According To Francis, We Faithful Catholics Are "Backwards-Looking" And "Reactionary"

Whining to some fellow Jesuits while in Portugal for the World Youth Debacle, Pope Francis crabbed about Catholics faithful to Tradition, calling us "backwards-looking" and "reactionary".  He tries so hard to convince us that there is an "appropriate evolution in the understanding of matters of faith and morals".

He cited some examples, disregarding the fact that he is holding to heresy.  He went on: "today it is a sin to possess atomic bombs.  The death penalty is a sin; you cannot employ it, but it was not so before."  If he wants to yammer about "appropriate evolution", here is a case where this so-called "evolution" is so inappropriate as to be called heresy, or at least based on heresy.  The underlying heresy is in believing that God can somehow change.  He is beyond change.  He is immutable, and thus His words and thoughts are, too.  Pope St. Pius X had much to say about Francis' mindsets in Pascendi Dominici Gregis.  I suggest you read it.

Later he said, "what I don't like at all is that we look at the so-called 'sins of the flesh' with a magnifying glass..if you lied or cheated, it doesn't matter and instead, only sins below the waist are relevant".   "So-called sins of the flesh"?  Yes, Francis!  That is the term used by Our Lady of Fatima when she told the three children that more souls go to hell on account of sins of the flesh than any other sins.  I can see, though, where that might not be relevant if one doesn't believe in hell.

He said this regarding persons currently committing mortal sins of homosexual relations: "the door is open to everyone.  Everyone has their own space in the church."  After this is when he let loose with his "so-called sins of the flesh" quips.

I believe there is some "method to the madness" here.  He has two things on the horizon.  First there is this so-called "Synod on Synodality" that some have dubbed "sin-nod on sodomy".  Yes, there will most likely be some heresy regarding homosexuality that comes out of this thing.  In fact, given previous patterns regarding past meetings, the "documents resulting from the synod" are most likely written and ready to be released at an opportune time.  Of course any little poison pill will be buried amidst piles and piles of fluffy-puff verbosity.

Speaking of verbal diarrhea, be prepared for another encyclical that Michael Matt has dubbed "Laudato Si II".  Oh, joy!  Hear for yourselves.  

We need to resist the onslaughts against truth coming at us from the Vatican, just as we must resist the civil wonks who are rattling the covid sabers again.

Pope Francis, Health Care, And Sustainable Development Goals

 If we recall the meetings that the pope had before Laudato Si was inflicted upon us, we will recall that he is all on board with the UN's Sustainable Development goals.  The pope lends a facade of moral credibility to these Masonic goals.  With President Trump gone, the progressives - and that includes the pope - have a more clear path towards the implementation of these goals.  All this and more was just discussed on this evening's Anchor Team broadcast by the Lepanto Institute.

Vatican Academy - "Forget God! We Want Our Audience!"

That is exactly what the Vatican said when they were caught several weeks ago wasting a bunch of paper and ink on that verbose plop that blamed the covid virus on us not paying attention to that other piece of nonsense called Laudato Si.

They deliberately disregarded God in order to promulgate their earth-worship tripe.  It's more important to them that they have the "widest possible audience" to push their globalist new-world order tripe.  All that neopalagian, triumphalist talk of Jesus, sin, eternal salvation, etc might alienate the ungodly from the really important stuff, you see!  Not only might the promulgation of the One True Faith offend the sensibilities of atheists, but that message flies in the face of the lies of the "new world order" that these progressives want to promulgate.

Doesn't that put the Lourdes debacle (see previous post) in a whole new light?

Vatican Striking Hands With New World Order

Earlier today the pope spoke at a Vatican "climate change conference" (yes, another one!).  Please note that it was not a conference to discuss the precipitous decline that faith and morals have undergone in once-Catholic enclaves like Ireland.  Nope!  One again the pope was touting his screed Laudato Si and yes, the United Nation's Sustainable Development Goals.  Don't believe me?  It's right here on the Vatican site!  Notice also in his address the references to "global energy transition", "interdependent world", "global responses".  This is nothing more than unabashed shilling for a one-world government.

