September's Poop Video - A Travesty Against God's Justice

H/T Canon 212

In September's Poop Video, Francis calls upon all Catholics to "pray for abolition of the death penalty".  Here it is now.  Below that I will explain why I believe this is supremely wrong and spiritually poisonous.

So much error.  So little time.  But I'll do my level best to unpack this crap.

I've written much about Francis' dalliance with heresy in calling for the abolition of the death penalty.  I need not rehash those writings in this post.  If the reader would like to dismiss my writings as simply the opinion of some "rigid rad-trad", go right ahead.  Will you say the same of previous popes, some of them canonized and beatified?  How about two prominent Doctors of the Church: Augustine and Aquinas?

I believe this poop video schlock isn't just about the death penalty, per se.  In fact, Francis' animus towards the death penalty is simply a trial balloon, to see how much he can get away with completely twisting Church teaching to be just the opposite of what it's always been.  The death penalty is a relatively easy topic for him to use, since many Catholics are ambivalent towards capital punishment.  Their own feelings towards the matter obscures their perception of the larger picture of the totality of Church teaching.  If Francis can work his wiles with the death penalty, it would be so much easier to attack other areas of Church teaching.

And those attacks are starting.  Last month the Pontifical Academy for Life, led by homophile Archbishop Paglia, released a document called "Theological Ethics of Life: Scripture, Tradition, and Practical Challenges".  This tome calls into question the Church's teachings on contraception.  The question is, what will Francis do with this?  It appears that many of the PAL were not aware of this document.  So only a few concocted this thing in a rather secretive manner.

So this poop video appears to be an attempt to condition Catholics to passively accept more attacks on Church teaching, but maybe it's worse than that.

Not only is Francis announcing his attempt to mutilate the Teachings of the Church regarding the death penalty, that is, to commit heresy, but he is trying to con Catholics into formal cooperation with his sinful intentions.  For many Catholics who are ignorant of the tenets of their Faith, their personal culpability may be mitigated somewhat, but I doubt that it is fully erased for the heresy does exist and they would be giving their assent to it.

We now know there are proceedings underway to change the Church's teachings regarding the sinfulness of contraception.  If Francis succeeds into duping Catholics to go along with disregard for Church teaching regarding the death penalty, it's all the more easier to convince these same Catholics that "Church teaching can change" regarding contraception.  Of course we know from our 50+ years of history that the status of abortion will soon follow that of contraception.  Recall that last week, Francis confirmed and renewed Father James Martin's appointment as advisor for Vatican communications.  Recall also that after the Dobbs ruling, Martin released a tweet in which he said, "a one-minute-old zygote is not the same as a nine-month-old baby about to be born".  Yes, he did have the nerve to say that.  But maybe that's because he knows his higher-ups are of the same mind-set as he.

I certainly cannot join in prayer for that "intention".  Truth be told, I stopped praying "for the pope's intentions during my morning offerings.  Instead, I pray for his conversion to the One True Faith.

Pope Francis Continues To Clash With Sacred Tradition

The pace of the current pope's attempts to deconstruct the traditions as espoused by his predecessors is increasing to a pace that is difficult to match.  The pope recently referred to the death penalty as a mortal sin.  From America magazine we read how he equated the death penalty with slavery, saying erroneously that they were both considered acceptable.  Note - before some say that this article simply reflects America's progressive leanings, a careful read of the byline will reveal that this article is a reprint of a piece from Catholic News Service, the news outlet of the USCCB.  Why USCCB is clasping hands with this heretic rag will have to be a topic for a future post.  Suffice it to say that I've no reason to doubt the factual accuracy of the pope's quoted statements.

Nowhere in Scripture or Tradition is the practice of slavery condoned, let alone promoted as a social good.  Individual Christians may have been embroiled in it, but that does not mean the Church hierarchy gave official approval of slavery.  Sacred Tradition, on the other hand, has always held that the death penalty is a legitimate tool to be used by civil governments to facilitate the protection of the citizens under their care.  Even St John Paul II acknowledged the same when he made his own abhorrence of the death penalty known.

In the America article, the pope pretends to be able to take what Sacred Tradition always acknowledged to be a tool for the maintenance of the public good and to make it into a mortal sin.  He's trying to morph a moral good into an intrinsically moral evil.  I remember a quote whereby the Lord chastises those who call "evil" "good" and vice versa.  Let's move on.

