The Holy Father - the real one - passed away at 9:34 Italian time this morning. We pray now for his immortal soul and the Church Militant that he left behind. I believe it was in 2007 when he released his moto propitio that made clear that the Tridentine Mass was a valid rite and that no prelate could prevent its celebration. The current occupant of the chair of Peter undid that, as well as unleashing immeasurable harm against Holy Mother Church.
Regrettably Benedict shared some responsibility for that harm, with his extremely irregular "resignation". When he proffered that, he paved away for the destructive debacle known as Francis' papacy. Some are now lamenting that Francis is now unrestrained. I am not certain how he was ever restrained, but only time will tell.
In the meantime, we pray for the eternal repose of Benedict XVI and for the return of a true pope. At this time, owing to all the signs that Francis' election was rigged and therefore canonically invalid, I am not certain that we have a true pope at this time. Pray for the One True Church, now rudderless.
This comes courtesy of the Babylon Bee. Frankly, I think Biden knows enough to be culpable. At least this song doesn't spout a bunch of blasphemy under the guise of a pretty tune as does the original. Enjoy!
Anyone with two brain cells firing in syncopation knows that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump. Moreover, last month several elections were also stolen: Kari Lake in Arizona, Neil Parrott in Maryland, etc. We can whine and cry about it till the cows come home. But now some hope appears over the horizon to address the corruption that, if it remains unfettered, will reduce us to voiceless slaves of an oligarchy. The question is, will we seize it and work with it?
Several brothers from Utah, ordinary citizens like the bulk of us here, have filed suit against the members of Congress who abdicated their duty to properly certify the Presidential election and let the fraud proceed unopposed. The case is known as Brunson v Adams. On January 6 2023, that is, in less than two weeks, the US Supreme Court will consider whether or not to hear this case. Only four justices need to vote favorably in order for the case to move forward. Note the case number 22-380.
This case, if heard and subsequently voted in favor of the Brunsons, could well cause the ouster of Biden, Harris, and those members of Congress listed therein who voted for certification without addressing the serious and well-founded allegations of irregularities that were brought to their attention prior to certification. However, the intention of the Brunsons is not so much to alter the election as it is to deal with the rot and corruption that has infested our election mechanisms.
Here is the Petition for a Writ of Certiatorari as filed with the US Supreme Court. It is this that will be considered in a matter of days. The defendants simply refused to do their constitutional duty. Yes, there are a lot of "usual suspects", but other surprise me. Rand Paul?? Here's some explanatory commentary; more can be found by just googling "Brunson v Adams".
Below these musings I will post two videos: one from today's Lepanto Institute where Michael and Alyssa Hichborn are discussing Father Pavone's plight, bringing some salient points to bear on the matter and also taking issue with some faithful Catholics who are drinking the anti-Pavone kool-aid. Below that will be an interview with Father Gerald Murray (one of the Papal Posse from The World Over). Father Murray is a canon lawyer and he will explain just why this bogus laicization just does not jive with canon law. I urge that both videos be watched in their entirety.
The Code of Canon Law, sections 1717 - 1731, seem to indicate that the accused (in this case, Father Pavone) has a right to appeal and to present his case. Specifically that is stated in section 1723. There is one exception to that requirement: if the action is done by the pope. That is the input from Father Gerald Murray, a canon lawyer who is associated with Robert Royal and Raymond Arroyo in the Papal Posse. Moreover, a copy of the letter from the Papal Nuncio is now online. The Papal Nuncio acts on behalf of the pope. Hitherto, I had thought that maybe Francis wasn't involved with Father's removal, that it might have been too "small potatoes" for him. I stand corrected, as it seems that Francis has bared his teeth here.
Now Canon 193 sec 4 states that removal from the office (priesthood) must be communicated in writing. Father Pavone heard about his laicization in the same manner that most of us did - through the Catholic News Agency announcement yesterday. The Nuncio's letter was only made public today. I still am uncertain as to whether or not Pavone received formal notice of this action. Irregularities abound.
