Thursday, September 30, 2010

" will only come when the social order has been sufficiently destabilized.."

At his Blog, Mark Mallett writes, "world bodies such, as the International Monetary Fund, who are increasingly warning that America’s foundations are beginning to crumble under its enormous debt. I have written before that Revolution is coming. But it will only come when the social order has been sufficiently destabilized, and then, the opportunity for a new political order is possible. That destabilization is coming hard and fast, it seems, as unemployment and poverty in the U.S. rises and the possibility for social chaos, such as we see breaking out in other third world countries, becomes less remote. Far from a speculation, several popes have been warning for decades that such a revolution has been the intention all along of secret societies working parallel to governments...With the collapse of the United States, the door will be open for a new super-power—or super-world government—to assert a mode of governance that does not place the intrinsic freedom and dignity of the human person at its center, but instead profitability, efficiency, ecology, the environment, and technology as its primary goal."

He then cites Pope Benedict XVI who has said that:

"...without the guidance of charity in truth, this global force could cause unprecedented damage and create new divisions within the human family… If there is a lack of respect for the right to life and to a natural death, if human conception, gestation and birth are made artificial, if human embryos are sacrificed to research, the conscience of society ends up losing the concept of human ecology and, along with it, that of environmental ecology. It is contradictory to insist that future generations respect the natural environment when our educational systems and laws do not help them to respect themselves." (Caritas in Veritate, No. 51).

We are being prepared for the Reign of Antichrist.  The Rev. P. Huchede, in his work entitled "History of Antichrist," explains the religious preparation, both intellectual and moral, for the Reign of Antichrist which will arrive after economic collapse:

 "But how shall he deprive the world of Christianity and have himself adored as God? Alas, it is only too true that the minds and hearts of men are admirably disposed for revolution and consequently ready to accept and bear the cruel yoke of such a tyrant. Revolution as the word itself implies means a subversion, but a subversion of all that is true, good, beautiful, and grand in the universe. It is the subversion of religion, representing its dogmas as myths and its moral teachings as tyranical. It is the subversion of authority. Licentiousness under the name of liberty becomes the order of the day; each one is invested with the right to govern himself. It is the subversion of reason: and do we not find leading minds in some of the most enlightened nations denying the principle of contradiction and maintaining the absolute identity of all beings? Revolution is therefore essentially destructive, and it becomes cosmopolitan by the action of secret societies scattered throughout the world. Is it not true to say that the 'mystery of iniquity' is prepared in secret revolutionary dens? But it does not suffice to destroy; it is absolutely necessary to build up again. The world cannot subsist long in a vacuum. It must have a religion; it must have a philosophy; it must have an authority. Revolution will furnish all these. Instead of the reasonable and supernatural religion of Jesus Christ, Revolution will preach Pantheism. The God-humanity will impart the theurgic spirit and thus lead men to adore the demon as the author of universal emancipation...What frightful immorality must follow in the train of this shameless prostitution of religion! Never has the threefold concupiscence made greater ravage among mankind. And this is the religion sought and hoped for as the cherished boon of the aspirations of our modern free thinkers. To our Christian philosophy, the honor of humanity's revolution will substitute a babel of extravagant and absurd ideas. Instead of a mild and efficient authority consecrated alike by Church and state, despotism* and anarchy will rise up and contend for the shreds of religious liberty and human policy...if the state of perversion continue for a while longer, he [Antichrist] will find the world prepared to receive and serve him." (Rev. P. Huchede, History of Antichrist, pp. 13-14, Tan Books).

Is there really any doubt that we are now on the verge of a One World Government which will be eventually led by the Son of Perdition? Men are ready to worship and adore the demon. Those whose names are not written in the Book of Life, that is, who are not consecrated to the Immaculata.

" is even more urgent to teach the hard words of the Gospel today.."

In her own day, St. Catherine of Sienna found much corruption within the Holy Church. Homosexuality and many other deeply rooted problems were found among the clergy and Our Lord spoke to this Doctor of the Church about these problems (pride, loss of sacred identity, loss of faith, worldliness, and sensuality). These conversations were laid out in St. Catherine's book entitled "Dialogue," and most especially in that portion of the book labelled "The Mystical Body of Holy Church."

While St. Catherine cautions her readers not to engage in blanket condemnations aimed at the clergy in general (using scandals as an excuse to denigrate priests in general), and refers to such people as "irreverent persecutors" of the clergy, still, she was told by Our Lord that those who will not receive correction and those who will not give it are like the limbs of a body beginning to rot.