Now let's look at another meeting that will be attended by Cardinal Parolin; I speak of the annual Bilderberg Group meeting.  Lifesitenews gives a brief run-down of the history of this thing.  Basically it's a gabfest of those who wield power in Europe and the US to discuss various issues regarding government and life.  It's quite elitist, to say the least.  It's also quite secretive, as attendees are sworn not to divulge the discussions outside the meeting.  This is the first time that a Church official has been invited to this globalist gaggle.

Daniel McAdams, executive director of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity, said that "while the Church is a global organization, it is thankfully not a globalist organization".  In light of the pope's address this week (and in light of Laudato Si and other occurrences), we might believe Mr. McAdams to be mistaken.  McAdams also pointed out that Bill Gates, a frequent Bilderberg attendee, advocates lowering the world's population to stop "global climate change".  He does indeed.  However, the pope's address this week, coupled with Laudato Si, echo Gates' beliefs when they embrace the UN's Sustainable Development Goals.  In many ways, this pope has adopted the anti-life mindset of Gates et al; he certainly is furthering the progressive goals.

By the way - the big topic of discussion at this year's Bilderberg event is "populism".  Yes, they are truly worried when people actually value their own culture, traditions and faith in God versus a slavish grovelling to the New World Order.  And in what country to the Great Unwashed dare to throw off their progressive-imposed shackles?  Italy!  They join Poland and Hungary in declaring their autonomy from the EU slave-masters!  This must be such an embarrassment to the Pope and his Vatican progressive pals.  Let us keep them in prayer that they rediscover and reinvigorate their Catholic heritage.  We can even pray the same for the Vatican.

Speaking of Laudato Si, here's a little entertainment from AKA Catholic.

March For Pseudo-Science; With Idea On How Catholic Church Can Really Be Green

This is a "two-part" post as the title implies.  Both parts have as their common theme environmentalism.  First, I'll deal with the junk-science aspect.

It's obvious from the name that they dubbed for their latest media stunt "March For Science" that these people are in damage-control mode.  They understand that many people in the US are fed up with their bogus, hypocritical claims.  One "case in point" was their protest of the Dakota Pipe Line.  Their protests were ostensibly for the sake of the "environment" but in their wake they left mountains of trash that required a massive clean-up effort.

So now they claim to be upholding the banner of "science"!  Really??  What science?  Well, they hold in high esteem Paul Erlich, author of "The Population Bomb".  Remember that?  That book predicted that we would all starve ourselves to death.  But that mass starvation was supposed to occur at least twenty years ago.  His book might well have been entitled "The Bomb" for his predictions fizzled out.  It's worth noting that Ehrlich advocated abortion and contraception (even forced) to reduce the world's population.

They have the audacity to claim that their "science" is settled, that it is written in stone.  Other distinguished scientists beg to differ.  I've written before on the Heartland Institute and the Cornwall Alliance.  These two organizations have done much to demonstrate the frivolity of the claims of radical environmentalists.  We also salute Lord Christopher Monkton, who speaks truth to the harm done by environmentalism, and in particular to the harm being done by the pope's participation of that hoax.

I link now to one talk given by a so-called "illuminary" of yesterday's pseudo-science gabfest.  Perhaps this speaker didn't realize how honest she was.  She flat out states that "science, arts, etc" will wither away unless the federal government funds them.  Right there we see what that whole cabal wants - more of our money and more of our liberties.

As we've seen before, Pope Francis is in on the hoax.  I no longer believe that he is simply a naive dupe of the progressives.  He is one of them.  I mentioned Paul Ehrlich earlier in this post.  Long-time readers of this blog will note that Ehrlich was invited by the Vatican to give lectures on this topic, as were Jeffrey Sachs and other anti-life people.  We also know that Laudato Si is one giant envirowhacko screed designed to give the environmentalist movement a Catholic veneer.  I now link to one of my older posts that contains two videos that expose environmentalism and its advocates.

So much for my first topic.  Now let's move to the second topic, that is, how the Church can really do something worthwhile for the environment and reduce its carbon footprint.

