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.

Maryland Catholic Conference Errs (Again) With Death Penalty

In today's Catholic Standard, page 3 in print and online here, the Maryland Catholic Conference is beating its chest over its faux-victoire regarding the abolition of the death penalty in Maryland.  I stated my case clearly how the abolition of the death penalty actually runs counter to Church teaching and Evangelium Vitae in particular.  I needn't rehash all that here.

I also stated in that post that there is an effort underway to petition this abolition to the next Maryland referendum.  I signed that petition, no doubt to the consternation of Mary Ellen Russell.  In the Standard article, read that little insert of hers that's designed to cajole faithful Catholics into eschewing the referendum petition.  She talks of the repeal of the death penalty as "an integral part of our pro-life efforts to uphold the sanctity of all human life."  No, it is not!  I'd strongly suggest that she study Evangelium Vitae and notice that there is a world of difference between the inherent evil of taking the most innocent human life - that is, murder and the exercise of legitimate authority a charge laid upon it by God Himself.

She then takes a direct pot-shot at the referendum effort itself, saying "the referendum will only divide the prolife community and drain scarce time and resources from other more important prolife goals".  Well, guess what, Ms Russell?  On both counts here, it's the Maryland Catholic Conference (under your less-than-stellar leadership) that stands guilty as charged!

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.

No Wonder Progressives Rail Against The Death Penalty!

 A few days ago I put up a post containing Taylor Marshall's commentary about the perversion that a priest committed atop the altar of his parish church, in effect desecrating it with his gross sacrilege.  Taylor mentions that the altar is symbolic of Christ Himself; that is why there are five crosses carved into each Catholic altar.  He noted that in more sane and reverent times, such deliberate desecration and sacrilege would have garnered the death penalty for the perpetrator.

He said this in passing, and I was prepared to let it remain a lesser point.  However, this is NOT the first time that a Catholic altar was desecrated - not so much with sexual perversion as with rank idolatry.  I remind you of this outrage, right after the pachamama idols were tossed in the Tiber.  This detailed what happened during the closing Mass of that climate-change gabfest during which the pachamamas desecrated the Vatican gardens and several Catholic churhes before being hurled into the Tiber.  As you watch the video of the Mass, take notice of how many times the camera zooms onto that plant.  Then the plant is placed on the altar in direct disobedience to the GIRM.  Take note particularly from 55:38 to 56:20.  Recall from the previous paragraph that any Catholic altar is representative of Christ Himself - and that defilements of said altars at one time were punished via the death penalty.

I'm going to link now to an article in Catholic World Report, where the author directs three questions to opponents of the death penalty.  These questions, in my opinion, reduce to shreds any attempt to vilify the death penalty.  But have you noticed that among death penalty opponents are all proponents of abortion, gay perversions along with heretics and those who blaspheme and commit vile sacriledge?  One might ask why, but I think the answer to that is quite obvious; they know that in a saner time, they themselves would be eligible for capital punishment.  Let us pray that these people come quickly to repentance.

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.

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?

Maryland "Pro-Life Victory" A Sham

The Maryland Catholic Conference is calling the recent repeal of the death penalty in Maryland a "pro-life victory".  Really???  Seriously???   What about the real death penalty in Maryland??

While the MCC and state legislators were celebrating and giving "high-fives" to each other, another 95 babies were slaughtered in abortuaries across the Free State.  Yes, approximately 95 babies are murdered vis-a-vis abortion in Maryland - with the support of many of the legislators who repealed capital punishment.

How many executions occurred in Maryland over the years?  According to Maryland's own statistics, 85 men were executed from 1923 to present.  Obviously that's less than 1 per year: 0.94 to be precise.  With 95 babies being murdered every year, that makes 34,700 per year.  Once again, the Maryland Catholic Conference displays an abysmal lack of perspective just in terms of arithmetic as they wax lyrical about a legislative body that largely condones the murder of innocents.

There's a larger issue here, one that eludes the folks at Maryland Catholic Conference.  Mary Ellen Russell, executive director of the MCC stated the case although she doesn't acknowledge the impact of what she said.  She said, "the test of whether the death penalty can be used is not the gravity of the offense, but whether it is absolutely necessary to protect society."  Right there she acknowledges that capital punishment is permissible if "it is absolutely necessary to protect society".  However, thanks to their short-sighted (and progressive leanings of the "social justice" cabal), they have just removed a means of societal defense that would otherwise be available to protect society from dangerous criminals.

