More On Father Rosica Spouting Dissident Quackery

There's a reason why Father Rosica has the long knives out for Vox Cantoris.  It can be summed up in a saying: cockroaches flee the light.  We Catholic bloggers are shining the light on those who dissent from the Teachings of Jesus Christ.  I am proud to consider Vox Cantoris as a colleague in the fight for timeless truth.  So why is Vox Cantoris targeted?  I believe it's because both Rosica and the Vox blogger are Canadians.  If you read the linked lawyer letter closely, you'll notice that the lawyers are also Canadians, and Canadian law is invoked therein.  Mind you, the Vatican, through Rosica, are making their proverbial "shot across the bow" at all of us, but they perceive legal vulnerability with Vox Cantoris.

Lots of us Catholic bloggers have weighed in on the matter; the Tenth Crusade published an anthology of our posts.  I refer you to Michael Hichborn's post in Lepanto.  Hichborn makes a number of interesting points.  I won't comment on them all but will take minor exception to one.  He notes the priest's role to be a victim (read the article for context on that), and Rosica's refusal to follow that precept in this situation.  I hold it would be logically impossible for Rosica to try to adopt a victim's stance in that manner, for to truly be a victim, one must be innocent.  As Hichborn and others so aptly demonstrate, Rosica is guilty of objective wrongs, both in the wrongs that Vox and others pointed out and in the conduct of the lawsuit itself.

Besides yesterday's post, I've a number of them that mention the problematic statements of Rosica, including him calling the Holy Family "irregular".  Today Michael Voris released a Vortex regarding Rosica, including an encounter he had with Rosica while he was in Rome covering the sin-nod last October.  With this encounter, Rosica made plain that his status as "dissenter" is well-earned.  See for yourselves now.  After you watch the video, you may wish to contact the Vatican as suggested by Les Femmes.  You may also wish to pop over to the Salt and Light site (of which Rosica is CEO) and voice your displeasure there; at the bottom of that page is his Twitter address.  Since he's obviously been on Twitter a lot, he'll certainly get your message there.

Vatican Spokesman Suing Faithful Catholic Blogger

My blogging colleague Vox Cantoris has been targeted by Father Thomas Rosica, Vatican spokesman.  Within the linked post you can see another link that is a pdf of the letter he received from Rosica's attorneys.  Take a look at it and you can see that Rosica doesn't like it when his public statements draw comments that aren't favorable to him.  The whole list of grievances reads like a big temper tantrum.

Here's a post from Vox that probably knotted his knickers.  Notice the picture of a tweet that Rosica sent.  A reasonable person might conclude that Rosica agreed with the depiction of Cardinal Burke as a "dissenter" (the word "dissenter" being redefined by Cardinal Wuerl).   Yoo, hoo!  Father Rosica!  Here's a fact that you'll do well to learn: when you make a public statement, you invite public comment!  If those comments are going to hurt your poor widdle feel-bads, you'd do best not to put them out there until you grow up a bit!

I'm also a bit bemused by what appears to be a double-standard being exercised by Rosica.  His lawyers are carrying on about "defamatory statements" and "damage to reputation".  Father Rosica (and lawyers), what about these statements that Rosica lodged against LifeSiteNews several years ago, voicing publicly his opinions that LifeSiteNews is:

• "not ethical"
• "not honest"
• "bombastic"
• "not credible"
• "doing the work of Satan"

So Rosica can voice his opinions against a faithful Catholic outlet, but let another Catholic outlet voice their opinions about his public conduct - and he tries to break out the long knives?  I fail to see how this is proper conduct for a person involved in the media, let alone a Catholic priest.

In that incident with LifeSiteNews, Rosica trash-talked LSN in the same breath that he used to call for "civility, charity, kindness and humanity".  I now believe that was a tactic to try to stifle LSN.  That didn't work so now he's going the legal route.  That won't work, either.  We will speak the truth.

Today's Vortex deals with this matter.  Here it is.

The Church Of Nice Is The Real Cesspool Of Hatred

We haven't had much from the #Rosicagate Department lately, but today Father Thomas Rosica has again made a fool of himself.  First, check out this anthology of articles regarding Father Rosica and the animosity that he obviously harbors to those telling the truth regarding his progressive shenanigans.  His vituperation inspired him to file lawsuit against Vox Cantoris, if you'll recall; the Vatican, embarrassed by his obvious tempter tantrum, ordered him to drop it and save what remained of his face.

