Is Cardinal Muller Cowering Before Vatican Progressives?

It certainly appears that way, given the statement that he released on Sunday.  He is Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.  He said that a "fraternal correction" regarding Amoris Laetitia is "not possible" because AL poses "no danger to the faith".   Edward Pentin, in the National Catholic Register, points out that the CDF lodged a large number of corrections for AL; not one of them was accepted.

Now what else happened at the CDW just a few days prior to that?  Recall that on December 26, the pope ordered Cardinal Muller to dismiss three of the priests who were working with the CDW.  When the Cardinal succeeded in getting an audience so that he could discuss the matter with the pope, the pope tersely told the cardinal, "I am the pope, I do not need to give reasons for any of my decisions.  I have decided that they have to leave, and they have to leave".  He then walked out of the room, ending the meeting right then and there.  So much for all this "collegiality".  It seems reasonable to guess that Cardinal Muller felt the pope's displeasure.  One might think of the fear that a mafia underling would feel if his don behaved like that.

Like Mundabor, I strongly suspect that Muller is in "cya" mode: that is, "cover your @ss".  While I can understand Muller's "about-face", I can in no way condone it.  I had hopes that he was a bright spot in a very dark place, but he has cowed; no John Fisher is he.  Maybe he will reconsider; I pray he does.  But if he does not, let the four dubia cardinals press forward and do what needs to be done to bring some light and truth to the higher echelons of the Church.  Maybe Cardinal Napier can join them with his own dubium.

Muller And Sarah Raining On Progressives' Parades

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

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

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

Personnel Is Policy - Cardinal Muller Removed From CDF

Today it was announced that Pope Francis has removed Cardinal Gerhard Muller from his position as Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.  He will take post as Archbishop of Mainz.  His replacement at the CDF?  Cardinal Christophe Schonborn of Vienna: yes, this one.  He is also the prelate that overrode one of his priests when the latter blocked an openly gay man from sitting on a parish council - just two months after Cardinal Wuerl ousted Father Guarnizo for likewise being a faithful priest.  See here for more of Schonborn's destructive antics.

We knew this was just a matter of time, didn't we?  Cardinal Muller has been one of the few remaining voices of sanity and orthodoxy in the Vatican, much to the chagrin of many of his fellows and perhaps even Pope Francis.  Read here for an account of the many times he, as Prefect of the CDF, spoke truth to the lunacy spewing forth from the Vatican.  More than a year ago I predicted that Muller might well find himself in progressive cross-hairs; that has come to pass.  Surprise!!

As they say, "personnel is policy".  With all the faithful prelates being ejected from positions of influence in the Vatican in favor of progressives and de facto heretics, can there linger any reasonable doubt regarding the policies of Pope Francis?

Correction - There is reason to hope that this change has not happened and that the reporting was premature.

Pope Francis Needs To Fire His Current Ghostwriter

Apparently Pope Francis has been using the services of a ghostwriter.  From One Peter Five we read that Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez, also from Buenos Aires, is the ghostwriter behind this much ballyhooed environmental encyclical that we all await with bated (?) breath.  He and the pope go back a good bit, as the Glora TV clip will illustrate.  Fernandez apparently had a hand in the writing of the Evangelii Gaudium encyclical.

Now it seems that this environmental encyclical will be delayed by Cardinal Gerhard Muller in his capacity as Prefect for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith owing to theological deficiencies.  As the Cardinal stated in an interview, the mission of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith is "to provide the theological structure of a pontificate".   Moreover, the Apostolic Constitution states that the Congregation must "promote and safeguard the doctrine on faith and morals in the whole Catholic world".

Cardinal Muller is to be commended for putting the breaks on this encyclical.  Besides the many serious shortcomings of this new papal envirowhacko fad (and I'll elaborate in a few minutes), I wonder if Muller is concerned about some of Fernandez's other mindsets,such as the ones evinced in Fernandez's book entitled "Heal Me With Your Mouth: The Art Of Kissing".  My!  He certainly is a man with, uh, many interests!  Or is he just getting the "smell of sheep" on himself?

I wrote a bit about that one-day envirowhacko meeting hosted by the Pontifical Academy for Sciences last week.  Elaborating on that, I penned an article on this topic that will appear in a local pro-life publication.  When it comes out I'll link to it.  Meanwhile I'll post below an excerpt from that article that elaborates upon the anti-life screed (see here) that is the report from the meeting.