Cardinal Coccopalmerio is President of the Pontifical Council For Legislative Texts.  He's responsible for interpreting much of canon law.  He recently said that Anglican orders may be, in some cases, valid.  That is a direct contradiction of Apostolicae Curie, issued by Pope Leo XIII.  In that papal bull, Pope Leo XIII declared (in section 36) "that ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been, and are, absolutely null and utterly void".  Pope Leo could not have been any clearer.

Here's the last one for this post.  From Gloria TV we learn of the possibility that Humanae Vitae might be on the papal chopping block.  Well, it's all about being "pastoral", isn't it?  Will contraception be considered "pastoral" and "accompanying"?  That would be a violation not only of Humanae Vitae, but of Evangelium Vitae, Casti Connubi, and most likely others - all teachings of Jesus Christ Himself.

Any sitting pope can only guard the Deposit of Faith.  He cannot alter it.  I'm not a canon lawyer so I ask that if Pope Francis were to solemnly proclaim these errors to be truth, would said declaration show his papacy to be illegitimate?

USCCB Calls Evil What God Ordained As A Tool For Civil Order

Last week I posted how many leftists are putting their souls into jeopardy by calling evil what God has ordained as goods.  The USCCB continues down that slippery path.

Today Attorney General William Barr has announced that the US Department of Justice will resume the federal death penalty.  Right on cue the USCCB is pitching its hissy fit.  A telling phrase in the Catholic News Agency piece is this: "Catechism of the Catholic Church paragraph 2267 on the death penalty was updated in 2018 with a statement from Pope Francis, calling the death penalty “inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person."

NEWS FLASH!  No one, not even a pope, can change Church teaching.  The pope is to safeguard the Deposit of Faith, not mutate it according to his whims and fancies.  Other popes throughout the centuries have upheld the legitimacy of the death penalty.  Pope John Paul II, in paragraph 56 of Evangelium Vitae, while making his personal disapproval known, also upheld the licity of the death penalty.

Any statement that claims that the death penalty is inherently evil is rank heresy.  It doesn't matter who utters it.

Did The Pope Utter Heresy In Regard To The Death Penalty?

We know that several of the previous pontiffs have personally opposed the death penalty.  Pope Saint John Paul II was one.  He wrote about it in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae.  However, he acknowledged that the state still had the right to legitimate use of the death penalty.  He never tried to abolish it outright.  He couldn't, for the legitimacy of the death penalty has been established Church teaching for the past 2,000 years.  I will link to two blogging colleagues who wrote pieces in response to the erroneous efforts by a number of Catholic press outlets.  One is by From Rome and the other from One Peter Five.  In my post two weeks ago I also presented some Catholic truth on the matter.  I think all this supports From Rome's premise, that it is a heresy to claim that capital punishment is wrong.

That makes the pope's words, released this morning by Vatican news outlets, to be quite troubling.

He stated today that the death penalty is "inadmissible, however serious the crime".  Ladies and gentlemen, that is not Catholic doctrine - and thus not the teaching of Jesus Christ.  Will this pope declare that his predecessors and many Doctors of the Church to be in error?  He rails against "punishing one murder with another".  His statement does not do justice to the definition of "murder" according to Catholic moral theology, as I explained in my March 6th post.

No pope can contradict the perennial teaching of Holy Mother Church - but that is precisely what Pope Francis did this morning!  St Thomas Aquinas defines heresy as "a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith in Christ, corrupt its dogmas."

So does this blanket condemnation of capital punishment constitute heresy?

Is The Church's Teachings On Contraception In Francis' Cross-Hairs?

While returning to Rome after his recent trip to Canada (a disaster in and of itself), Francis gave yet another lackluster plane interview.  The official transcript is on the Vatican website.   The question of concern is towards the bottom.  Even more concerning than the question is the answer.

In actuality, the question was one that would have been answered with a simple "yes" or "no", with "no" being the correct answer.  Francis never answered the question.  Rather, he segued into an overly wordy session of verbal diarrhea.  Read it for yourselves, as he blathers about "development of doctrine".  Somehow he manages to badmouth faithful Catholics who hold to the Church's timeless traditions.

Francis incorrectly invoked Saint Vincent of Lerins as the latter spoke of doctrine.  Catholic Answers has an excellent article that unpacks Francis' misquote of St. Vincent.  Please read it.  I need not rehash it here except to emphasize that doctrine, as it develops correctly, will always clarify truth.  Never will authentic development of Church doctrine lead to its contradiction.  Please recall that is what Francis did when he attempted to change Church teaching regarding the death penalty.  The Church had always recognized the death penalty to be a legitimate option to be used by civil governments in the restoration of justice.  Francis falsely stated that the death penalty is "intrinsically evil".  Not only is that false, it is rank heresy.