Well, judging from this piece that appears on the Crud site, Rosica still has plenty of axes to grind against us Catholic bloggers.  In his rather questionable judgment, we are "creating cesspools of hatred".  Then he goes on to spout vitriolic descriptions of us being:

• "obsessed, scrupulous"
• "disturbed, broken, angry individuals"
• "trolling pontiffs, holy executioners"

Coming from him, these choice descriptions are badges of honor!  But seriously; he sputters like that, and then has the audacity to accuse us of creating "cesspools of hatred"?  At best, I think we have a case of "pot calling kettle black".  What's really happening is that we bloggers are not allowing him and his compatriots to have a monopoly on social media and we aren't allowing them to dictate the terms and conditions of public discourse.  We can and will call out their dissidence, blasphemies and heresies.  I highly suspect that motivated his tirade in Crud and possibly goaded him into trying to sue Vox Cantoris.

By the way - Rosica still occupies his position in the Vatican.  I suspect his employment there does not so much continue in spite of his hatred for faithful Catholic media but because of it.  Given what we've seen from the Vatican - and the pope - over these past few months, I think my suspicions have valid basis.

Another way to put this situation is that those of Rosica's ilk resent us combating their "church of nice" instead of following their lead like sheeple.  Read what Michael Voris has to say about how the "church of nice" is the antithesis of true charity.  Father Rosica inadvertently illustrates that fact with his screed in Crud.  Did you notice, as you read Rosica's words, that he didn't offer one objective rebuttal to anything we've broached over the years?  He cannot for his "church of nice" isn't at all interested in objective truth, and in the God reflected in that truth.

We must continue to pray for those seduced by the "church of nice".  We will also continue to speak the truth.

A Prince Of Peace Is Coming To Town??!!?

That's what Father Rosica said of Pope Francis' visit to the DC area.  In this clip you'll see both Rosica and Cardinal Wuerl being interviewed on Fox News Sunday (ht Pewsitter).  The commentator is questioning Rosica and Wuerl about US Rep Paul Gosar's announcement of his boycott of the Pope's planned address to Congress.  Both clerics poo-poo the idea that the Pope will be promoting any kind of political agenda, let alone a leftist one (although Wuerl admits to political "ramifications").  When asked if the Pope will broach religious freedom, contraception, etc when he meets with Obama, Rosica emphatically answers "no" (at the 3:40 mark).  Then at the 5:00 mark we hear Fr Rosica call the pope a "prince of peace".  There is so much to unpack I almost don't know where to begin.

Let's start with this "prince of peace" crack.  In all of Scripture and Tradition, only One Person has ever been identified as "prince of peace" and that is Jesus Christ.  No one has dared called another person - even a previous pontiff - as "prince of peace".  That is a title that has always been reserved for Our Lord and Him alone.  Is there some attempt at deification here?

Now as far as lack of political agenda goes, that too is stuff and nonsense.  Does anyone doubt that Laudato Si will not at least be mentioned?  That thing itself is chock-full of leftwing envirowhacko socialistic screed.  Rep Gosar is correct. Read this Breitbart article (and associated links) for his level-headed, truly Catholic thinking.  I commend him for his boycott and hope he's not alone in his principled stance.

In the video that I'll post below, Judge Andrew Napolitano is being interviewed about the Pope's trip.  Identifying himself as a traditional Catholic, he opines that Pope Francis is a "challenge and an obstacle" to traditional Catholics.  Napolitano succinctly states why it is simply wrong for the pope to lend the solemn dignity of his role as Vicar of Christ to his mere personal opinions.

I'll also link to an article written by Michelle Malkin (another Catholic) as she explores the ramifications of apparent papal disdain for air conditioners.  She's correct about all these folks bemoaning "carbon footprints" from their air-conditioned offices or their private jets.  Napolitano mentioned that the pope is charged with teaching on faith and morals.  We'd all be much better off if he paid attention to that mandate.  He is Christ's Vicar, not a rival "prince of peace".

From The #Rosicagate Department - Father Rosica Interviews Bernie Sanders

Highly-placed Father Thomas Rosica is once again making news for all the wrong reasons.  Vox Cantoris reveals that Rosica, on his Salt and Light network, interviewed Bernie Sanders, Democratic candidate for the US presidency.

In his post, Vox mentioned that Sanders dabbled in porn writing.  I googled that and sure enough, he did precisely that in the 1970s.  I wonder if that topic was broached in the Rosica interview?  Has anyone seen or heard of this as Sanders conducts his campaign?  Probably not and I take a dim view of that omission.

Ladies and gentlemen, our governmental system is that of a constitutional republic bound by rule of law.  That said, the moral character of our elected officials really matters.  We elect human beings, with their own sets of principles and convictions.  It behooves us to know whom we are electing to high office.  If Sanders' porn dalliance matters little to the voters, that says more about the voters than it does Sanders.

