Saturday, December 31, 2016

FWIW - Thoughts On 2016 And 2017

In a few hours 2016 will end and 2017 will begin.  On a personal note 2016 has been somewhat difficult owing to two family deaths, one of them immediate.   With regards to Catholic and national life, it's a mixed bag from my perspective.

Of course Our Lord has promised that the gates of hell will never prevail against the Church.  But think about the words of that promise, for Our Lord chooses His words precisely and words have precise meanings.  When we talk about the gates of any institution not prevailing, doesn't that refer to that institution being under seige?  In this case, wouldn't the Church then be the attacking army?  Let's be very blunt about this, shall we?  At this time, the Church is taking no proactive stand against any real evil whatsoever.  I'm speaking primarily of the institutional Church, starting with Pope Francis himself for he constantly displays his divergence from the true mission of the Church to save souls.  Instead of having the salvation of souls and fidelity to the magisterium at the forefront of its actions and very existence, the institutional church, under the deliberate impetus from this pope, not only cowers before the gates of hell but in some cases (Amoris Laetitia being only the latest example) seems to be reinforcing the gates of hell.

There are pockets of faithful Catholics who are striving to keep the faith alive.  By God's grace we are finding each other and are learning to work together to counteract at least some of the mischief that emanates from the Vatican.  Within the past few weeks four faithful prelates promulgated the dubia to correct errors being caused by Amoris Laetitia, and more are rallying with them.   Unless the pope issues an appropriate response to the dubia, a formal correction to the errors of Amoris Laetitia will be issued.  In that we rejoice and pray for while correction seems to be forthcoming, it won't come without considerable angst.  In the meantime we bloggers will keep writing in the hopes of waking up fellow Catholics.  In the midst of this travail, I'm stunned by how many Catholics are oblivious to the sorry state of the Church at large.  While some of the blame can be laid at the feet of the official Catholic news outlets, the great bulk of it lies with the Catholics in the pews themselves.  Most have internet access.  With real information just a few mouse clicks away, there's simply no excuse for ignorance.

On the national front, 2017 promises to be much better than the past eight years.  During the first few days of November there was much apprehension regarding the real possibility of a Hillary presidency.  Many prayers, many rosaries were offered for the outcome of the election.  God displayed His mercy in sparing us the scourge of four more years of a quasi-socialistic dictatorship.  That's not to say that Trump will be perfect, but let's face it; Bozo the Clown would have been preferred over Hillary.  Trump's election is not so much a cure as it is a reprieve.  We now have some breathing room, some time, in which to work.  We must pray, fast, work, educate our fellow Americans regarding our heritage.  Catholics in particular must work to learn the Faith ourselves and to bring Christ's teachings into the public square.

2017 can be an opportunity to bring western civilization back from the precipace.  The question now is whether or not we will avail ourselves properly of that opportunity or squander it.

Wednesday, December 28, 2016

In The Wake Of Celebrity Deaths, Some Catholics Forget The Faith

At this time of the year (end) we start seeing litanies of well-known personalities who have passed to their eternal rewards.  This year is no different.  What truly befuddles me, though, is how otherwise intelligent Catholics join in on the wailing and gnashing of teeth.  It is one thing to pray for their eternal repose, as we would pray for the souls of all who departed this life in 2016 (and earlier).  But why is more attention paid to these "famous" people that others - including those who were part of our own lives?

Even more baffling is the tone taken by otherwise faithful Catholics as they join in this caterwalling.  Take, for example, the recent deaths of George Michael and Carrie Fisher.  When these Catholics mourn the passing of the musician Michael but don't utter a prayer that he repented of his sodomy before his end (he was gay, and died of AIDS), one can wonder what really occupies the minds of these Catholics.  In a facebook page I broached that topic and was mocked as being judgmental for doing so.  I could understand such a reaction from the page of a non-Christian, but find it troubling from a page of someone who is ostenstibly aiming for heaven and God.

Then, as a form of tribute to Carrie Fisher, other Catholics, instead of praying for her soul, type "may the force be with you"!   What??!?!  Since when do faithful Catholics ever let new age garbage out of their mouths - or keyboards as the case may be?  Are these Catholics suffering from a weird kind of schizophrenia?  Do they not allow Jesus Christ to guide how they view the "famous" as opposed to the "ordinary"?  Perhaps they should study closely the Letter of James; he had some things to say about toadying to the worldly well-placed.

Does anyone else find all this kvetching over these deaths bizarre?

Saturday, December 24, 2016

Pope Francis Demonizing Faithful Catholics During His Christmas Address To The Curia

The pope's Christmas Greeting to the Roman Curia this year was singularly lacking of any semblance of Christmas cheer.  National Catholic Register has some commentary on the address, but at the bottom of that article is the full text of the pope's address.  He speaks of the "reform of the curia" and making it "conform to the signs of our time".  Shouldn't it be conforming to God's immutable will?