So do double standards. One of the trumped up charges stems from Father displaying an aborted baby on a table that he sometimes used for Mass. Zurek called that table "an altar" when in fact it was never consecrated as such. However, if Bishop Zurek wants to get outraged over altar desecrations, the current occupant of the chair of Peter has provided at least two occasions for such indignation. When Francis returned home from World Youth Day in 2013, he placed on an altar of St Mary Major Basilica, next to the Tabernacle, a beach ball and sports jersey. In 2019, at a closing Mass in St Peter's after one of the countless synods, Francis placed on the altar a pachamama idol-plant. Yes, the reputed pope placed an idol on a consecrated altar during Mass. Bishop Zurek's anger would be more appropriately directed at that actual outrage.
Taylor Marshall below offers some insight into this whole vindictive attack on Father Pavone.
Marshall ended by exhorting us to prayer, fasting, personal holiness. I take issue for that is not all we must do. Yes we are laity, but some of us also have a few dollars - that should NOT go to the diocesan appeals and especially NOT to the Peter's Pence collections. Now when (not if, when) we boycott these collections, it is not sufficient to refrain from contributions. We must also drop into the collection baskets notes explaining precisely why we are boycotting - and sign your names. The time for demure silence is long past. They might cancel clerics, but we laity have rights that they don't. Let's use them.
By the way - it appears that Father Pavone has at least one friend among the bishops. Bishop Strickland decried the nuncio's letter in a tweet.
The blasphemy is that this holy priest is canceled while an evil president promotes the denial of truth & the murder of the unborn at every turn, Vatican officials promote immorality & denial of the deposit of faith & priests promote gender confusion devastating lives…evil https://t.co/ASzjW7IuAv
This from the Catholic News Agency - Father Frank Pavone, pro-life activist and director of Priests for Life has been dismissed from the clerical state for "blasphemous communications on social media" and "disobedience to his bishop". Mind you, Father Pavone has yet to receive formal notice of this action himself. I too find it odd that CNA would learn of it before Father did.
Assuming that this is true, let's look at some context. Francis celebrates Father James Martin, bestowing upon the perversion-advocating cleric high Vatican posts as well as private audiences, the latter never having been granted to the dubia cardinals nor to Cardinal Zen. We see Knestout the Richmond bishop running interference for a priest that just happens to be a convicted sex offender. Bishop Stowe of Louisville Kentucky ran roughshod over high school boys who were faithful Catholics and Trump supporters, and apologizing to gays for them being called out on their perversions. This list could go on and on.
But Francis et al single out Father Pavone for maltreatment? This isn't only about Father Pavone. The Vatican goons are firing the proverbial "shot across the bow" to other Catholic clergy who might have the decency to comport themselves as actual Catholics instead of toadying to the New World Order and the Great Reset.
If course I'm hoping this announcement isn't true, but I suspect it is.
George Neumayr went to Bishop Knestout's residence and asked his point-blank why he made that appointment (see post from Tuesday). Here it is. Here Knestout displayed the same cowardice that marked his so-called "interview" with Father Guarnizo and the sniveling apology to the lesbian who was denied Holy Communion ten years ago in Montgomery County MD.
I went to Bishop Knestout's rectory at Richmond's Cathedral of the Sacred Heart and asked about his scandal of appointing a public sex offender, Fr. Wayne Ball, to a pastorship without informing parishioners of his guilty plea for the crime in a park with a man in a parked car. pic.twitter.com/WTxLuAwIEB
Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, while President of the Pontifical Council for the Family, diverted hundreds of thousands of euros away from its intended charitable purposes to real estate renovations. One of those renovation projects was the refurbishing of his apartments in Rome. This misappropriation was discovered by Cardinal Pell in his capacity of Secretariat for the Economy in 2014. In 2015 attempts were made in earnest to have Cardinal Pell imprisoned on the basis of decades-old allegations of sexual abuse. My! Isn't the timing of these legal shenanigans such a coincidence? Nothing to see here! Move along!
Side note: If Paglia had spent some of that money to have this eyesore removed from his titular cathedral, perhaps that might have been an acceptable expenditure. But I digress.
Paglia currently heads the much-disgraced Pontifical Academy for Life. Recently one of the academy's moral theologians, Father Maurizio Chiodi, claimed that Humanae Vitae is not part of the Church's magisterium and thus its contents were basically fair game for change. Among his excuses for this attempt to change centuries-old teachings is the attempt to change other centuries-old teachings of the church, namely the teachings regarding the death penalty.
Chiodi validated a point that I and others made regarding the pope's attempt to mutilate the Church's teaching on the death penalty. Over four years ago I blogged that the death penalty attempt was an attempt to buy into the erroneous notion that Church teaching can be changed. If it could be changed for the death penalty, why not contraception? It's a classic case of calling good (death penalty) evil and calling evil (contraception) good.