It would appear that the Archdiocese of Boston may be likened to such a limb.  For its officials refuse to accept even constructive criticism.  Such criticism has angered archdiocesan officials to such an extent that they have accused the Catholic bloggers who have issued the medicinal rebukes ( Catholics who are faithful to the Church's Magisterium and who actively oppose dissent from the teaching authority of the Church) of causing harm to the community.
Several years back, in 2006 to be exact, a Roman Catholic priest penned these words which everyone within the Archdiocese of Boston should prayerfully meditate on:
"It is important to express the moral teachings of the Church with clarity and fidelity.  The Church must be Church.  We must teach the truths of the Gospel in season and out of season.  These recent times seem to us like it is out of season, but for that very reason it is even more urgent to teach the hard words of the Gospel today...Calling people to embrace the cross of discipleship, to live the commandments and at the same time assuring them that we love them as brothers and sisters can be difficult.  Sometimes we are told: If you do not accept my behavior, you do not love me.  In reality we must communicate the exact opposite: Because we love you, we cannot accept your behavior."
Who was the priest who authored these words?  His Eminence Sean Cardinal O'Malley.  See here Why then do his subordinates accuse Catholcs faithful to the Church's Teaching Office of causing harm to the community for engaging in fraternal correction?  After all, such Catholics are only responding to the call of His Eminence to communicate the "hard words" of the Gospel.  Read Father Richard Erikson's response to Catholic bloggers.  Is there really any difference between his response toward criticism of Father Bryan Hehir's dissent from Church teaching and the person who says, "If you do not accept my behavior, you do not love me."  Again, constructive criticism is being confused with condemnation.
Something to think about on this rainy Thursday afternoon.

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

I'm as mad as Hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!

This is Joe Sacerdo speaking...

I don't have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad. It's a depression. Everybody's out of work or scared of losing their job. The dollar buys a nickel's worth; banks are going bust; shopkeepers keep a gun under the counter; punks are running wild in the street, dissent and homosexuality have infected certain segments of the Church and there's nobody anywhere who seems to know what to do, and there's no end to it.

We know the air is unfit to breathe and our food is unfit to eat, that our local church is infected with modernism. And we sit watching our TVs while some local newscaster tells us that today we had fifteen homicides and sixty-three violent crimes, as if that's the way it's supposed to be! 

We all know things are bad -- worse than bad -- they're crazy.  When an Archdiocese honors a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual mayor, things are crazy!

It's like everything everywhere is going crazy, so we don't go out any more. We sit in the house, and slowly the world we're living in is getting smaller, and all we say is, "Please, at least leave us alone in our living rooms. Let me have my toaster and my TV and my steel-belted radials, and I won't say anything. Just leave us alone.  Just let us pray quietly in church and leave us alone."

Well, I'm not going to leave you alone.

I want you to get mad!

I don't want you to protest. I don't want you to riot. I don't want you to write to your Congressman, because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do about the depression and the inflation and the Koreans, the Lavender Mafia, liturgical terrorists, wiccan nuns, Call to Action and the crime in the street.

All I know is that first, you've got to get mad.

You've gotta say, "I'm a human being, goshdarnit! My life has value!  And the teaching of the Magisterium must be adhered to, we must listen to the Lord Jesus!

So, I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up right now and go to the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell,

"I'm as mad as hell,

and I'm not going to take this anymore!!"

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Don't Ask, Don't Care....About God's Commandments

In an article written for the Institute for Policy Studies, the same extreme-left organization which recognized Father J. Bryan Hehir of the Boston Archdiocese as one of the "cornerstones" of its Washington School where the dissident priest taught a course on liberation theology entitled "Matthew, Marx, Luke and John" which focused on Nicaragua, William A. Collins writes:

"The glacial progress toward equality for gay Americans offers some revealing looks at our society. One is the weakening hold of religion, Roman Catholicism in particular. Until recently, church bias against homosexuals was plainly understood, unspoken, unchallenged, and accepted.

No longer. That underlying bulwark of morality is now widely perceived as bigotry. For example, at Jesuit-run Marquette University a great uproar ensued when the school revoked a deanship offered to a lesbian professor. In other days not only would there never have been an offer, but she probably would never have become a professor. And surely faculty and students would never have raised such a howl.
Other religions are in turmoil too. Episcopalians are breaking into separate churches over the issue, and while northern Methodists lean toward allowing gay clergy, Southerners control the votes. Lutherans are similarly divided. Mormons of course remain officially opposed, but church fathers (there are no church mothers) recently supported an anti-discrimination ordinance to protect gays in Salt Lake City. Black churches, however, fear that homosexuality threatens the basic family, and in Africa churches have succeeded in making same-sex relationships a serious felony.