There is a malevolent pattern in recent actions of the Maryland legislature.  It's seen in the repeal of capital punishment and it's also seen in the push to cripple our exercise of Second Amendment rights.  In both cases, the progressives are acting to tie our hands when it comes to defending ourselves, our families and our society against dangerous thugs.  In fact, the thugs who call themselves "doctors" while plying their murderous trades are no doubt joining in the celebration of the death penalty repeal.  Why?  Simple!  They no doubt realize that in a saner time, they would be considered eligible for capital punishment.

ADDENDUM:  Perhaps the MCC staffers are reading the Not-at-all Catholic Reporter.  Yesterday their columnist Bill Tammeus questioned why true Catholics spend so much energy trying to stop abortion as opposed to the death penalty.  Why?  According to this dubious sage, the unborn child is just "a bundle of cells" whereas the criminal is a human being.  What a guy!

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.

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.

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?

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 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.

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?

The Death Penalty

As most readers know, the State of Maryland has just abolished the death penalty.  Oh no, I don't mean that Maryland has halted the murder of nearly 100 babies every day vis-a-vis abortion; I mean for the 1 convicted felon who was executed every 4-6 years (at most).  For that, the Maryland bishops lavished praise upon the CINO governor who has been known to use his bully-pulpit to raise funds for Maryland NARAL.

Initially I thought the abolition of the death penalty was a matter on which there could be legitimate disagreement amongst Catholics.  I no longer believe that.  Let me start by differentiating between two concepts that are often erroneously thought to be equivalent; they aren't.  They are:

1. Opposition to capital punishment
2. Abolition of the death penalty

One is a matter of personal belief, of prudential judgment.  The other is a matter of public policy.  One does not necessarily imply the other.  Let's now refer to Evangelium Vitae, section 56.  Please read the entire section.  I'll copy below a paragraph from that section.

"It is clear that, for these purposes to be achieved, the nature and extent of the punishment must be carefully evaluated and decided upon, and ought not go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity: in other words, when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today however, as a result of steady improvements in the organization of the penal system, such cases are very rare, if not practically non-existent."

Well, these cases are not non-existent.  They might well be rare, but from time to time they do exist; that's just reality.  In those rare cases, Church teaching provides for the imposition of capital punishment by legitimate civil authority.  Why?  Because as the encyclical clearly states, in those cases capital punishment is required to defend society.

 Acknowledging that God alone has supreme authority over life, the Church also acknowledges through Scripture and Tradition that God delegates the responsibility of capital punishment to legitimate civil authority.    Such delegation cannot be abdicated by state authorities, for in so doing, they stand in disobedience to the God who laid that charge upon them.   And once again, progressives within the Church hierarchy (and I mean you, Maryland Catholic Conference!) join the Maryland governor and other officials in their arrogance and disobedience as they thumb their noses at the Lord of Life and abdicate their duties and responsibilities to protect innocent life on one hand - and on the other hand, foster the murder of innocent children.

The Maryland bishops would do more for the culture of life if they demanded that the stonewalling of the Carhart investigations cease and that abortion be banned in Maryland.  Stop the murders of the 90+ babies everyday in Maryland before braying about false "triumphs".

My colleague at An Archdiocese of Washington DC Catholic links to a petition to put the matter to referendum.  I in turn will link to his piece.  I will sign the petition.  Knowing that this petition will never be allowed in Church, I urge interested readers to visit that site.

Bishop Paprocki Administers Truth To His Flock And Draws Ire Of Progressive Reprobates

On June 12th the Bishop of the Diocese of Springfield (IL) issued guidelines to his churches regarding those who openly flout Church teaching to the detriment of their souls.  I link to the original letter now.  Among other things, he has instructed his priests to obey Canon 915.  For ease of reference, I'll copy/paste it below.

Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.

That's not so complicated, is it?  Among other things the canon means that those who are flaunting themselves in their commission of mortal sins are not to be assisted by the ministers of Holy Communion in the commission of sacrilege against the Eucharist.  The purpose of this is several-fold:

• It prevents the sinner from incurring the guilt of yet another mortal sin.
• It protects the Eucharist from profanation.
• It prevents scandal to other faithful Catholics
• It hopefully will drive home to the flagrant sinner the need to repent and to make a good confession so as to escape the danger of eternal damnation.