(begin excerpt)
A thorough read of the document makes plain that it is nothing more than an apologia for the United Nations Sustainable Goals initiatives.  The authors make no attempt to disguise it.  Another key attendee at this summit was none other than UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, who also has been known to advocate for abortion.  I refer you to this UN link: http://www.unece.org/sustainable-development/sustainable-development/home.html.  Interestingly enough, scrubbed from this link is any mention of Agenda 21, an action plan that arose out of several meetings with regard to “sustainable development”.  Wikipedia gives some details of it, albeit rather sympathetic, owing to wikipedia’s own leftist bias: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21.   Many see Agenda 21 for the snake in the grass that it is and are sounding the alarm; see http://www.teaparty911.com/issues/what_is_agenda_21.htm  and http://www.freedomadvocates.org/.
The information available about “sustainable development” and Agenda 21 makes clear the betrayal of the Faith that the Vatican hierarchy is committing by lending its moral voice to “one-world-government” and even to “population control”.  It is particularly scandalous that these Vatican agencies signed onto a thinly-disguised apologetics effort for abortion – in the name of the “environment” – just a few weeks prior to the anticipated papal encyclical on the environment.  Catholics are reminded that while the Magisterium can pronounce infallibly only on matters pertaining to Faith and Morals, it does not have the same authority regarding matters scientific and/or economic.
(end excerpt)

Did Cardinal Muller see similar issues in the encyclical itself?  Now the link to the GloriaTV expose of Archbishop Fernandez..

Disgraceful Dismissal Of Cardinal Muller

Cardinal Muller has been dismissed as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.  We knew that was coming, owing to the Cardinal's stances on both Laudato Si and Amoris Laetitia.  One Peter Five has further details of the dismissal interview. The pope summoned Cardinal Muller to a conference.  Right away the Pope presented him with five questions in apparent mockery of the dubia issued a few months ago by the "dubia Cardinals".  The questions are (with the Cardinal's replies):

• Are you in favor of, or against, a female diaconate? “I am against it,” responded Cardinal Müller.
• Are you in favor of, or against, the repeal of celibacy? “Of course I am against it,” the cardinal responded.
• Are you in favor of, or against, female priests? “I am very decisively against it,” replied Cardinal Müller.
• Are you willing to defend Amoris Laetitia? “As far as it is possible for me,” the Prefect of the Congregation for the Faith replied: “there still exist ambiguities.”
• Are you willing to retract your complaint concerning the dismissal of three of your own employees? Cardinal Müller responded: “Holy Father, these were good, unblemished men whom I now lack, and it was not correct to dismiss them over my head, shortly before Christmas, so that they had to clear their offices by 28 December. I am missing them now.”

Any Catholic worthy of the name would have answered all five of these in the negative, as has the Cardinal.  Immediately afterwards, the Pope announced to the Cardinal his dismissal from the post and abruptly ended the interview by walking out without even a "good bye".

When Cardinal Muller first complained about the manner of his dismissal, these details were not known.  Now we can understand the Cardinal's complaint in the correct context.  He also remarked that the Church should follow its own social teaching.  I agree.  For all the jibber-jabber about "dialogue" and "accompanying", those two elements were nowhere to be found in that conversation.

I will say one thing.  The pope put forth five questions and received five very prompt replies.  Will he now condescend to answer the cardinals' dubia?

Who's next?  Will it be Cardinal Sarah?  How about Archbishop Schneider or maybe Bishop Paprocki?  Pray that the faithful prelates remain steadfast and show your support for them.

Why Fiducia Supplicans Is Spiritually Poisonous

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More on FS soon.

Just Who Is Silencing The Church's Voice?

Almost two weeks ago I noted the peculiar definition of "dissent" as coined by Cardinal Wuerl in a blog post that he wrote.  He hopes to warp the meaning of the word to convey "one who disagrees with the pope because he does not agree with them and therefore follow their position".  Yes, I agree the structure of that sentence is awkward but it isn't mine.  The structure is twisted because of the attempt to twist the meaning of the word "dissent".