Getting back to Rosica himself, do you think he'll be interviewing the other US candidates?  Me neither!

From The #Rosicagate Department - The Underlying Madness

Note before we begin.  Yes, we have both a new "department" and hashtag here.  I will be using them and invite others to do the same as new developments will undoubtedly unfold.

The Lepanto post linked to an address given by, and an article by Fr. Rosica.  They are fascinating for they reveal the true dissident mindset of this Vatican official.

First, let's look at an address that Rosica gave at Loyola University in Baltimore.  The Catholic Review published a transcript of that.  Please read it on their site.  I'll highlight some rather revealing snippets from that.  I'll do that "bullet style".

• Speaking of Pope Francis' election to the papacy he asks "How can we describe the sense of springtime that has come upon the church?"  What??!!?  This is rather revealing of his attitude towards Pope Benedict XVI and perhaps toward Pope St John Paul II.  Further talk of "revolution of tenderness" underscores this point.
• He writes "He has declared that the church’s main mission would no longer be as a lead combatant in the culture wars."  Let's clarify terms, shall we?  By "culture wars" we are talking about the core spirituality and morality that define western civilization.  Western civilization is being threatened with the acceptance of abortion, homosexual lifestyles, contraception, euthanasia.  Additionally, western civilization is unraveling because of an abandonment, if not outright rejection, of its Christian heritage and history.  Part and parcel of the Church's primary mission - to save souls - is to combat the moral rot that will lead to the damnation of souls.  As the Church established by Jesus Christ Himself, it is only fitting that the Church retains and even expands its leadership role in the "culture wars".
• He asked and answered a question: "What is the most important achievement of Pope Francis?  He has rebranded Catholicism and the papacy."  Well, he certainly has done that to the latter; but why should that be considered an "accomplishment"?  The papacy is 2000 years old, established by Jesus Christ Himself.  What?  Did Our Lord not do a good enough job of "branding the papacy"?
• In short, Rosica has shown his disdain for the history and traditions of the Church by portraying the Pope as some avant-garde person who will attempt to set the Church on a new course.  While his portrayal of the pope's intents may well be correct, his enthusiasm over the de facto mutation of the papacy is nonetheless regrettable.

This next article he wrote on the occasion of Ted Kennedy's very public funeral.  In it he excoriates those of us who protested the laudatory accolades afforded to someone who used his position to foment the murders of millions of tiny children in their mothers' wombs.  I won't pick apart his numerous logical fallacies regarding the funeral per se, nor even of his disparagement of concerned pro-life blogs.  I do want to point out some odd contrasts between what he wrote in this article and his actions against Vox Cantoris.  

• He says the writings of pro-life bloggers reveal "a new form of self-righteousness, condemnation and gnosticism reveals authors who behave as little children bullying one another around in schoolyards- casting stones, calling names, and wreaking havoc in the Church today!"  Speaking of "bullying" and "wreaking havoc", how may we characterize his legal threats against a Catholic blogger?
• He writes "What such people fail to realize is that their messages are ultimately screamed into a vacuum. No one but their own loud crowd is really listening."  Well, that's not true and he knows it.  Else, why is he attempting to sue Vox Cantoris into silence - and to intimidate the rest of us?

I refer you to the Lepanto post for more ironies and contradictions evident between Rosica's lofty words and his despicable actions towards Vox Cantoris.  I publicly call upon the Vatican to rein in Father Rosica as his actions are besmirching their appearance before the eyes of the world.

Father Spadaro Points Long Knives At Raymond Arroyo - Call Him Out On It

It was almost exactly three years ago when Father Thomas Rosica, a highly-placed Vatican official, threatened to sue the blogger behind Vox Cantoris (see right side-bar).  The latter had commented on public comments made by Rosica that betrayed Rosica's dissident perspectives on matters of Catholic doctrine.  Other faithful Catholic bloggers shone the light on Rosica's despicable attempts and he was forced to stand down lest he make the Vatican appear to be a bunch of vindictive fools.

Well, maybe it isn't just a matter of appearances at the Vatican and perhaps they failed to learn their lessons.  It appears that Father Antonio Spadaro has drawn his long knives and is pointing them directly at Raymond Arroyo of EWTN.  LifeSiteNews shows where Spadaro retweeted a call for EWTN to be put under interdict if they don't fire Arroyo.