We then see how he talks of "malicious resistance" to this reform, and how he says this resistance "takes refuge in traditions, appearances, formalities".  He's taking pot-shots at those faithful Catholics who adhere to God's teachings, particularly on marriage and family, and I believe he's taking deliberate aim at the four cardinals who promulgated the dubia.  Then he calls for "unconditioned obedience" to this "reform".  Where is his call for unconditional obedience to Christ's teachings regarding marriage and worthiness to receive Holy Communion?

Perhaps his ire against the dubia cardinals, particularly Cardinal Burke, may be a motivation behind another recent action of the pope's.  Recall that Pope Francis named Cardinal Burke as patron of the Order of Malta after he ejected Burke from some Vatican posts.  It seems that a senior official of the Knights of Malta was involved in the distribution of condoms.  For that he was ejected from the order.  Lepanto Institute did a very thorough investigation into the matter and found ample evidence that this official was indeed involved in that very anti-life activity.  His ouster was entirely justified.

Now why, oh why, does Pope Francis find it necessary to create an entire commission to investigate the matter?  It seems rather simple to me; an official in a Catholic organization was caught in activities not becoming a Catholic.  He was ejected from his post as a result.  Granted, when other such scandals have been unearthed, it's only when public scrutiny occurs that the offending party is disciplined (and sometimes the offender is retained).  But Cardinal Burke is at the helm of the Order of Malta, and I think it's likely that he took immediate and proper action.  So why does the pope seek to meddle after the fact?  Is he that much of a micro-manager or is this just an excuse to take out some long knives against Cardinal Burke?

In an interview with Catholic World Report, Cardinal Burke pointed out that any pope who professes formal heresy would automatically cease to be pope.  In that article, Burke goes into the provisions in canon law for such a scenario.  He also voiced hope that the pope will answer the dubia, to allay possible schism.

Cardinal Walter Brandmuller, another of the four dubia cardinals, granted an interview to Der Spiegel.  He too was questioned about the dubia and its implications.  Brandmuller pointed out that "whoever thinks that persistent adultery and the reception of Holy Communion are compatible is a heretic and promotes schism.”  As we read the article, we are reminded that Pope Francis, in his letter to the Argentinian bishops, did make allowance for unrepentant adulterers to receive Holy Communion; in other words, Pope Francis gave approval for sins of sacrilege to occur.

Now consider both these interviews together.  On the one hand, Cardinal Brandmuller states that someone allowing for Holy Communion to be given to unrepentant adulterers is a heretic and promotes schism.  In that same article, Pope Francis is fulfilling that definition of "heretic" in his letter to the Argentinian bishops.  On the other hand, Cardinal Burke points out that a pope formally professes heresy automatically ceases to be pope.

Faithful Catholics, do we understand the gravity of the situation?  Depending on how Pope Francis treats the dubia, the Catholic Church might well find itself in schism.  If he states formally the heresy that those in public mortal sin can receive Holy Communion, it seems that he will have ejected himself from Peter's chair.  The Church might well find herself in schism.  As hard as it is to admit, schism would be far preferable than the Church being led into error.  As you read further down the LifeSiteNews piece, Pope Francis himself seems to understand that he could well divide the Church.

Wednesday, December 21, 2016

Vatican Vibrations?

Remember Father Lefty Goodvibes from almost seven years ago?  I'm wondering if he was called to the Vatican to offer his services there - perhaps as a shaman.  Now calm down!  Of course "Goodvibes" is a fictitious character.  I only wish some of the slop coming from the pope's mouth were just as imaginary.  Papolaters, if you think the term "slop" is overly harsh, what would you prefer I call the unabashed indifferentism and New Age glop that he uttered a few days ago?  Bovine excrement?

I'm referring to his recent letter to the mayor of Paris, who happens to be an atheist.  He asked her prayers, but if she is not inclined, to send him "positive waves".  Is this an example of the "new evangelism"?  To affirm someone in their sin against the First Commandment?  To appeal to New Age idolatry?

This serious lapse is not the first such episode. In June 2015 he asked a group of reporters to "send him good vibrations" if the "cannot pray because they aren't believers".   Why didn't he urge them to pray?  Did he have any concern for their souls?  Is he not the chief shepherd?  Our Lord had something to say about true shepherds versus hirelings.

Will prayerful Catholic songs soon be replaced by the following?  I regret that in this clip seems to sum up the pseudo-spirituality evinced by the pope's letter to the mayor.  Let's continue to pray our rosaries that Our Lord will once again be honored at the Vatican.

