment) the open embrace of left-wing positions on lesser issues, do you notice what's missing from that list of malevolent forces that attack our families?  Yes - those sins against family and life that are always intrinsically evil.  I'll list them below:

• Abortion.  That should be included in that list, as abortion is literally an attack on a most helpless babies by members of his/her own family.
• Homosexual conduct.  Those engaged in such sins make a mockery of families.  Two of the same gender who "play house" together are NOT families, wicked and inane civil laws notwithstanding.  We pity and pray for the children embroiled in these situations as they are denied the mother and the father that they need and deserve.
• Contraception.  Usage of these substances distorts the meaning of true marital love and is the most reliable predictor of divorce.

Yet these evils were not included in the list of forces that tear families apart.  Thinking back on the sin-nod, it's not difficult to realize why they were deliberately omitted from that list.  These are the very behaviors that Marx et al want to legitimatize by use of the sin-nod, and he most likely has an ally in Cardinal Wuerl.  Looking at the matter from the progressive viewpoint, how could Wuerl's chancery mandate or even allow them to be included when the progressives at the sin-nod are trying to "mainstream" them into Church life?

I realize that this omission during the prayer may seem like a minor little thing, but it is precisely by these "minor little things" that they hope to change the mindsets of Catholics in the pew.  That's how these little "zingers" work; the less noticed they are, the more effective they are.  This questionable prayer is NOT the only "zinger" that happened in today's 9:30 AM Mass at St John Neumann in Gaithersburg MD.  Let's look at "zinger #2".

Voris Rebukes Some High-Placed German Bishops

In today's Vortex, Michael Voris calls out the bishops of Germany for their heresy.  I just have a few caveats.  First, while he rightly rebukes Cardinals Kasper and Marx, one must bear in mind just who is enabling these men to wield considerable influence.  It is none other than Pope Francis.  While he lauds the heretical Kasper as a "serene theologian" he has stripped Cardinal Burke, a truly capable and faithful son of the Church of all Vatican authority and assigned him a largely ceremonial role.  I believe that means that Cardinal Burke will not be able to attend next year's Ordinary Synod on the Family.

I also hoped that he would have exempted Cardinals Gerhard Muller and Walter Brandmuller, for they have spoken against much nonsense, including some that occurred at last month's SinNod.  They are Germans but they are so in the mold of Cardinal Von Galen.  Of course we won't forget the German bishop who is now the Pope Emeritus.

He does accurately diagnose some motives behind Kasper's shilling for laxity in Catholic moral teaching.  Listen closely as he describes how Germany allots tax revenues to the churches in its borders.  But as you do, bear in mind the question, "who is enabling Kasper and Marx in their promulgation of heresy and dereliction of duty?"

Will The Upcoming Sin-Nod Lead To Schism?

That is a very real concern being voiced by some faithful bishops and laypersons.  Before we watch a video dealing with these questions (ht: LifeSite News), let's digest a piece of news from Rome.  Within the city limits, a square will be dedicated to Martin Luther - with no opposition from the Vatican.  This is not "ecumenism" in any healthy sense of the word.  Martin Luther was a heretic who did much to undermine Christianity, leading to death and destruction - and not just in this life.  Now consider that lately the German Catholic Conference has been standing in open defiance of the Magisterium.  Who is the president of the German Catholic Conference?  Cardinal Reinhard Marx - the same who organized the "shadow council" (now occurring) and who is among the pope's closest advisers.  So now we have the Vatican sitting silently by, while a German heretic is being honored in Rome.  Might this be a nod to the current German heretics?  As you watch the video, notice the references to both Martin Luther and German bishops who are spreading heresy.

By the way - check out Cardinal Marx's crosier at 28:19.  What is that thing supposed to be??

Bishops - Good And Bad

Let's start with the bad first so that we can end this post on the good side.  The German Bishops' Conference, under Cardinal Reinhard Marx, has formally declared it permissible to commit sacrilege against Holy Communion.  They are allowing Protestant spouse of Catholics to receive Holy Communion "under certain conditions".   Of course sensible people understand that "under certain conditions" is a polite way of saying "allowing the camel's nose to get under the tent".  We know where that leads.  Remember that at the infamous 1930 Lambeth Conference, the Anglican church permitted the use of contraceptives under "limited" circumstances.  Now the Anglicans and many other church bodies brook baby-murder, gay clergy, etc.

