Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Militant Islam wants to conquer Rome but have no fear folks: Bishop Robert McManus assures us we are reaping a harvest of respect

Writing for The Telegraph, Damien McElroy notes that:

"Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the self-proclaimed leader of the 'Islamic State' stretching across Iraq and Syria, has vowed to lead the conquest of Rome as he called on Muslims to immigrate to his new land to fight under its banner around the globe.

Baghdadi, who holds a PhD in Islamic studies, said Muslims were being targetted and killed from China to Indonesia. Speaking as the first Caliph, or commander of the Islamic faithful since the dissolution of the Ottoman empire, he called on Muslims to rally to his pan-Islamic state.
'Those who can immigrate to the Islamic State should immigrate, as immigration to the house of Islam is a duty,' he said in an audio recording released on a website used by the group formerly known as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham.
 
'Rush O Muslims to your state. It is your state. Syria is not for Syrians and Iraq is not for Iraqis. The land is for the Muslims, all Muslims...This is my advice to you. If you hold to it you will conquer Rome and own the world, if Allah wills.'
 
Having claimed the title of 'caliph', Baghdadi appealed to 'judges and those who have military and managerial and service skills, and doctors and engineers in all fields.'
 
He also called on jihadi fighters to escalate fighting in the holy month of Ramadan, which began on Sunday. 'In this virtuous month or in any other month, there is no deed better than jihad in the path of Allah, so take advantage of this opportunity and walk the path of you righteous predecessors,' he said. 'So to arms, to arms, soldiers of the Islamic s, fight, fight.'
 
In a reflection of the havoc wreaked the past month by the Sunni insurgency led by the group, the United Nations said more than 2,400 people were killed in Iraq in June, making it the deadliest month in the country in years.

Baghdadi's claims to control vast territority have yet to be tested by an Iraqi government counter attack. Many Muslim groups dispute his putative caliphate. However some experts fear his rise could transform the appeal of extremist Islam, partly by harassing social media to build a global following.
Hassan Hassan, an analyst at Abu Dhabi's Delma Institute, wrote that Baghdadi provided the most radical challenge since the emergence of Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. 'The whispers of support to a caliph in Afghanistan are now replaced by clear words and acts, amplified by social media,' he said. 'Jihadism has evolved significantly. It is no longer limited to narrow “elitists” who travel to distant countries to wage jihad. Today’s jihad is more sophisticated and individualised and can be waged everywhere.'" See here.

Although militant Islamists across the globe have a stated goal of conquering Rome and driving Jews in Israel into the sea, have no fear folks.  Bishop Robert McManus assures us that, "..the Catholic Church has engaged herself in inter-religious dialogue with Muslims.  This dialogue has produced a harvest of mutual respect, understanding and cooperation throughout the world."  See here.

Curiously, the same Bishop McManus who says he believes in dialogue, mutual respect, understanding and cooperation, refuses to answer letters from Catholics faithful to the Magisterium when they witness doctrinal dissent, various liturgical abuses, radical feminist ideology or New Age occultism.  Apparently Bishop McManus believes in a sort of peekaboo dialogue - now you see it, now you don't.  For when I wrote to His Excellency expressing my interest in pursuing a vocation to the ministerial priesthood, I received no response whatsoever. 

So be of good cheer folks.  Even though militant Islam is committing genocide while destroying entire Christian communities, everything is really okay.  Bishop McManus assures us that we are reaping a harvest of respect.

 

Monday, August 18, 2014

May a Catholic question the Pope or engage in constructive criticism of Bishops who appear to depart from Tradition?

"Dear Father,


Can I be a good Catholic and still be skeptical or even critical of certain things said or done by bishops and popes that appear to contradict all the Tradition of the Church?

Thank you,
Confused in Ontario"


Dear Confused in Ontario,


This is a question that I am asked many times. It is, of course, the result of disquiet over what is said by Church authorities mainly in Rome but elsewhere as well. So many “off-the-cuff” pronouncements by members of the hierarchy and the reappearance of theologies that we thought were dead because they lead to dead ends have had this disquieting effect on many of the faithful.