As I said in earlier posts, I think Francis used the death penalty matter as a trial balloon to see how much heresy the faithful were willing to swallow before coming to see that Francis might be an anti-pope.  At first glance, it appears that his gambit worked.  Now with him potentially rattling his saber against several papal documents condemning contraception, it appears that more are willing to consider the sad possibility that an anti-pope rules the Vatican.  How much more before faithful Catholics wake up?

Pope Francis Thumbs His Nose At Predecessors Regarding The Death Penalty

Pope Francis has for several years been advocating for an end to the death penalty, claiming that it is immoral.  Of course such opinions are in direct contradiction to the 2000+ years of Church Tradition.  I have long suspected that he has gone after that precisely because many good Catholics are ambivalent about usage of the death penalty today.  Perhaps he thinks that he can tinker with it to the point of heresy since he is not too likely to receive strenuous blow-back from such heretical attempts.  Therefore, if he weakens and compromises Church doctrine regarding that topic, he will have set a precedent for mutating other Church doctrine. 

Earlier today, the pope addressed a delegation from the International Commission Against The Death Penalty.  During that address, he dared to state that his predecessors "ignored the primacy of mercy over justice".  Of course he set up one of his infamous false dichotomies between "mercy" and "justice", as though justice is not an attribute of God's.

We must continue prayers for this pope.  While doing so, we must also study the Faith on our own, for many simply don't have access to faithful teachers of Church tradition.

The Pope Has Uttered Heresy. Is The Seat Of Peter Vacant?

From the Catholic News Service (official news outlet of the USCCB), we read that the "pope revises catechism to say that death penalty is inadmissible".  With that the pope has squarely plopped himself into full-blown heresy.

It cannot be denied.  No pope can change Church teaching.  The Church's teachings are immutable for they emanate from God, who is Himself immutable.  Throughout the centuries the Church has always upheld the legitimacy and usefulness of capital punishment.  No one pope can turn around and contradict all his predecessors, Church Fathers, Doctors of the Church etc without pronouncing heresy.

Many blogging colleagues have written excellent analyses of this latest antic of Pope Francis'.  Rather than "reinvent the wheel", I'll now link to them for your reference and reading.

• One Peter Five - with a discussion on why the pope's statement is formal heresy
• Ann Barnhardt - with a smattering of teaching throughout the years
• AKA Catholic - detailing how Pope John Paul II's errors facilitated today's heresy
• Remnant - exposing the arrogance behind Francis' stunt.
• My own prior writings - including why abolishment of the death penalty is itself sinful

This heresy needs to be put in some context.  I don't think I'm the only one to find it very interesting that the pope plopped this stinker just as we are all focused on the sodomite rapists among the episcopate.  In a saner time, they would be eligible for the death penalty, but I digress.

We also notice that this is happening as there is much discussion on:

• admission of divorced and "remarried", that is, adulterers, to Holy Communion
• admission of non-Catholics to Holy Communion
• allowing dissident women to pretend that they are "deaconesses"
• attempts to normalize sodomy in the Church (e.g., amoralis lamentia)

The things stated above would all be heretical.  Might the push to demonize capital punishment be a "trial balloon", so to speak, to get faithful Catholics to swallow the false notion that immutable Church teaching can be "tweaked" here and there?  Some faithful Catholics might buy the canard that capital punishment might well be declared wrong in opposition to centuries of Tradition.  But right there, the camel has stuck his nose under the tent, for if Tradition can be disregarded with respect to capital punishment, why not with respect to contraception or homosexuality or divorce/remarriage or even abortion?

Formal heresy has been uttered.  Is Peter's seat vacant?

Pope's Erroneous Call For End To Death Penalty AND Life Imprisonment

As most Marylanders know, the State of Maryland last year abolished capital punishment of deadly criminals (the execution of innocent babies goes unabated, however).  I wrote two pieces that both excoriated the Maryland Catholic Conference and demonstrated why they actually violated Church teaching in their effort to abolish capital punishment.

In their efforts to abolish capital punishment, both on their website and during testimonies in Annapolis, the MCC stated that Maryland would be able to protect its citizens through the use of life imprisonment without parole in lieu of the death penalty.  I've saved screen shots of two of these and will post them after the jump break so as not to take up too much space in the main screen.