I could be wrong, but I don't believe an interdict can be placed on any group of Catholics because of some willy-nilly whim.  Certain conditions must be present, one of them being the commission of a gravely immoral act.  No one in their right minds can pretend that the discussions in which Arroyo is participating constitute gravely immoral acts.  Perhaps the dissident lay Catholic who originally tweeted that nonsense doesn't know that (and maybe doesn't care), but certainly Spadaro should know better than that.  Like Father Rosica did three years ago, Spadaro is making himself appear to be the vindictive fool, resenting the light that is being shone on his misdeeds - not to mention ignorance of canon law.  But perhaps we're not talking merely of "appearance", but "fact".

As we did for Vox Cantoris three years ago, so again must we do for Raymond Arroyo.

Rosica And Papolatry

Almost two weeks ago, Zenit published a piece by Father Thomas Rosica entitled "The Ignatian Qualities Of The Petrine Ministry Of Pope Francis".  For all his many faults, and they do abound in excess, he certainly seems to be accurate in stating the underpinnings of Pope Francis' thinking.  Of course he enthuses about the pope's progressivism, but they do seem to be peas of the same pod.

This most revelatory gem occurred towards the end: "Pope Francis breaks Catholic traditions whenever he wants, because he is free from disordered attachments. Our Church has indeed entered a new phase: with the advent of this first Jesuit pope, it is openly ruled by an individual rather than by the authority of Scripture alone or even its own dictates of tradition plus Scripture."

"Whenever he wants"?  That is a mark of a tin horn dictator, not the "Servant of the Servants of God".   Then he says that the Church is ruled by an individual rather than the authority of Scripture and Tradition.  Well, so much for all that "collegiality" talk!  Sure sounds like papolatry to me!

Rosica also agrees that the pope doesn't care one whit about defending and promulgating Church teaching and Tradition.  In fact, Tradition stems from God Himself, so does that mean that the pope might actually be setting himself before God?  For an excellent treatment of this problem, we are grateful for Pope St Pius X and his encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis.  The current pontiff would do well to read it - if he hasn't already done so and scoffed.

Rosica's piece was published before he and Cdl Wuerl engaged in their mutual-admiration gabfest.  I've no reason to doubt that the Cardinal saw it and had not one objection.

Progressive Vatican Hyenas Frothing At The Mouth

One such critter is Father James Martin, author of the misnamed "Building Bridges".  That screed is nothing more than a lame attempt to normalize the mortal sin of homosexual perversion.  Happily Father Martin has been and is being rebuked by fellow clergy.  Cardinal Robert Sarah, in a piece published in the Wall Street Journal, reminded him that "those who speak on behalf of the Church must be faithful to the unchanging teachings of Christ"  (italics mine).

Pssst!  Father Martin!  The Catholic Church has always had the best bridge for those living in perversion to come back to the Church!  It's called the Sacrament of Confession!  You cannot improve on that!

Archbishop Chaput spoke similar words in his regular column in the newspaper of the Philadelphia archdiocese.  In that column Chaput reminds Martin (and all of us) that "the church is not simply about unity - as valuable as that is - but about unity in God's love rooted in truth."

The archbishop's words were enough to arouse the ire of Father Thomas Rosica.  It doesn't take too much to get his dander up. I could spend an hour unpacking the errors in this latest of Rosica's rants, but I don't want him monopolizing my time.  You might recall that Father Rosica actually attempted to sue one of my blogging colleagues at Vox Cantoris for calling him out on various heresies; his Vatican superiors put the kibosh on that stunt.  However, Rosica, in that column, took the occasion to lambast faithful Catholic bloggers as "the dark, dysfunctional side of the Catholic blogosphere...erecting high, impenetrable walls and noisy echo chambers of monologue.”  With respect to his badmouthing of us bloggers, maybe someone should remind him that "to use clerical status, episcopal authority, or other forms of leadership to dismiss, disparage or slam the efforts of those who simply want to reach those on the peripheries is not befitting of shepherds, pastors or servants of the Lord. It has nothing to do with the Gospel! It is not who we are!"  Now who originally uttered those words??  Hmm...!

Professor Josef Seifert is another faithful Catholic who has taken issue with Amoralis Lamentia.  I related a few days ago how he (and many others) were expelled from the Pontifical Council for Life to make room for dissenters.  We now learn that he was fired from his position at the International Academy of Philosophy in Granada by the local Archbishop Martinez Fernandez.  Seifert rightly pointed out that if unrepentant adulterers and sodomites were seen as justified, then the same could happen for anyone else embroiled in any intrinsic moral evil.  He called AL a "theological atomic bomb".  That was enough to get him sacked.  I suspect that if Seifert advocated for more perversion, he might have been offered tenure.