Monday, December 19, 2016

Events Of Today Dec 19 2016

St. Januarius was a bishop who was martyred under the Roman emperor Diocletian.  Read here for the story of his martyrdom and the miracle that has been occurring with respect to his blood that was preserved as a relic.  The blood liquefies three times a year and has been doing so all along.  Only three times has it failed to liquefy and each of those times has been a foreboding of disaster.  One of the days the blood liquefies is December 19th.  Today it failed to do so.

Also of significance today is the assassination of the Russian ambassador to Turkey.  The assassination was done quite openly by an off-duty Turkish police officer.  Obviously we don't know what the response of Putin will be.

We also heard today that Cardinal Burke and the other Cardinals will issue a formal correction of Amoris Laetitia soon after the completion of the Christmas season.  It makes sense to wait till then as to not distract from the truth of the Incarnation of Jesus.  His Eminence discussed this in an interview with LifeSiteNews.

Last but not least, today the Electoral College formally elected Donald Trump as the next President of the United States.  It will be a relief to have an adult in charge of the White House once again.  I suppose we'll next be hearing, from college towns where progressives reign, that there is a run on vital supplies such as diaper pins, crayons and play-dough.

Now consider that next October will be the 100th anniversary of the Fatima apparitions.  Many things do seem to be converging.  We must continue to pray for that all will repent and beg God for His mercy.

Sunday, December 18, 2016

Papolatry - Deadly To The Church

Papolatry isn't a new word.  It has a formal definition; see the Oxford Dictionary.  The definition is "excessive reverence for the pope".  Our Lord promised one thing regarding the pope: that he would never solemnly proclaim error, that is, anything that contradicts the Deposit of Faith.  That's it.  As we all know, such a solemn proclamation must meet a stringent set of conditions.  The pope has free will.  Apart from such solemn declarations, he can wreak all kinds of havoc if he is so inclined.  A number of examples can be found in Church history.

This blog, and others, have been shining the light on various errors being promulgated by the Vatican and yes, by Pope Francis.  Others in high places share our concerns: hence the issuance of the dubia.  We have been pilloried and criticized for so doing; that reaction is certainly not unexpected.  Now some in the Vatican are enraged because they know the light is shining on their schemes, threatening their outcome.  The preceding post gives us a glimpse into the halls of the Vatican.

Others, though, particularly among faithful Catholics in the pews, are likewise outraged that their illusions of the papacy are being challenged.  Many hold to a dangerously simplistic concept of the papacy, believing that every utterance and deed of the sitting pope is beyond question.  They too rail against us, accusing us of "pope-bashing" and "causing division".  On Friday, I posted Cardinal Burke's latest interview where he answered that criticism as it was leveled at him and the other authors of the dubia.

I believe these Catholics, holding that the pope cannot be questioned, are falling into the error of papolatry.  That itself is its own sin, as the one guilty of it ascribes to the pope authority and power that never was granted to him by Jesus Christ and His Church.  Only Jesus (and His Mother) can be held to be completely free of error.   Not even the sainted popes were completely free of error.  Recall that the now-sainted John Paul II kissed a Koran.  Of course we read in Galatians how the first pope himself fell into such a grievous error that Paul had to publicly rebuke him.

A year or two ago, social media was full of these papolatrous individuals.  Their numbers have dropped as the accounts of this pope's verbal gafffes and misdeeds increase at an alarming rate.  I think many of them find that they cannot deny the incontrovertible truth that slaps us all in the face continually.

To those who persist, I beg you to wake up and remove the blinders from your eyes.  For all your accusations of us regarding "pope bashing" or even "not being true Catholics", I fear it is you who are falling into papolatry, a sin against the First Commandment.  You are placing yourselves in grave dangers; one of these dangers is that of being seriously disilusioned to the point of despair when the evidence becomes too great for even you to ignore.  Yes, the gates of hell will not prevail against His Church, but all must know and acknowledge where the problems are within the Church lest they become part of the problem.  Some of you papolaters are already part of the problem.  For your good and that of the Church, please cease and desist.

Reign Of Terror In The Vatican

Steve Jalsevac, one of the founders of LifeSiteNews, published yesterday a piece in which he details the horror that the Vatican has become under this pontificate.   He quotes from first-hand sources who must remain anonymous for obvious reasons.  I've heard similar stories about the climate at the DC chancery; as the case with Jalsevac, I'm not at liberty to divulge my sources.  I link to the article now and urge you to read it.  How anyone can continue to pretend that all is sweetness and light with this pontificate is beyond the comprehension of any sane person.

Friday, December 16, 2016

Cardinal Burke On EWTN Dec 15

In this interview with Raymond Arroyo that was released yesterday. Cardinal Burke answers his critics and restates the need for the dubia and for fidelity to the timeless teachings of Jesus Christ.