When many of us go to Mass, we probably use the missalette in the pew.  It's probably made of paper, and is changed periodically, to coincide with liturgical seasons, etc.  Many people who pray the liturgy of the hours probably also use a paper booklet; Magnificat is one of the more popular ones.  Then we also see the various weekly handouts that give the hymns for the day.   Readers, does that not strike you as a considerable waste of paper, not to mention the money to print those things?  Solution?  Return to the use of the missal, the breviary, and the hymnal.  I mean the permanent ones that can be used day after day, year after year.  Yes, it will involve an initial outlay of cash, but think of the savings throughout the years in reduced subscription and printing costs.  As an added bonus, there will be less need to cut down trees.  I've had my breviary set for well over twenty years, my missal ever since the changes promulgated by Pope Benedict XVI.  What do you all think of that?

Advocate For Coerced Population Control To Speak At Vatican

When Laudato Si was being formulated, the Vatican invited many progressive hacks to conduct seminars and conferences in preparation.  Jeffrey Sachs, John Schnellnhuber and Naomi Klein come immediately to mind.  All of these people are flagrant proponents of "population control".  Within a preparatory report for Laudato Si called "Climate Change and the Common Good itself is an unmistakable call for "population control"; see this post for the direct quote.  I also link to another post on environmentalism junk science and suggest that you review the videos embedded therein.

In 1968, a left-wing ideologue named Paul Ehrlich released a book called "The Population Bomb".  This tome helped the population-control/enviromentalis juggernaut get underway.  In this book he advocated mandatory population control.  I quote: "we must have population control at home, hopefully through a system of incentives and penalties, but by compulsion of voluntary methods fail.  We must use our political power to push other countries into programs which combine agricultural development and population control."  The "voluntary methods", of course, include contraception and abortion.  As far as "compulsion", we see that in Communist China today with their barbaric forced abortions to enforce their "one child policy".  The man is flat-out advocating for big government (a prime progressive goal in and of itself) to engage in gulag-style mass murder of infants that would make both Hitler and Stalin resemble Mother Teresa in comparison.  It is not too far-fetched to guess that this man has much blood on his hands and is in grave danger off damnation as he continues to espouse his hell-spawned convictions

Incredibly, though, it seems that the Vatican, far from calling this man to repentance for his advocacy of murder, intends to give to him a forum by which he can continue to promulgate his anti-life and anti-God screeds.

The venue is a conference on "Biological Extinction", sponsored by the Pontifical Academies for the Sciences and Social Sciences, to be held late Feb - early March.  The program for this gab-fest is one huge propaganda piece telling the cliche-lie that mankind is ruining Mother Earth and we'd better do something about it yesterday or we'll all die".  See the LifeSite link for the program.   C-Fam listed a number of bald-faced lies committed by Ehrlich; I wonder how many will be in that paper that Ehrlich presents to that overpopulation hootenany next month.

By the way - who is paying for all these bogus conferences?  I'm beginning to think that a boycott of the Peter's Pence collection might be in order..

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.

Laudato Si And Paris Agreement - Spawned From Same Progressive Agenda

Cardinal Peter Turkson, who had a major role in the drafting of Laudato Si, granted an interview to a news outlet called Mongabay.  In it, he unabashedly admitted that the preamble to the agreement and Laudato Si bore very striking resemblances.  I've no doubt that they are very similar.  This only goes to show how the current Vatican leadership - including Pope Francis - are taking their marching orders from progressive puppet-masters.  Turkson might attempt to pretend that Laudato Si was some sort of inspiration for the Paris Agreement.  However, could it be that the drafters of Laudato Si and the Paris Agreement are simply taking their talking points from the same sugar-daddies?  They certainly aren't basing their theories on solid science!

The Church hierarchy has no moral right to try to cram the "climate change" ideology down our throats.  The mission of the Church is to save souls; that's the mandate given to her by Jesus Christ Himself.  The Church disgraces herself when she lets that divinely-ordained mission play second fiddle to progressive pet projects that are designed to insinuate one-world government as the world's de facto deity.  That disgrace is being allowed by, if not perpetrated by, the pope.

For instance, the Church must uphold Christ's teachings on marriage and the evil of homosexual conduct.  The Italian Parliament is deliberating bills to legalize sodomy and the adoption of children by perverts.  Good people are taking a stand.  This past weekend, an organization called "Committee to Defend Our Children" organized a rally in Rome, dubbing it "Family Day 2016".  Hundreds of thousands of good people made their voices heard.   Cardinal Angel Bagnasco, Archbishop of Genoa and president of the Italian Bishops' Conference played a key leadership role and was present at that rally.  Pope Francis, however, distanced himself from the rally, going so far as to cancel a meeting he had scheduled with Bagnasco. The Remnant has more details.  They give their opinions on the "whys and wherefores" of the pope's reluctance to stand with faithful Catholics.  They are opinions but I believe they are well-reasoned.