Moral of the story?  When one advocates for rank disobedience to God's moral laws, today's Vatican rewards them with prominent positions.  When one defends the timeless teachings of Jesus Christ, the current hierarchy, headed by Pope Francis, plunges the long knives in their back. The persecution is real and is becoming ever more stark; be watchful and praying.

Time For A Ma$$ive Ma$$ive Cri$i$ In ADW Coffers!

The Knights of Columbus held their Supreme Convention in Baltimore a few days ago.  In attendance were Cardinal Wuerl and Father Thomas Rosica.  Rosica interviewed Wuerl, probably as part of his coverage for his "Salt and Light" thing.  You can put both their names in the search box at the top left to understand why this interview is a huge joke.  No one with two brain cells firing in syncopation could possibly take this seriously.  When Wuerl congratulates Rosica for his "fine work", did he have in mind Rosica's attempt to sue the blogger behind Vox Cantoris?

At 6.35 Wuerl glibly distorts the Fifth Commandment and the Church's Traditional support of the death penalty.  He says that (sit down!), the state's usage of armies and death penalty are exceptions to the Fifth Commandment.  No, Your Eminence!  The Fifth Commandment prohibits murder - that is, the deliberate killing of innocent human beings.  The usage of armies and the death penalty were - and are - never proscribed by the Fifth Commandment!  A few minutes later, he says, that "we don't have to do that anymore, we can put them in jail".  But wait a minute!  Pope Francis has also bad-mouthed life imprisonment, calling it "torture".  Here we have a prime example of the progressives collectively talking out of both sides of their mouths.

Here is the interview.



Did you catch, at 3:11, when Wuerl says "I don't think this is some massive, massive crisis".  He's speaking of the bishop sex abuse scandal.  Oh really, Your Eminence?  Try saying that to the men who have left the priesthood and even the Faith after they were abused and subsequently dismissed!  Try saying that to the parents of the shattered young men!

Well, what might he think is a "massive, massive crisis"?  Yes!  The shrinkage of archdiocesan bank accounts!  Perhaps if we give him that ma$$ive cri$i$, maybe then he and his ilk will understand that we are going to clean house!

Any parishioners of St John Neumann who are reading this, please boycott the CCHD collection this weekend.  For your envelopes, you may wish to use the stuffer at the bottom or make up your own note.  Let's give them a "ma$$ive, ma$$ive cri$i$" in their wallets!

From The #Rosicagate And Maturation Departments: More Food For Thought

Father Timothy Scott, a Basilian priest in Canada and former spokesman for that order, tweeted an obscene acronym to Cardinal Burke.  After well-deserved outcry from Catholics everywhere, Scott took down the tweet and issued an apology (of sorts) to the cardinal and Catholics in general.

Most people will recall that Father Thomas Rosica is also a Basilian priest with strong Canadian ties (namely his Salt and Light broadcast venture).  Like Michael Voris and so many others, I see a strong correlation between Scott's tweet and Rosica's legal action against Vox Cantoris.

Michael Voris produced a Vortex today that asks many relevant questions regarding these two.  The timing  of these is no accident, as Voris points out.  I'll go a few steps further than Voris and postulate that these actions are part and parcel of the "maturation" that the pope wants us to undergo to soften us for the deluge of heresy that will probably pour forth from next October's sin-nod.  As an aside, I too look askance upon all this legal expense being incurred by Rosica.  Where is this "poor humble church" about which the pope waxes so eloquent?

It is clear from the Vortex that it was created before the news broke that Scott has been removed as spokesman for the Basilians.  Will he also be removed from the Canadian Bishops' Conference?  We might also ask if Rosica will keep his job at the Vatican.  If he does, I believe that will be quite indicative of the mindset of Father Lombardi and perhaps the pope himself.

Rep Gosar Was Wise To Boycott Today's Congressional Debacle

Representative Paul Gosar was wise to boycott the pope's address to the joint session of Congress today for it was a bit of an embarrassment.  This LifeSiteNews article has the full text of the thing.  I'll be focusing on some highlights - or lowlights.  Consider, for a little perspective, that the Senate just failed to defund Planned Parenthood: this in the wake of the evidence of their selling of the bodies of babies whom they routinely murder in the dungeons the laughingly refer to as clinics.

Early in his talk he mentions four Americans, holding them up for honor.  They are: Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Dorothy Day and Thomas Merton.  It's probably a good thing that today's Congress is GOP-controlled, for he did mention the nation's first Republican president.  Guess who else was Republican?  Martin Luther King!  Yes, he was a Republican.  He was also pro-life.  For that matter, his protege Jesse Jackson was also pro-life early in his career.  Read his defense of life written in 1977 - before he hankered after the Democratic presidential nomination and turned his back on his principles and the babies.  But I digress.