Tuesday, December 13, 2016

Priestly Formation Document - Its Sinister Context

With this post I'd like to delve more into the problematic guidelines for priestly formation that were recently released; see yesterday's post.  Some good people don't see the harm in what was said in the guidelines per se about concern for the environment.  As I said yesterday, I think it's necessary to look at them in the context of other proceedings from this papacy to date.  Together they paint a very ominous picture.

In addition to Laudato Si, many questionable statements were issued and deeds committed by the Vatican, many with the cooperation of anti-life forces.  Recall that last month the pope addressed the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, calling for the creation of "a regulatory system that included inviolable limits and ensure the protection of ecosystems".  Will seminarians be brainwashed taught to shill for these "regulatory systems"?  Also recall how the pope waxed lyrical about the UN summit on climate change last year.  He, the Vicar of Christ, stated that the summit was "humanity's last chance to thwart climate disaster" and that the world is at "the limits of suicide".  Will seminarians be forced to parrot that crap?  Will they be forced to teach that "global warming is a sin" that must be "atoned" by recycling and carpooling?

Will they be forced to promote the Catholic Climate Covenant?  That was a bit of a fad a little while ago and may well make a comeback.  Let's look at the Catholic Climate Covenant in light of some very troubling facts unearthed and exposed by Michael Hichborn of Lepanto Institute.  Sarah Spengeman, Program Director of CCC, is a member of Emily's List.  That organization exists for the sole purpose of helping elect pro-abortion women to political offices.  The Lepanto page shows the online evidence.  Additionally, Spengeman's social sites show her to be sympathetic to women's ordination and homosexual perversity.

I bring up the matter of Sarah Spengeman for she is only one of the anti-God activists that new priests, thanks to that ill-considered "gift of the priestly vocation" thing, will be forced to promote (even if only indirectly).  They will also be forced to portray "climate change" as sin, thus obfuscating the true serious nature of sin.  In fact, the very acceptance of the notion of "climate change" as fact may be its own sin against honesty, for by no means is "climate change" settled science and it is outside the competency of Church hierarchy to pronounce it settled.  So it seems that our seminarians will be coerced into preaching a progressive agenda that has nothing to do with scientific truth, let alone the salvation of souls.

Monday, December 12, 2016

Problematic Guidelines For Priestly Formation

The Vatican released new guidelines regarding the education and formation of priests.  LifeSiteNews has a nice synopsis, and I now link to the full document "The Gift Of The Priestly Vocation" in pdf format.  It appears to be an update of previously issued guidelines that reflect the teachings of Pope Francis.  An immediate question that comes to mind is that any such guidelines should be reflective of the Teachings of Jesus Christ, which do not change for He Himself is immutable.

As does Mr. Bentz, I too take strong exception to the rather strange and perhaps harmful priorities that the pope seems to be urging for new priests.  If you have the document itself open, please go to page 71 and look at the second paragraph in section 172.  The new priests are expected to promote "climate change" junk science from the pulpits.  While the phrase "climate change" is not specifically mentioned in this document, the reference is clear.  To what else would "emerging planetary crisis" be referring?  And who are these "experts and researchers"?  Well, let's take a look at Laudato Si itself and some of the "research" that occurred.  They include "luminaries" such as Jeffrey Sachs, Hans Schnellnhuber, Naomi Klein, etc - progressives who just happen to be advocates of "population control".  Now is the priest being asked to promote population control?  Not directly, but by what he'll be ordered to do, he will insinuate "population control" sympathies to his congregation, even if he's doing so unwittingly.

We also have to note what is not being said in that document, especially in the context of other current controversies embroiling the Church.  As the LifeSiteNews article states, scant attention is being paid to pro-life and culture of life concerns.  While the document proscribes the ordination of homosexual candidates, it makes no mention of what priests are to do in combating the ever-encroaching homosexual culture that threatens to swallow up more vulnerable people and to demand that homosexual sin not only be accepted but celebrated by everyone.  Since the document does talk of "peace and justice" I do not understand why the priest would not be instructed to do all he can to combat the mortal sin of homosexual conduct.  Again, this deliberate omission must be seen in context: this time, the context of the two sin-nods with the resultant mess known as Amoris Laetitia - or as I call it, Amoralis Lamentia.

As an aside, two other prelates are supporting the dubia issued by the four cardinals: Archbishop Chaput of Philadelphia and Cardinal Paul Josef Cordes of Germany.  I pray that more join them and that the dubia receive the responses that they deserve, for the good of all concerned.