No one may permit that kind of sacrilege - ever.  If Cardinal Marx retains his position of influence, we can very well glean the pope's own attitudes towards the Eucharist - and perhaps towards God Himself.

That's the bad news about bad bishops - now for some good news about good bishops.

I've lauded Bishop Thomas Paprocki before on this blog.  He is the bishop of Springfield, IL.  In his diocese resides Senator Dick Durbin, one of the most rabidly pro-abortion faux-katholycs.  Bishop Paprocki recently announced that Durbin was not to be admitted to Holy Communion until he repents of his support of baby-murder. The straw that broke the camel's back appears to be Durbin's vote against the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act. 

Imagine that!  A bishop obeying Canon 915 and instructing his priests to do the same.  Let us pray that other bishops follow suit and that the wolves at the USCCB learn a thing or two from him.

Belgian And German Prelates Promulgate Heresy Unfettered

Last week it was announced that Johan Bonny, Bishop of Antwerp (Belgium) made public his dissidence from Catholic teaching by promulgating his opinion that same-sex couples should be recognized by the Church.  He has gone so far as to hint that these couples should be allowed to adopt children.  This post from Angelqueen has more details.

At the bottom of that post you'll see an equally disgusting quote from the rector of the Catholic University of Leuven, Rik Tors: "Do not underestimate the significance of this. Bonny advocates a change in long-held unshakable principles, something that the dogmatic pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI no bishop could afford to do."

Let's take a look at what Torfs said.  He said that Bonny felt free to mock his own bishop's miter under this pontificate, not being "free" to do so under the previous pontiffs.  There might be truth in that.  Both John Paul II and Benedict XVI upheld the teachings of Jesus Christ and, like true successors to St. Peter, expected the bishops under them to do the same.  I'll emphasize this also; what Torfs stated as being "long-held unshakable principles" are much more than that, as they have originated from God Himself and cannot be flouted without severe consequences, even if those consequences happen only in the afterlife.

The German Bishops' Conference, led by Cardinal Reinhard Marx (a key player in last October's sin-nod) issued an official statement calling for the admission of Catholics who have divorced and remarried without annulment, i.e., those living in adultery (let's call it what it is) to Holy Communion.  In other words, they want to facilitate for those Catholics the sin of sacrilegious Holy Communions.

Vox Cantorus has another quote from Bonny.  Note the theme of allowing polluted secular culture to dictate Church practices - a common theme these days.  The Germans believe they have particular impetus to do so, to increase their revenues from Germany's church-tax.

In September of 2013, the Holy Father excommunicated an Austrilian priest for conducting himself as one after his faculties had been suspended.  They were suspended because he advocated various heretical positions, among them "same-sex marriage".  In light of that, one must wonder why he lets Bonny, Marx et al carry on with their shenanigans while he has sacked Cardinal Burke who is an exemplary champion of the Church.

Interesting Definitions Of Dissent And Terrorism

In order for prelates to monkey around with theology, they must first attempt to redefine basic terminology, that is, they must twist the meanings of specific words.  Whoever controls the language controls not only the debate but ultimately the thinking of unsuspecting listeners.  To that end, I write this post to expose some linguistic chicanery.

First we take a look at remarks made by Cardinal Reinhard Marx.  He gave an interview to America magazine two weeks ago.  In it he validated homosexual relationships.  Of course that's impossible since the sin of homosexual conduct is always evil.  But he didn't stop there.  He went on to liken people yearning for traditional mentality with terrorists.  Here's the quote from LifeSiteNews.  "I had a discussion with some of the students, 'Cardinal is it true that the younger people are more traditional?’ And that’s true. But that is not dangerous.  I have no problem with tradition. But we have also the tendencies that the people want to be clear in their positions. Black and white populism is growing in Europe. And that is the beginning, perhaps, of populism, of terrorism, that’s clear.  The atmosphere of reducing the complexity of the world, to give simple answers, to give black and white answers, is growing, and I think that is very dangerous,”

Got that?  If people want the truth of Jesus Christ, that is the "beginning of terrorism.  Let's address this bugaboo regarding "simple answers", shall we?  The truth usually is simple; it may not be easy to implement as it often goes against sinful natures, but the meaning is simple.  Such is God's prohibition against homosexual conduct, for instance.  But progressives often like to make the truth seem more convoluted than it is, to allow themselves an excuse not to conform their lives to it.