I mention all this to remind us all that it is outside the Church's realm of expertise to pronounce on "climate change".  We are free to disagree with the hierarchy's progressive take on the matter.  In light of the flimsy scientific basis for it and the progressive ramifications of it, I'd suggest we disagree with it vigorously.

Attention Vatican! Envirowhackoism Is NOT Magisterial Teaching

A December 3rd Acton Institute conference in Rome saw a close papal adviser make statements about the Magisterium that are, well, not in keeping with Church tradition.  The bishop in question is Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo.  He unabashedly stated that the politically correct and scientifically unsound envirowhackoism as espoused by progressives is to be considered part of the magisterium.  Why?  Because the pope included it in Laudato Si.  LifeSiteNews has a full report.

The bishop found himself contradicted by Acton president Father Robert Sirico and journalist Ricardo Cascioli.  Sorondo then uttered this incredible nonsense as the definition of the magisterium: When the Pope has assumed this, it is Magisterium of the Church whether you like it or not..

Got that?  According to him, mere assumption is enough to constitute Church teaching.  Of course that is poppycock.  At the very least, any such "assumption" must be in conformity with already-established Church teaching, and that teaching states that the pope can speak infallibly only on matters of faith and morals.

My Catholic Media Coalition colleague at Les Femmes also commented on this bishop's foolish pronouncement, one that Father Fessio called an "embarrassment to the Church".  As I mentioned in her comments, this bishop was merely parroting the pope.  I now link to a piece published by Catholic Citizens of Illinois (another Catholic Media Coalition member).  It is by Carl Olson, editor of Catholic World Report.  He writes about the many gaffes that this current pontiff has uttered and the damage done by them.  I daresay this latest nonsense by Bishop Sorondo claiming that Laudato Si is defined dogma of the Church is just the latest example of the havoc being caused by these regrettable papal statements.

More Nonsense From The United States Hierarchy In Wake Of Sin-Nod

A few weeks ago we heard that the sin-nod fathers were batting around the idea of decentralizing the Church to place more authority in the hands of national conferences of Catholic bishops.  The world immediately realizes the ramifications for the German Catholics and I pointed out some similarly disastrous possibilities should the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops be imbued with undeserved authority.

Less than two weeks later we see evidence of damage that the USCCB will inflict.  Yesterday the USCCB put out a press release stating that Catholic and Lutheran leaders released a document entitled "Declaration on the Way: Church, Ministry and Eucharist".  I linked to the article and that in turn links to the statement.  It is a long tome.  These Catholics are operating under the delusion that doctrinal differences can be talked away.  What seems to be implicit in the notion of dialog is compromise.  That, of course is impossible.  The Roman Catholic Church has the fullness of truth because it comes from Jesus Christ.  We cannot compromise one iota of that for we cannot tamper with what Jesus has given us.  Yet such compromise is implicit throughout this document.

Yesterday I received news of another incident to occur this coming Monday.  With the sin-nod in the past, the progressives are focusing again on Laudato Si.  The Not-At-All Catholic Reporter announced that Cardinal Maradiaga will be featured at a panel discussion at Georgetown University.  Also featured in this panel will be John Podesta, former Obama official who is now chairing Hillary Clinton's campaign.  This dissent-fest will be moderated by John Carr.  Maradiaga's and Carr's names are hyperlinked for a reason; I've written about them in the past and if you follow the links you'll see why these men are dissenters if not outright heretics.  And yes, Maradiaga is one of the pope's top advisors; the pope has full responsibility for what he allows Maradiaga to utter.

Today I went to Mass at a parish that will remain unnamed.  In the bulletin I saw the above event being announced.  Knowing the priest to be faithful, I've no doubt that the announcement is in his bulletin only because its inclusion was dictated from "on high"; that is, orders came from the DC chancery and probably from the USCCB.  So yes, we are just beginning to see the progressives feeling their oats as a result of the sin-nod.  Those Catholics who are giddy simply because the "sin-nod wasn't all that bad" really need to remove your rose-colored glasses and start praying..