Then there's our military. The Commander-in-Chief, Defense Secretary and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs have now called for repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. But the individual service chiefs aren't so sure. Naturally all this internal tension gives gay-intolerant politicians room to maneuver. So with such rampant indecision still on the loose, Defense Secretary Robert Gates is simply changing procedures making it much harder to enforce the law that ejects gays from the service.

Social tolerance seems to be advancing quite nicely without us in other countries. Most Western militaries think we're kidding about banning gays. They never could understand Americans anyway. And now several Catholic countries are loosening up their wedding rules. Portugal lately became the sixth European nation to sanctify gay marriage, and Argentina just broke the ice in South America by court decree. It seems that its constitution, like many of our own state constitutions, contains an inconvenient "equal rights" clause. Mexico City has actually voted to allow same-sex marriage. More sleepless nights in the Vatican.

Back here at home, these social battles rage on. California, which includes many progressive-voting communities, actually approved a gay marriage ban in 2008. Citing the Constitution's guarantee of equal rights, a federal district court recently overturned the ban, but that decision doesn't alter the population's basic sentiment. The final outcome will probably be decided by our Supreme Court, which is dominated by a conservative majority.

Meanwhile, most lawmakers still seem convinced that in their hearts the "silent majority" of voters oppose gay rights. Whether these public passions stem from fear of sin or "otherness," or real concern for "family values" is hard to measure. What can be measured is that this icy grip on a big chunk of our population is gradually thawing and that automatic hard line opponents of equality are now faced with meaningful political opposition."

It says much that Father J. Bryan Hehir, a Roman Catholic priest who is supposed to adhere to the Church's teaching, would associate himself with a leftist movement which advances the radical homosexual agenda while mocking the Vatican.  And make no mistake about it, from the very beginning IPS has been advancing the homosexual agenda.  At its website, the organization freely acknowledges that Rita Mae Brown wrote her "path-breaking lesbian coming-of-age novel Rubyfruit Jungle while serving on the staff of IPS in the 1970s.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in its document entitled "Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons," recalls the distinction between homosexual tendencies and homosexual practices:

"Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder." (No. 3).  And while condemning crimes and other hateful acts against homosexual persons, the Letter explains that these crimes cannot serve as a pretext to justify homosexuality.

And, in its document entitled "Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons," the CDF emphasizes that, "Sacred Scripture condemns homosexual acts 'as a serious depravity....This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.'  This same moral judgment is found in many Christian writers of the first centuries 'and is unanimously accepted by Catholic Tradition.'" (No. 4).

The real question is: is this same moral judgment accepted by Father J. Bryan Hehir?  If so, what do we make of this?

William Collins, like others who have bought into homosexual agitprop, is attempting to paint Christian opposition toward homosexuality (and especially the perennial teaching of the Church founded by Jesus Christ) as bigotry and intolerance. As I said in a previous post: "..the same radical homosexual activists who continually cry for more "tolerance" are anything but tolerant. This is a spiritual war. The homosexual movement is not a civil rights movement. It is an attempt at moral revolution. An attempt to change people's view of homosexuality.

Writing in the Chicago Free Press, even homosexual activist Paul Varnell admitted this. He wrote, "The fundamental controverted issue about homosexuality is not discrimination, hate crimes or domestic partnerships, but the morality of homosexuality. Even if gays obtain non-discrimination laws, hate crimes law and domestic partnership benefits, those can do little to counter the underlying moral condemnation which will continue to fester beneath the law and generate hostility, fuel hate crimes, support conversion therapies, encourage gay youth suicide and inhibit the full social acceptance that is our goal. On the other hand, if we convince people that homosexuality is fully moral, then all their inclination to discriminate, engage in gay-bashing or oppose gay marriage disappears. Gay youths and adults could readily accept themselves. So the gay movement, whether we acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a sexual liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people's view of homosexuality." (Paul Varnell, "Defending Our Morality," Chicago Free Press, Aug 16, 2000, See here).

Related reading here

And here

Monday, September 27, 2010

CDC: 20% Of Homosexual Men Are HIV-Positive, Nearly Half Don't Know It

Dutch psychologist Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, Ph.D, a specialist on homosexuality, says that the claim that homosexuality is normal is one of those statements that are "so foolish that only intellectuals could believe them."  It is like saying that anorexia nervosa is healthy.  See here.

Recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show that 1 in 5 sexually active homosexual and bisexual men in America are HIV-positive but that 44% of them don't know it.  See here.

Related reading: The health risks associated with the homosexual lifestyle.