Regrettably, their ploy seems to be working. We can fault not only Francis and Paglia for that, but also ourselves for not educating ourselves regarding authentic Church teaching.
George Neumayr published the account of Bishop Barry Knestout of the Diocese of Richmond (VA) appointing as pastor of St Augustine a public sex offender without notifying the parishioners. The criminal priest in question is Father Wayne Ball. He pled guilty to "lewd acts" with another male in a car in a parking lot. At the time of the incident and subsequent hearing, he was at another parish. Those parishioners petitioned for his removal and hence he left.
The excuse being proffered for this appointment is that no underage person was involved. In other words, Ball did not rape a boy. However, he is a priest and he is obliged to obey the Church's moral laws and honor his priestly vows. That is, no one may engage in homosexual relations as they are inherently sinful. Not only is it natural law and (should have been) taught in Catholic education, but the man attended seminary where (we hope) he would have received further teaching on the matter. Moreover, there are his priestly vows of celibacy, meaning he can engage in no sexual relations whatsoever.
Bishop Knestout should immediately remove him from ministry with the same speed and alacrity with which he removed Father Marcel Guarnizo from his parish assignment while he was Auxiliary Bishop in the Archdiocese of Washington. There is one teeny bit of difference between Ball and Guarnizo. The former has engaged in homosexual perversions while the latter denied Holy Communion to a woman living in a sinful lesbian relationship. He wrote this nice sniveling apology - to the woman who was prevented from committing sacrilege against the Blessed Sacrament.
A reasonable person could surmise from all this that Bishop Knestout seems to be coddling and "running interference" for those engaging in mortally sinful homosexual conduct, no matter who is harmed in the process - faithful priests or unsuspecting parishioners.
At the bottom of his article, Neumayr suggests that all contact Bishop Knestout and urge him to do right by the parishioners of St. Augustine. I might add two things. First, also suggest that Knestout resign from his new USCCB post as his obfuscation of the truth regarding Ball is the very antithesis of the mission of that committee. Second, notify Archbishop Lori of the same; the Diocese of Richmond is a suffragan under the Archdiocese of Baltimore.
Our Parish Times is a periodical published by the Catholic Businessmen's Network, founded in 1991. It focuses on news pertaining to the Catholic parishes in Montgomery County MD. Each parish has its own page, with some other columns here and there. Frankly, these pages are filled with happy cheery stuff, with lots of photo-op types of pictures. Oh, yes! It has lots and lots of advertisements sprinkled throughout, most if not all of them from members of the CBN. Since the periodical is free for the taking from church lobbies, I must presume that their revenue comes from the ads.
At one time I found OPT to be a refreshing alternative to the archdiocesan propaganda rag known as the Catholic Standard. It was not uncommon to find columns that discussed the very real problems and scandals that plagued the Church. Some of them were outright critical of the various cover-ups. About 10 years ago, anything that could be considered critical of the chancery disappeared from the OPT. As a case in point they mentioned not one peep about archdiocesan misbehavior that literally made international news. Did OPT trade its journalistic integrity for permission to place their ads in church lobbies?
The OPT has also taken up the habit of schmoozing with progressives who work, or did work, for the Archdiocese. Chuck Short is one such individual, with his column appearing on the front page. Yesterday I picked up the December 2022 issue from a church lobby. At the bottom right hand corner we read that the former director of social concerns for the Archdiocese of Washington will be inducted into Montgomery County's "Human Rights Hall of Fame".
I'm not going to go into the kind of "social justice warriors" who were inducted into that dubious clique over the years. All you have to do is contemplate the progressives who run Montgomery County and you get the idea. Therefore, Short's induction into that cabal comes as no surprise. What is disappointing is the absolute chortling in which the OPT engages, right on its front page. It is disgusting beyond all telling to see this kind of slobber in publications that hold themselves out to be Catholic. This is just one small reason (among many) why so many hold the Faith in contempt. The staff of Our Parish Times should be ashamed of themselves.
I join my friend and blogging colleague at Les Femmes in lamenting the House vote on the mis-named "Respect for Marriage Act" today. It is, in fact, an attempt to utterly distort true marriage as God intended. Yes, these perversions have always existed, but now we're just one step away from enshrining perversion into law and thus incurring national guilt for yet another sin that cries to God for vengeance. There is no doubt that Joe Biden will sign this pig-slop presently.
