When Faithful Catholic Youth Challenge Vatican Disdain For Truth

The Pope has confided to the world that he is worried.  We faithful Catholics agree that there are indeed many pressing concerns:

• the persecution of Christians increasing throughout the world
• the numbers of Catholics practicing their faith decreasing and churches shuttering
• Christian marriage and family life being discarded for the hook-up culture
• the whole-scale murders of millions of babies

That list could go on and on - but none of these amounts to a hill of beans in comparison with this matter that weighs heavily on Pope Francis' mind.  What might be this pressing concern?  In his own words, "When they tell me that there is a congregation that draws so many vocations, I must confess that I worry."  He shared this heavy burden at a meeting with 140 superiors general of various religious orders.  He went on by saying that young people in traditional orders are "soldiers who seem ready to do anything for the defense of faith and morality, and then some scandal emerges involving the founder".  Frankly that seems rather cynical, doesn't it?

No one can help but notice that "modern" progressive orders are literally dying of old age.  They've stripped themselves so much of any real remembrance of their original charisms that they aren't attracting any young people to their ranks anymore.  The orders who do embrace the Faith of Our Fathers, that is, who wear the traditional habits, who devote themselves to the Divine Office and prayer, who practice penance and the evangelical counsels and have eschewed new-age modernism/progressivism are the ones who are attracting young people.  Why?  Because in devotion to prayer, sacraments, teachings, etc, they open themselves to God's grace and that is what young people find attractive.  They find meaning in this life by working to secure their eternal salvation and that of the world.

That kind of devotion flies in the face of the modernistic bile that the pope seems intent on cramming down our throats.  Hence the charge of "pelagianism", etc.  It seems that the pope has animosity towards these orders.  "Scandal involving the founder"?  Well, if one can't be found regarding a particular founder, sometimes they can be contrived out of thin air.  Look at the abuse that Father Manelli, founder of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate is still undergoing as the friars are now scattered hither and yon.  There was an order chock full of young men who love Jesus and Holy Mother Church.  But they didn't embrace modernism with all its attendant nonsense.  For that, the pope continues to grind his axe at Father Manelli.  But I don't think any fear of "scandals" is what is driving the Vatican's animosity towards young people who love the Church.

Recall that last month, the pope, at a meeting for the World Day of Communications told those in attendance that "reality in and of itself has no one clear meaning".  Is that not, in and of itself, a ridiculous (and even self-contradicting) statement?  He is the Vicar of Christ, the same Christ who declared that "I am the way, the truth and the life".  Reality and truth are essentially the same, are they not?  Now, if we take the pope's statement to be accurate, does it logically follow that Jesus Himself has no meaning?  The pope's error leads to that conclusion.

These young people, of whom the pope takes a condescending view, understand that reality stands on its own, for it originates from God and certainly from the Second Person of the Trinity.  In addition to holding these faithful Catholic youth in disdain, he also sounded his alarm about "rigid thinking" to a group of Jesuit editors.  The two of these considerations make sense.  Truth by definition cannot change.  Therefore, to adhere to immutable truth would amount to consistent thinking - or as the pope puts it, "rigid thinking".  His rationale?  As he put it, "Rigid thinking is not divine because Jesus assumed our flesh, which is not rigid except at the time of death."  I really don't know how to make sense out of that gobblygoop

So there we have it.  We have a pope who thinks that truth and reality changes with the wind.  Now we can see how he justifies his attempts to warp the timeless teachings of Jesus Christ as He communicated them to the Church with the most recent manifestation of the mischief being seen in the mess called Amoris Laetitia - or Amoralis Lamentia as I've dubbed it.  When faithful Catholic youth flock to traditional orders and faithful Catholic cardinals seek clarification (or rigidity as he might call it) when they issue dubia, he sees it as a threat to his wish to have truth devoid of real meaning.  Now we see why the young people are derided, why other faithful Catholics are slandered with the epithet "pelagian" or when faithful prelates such as Cardinals Burke or Muller are maltreated.

Pope Spits At Faithful Catholics Again

It was just last week I wrote something similar.  These diatribes are occurring with disquieting frequency.  Yesterday's occurred during Mass, when again the Pope decried the "rigid": that is, those who abide by all the Church's teachings.  Have you ever noticed how many times he assails us, yet utters not one peep about those who play loosey-goosey with the teachings of Jesus Christ regarding faith and morals?  Is all this "rigid is bad" talk part of a strategy to get us to swallow Amoralis Lamentia?

Three days earlier, we heard from him again about Jesus's "tenderness" versus our "rigidity".  I could be wrong, but I don't recall ever hearing about any saint going on so much about Jesus's "tenderness".  I also fail to see how Jesus views our sins with tenderness.  Our Lord hates sin for the dishonor it entails and for the harm it does to sinners.  All this "tenderness" yammer makes Our Lord sounds like an effeminate sentimental squish.  It's almost blasphemous.

These are just the latest instances of him setting up false dichotomies between "rigidity" and "meekness/tenderness".  What I find particularly despicable is him accusing young Catholics of being "rigid".  Let's face it; the young are dealing with a world that is literally hell-bent on dragging them from the One True Faith.  They need to be strong, to be strident, to be the Church Militant.  The operative word is "militant".  Our Lord did not establish the Roman Catholic Church to be:

• church mellow
• church mediocre
• church meely-mouth
• church milque-toast
• church mushy

Why on earth is the pope joining the mob who seek to undermine the very salvation of our young people?  In fact, he's doing that to all faithful Catholics and those who need a strong Church that does stand firmly, even rigidly, against the sinful snares and wiles of this sin-sick world.

Pray for his conversion.