Sunday, September 26, 2010

The Global Elite's Idea Of "Utopia"

In his book entitled "Europe Today and Tomorrow," then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, warned that, "Today we find ourselves in the midst of a second Enlightenment, which has not only left behind the motto Deus Sive Natura but has also unmasked as irrational the Marxist ideology of hope.  In its place it has proposed a rational goal for the future, which is entitled the New World Order and is now supposed to become in its turn the essential ethical norm.  It still shares with Marxism the evolutionary idea of a universe brought forth by an irrational event and formed by its intrinsic rules, which however - unlike the provisions of the ancient idea of nature - cannot contain within themselves any ethical direction.

The attempt to derive from the rules of the evolutionary game the rules for the game of human life as well, and hence a new set of ethics, is in reality rather widespread but not very convincing.  There are more and more voices of philosophers such as Singer, Rorty, and Sloterdijk telling us that man now has the right and the duty to construct a new world order on a rational basis.  The new world order, the necessity of which cannot be doubted, they say, ought to be a world order of rationality.

Thus far they are all in agreement.  But what is rational?  The criterion of rationality is drawn exclusively from experiences of technological production on scientific foundations.  Such rationality exists in the sense of functionality, efficiency, increase in the quality of life.  The exploitation of nature that is connected with it increasingly becomes a problem because of environmental hazards, which are becoming dramatic.

Meanwhile, the manipulation of man by man is proceeding apace with even greater impudence.  The visions of Huxley [Aldous] are definitely becoming a reality; the human being must be no longer begotten irrationally but rather produced rationally.  But man as a product is at the disposal of man.  The imperfect specimens are discarded, so as to develop the perfect man by way of planning and production.  Suffering must disappear, life must be nothing but this way new forms of oppression are born, and a new ruling class arises.  Ultimately the destiny of other men is decided by those who have scientific power at their disposal and those who manage the finances...The human being cannot become a product.  He cannot be a product; he can only be begotten.  And for this reason protection for the special dignity of the communion between man and woman, on which the future of mankind is based, must be numbered among the ethical constants of every human society."

Having abandoned the God of love, the Supreme Creator, 21st-century man is now ready to worship himself and to usurp the divine powers of creation and destruction. In the words of Dr. Edmund Leach of King's College at Cambridge: 'The scientist can now play God in his role as wonder-worker, but can he - and should he - also play God as moral arbiter?...There can be no source for these moral judgments except the scientist himself. In traditional religion, morality was held to derive from God, but God was only credited with the authority to establish and enforce moral laws because He was also credited with supernatural powers of creation and destruction. Those powers have now been usurped by man, and he must take on the moral responsibility that goes with them' (Edmund Leach, "We Scientists Have the Right to Play God," The Saturday Evening Post, November 16, 1968, p. 16).

But make no mistake about it, when man becomes God society becomes, in the words of the French philosopher Gabriel Marcel, 'a termite colony.' We are still in the twilight. But unless we take a stand now, we will have the Moloch state. As at Auschwitz, men will determine who has quality of life and who should be "mercifully terminated."

Saturday, September 25, 2010

Father Anthony Di Russo gets it right

In a letter to the Editor of the Sentinel & Enterprise entitled Religious tolerance is a two-way street which was published yesterday, Father Anthony Di Russo wrote: "I found the Sept. 20 article on Ahmadiyya Muslims very interesting. We can sympathize with them and they with us because in Saudi Arabia and other Muslim-majority countries they would have no freedom of religion and would actually be at risk of losing their lives since they would be considered heretics.

In his recent trip to England, Pope Benedict said the Catholic Church is open to dialogue with other religions. But he also said there must be reciprocity. Reciprocity from the Muslim side is practically nonexistent. Where is there a church in Saudi Arabia? We cannot even go into that country with a Bible. In fact, the U.S. military recently burned Bibles in Afghanistan to avoid the appearance of trying to convert the Afghans.

Islam has a huge problem because the true believers think they must subject the rest of us to Sharia. They think later verses in the Quran supercede earlier verses. Unfortunately, the later verses are the violent ones and the peaceful, earlier verses are superceded. So the Jihadists actually have the Quran to back up their position.

The Sunoco station on Main Street in Leominster has been displaying a sign saying: Tolerance without reciprocity is appeasement. It is about time we demand reciprocity from Islam."

I've been saying this right along

Friday, September 24, 2010

As the American Empire crumbles...

You are witnessing a fundamental breakdown of the American dream, a systemic breakdown of our democracy and our capitalism, a breakdown driven by the blind insatiable greed of Wall Street: Dysfunctional government, insane markets, economy on the brink. Multiply that many times over and see a world in total disarray. Ignore it now, tomorrow will be too late.” - The Wall Street Journal, February, 2010.