However, Pope Francis today made clear his opposition not only to the death penalty, but to life imprisonment.  He said "life imprisonment is a hidden death penalty".  So he just contradicted Archbishop Lori and the Maryland Catholic Conference.  He made the latter appear to be a bastion of conservative common sense - that's quite an accomplishment!

More seriously, though, he spoke in disregard to Evangelium Vitae and the hundreds of years of Church teaching.  He seems to impute motives of "violence and revenge" to governments who employ these means.  I've no doubt that some corrupt regimes do precisely that; however, to issue a blanket denouncement of life imprisonment - and the death penalty for that matter - is simply irresponsible.

What also seems to be disregarded is that governments have a solemn duty to protect their citizens from unjust aggression - including that which arises from other citizens.  That is an overriding concern, and in fact one that must rise above the "redemption" of one criminal.  So without at least life imprisonment, just what does His Holiness think should be done with those violent criminals who simply won't be "redeemed"?  Do I hear crickets?

Ladies and gentlemen, sometimes we must disagree vociferously with our Church leaders in matters of "prudential judgment".  Clearly this is one of them.  I link now to excellent points by Vox Cantoris.

Again, the MCC writings are below this jump break.

Pope Leo XIV Breaks The Record For How Many Errors Can Be Crammed Into One Statement

Several weeks ago, Cardinal Blaise Cupich, Archbishop of Chicago, announced his intentions to bestow upon pro-abortion and pro-gay U.S. Senator Dick Durbin a "lifetime achievement award" for his support of - you guessed it! - illegal immigrants crashing through our southern borders.  This award was supposed to have been bestowed in November  

Immediately Bishop Paprocki and Archbishop Cordileone urged Cupich to cancel that award.  Other bishops soon followed in their condemnation of that award.  In the words of Complicit Clergy, Cupich told them to "pound sand".  Of course Cupich holds the slaughter of babies to be of little importance.  Recall that as Bishop of Spokane, Cupich forbade his priests from participating in the local 40 Days for Life efforts in his diocese.

Pope Leo was asked about this Cupich-Durbin scandal.  He responded by adding his own verbal manure to the pile.  Not only does he trot out the "seamless garmet" tripe, but also slanders faithful Catholics and good pro-life people in the process.  Please watch below the jump-break.

Pope Francis Toys With Heresy In His Hostility Towards Capital Punishment

Pope Francis has made known his animosity towards capital punishment, going so far as to condemn it outright.  Of course in doing so, he has directly contradicted centuries of Church teaching.  These teachings include proclamations by various popes and the Council of Trent.  Also read here, here, here, here, and a smattering of my previous posts dealing with this as the Maryland Catholic Conference repeatedly blundered on this topic.

In Evangelium Vitae, Pope St. John Paul II betrayed his personal distaste for capital punishment, but he respected Sacred Tradition enough to acknowledge that it trumped his personal proclivities.  In other words, he understood that as the Successor of Peter, his role was to safeguard and promulgate the Deposit of Faith in its entirety.

Today we heard from several sources that Pope Francis thinks the catechism should be updated to reject the death penalty.  See here and here.

Ponder these considerations:

• The pope is the guardian of Church teaching, not its judge.  He cannot alter it to his personal liking.
• The Teaching of the Church is immutable for it stems from God's word, which is as immutable as He is.  To pretend that God's word can change is to insinuate that God is subject to change.  That is impossible.  Such notions strike at the very nature of God Himself - a supreme blasphemy.
• "Heresy" is defined as by St Thomas Aquinas as being "a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas".  The morality of capital punishment has been promulgated by the Church for hundreds of years.  It will not change.  The attempt to change it is inherently heretical. 

If God's teaching can be held to be subject to change in this matter of capital punishment, then all topics of doctrine and morality can be seen as subject to change.  I believe this is the main goal of this latest papal move.  This proposed change to declare capital punishment to be anathema is a trial balloon.  If this "balloon" appears to be flying free, we'll see the heresies ensconced in Amoralis Lamentia being promulgated without nuance or apology within our Churches.

Thus far Pope Francis has opposed capital punishment as a matter of public opinion.  For canon lawyers and moral theologians out there, if the pope does attempt to alter the catechism, will that constitute an act of material and formal heresy that might render his papacy invalid?  I don't know, but it seems to me to be a reasonable question.