Pope Francis Rigidly Promotes His Progressive Priorities

I thank Vox Cantoris for pointing out the pope's mindset that underlies his rhetoric and actions in two areas.  Let's look at priestly formation, for starters.  Rorate Caeli analyzed a talk that the Pope gave to a group of Jesuits a few months back.  In it he lamented "rigidity" in the priestly formation in traditional circles.  Notice how he slyly insinuates that when a young man is "too confident, rigid and fundamentalist", then he might be "mentally ill".  Of seminary teaching he laments "educating in light of overly clear and distinct ideas".  Then he talks about the "dynamics of personal discernment, which respects the law  but knows how to go beyond."

There's much to unpack here.  First, let's look at the phrase "overly clear".  Most sane people would agree that clarity is a good to be desired.  Clarity is tied to truth.  How is it possible to be "overly clear" or "overly truthful"?  If one lessens the truth or clarity, then one is engaging in dishonesty and obfuscation, right?

Now let's address that second quip about the "rigidity" indicating "mental illness".  This is nothing short of slander directed at young men, aspiring to the priesthood, who exert much effort to follow God's immutable commands.  And yes, God's commands are quite clear.  For instance, "thou shalt not commit adultery" does not admit of any exception.  Does the pope find that "overly clear"?  Well, perhaps he needs to take that up with the Author of that "rigid"command.

This dovetails right into that last quote: "respect the law but know how to go beyond".  If one is going beyond what God's law says is permissible, he/she should drop any pretense of "respecting the law".  "Respect" is just a mental game played by those who would justify thumbing their noses at God's law, and ultimately God Himself.

So, as far as Pope Francis is concerned, is everything up for "discernment" and "accompaning on the journey"?  Is everything to be considered free of "rigidity"?  Surprisingly, NO!  There are some matters, according to this pontiff, that are to be considered set in stone, that admit of no divergence of opinion whatsoever.  These are matters that are indicative of his real loves and mindsets.

Today he addressed the Pontifical Academy of Sciences regarding "climate change".  He said it's "indispensible to create a regulatory system that includes inviolable limits and ensure the protection of ecosystems" blah-blah-blah.  "Indispensible"!  "Inviolable"!   Hmmm!  Sounds like rather "rigid" language to me!  Where does "knowing how to go beyond" fit in with this paradigm?  So the Teachings of Jesus Christ as revealed through His Church is subject to "gray areas" but "climate change" junk sciene is sacrosanct?

Let's look at this "regulatory system".  Who will be controlling this "regulatory system"?  The pope never got around to divulging that teensy detail, but one can imagine that the UN (Useless Nincompoops) would have their hand in that, along with George Soros and other assorted oligarchs.  Over the years I've done many posts on the menace of environmentalism.  As you read the posts, you'll notice that one underlying motive to this movement is the deconstruction of western civilization and its Christian roots.  In particular, pay close attention to this post, noticing the three motives that seem to be underlying this junk science (and watch the video).

Unless we believe that the pope is a total idiot, we must concede that he is in cahoots with the progressives and their agendas.  Owing to his position as Vicar of Christ, he is poised to spread the poison of progressivism.   Many Catholics at one time were naive in their disbelief of this problem.  While some continue their pollyanna-esque blindness, an increasing number are admitting that the ever-mounting pile of evidence is shattering their illusions.  Some of these, though, are now trying to ignore the problem, pretending that it has no relevance to their lives.  This blog joins with the Remnant in stating that we cannot be indifferent and silent with respect to the harm being caused by this papacy, for souls are at stake.

From The Maturation Department - Prior Eucharistic Disciplines Were "A Heavy Cross"

In his interview with La Nacion, the one in which he said he was blessed with a "healthy state of unawareness", he claimed that "I'm permanently making statements, giving homilies; that's teaching".  I concur with Pat Archibald at Creative Minority Report that he intends these words to be considered part of his personal magisterium.

With that in mind, I think we need to look seriously at the homily he gave today.  He stated that observances of law and discipline are signs of a "weak heart" (please note I corrected the spelling of "weak").  I'm appalled that as an example he used a prior discipline of a Eucharistic fast, going so far as to call it a "very heavy cross".  He credits Pope Pius XII for amending the discipline.  But..does that mean he thinks that the previous popes, from Pius XI on back, were just a bunch of Pharisaical meanies for instituting the fast in the first place?

After he complains about the inconvenience of the fast, he goes back into a tirade against "rigid" (or is that neo-pelagian?) folks.  He "confesses" that he asks the Lord to (I'm not making this up!) "throw a banana peal in front of them".  I see little repentance, to be frank, for wishing harm to people with whom he disagrees.  I fail to see how slipping on a banana peal is supposed to make people realize they're sinners; perhaps some good old-fashioned "rigid" proselytizing might do the trick.

But let's look at what's being slipped into the discussion and perhaps our thinking.  He's using as an example a discipline regarding the reception of Holy Communion.  Is he trying to instill questioning mindsets about other Eucharistic disciplines and even dogmas?  What happened six weeks ago?  The Sin-Nod!  What was put into the final relatio despite the vote of the attending bishops?  We see in the Italian translation of the preliminary questionnaire some discussion about distribution of Holy Communion to divorced/remarried Catholics who, by definition, are living in the mortal sin of adultery.

What happened today was no unintentional gaffe.  When he says he's "teaching" I believe him.  It's part of the brainwashing "maturation" process to lull us into accepting "pastoral solutions" to icky "rigid" doctrines.  That's why every word of his must be measured carefully.

Announcing The "Did He Really Say That?" Department

Regrettably Pope Francis' "off-the-cuff" remarks convey ideas that are not too terribly helpful.  I cannot divine what he really intended, and perhaps that is irrelevant anyway.

In an address to Italian priests yesterday to start off Lent, he elaborated on what he believes the priesthood should be in order to meet the needs of people.  One remark he made caused me to raise my eyebrows: "Ascetic priests do not help the Church."