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".

Church Environmentalism Is Phariseeism

Today is the 22nd Sunday in Ordinary Time and we are in Cycle B for Sunday readings.  Today's first reading is from Deuteronomy 4:1-2,6-8.  Here it is.

Moses said to the people:
“Now, Israel, hear the statutes and decrees
which I am teaching you to observe,
that you may live, and may enter in and take possession of the land
which the LORD, the God of your fathers, is giving you.
In your observance of the commandments of the LORD, your God,
which I enjoin upon you,
you shall not add to what I command you nor subtract from it.
Observe them carefully,
for thus will you give evidence
of your wisdom and intelligence to the nations,
who will hear of all these statutes and say,
‘This great nation is truly a wise and intelligent people.’
For what great nation is there
that has gods so close to it as the LORD, our God, is to us
whenever we call upon him?
Or what great nation has statutes and decrees
that are as just as this whole law
which I am setting before you today?”

Today's Gospel is from Mark 7:1-8,14-15,21-23.  I repost that.

When the Pharisees with some scribes who had come from Jerusalem
gathered around Jesus,
they observed that some of his disciples ate their meals
with unclean, that is, unwashed, hands. 
—For the Pharisees and, in fact, all Jews,
do not eat without carefully washing their hands,
keeping the tradition of the elders.
And on coming from the marketplace 
they do not eat without purifying themselves. 
And there are many other things that they have traditionally observed,
the purification of cups and jugs and kettles and beds. —
So the Pharisees and scribes questioned him,
“Why do your disciples not follow the tradition of the elders
but instead eat a meal with unclean hands?” 
He responded,
“Well did Isaiah prophesy about you hypocrites, as it is written:
This people honors me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me;
in vain do they worship me,
teaching as doctrines human precepts.
You disregard God’s commandment but cling to human tradition.”

He summoned the crowd again and said to them,
“Hear me, all of you, and understand. 
Nothing that enters one from outside can defile that person;
but the things that come out from within are what defile.

“From within people, from their hearts,
come evil thoughts, unchastity, theft, murder,
adultery, greed, malice, deceit,
licentiousness, envy, blasphemy, arrogance, folly.All these evils come from within and they defile.”

I emphasized in bold some points that I'll make in a minute.

Envirowhackos Prepare For Pope's Visit

From the Washington Post we read that several envirowhacko groups are planning to stage a rally on the Mall on September 24th, when the Pope is due to speak at the Capitol.  Their permit application reveals that they expect several hundred thousand to attend this thing.  Note on the Post site the picture of the poster thanking the pope for Laudato Si.  They intend to make "the moral case for reducing greenhouse gas emissions".

So they expect around two hundred thousand.  Alrighty then!  Now just how are all these environmentally-conscious activists planning to get to this rally?  I assume the great bulk will be from out of town and from different areas of the country.  In keeping with their aim of "reducing greenhouse gas emissions", will they eschew cars and planes?  Do they plan to hike on foot here?  Or maybe they'll come via horses and wagons?  Surely they don't plan to increase their own carbon footprints with gas-guzzling planes and cars now, do they?  Do they???  Well, I think we know the answer to that!

Noami Klein herself let the cat out of the bag regarding the real use that progressives have for environmentalism.  It's a ploy to foist socialism, with all its atheistic and anti-life underpinnings on humanity.  And yes, the pope is in on it; let's stop pretending that he's a naive but lovable ol' grandpappy.  Whatever else he is, he's not stupid.

We now have an idea why the United Nations has embraced environmentalism, along with Agenda 21 and all the socialist philosophies underlying them.  Why else would Ban Ki-Moon have attended the Vatican-sponsored environmental summits?  We have noticed these patterns and the Vatican tries to poo-poo our concerns.  Perhaps they protest too loudly.