I fear that I will not be able to answer your question in a way in which you will be satisfied. For a clear answer would have to be part of a serious theological task that so far no one has undertaken and that involves a serious rethinking of the role of the Pope and of the bishops in the Church in the light of Tradition. Tradition, we must always remember, is something living and therefore is integrally connected with the past and open to the future, all under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. It bothers me that those Catholics who are labeled as Traditionalists are seen to be somehow locked in the past. While it is absolutely true that the teaching of the Church in the past is necessary for true development of the Church’s teaching in the present and future, one must always be one’s guard against antiquarianism (which in part gave us the Novus Ordo ) and against nostalgia for a perfect time that never really was.

One of the greatest problems in the Church for the past hundred years has been a creeping Ultramontanism that seeks to almost identify the Church with the Pope. We see this happening all through the 20th century, but especially during the last quarter of that century. The era of instant communication afforded by the Internet and the all-pervasive presence of the media has contributed greatly to this situation. But it is also because of a series of Popes who traveled widely in the world in the name of evangelization. Those Masses in football stadiums with thousands and thousands of people, the World Youth Day celebrations, all followed by the media everywhere as they would follow “rock stars”, further contributed to this phenomenon.

Perhaps this was inevitable given the world in which we live. But it has had a bad effect on the understanding of the Papacy and its role both in the world and in the Church herself. We seem to have gone from an understanding of the role of the Pope as Supreme Pastor, Defender of the Faith and Guardian of the Liturgy, the Supreme Teacher who when guided by the Holy Spirit can define in a solemn way what the Church has always believed: from this understanding of the Papacy that reaches (one thought) its dogmatic zenith at the First Vatican Council with its careful definition of Papal Infallibility to the current understanding of the Papacy that sees him as the very embodiment of the Church with apparently no boundaries to his power and authority....

The irony of all of this is that we find ourselves in the grip of reactionary forces that are pushing liberal (as Blessed John Henry Newman understood that word) causes in the Church. That Newman foresaw this in his Biglietto Speech over one hundred years ago is no comfort to us who are going through this time of tribulation.

Having said all of this, I will answer your question in a qualified way. My answer is as follows. Yes, you are free as a Catholic to question the decisions of the bishops of the Church, including the Bishop of Rome, when they seem to you to depart from the Tradition, the teaching of the Church for the past two thousand years, in its roots in Scripture and in the organic growth of the Tradition. But one must differentiate here between criticizing and questioning. It really does no good to criticize specific words or acts of the Bishop of Rome or of any bishop in an uncharitable and carping way. It is often an offense against charity and leads to hardness of heart.

But it is surely the duty of the laity to question pronouncements (including press conferences and sermons) and decisions of the hierarchy when they seem to depart from the teaching of the Church, from the Tradition. Newman believed so strongly in the importance of an educated laity, educated both in the secular sense and in the ecclesial sense! And in this way it is the duty of the educated and faithful laity to question decisions of the hierarchy on the basis of the Tradition of the Church. And questioning here means to ask the bishops (with no animosity) how a specific pronouncement, whether official or unofficial, of a bishop squares with the Tradition. In this way, for instance, it is perfectly fine to ask how the image of the Church as a “field hospital” is consonant with the self-understanding of the Church within her Tradition.

I am sure, dear Confused in Ontario, that my response is not crystal clear nor does it help to assuage your genuine concerns about the state of the Church. But a priest is neither a medicine man nor a magician. He is called to faith in the same way as every Catholic is called to faith. And he sees, like we all do, “through a glass darkly”. But even through that partially de-silvered mirror that is the Catholic Church here on earth, we see the glory of the Truth in the face of the One who is our only hope, our only source of truth, our only source of real life, our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ."

Father Richard G. Cipolla


My added response:


In his important work entitled The Devastated Vineyard, Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand examines three false responses to the devastation within the Catholic Church while emphasizing that, "the most dangerous one would be to imagine that there is no devastation of the vineyard of the Lord" and that "our task as laymen is simply to adhere with complete loyalty to whatever our bishop says." Dr. von Hildebrand warns that, "the basis of this attitude is a false idea of loyalty to the hierarchy." (p. 246).