Really?  That's quite a blanket statement.  Right away, St. John Vianney, also known as the Cure of Ars, comes to mind.  The fastings and sleep deprivations he undertook would cause many of today's soft and flabby generation to faint and cower.  Yet people came from all over France so that he could hear their confessions.  When he first arrived in Ars, the place was quite the moral cesspool.  Within a few years, many conversions there turned that place around dramatically.  Many of the people who came to Ars experienced dramatic conversions (he could read hearts).

Even other priests came to him.  Often they would tell him that they were troubled about the lack of fruit in their own priestly ministries.  He challenged them to increase their own penances and fastings if they wanted to see greater fruitfulness in their priesthoods.  It bears mentioning that the Cure of Ars is regarded as the patron saint of parish priests.

He did make one statement that "mercy involves not being too rigid nor too lax".  But right afterwards he lit right back into those deemed "rigid"; nowhere did I see any admonishment towards those priests who do go easy on themselves.  Curious.  What's not said is just as important as what is said, considering context.

My Lenten suggestion of a few days ago stands.  And I pray that we all have a blessed Lent.

UPDATE - A Facebook friend alerted me to this article from Father Zuhlsdorf, shedding some additional light on the Holy Father's remarks.  Please read it.

Does The Pope Regard Traditional Catholics As Niggers Of The New Age?

Remember three years ago when Pope Francis asked "who am I to judge" when discussing the situations of gay people?  It sure sounds so nice and non-judgmental now, doesn't it?  Contrast that with this screed that he uttered against those Catholics who prefer the Tridentine rite (Extraordinary Form).  He speaks particularly derisively towards young people who prefer that rite over the Ordinary rite.  To wit: "Pope Francis told Father Spadaro he wonders why some young people, who were not raised with the old Latin Mass, nevertheless prefer it. And I ask myself: Why so much rigidity? Dig, dig, this rigidity always hides something, insecurity or even something else. Rigidity is defensive. True love is not rigid."

Let's unpack this.  Notice that he equates "preference for the Tridentine rite" with "rigidity".  Then "rigidity" is equated with "insecurity" and "not true love".  The pope is slandering those faithful Catholics who prefer the Tridentine rite, portraying them as "insecure", "rigid" and not possessing "true love".  What ever happened to "who am I to judge?"  Let's address that now.

When the pope uttered that now-infamous quote three years ago, he was applying that to people living in states of mortal sin.  With that, he avoided the task of rebuking sinner, of setting them on the path of salvation.  However, when it comes to those Catholics who do obey Christ and His Church, he is quite judgmental towards them, demonizing their piety.  In this LifeSiteNews piece, read what Anya Proctor has to say about her love for the Tridentine Mass.  Her insights are nothing less than wise and profound.  Do you think this young lady deserves to be belittled by the Vicar of Christ?  Yet such is the treatment meted out to her and to countless others as well.  Liturgyguy believes this screed by Pope Francis to be a direct insult to Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.

Catholic Family News believes that we are being demonized as the new "deplorables" or as I've observed, this is more relegation of us to the status "niggers of the new age".

When The Pope Calls Evil "Good" And Good "Evil"

That is essentially what happened in the Pope's homily today.  He took the occasion to (again) vilify faithful Catholics as "rigid" and therefore "heretical".  Read this LifeSiteNews report, along with commentary.  He claims to decry an "all or nothing" attitude that he perceives in us, forgetting that Our Lord Himself often took an "all or nothing" stance, particularly when it came to obedience to His immutable commandments.

Last November, in a plane interview (Yep!  Pope Francis and planes are a bad combination!), the pope seemed disinclined to view the usage of condoms in light of the Fifth and Sixth Commandments.  First He cited the pharisees' question, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath" as a roundabout way to justify using condoms to prevent the spread of aids.  What he fails - refuses to understand is that there is a world of difference between "healing" (a good act) with usage of condoms (inherently evil act as it frustrates God's intentions for sexual relations).  The latter can never be justified.

He then segues into a screed about what he calls "big wounds": social injustice, environmental injustice, etc.  His remarks during his interview are really quite explicit.  To summarize, the pope - chief shepherd of the Church, can't be bothered with mortal sins of the flesh, even though they most likely will cause the eternal damnation of millions.  These poor souls don't amount to a hill of beans when it comes to this "social gospel".  He shows that he has his priorities exactly ass-backwards.  Please read the above link thoroughly, for it is an excellent treatment on why each person must conform to God's moral demands before he/she can even begin to address "social issues".

About six weeks ago, Msgr Charles Pope offered commentary on wise words uttered by Cardinal Robert Sarah during an interview, detailing why the concept of the "social gospel" is complete anathema to the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.  At about the same time, the Cardinal spoke at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast.  He warned that "today we are witnessing the next stage and the consummation of the efforts to build a utopian paradise on earth without God."

Regrettably, the pope's poo-pooing of the immutability of God's commands and disregard for the same in preference to focus on temporal matters seems to be part of these "efforts to build a utopian paradise on earth without God."  If we are to counteract this spiritual poison, it is vital that we not be cowed by attempts to marginalize us as "rigid" and even "heretical".

Pope Encourages Fellow Jesuits In Their Neglect Of Their Duty To Teach And Preach

This happened a few days ago as the pope was addressing fellow Jesuits in Mozambique.  Here is the text of the address.  It really is a rambling mess, but the darts against the One True Faith are obvious.

Of course there is the almost obligatory smear against young priests who love their Faith with all its traditions: "Clericalism has a direct consequence in rigidity. Have you never seen young priests all stiff in black cassocks and hats in the shape of the planet Saturn on their heads? Behind all the rigid clericalism there are serious problems. I had to intervene recently in three dioceses with problems that expressed themselves in these forms of rigidity that concealed moral problems and imbalances."