With all the talk we're hearing about "mercy", we can see that the application of Canon 915 is an act of mercy.  However, some progressives who call themselves "catholic" are in a blather over the good bishop's much-needed directives.  I link now to one such hissy-fit at New Ways Ministry.  I'll highlight one paragraph that illustrates the author's (Robert Shine) abysmal grasp of both reading comprehension and basic Catholic morality.

It is discrimination to target LGBT people when, in a certain sense, all Catholics could be deemed “manifest sinners.” Who among us, including Bishop Paprocki, does not publicly sin at different moments? Yet, funeral rites are not denied to Catholics who pay employees an unjust wage, publicly advocate for the death penalty, or deny climate change.

Please refer to Canon 915, as written in its clear, concise manner.  Shine completely, and I think deliberately omits key descriptors of the sins that would call for the remedy of Canon 915.  Those descriptors are, "obstinately persevering", and "grave".  Shine is right; faithful Catholics do openly sin from time to time.  However, these faithful Catholics will not "obstinately persevere" and most likely the sins will not be "grave" but venial.  As we do have decent dreads of sin and its impact in our lives, we will get ourselves to Confession as soon as possible and we will make amends.  Thus the remedy of Canon 915 is not appropriate in those cases.

Shine also makes another error in assuming that liberal positions on several pet issues of the progressives, e.g., death penalty and climate change, are binding on the Catholic conscience.  They are not.  In fact, I've gone to great lengths to detail why I believe the progressive position on the death penalty may in fact be a sin.  To insinuate that divergence from these liberal positions warrant denial from Holy Communion is to sin against honesty and the Traditions of Holy Mother Church.

Let us recall, of course, that New Ways Ministry has itself been condemned by the Church and its dribblings carry no weight whatsoever.  However, it is helpful to see the intensity with which they wail and gnash their teeth when a Catholic bishop such as Bishop Paprocki is faithful to his sacred trust and utilizes his authority to protect his flock from the wolves of progressivism and heresy.

Rep Gosar Was Wise To Boycott Today's Congressional Debacle

Representative Paul Gosar was wise to boycott the pope's address to the joint session of Congress today for it was a bit of an embarrassment.  This LifeSiteNews article has the full text of the thing.  I'll be focusing on some highlights - or lowlights.  Consider, for a little perspective, that the Senate just failed to defund Planned Parenthood: this in the wake of the evidence of their selling of the bodies of babies whom they routinely murder in the dungeons the laughingly refer to as clinics.

Early in his talk he mentions four Americans, holding them up for honor.  They are: Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Dorothy Day and Thomas Merton.  It's probably a good thing that today's Congress is GOP-controlled, for he did mention the nation's first Republican president.  Guess who else was Republican?  Martin Luther King!  Yes, he was a Republican.  He was also pro-life.  For that matter, his protege Jesse Jackson was also pro-life early in his career.  Read his defense of life written in 1977 - before he hankered after the Democratic presidential nomination and turned his back on his principles and the babies.  But I digress.

The inclusion of Thomas Merton is most questionable.  Of Merton, the pope says "he remains a source of spiritual inspiration and a guide for many people" and "a thinker who challenged the certitudes of his time and opened new horizons for souls"  REALLY???

Take a moment to examine Merton's life and his dalliance with Zen Buddhism.  Catholic Answers has a fairly comprehensive biography of him, detailing how he became seduced by Buddhism.  Merton told a friend shortly before his death that "Zen and Christianity are the future".  In that article, you'll notice that Pope Benedict XVI took a dim view of Merton and Buddhism,  going so far as to opine that Buddhism would replace Marxism as Catholicism's chief antagonist.  So why did the pope hold up as a model a de facto heretic?  In light of what was just said, it's worth noting that not once did the pope mention the name "Jesus Christ".  Why not?  He's the Vicar of Christ, is he not?  Unlike what Father Rosica said a few days ago, he himself is not a "prince of peace".  Some believe that Rosica just made a slip of the tongue when he plopped that blasphemy; I think it quite possible that Rosica knew very well what he was saying.

As for Dorothy Day, while undergoing a real conversion to Catholicism, she remained confused about a great many things.  To her credit she did make a request: "Don't call me a saint". (ht: St Corbinian's Bear).