Closer to home, we read a blog post by Cardinal Donald Wuerl entitled The Pope, Touchstone Of Faith And Unity.  In the second paragraph, he alludes to "an interview and an article by brother bishops."  Might that brother be - Cardinal Burke?  He voices discontent at those who differ from various popes.  Some things are worth noting.  First, not all examples he cites involve matters of faith and morals.  For instance, there were differences of opinion regarding clerical vesture and proper protocol in crowd situations.   There is also Cardinal Wuerl's own blatant disregard for Canon 915, as he takes it upon himself to aid and abet sacrilegious Holy Communions by dissident Catholics AND punishing priests who uphold the Canon (as happened to Father Guarnizo three years ago).

A key to understanding his blog post might be found in his peculiar definition of dissenters: those who "disagree with the pope because he does not agree with them and therefore follow their position."   Not quite!  Dissenters are those who willfully diverge from the Teachings and Traditions of Holy Mother Church and her Lord Jesus Christ.  These are two very different definitions; there can be congruence between them if the pope is himself faithful to these Traditions of the Church.  But if the pope diverges from the Church's teachings and faithful Catholics call him on it, these Catholics disagree with the pope precisely because in that instance it is the pope who is the dissenter.

So there you have it!  Cardinal Marx calls the yearning for the Church's teachings as "terrorism".  Cardinal Wuerl thinks it is "dissent" to object to papal violations of canon law, tinkering with the sin-nod interim report, etc.  Might it just be part and parcel of the "maturation" that the pope wants to have accomplished before the next synod?

The Schism In The Church Cannot Be Denied

Crisis Magazine published last week a very thoughtful article by Dennis Prager entitled "Why Judaism And Then Christianity Rejected Homosexuality".  I'd urge all to read it carefully - several times.  I think he's correct about the benefits of instilling Godly discipline of the procreative powers.  One might do well to intersperse that reading with the reading of Humanae Vitae.  One thing we can notice right off the bat is the correlation of the abolition of sexual restraint and the increase of coarseness and even violence in our society.  Interestingly enough, we even notice a proportional increase in the clamoring for governmental intervention in our lives, almost as if we (as a society) both crave the controls from government to replace our own abandoned self-control and the facilitation of hedonism.  That is why the Democrats, the party of baby-slaughter and sodomy, is also the party of socialism.

That article underscores the grave nature of the errors embodied in Amoralis Lamentia, particular Chapter 8 of the thing.  On February 3, Cardinal Reinhard Marx, president of the German Bishops' Conference, declared that priests and clergy can conduct "blessing ceremonies" for homosexual couples.  I put "blessing ceremonies" in quotes for it is impossible to bless mortal sin.  The attempt to do so is both blasphemy and sacrilege.  He stated this an in interview during which he also shilled for female deacons and married clergy.  Why didn't he just throw abortion in there for good measure?  Cardinal Marx still retains his position - unlike several faithful priests who were kicked to the curb for upholding the Church's teachings on homosexuality, etc.

Not only does the pope fail to utter one word of correction (let alone rebuke) against this flagrant disobedience to God's commands, but he gives honor to yet another dissident cleric.  Father Jose Tolentino Calaca De Mendonsa (hereafter just called Fr. Tolentino for obvious reasons) is rector of the Cathedral of Lisbon.  He recently wrote the introduction to a book called "Feminist Theology In History".  That book sounds like a hoot, doesn't it?  It's written by a faix-nun who is both pro-abortion and pro-sodomy.   LifeSiteNews has details of the gibberish found in this "introduction".  Now consider that Pope Francis selected Tolentino to preach at his 2018 Lenten retreat.  One can only imagine the kind of poison that will be served to the pope and the others at that retreat - not that they are unaccustomed to this poison for they produce enough of it themselves.