Got that?  According to him, if a priest - particularly a young one - wears a cassock and saturno, why, he always has "concealed moral problems and imbalances" as well as "rigidity"!  Don'cha know?  The pope provides examples in "unrigid" headgear.  Behold the vision to the right!  Isn't that just worthy of emulation?  As an alternative, perhaps those "rigid" priests can get hats just like Gordon Creamer's frilly yellow head -piece!  Maybe I better shut up before I give the pope and bishops any more evil ideas than they already have!

But not to worry!  He "intervened"!  He certainly did with the Franciscan Friars and Sisters of the Immaculate and other orders - intervened them right out of existence!  I pray those poor priests stay strong in their Faith as they face demonic onslaughts from their superiors.

"Clericalism" also features "exclusive moral fixation on the sixth commandment"  "We focus on sex and then we do not give weight to social justice, slander, gossip, and lies".  He's got that precisely ass-backwards.  His topsy-turvy principles are exactly why the Baltimore Archdiocese allows two of its parishes to prance and sashay with the Baltimore pride parades, complete with banners with parish names on them.  Let us recall that Our Lady of Fatima told the children that more souls go to hell than for any other reason.  The late Father John Hardon (one of the few sane Jesuits of the 20th century) pointed out that sins against the Sixth Commandment lead to sins against the Fifth Commandment.  Witness the bloodbath known as abortion.

The LifeSiteNews piece also mentions that the pope referred to an article that deals with an "ecumenism of hatred".  It is true that faithful Catholics have banded together with evangelical protestants to engage the culture for traditional Christian morality.  Among our successful endeavors was the election of Donald Trump.  Let's face it; our progressive cabal in the Vatican and the USCCB despise the President for he is actually keeping his promises.  Perhaps that is what they mean by hatred.  By the way - if you told me ten years ago that I would trust the White House more than the Vatican, I would have thought you insane.  Yet today that is precisely the state of affairs.

Make no mistake about it.  All this talk about "rigidity" and "fixation on the Sixth Commandment" is merely an attempt to prime us for the oncoming attack on Tradition that will occur with the Amazon Synod.

The Priorities Of Some Bishops

There's no gainsaying that much in the world is crumbling before our very eyes, most of it due to the sinister intents of very powerful - and evil - progressives. 

• The throwing of Afghanistan under the bus.  Thousands of US citizens are still in danger, the Christians there are starting to be butchered by the now-dominant Taliban, and much US military hardware, weaponry and software is in Taliban hands.  A plausible theory is that this hand-over was not a colossal blunder but a very deliberated betrayal.
• The ever-growing calls for mandated vaccinations with compounds made with the bodies of aborted babies, causing harm and death to recipients.  Democrat strongholds are rattling the sabers of martial law to force submission, setting the stage for the great reset.

One might think the Catholic bishops would be voicing great concern about these matters - if one didn't realize that most of the progressive cabal are actually tightening the nooses around our necks.  As long as cash flows into their coffers, they are happy as clams and free to pursue their other pet projects - with these projects actually being the furtherance of other aspects of the great reset. 

For instance, there is my own bishop, Cardinal Gregory of the Archdiocese of Washington.  With the deconstruction of western civilization well under way, his thoughts can now lightly turn to (drum roll, please) caring for creation!  Yep!  He's trying to promote an "integral ecology" for parishes, schools, etc. 

They will be engaged in crucial efforts such as:

• caulking doors and windows
• controlling thermostats
• using LED bulbs
• ad infinitem, ad nauseum

They want to respond to the "cry of the earth", you see?  Well, what about the cry of souls who need the Faith and Sacraments for the salvation of their souls?  Is that a tad too "rigid" for the DC chancery?

Speaking of "rigid", let's move on to the Bishop of Pittsburgh, Bishop Zubik.  He is all gung-ho about implementing Traditionis Custodes, more accurately rendered Traitorous Custodes.  He has gone so far as to forbid his priests from praying the Traditional Latin Mass privately.  This is nothing short of sheer hatred for the Church and her sacred Traditions.  The sheer vindictiveness and pettiness is astounding.  If this is one diocese that needs to see a huge curtailment of donations, this would be a solid candidate for such treatment.

In fact, both of them are.

Cardinal McElroy Feeds Spiritual Poison To Sin-Sick Gays

This is the text of McElroy's homily to the Georgetown pervert-fest last week, as reproduced by Outreach https://outreach.faith/2026/06/cardinal-robert-mcelroy-to-lgbtq-catholics-mercy-redemption-and-holiness/

Cardinal Walter Kasper, in his magnificent book on mercy, states that the greatest attribute of God in God’s relation to humanity is mercy. For it is at the moments when we approach the Lord, resplendent precisely in our humility and seeing ourselves as we truly are, that we comprehend the magnificence of Divine Grace and the utterly unmerited embrace of pure love that God bestows upon us at every moment of our existence. Where does our repentance fit into this lovely imagery?

Mercy is God’s first word to us. Mercy is God’s great gift to us. Mercy is the ambient culture of the church which sees both the sinfulness of the human person and the striving for redemption and holiness that constitute the seeds of grace planted in fertile soil in our hearts and souls, capable of leading us through our failures, our periods of being lost, our times of ecstasy and resilience in this earthly pilgrimage on which we are traveling. The ignorance of Scripture is disgusting and not at all surprising.  Jesus' first public word, as reported in Mark's gospel, is "repent".  Given the sin that was swarming all over that conference, is it any wonder why McElroy would gloss over that?