The pope addresses many issues: death penalty, climate change, immigration, arms trade, redistribution of wealth.  What's missing from that list?  The legalized murder of babies known as abortion.  To put things in context, let's think about the conduct of this papal address at Congress today.  It took me a good 20-25 minutes to read through it silently.  It would probably take longer to speak it.  It would probably have taken the pope a bit longer than that since he's not fluent in English.  An then there's the breaks for applause, etc.  I would guess from start to finish the entire address took about 45 minutes or so.  If anyone has more precise data please advise via comments.  Now consider some statistics that indicate that a baby is aborted in this country every 20 seconds.  That means 3 babies are murdered every minute.  Therefore while the pope spoke, over 200 babies were slaughtered.  What of the death penalty?  Less than 100 have been executed in the past several years.  So why did the death penalty garner so much attention, while whole-scale baby-murder didn't rate one mention by the pope?

Some additional thoughts can be found at One Peter Five and Les Femmes.  Soon the pope will head to Philadelphia and the World Meeting of Families.  If these past few speeches of the pope are any indication of what may be on the horizon, dark days are ahead.

A Courageous Priest And His Craven Bishop

Father Theodore Rothrock of St Elizabeth Seton Church in the Diocese of Lafayette (IN) correctly identified Black Lives Matters rioters as "thieves, bandits, maggots, parasites".  The poor little snowflakes got their noses put out of joint.  Bishop Timothy Doherty ordered Father to "clarify" his remarks and apologize.  He apologized, but in light of BLM's own website, his original remarks were already accurate and crystal-clear.

However, that wasn't enough for a leftist front bunch called Carmel Against Racial Injustice.  They wanted Rothrock to be suspended.  Doherty, like a good little minion, obeyed them and suspended Father Rothrock.  Would Father have been suspended if he had spoken of the Ku Klux Klan or some neo-nazi group?  Somehow I think not.

Meanwhile, in New York City, Father Rick Walsh in St Paul the Apostle offered his own (?) "homily".  He declared that "Jesus is lesbian, queer, transgender" etc.  To my knowledge, Walsh has faced no official sanction of any sort from Cardinal Dolan.

By the way, scroll down until you get to OSP's statement on the death penalty.  Therein lies the perfect illustration of the leftists' whole purpose in trying to change Church teaching on the death penalty.  They know that if they can insinuate into the thinking of Catholics that if one facet of Church teaching can be altered, why not other facets, particularly those dealing with sexual morality?  The truth is either all of God's teachings are immutable, or none of them are.  God's teachings are immutable because He Himself is immutable.  His thoughts do not change.  They have always been perfect, in no need of so-called "evolution".  The death penalty is admissable in some cases of criminal conduct.  Under no circumstances is homosexual conduct allowed.

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.

Why Progressives Hate The Idea Of Defense Against Evil

Thanks to Canon 212, I came across this very interesting article regarding the insane progressive push to hamstring our abilities to defend ourselves: from threats against our persons, our communities and our nation.  The call-out sentence sums things up quite well; "A fearless citizen with the will and means to defend himself is a threat to left-wing bureaucrats who want to boss him around".  That is why New York City is hell-bent on prosecuting for murder that shop-keeper who defended himself against someone who might have murdered him.  That is why they are all having snit-fits after the Supreme Court ruled that we do not have to "show cause" for exercising our right to bear arms.

Let me say a word now to friends who may be wishy-washy regarding the Second Amendment, thinking that it's the government's job to protect us.  The Supreme Court ruled in 1948 that such was not the case, although modern progressives lie through their teeth to pretend that it is.  Consider that the United States Constitution puts constraints on the government so that it does not unjustly deprive innocent people of the right to life, hearkening back to the Declaration of Independence that stated that God endowed us with that right.  With the passage of abortion laws, governments at all levels in this country arrogated from God the prerogative to deprive innocents of their lives.  In so doing, they assume tyrannical personas.  So many pro-life people realize, even if only instinctively, that they have no recourse but to rely on their Second Amendment rights to defend ourselves against governmental tyranny, if it should come to that.  To do so, we must have the means adequate to meet modern threats. 

Let's take a look at the death penalty (again).  I've written much on that over the years.  Here is a link that detail why the clamor to end the death penalty is its own sin.  Please read them.  I will post below tonight's episode of the Anchor Team.  In it, Michael and Alyssa Hichborn mention that the clamor to end the death penalty might be a manifestation of the progressive attempt to dispel belief in hell.  I wonder if the progressives' attempt to dispel the Just War theory might be a way to dispel belief in the incompatibility of good versus evil.

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?