The Church's pastoral authority is not totalitarian. Her authority is subordinate to the theological virtues of faith and love, both of which redeem and perfect persons instead of merely subjecting them to a particular ideology. There are some who believe that the laith should never criticize a bishop because "it is impossible for a lay person to know all that goes into his decision-making process" and because "it just seems backwards to mistrust a man who authoritatively speaks in the name of Christ."

But a bishop only teaches authoritatively if he offers a teaching which conforms to that of the Church's Magisterium. And while the laity may not always be privy to all the factors that go into a bishop's decision-making process, they still are able to see the results of a particular decision and "have the right and even at times a duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church." (Canon 212).Dr. Germain Grisez reminds us, "That the Church is a communion of faith and love does not mean popes and other bishops may ignore the conditions necessary for the just use of authority in any human community. Like any community's leaders, the Church's pastoral leaders can make wise decisions only if they deliberate well. The other members of the community should contribute to their deliberation by responsibly expressing their opinions on matters concerning the Church's good."

Pope John Paul II said that there is room in the Church for constructive criticism. Sometimes such criticism must be directed toward a bishop. Especially when he sets himself against the Church's teaching or fails to protect the faithful entrusted to his care.


Many today, including sadly many Catholics, equate criticism with condemnation. Dr. Montague Brown explains the difference between the two nicely: “Criticism is the honest appraisal of the value of ideas or actions…Pursued in the right spirit, it is a positive undertaking whose purpose is to gain an accurate understanding for the sake of growing in wisdom and virtue….Condemnation goes beyond evaluation of an idea or action to a declaration of the worthlessness of a human being. It is never fair and is a wholly negative judgment, referring only to weaknesses. Because condemnation is unreasonable, it serves no purpose in our quest for wisdom and virtue.” (The One-Minute Philosopher, pp. 28,29).

“We invite you to criticize our institutions without reserve. One is not insulted by being informed of something amiss, but rather gets an opportunity for amendment, if the information is taken in good part, without resentment.” – Plato, Laws, Bk. 1, 635a

Thursday, August 14, 2014

As a result of unrepented sin, the Police State begins to emerge....


As a result of unrepented sin, America is gradually disintegrating and the Police State is beginning to emerge. See here and here for example.

Our Lady warned, "I foretold to you the great chastisement which would strike this poor humanity which has become pagan and built a new civilization without God, and which is threatened by violence, by hatred, by war, and which is running the risk of destroying itself by its own hands....I also foretold to you the great crisis which would take place in the Church, because of the great apostasy which has entered into her, caused by an ever wider diffusion of errors, by her interior division, by opposition to the Pope and by the rejection of his Magisterium. This most beloved Daughter of mine must live the hours of her agony and of her sorrowful passion. She will be abandoned by many of her children. The impetuous wind of persecution will blow against her, and much blood will be shed, even by my beloved sons...Tell everyone to enter the ark of my Immaculate Heart, in order to be protected and saved by me....Because of the generous response which I am receiving everywhere from my littlest children, I promise to intervene to save you in the hour of the great trial.." (Our Lady to Father Gobbi, Spiritual Exercises in the Form of a Cenacle with the Bishops and Priests of the M.M.P. from the United States and Canada, October 13, 1994).

In the words of Dr. J. Coleman, who served as an Intelligence Officer, “The One-World Government is going to consist of hereditary oligarchs who will divide the power between themselves. There is going to be only one legal religion and only one state church. Only Satanism and Luciferism will be the legal religious subjects in state schools. No other schools (private, Catholic, etc.) will be allowed. All present Christian education systems are going to be destroyed (and the fact is — they are destroyed in the most part) from inside, and become extinct. Satanism is already considered to be a 'true and legal religion'. In fact, in some U.S. military bases, they already celebrate black masses and worship Satan.

There will not be any sort of personal freedom, nor sovereignty of nations, and no human rights at all. We will all become slaves. Every man who does not belong to the elite will have his own number which is going to be recorded in the main computer (the "BEAST 666" in Brussels, Belgium). For control purposes, such numbers will be easily accessible for any government agency. Data regarding children and their mothers will be kept in local government computers.