In today’s second reading from the Letter to the Romans, Paul reflects that abundant mercy of God when he speaks of sinfulness in our lives, and true redemption (5:12-15). He forthrightly acknowledges that every woman and man is enmeshed in sin, and all of us have contributed to the breakdown in the divine plan for humanity that torments our world and tears our souls asunder.

But in the beautiful final words of the passage, Paul makes clear that the sin of humanity is dwarfed by the grace that God has given us in redemption: “The gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, how much more did the grace of God and the gracious gift of the one man Jesus Christ overflow for the many.”.

The gift is not like the transgression. It is far deeper, wider, more profound. It is precisely in light of this reality that we can comprehend the mercy of God in our lives and the life of the church. This does not mean that our sins are peripheral to our lives or our life of discipleship.

On the contrary, the mercy of God precisely in its immense goodness calls us to recognize and confront our sinfulness and recognize how it mars the beauty of our souls and the blessings of our world. Honesty and integrity are the foundations for the Christian moral life, and we live as Christians in the belief that we are called to conform our hearts to the virtues of Jesus Christ: faith, integrity, compassion, sacrifice, prayerfulness, hope, chastity, forgiveness and deepest love. This is the pathway to holiness for all of us, and it requires the rejection of sin in every dimension. 

As we gather for this conference in a church which has so frequently wounded the LGBT community through judgmentalism and exclusion, we should find great hope in two important developments that have taken place during the pontificate of Pope Leo which constitute rich seeds for the unfolding of the Gospel in the years to come.  Acknowledging the heinous nature and ramifications of homosexual relations is simply the truth that must be embraced by all. 

Interestingly, neither of these developments focus specifically on LGBT issues or persons. They focus on the call to holiness for every believer and how it can be lived out in the concrete realities of our modern world.

The first cause for hope lies in the reflection that Pope Leo gave during his inspiring trip to Africa. Speaking to reporters, the Pope said “the unity or division in the church should not revolve around sexual matters.” This simple declaration puts in context the call to chastity as a component of the Christian moral life. Too often both in magisterial statements and on the popular level, sexual sins have been condemned with an ardor that effectively places them in the eyes of many believers as the core moral obligation of  Christians. This is utterly false to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  Our Lady of Fatima told the three children that more souls go to hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other cause.

When Pope Leo points to the comparative importance of economic justice, war and peace, immigration and racism as key elements of the Christian moral life, he is rejecting this false reductionism that concentrates moral obligations within the sexual realm.  So did Our Lady of Fatima engage in "false reductionism"?

The second development of great import for understanding our call to holiness in the contemporary world is the issuance of the report of Study Group 9 from the 2024 Synod. This Study Group had the great task of applying the pastoral theology of Pope Francis in an integrated way with Catholic teaching and practice. Study Group 9 boldly presented its conclusions in favor of a new paradigm based upon the kerygma:

The church’s mission is not a matter of abstractly proclaiming and deductively applying principles that are set out in an immutable and rigid manner, but of fostering a living encounter with the person of the risen Lord Jesus by engaging with the lived experience of faith of the people of God…in relation to the diverse situations of life and the many cultural contexts.  Truth by its very nature is rigid and immutable from age to age.  Subjective experience will never trump that.

In its anthropology, the report is pathbreaking: “Every person is a singularity whose wholeness and uniqueness is constituted in relation to the other, to society and to culture.” This focus on singularity reflects the preciousness spoken of in today’s Gospel about the sparrow. How much greater is each of us in our singularity in the eyes of God, who understands the folds of our heart and revels in the diverse beauty of our humanity. Seen in this light, the call to holiness is a personal encounter with the Lord Jesus Christ which envelops the whole of our lives and calls us to walk together in the life of the church — unique yet formed together in Jesus Christ. 

The pastoral method of Jesus had a specific and consistent pattern. First the Lord embraced those who had come to him for help. Then, he assisted them with the issue that was weighing them down. Only then did he call them to reform. This pattern must consistently be reflected in the church’s pastoral practice and in our own pastoral outreach to those whom we encounter in our lives within the context of faith.  Not always.  Recall from Luke 5:17-26.  Clearly Our Lord prioritizes dealing with sin over physical ailments.

I believe that this is the greatest contribution that Pope Francis made to the life of the church – the call to reform our conception of pastoral theology and see it as a core element of coming to understand the call of the Gospel and the formation of Catholic teaching. Pastoral practice is not the understanding of how to apply an already formed and often reified set of principles to concrete situations. It proceeds from the conviction that the concrete situations in which people find themselves are constitutive dimensions of how doctrine should be formed in the light of the kerygma. 

We gather together as the fruit of synodality is still becoming apparent. Let us pray that in the unfolding conversations in the spirit that guide us in the coming years, the whole people of God will move toward the future that God is building for our church.

Thus ends McElroy's so-called homily, that only served to confirm his audience in their mortal sins, making all the more likely their eternal damnation.  Recall that the Church recognizes nine ways that we can share in the guilt of another's mortal sin by cooperating with it.  The National Catholic Register lists them.  Read that list and see how many ways McElroy's screed does just that. 

Yet the SSPX, completely faithful to the teachings of the Church, is the chosen target of Leo's animus?  Of course.  It's obvious when one considers their clear goal of deconstructing the Faith.

Consecrated To The Immaculate Heart Of Mary, Or To Pachamama???

There is some confusion and consternation regarding some translations of the consecration prayer used today by the pope.  I linked to it a few days ago; obviously I linked to the English translation.  The phrase in question is "Queen of Heaven".  In the English, this is a perfectly fine reference to use for Our Lady.  However, in the Italian, the language used by the pope in the consecration prayer earlier today, the phrase put in its place was "tiera del cielo".  Roughly translated, it means "earth of heaven".  Some think this may be a not-so-veiled reference to the pachamama demon-idol. 