The LifeSiteNews piece ends with an opinion of the document being "in general, well-rounded".  That is not reassuring.  Consider the case of one person who secretly hopes to poison another.  Does he/she force the poison upon the intended victim outright, or does he/she administer the poison in some other food?  That food may be good and wholesome in and of itself.  However, those few grains of poison render the whole serving deadly.  So it is with this document.

Sunday, December 11, 2016

Church Militant! Stand With The Four Cardinals!

Randy Engels, who wrote "Rite of Sodomy", one of the first books to expose the gay infestation within the Catholic Church, issued an open letter to Pope Francis on the occasion of the filth that poured from his mouth during that interview a few days ago.  Here it is at it is published at Renew America.  When the pope uttered almost identical bile three years ago, she had written a letter then.  My one disagreement with Ms. Engels is that the pope wasn't only referring to "false news", but "nasty things, even if they're true".  As we know, "nasty" is a term ascribed by subjective judgment/feeling, not by the merits of objective truth.  In other words, the pope was slandering all of us who seek to shine the light on his attempts to undermine Holy Mother Church.  Did he feel the need to trot out that vile insult in a lame attempt to discredit those of us who are shining the light on Amoralis Lamentia and the de facto schism that is becoming more and more apparent?

Perhaps, as Ms. Engel suggested, he was actively trying to desensitize Catholics to the sinfulness of various perversions in order to make things like Amoralis Lamentia more palatable.  Let's look at the title of that document itself - Amoris Laetitia.  Some have criticized my coined term for the document, but perhaps the actual name is problematic itself.  Blogger Ann Barnhardt has issued her own commentary about the papal vulgarity and noted that a Latin definition of "amoris" is sodomy.  I googled it myself and sure enough, it is one of the translations of "amoris".  Yes, it's only one of five definitions, but might we be looking at some deliberate "double entendre" here?  Given past history, I'd say that's a reasonable possibility.

Meanwhile more faithful Catholics are openly protesting Amoralis Lamentia.  Two leading Catholic philosophers, Germain Grisez and John Finnis, issued a 37-page letter to Pope Francis, asking him to condemn some errors that they believe could arise from Amoralis Lamentia.  (The link to the letter on the First Things article is broken.  Go here and download it in case it "disappears")

Yesterday I mentioned a meeting that Bishop Schneider chaired, regarding the AL mess.   He gave a talk at that meeting.  He detailed times throughout history when prelates either defended God's teaching against man's sinful fancies (such as St John Fisher standing against Henry VIII) or when they capitulated to public demand (Aaron the first Jewish high priest making the golden calf).

Now let's look at another aspect through the lens of Our Lady of Akita.  The message of that apparition is quite similar to that given by Our Lady of Fatima, namely, that if there isn't repentance, God will chastise the earth.   Two phrases from Our Lady's message of Oct 13 come to mind.  First, cardinals and bishops will be opposing each other.  Given Archbishop Pinto's rebuke of the four cardinals (apparently at Pope Francis' behest) and Cardinal Tobin's attack on Archbishop Chaput, we see that prophesy playing out before our very eyes.  Another piece of the prophesy that is unfolding as I write this is "the Church will be full of those who accept compromises".  Indeed, the upper eschelons of Church hierarchy seem to be dominated by those who work to undermine her mission to save souls.  Getting back to Fatima, Sister Lucia dos Santos predicted that the "final battle between Christ and Satan will be about marriage and the family."

No one with at least one functioning eye ball in their skull can deny that all these events are happening as we breathe.  What must we do?  First, we remember that we are part of the Church Militant.  We're not the "church mellow", not the "church meely-mouth", not the "church mediocre".  Each and every one of us is called to step out of his/her own insular existence and take up the fight.  It means doing precisely what Our Lord commanded as He communicated through His Mother at Fatima and Akita.  We must also take our public stances - each and every one of us - alongside the four cardinals to demand that the teachings of Jesus Christ be upheld in our Church.

Friday, December 9, 2016

Amoris Laetitia Or The One True Faith - Each Catholic Must Choose

A few weeks ago I wrote how Cardinal Farrell knotted his knickers because Archbishop Chaput had the audacity to act like a real bishop.  The latter issued guidelines for Catholics in his own diocese, telling his flock that Church Tradition took precedence over Amoralis Lamentia.  Now it seems like Farrell will soon be taking pot-shots at Archbishop Sample for doing the same thing.  Sample's clear and accurate statement "accepting an erroneous judgment of conscience is neither mercy nor charity" will not sit well with Farrell and the others who hope to exploit ambiguity so that God's teachings may be undermined.

Thankfully we do see an increasing number of those who are standing with the four cardinals in approval and support of the dubia.  A number of churchmen issued an open "Letter of Support Of The Four Cardinals From Catholic Academics And Pastors".  Church Militant TV interviewed Dr. Joseph Shaw, one of the signers of that letter.  When asked whether or not he believes schism is brewing, he replied, "it seems appropriate to use the language of schism."