The number of children will be limited and controlled by abortion and sterilization. There will be mind-controlling drugs, and people will be forced to take them. Euthanasia for elder people and the incurably sick will be obligatory. A minimum of four billion 'unusable bread eaters' will be terminated by planned and controlled wars, by planned mass hunger for some regions of the world (at present, Africa, South America, and Asia), and by widespread disease, causing fast death.

In the New World Order, there will be no money for any transaction to 'buy and sell'. All sales and purchases will be done by electronic money transferred by means of biochips implanted under the skin. Any violation of a Government provision will be punished by a suspension of the usage of the biochip for a period of time. Individuals whose biochips are put on the "black list of offenders" will not be able to buy, sale, nor get any kind of service or employment. They will be outlaws with a very slim or no chance to survive."

It was Tacitus who proclaimed, "O man, how prompt to slavery."  And waiting in the wings is a Lawless One who will rule over such men.  The Christian message will not be tolerated.  He will strive to stamp it out altogether.  He will seek to eradicate any expression of Christian thought or prayer.  He will outlaw the Holy Mass.  And then he will demand worship of himself.


Related reading here.

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Bishop McManus, wouldn't this be an opportune time to apologize to Mr. Robert Spencer and extend him a warm invitation to speak at next year's Catholic Men's Conference?

In an article which may be found here: http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Pontifical-Council-for-Interreligious-Dialogue-slams-Islamic-Caliphate-crimes-and-barbarism-31876.html, we read:

"The Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue deplores in no uncertain terms the acts of violence by the militants of the Islamic caliphate in the Middle East, especially in Iraq and Syria.


The Vatican body calls on the members of all religions and on the international community to join in the condemnation. It also calls on Islamic religious leaders to condemn the use of religion as a false justification for terrorism and to make the culture of coexistence and dialogue that has developed in the past few years more real and credible."

The full translation of the statement issued by the Pontifical Council is presented below.

"The whole world has witnessed with incredulity what is now called the "Restoration of the Caliphate," which had been abolished on October 29, 1923 by Kamal Ataturk, founder of modern Turkey. Opposition to this "restoration" by the majority of religious institutions and Muslim politicians has not prevented the "Islamic State" jihadists from committing and continuing to commit unspeakable criminal acts.

This Pontifical Council, together with all those engaged in interreligious dialogue, followers of all religions, and all men and women of good will, can only unambiguously denounce and condemn these practices which bring shame on humanity:

-the massacre of people on the sole basis of their religious affiliation;

-the despicable practice of beheading, crucifying and hanging bodies in public places;

-the choice imposed on Christians and Yezidis between conversion to Islam, payment of a tax (jizya) or forced exile;

-the forced expulsion of tens of thousands of people, including children, elderly, pregnant women and the sick;

-the abduction of girls and women belonging to the Yezidis and Christian communities as spoils of war (sabaya);

-the imposition of the barbaric practice of infibulation;

-the destruction of places of worship and Christian and Muslim burial places;

-the forced occupation or desecration of churches and monasteries;

-the removal of crucifixes and other Christian religious symbols as well as those of other religious communities;

-the destruction of a priceless Christian religious and cultural heritage;

-indiscriminate violence aimed at terrorizing people to force them to surrender or flee.

No cause, and certainly no religion, can justify such barbarity. This constitutes an extremely serious offense to humanity and to God who is the Creator, as Pope Francis has often reminded us. We cannot forget, however, that Christians and Muslims have lived together - it is true with ups and downs - over the centuries, building a culture of peaceful coexistence and civilization of which they are proud. Moreover, it is on this basis that, in recent years, dialogue between Christians and Muslims has continued and intensified.

The dramatic plight of Christians, Yezidis and other religious communities and ethnic minorities in Iraq requires a clear and courageous stance on the part of religious leaders, especially Muslims, as well as those engaged in interreligious dialogue and all people of good will. All must be unanimous in condemning unequivocally these crimes and in denouncing the use of religion to justify them. If not, what credibility will religions, their followers and their leaders have? What credibility can the interreligious dialogue that we have patiently pursued over recent years have?