Below are two videos, one from Taylor Marshall and the other from Michael Hichborn - both men whom I respect.  Marshall believes that the phrasing is, at best, suspicious.  Hichborn doesn't and he cites some Byzantine liturgies as precedents for the phrase's use.

I tend to side with Marshall on this one.  Even if Hichborn is correct in believing the phrase has basis for usage, it doesn't explain the variance between the English and Italian translations.  "Queen" simply doesn't get translated into "earth".  If anything, "Queen of Heaven" should be rendered "Regina Cielo" or something to that effect.  Why the disparity in those two words?  Most other languages, by the way, have the "earth of heaven" phrase as well.  So again, why is the English have a phrase that is more compatible with traditional Catholicism?

Well, call me a cynic, but I believe that you are looking at one of those reasons.  Blogs and other media outlets such as this, many of them in English-speaking countries, are run by us "neo-palagian rigid trads" who have obnoxious habits of calling the shots as we see them and doing so loudly and often.  Perhaps the Vatican thought we'd be so ecstatic about the consecration occurring that they thought we wouldn't notice such teensy details.  But, as they say, the devil is in the details - perhaps literally.

At the end of the day, though, there is hope that the consecration was done properly - not assurance but hope.  Both of the men below agree that no matter what, we must still conduct ourselves according to the requests of Our Lady of Fatima.  That means praying the Rosary daily and wearing the brown scapular.  That means keeping the Five First Saturday devotions.  That means prayer and penance.  We are still in for some intense battles so stay close to Our Lord and Our Lady.

Confess Your Ecological Sins NOW, You Rigid Reprobates!!

Remember Father Lefty Goodvibes?  Yes, him!  That post was a satire that I posted to point out the absolute banality of the "lenten carbon fast" that was promulgated by Catholic Climate Covenant and other envirowhacko groups.  At the end of that post, I expressed my hope that it was only a parody.  Sadly it's closer to truth than fiction.

We are hearing from the Scam-azon Sin-Nod that we need to "recognize our ecological sins" and come to "ecological conversion".  Now I'm all for not wasting food, electricity and other resources and for properly disposing of garbage, but what these people are proposing is just more of earth worship pantheism.

Speaking of "ecological sin", just how did these "synod fathers" get to Rome from their various homes?  Did they trek across the European continent on foot or horseback?  Did the ones domiciled in other continents sail across the seas?  Please tell me that they didn't (gasp!) fly in planes, thus belching all that plane exhaust in the skies!  The scandal - making such huge carbon footprints!

Here's a novel concept for the ones who persist in this nonsense!  They can advocate for the ban of artificial contraception.  Evidence now exists that estrogen from the Pill is leaching into the waterways, affecting fish so that they cannot reproduce.  It's a win-win!  They can preach against actual mortal sin while satisfying their ecological pet peeves!  Think that will happen?  Neither do I, but I remain open to being pleasantly surprised!

Meanwhile, Father Goodvibes' confessional light is on!

Cardinal Wuerl Tries To Talk Up Pope Francis

A few days ago, the Jesuit heresy-rag known as America published an interview that they conducted with Cardinal Wuerl.  No one should be the least bit surprised that Wuerl would converse with them for they seem to be kindred spirits.  We read in this piece a number of stinkers plopped by His Eminence.

• He said the pope "is changing the papacy".  Uh-uh!  No can do!  This is an office created by Our Lord Himself.  The pope is the chief shepherd of the Church and he must see to the salvation of its members, guarding the Deposit of Faith.  Note: that verb is "guarding" not "changing".
• He also said the pope is "completely refocusing the role of bishop".  Don't you just adore the fact that no specifics are given regarding this "refocusing"?  What is meant by that?  Are we to be kept guessing?  I think that's the idea lest we take action to protect the office of bishop.
• He carried on about the pope restoring "the Vatican II themes of collegiality and synodality".  But as LifeSiteNews reminds us (and as I've written in the past), all that "collegiality and synodality" went out the window as Pope Francis and his cronies (Wuerl being one of them) ramrodded through the two reports from the synods of the family.
• Of Amoralis Lamentia, he said "It told us that we have to get back, as the council said, to a moral theology that rests on scripture and Jesus’ command to love and to the virtues that are the signs of a moral life, not the rigid following of the letter of the law."  Notice how the false dichotomy trick is being implemented here: that is, taking two aspects of Jesus' teachings and pretending that they're at odds with each other, usually done to vilify Catholics faithful to the doctrines of Our Lord Himself.  I for one remember Jesus saying in the Gospel of John "he who loves me obeys my commandments.  For all you faithful moral theologians out there: is not this juxtaposing of various words of Jesus against each other its own form of blasphemy, to insinuate that God contradicts Himself?

I could spend all night unpacking this mess but time forbids it.  Christopher Ferrara has an analysis of the mess.  I will conclude with this thought.  The cardinal said, "This Holy Father has recognized that marriage in the culture in which we live needs to be totally renewed. But you can’t do this without recognizing that this is a different moment in history to 25 years ago, and the people the church is talking to don’t understand the words the same way as we do."

NEWS FLASH!  Many people inside the Church - and in high places - are either ignorant of the Church's teachings or they hold them in utter contempt.  For example, Bishop Sorondo, at the Biological Extinction Conference, said, "Many times, we don’t know exactly what is the doctrine of the Church – we know some part but not all the doctrine of the Church about the question of the fecundity."  Mind you, this is a highly-placed bishop, the chancellor of two pontifical academies, blithely admitting ignorance of basic teachings that any Catholic school child of two generations ago would have learned before graduating.  And now I'll leave you with Gloria TV.