At One Peter Five we read an article entitled "Approval For Blessings Of Homosexual Couples Equivalent To Founding A New Church".  The logic behind that statement is very simple.  In the authentic Church, mortal sin can never be blessed.  To insinuate that such is possible is to concoct an alien moral theology.  It would attempt to redefine moral truths.  In order to do that, it would have to redefine a different deity, for the One True God, immutable as He is, cannot change His word.

So now we see an attempt to deform the Catholic Faith, the One True Church, into something completely alien to the Bride of Christ as He established her.  Is this part and parcel of creating a "one-world religion" for a "new order"?  This is not the first attempt that progressives made towards this goal.  I believe they floated a trial balloon with the issue of capital punishment.  This current pope and many progressives espoused a position to abolish capital punishment altogether - a complete divergence from Church tradition.  Enough people are ambivalent about capital punishment so they weren't alert to the danger this posed to the Deposit of Faith.  Now they are getting more brazen.

Will some of us now take off the rose-colored glasses to admit that this pontificate is dangerous?  In the face of the overwhelming evidence, their denial of the facts can be considered willful - and sinful.  I ask them to please stop being part of the problem and to pray and speak out for the Church.

Truth Versus Heresy, Cardinal Versus Cardinal

I've written before about Cardinal Maradiaga and the harm he is wreaking on the Church.  Like a pesky weed he continues to undermine the Church from his position of influence as head of the group of top advisers to Pope Francis.  I can only surmise that Pope Francis approves of his dissidence; else he would have removed him just as he banished the good Cardinal Burke from the Vatican, but I digress.

Father Z relates that when Maradiaga was asked about Holy Communion for those in de facto adultery, he said, "Impossible?  No!"  He also blathered about an "ongoing synodal process" to bring about the abomination.  I'll look this up in Rules for Radicals, but I'm sure it's a tactic favored by Alinsky.  To paraphrase it in a poem, "Disobey!  Have your way!  Then one day they'll say ok!"

Cardinal Walter Brandmuller voiced quite an opposite statement, one that is faithful to the Teachings of Jesus Christ.  When he was asked about Holy Communion for those divorced and remarried, he said that would be possible only if they resolved to live as brother and sister.  He said this for sake of those with children who would be damaged by separation.  It is in this interview that Brandmuller took issue with the heresies of Cardinal Marx, stating that his statements "are in contradiction of the dogma of the Church".  It is worth noting that Cardinal Brandmuller takes direct exception to the notion that "pastoral practice" can stand in contradiction to Church dogma, as Cardinal Wuerl opined last October.

Let us pray for more leaders such as Cardinals Brandmuller, Muller, Burke, Pell, etc and that others like Cardinals Marx, Wuerl and Maradiaga repent and start acting like the Princes of the Church that they are.

Vile Orgy! Thy Name Is Superbowl!

I wish that were mere hyperbole, but it isn't.  In my post on Jan 30th (last Thursday) I embedded a rather lengthy video.  One of the points mentioned (almost in passing) is that many - if not most - Americans (and probably others in the western world) are more in tune with sports and celebrity gossip than they are with current issues dealing with morals and public policy.  I've seen it myself in folks with whom I deal.  Simply put, this is an abysmal disgrace and is most likely sinful.  It certainly is a sin of neglect for those of us living in democracies and republics where we can influence - via our votes - the directions of our respective nations.  We will at the end of our lives, have to give a strict account to Our Lord for how we discharged our civic responsibilities.  That's correct; voting isn't merely a right but a solemn duty.  We must be awake and sober, 24/7/365, no respite.  Consider:

• "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." Thomas Jefferson
• "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded.." Luke 12:48