Religious leaders are also called to exercise their influence with the authorities to end these crimes, to punish those who commit them and to re-establish the rule of law throughout the land, ensuring the return home of those who have been displaced. While recalling the need for an ethical management of human societies, these same religious leaders must not fail to stress that the support, funding and arming of terrorism is morally reprehensible.

That said, the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue is grateful to all those who have already raised their voices to denounce terrorism, especially that which uses religion to justify it."

As I noted last year (see here: http://lasalettejourney.blogspot.com/2013/02/what-is-real-reason-for-bishop-robert.html):

"In a statement which was published in The Catholic Free Press...Bishop Robert McManus explained his decision to rescind the invitation to Mr. Robert Spencer to speak at the Diocese of Worcester's Catholic Men's Conference which is to be held next month.


Bishop McManus writes, 'In light of my recent decision to rescind the invitation to Mr. Robert Spencer to speak at the Catholic Men's Conference next month on the topic of Islam in its relation to Christianity, I should like to reflect briefly on the conciliar document entitled, The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium), specifically on paragraph 16 of Chapter 2 which speaks about the special relationship that Christianity has to Islam. The paragraph states, "But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place among these are the Muslims who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind."

As a result of such a theologically salient statement, the Catholic Church has engaged herself in inter-religious dialogue with Muslims. This dialogue has produced a harvest of mutual respect, understanding and cooperation throughout the world and here in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. My decision to ask Mr. Spencer not to speak at the Men's Conference resulted from a concern voiced by members of the Islamic community in Massachusetts, a concern I came to share. That concern was that Mr. Spencer's talk about extreme, militant Islamists and the atrocities that they have perpetrated globally might undercut the positive achievements that we Catholics have attained in our inner-religious dialogue with devout Muslims and possibly generate suspicion and even fear of people who practice piously the religion of Islam...I based my decision solely on the concern that Mr. Spencer's talk would impact negatively on the Church's increasingly constructive dialogue with Muslims.' (Bishop shares concerns about conference speaker, Catholic Free Press, February 8, 2013 edition).

At first, Bishop McManus cites a document of the Second Vatican Council - Lumen Gentium - to make it appear as if there is a theological basis for rescinding Mr. Spencer's invitation to speak at the Catholic Men's Conference. Then he later acknowledges that his decision was really entirely subjective, admitting that his decision was based "solely" on his concern that Mr. Spencer's talk would have negative consequences with regard to Catholic-Muslim inter-religious dialogue.

While it's certainly true that Vatican II insists, 'The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems' and that Christians and Moslems should 'forget the past and..work sincerely for mutual understanding..' (Nostra Aetate, No. 3), dialogue, if it is to be authentic, always means taking the other seriously and approaching him with reverence and love. And this can only be accomplished by communicating with the other in truth.

In his book entitled Truth and Tolerance: Christian Belief and World Religions, Pope Benedict XVI makes a few observations which Bishop McManus would apparently find problematic. The Holy Father writes, 'To what extent the new surge forward of the Islamic world is fuelled by truly religious forces is..open to question. In many places, as we can see, there is the danger of a pathological development of the autonomy of feeling.."' (p. 104).

Which is why Mr. Spencer's talk would have been most beneficial.


On page 204 of the same book, Pope Benedict XVI writes, '...even with Islam, with all the greatness it represents, is always in danger of losing balance, letting violence have a place and letting religion slide away into mere outward observance and ritualism.'

Wasn't this to be the point of Mr. Spencer's talk? Would Bishop McManus accuse the Holy Father of undercutting the positive achievements which Catholics have attained with regard to inter-religious dialogue with Moslems? Why is it acceptable for Pope Benedict XVI to speak of the danger of Islam 'letting violence have a place' but unacceptable for Mr. Spencer to talk about 'extreme, militant Islamists and the atrocities that they have perpetrated globally'?

Bishop McManus insists that Mr. Spencer's presentation would not be 'suitable' for the Men's Conference because its focus 'would be on the danger of militant Islamist jihad.' But jihad is not just an aspect of 'militant Islam.' Jihad is the duty to engage in holy war against unbelievers or enemies of Islam if called upon to do so. It is one of the basic tenets and requirements of Muslim faith. Which is why Pope Benedict XVI has warned that Islam 'is always in danger of losing balance' and succumbing to violence."