He was commenting on a statement made earlier by Bishop Athanasius Schneider.  When asked if the pope's silence in regards to the dubia increases the risk of schism, he replied that "a certain type of schism already exists in the Church."  In a meeting this past Monday he remarked, "the reaction to the dubia is a proof of the climate in which we actually live in the Church right now.  We live in a climate of threats and of denial of dialogue towards a specific group."  Of course that specific group is those who faithfully adhere to the teachings of Jesus Christ despite the rubbish found in Amoralis Lamentia and other progressive flim-flam.  At that Monday meeting, also in attendance were Cardinals Burke and Brandmuller, two of the four cardinals; Bishop Schneider chaired it.  Amoralis Lamentia was discussed, as well as courses of action to be taken.

Professor Roberto de Mattei, also in attendance, stated that "it is important to comprehend that today there is a clear choice between fidelity to the Church, to the perennnial Magisterium, or infidelity, which means errors, heresy and apostacy."  He has taken his stand with the four cardinals against the mess found in Amoralis Lamentia.  Each and every Catholic faces that choice, like it or not.  Ora et labora.

Wednesday, December 7, 2016

Papal Pornography

If one thought the papal interviews couldn't get much worse than what they had been, they regrettably err.  Today's is so depraved that parents may be advised not to discuss this in the presence of small children.  He whined and complained about the media (while giving an interview to the media - go figure), lamenting their tendency to report unpleasant news, "even if they are true".  He likens the reporting of "nasty" things to coprophilia.  If you never heard that term before, please be advised that until two hours ago, I never did either.  Apparently neither did the creators of the blogger platform on which I write this blog, for its spell-checker is prompting me to change it.  I will give the wikipedia definition now.

Coprophilia (from Greek κόπρος, kópros—excrement and φιλία, philía—liking, fondness), also called scatophilia or scat (Greekσκατά, skatá-feces),[1] is the paraphilia involving sexual arousal and pleasure from feces.

He went on to say that "since people have a tendency towards the sickness of coprophagia, a lot of damage can be done".

Coprophagia!  Another term, similar to the first but not quite identical.  What is that?  Again we look to wikipedia.

Coprophagia /kɒp.rə.ˈf.i.ə/[1] or coprophagy /kəˈprɒfə/ is the consumption of feces

So people "have a tendency" toward this, uh, dietary predilection?  Dear readers, when is the last time that was served at your dinner tables?  When was the last time you saw that featured at your favorite restaurants? When is the last time that crossed your minds?  I didn't think so!

Two things need to be discussed.  To liken journalism to a perverted sexual fetish is nothing short of the sin of slander against those journalists who take seriously their responsibilities to inform the public of current affairs.  One might think the pope is taking a swipe at those of us who shine the light on his evident designs to undermine Holy Mother Church in all manners possible.  It's worth noting that Father Spadaro accuses those who criticize Amoralis Lamentia as "being influenced by the devil".  Hmm.  Do I detect a coordination of talking points here?

But what is behind the pope's decision to use vulgarity?  As I mentioned earlier, I never even heard of these terms, and I'm not particularly naive.  Several others never did, either.  So what gives?  Who would even think to use terms that describe perverted practices?  One of my friends pointed out that such language would be quite familiar to the "gay community", that is, those who regularly engage in such perversions as part and parcel of their lives.  With whom is the pope surrounding himself?  One who lies with dogs arises with fleas.

This is the Vicar of Christ who is now not only spouting thinly-veiled heresy - now he's uttering vulgarity to boot.  As I said before regarding the cardinals and the dubia, let us pray that the course of this papacy changes and soon.

Correction - Today is not the first time such vulgarity spewed from the pope's mouth.  Almost word for word he uttered the same bile in 2013.  What is filling the mind of the Vicar of Christ?  Please, Lord, awaken us from this surreal nightmare!

Tuesday, December 6, 2016

Please Don't Call This Feastday "Slap A Heretic" Day

Today is the feast of St. Nicholas.  Among other accomplishments, he helped defeat the heresy of Arianism in the Church.  This heresy claims that Jesus Christ is not divine in nature.  There was a council conducted, with both Nicholas and Arius in attendance.  As the story goes, Arius was spouting his heresies.  Nicholas became so incensed that he went over and slapped Arius.  The others in attendance stripped Nicholas of the signs of his office and imprisoned him.  He repented.  In the cell he was visited by Jesus and Mary and they restored to him his office.

As I read the story, I see no signs of Jesus and Mary vindicating his loss of temper and act of violence.  I think it's safe to say that had not Nicolas repented, Jesus and Mary would not have come to him.