There is one detail that I think my friend missed. In 1846, the bishops of the United States named as patron saint Our Lady under her title Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception. I don't know if Pelosi really had it in mind to insult Our Lady like that. Perhaps she just wanted to get this bill passed before she surrenders her Speaker's gavel in a few weeks. At any rate, the vote on this day is a monumental blasphemy all around as our country has thumbed its nose at its patron saint.
As mentioned in the previous post, we must pray our Rosaries, make the Five First Saturday devotions, live as true Catholics who honor and obey God. Pray seriously for our nation and western civilization, for God will not be mocked. Much punishment is on the horizon.
After the Fatima apparitions, the children said that Our Lady confided three secrets to them and that they were to be announced no later than 1960. Moreover, the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart was supposed to be done by the pope as soon as possible but no later than 1960. To date, neither has happened. Ironically, Francis is the one who has come closest to fulfilling the consecration request in that he explicitly mention Russia by name, but he did not order the bishops to join him in the consecration (a number of them did, though, on their own initiative).
In the middle of the 20th century, Sister Lucia stated several times that Our Lady was displeased at the delay in fulfilling her requests. Then, in the 1980s, after John Paul II consecrated the world - not mentioning Russia by name - to her Immaculate Heart, Sister Lucia was quoted as saying that this consecration fulfilled Our Lady's request. That is, of course, a flat-out lie. Our Lady was quite specific when she said that Russia must be consecrated. She singled out Russia, and the consecration should have done the same. I had always hypothesized that Sister Lucia was being misquoted by bad-actor bishops and that may indeed be the case. Now that some are coming forth with evidence that the Lucy that we've been seeing for the past few decades may be an imposter, we can reasonably entertain the possibility that this bogus Lucy did claim that John Paul's consecration was according to Our Lady's stipulations.
Think of it. This woman, if she was an imposter, was lying anyway. Why would she have any compunctions regarding her false claim? For that matter, her claim regarding the third secret is probably also a lie and we still aren't being told the full story, contrary to Our Lady's wishes. I post three videos below and ask that you watch these closely. I will have more commentary below them.
In the Lifesite clip, Dr Chojnowski mentioned (the real) Sister Lucy's insistence that the third secret be announced no later than 1960 or the time of her death. However, in a 1993 interview, the imposter said that the secret was not to be released. This is at the 29:03 mark of the video.
Not only do we have a clear contradiction, but perhaps we have here a motive for replacing Sister Lucy with an imposter. During much of the 1950s, Pius XII was pope. Aside from his own faulty consecration (he mentioned Russia but did not involve the bishops) he seemed ready to obey the Fatima message, meaning that he would have released the third secret in compliance with those deadlines. I am now hypothesizing, but perhaps the real Sister Lucy passed away in the 1950s. To prevent the pope from revealing the Third Secret, is it possible that the masons in the Vatican coughed up a scheme to present a phony Lucy so Pius would not believe it incumbent to reveal the Third Secret?
Perhaps several popes were deceived by her. She was cloistered and not seen frequently. Pope John XXIII still could not have been held blameless as 1960 happened during his pontificate. Again, this is just a theory, but it sounds more humane than if the masons actually harmed the real Sister Lucy.
At any rate, it seems to be the case that what we have here is a brazen attempt to thwart the intentions of the Mother of God, and of Our Lord Himself. If nothing else, it shows that the masons believe in the spiritual ramifications of the Fatima message; why else would they work so feverishly to thwart it? And no, it wasn't just mere fear of insulting the Soviet Union. They knew what they were doing - engaging in yet another attempt to undermine Holy Mother Church.
So how have they gotten by with this scam for so long? There are a multiple of factors.
Catholics today, even well-meaning Catholics, are simply ignorant of both Church teaching and Church history. In this day and age, with the internet at our disposal, such ignorance is inexcusable. I would recommend some serious reading and study. For details about Fatima, read accounts dated 1950-ish or older. Compare that with what the imposter said.