The inclusion of Thomas Merton is most questionable.  Of Merton, the pope says "he remains a source of spiritual inspiration and a guide for many people" and "a thinker who challenged the certitudes of his time and opened new horizons for souls"  REALLY???

Take a moment to examine Merton's life and his dalliance with Zen Buddhism.  Catholic Answers has a fairly comprehensive biography of him, detailing how he became seduced by Buddhism.  Merton told a friend shortly before his death that "Zen and Christianity are the future".  In that article, you'll notice that Pope Benedict XVI took a dim view of Merton and Buddhism,  going so far as to opine that Buddhism would replace Marxism as Catholicism's chief antagonist.  So why did the pope hold up as a model a de facto heretic?  In light of what was just said, it's worth noting that not once did the pope mention the name "Jesus Christ".  Why not?  He's the Vicar of Christ, is he not?  Unlike what Father Rosica said a few days ago, he himself is not a "prince of peace".  Some believe that Rosica just made a slip of the tongue when he plopped that blasphemy; I think it quite possible that Rosica knew very well what he was saying.

As for Dorothy Day, while undergoing a real conversion to Catholicism, she remained confused about a great many things.  To her credit she did make a request: "Don't call me a saint". (ht: St Corbinian's Bear).

The pope addresses many issues: death penalty, climate change, immigration, arms trade, redistribution of wealth.  What's missing from that list?  The legalized murder of babies known as abortion.  To put things in context, let's think about the conduct of this papal address at Congress today.  It took me a good 20-25 minutes to read through it silently.  It would probably take longer to speak it.  It would probably have taken the pope a bit longer than that since he's not fluent in English.  An then there's the breaks for applause, etc.  I would guess from start to finish the entire address took about 45 minutes or so.  If anyone has more precise data please advise via comments.  Now consider some statistics that indicate that a baby is aborted in this country every 20 seconds.  That means 3 babies are murdered every minute.  Therefore while the pope spoke, over 200 babies were slaughtered.  What of the death penalty?  Less than 100 have been executed in the past several years.  So why did the death penalty garner so much attention, while whole-scale baby-murder didn't rate one mention by the pope?

Some additional thoughts can be found at One Peter Five and Les Femmes.  Soon the pope will head to Philadelphia and the World Meeting of Families.  If these past few speeches of the pope are any indication of what may be on the horizon, dark days are ahead.

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.

Catholic Freedom Of The Press

Yesterday's Vortex speaks to several things.  Voris addressed the "good old boy" network in the Catholic hierarchy as they try to undermine Holy Mother Church under a cloud of secrecy.  He's also addressing the existence of those of us faithful Catholics who simply won't allow these progressive lemmings to get away with that status quo any longer.  This blog was started for these very reasons as they exist in the Archdiocese of Washington.  In his words, "the Catholic free press has finally arrived and is ready to get down to business."

That last truth is what causes the Catholic progressives to gnash their teeth.  I've no doubt that the attack on Vox Cantoris by Father Rosica is part and parcel of a campaign to derail us.  Of course they'd like that accomplished well before "Sin-Nod 2" next October.  Father Rosica et al, that ain't happening!

#RosicaFactor - Another Wayward Priest Threatens To Sue A Blogger

A British blogger, who writes the http://faithinourfamilies.com/ blog, is being sued by the associate priest in her parish.  Father Dan Fitzpatrick of the Durham Martyrs Church insists on referring to the Holy Spirit as female and the blogger rightly rebuked him.  See Father's twitter page and you'll see this (before it's taken down).

That's not Church teaching as handed down through the Apostles, who would have first-hand knowledge of Jesus' meeting.  A look at Ms. Short's blog indicates the despicable conduct of Father Fitzpatrick as he is rebuked.  He threatens suit, then claims that Ms. Rock pulled down her post when she did nothing of the sort. I suppose he was simply looking to back down from his suit threat and save face in the process.

A facebook friend coined the term "Rosica Factor" to describe this action; here is her blog post, on Keeping It Catholic.  This hearkens back to the episode several months ago when Vatican official threatened to sue the blogger behind Vox Cantoris.  Wind of it got into the internet and the suit blew up on Rosica's face.  We can make this happen again.  I see a post on this matter is already up on the Vox Cantoris blog.