Because almost everyone with a brain understood him to imply that Cardinal Burke is a "dissenter" (according to his odd definition of that word), he felt impelled to go into "damage control" mode.  Often, though, "damage control" winds up causing more damage.  America magazine interviewed him.  (Hint: For examples of "dissent" as the word is classically defined, just read an issue or two of that rag!  But I digress!)  As my friend at the Tenth Crusade noted, the Cardinal does a "Fred Astaire", or at least he attempts it.

Here's a rather telling statement from him, regarding the sin-nod (in response to the first question).  "In the closing hour of that daylong discussion, I noted in my brief intervention that obviously there is no challenge to the teaching of the church on the indissolubility of marriage. I also pointed out that many participants distinguish between the doctrine on marriage and the pastoral practice of reception of Communion for those divorced and remarried."  (Italics mine)   May I assume from this that in addition to Cardinal Burke being a "dissenter", that Cardinal Gerhard Muller also fits Wuerl's definition of that word?  Cardinal Muller did state, "Each division between ‘theory’ and ‘practice’ of the faith would be a reflection of a subtle Christological ‘heresy."  What Cardinal Muller said is very true.  Those "many participants that Cardinal Wuerl mentioned are dabbling in heresy.  Enough of that for now.

Three days ago, Cardinal Wuerl posted another piece on his blog.  This one is entitled, "Silencing The Church's Voice".  In it he voices this complaint: "But today there is a new challenge. Some who reject the Church’s teaching – who choose to live by another set of values – not only find the voice of Christian values annoying, they would like to see it silenced or at least muted. Thus we have a whole new upside down version of words like 'discrimination,' 'freedom' and 'human rights,' and laws to enforce the new meaning."  While these words are true enough, they ring ironic and I daresay hypocritical in light of his treatment of Father Marcel Guarnizo three years ago.  I now present an anthology of posts I did as that incident and its fallout were unfolding at the time.  To reiterate: Father Guarnizo withheld Holy Communion to a flagrantly practicing lesbian.  This woman and her cohort raised a ruckus, whereupon the Archdiocese of Washington immediately surrendered to the gay community and threw Father Guarnizo under the bus.  In this scenario it was Cardinal Wuerl who played the part of the one "silencing and muting the voice of Christian values".  If he truly is serious about what he wrote three days ago, he might want to revisit his conduct (along with Bishop Knestout) of three years ago for his actions against Father Guarnizo can only have emboldened those who seek to stifle Christian morality in our culture today.

Another cleric who tried to silence the "voice of Christian values" is Father Thomas Rosica.  You might recall that he threatened to sue David Domet, the blogger behind Vox Cantoris because he had been shining the light on Father Rosica's misconduct.  After other faithful Catholics (and bloggers) got wind of it, we caused that light to be glaring.  Father Rosica caught a glimmer of that light (or he was instructed by higher-ups to stand down) and backpedaled on his legal threat.

Along with prayer, we'll have to continue to speak out.  If we shine the light on these folks relentlessly, we can at least mitigate the damage if not eliminate it altogether.

Cdl Muller Administers Much-Needed Truth To LCWR

A few days ago, Cardinal Gerhard Muller of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith administered some much-needed medicine to the Leadership Conference of Women Religious.  He did not sugar-coat it, he did not adulterate it with disgusting "nuance" and "diplomacy".  He served the truth straight up.  The question remains whether or not the LCWR will actually repent and remind themselves that they took religious vows to obey Holy Mother Church.

Here is the address on the CDF site.

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

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

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

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

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

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

God Bless Cardinal Muller And God Have Mercy On Cardinal Gregory

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

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

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

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

National Bishops' Conferences Presidents NOT Vice-Popes

From Lifesite News, we read the statements of the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Muller.  He is attempting to clarify misunderstandings brought about by Evangelii Gaudium.

When I think of the mess that is our own United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, I only have two words to say in response to Archbishop Muller:

DEO GRATIAS!

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/  .

Cardinals Burke And Muller Speak Truth To Rogue Prelates

LifeSiteNews published some excerpts of an interview that Cardinal Burke gave two months ago to them.  I link to it now and urge its study.  He points out the absurdity of:

• Trying to claim that there is some "redeeming" value to homosexual acts
• The use of contraception to be "responsible stewards of the earth"
• The many anomalies of the sin-nod

Similarly, Cardinal Muller had some words of truth for his fellow German bishops, stating quite clearly that local bishops' conferences could not decide for themselves what constitutes dogma and discipline, stating that it was "an absolutely anti-Catholic idea that does not respect the Catholicity of the Church".  He also stated that "the president of an episcopal conference is nothing more than a technical moderator" and that a country's dioceses are not subsidiaries of that country's episcopal conference.  I recall that Pope Benedict XVI also made the point of stating that these conferences have no inherent authority in and of themselves.  This only serves to strengthen my belief that these bishops' conferences are snakes in the grass and should be immediately dismantled.