Now that the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue has called on Islamic religious leaders to condemn
to condemn "the use of religion as a false justification for terrorism and to make the culture of coexistence and dialogue that has developed in the past few years more real and credible," perhaps now would be a good time for Bishop Robert McManus to apologize to Mr. Robert Spencer and to invite him to next year's Catholic Men's Conference?


Related reading here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/06/13/isis-beheadings-and-the-success-of-horrifying-violence/




Wednesday, August 06, 2014

This is Pope Francis' idea of a priest in good standing?


This is Pope Francis' idea of a priest in good standing: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/08/in-new-declarations-priest-pardoned-by.html

This is the "Social Gospel."  Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich was shown this secular humanism which would disguise itself as Christianity:



"...this church was born without a Saviour, good works without faith, the communion of the unbelieving with the appearance but not the reality of virtue; in a word, the anti-Church whose centre is malice, error, falsehood, hypocrisy, tepidity, and the cunning of all the demons of the period... Its mysteries are to have no mysteries and, consequently, its action is temporal, finite, full of pride and presumption, a teacher of evil clothed in specious raiment."

An authentic charity always places God first. We read in the Catechism of the Catholic Church that, "Charity is the theological virtue by which we love God above all things for his own sake, and our neighbor as ourselves for the love of God" (1822).

Proponents of the Social Gospel attempt to reverse this order. They would have us put man first and God (if at all) after. For some 40 years now Catholics have been subjected to a watered-down Catholicism which seeks to replace many basic truths of the Faith with an emphasis on the temporal. It was Bishop Fulton John Sheen who said that the unrepentant sinner turns to 'social justice" to ease his conscience.


The results? In the words of Stephen Brady, President of Roman Catholic Faithful, "By direct promotion of, or by simply ignoring the use of the birth control pill by the faithful, the corrupt Hierarchy has purchased the souls of millions of Catholics who now live as unrepentant sinners. These compromised Catholics are, for the most part, the ones who are pro-choice, pro-homosexual, and represent the liberal wing of the Church that accept all the sinful innovations that have now found a home in the local parish. This sodomite sexual revolution, aided by the abortifacient pill, has brought on all of society's ills, including unchecked abortion, adultery, fornication, out-of-wedlock pregnancy, divorce, sexually transmitted disease like AIDS, and the complete breakdown of the family. This compromised morality, winked at by the Church Hierarchy, has brought about the corruption of every segment of society. The moral guidepost, known as the Catholic Church, has been so weakened by the current Church leadership, that any true moral guidance offered by a Bishop is now ignored."

We have seen this repeatedly. When a faithful Bishop or other member of the Church's hierarchy speaks out against sin, he almost inevitably receives criticism. Especially from the Main Stream Media. Recall what happened when Cardinal Francis Arinze spoke out against the evils of our day (abortion, contraception, sodomy etc) - all of which are destroying the family - in an address given at Georgetown University.

The Social Gospel is not the true Gospel of Christ. It is a counterfeit which has been constructed to pave the way for the Man of Sin.

"Fidel Castro is often portrayed as the "benevolent" dictator of Cuba, such portrayals are unarguably wrong. The evidence of his bloodthirsty and murderous nature is unequivocal and available for anyone who wants to know the truth. Unfortunately such evidence is rarely discussed by the news media and at schools. There's perhaps no more grizzly atrocity committed by Fidel Castro than the firing squads which he implemented. Beginning as a rebel, before he would eventually take power in Cuba, Fidel Castro used firing squad executions to enforce discipline, punish followers deemed disloyal or intimidate potential opposition. At the beginning of the Castro regime there was a reign of terror typical of revolutions in which the firing squad was used prominently but the executions continued for decades.


The Cuba Archive which documents deaths and disappearances resulting from Fidel Castro's Cuban revolution has documented 3,615 firing squad executions conducted by the Cuban state since Castro took over on January 1, 1959.