Christ, in a vision to the stigmatist Martha Robin:

"I play with the plans of men.  My right hand prepares miracles and My Name shall be glorified in all the world.  I shall be pleased to break the pride of the wicked much more when the world will be most hostile to all that is supernatural.  And much more admirable and extraordinary will be the event that will come out of our encounter.  In place of the throne of the Beast two glorious thrones will arise, one of My Sacred Heart and the other of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Then it will be understood that neither human power nor demons nor the genius of industry will end the conflict, but that will end only when reparation has been consummated.  Be courageous!  The Kingdom of God is near.  It will begin with something that will come so suddenly as to be entirely unexpected."

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Nine Day Novena To Our Lady of La Salette

The Nine Day Novena To Our Lady of LaSalette

Day One
Theme: Welcome
Scripture Says: "Come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will give you rest. For my yoke is easy, and my burden light." (Mt. 11: 28, 30)

Mary Said: "Come near, my children."


What a wonderful invitation! In all simplicity Mary at La Salette calls the two children to come near. Her words echo her Son's invitation to come to him that we may find rest from our burdens and refreshment for our spirits. This too is Mary's desire: that her children-meaning us as well- should feel welcomed and loved.
Mary wishes us to come nearer to God who desires only good for us. We must approach and listen to her words, spoken with the love and concern of Jesus. She and her Son wish that during this La Salette Novena of prayer we may "have life and have it more abundantly." (John 10:10) This is a wonderful outcome from this special time of prayer-that we would feel at home and sense the fullness of life God wishes for us. (Quiet Reflection)

Our Prayer: Virgin Mother of La Salette, we approach your loving Son with confidence. We place before our Savior our labors and burdens, our thoughts and feelings, words and actions, during these days of prayer and reflection. May Christ ease our burdens, and fill us with his presence. With faith, we ask for his blessings on us and on those whom we hold close to our hearts. (mention your request)

Pray: the Lord's Prayer and Hail Mary

Invocation: Our Lady of La Salette, Reconciler of Sinners, pray without ceasing for us who have recourse to you. (top)

Day Two:

Theme: Freedom from Fear

Scripture Says: "Do not fear, Mary, for you have found favor with God." (Luke 1: 30)

Mary Said: "Do not be afraid."


At her Annunciation, Mary's initial response to the presence and words of the angel was anxious fear. She could easily sympathize with the reaction of fear which overcame the two children at her sudden appearance on the Holy Mountain of La Salette. Her words, like those of the angel, were most welcome and reassuring.

Mary, who was relieved of her fears, now relieves us of our own. She who "found favor with God," in turn finds favor for us. Mary who knew the God of her ancestors as a God of power and might now encounters God in a personal and intimate way. At La Salette she speaks from that privileged relationship with God to teach us that we too are "beloved of the Father."

Saint John declares "perfect love drives out fear." (1 John 4: 18) Mary came to know that "perfect love" as her own Son. May he cast out our fear as well, and perfect his love in us. (Quiet Reflection)

Our Prayer: Remember, Mother of Sorrows, how often fear keeps us from God. Lovingly guide us to Jesus, the source of grace. As we take comfort in your invitation to draw ever closer to your Son, may your words melt our hearts, dispel our fears, and increase his peace within us. (mention your request)

Pray: the Lord's Prayer and Hail Mary

Invocation: Our Lady of La Salette, Reconciler of Sinners, pray without ceasing for us who have recourse to you. (top)

Day Three:

Theme: Joy

Scripture Says: "The angel of the Lord appeared to (the shepherds) and said, 'Behold, I proclaim to you good news of great joy that will be for all the people.'" (Luke 2: 10)

Mary Said: "I am here to tell you great news."


The good news spoken to Mary at her Annunciation brought forth a prayer of praise. This prayer, the Magnificat, not only expresses her deep joy and the conviction of her strong faith; it also recounts how God cares for and helps the needy, the downtrodden, the lost.

Like the Gospel, the message of Mary at La Salette is one of good news. Her words announce great joy-the joy of our salvation: sin is forgiven, death is destroyed, a broken world has been renewed.