Woe To You That Call Evil Good, And Good Evil

That passage from Isaiah 5:20 is a strong admonition to left-leaning Catholics who have joined the progressive clarion call to fight all kinds of what they consider to be "social injustices" that may not be unjust at all.  The measure of what is good or evil, just or unjust is to be found in the Church's teaching traditions of the past two centuries, as opposed to popular fads that are spewing forth from dissident Catholic quarters.

Let's look at immigration, since these left-wing quarters, from the top down (that means you, USCCB) are having hissy fits about President Trump's ongoing efforts to expel foreign invaders.  The left-wing, clergy included, refuse to acknowledge that our concerns lie not with those who immigrate in conformity with our applicable laws, but with those who flout our laws and sneak inside the US.  They are, by definition, criminals.  They are breaking US law that does comply with Catholic moral theology.  In obfuscating that important distinction, they commit serious sins against the Eighth Commandment.  I've written a bit on this topic over the years; here's a collection of it.  So in this case, what's being called "evil" is the responsible regulating of immigration and what's being called "good" is the direct disobedience of immigration laws and being accessories to these crimes.

Let's move to another darling cause of the progressives - gun control.  The left is all gung-ho on this bugaboo, not addressing the fact that criminals, by definition, disobey laws.   The only ones impacted would be law-abiding citizens who desire to own firearms for the protection of themselves and their families.  Whenever a shooting happens, immediately the left starts kveling about the need for firearm restriction - never the apprehension of criminals.  Would that impinge too greatly on the Democratic voting base?  Look at England.  They've essentially outlawed guns, so what happens? Knife attacks arise - surprise!  The "geniuses" governing England are now into (wait for it!) knife-control!  Same thing in Red China!

Again, I've written a bit about that.  See here.  Please note that the top post explains why I believe that the USCCB's stance on gun control runs counter to Catholic moral theology.  Once upon a time I believed that this was an area in which good people could disagree.  I no longer hold onto that delusion.  The right to adequate self defense is a moral good that no one may call evil, on pain of sin.  A former pro-life leader, Rob Schenck, has glommed onto the erroneous push for arms banning, and in the process has allowed his thinking on basic pro-life issues to become corrupted.  I'll have more to say on that later.

Let's move on to the death penalty or capital punishment.  If gun control is an attack on the good of self-defense, the push to eliminate the death penalty is an attack on the good of civil government protecting its citizens from violent criminals.  Again, the USCCB and their dutiful puppets are lock-step with their Soros-esque sugar-daddies in their shielding of criminals from the death penalty.  Again, I've written much on that and won't rehash everything, but will elaborate on one major point.  In the past, all the popes have upheld the legitimacy and the good of capital punishment.  The most recent catechism from Pope John Paul II does the same.  However, last year Pope Francis annnounced his intention to rewrite the catechism to say that the death penalty is inadmissable.  I said it then, I'll say it now; THIS IS HERESY.   Of course the USCCB intends to happily comply in promulgating this heresy.  So now the good of capital punishment has been called evil, and this error has reached the proportions of full-blown heresy.

The USCCB, their obedient state-wide counterparts and the rest of their lapdogs are fully engaged in calling good "evil", and evil "good".  They have jettisoned all authentic moral bearing for the favors of money, power, and worldly prestige.  In so doing they have allowed their own thinking to become clouded, as have those who unthinkingly swallow the progressive bile simply because it comes from men wearing miters.

However, there have been pro-life leaders who, themselves succumbing to the siren calls of emotion-based leftwing sentiments, have allowed their pro-life beliefs to become weak and uncertain.  In other words, by assuming progressive positions on immigration, gun control, etc, they have assumed progressive positions in pro-life matters as well.  I have already mentioned Rob Schenck a few paragraphs back.  He now supports the legalized murder of children.  Another former pro-life leader, John Cavanaugh-O'Keefe, became so enamored of progressivism that he cast his vote for the rabidly pro-abortion Hillary Clinton in 2016.  Both of these men clearly called evil "good".

Ladies and gentlemen, liberalism is harmful to the soul and can impede eternal salvation.

Might This Be The REAL Reason Why Cardinal Pell Was Thrown Under The Bus?

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.

The Traditional Latin Mass, And All The Church's Patrimony, Threaten The Pope And His Progressive Agendas

Let's recap events of the past few weeks - events that involved the attempts to quash the Mass of the Ages.  Cardinal Cupich effectively suppressed the Institute of Christ the King, evicting them from their Chicago church for which their congregation raised  $4 million  after a 2015 fire damaged it.  Meanwhile in Inverness IL, at Holy Family Catholic Community (site of the guitar blessing) a lay person gave the homily at Pentecost Mass and soon afterwards, the whole place erupted in dance music and blowing bubbles.  To date I have heard nothing of Cardinal Cupich bringing this bunch to heel.