Today, at Metlife Stadium in New Jersey, much of this wisdom will be jettisoned.  "But it's only innocent fun", you'll say.  Is it?  Consider now that tickets are going for thousands of dollars each.  Of course for fans coming from out of town, there will be additional travel and lodging expenses.  There will be "entertainment" aplenty.  I speak not only of the drunken behavior that is so typical, but there will be much sexual immorality.  Much of that immorality will be at the expense of young girls (and boys) who have been roped into the sex trade and are quite literally being sold as sex slaves.  Yes, the Superbowl makes sex trafficking all the more prosperous for pimps and other unscrupulous vermin.  To further fuel the fire, Robin Thicke and Jay-Z will be among the "entertainers".  Both have made names for themselves with their songs (?) glorifying rape.  During the half-time show, a gay-wedding farce will be thrust in the faces of the game attendees.  I'd imagine many of them will be too drunk to recognize what's going on - and the rest simply won't give a rip!

Karl Marx once said that "religion is the opiate of the masses."  Well, Marx got that wrong (among many other thngs).  In America today, the opiates are sports, celebrity ogling, entertainment, creature comforts.  And there will be some overdosing on these opiates not only in New Jersey, but in any home where people are prostrating themselves before those Electronic Deities known as "televisions" and allowing the Superbowl proceeds to spew forth into their sponge-like brains.  I link now to an excellent article about the slop that is occurring as I type this.

Turn the TV off.  Pray a little extra on this Lord's Day.  Heaven knows we all need it.

Cardinal Marx, Hell Is Real!!

My blogging colleague at veneremurcenui pointed out a gross error uttered by Cardinal Marx, one of the members of Pope Francis' eight advisors, opined that the church must "repent of scaremongering hell".  With all due respect to His Eminence, he has that precisely ass-backwards.  Does he not recall that "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom"?  I could go into a long tome regarding this error and the monstrous spiritual ramifications, but instead I'll post a homily on this very matter.  It's most relevant during November, as we ponder the Last Four Things.  If any friends of Father Robert Barron are reading, will you please ask him to pay special attention to the segment beginning at the 8:00 mark?

Sin-Nod: A Thinly-Veiled Attempt To Cram The Gay Agenda Down Catholic Throats?

Within these past few days we have seen "synod fathers" acts as apologists for sodomy.  ChurchMilitant.TV reports that an Austrialian archbishop favors "less condemnatory language" with regards to the mortal sins of sodomy and adultery.  One wonders if he would like to edit several of the epistles of St Paul that are found in the Bible for they clearly state that those engaging in such sins will suffer hell fire if they die unrepentant.

LifeSiteNews published an article by Phil Lawler regarding the obvious attempt to rig the sin-nod, an attempt that many of us have noticed..  I urge you to read it.  Note two things:

• Much of this strong-arming is being done by Cardinal Baldiserri, secretary of the synod.  Recall that there is a reason that I dubbed him "Book-Thief Baldi".  Hold that thought as you ponder this revelation: that of homosexual propaganda being distributed at the sin-nod with authorization of higher-ups. (ht - Toronto Catholic Witness)  This is confirmed by Archbishop Gadecki.  So the sin-nod honchos (Baldiserri included) resort to theft to prevent circulation of Remaining In The Truth of Christ, a book authored by several prelates that champions the teaching of Jesus Christ, but they allow distribution of tripe that justifies homosexual conduct.  Those engaging in such distribution find themselves in the unenviable position of cooperating with mortal sin and that is its own mortal sin, by the way.
• In Lawler's last paragraph, we read, "The Pope ultimately controls the process. The Pope will ultimately control the product."  True enough; he does.  But considering what was revealed about the "shadow synod", along with all the other little meetings that have been occurring at the Vatican, might this rigging be part and parcel of an attempt to insinuate the proceeds of the "shadow synod" into Church life?   The procedural changes that Lawler noted would make it difficult for faithful prelates to discern whether or not any final documents were truly representative of their deliberations.