The angels announced the Good News of Jesus' birth-God breaking forth into our world. Mary at La Salette reminds us that God continues to break into our world, restoring and renewing the face of the earth. This is the Good News! This is the source of our joy! (Quiet Reflection)

Our Prayer: Gentle Virgin of La Salette, you urge us to find joy in God our Savior. Gladly we hear your words and pledge to spread this good news. May our lives give glory to your Son and be filled with joy in serving Christ, now and forever. (mention your request)

Pray: the Lord's Prayer and Hail Mary

Invocation: Our Lady of La Salette, Reconciler of Sinners, pray without ceasing for us who have recourse to you. (top)

Day Four:

Theme: Rest

Scripture Says: "Six days you may labor and do all your work; but the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord, your God... For remember that you too were once slaves in Egypt, and the Lord, your God, brought you from there with his strong hand and outstretched arm. That is why the Lord, your God, has commanded you to observe the sabbath day." (Deuteronomy 5: 13, 14a, 15)

Mary Said: "I gave you six days to work; I kept the seventh for myself..."


Yes, the seventh day belongs to God and God shares this gift with us. This consecrated time is meant to free us from the vicious cycle of production and consumerism. It points us to the greater reality of God's presence and our life of grace. We are restored to the divine image.

The One who made the heavens and the earth has reserved this day for himself to remind us that we are "[God's] children in Christ". (Romans 8:16) This day, then, is also meant to restore our community. In sharing the Body of Christ we are called to be the Body of Christ. We are given into one another's care as were Jesus' mother and disciple at the foot of his cross. (Quiet Reflection)

Our Prayer: Faithful Virgin of La Salette, you uphold our dignity as free people and as children of God. May the Day of the Lord shine on us and give meaning to our work and our relationships so that in Jesus Christ we may give thanks to God. (mention your request)

Pray: the Lord's Prayer and Hail Mary

Invocation: Our Lady of La Salette, Reconciler of Sinners, pray without ceasing for us who have recourse to you. (top)

Day Five:

Theme: True Fasting

Scripture Says: "This, rather, is the fasting that I wish: releasing those bound unjustly, untying the thongs of the yoke; setting free the oppressed, breaking every yoke; sharing your bread with the hungry, sheltering the oppressed and the homeless; clothing the naked when you see them, and not turning your back on your own." (Isaiah 58: 6-7)

Mary Said: "If the harvest is ruined, it is only on account of yourselves. I warned you last year. You paid no heed! Instead, you swore. The rest will do penance through the famine!"


Mary's message startles us to an awareness of the evils of our world and to our own indifference. Today two-thirds of the world suffers or dies from hunger. Human rights are ignored across the face of the earth and injustice lies on our very doorstep. These signs cry out for our response.

If we listen to and act upon her words and those of her Son, she promises that one day Jesus will say to us: "Come, you who are blessed by my Father. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me whatever you did for one of these least...of mine, you did for me." (Matthew 25: 34a, 35-36, 40b) (Quiet Reflection)

Our Prayer: Mother of Compassion, open our eyes to the sufferings of our sisters and brothers. Open our hearts and hands to share with these most needy of your children the plenteous blessings of this earth. Inspired by your words, Mary, may your people continue to nourish and heal, to love and forgive, to build the world our God desires. (mention your request)

Pray: the Lord's Prayer and Hail Mary

Invocation: Our Lady of La Salette, Reconciler of Sinners, pray without ceasing for us who have recourse to you. (top)

Day Six:

Theme: Promised Blessings

Scripture Says: "The desert and the parched land will exult; the steppe will rejoice and bloom. They will bloom with abundant flowers, and rejoice with joyful song. They will see the glory of the Lord, the splendor of our God." (Isaiah 35: 1-2)

Mary Said: "If (my people) are converted, rocks and stones will turn into heaps of wheat..."


Jesus who opens the eyes of the blind and makes the lame dance, comes to restore us to life. The constant temptation is to harden our hearts and narrow our vision, so that we miss his very presence.

Let us come to Jesus, who is the Way to follow, the Truth to be discovered, the Life to be enjoyed and shared. He is the One who can make the desert of our heart-and of our world-bloom and bear abundant fruit.

Mary's apparition on the barren slope of La Salette has unleashed a stream of life-giving water, bearing the promise of refreshment and renewal. Heeding Mary's call to conversion makes our own lives rich and fruitful. (Quiet Reflection)

Our Prayer: Virgin Reconciler, may your unceasing prayer and loving concern for us bear fruit in the constant conversion of our minds and hearts. May our lives burst forth anew with love for your Son. May we obtain the blessings you and your Son have promised and faithfully give him thanks as our Savior and Lord. (mention your request)

Pray: the Lord's Prayer and Hail Mary

Invocation: Our Lady of La Salette, Reconciler of Sinners, pray without ceasing for us who have recourse to you. (top)

Day Seven:

Theme: Prayer

Scripture Says: "Rejoice always. Pray without ceasing. In all circumstances give thanks, for this is the will of God for you in Christ Jesus." (I Thessalonians 5: 16-18)

Mary Said: "Do you say your prayers well, my children? You should say them well, at night and in the morning...(people) go to Mass just to make fun of religion. In Lent they go to the butcher shops like dogs."