Opponents of the death penalty should be horrified at the amount of death Fidel Castro and his accomplices have directly caused. It's important to note that in Revolutionary Cuba there are none of the due process guarantees found in a western-style democracy. Most of Castro's firing squad victims were afforded only a perfunctory show trial the outcome of which was predetermined, some didn't even get that. Ernesto "Ché" Guevara is a popular culture icon, his face adorns posters and t-shirts around the globe. Most people don't realize that he was Fidel Castro's chief enforcer and had a personal hand in at least 100 firing squad executions, often delivering the coup de grace personally. In response to questions about Castro's firing squads Guevara once said, "To send men to the firing squad, judicial proof is unnecessary. These procedures are an archaic bourgeois detail. This is a revolution. And a revolutionary must become a cold killing machine motivated by pure hate."

For the author's full Blog post and videos showing executions carried out under the satanic Castro regime, go here:

http://babalublog.com/fidel-castros-greatest-atrocities-and-crimes/fidel-castros-firing-squads-in-cuba/

The true Christian, in the Creed, proclaims: Et exspecto resurrectionem mortuorum, et vitam venturi saeculi - 'We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come." But proponents of the "social gospel" have largely abandoned such a hope and prefer instead to embrace a humanitarian religion and to work for an earthly "utopia." Robert Hugh Benson, in his classic work entitled The Lord of the World, describes this humanitarian religion:


"Humanitarianism..is becoming an actual religion itself; though anti-supernatural. It is a pantheism. Pantheism deifies all nature, God is the world, but naturally, man above all is God since he is the highest expression of nature. It is a religion devoid of the 'super' natural, because since God is nature itself, there is no longer a distinction between Creator and creature. The creature is God and hence arbitrator of his own destiny and establishes the moral law for himself....Humanitarianism is a religion devoid of the supernatural. It is developing a ritual under Freemasonry; it has a creed, 'God is man'; and the rest. It has, therefore, a real food of a sort to offer religious cravings: it idealizes and yet makes no demands upon the spiritual faculties..." (Introduction, p. xvii).

The Church's mission is not to solve poverty. In fact, Jesus said that we would always have the poor with us (Mark 14: 7). The Church's mission is the salvation of souls. When a crowd of people went searching for Jesus and found Him on the other side of the Sea of Galilee, they said to Him, 'Rabbi, when did you come here?' And Jesus answered them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. Do not labour for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you; for on Him has God the Father set His seal." The crowd said to Him, "What must we do, to be doing the works of God?" And Jesus answered them: "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him who He has sent." (John 6: 25-29).

The work of God is believing in Him whom the Father has sent. Jesus reveals Himself as the Bread of Life. He reveals in the synagogue who He is, where He comes from and the good things He has in store for those who believe in Him: faith, the Eucharist and eternal life.

Proponents of the 'social gospel" have forgotten that "man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God" (Matthew 4: 4). Crippled by distorted humanitarian ideals, such confused souls forget Our Lord's injunction to "seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things (food, drink, clothing etc) shall be yours as well." (Matthew 6: 33)

Friday, August 01, 2014

North Quabbin Catholic Community and satanic pride...


In a post which may be found here, Gregory Dipippo notes how, "The fourth Sunday of Lent, John XXIII was once again among the crowd, at Ostia. (about 15 miles to the south-west of Rome.) Thousands of people were waiting for him along the street, in the piazza, in the church. They wanted to see him, to applaud him. They did not know that afterwards, he would rebuke them, in a good-natured way, in his simple , spontaneous, familiar way of speaking.

I am very glad to have come here. But if I must express a wish, it is that in church you not shout out, that you not clap your hands, and that you not greet even the Pope, because ‘templum Dei, templum Dei.’ (‘The temple of God is the temple of God.’)

Now, if you are pleased to be in this beautiful church, you must know that the Pope is also pleased to see his children. But as soon as he sees his good children, he certainly does not clap his hands in their faces. And the one who stands before you is the Successor of St. Peter.”

Readers of this Blog know that when I advised the North Quabbin Catholic Community that applause during the Liturgy is not appropriate, I was banned from the Church's Facebook page and ostracized.  See here.  To this day, the North Quabbin Catholic Community cannot admit that applause doesn't belong in the temple of God and I remain banned for defending sound liturgical rubrics and authentic Catholic teaching.