I'm going to venture a guess and I think it's one shared by many.  The so-called "synod reports" are already drafted, and they will "change pastoral practice" to allow for the admittance to Holy Communion those living in de facto adultery AND to "mainstream" sodomite shack-up situations into Church society.  This sin-nod will only serve to lend an aura of legitimacy to the de facto heresy that probably has already been concocted by this "shadow synod", to be foisted on unsuspecting Catholics.  Could that be why Cardinal Reinhard Marx appears to be a bundle of joy and giggles now (as reported by One Peter Five, despite past hints of going into schism?  If that is the case - and I hope and pray that I'm incorrect - the Pope will fully own such a travesty.

In light of my hypothesis, other news makes sense as we consider the strategy of progressives to normalize homosexuality within the Church.  Voice of the Family has informed us that gay-coddling Cardinal Vincent Nichols will be moderating one of the English-speaking small groups at the sin-nod.  Of course he will have much discretion as to what is included in the report for that group.  We also hear from Church Militant that a priest in the diocese of Oakland CA gave a homily at Mass telling his parishioners that "being gay is not sinful".  To make matters even more scandalous, the homily was published in the official diocesan newspaper.  Clearly these events are part of the #maturation process to brainwash us to submit to the gay agenda.

Let us continue to pray and to shine the light of truth on cockroaches.

Hymn To Socialism

That describes the offeratory hymn at today's 9:30 Mass at St John Neumann in Gaithersburg, MD.  It's called "Render to Caesar" by Carolyn Winfrey Gillette.  I was singing right along but stopped at this line: "may our taxes, all together, fund our working hand in hand".  It's a sweet, clever paraphrase of this statement: "from each according to his ability to each according to his need".  For the history-deprived, that last piece of mental poison comes to us courtesy of Karl Marx, the long-recognized father of modern socialism.  Socialism has been condemned by many popes.

Seeing this slop coming from this woman, I knew that "when there's smoke, there's fire".  And quite a destructive fire there is, as a simple google search revealed.  She has quite a write-up in wikipedia.  She and her husband are "co-pastors" at Overbrook Presbyterian Church.  Right there we have two problems: 1) the works of a non-Catholic were proffered to our congregation for singing as though they were valid spiritual input; 2) she obviously doesn't understand the concept of only men being permitted to preach.

Going down the wikipedia page, we see that she's written hymns for all sorts of occasions: peace, racial justice, environmentalism, illegal immigrants, natural disasters, etc.  We even see one for superbowl Sunday.  So that pretty much covers all areas of "concern" for Christians, right?  Well, not quite!  But maybe I just overlooked the hymns lamenting abortion, euthanasia, homosexual sin, assaults on marriage and family.  If they exist, please point them out to me in the comment boxes.  If not (and I truly think that's the case), why not?  Sometimes silence and omissions sound the loudest sounds.

Speaking of assaults on life, marriage, and family, our pastor made the point that these are matters that belong to God as opposed to the state.  It was a solid, truthful point.  I regret that the offertory hymn undermined that message.

In Case You Missed It..

Because I sure did!  What did I miss?  (Drum roll and trumpets, please!)

The 2012 Leadership Conference of Women Religious Assembly in St. Louis MO, from Aug 7-10

Actually it ends tomorrow (Deo gratias!), but their true colors certainly did fly.

From Father Z's blog we read that the keynote speaker of the event was Barbara Marx Hubbard.  What does she consider her life's mission?  Well, that's straight from her Facebook page: "to be a voice for the Collective Emergence of humanity as a Co-creative Universal Species".  I can just imagine that her address induced, uh, "deep meditation" among the attendees.  The National Catholic Reporter noted that "Teilhard would find in Barbara a kindred spirit".  The NCR might well be correct; many of Teilhard's writings were condemned by the Church!  At the very least, she certainly shows a knack for inventing interesting-sounding words like "regenopause".

By the way - for all their snivveling about what they claim is the Vatican's refusal to "dialog", why did they not allow the CDF laison, Bishop Sartain, to attend their meeting?  Such snubbing hardly seems conducive to "dialog".

There was a protest of the LCWR meeting.  By whom?  Right-wing religious zealots?  Nope!  SNAP!  There have been cases of abuse perpetrated by women religious.  So why, oh why, was there complete silence of this protest?  Had this been a clergy meeting, SNAP would have been featured front and center of all the coverage.  Could it be because the progressive media doesn't want to air "in-fighting"?  So much for truth in media.