The Virgin at La Salette questions us on the quality of those gestures of faith which link us to God, and serve as the source of our ongoing conversion. Each day, we are invited to express in prayer our free and constant dialogue with God. We remember the words of Jesus' own prayer: "Father...not my will but yours be done." (Luke 22: 42) Each week, we are called to celebrate the Eucharist, the central memorial of the death and resurrection of Christ. The presence of the Risen Lord in our gathering revives our faith, and helps us wait in hope until he comes again. Each year, our Lenten penance, prayer and sharing strengthens our faith. With renewed vigor, we give our lives to God daily in service to our sisters and brothers. (Quiet Reflection)

Our Prayer: Mary, first disciple of Jesus, make our lives a living prayer. May we always be ready to pray, to celebrate God's presence and to follow Jesus faithfully every day. Hold us close beside you in the heart of the Church, ready to share the struggles and sufferings of all your people. (mention your request)

Pray: the Lord's Prayer and Hail Mary

Invocation: Our Lady of La Salette, Reconciler of Sinners, pray without ceasing for us who have recourse to you. (top)

Day Eight:

Theme: Bread of Life

Scripture Says: Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst." (John 6: 35)

Mary Said: "But you, (Maximin), surely you must have seen some (spoiled wheat) once, at (the field of) Coin...your father gave you a piece of bread and said to you: 'Here, my child, eat some bread while we still have it this year...'"


The fear of a future evil, the carefree attitude of a child, the concern of parents for their family, the sharing of bread-all details of life held in the memory and heart of the Virgin Mary at La Salette. Her solicitude invites us to trust in her concern for our welfare.

Her loving Son, Jesus, also reminded people how much our Heavenly Father watches out for our welfare. "If you, then, who are wicked, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give good things to those who ask him." (Matthew 7:11)

The promise of shared bread and good gifts is a consoling message. This pledge reminds us that the Bread of Life willingly broke and gave himself to satisfy our deepest hunger for God. He continues to do so, and invites us to do the same. (Quiet Reflection)

Our Prayer: Mother, ever attentive to our needs, awaken in us compassion for the hungry and the needy. Help us to share our Creator's concern for all human hungers-of body, heart, or spirit. Give us always a yearning for the Bread of Life, Jesus, your Son and our Lord. (mention your request)

Pray: the Lord's Prayer and Hail Mary

Invocation: Our Lady of La Salette, Reconciler of Sinners, pray without ceasing for us who have recourse to you. (top)

Day Nine:

Theme: Our Mission

Scripture Says: Then Jesus said to them, "Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of (time)." (Matthew 28: 18-20)

Mary Said: "Well, my children, you will make this known to all my people."


As Mary challenges and encourages us to follow her Son, she reminds us of our mission. We are to bring to the whole world the Good News of Jesus Christ. Marked by his Spirit and consecrated in truth and love, the followers of Jesus work together to advance the Kingdom of God.

The "great news" of Mary is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Like Mary, as we hear and bear the Word of God, we carry on the mission of Jesus, the mission entrusted to his apostles and to all the baptized. Such is our mission, so plain and simple that it was entrusted to two young children on the mountain of La Salette.

With maternal concern, the Virgin encourages us one final time: "Well, my children, you will make this known to all my people." (Quiet Reflection)

Our Prayer: Mother of the Church, watch over us, your people. Help us who have heard the Word of God to proclaim it in word and deed. As you were filled with the Spirit and gave birth to the Savior, may we, filled with that same Spirit, advance the kingdom of unity and peace for which Jesus gave his life on the cross. (mention your request)

Pray: the Lord's Prayer and Hail Mary

Invocation: Our Lady of La Salette, Reconciler of Sinners, pray without ceasing for us who have recourse to you. (top)

Nihil Obstat: Very Rev. Timothy J. Shea, V.F. Imprimatur: Bernard Cardinal Law, Cardinal Archbishop of Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A., September 19, 1989

Prayer intentions?  Send them here.