He has no words of admonishment for Father Pfleger either, after this latest debacle of a mass.

A similar injustice happened in Benedict, MD after Cardinal Gregory's tyrannical edict;   Those attending the Traditional Latin Mass there raised $250k for renovations and decorations.  Now they will have to go elsewhere to attend the Latin Mass.

Any honest person can only surmise that those trying to suppress the Latin Mass are simply full of spite.  Yes, that includes the pope.  Read this and this to see how some faithful Catholics are calling out this obvious pettiness and hatred.  There is quite a succinct comment on social media regarding the fanaticism with which the pope is grinding his axe against the Traditional Latin Mass.  It reads:

Have you noticed how often, in the last 18 months, the pope’s off-the-cuff comments have focused on traditionalists? There are 50 grave problems in the Church that need major papal attention, and THIS is what smolders on his mind constantly? PF's priorities are clear in this: to heck with all those other problems. It’s the 1% traddies who need to be 'dealt with', not the 99% of dreadful masses, the 99% of heretical 'catholic' colleges, the 99% of degenerate bishops, etc. Even if traddies were wrong in loving Tradition, his inattention to the vastly larger problems is mind-boggling."

This obsessive and seemingly disproportionate campaign against the traditionalists is in fact perfectly logical. Pope Francis realizes that the only effective resistance to the modernist remake of Catholic doctrine, morals, and liturgy is coming from this zealous minority, who have shown every sign of growing numbers and influence. Remember, it is creative minorities who change the course of history, not the majority who float along with the spirit of the age.

What is at stake is not merely "liturgical preference" but the dogmatic structure of Catholicism, the historical-theological continuity of the Church, and the soundness of Christian morality. His tactical hits in all of these areas show that the ultimate aim is the transformation of the Catholic Faith into something quite, quite other than it has been.

That is why our opposition to his entire agenda, which has TC as its poster-child, must be inflexible, determined, and indefatigable, and why "obedience" must be tendered only to what is true and good, not to what is false and wicked.

Actually only the first paragraph is the viral comment.  The other paragraphs are the thoughts of Peter Kwasniewski.  So there is a broad attempt to tear down all Catholic worship and teaching - including morals.  Eric Sammons echoed similar theories.  The interview to which Sammons alluded can be found here.  By the way - notice what he said about "true doctrine progressing".  Now remember how the pope erroneously, and probably sinfully, condemned the death penalty as intrinsically evil?  I opined then that he was floating a trial balloon with that, to see how Catholics would react, given that many of them are themselves confused about the death penalty.  Apparently he was pleased enough with the results of that experiment to start broaching contraception.  If he does, by some Jesuitical verbal trickery, manage to hoodwink the faithful into thinking that contraception might be acceptable in some circumstances, we'll have deadly history repeating itself.  We'll be having the 1930 Lambeth Conference all over again and that could actually lead to the horrors of baby-slaughter being condoned by Church hierarchy. 

One would hope that would be enough for some timid souls in the hierarchy to declare Francis an imposter to the papacy.  Note that I am not a sedevacantist for I do not believe Benedict's "resignation" to have been properly performed.  My blogging colleague at Les Femmes posted on the situation in her home diocese of Arlington, site of one of the recent draconian attacks on the Faith.  She challenges her priests, as I do the priests in my own Archdiocese of Washington, where Cardinal Gregory has been chomping at the bit for his turn to beat down faithful Catholics.   

We laity have a responsibility to positively resist, too.  Prayer and fasting are necessary, but by no means sufficient.  Ora et labora.  I post below a note from another Arlington Catholic to the chancery.

One language the corrupt bishops understand and heed is money.  We must use ours to good advantage, and sometimes one must starve the beasts.  Not one more red cent to these wolves in shepherd's clothing.  It's high time we stop kissing the hands that slap us and rob our children of their patrimony.

Pope Francis Is Dead

Less than three weeks after the passing of his former ally, Ted McCarrick, Pope Francis has gone to his reward, such as that reward might be.  I would suggest that we pray that God had mercy on him and granted him the grace of final repentance; else, his eternity doesn't look too promising.