Cardinal Pell Makes Plain Why Laudato Si Should Not Be Taken As Teaching

Cardinal Pell is to be commended for reminding the world that the Church cannot pronounce infallibly on matters of empirical science, or economics for that matter, because Our Lord has not granted her any mandate to do so.  She may teach infallibly on matters of faith and morals - but that's it.  All other matters are left to prudential judgment, given the parameters of faith and morals.  The encyclical makes pretentious claims that the "science" and "economics" promoted therein are the will of God; again that's impossible for those fields are not within the Church's competence.  One immediate outcome will be the reduction of credibility that will be ascribed when the pope does speak on matters of faith and morals, for people might understandably think that if the pope can botch up matters of science and economics in an encyclical (and he has!), why should they believe him when he speaks on matters of faith and morals?  Yes, such thinking would be erroneous and cannot be condoned, but the mess that is Laudato Si renders it understandable.

No doubt Cardinal Pell sees the potential for such real damage that Laudato Si will wreak (see here and here).  It is filled with progressive screed that not only was inspired by the rantings of Sachs and Shnellnhuber, but perhaps are the prattling of the same.  You'll notice that in the first half of the thing.  Here is a collection of my posts on LS; in those posts is a link to the English translation of the document.

The Catholic World Report recently put out a piece that takes issue with the faulty economics that are peppered throughout Laudato Si.  In Laudato Si, the pope raises the same alarmist tocsins regarding the "scarcity" of resources.  Now here's a salient point that CWR raises: "If the pope and others are ringing alarm bells, at times they seem to underestimate the creative power of human intelligence and freedom in the face of extreme scarcity of resources."  Many, if not all, progressives seem to think of man as being a mere consumer.  They fail, or more aptly, refuse to recognize that human labor and ingenuity is probably the most valuable resource imaginable.  That is why they are constantly kvetching for "population control" along with the abortion, contraception and sterilization that they think is necessary to attain "sustainable development".  That is why the "Sachs and Schnellnhuber" cabal seek to bring in others of their mindset such as Noami Klein.

This week's Catholic Standard had as its theme "preparation for the Pope's visit".  One "suggested activity" was to read Laudato Si.  I agree that it should be read so that all might see for themselves that it is permeated with progressive venom.  It is not in keeping with the traditions of our Church and must be both refused and resisted.

Yet Another Vatican Conference Will Promote Climate-Change Junk Science And Population Control

From the Catholic News Agency, we read that this conference will occur next week, July 21-22.  Ostensibly its purpose is to demonstrate a linkage between "climate change" and slavery.  Well, I daresay other linkages are made even more manifest by this conference.  The title of the conference is one indicator.  "Modern Slavery and Climate Change: the Commitment of the Cities" is the title of the workshop in question that will be held during the conference entitled "Prosperity, People and Planet: Achieving Sustainable Development in Our Cities".  The conference is sponsored by (surprise!) the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.

Let's focus on the conference title for now.  What two words indicate the underlying agenda with all this?  Sustainable Development!  We've seen that lots of times over the past few months, have we not?  Back in April, this same Pontifical Academy of Sciences hosted another symposium to prepare for the disastrous Laudato Si; the report produced therein specifically called for "reaching a level and sustainable population".  Recall that just after the release of Laudato Si, the Apostolic Nuncio to the UN gave the Vatican's formal approval to "the verbatim inclusion of the sustainable development goals and targets" of the UN.  That means that the Vatican has given approval for the usage of abortion, contraception and sterilization to accomplish those ends.  Oh sure, there might be the statements here and there decrying abortion, but they are far outweighed by the more insidious promulgation of concepts such as "climate change" and "sustainable development".

We also must consider whom the pope is taking into his confidence.  We've seen him include in various deliberations and conferences notorious "population control" advocates such as Jeffrey Sachs, Hans Schnellnhuber and others.  I point out that Schnellnhuber was recently appointed by the pope to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.  Can anyone doubt that he had much to do with the putrid output of these symposiums and conferences?

I wrote a piece two months ago explaining how I see the "smoke of satan"entering the Church through a number of specific avenues; one of them is climate change, but they all seem to dovetail into each other.  We also see how the "climate change" hoax makes it easy for guilty parties to excuse their enabling of the gay agenda.

Almost two years ago I wrote of a pastor within the Archdiocese of Washington who publicly announced that he condoned homosexual conduct while counseling Catholics.  At that time I wondered aloud if he would be allowed to continue in his post, where he posed a danger to souls.  Lo and behold, this week's issue of the Catholic Standard indicates that he still holds his post.  Not only that, but the Standard is holding Father Daly and his parish up as examples.  Why?  Because they've "gone green"!  In Father's words, it's part of "a living faith".  So, never mind about the souls of the poor homosexuals who need the truth of Jesus Christ and His sacramental graces.  As long as the parish and pastor are "green" (and don't you just love his green cap?), who care about souls going to hell?