Our Lady has spoken to Father Gobbi many times about the satanic pride which is crippling humanity and so dangerously threatmening it. On December 8, 1993, she told Father Gobbi, "Satan has deceived this entire poor humanity, bringing it so far away from God and building for it idols of his own perversion: money, pride, egoism, amusement and impurity. And so humanity is today greatly threatened by violence, hatred, rebellion and war. During these years, you will see the great chastisement, with which the justice of God will purify this world, which has become a thousand times worse than at the time of the flood and so very possessed by evil spirits.....Satan has also entered into the interior of the Church and has succeeded in darkening her splendor. With the darkness of sin, he has obscured the splendor of her holiness; with the wound of division, he has made an attack upon the strength of her unity; with the spread of errors, he has stricken her in her proclamation of the truth.."

On May 13, 1993, Our Lady told Father Gobbi, "The powers which are directing and arranging human events, according to their perverse plans, are the dark and diabolic powers of evil. They have succeeded in in bringing all humanity to live without God. They have spread everywhere the error of theoretical and practical atheism. They have built the new idols before which humanity is bowing down in adoration: pleasure, money, pride, impurity, mastery over others, and impiety. Thus, in these years of yours, violence is spreading more and more. Egoism has made the hearts of men hard and insensitive. Hatred has blazed up like a scorching fire. Wars have multiplied in every part of the world, and you are now living in the danger of a terrible world war which will bring destruction to peoples and nations, a war from which no one will emerge victorious. Satan has succeeded in entering into the Church, the new Israel of God. He has entered there with the smoke of error and sin, the loss of faith and apostasy, of compromise with the world and the search for pleasure. During these years, he has succeeded in leading astray bishops, priests, religious and faithful.."

Today we are living in the most decadent, violent and faithless period in the history of mankind. But many cannot see this because they have succumbed to satanic pride. Satan fell in love with his own beauty and wound up rebelling against God and leading other angels to do the same, drawing them to Hell. Today, bishops, priests, religious and laity, puffed up with satanic pride, have become enamored with themselves and their "intellectual prowess." And like their master, the father of all lies (John 8: 44), these too are now rebelling against God and His Holy Church. These sons of Hell spend much of their waking hours contradicting Sacred Scripture, denying dogma and popularizing immorality. These pseudo-intellectuals arrogantly divinize man's intellect while ridiculing the Word of God. Saint Paul spoke of these disciples of Lucifer in 2 Timothy 4: 1-4: "I charge you to preach the word, to stay with this task whether convenient or inconvenient - correcting, reproving, appealing - constantly teaching and never losing patience. For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine, but, following their own desires, will surround themselves with teachers who tickle their ears. They will stop listening to the truth and will wander off to fables."

In Romans 1, Saint Paul emphasizes the fact that there is a connection between a refusal to acknowledge and obey God and a subsequent degeneration of morality. And yet, with all the sex abuse scandals within the Church and all the sexual immorality and dissent, there has been very little discussion about this truth. False worship and pride in one's own intellect cause spiritual blindness and subject men to the destructive and degrading drives of fallen nature - most especially in the area of sex. Saint Paul tells us that people who fall into such spiritual blindness begin to encourage others to do so. And so infidelity spreads like a cancer.

If we are to remain steadfast in the faith, we must continue to rely only on the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of His Mother. As Father Lorenzo Scupoli reminds us, "Distrust of yourself is so necessary in the spiritual combat that, without it, you may be assured that you will neither gain the desired victory, nor be able to overcome even the weakest of your passions. You must be firmly convinced in your mind that this is the case, for, through our natural conception, we are too prone to make a false estimate of ourselves. Although we are absolutely nothing, we persuade ourselves that we are something and presume without the slightest foundation on our own strength." (Spiritual Combat, p. 11, Sophia Institute Press).

Jesus has said it: "Without Me, you can do nothing." Do we really believe this? Do we remind ourselves every day that without Him we can do nothing, that we are nothing? We are like a puff of smoke, a blade of grass - here today and gone tomorrow. Do we, insignificant creatures that we are, dare to question or challenge Almighty God? Do we dare to contradict the Son of Man and His Church? If so, then we are either unbelievers or demoniacs.

And His Word is not in us.
Site Meter