Francis' chequered legacy includes (but is not limited to) these:

• the pachamama idol worship in the Vatican gardens and St Peter's Basilica
• dismissing the pro-life champions in the Pontifical Academy for Life and replacing them with pro-aborts
• issuing Amoris Laetitia that calls for admittance of active adulterers to Holy Communion
• contradicting Tradition regarding the death penalty
• hob-nobbing with abortionist Emma Bonino
• dissuaded Tony Palmer, a protestant official, from converting to Catholicism when the latter expressed his wish to do so.
• his vendetta against the Traditional Latin Mass, in direct disobedience to the Papal Bull, Quo Primum

I have a whole anthology of misdeeds of Francis', as do others.  I cannot list them all, as I lack both time and space.

In a few weeks' time, the process for selecting a new pope will begin.  Starting right now, we need to beg God to give to the Church a truly Catholic and capable pope, one who is "wise as a serpent and innocent as a dove" (Matt 10:16).  Ask God to give us a pope that we need, not what we deserve.

If you are not yet in the habit of praying a daily Rosary, now is a good time to start.

Another Jesuit In The Vatican

From Church Militant we read of a Jesuit in the Vatican chiding an Ohio prosecutor for seeking the death penalty in relation to a murder that he is prosecuting.  The Jesuit is Father Paul Mueller and the Ohio official is Joseph Deters, Prosecutor for Hamilton County, Ohio.  Mueller is trying to bamboozle Deters into believing that 2000-year-old Church teaching no longer exists, owing to the way that Pope Francis is trying to mutate it.

A canon lawyer who spoke with Church Militant flat out said that Mueller is wrong and that he himself has committed canonical crimes of calumny and defamation against Deters.  I'm just wondering when outfits such as "People for the American Way" and "Freedom from Religion Foundation" are going to rally to Deters' assistance.  After all, aren't they all about "separation of church and state"?  Or does that only work when the clergy is upholding actual (instead of imitation) Church teaching?

I looked around for more information in Mueller in addition to what is on the CM site.  He is an author of sorts.  His "scholarly" works include a book entitled, "Would You Baptize An Extraterrestrial?"  Yeah, that should solve all the problems of the universe and quench the thirst of the human heart!  One wonders what about this case would pique his interest since they are thousands of miles apart.  That is its own mystery.

By the way - since Mueller is so quick to charge into this situation (in which he has no authority to do so), please point out to me all the times he has railed against Catholic politicians who support baby-murder and gay perversions.  Please do so in the com-box, but be advised that I won't be holding my breath.

Speaking of the death penalty, this is an interesting read about why opponents of the death penalty among the clergy might have been predisposed to shield their perverted colleagues from the consequences of their mortal sins.

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

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

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

Here is the interview.



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

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

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

Catholic Standard And Catholic Review Repeat Our Sunday Visitor Inaccuracies Regarding Bishop Strickland

Both the Catholic Standard and Catholic Review use the same article from Our Sunday Visitor as they relay the news of Bishop Strickland's ouster.  OSV acknowledges that the Vatican has not yet given any official reason for Strickland's ouster, but it does point out a tweet that Strickland wrote last May stating that the Pope is "undermining the deposit of faith". 

All Strickland did was call a spade a spade.  Let's look back at some of the antics coming forth from this Vatican, shall we?

• A few weeks ago, he signed a document that allows gays and transgender perverts to be godparents at baptism
• While Strickland was stripped of his diocese, the German bishops who declared their intention to "bless" gay unions remain untouched.
• There is the colossal pachamama debacle during which this filthy idol was worshipped in the Vatican Garden, in the pope's presence.  Later that week, he placed a pachamama plant on the altar during Mass - a direct violation of GIRM and an act of idolatry.
• There is that insidious footnote in Amoris Laetitia, stating that de facto adulterers may receive Holy Communion while continuing their mortally sinful lifestyles
• He declared the death penalty to be inherently evil, directly contradicting 2000 year old Church teaching. 

This list could go on and on, but these will suffice to demonstrate that yes indeed, the pope is undermining the deposit of faith.

As for this October 31 address in question, LifeSiteNews diligently recorded the entire thing and published it for our reading.  Here it is.  Please read it.  Some reading the OSV article might get the erroneous impression that Strickland is calling the pope a "usurper".  In an interview with the Pillar Catholic, Strickland plainly states that such is not his view.  Rather, he was reading a letter from a friend to illustrate the confusion that this pope is undeniably causing.  He states that the pope is neglecting to clear up confusion by not answering the dubia and not issuing plain statements of belief.

Further on down the OSV article, we read that "the letter outright attacked Pope Francis' validity as the successor of St. Peter...Bishop Strickland said the letter's words were challenging but did not dispute the allegations."