Well-meaning Catholics are way too naïve regarding clergy and other leaders. One would think that the sex scandals might have knocked off some rose-colored glasses but for too many, that has not been the case. There is evil in the Church, even in the Vatican itself. Wake up
Above all, pray and frequently avail yourselves of the Sacraments. Go to a Traditional Latin Mass if at all possible. Pray your Rosaries daily and wear the brown scapular. Practice the Five First Saturday devotions, as requested by Our Lady of Fatima. Pray for a pope who will consecrate Russia exactly as she stipulated and who will reveal the Third Secret. We are in a time of chastisement (in case you haven't noticed) and it will worsen, barring a direct intervention from God. We don't have time to waste.
I have known that for a while now, having read a bit about Freemasonry and how it insinuated itself into the Church over the past 100+ years. LifeSiteNews published a report six weeks ago entitled "Is Masonic Infiltration Responsible For The Widespread Apostacy Among Catholic Clergy?" That and more. Anyone who is seriously concerned about the state of affairs in the Church (that should be everyone who calls themselves "Catholic") needs to read that report carefully. It is long past the time when faithful Catholics can wear rose-colored glasses in regards to the quality of our clergy. If such Catholics remain stubborn against calling a spade a spade, they will be held culpable of aiding great sin in the Church.
In this report, you'll see some background information regarding:
Setting an arbitrary retirement age of 75 years for bishops, allowing Masonic Vatican officials to replace the retirees with their Masonic accomplices
The placement of harmful prelates such as McCarrick, Mahoney, Brown, etc in their respective sees
The assassination of Pope John Paul I
The creation of the Novus Ordo Mass by the Mason Anabale Bugnini
The report, at the beginning, cites "Alta Vendita", where the plan for the ruin of the Church was laid out. It is readily available for reading. I'd suggest getting it from the Tan Books site. As you read it, bear in mind that it was written over 100 years ago. The authors knew that their plans would take decades to implement and that they wouldn't live to see them come to fruition. But they advocated patience. Now we may wonder, since they have come to their final end, what they think now - but I digress.
So what brought about this infiltration? Obviously evil people have been trying to destroy the Church since Christ founded it Himself. I cannot recall, though, when the evil inside the Church has had such an upper hand. Perhaps this quote from Saint John Eudes might shed some light. From his book, "The Priest: His Duties and Obligations"..The most evident mark of God’s anger and the most terrible castigation He can inflict upon the world are manifested when He permits His people to fall into the hands of clerics who are priests more in name than in deed, priests who practice the cruelty of ravening wolves rather than the charity and affection of devoted shepherds. Instead of nourishing those committed to their care, they rend and devour them brutally. Instead of leading their people to God, they drag Christian souls into hell in their train. Instead of being the salt of the earth and the light of the world, they are its innocuous poison and its murky darkness. St. Gregory the Great says that priests and pastors will stand condemned before God as the murderers of any souls lost through neglect or silence….
When God permits such things, it is a very positive proof that He is thoroughly angry with His people, and is visiting His most dreadful anger upon them. That is why He cries unceasingly to Christians, “Return, 0 ye revolting children . . . and I will give you pastors according to my own heart” (Jer. 3, 14-15). Thus, irregularities in the lives of priests constitute a scourge visited upon the people in consequence of sin."
For instance, so many of us have decried the refusal of the popes since 1960 to consecrate Russia to Mary's Immaculate Heart. Yet how many of us are faithful to the daily Rosary and the Five First Saturdays devotion? How often do we advocate it? Also, how many of us tolerate the liturgical abuses of the Novus Ordo without raising one protest, for fear of incurring personal dislike from the priests?
Many of us decry the errors of Francis as he occupies the Chair of Peter, but how many of us have turned blind eyes to the errors of Pope John Paul II and even Pope Benedict XVI? How many of us complied with the lockdowns and absented ourselves from Mass, when Masses were available (albeit at some sacrifice)?
I will suggest some things that I and others have been suggesting for some time.
Attend the Traditional Latin Mass, even if you have to drive a bit. By the way, contrary to popular fairy tale, the SSPX is NOT in schism. You can attend those Masses and still fulfill Sunday obligation.
If you have no other choice but to attend Novus Ordo, be reverent and respectful of the Blessed Sacrament on the altar. Do not behave as though the nave of the church is a social hall. You might stick out like a sore thumb by so doing, but so what? Perhaps others, by reason of your example, might come to deeper belief in the Real Presence.
Pray your Rosaries daily for the conversion of the world.
Learn as much as you can regarding how the Church got to this sorry state of affairs and tell others about it.