How Francis-Mercy Is Harming The Church

In a talk given to a meeting of Italian Catholics a few days ago, Pope Francis flat out said that the Church must submit itself to all sorts of "change".  All sorts?  Yes.  He opined that "our times require a deeply merciful Church that is unafraid of change".  What are the assumptions implicit in that statement?  They are:

• "Our times" are somehow different than all the other epochs in the thousands of years that human beings have walked the earth, despite the fact that our human natures remain the same.
• Implicit (maybe explicit) in this statement is an assumption that until now, the Church hasn't been "deeply merciful".  In fact, the Church has always been merciful, proclaiming the truths of God and being about the mission of "saving souls" via the Sacraments and teachings.  If the pope is truly concerned about getting back to mercy, perhaps he can recall the primary mission of the Church is to save souls from hell, not to be a front for "social justice", community organizing and environmentalism.
• That the Roman Catholic Church, although it is the Mystical Body of Christ and entrusted with the Teachings of Jesus Christ and His Sacraments has been deficient in "mercy" during its two-thousand years of existence.
• "Change" in the Church is somehow a pressing necessity in this era, although it seems the pope just can't bring himself to be specific about the "change" he thinks the Church needs.  Perhaps he just doesn't want to tip his hand.
• All change is good.  That sentiment is clearly indicated by lack of distinction between "good change" and "bad change" in his talk.  Whether or not the pope intended it, the "change" mantra seems reminiscent of the "hope and change" slogan utilized by Obama.

Here's a very telling and ominous statement from the pope:  "Before the problems of the church it is not useful to search for solutions in conservatism or fundamentalism, in the restoration of obsolete conduct and forms that no longer have the capacity of being significant culturally,  Christian doctrine is not a closed system incapable of generating questions, doubts, interrogatives -- but is alive, knows being unsettled, enlivened. It has a face that is not rigid, it has a body that moves and grows, it has a soft flesh: it is called Jesus Christ."

There's so much mess in here so let's take it from the top.  Notice the jabs at "conservatism and fundamentalism"?  Why didn't he also say that "it isn't useful to search for solutions in novelties that occur to progressive minds out of the blue"?  Sometimes what isn't said is just as indicative as what is said.  Couple this statement with the crack about "obsolete conduct and forms that no longer have the capacity of being significant culturally".  Who or what is the pope allowing to be the determinant of obsolescence and significance?  The truths of God, of Jesus Christ, are timeless as He is eternal.  They do NOT change!  If they appear to be at odds with the culture at large, it's because the culture itself requires change to be in conformity with the Word of God as represented by Catholic doctrine and teaching, not vice versa.  As Pope St John Paul II wrote in his book "Sign of Contradiction", the Church, as she obeys God, will often speak and act in ways not in accordance with the world's dictates.  We cannot try to be "significant" to a culture steeped in sin lest we entangle ourselves in that sin.  We are not to assume the "smell of the sheep" but rather to exude the odor of sanctity.

Unfortunately it seems that this false "Francis-mercy" is infecting too many churches.  I blogged a few days ago about Our Savior Parish in Manhattan hosting a hare krishna idolatry session in front of its altar.  We now have more startling details: one being that a Cardinal was in attendance.  In that link you will find a short video of the sacrilege.  And yes, it is sacrilege; some are of the belief that this Church will need to be reconsecrated to purify it of the effects of the idolatry.

Then in the Diocese of Buffalo, NY, the pastor saw fit to put a sign outside the Church of St Columba Brigid that said "Jesus had two dads and He turned out just fine".  No one can doubt what the pastor intended to convey.  Fortunately the bishop of that diocese intervened and ordered its removal.

The hare krishna thing was not the first act of idolatry permitted to occur in a Catholic Church.  I was just made aware of a video in which a muslim carries on in a Catholic Church.  The video did not identify the Church but the video makes plain that this is a Catholic Church.  I hope that since this incident occurred that the church was reconsecrated.  Below the video I'll have more commentary.



The Bellarmine Forum has a post that addresses these atrocities in light of Our Lady's apparitions in both Fatima and Akita.  There is no doubt that she has given us ample warning.  Sadly, it seems that the Church, as a whole, is still not listening.  I realize that what Our Lady is asking of us seem to no longer have the capacity of being significant culturally (where have we heard that before?), but so what?  Again, the world does not call our shots.  Our Lord does.  Despite the fact that the Vatican seems hell-bent on hindering us, we need to pray and proclaim the truth before it's too late.

Vocal Catholics Keep Eucharist From Being Treated Like Drive-Thru Hamburgers

Please be advised that the following video is not satire!



That's right!  Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament is being treated with all the dignity of a Happy Meal from the McDonald's drive-through. As we watch the people walk to their cars with their arms swinging in a normal gait, we know that Particles of the Host are flying everywhere from the wrappers.  By the way - did you hear any directions regarding the disposal of the wrappers - that probably containg pieces of the Host?  I didn't either.

Note: In the 0:07 mark, notice the drums to Father's right.  In most localities, singing is banned.  Perhaps that is a blessing in disguise for now the ears of the few Catholics who now attend Mass are not being assailed with all manners of ungodly racket.  Also at th 0:09 mark, take note of the lady in the pink sweater (bottom right of the screen) giving us all a demonstration as to why the masks accomplish the exact opposite of their touted purpose.  Just for fun, go to their website and look at all the laudible causes being pursued by their Justice Council. What's that?  Where's any mention of fighting abortion?  Oh, how..how.. rigid of you!  But I digress!

I understand that since this video from Complicit Clergy was released till now, that the uproar resulted in this debacle being canned.  That shows what can happen when we raise our voices and make these careless clergy uncomfortable in their sacrilege. Please advise via comments of any other such nonsense, providing corroborating links so that we can shine light on cockroaches.  Thank you.

The Best Defense Is A Good Offense

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

How else do you account for these gaffes?