I find great fault with the reporting of Our Sunday Visitor in this matter.  They utterly failed - whether by neglect or intent, I do not know - to take into account Strickland's subsequent exchange with the Pillar, during which Strickland acknowledges Francis's papacy.  OSV's sloppiness could lead the unsuspecting reader to believe that Strickland doubts the validity of Francis' papacy.  The OSV has a duty, in my opinion, to correct their reporting.  Moreover, The Catholic Standard and Catholic Review. have a duty to acknowledge their own sloppiness in their blind repetition of the OSV error without doing any "due diligence" verification themselves.

Here are more details about these matters from the Lepanto Institute.

It's Not Just About Capital Punishment

In a blog post yesterday, Msgr Pope appears to be minimizing the damage done by Pope Francis' attempt to change Church doctrine and to chide faithful Catholics (including Yours Truly) into silence.  Please remember that this blog is hosted on a server owned by the Archdiocese of Washington and that he has been quashed by them before.  However, if you read through the comments, you'll see that many of his readers comprehend the far-reaching implications of this latest action by Pope Francis.  Edward Feser of First Things elaborates on this further.

The Not-At-All Catholic Reporter opined last week that abortion should not be criminalized and that if we really want to end abortion, we'll need "support for birth control".  In other words, to eliminate one evil, substitute another.  In this screed against laws to prevent abortion, I wonder what the authors would think if we were to substitute "racism" for "abortion"?  But I digress.

Of course they waxed lyrical over Francis' death penalty gaffe and what they acknowledge as an attempt to change Church teaching.  They really have no concern for obeying Church teaching, as evidenced by their dismissive attitudes towards contraception.  But perhaps they believe that the pope will try to bastardize the Church's teachings on contraception.  I regret they may be correct in that prediction.

Of Medals, Seamless Garment, And Corruption

I posted the above from Father West for he says eloquently what I've been trying to say to those Catholics who not only refuse to acknowledge the evidence of Pope Francis' misdeeds but who lash out (in fits of obvious denial of reality) at those of us who are trying to shine much-needed light on these situations.  At one time I thought that these friends were simply too trusting and a bit simplistic in their views on the papacy.  Given their increasingly vitriolic reactions to our efforts, I must wonder if there is some intellectual dishonesty influencing them.

Let's look at two things.

Last week we learned that the pope gave a medal that is only given to a Commander of the Pontifical Equestrian Order of St Gregory to a rabidly pro-abortion Dutch politician.  Now they've gone into "damage control" according to Austin Ruse.  Perhaps the "control" should be rendered "augmentation".  We read that "the medal was no more than part of a protocol exchange".  Really?  I'm sure the Vatican has engaged in many, many protocol exchanges with other visiting dignitaries over the past centuries.  When, oh when, has the Vatican ever given such medals in the past as part of "protocol exchanges"?

Then the article says, "In recent months, the Vatican has played host to a steady stream of speakers who stand in public opposition to Church teaching on a whole host of issues including Governor Jerry Brown of California."  Now hold this thought for a moment while I bring up a related matter.

Today the annual March for Life occurred.  In addition to the main march in Washington DC, similar marches occurred elsewhere at the same time for the sake of those who were unable to make the journey to DC.  Such was the case in Little Rock, AR.  The local marches there were first organized by local bishops.  However, this year, Bishop Anthony Taylor of the Diocese of Little Rock boycotted the march because the local pro-life organizations had booked as a speaker someone who supports the use of the death penalty.  The speaker is Attorney General Leslie Rutledge, whose pro-life credentials seem to be totally in line with traditional Catholic morality as opposed to the "seamless garment" caricature of the same.  Bishop Taylor, in ascribing capital punishment the same status as baby-murder, is dissenting from Catholic moral teaching.  I've posted before why the move to eliminate the use of all capital punishment may well be its own heresy.  But the death penalty is not today's main consideration.

Consider both of the preceding paragraphs.  One the one hand, you have rabid pro-aborts being wined and dined and even given medals by the pope. These pro-aborts, though, are good little progressives who whine about capital punishment, climate-change junk-science, immigration.  On the other hand, you have a bishop snubbing a march for life because another speaker doesn't toady to the progressive talking points on capital punishment.  A consideration of both these scenarios together buttresses my suspicions that the so-called "seamless garment" yak is nothing more than a smokescreen for pro-abortion infiltration of the Church.

By the way: Eccles and Bosco have some pointers in giving out medals.

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.