Those of us who write our blogs and otherwise engage in apostolates to counteract the heresies that bombard us will recognize in ourselves the temptations to act as did Nicholas.  While we must speak and act, we must continually keep our own emotions in check lest they undermine our tasks and perhaps our eternal salvation.  Let us not dare to snicker at Nicholas's fall into temptation for that might indicate a willingness to engage in impropriety and sin ourselves.  Nicholas repented; with that he was able to continue his mission.  Let's not celebrate his lapse into sin, but his repentance and great service to the Church.

President Trump And Notre Dame

Most of us remember how the University of Notre Dame disgraced itself by allowing the Messiah Most Miserable to sully its commencement ceremony AND receive an honorary degree from what once was a Catholic institution.  This happened in 2009.  Many good people protested, both before and during the debacle, from afar and right on the campus itself with some being arrested.  Father Jenkins was warned of the protests beforehand but carried on, claiming that the President of the United States should be a welcome speaker.

My!  How times change in these eight years!  When faced with the prospect of President Trump giving a commencement address at his campus, all of the sudden, Jenkins is having his doubts!  Says the UND president, "I do think the elected leader of the nation should be listened to. And it would be good to have that person on the campus — whoever they are, whatever their views.  At the same time, the 2009 commencement was a bit of a political circus, and I think I’m conscious that that day is for graduates and their parents — and I don’t want to make the focus something else."

Let's examine all this, shall we?  We'll start from the end: "I don't want to make the focus something else".  What a piece of crock!  When Obama came, Jenkins didn't care one whit about that day being "for the graduates and their parents".  It was a victory lap for both Obama and Father Theodore Hesburgh.  The latter was president of UND from 1952 - 1987.  During that time he authored the heretical Land-O-Lakes Statement and helped the infiltration of progressivism into the inner workings of the Church hierarchy.  Because he also gave aid and comfort to Msgr Jack Egan as the latter was developing the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, he fostered the kind of "community organizing" that jump-started Obama's political career.  Yes indeed, Jenkins was celebrating a triumph of progressivism that day, not the graduates.

Now let's look at the "circus".  He thinks that more of that may be present because of Trump as opposed to Obama?  Arguably he has a point.  Consider the rioting and rampage that occurred in various metropolitan areas as marauders roamed the streets, smashed windows, beat up Trump supporters, set things on fire, etc while proclaiming that Trump is "not my president".  Consider all those Clinton supporters who claimed to be traumatized, with many campuses setting up crisis counseling centers all because their candidate lost.  Perhaps Jenkins is concerned that UND students will have their noses put out of joint in such great numbers that he'll have trouble setting up enough counseling centers, safe spaces, etc.  Such a circus might indeed dwarf what he faced in 2009.  Does Jenkins realized what he might have admitted?  He might have cheered all the mayhem that happened elsewhere after the election, but isn't so keen with the prospect of his own campus being trashed by overgrown brats.  Well, just as he jailed the pro-life protesters, he can grow a backbone and be prepared to haul away any rampaging snowflakes.

Such double standards these progressives have!  And now the masks are coming off their faces.

Sunday, December 4, 2016

Radcliffe Debacle In Light Of Amoralis Lamentia

Some of my blogging colleagues reposted a story from last year regarding Father Timothy Radcliffe, a former Master General of the Dominicans who is now an open homophile.  That last term is not to imply that he himself is embroiled in the gay lifestyle (although there is reasonable probability of that) but it does signify that he is a willing enabler of such sinful conduct.

Initially I declined to do so, simply because his appointment by Pope Francis to the post of Consulter for the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace was last year's news.  In retrospect, I see my colleagues' wisdom in so doing for the recent events regarding Amoralis Lamentia and the dubia do put the Radcliffe matter in a new light.

Recall how Radcliffe stated that "gay sex..can be expressive of Christ's self-gift".  Of course this statement is pure blasphemy, to equate mortal sin with Christ's love for mankind.  But now consider the interim relatio report from the sin-nod from two years ago.  It drew much-justified criticism because it too suggested that mortal sin can "contain positive values".  And yes, the pope was well aware of this content before the document was promulgated with his approval.

No reasonable, honest person can deny any longer that there are efforts afoot by progressives in the Vatican (and that includes Pope Francis) to undermine the Teachings of Jesus Christ Himsef regarding faith and morality.  While it's true that the pope cannot solemnly proclaim error, he can accomplish nefarious ends by other, less flamboyant methods such as introducing confusing documents (such as Amoralis Lamentia), appointing dissidents such as Radcliffe to influential posts and by removing faithful prelates from their positions of influence.