The Church is Durham Martyrs Church.  Here is their contact page.  From the parish site, I gather that they're in the Dioces of Hexham and Newcastle, led by Bishop Seamus Cunningham.  Phone numbers are here, as well as facebook and twitter links.  Try them all.  If any from the North American continent calls, keep in mind that England's time is 5 hours ahead of the US east coast.

As we stood with Vox Cantoris, let us stand with  Faith In Our Families.  I will tweet this, using the hashtag, #RosicaFactor.

Pope Francis Accepts Wuerl's Resignation As DC Archbishop

I certainly was delighted to see that news this morning.  By the way - isn't it just the strangest of coincidences that news like this often breaks on Fridays?  It's like some people hope that the weekend will help dissipate interest in the topic at large, right?  But I digress.

But as I pondered the pope's request that Wuerl remain as an interim administrator in DC until a successor is named and installed, my jubilation was tempered somewhat.  Just how long will this selection process take?  Is this "resignation acceptance" thing just a ploy to allow Wuerl to retain all his authority and influence while pretending that he really isn't doing that?  Speaking of authority, Wuerl will still retain his position at the College for Bishops.  I'd also be willing to bet that he'll have significant input, if not sole discretion, in the selection of his successor.

The CM link has the full text of the pope's letter in which he accepts Wuerl's resignation.  As you read it, please have some peptol bismol at the ready and try not to punch your computer screens.  His praise of Wuerl is over the top, yapping and yammering about his "heart of the shepherd" and "nobility".  Oh, puleeze!  Get real!  Oh, wait a minute!  What can we expect? In many ways the pope and Wuerl are two peas from the same pod.

Another pea from that same pod is Father Rosica - yes, this one!  After the news broke, he let loose with a tweet praising Wuerl, saying "he touched us".  One might wonder just where was he touched?  Given the fact that Wuerl is suffering the just desserts of having covered for McCarrick and other predators, we can only state that Rosica's choice of words was oafish and boorish at best.  Or perhaps it was quite the Freudian slip.

Catholics in the DC archdiocese, please be alert as to how this news is handled at Mass this Sunday.  Share your reactions in the comment boxes if you'd like.  We will all keep praying our Rosaries, as many more clerical dissidents and predators need to be removed.

News Flash! Father Rosica Has Been Healed!

Towards the end of this tome, Father Rosica said that the visit of Pope Francis to the United States caused him to be healed!  Healed of what, dare we ask?  There are several possible maladies that come to mind.

• Perhaps he's been healed of the regrettable (and petulant) tendency to try to sue Catholic bloggers who call his words and behaviors into question.
• Or maybe it's his view of the Holy Family - recall that he called them "irregular".
• Confusing faithful Catholics with the taliban
• His adulation of pope Francis, going so far as to call him "prince of peace" - a title reserved to Jesus Christ Himself

Well, here's hoping and praying that a miracle did indeed occur.  If not, though, I'll not be too surprised.

SinNod's Interim Report And Its Shady Circumstances

Today's Vortex Report from Rome is aptly entitled "Document-Gate".  Voris reiterates some facts abut the document.  I'll interject my own comments.

• It was released to the press before most of the bishops at the SinNod received a copy.  I think it's worth noting, too, that the publication of the document on the Vatican website coincided with the release to the press.  Whoever (probably several people) released it to the press had some collusion with those who published it on the Vatican site.
• According to Cardinal Napier, topics in the document were hardly discussed at all during the SinNod proceedings.  Who inserted them?  Was that the work of the six additional committee members hand-picked by the Pope?  Father Zuhlsdorf has an account of behind-the-scenes occurrences at the SinNod.
• Paragraphs 50-53, those that openly condone sodomy, seem to be the handiwork of Archbishop Bruno Forte.  By the way - Father Paul Check, international director of Courage, made known his disapproval, citing concerns for those struggling homosexuals whom Courage tries to assist as they live according to Church teaching.
• At 6:11, Voris asked who collected the information, who wrote the document, who published the document, who distributed the document to journalists before the bishops saw it.  I think we can safely hypothesize that those six prelates (including Cardinal Wuerl), handpicked by the Pope, facilitated that process.  As far as I'm concerned, this has papal paw prints all over it.  Voris mentions that Vatican official Father Federico Lombardi and Father Thomas Rosica stonewalled him when he asked his questions.  Father Lombardi is director of the Vatican Press Office.  It is on the site of that office that the document appeared when first released to the press.  Father Rosica is also with that office.
• Voris asks was the leak planned, with the hopes that the secular media would react as it did?  We know the key players enough to opine "yes".
• He makes the excellent point that those who insist that "this is only a working document", "don't worry, be happy" crowd are engaging in dangerous and dare I say ungodly naivete.