I pray that the words of these two good cardinals are heeded and studied, as antidotes to the "maturation" that is being shoved down our throats to make us susceptible for more doctrinal poison that no doubt is planned for the sin-nod that will occur in October 2015.

Cardinal Muller Stands With Bishop Strickland

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

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

Why Infringement On Our Civil Rights Is More Deadly Than Corona

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Vatican Mafia Strikes Again

Yesterday I asked "who's next on the Vatican Mafioso hit list"?  We sure learned that in a jiffy, didn't we?  In a few days, Cardinal Gerhard Muller will no longer be prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.  He has always stated that the various screeds proceedings from the Vatican could never trump the Church's traditional teachings on faith and morals.  The LifeSiteNews piece theorizes about possible replacements for Muller; anyone of them would wreak havoc in that position.

Of the faithful prelates who headed various offices, only Cardinal Sarah remains - for now.  Pray for his strengthening and pray for the Church.   If your diocese has not yet had its "Peter's Pence" collection, consider boycotting it.  Regrettably the only language they will heed is the sound (or lack thereof) from the cash register.

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

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

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

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

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

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

A Sin-Nod Circus Starts This Week

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

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

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

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

How long, oh Lord, how long?

Long Knives Aimed At Cardinal Sarah's Back

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

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

Pope Francis Channeling Juan Peron?

As we all know, Pope Francis is an Argentine native.  It is said that he is sympathetic to "liberation theology", condemned by Pope Benedict XVI in 2009.  Pope Francis' sympathies to it have been evidenced over the past few years. Last week, Leonardo Boff, a leading proponent of the flawed thought system in the 1980s (and former Franciscan priest), said of Pope Francis "he is one of us".  He even indicated that Pope Francis solicited him for input for Laudato Si.  Unless Pope Francis explicitly repudiates this, I've no reason to doubt Boff's allegations.  Recall that over two years ago, a former Soviet spy claimed that "liberation theology" was a thought system invented by the KGB so that Marxist thought could be insinuated in the thinking and policies of various church bodies.  The KGB might well have found a willing ally in Pope Francis.

Liberation theology might not have been the only mental poison that Pope Francis contracted in Argentina.  Recall how Juan and Eva Peron had a virtual stranglehold on that country as they nationalized the economy, driving it to ruin.  Yes, they did much by hoodwinking much of the populace (like the Obamas managed to do for so long), but some heavy-handedness was also used.  Read this wikipedia entry and go to the "opposition and repression" section.  Bearing in mind that this wikipedia piece seems somewhat sympathetic to the Perons, even the author cannot ignore the way that Peron opponents were treated and that the Perons did hold both Mussolino and Hitler in some admiration.

We've seen how the pope seems to be emulating the Perons as he expunges from Vatican posts those who differ with him, just as Peron did at various universities and other places.  On the day after Christmas, Pope Francis ordered Cardinal Muller to expel three priests from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.  The order was given without any explanation.  Read the article to get a glimpse of the atmosphere of fear that seems to permeate the Vatican.

There is also reason to believe that the pope (or at least his operatives) are behind the ongoing smear campaign against the four dubia cardinals, particularly Cardinal Burke.  From EWTN, we read that on Christmas Day, Leonardo Boff (yes, the one mentioned in the first paragraph of this post) mocked Cardinal Burke by calling him "the Donald Trump of the Catholic Church".  Come to think of it, that might not be so much of an insult after all, although it was intended as such.  At any rate, we do see signs of a coordinated campaign.  It's eerily similar to the mainstream media campaign that they undertook before the election to sway the voters towards Hillary.  Happily that media campaign was an abysmal failure, but only because people are waking up to the media's lack of credibility.

We bloggers hope to assist in a similar epiphany for Catholics in the pews so that they can understand what is happening in the Church today.  We must pray and act, but in order to do either properly, we must understand the true nature and gravity of the events occurring in the Vatican.