Jesus Begged For What??!!?!

HT to Pewsitter, by the way.

I would not believe this otherwise, but since it's on the Vatican's own website the evidence is irrefutable.  This is the Pope's homily for this past Sunday, the Feast of the Holy Family.  Here is the line in question:  "Instead of returning home with his family, he stayed in Jerusalem, in the Temple, causing great distress to Mary and Joseph who were unable to find him. For this little “escapade”, Jesus probably had to beg forgiveness of his parents. The Gospel doesn’t say this, but I believe that we can presume it."

From the very first moment of the Incarnation, Jesus was and is God, the Second Person of the Trinity.  God does not beg for forgiveness for God does not sin; to insinuate otherwise is to commit heresy.  This gaffe that is embedded in the Pope's homily is not a harmless little "slip of the tongue" for this runs counter to the Divine Personhood of Jesus.  We're seeing way too many of these little "zingers and snippets".  (I'm thinking of the Matthew Kelly "half-brother" gaffe, too)  They occur so quickly that they can escape notice, but still the words and yes, heresies, are introduced into our minds - and all the more readily since we're often not on guard and vigilant against these.  Therefore, I will do my best to continue to call these out.

Operation Storm Heaven

An organization called Catholic Action For Faith And Family has inaugurated a prayer campaign called Operation Storm Heaven.  A key component of the campaign is for Catholics to pledge to pray the Rosary on the first of each month.   Cardinal Burke has lent his support and encouragement to this prayer effort.

Obviously the world is in desperate need of prayer.  This effort seems to dovetail nicely with the requests put forth by Our Lady of Fatima.  Let us all pledge to offer the Rosary on the first of the month at a bare minimum and to get others to do the same.

Matthew Kelly Poison In DC Parishes Again

After Christmas Mass we all received a Christmas present.  It was a book by Matthew Kelly called "Rediscover Jesus".  I've written about Kelly in the past as I have found his stuff to be, quite frankly, less than Catholic.  Because it was free (meaning I did not have to pony my cash to Kelly's wallet) I took one and glanced through it.  That one glance told me that Kelly's theology had not improved one iota.  I copied the page and post it below.

The problem is the last sentence of the third paragraph.  I tried to highlight it, but it is faint.  At any rate, that last sentence is enough to cause a sane Catholic to junk this book.  Ladies and gentlemen, note the phrase "half-brother of Jesus".  Jesus had no "half-siblings".  The Perpetual Virginity of Mary is defined Catholic dogma!  Please let no one delude themselves into thinking that this point is "just a technicality".  If Holy Mother Church thought it important enough to make the perpetual virginity of Mary a dogma, then it deserves all due consideration.

Whether or not Kelly intended it, he wrote heresy.  Perhaps this lapse can be chalked up to faulty formation that he may have received as a child.  We all know how far Catholic education has declined in the past 50 years or so.  But isn't that all the more reason for our parishes and chanceries to carefully vet these books before they're released to the Catholics in the pew?

There are other issues with this book (and his previous books).  While this book does state that sin hinders our relationship with God, it is quite selective about the kinds of sins with which it deals.  I see talk of "greed" and "losing one's temper", but nowhere did I detect any mention of mortal sins such as the support of abortion, contraception, gay #mowwidge.  But anyone with two functioning eyeballs can see that it's rampant in the pews - not only the support but the participation in these mortal sins.  That means we have Catholics in the pews who may well be hell-bound, and there's no mention of these real dangers.  Speaking of hell, I see no mention of that important reality whatsoever in that book (or his other books).  Why not?  Our Lord mentioned it often as a solemn warning.  In all fairness to Kelly, it can be argued that he's merely following the lead of the American clergy in not specifying mortal sins and the reality of hell.  In their misguided and dare I say feckless desire not to upset people, they are doing the Catholic congregation a gross disservice.

Another related issue is the overemphasis on "experience".  As I read the Gospels, I see no mention of Jesus calling people to "experience" Him.  Rather, there is the call for repentance and obedience, with the graces communicated through the Sacraments as administered by the Church.  Indeed, in the Gospel of Mark, Jesus's first recorded word is "repent".  The soon-to-be-canonized Mother Teresa of Calcutta is said to have gone most of her life with no experience of God's presence.  She did count that as a cross, but still it goes to show that "experience" is not a necessary component of the Catholic's spiritual life.  One could call Kelly's approach "putting the cart before the horse", but without specific mention of the serious sins for which one should repent and obtain absolution, I'd have to say in this instance that "there's a cart but no horse".