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

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

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

The Guns Of Lori

Showcasing once again that the Catholic hierarchy in the USA is, by and large, at the beck and call of their socialist puppet masters and sugar daddies, the Archdiocese of Baltimore spearheaded a gun buy-back session in Baltimore.   What?  They should be about the salvation of souls?  How rigid of you!  Didn't you read what the occupant of Peter's chair said last week?  Why, priests aren't supposed to "dogmatize", didn't you know?

Here is the article from the Catholic Review.  By their own admission, most of the docile dupes are middle-aged.  They probably aren't inclined to engage in drive-by shootings, etc.  One deluded guy said he suffered gunshot wounds as a victim of a car-jacking, but now that he's in a "better area", he didn't need his gun anymore.  He gave it away with no compensation.  Now just think.  If he had a gun at the time of the car-jacking, would he have been shot?  What makes him think that his "better area" won't go to seed?

Speaking of car-jacking, here's an account of an incident in North Carolina.  One woman had some road-rage lunatic follow her into a parking lot.  He tried to force her car door open.  Fortunately she was armed and shot her would-be assailant to death.  I'm sure she would not have been inclined to fall for that gun buy-back codswallop, and probably will never be so stupid.

Both of these articles came to me by way of Canon212.com.  Both that webmaster and I wonder just where did the Archdiocese of Baltimore get that $50k to fund that gun buy-back nonsense?  Inquiring minds would like to know.

Malta - Lastest Skirmish In The War Against Truth

Two weeks ago I wondered aloud about the dictatorial streak that was being displayed as he began his meddling in the internal affairs of the Knights of Malta.  I had proposed earlier that he was emulating Juan Peron, the infamous dictator who ruled his own native Argentina with an iron fist.  It is now becoming evident that what was a minor "streak" is evolving into a full-blown modus operandi.  No one who is watching his growing encroachment into the governance of the Knights of Malta can pretend otherwise.

The Knights' Grand Master, Fra Matthew Festing, was compelled to resign his position (a life-time appointment, by the way) by Pope Francis.  Recall that the Festing presided over the ouster of Grand Chancellor, Albrecht von Boeselager when the latter was implicated in a scheme to use the KofM's charitable arm to distribute condoms.  The Lepanto Institute, headed by Michael Hichborn, produced evidence pointing to Boeselager's guilt.  Apparently the latter has friends in high Vatican places.   Because Festing resisted the pope's arm-twisting and attempts to meddle in the internal governance of a sovereign state, he was ousted and now some "delegate" will be at the KofM's helm.  The Vatican took umbrage that Boeselager's dismissal occurred without "dialogue", but then seems to have given the heave-ho to Festing without "dialogue"; go figure!

But the sordid tale gets worse.  After Festing was forced to resign, Boeselager was reinstated into his old position.  So the Catholic official who upheld the teachings of the Church was kicked to the curb by Pope Francis while the dissident enabler of anti-life activities was affirmed in his sin.  Life Site News also touched on this travesty.  Read the comments.  One reader asked a very astute question in reaction: "No truth anymore?"  To me, the question isn't merely rhetorical; rather it gets to the heart of a lot of the ills with this papacy.

Yesterday I wrote how Pope Francis obscured the concept of objective truth.  I believe that is a key theme to so much of his mischief, whether or not it is deliberate on his part.  He seems intent on denying the existence of objective truth.  Witness how he mocks Catholics who are faithful to the Church's timeless teachings as "rigid", "neo-palegian", etc.  With Amoralis Lamentia, we see the none-too-subtle exaltation of subjective "conscience" over the objective truths of God's revealed moral teachings.  Truth is timeless and eternal.  It is immutable.  But those who revel in sin wish to deny that, for truth demands accountability.  Eliminate truth, they reason, so that accountability is likewise quashed.  I link now to a post written by Billy Graham three years ago that touches on the topic of truth versus lie, good versus evil.

That is why five years ago Father Guarnizo was ejected from my parish.  He stood for truth against the politically correct gay agenda and the ever-pandering DC chancery.  That is why the pope continues his efforts to marginalize Cardinal Burke (and the other faithful prelates).  That is why Fra Festing was ejected from his leadership role, in favor of the unfaithful Boeselager.  Rorate Caeli's commentary raises the question of whether or not the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI was obtained in a similar manner.  That is a valid question.

We'll see more instances of truth being rejected for oh-so-enticing lies.  We need to keep praying, with Rosaries in hand.  We need to keep speaking out.

The Dubia Cardinals Should Have Dressed In Spiderman Outfits! Then The Pope Would Have Spoken With Them!

Super-hero gee-gaw!  That's what's needed these days for a papal interview!  Forget about tradition and the dignity inherent in the office of Christ's Vicar!  Why, that's so, so ... rigid and pelagian!

It figures after this encounter that the pope would crab at us bloggers who do try our level best to defend Holy Mother Church.  Perhaps that is a good sign, of us having a beneficial effect.

Is The Pope Trying To Get The Number Of Priestly Vocations To Tank?

When he makes statements like, “There are often young men who are psychologically unstable without knowing it and who look for strong structures to support them. For some it is the police or the army but for others it is the clergy,” and  “When a youngster is too rigid, too fundamentalist, I don’t feel confident (about him). Behind it there is something he himself does not understand. Keep your eyes open!”, what are we to glean from them?

Couple those statements with what is NOT said.  Notice that he voiced no concern for the seminarian who openly dissents from Church teaching regarding faith and morals, who is not devout, etc.  Then the meaning is all too clear.  Can all this give a clue as to why the pope and/or some in the Vatican obviously had an axe to grind against the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate?  Look at the video below.  Do they strike you as "neurotic"?  Under the previous two pontiffs, the number of vocations had been increasing.  Pray that good vocations aren't once again hindered as they were in the wake of Vatican II.