Taxpayer March 3/20 - Part 2, at Rayburn Building

As said in the last posting, many of the attendees tried to get into the Rayburn Building, but were barred from so doing.  I guess those of us who don't worship at the feet of the Messiah Most Miserable and his Prophetic Teleprompter are persona non grata.  Watch and hear them as they queue up at the doors, down the steps and along the walk.



The rather inglorious ending was me taking a rather nasty tumble off the curb, where some landscaping was in progress.  I was helped to my feet by some very nice people from Nevada (they came all the way from there).  In return for dusting me off, they asked me to alert all of you that they are doing their best to rid the country of Harry Reid in the elections this November.  I am all too happy to relay this message on their behalf.

You may have noticed that some are at the Rayburn Building, and some of us remain on the north side of Independence Avenue.  We were blocked from coming across.  You'll hear the chant, "Red rover, red rover, let the patriots cross over!"



Now you'll hear us cry out "Nancy!"  Oddly enough (ahem!), she did not reply!  Hmm..  Could it be that she was - avoiding us?  Even if she was, she (or her staff) heard us in the street.



I haven't finished processing all the video that I took yesterday.  There will be more to follow.  At the time of this posting, I have not heard a final word from the Capitol, so I continue to pray, and to invoke the intercession of the recently-deceased Father Paul Marx, founder of Human Life International.

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.

USCCB Misquotes Catechism To Buttress Their Socialist Propaganda

Today Sister Mary Ann Walsh penned an article on the USCCB blog entitled "Time to Listen to the Bishops on the Shutdown".  A study of this piece makes clear that the title should be "Time for the Bishops to Abolish the USCCB".

The theme of this less-than-masterpiece is a simple regurgitation of the USCCB swan song heard throughout the fight over the passing and implementation of Obamacare.  In a nutshell, the progressives controlling the various puppet strings at the USCCB support the idea of socialized medicine.  Notice that they aren't even advocating that abortion and contraception be expunged from Obamacare.  They simply don't want to be put in the position of paying for it.  In other words, as long as they (believe that they) won't sully their hands with abortion, they've no problem whatsoever with these moral evils becoming even more ensconced within our medical system because of Obamacare.

Now notice in the fifth paragraph, the one that starts with "The bishops noted that the Catechism..".  They claim to cite the Catechism as the source of their belief that the state must supply health care.  I'll post the full paragraph below:
The bishops noted that the Catechism of the Catholic Church says it is the proper role of government to "make accessible to each what is needed to lead a truly human life," including food, clothing, heath care, education and culture.

Ladies and gentlemen, that is a misquote of paragraph 2288; here is the link to the Catechism, and you'll need to scroll to the paragraph.  I'll post it below.
Concern for the health of its citizens requires that society help in the attainment of living-conditions that allow them to grow and reach maturity: food and clothing, housing, health care, basic education, employment, and social assistance.

Are you noticing any differences??  There are two big differences.  Notice that the USCCB claims that government is the agent of provision.  The Catechism uses the word society.  They are not synonyms.  Let's look at the Catechism again, this time paragraph 1880, where "society" is plainly defined as "a group of persons bound together organically by a principle of unity that goes beyond each one of them".   Thus, the Catholic Church is a "society" as much as any civil body.  At this point, I'd also suggest a close study of paragraphs 1883-1885; they go into detail about the Principle of Subsidiarity and the danger of collectivism.

Bearing those last two points in mind, let's look at the second difference.  The USCCB uses the phrase "make accessible" while the Catechism uses the phrase "help in the attainment".   How can the government "make accessible" that which it doesn't possess?  Why, it has to seize it, doesn't it?  From whom?  Remember the phrase "from each according to his ability to each according to his need"?  That's straight from Karl Marx.  On the other hand, help in the attainment is innocuous: it could mean job skills training or truly charitable outreaches - means that don't entail confiscation from those who honestly attain goods vis-a-vis onerous taxes/fines such as the ones that Obamacare is already starting to impose.

I would propose that the USCCB is not worthy of the audience of anyone.