Some might think my characterization of Kelly's materials as being "poison" to be a bit harsh.  They might say that the great majority (while somewhat vapid for its "peaches and ice cream tone") is decent enough.  But no one can gainsay the heresy that is there in plain sight.  For reasons that I stated in an earlier post, I don't think anything that contains heresy can be used as a spiritual guide regardless of other material contained within.

Is this book showing up in other parishes?

UPDATE - The answer to that last question is "yes".  Someone from St. Andrew the Apostle told me they have it.  That suggests impetus from the DC chancery.

UPDATE #2 - Per Jeff's comment below, the phrase I wrote above, "he wrote heresy" should be rendered "he published heresy".  Kelly says it's from another source but in his own book offered no correction nor clarification regarding the Church dogma.

O Holy Night

Celine Dion and Susan Boyle sang their own versions and they were mixed - not bad.  Have a blessed Christmas!

Caution! Trigger Alert! Watch At Your Own Risk!

Warning to the perpetually-offended-snowflake crowd!  It's time to grab your binkies, security blankets and teddy bears and head to your nearest "safe space"!  Why?  Because the following video is a racially-charged micro-aggression!

To the adults among my readers  I wish the preceding paragraph was just a spoof, but regrettably it's not.  A reporter took a fake petition to a college campus (he didn't specify but the video indicates that it was George Mason University) and got some students to sign a petition to ban "White Christmas" from radio stations because, well, it does mention the word "white".  Eek.  Eek.  How racist!

Anyway, here is the horrifying video!  You've been duly warned!

Vatican Aligning Itself With Socialists For Population Control And Governmental Tyranny

About six months ago, I mentioned how Margaret Archer, president of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences (PASS) paved the way for socialists to influence Laudato Si.  My remarks concerning Archer were rather perfunctory.

Michael Hichborn of Lepanto Institute has released a piece in which he delves into Archer's past career, revealing her own Marxist mindset.  He also exposes the same in several other members of the PASS.  How is it that all these people, who espouse and promote ideologies at odds with Church teaching, were granted admittance to positions of influence?

Remember the plane interview that the pope gave last month, just as the UN summit on climate change was set to begin in Paris?  At that time, he said that the summit was "humanity's last chance to thwart climate disaster" and that the world was "at the limits of suicide".  Voice of the Family announced today that the pope is pleased with the final agreement that came from that gabfest, although the language contained therein promotes abortion and contraception.  I urge you all to read VOTF's excellent analysis.  I needn't rehash it here, but will now touch upon an American who was present at that meeting.

He is California Governor Jerry Brown and he's known in many circles as "moon beam".  What follows is just one reason why he so richly deserves that moniker.  In an address that he gave to the other attendees at the UN meeting in support of their objectives, he advised them to  "never underestimate the coercive power of the central state in the service of good".  Yes, he actually uttered that bald-faced endorsement of governmental coercion of citizens.  It is screed worthy of Josef Stalin or Chairman Mao: not of a governor of one of the fifty United States of America.

Now recall that the pope is pleased with the final outcome of this meeting, this "last chance for humanity"!  The pope cannot be blind to the rampant, overt socialism oozing forth from the Vatican and the summits that he supports.  Regrettably he seems to be of like mind with the Marxists.

Yes! Mary DID Know!

Christmas Music - Caution Is In Order

If you've gone into shopping centers these past few weeks, you've undoubtedly noticed music with Christmas-related themes.  In fact you might have noticed that if you've been in the malls anytime after Halloween.  We heard Silent Night, O Holy Night, Joy to the World, etc.  Of course public schools have exerted all kinds of efforts to expunge any mention of Christ from His own birthday.  The stores, though secular, aren't that stupid; they understand that this music often induces purchases at their stores.

Much of the music is indeed uplifting, such as the carols listed above.  But others, not so much.  Along with the music that does explicitly mention the Birth of Christ, there are other songs, popularly associated with Christmas, that simply talk of winter-themed pleasantries.  I have in mind songs such as Jingle Bells, Sleigh Ride, Deck the Halls, etc.  While these songs, in and of themselves, are harmless enough, their inclusion in the ranks of true Christmas Carols tends to adulterate the true focus of Christmas.