Remember - Laudato Si and the proceeds from these junk-summits do not stem from dogma.  They fall within the realm of "prudential judgment" at best.  Truth be told, the level of "prudence" isn't that high, as these things do reek of progressivism.  We are not required, as faithful Catholics, to give assent to them.  I'll leave you with two things: the first is an excellent article by John Zmirak.  The second is a link to some very relevant entertainment for a Friday evening.

More On The Blasphemy From Bolivia

This past Friday I wrote a bit about the blasphemous "crucifix" offered to the Pope by Bolivian president Evo Morales.  In the blogosphere there was doubt as to whether or not the Pope looked favorably upon that monstrosity.  Subsequent events indicate that he did.

The pope also gave an address to a summit of "social justice" activists.  The full text can be found on Whispers In The Loggia.  This blogger points out that this address of the pope was actually written out, complete with footnotes; it's not just some "off-the-cuff" production.  I urge you to read it.  Quite frankly, it resembles something we might have expected at some community-organizing ACORN convention.

In the first section, he asks a series of questions, each starting with the phrase "do we realize that something is wrong" then names some social ills.  None of these questions touches upon the millions of unborn children being slaughtered in the womb.  We see no mention of the ever-increasing usage of contraception and sterilization.  Neither do we see any mention of the homosexual assault upon marriage.  Of all the things that the pope lists as "intolerable" these mortal sins should top the list, for in addition to endangering the souls of all who commit these sins, they also undermine the moral underpinnings of any society, regardless of the economic condition of that society.

What you have here is a thinly-disguised commercial for Laudato Si and for world-wide government - a socialistic one at that.  Time had some commentary on this exchange.  Yes the author is waxing lyrical about the progressive elements in the events of that day.  Sadly I can understand how she would draw such conclusions.

There is a rather distasteful twist to the bauble saga.  Before he left Bolivia, he placed the "hammer/sickle crucifix" and its matching medal at the foot of a statue of Our Lady.  It would have been far more appropriate to lay these abominations in the nearest trash can.  So now not only is Jesus blasphemed but His mother is similarly mocked as well.

It now seems that what we once thought were simply unfortunate gaffes and media spins were in fact representative of what the progressives in the Vatican really want - and that probably includes the pope!  We do have Christ's promise that the pope will never solemnly promulgate error, but that doesn't mean havoc cannot otherwise be wreaked.  Pray, frequent the Sacraments and study the traditions of our faith.

Laudato Si - Featuring The Neverly Brothers!

From Harvesting the Fruit by Louie Verrecchio!  Enjoy!

Vatican's Flirtation With Climate Change Leads To More Squalid Associations

Almost two months ago, I wrote of "the smoke of Satan" infiltrating the Catholic Church.  As you read the first post in that anthology, you'll notice that there are a number of avenues by which progressivism and by extension, Satan, is insinuating his anti-God agenda into the minds of Catholic leaders; I regret to say that evidence indicates that some of his nefarious ideas are seemingly being entertained by the pope.  Obviously with the Obergefell v Hodges ruling, our attention has been focused on the second bullet point.  However much has been happening with regards to the first and fourth points.

Again we owe much gratitude to the Lepanto Institute for smoking out some "smoke of Satan".  They discovered that within days of the issuance of Laudato Si, Archbishop Bernardito Auza, Aposotoic Nuncio to the UN, gave formal approval to the "Sustainable Development" goals of the United Nations.  The official Vatican statement, made on behalf of Pope Francis, stated, "We support the verbatim inclusion of the sustainable development goals and targets as in the Report of the OWG (Open Working Group)."  We all know what that term "verbatim" means in this context; the Vatican has put its stamp of approval to all the sustainable development goals; that includes "sexual and reproductive rights".  Of course that means contraception, sterilization and abortion.

Read the Lepanto article for more detail.  I do have one minor disagreement with Lepanto.  Towards the end, they opine that the archbishop and the pope don't understand the ramifications of the sustainable development goals.  I believe the only way that could possibly be true if both the pope and this archbishop were absolutely clueless dunderheads.  Can we believe that without being simpletons ourselves?  Of course not: not when "sustainable development" and various synonyms are splattered all throughout Laudato Si itself.