Voris reminded us that Cardinal Burke has publicly called upon the pope to publicly proclaim that no teaching will change.  Cardinal Pell now echoes the same call.  As of the time of this writing, I've heard no word that the Pope has issued any such declarative statement.  Will he?

Of New Things And Surprises And Diabolical Subtleties

A little note before I begin this post.  I will be expounding on these rather bizarre statements from the Pope, understanding of course that they are not spoken ex cathedra.  However, because there are some good-hearted people who think that every word he utters is a prophetic declaration or that it's just wonderful when he dons a clown nose for a silly selfie, there needs to be some input that is not derived from the "three monkeys" approach.  I'm pleased to note that many of my fellow bloggers seem similarly persuaded.  In fact, I shall be linking to them (as I often do).

Within the past several weeks Pope Francis has said some things that are perilously close to being logically, philosophically and theologically impossible.  These anomalies of thinking seem to be shared by prelates such as Cardinal Kasper, and their stench emanated from the SinNod.

On October 13, the Catholic Herald (UK) reported on the Pope's homily.  In that, he reportedly stated that "if laws do not lead people to Jesus they are obsolete".  It's obvious that he is confusing God's law with Pharisaical customs, for there is nothing inherently evil about eating with sinners (we all are sinners).  Why that distinction was not drawn is not so much careless, but now in light of the SinNod, somewhat suspect.  God's laws will never be obsolete.  They are His word, and as God Himself is eternal, so are His laws as they reflect His eternal will.

We certainly did see an attempt during the SinNod to question the eternity and relevance of God's laws, especially with the indissolubility of marriage and the gravity of the sins of sacrilegious Holy Communion and sodomy.  They are contained in those three paragraphs that should have been removed but in reality they still remain part of the report despite the votes of the prelates in attendance.

Regarding the fallacy of the law "not leading people to Jesus", recall that it's God's law that is indispensable to our discernment of Jesus in our lives and Church as opposed to some counterfeit.  Let's look at that statement again, rephrasing it ever so slightly.  "If laws do not lead people to Jesus, it's because that pseudo-lovely image of Jesus is a counterfeit.  God's authentic laws will never lead to anyone but Jesus."  With all due respect, I think this statement to be tad more accurate than the former.

In that article, we also heard about this "god of surprises", and he has been throwing that phrase at us ever since.  You'll notice that I did not capitalize that "g".  "God of surprises" is not a phrase that I've ever seen in the Scriptures nor in any other Church documents (I suppose that omission renders them "obsolete"?).  What is with this fetish about "being surprised"?  In the various contexts in which this phrase is bandied about (including the closing address of the SinNod), I suspect this "god of surprises" is not much more than a pagan idol designed to lure the naive into abandoning the One True Faith.

Let me share a particularly blasphemous manifestation of this "god of surprises", with thanks to Vox Cantoris.  Father Thomas Rosica, official of the Vatican Press Office and player in the SinNod, tried his best to make those in irregular marriages (that is, adultery) seem legitimate by opining that the Holy Family was "irregular"!  To suggest any hint of sin about the Holy Family is both intellectually insulting and blasphemous.  Is it, as the blogger suggests, part of the campaign for us to "mature", as said Pope Francis in his closing address?  Most likely so.  In saner times, Father Rosica would have been disciplined if not defrocked.  Now he'll probably be rewarded.

During the Mass during which Pope Paul VI was beatified, Pope Francis said repeatedly that "God is not afraid of new things".  There is truth to that statement - for several good reasons.  First, we read in Ecclesiastes 1:9-10 that "there is nothing new under the sun".  God is eternal.  His Word and Law is eternal.  Furthermore, we know that all public revelation has occurred and ended with the death of the last Apostle (John).  If there is any new "dogma" or tweaking of settled Church teaching, the impetus of such is utter foolishness at best and diabolical at worst.  Of course God can overcome all such duplicity; we weak humans need to exercise prudence and discernment.  Those two qualities must not be confused with fear and suggestions for such confusion must be rejected.

Let's face it.  This talk of "god of surprises" and "new things" is progressive manipulation of words to manipulate the Catholics into questioning the Magisterium and the teachings of Jesus Christ Himself, this time in regards to divorced/remarried Catholics and those embracing the sin of sodomy.  Even now they are preparing in earnest for next year's ordinary synod, where they hope that they will be more successful in undermining the Faith.

#Rosicagate - Vortex Reveals More Of Fr Rosica's Chequered Past

How this man was ever ordained, let alone promoted to his current post, will remain a mystery to me.