Cardinal Burke, one of the authors of the dubia, has asked that rosaries be offered "so that bishops and priests will have the courage to teach the truth and defend the faith against all her enemies, both within the Church and outside the Church.  And may all confusion be dispelled from the Church."  While he made that appeal specifically for Dec 1, this intention is obviously one that deserves ongoing prayers.  Let us also pray that Pope Francis does restore clarity, as requested in the dubia.  But if he doesn't, let us pray that these cardinals follow up with the corrective measures as briefly described by Cardinal Burke.  The festering boil of heresy within the Church must be brought to a head so that it can be lanced and the infection treated.

Friday, December 2, 2016

Masons And Mafia In The Vatican?

A few days ago I wrote of the none-too-veiled threats emanating from the Dean of the Roman Rota, Archbishop Pio Vito Pinto.  Some of my blogging colleagues nicknamed him "Don Vito", owing to his mafia-esque demeanor in issuing his threats.  Well, it turns out they aren't that far off the mark.  One Peter Five reveals that while Don Vito may not be a mafioso, he is a mason.  Membership in secret societies such as the freemasons is forbidden to Catholics.

I urge all to read that last link carefully, along with the other embedded links.  The one entitled Paul VI Beatified? is an eye-opener.  It's a pdf, therefore downloadable.  I'd suggest you do so.

I must admit that when I first read Pinto's threats, my thoughts went immediately to another Don Vito and to the music below.  Whether or not the mafia has invaded the Church remains a possibility; the invasion of the masons is a fact.

Thursday, December 1, 2016

Islamic Terrorism - Courtesy Of Catholic Charities

Two years ago it was revealed that various Catholic Charities offices in Texas were receiving millions in federal grants to facilitate massive immigration, some of it illegal.  One of those outlets was the one in Dallas.

On Monday, a Somalian immigrant plowed his car into a crowd at Ohio State University, then began stabbing bystanders.  He was shot by a police officer.  ISIS is taking "credit" for the act.  But perhaps ISIS shouldn't hog all the dubious "glory".  Some of that "glory" belongs to Catholic Charities of Dallas.

From Breitbart News we read that the terrorist and his family entered the US through Texas and were resettled by Catholic Charities in June 2014.  This is yet another illustration why nations who seek reasonable security at their borders are not to be demonized by progressives in the Church.  Well, let me rephrase that for they obviously are going to run their mouths about that.  This is why we must oppose them and rebuke them for they play the "useful idiots" for those who seek to destroy civilization.

From The Niggers Of The New Age Department - Persecution By Dissident Bishops

It's one thing for faithful Christians to be maltreated by secular society for holding fast to the moral teachings of Jesus Christ.  It's quite another for faithful Catholics and priests to be knifed in the back because they are living and speaking in accord with the Faith.  Thanks to Amoralis Lamentia, rogue bishops are doing precisely that with increasing frequency.

I wrote recently of San Diego Bishop McElroy ordering his priests to sin by offering Holy Communion to flagrant adulterers.  Now it appears that indeed one of his priests is in his crosshairs.  Father Richard Perozich of Immaculate Conception Catholic Church wrote some columns in his parish bulletin of matters of Catholic morality.  His columns were faithful to Church Tradition and contradicted some pet causes of the progressive elements in the hierarchy - including McElroy.  The latter forbade anymore such columns in the parish bulletin.

Meanwhile, across the Atlantic Ocean in Scotland, Father Matthew Despard has been ordered to leave his parish.  Some time ago, he wrote a book called "Priesthood In Crisis".  It revealed the workings of the gay influence among Catholic clergy.  First he was removed from ministry because he "injured reputations".  For his telling of truth, he is being punished.

Of course the four cardinals who wrote the dubia are taking flack from some of their errant brothers.  Cardinal Claudio Hummes of Brazil recently rebuked them.  His line of reasoning is that "we are 200, they are only 4". Leaving aside for the moment that other bishops are speaking out, we ask precisely what his statement proves.  Since when is truth defined by consensus or majority?  Is Hummes so ignorant of Church history that he fails to consider other faithful prelates who stood alone, such as Athanasius or John Fisher?

In the Netherlands and Belgium, some dissident bishops have adopted another tactic.  They have changed the words of the Lord's Prayer - the Our Father as it is prayed at Mass.  Remember - this was a prayer dictated to the disciples by Our Lord Himself.  These false shepards have the audacity to edit what Jesus clearly said.  They know better than Our Lord?  The words are changed so that they trivialize the truths regarding sin and tempation.  When coupled with the suggestions in Amoralis Lamentia that those in mortal sin be allowed to receive Holy Communion, we can see how faith is being weakened, along with a proper regard for the Sacraments.

We'll see more of these incidents in the next coming days.  I will post as I'm able to shed the light on cockroaches and to hopefully awaken others to the need to pray and speak out.