I mention this because I do hear among people genuine concern about the commercialization of Christmas and the loss of focus on its meaning.  Yet many of these same folks will insist that "White Christmas" is a true Christmas carol, right up there with Lo How A Rose E'er Blooming.  They believe that the loss of the sense of Christmas is a relatively recent phenomenon but I think it goes back a lot longer than that - and I mean like 70 years ago at least.  The "harmless" songs I mentioned are a clear indication of the distractions that have been allowed to worm their ways into our culture.

But I daresay there have been some "not-so-harmless" influences that have corroded our understanding of Christmas.  There are two songs that I have in mind.  How on earth any right-thinking Christian can consider these authentic "Christmas music" boggles my mind.  In fact, any decent society would have relegated these to the trash.  The first one is called "Santa Baby", made (in)famous by Eartha Kitt in 1953.  I will not dignify this by linking to it. I'm sure many can remember it and why I say that it is chock full of vulgar innuendos.  It was my understanding that radio stations back then were a bit more discerning about the morality of music played on their stations; obviously I was mistaken.

The other was released about five years prior to "Santa Baby".  It's called "Baby It's Cold Outside".  It is a man-woman duet, performed by many singers over the years and it was included in a movie.  I cannot even fathom how it's considered "Christmas music".  "Santa Baby" does mention Santa so I get that connection.  All "baby" does is mention some cold weather, but I guess that's enough to trigger "Christmas" in some minds.  Now again I won't link to this, but the lyrics reveal a conversation between the man and the woman, where the man is trying to seduce the woman into spending the night at his place and most likely to commit the mortal sin of fornication.  Please tell me - how does any right-thinking Christian equate the seduction into mortal sin with the birth of God Incarnate?  I don't get it!

Many of us see quite clearly how the culture has degraded and become more bestial as it has abandoned its Christian underpinnings and indeed God Himself.  However, we must be honest and realize that the rot started a bit earlier than we might care to admit.  The two songs I just mentioned above, along with the supposedly "Christian" public's initial enjoyment of them, were part and parcel of the corrosion of morality.  I know some will poo-poo this post, telling me to "lighten up".  Well, first - let's wise up, shall we?  When we're exhorted by Scripture to "always keep watch", that passage means what it says, with the operative word being "always".

We've heard of "custody of the eyes".  I suspect we need to practice some "custody of the ears" as well.  In the next post I'll put up a Vortex that exposes the heresy in a contemporary "Christmas" song that is quite the hit in "Christiian pop" culture.

Catholic Standard Sells Its Soul For Advertising Revenue

The December 17th issue of the Catholic Standard arrived in my mailbox today.  As all know, it is the official news organ of the Archdiocese of Washington, supposedly a bastion of all things Catholic.  At the very least, one would hope that everything published therein would reflect Catholic morality.  Today that assumption is called into question.

Please notice the two pictures of page 19, the advertisement page.  I'm unable to find the online version of it so I presume it doesn't exist.




Here is a shot of the entire page 19.  The ad in question is at the bottom left.  The next shot is a close-up of it.

Here it is.  Regrettably we've all seen these as spam ads in our email boxes.  Fortunately many of us have learned to filter these out with various firewalls and spam filters.  So now we find them in Catholic newspapers?  Who at the Standard is in charge of deciding what ads are permitted to be published?

Ladies and gentlemen, this is NOT the sort of ad that belongs in a Catholic publication, especially the official publication of a Catholic diocese.  Look at the wording of this thing.  "Love life"?  Right there we see the word "love" being cheapened as it is equated with sexual activity.  I shudder to think what these "seven secrets" might entail.  We hope and pray that none of these "secrets" has nothing to do with mortal sins against chastity.

The ad claims that "you owe it to yourself and to your lady".  Lady??  That's rather all-encompassing, wouldn't you say?  Could they not at least have used the word "wife" instead of "lady"?  After all, such matters should be occurring only between a man and a woman united in permanent, faithful matrimony.  It would seem that "lady" leaves the door wide open for fornication and/or adultery.

Some people at the Standard need to be set straight for allowing this debauched ad to be published.

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.