But there is evidence to make clear that the Vatican, all the way to the pope, understand very well what is entailed by the phrase "sustainable development".  A key component of that evidence is the plethora of progressives and anti-life personalities who, at the behest of the Vatican, are providing input to the "climate change" initiatives of the Vatican: Ban Ki-Moon, Jeffrey Sachs, Hans Schnellnhuber.  It seems that this evidence is growing before our very eyes.

Word now comes to us via Catholic News Agency that yet another such individual will be working with Cardinal Turkson.  She is Naomi Klein and she describes herself as a "secular Jewish feminist".  She states that she was "surprised" to be invited to speak at a Vatican environmental summit.  Well, many of us share her surprise, albeit for different reasons.  She clearly has Marxist leanings (like so many in the Vatican these days) and has gone so far as to support the Occupy movement.

We clearly are getting an unambiguous picture of the attitudes of many in the Vatican when it comes to population control.  Whether they intend it or not, they are lending credibility to baby murder.

The Rot Inside The Church That Paved The Way For Laudato Si

An organization called America's Survival interviewed Michael Hichborn shortly before Laudato Si was officially released.  He revealed quite a few details on how pervasive the progressive rot is inside the Vatican - all the way to the top.  Of course he touches upon the Catholic Campaign for Human Development and all the other corruption that make up the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.  Take note especially of how John Carr, former director of "social justice" at the USCCB, tried to bribe Hichborn into silence about all that he uncovered.

Towards the end, Hichborn noted that CCHD is still corrupt and that we should not contribute.  I agree.  On that note, I've a word for the Archdiocese of Washington.  Most dioceses hold their CCHD collections in November.  For several years now, the ADW has held its collection in August; this year it'll be during the Aug 8-9 weekend.  Moreover, they've tried to disguise it by stating that it's the "Catholic Communications and Human Development" collection.  Drop not one red penny into that.  I'll have more on this later.  Now the video.

Laudato Si And Climate Confusion

In today's Mic'd Up from Church Militant TV, Michael Voris interviews three guests to comment on the junk science that is the basis of Laudato Si.  Two of them are Lord Christopher Monckton and Michael Hichborn.  Pay close attention to all of them, but note most carefully the indignity that Monckton endured at the hands of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences because he doesn't swill the "climate change" kool-aid.  Here's the link.

By the way - look up some words and phrases in Laudato Si.  It's quite telling.

• Try "sustainable" (for "sustainable development).  I suggest just that one word for what you will see is an attempt to conceal the phrase by plopping other words: namely "sustainable and integral development", found in paragraph 13.  We also see "sustainable human development" in paragraph 18.  The simple phrase occurs by itself in paragraph 52.  Now in paragraph 61, we see that "the present world system ...is unsustainable".  See how the idea of a "new world order" is being insinuated?  There are synonyms, such as "sustainable progress" in paragraph 114.  The phrase by itself occurs again in paragraph 159.  We see it again in paragraph 167 as the Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit is lauded, and again in paragraph 169 as scientists such as Lord Monckton and others are mocked.  That word again is found in paragraphs 191 and 192; read those paragraphs.  So the phrase "sustainable development" is being repeated, and perhaps for a purpose.  Consider that in April the Pontifical Academy of Sciences hosted a "sustainable development" symposium (from which they tried to exclude Monckton).  From that meeting came a document that overtly called for population control.  See the quote in my linked article.  There's method to the madness, it seems.
• Let's look at "humanism".  I touched upon the atheistic underpinnings of that term a few days ago.  Just google "American Humanist Association" and look at the manifestos.  In this document, the word occurs in paragraphs 141 and 180.
• Try looking up "regulat".  I suggest that spelling so you can see the root word in both "noun" and "adjective" permutations.  Interesting?

The authors were not at all subtle about their shilling for one-world-government in Laudato Si.  In the video, suggestions are made that the pope was "duped".  I think that's unreasonable.  Should we really believe that the leader of the Church, who was a bishop in a major city, is really such an imbecilic dunce that he could be led by the nose like that?  I'm grateful that Monckton ended his portion of the interview as he did.