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Father Bryan Hehir had hopes that the Call to Action Conference would be comparable to the Medellin Conference

As noted here, historian David O’Brien says that Father Bryan Hehir, one of the founders of Call to Action, “hoped the event [the Detroit Call to Action Conference] would be comparable to the Medellin, Colombia, conference in 1968.” This is most significant since, as Malachi Martin notes in his book “The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church,” “Those who..know the history of Liberation Theology..may point out that Gutierrez’s work [Father Gustavo Gutierrez, author of A Theology of Liberation] was inspired by a 1968 Conference of Latin American bishops at Medellin, near Bogota, in Colombia, where the delegates highlighted the plight of the poor, and the needy to remedy their awful conditions

Essentially, Liberation Theology is the answer to that summons to the Church codified so many years before by Maritain – to identify itself with the revolutionary hopes of the masses. The difference, perhaps, insofar as there is one, is that while Maritain adopted a theology of history built on a misapprehension of Marxist philosophy, Liberation Theologians adopted a theology of politics built on Soviet tactics. In essence, the propagators of Liberation Theology took the current of theological thought developed in Europe and applied it to the very concrete situations in Latin America. Suddenly, theological and philosophical theory became the pragmatic proposals and actual programs for changing the face of all social and political institutions in Latin America….

Liberation Theology turned its back on the entire scope of Scholastic Theology, including what was sound in Maritain. It did not base its reasoning on papal teaching, or on the ancient theological tradition of the Church, or on the Decrees of the Church’s Ecumenical Councils. In fact, Liberation Theology refused to start where Councils and Popes had always started: with God as Supreme Being, as Creator, as Redeemer, as Founder of the Church, as the One Who had placed among men a Vicar who was called the Pope, as Ultimate Rewarder of the Good and Punisher of the Evil. Rather, Liberation Theology’s basic presumption was ‘the people,’ sometimes indeed ‘the people of God.’ ‘The people’ were the source of spiritual revelation and religious authority. What mattered in theology was how ‘the people’ fared here and now, in the social, political, and economic realities of the evolving material world. The ‘experience of the people was the womb of theology,’ was the consecrated phrase.

At one stroke, therefore, Liberation Theology unburdened prepared and restless minds from an entire panoply of ancient concepts, dogmas, and mental processes governed by the fixed rules of Thomistic reasoning, and from the directives of the authoritative voice of Rome…Liberation Theology was no theology in the Roman Catholic sense of the word. It was not primarily about God, about God’s law, about God’s redemption, about God’s promises. Liberation Theology was interested in God as revealed today through the oppressed people. In God for himself, practically speaking, no genuine Liberation Theology was interested.

The second promise of Liberation Theology was even more exciting than freeom from Rome’s theology. It was the promise of longed-for participation in the New Humanity; in the new world emerging all around men…It was the promise of evolution with the evolving conditions of men and women; of fundamental change with the fundamentally changing society of man…Both of these promises – freedom from Rome’s outworn theology and participation with ‘the people of God’ in the enterprise of social evolution and revolution – were encased in the term liberation.” (The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church, pp. 308-309).

Under the banner of “liberation,” many in the Church’s hierarchy began to enlist the Church’s resources to advance the Marxist plan of revolution. Having abandoned the Church’s supernatural mission – building the Kingdom of God, these confused clerics began to turn exclusively toward a new goal: that of building a new world centered on man, a City of Man.

Fr. Martin explains how the Jesuits succumbed to this apostasy: “Classical Jesuitism, based on the spiritual teaching of Ignatius, saw the Jesuit mission in very clear outline. There was a perpetual state of war on earth between Christ and Lucifer. Those who fought on Christ’s side, the truly choice fighters, served the Roman Pontiff diligently, were at his complete disposal, were ‘Pope’s Men.’ The ‘Kingdom’ being fought over was the Heaven of God’s glory. The enemy, the archenemy, the only enemy, was Lucifer. The weapons Jesuits used were supernatural: the Sacraments, preaching, writing, suffering. The objective was spiritual, supernatural, and otherworldly. It was simply this: that as many individuals as possible would die in a state of supernatural grace and friendship with their Savior so that they would spend eternity with God, their Creator…

The renewed Jesuit mission debased this Ignatian ideal of the Jesuits. The ‘Kingdom’ being fought over was the ‘Kingdom’ everyone fights over and always has: material well-being. The enemy was now economic, political, and social: the secular system called democratic and economic capitalism. The objective was material: to uproot poverty and injustice, which were caused by capitalism, and the betterment of the millions who suffered want and injustice from that capitalism. The weapons to be used now were those of social agitation, labor relations, sociopolitical movements, government offices…” (The Jesuits, p. 478).

In this light, we can better understand Father Hehir’s assertion that, “the weakness of pre-conciliar Catholic social teachings stemmed from its sketchy understanding of the distinction between the Church’s nature (or mission) and its social ministry.” (Social Teachings At Risk In The American Catholic Church, The Wanderer, 1996).

But if anyone is guilty of “sketchy understanding,” it is Father Bryan Hehir. As Fr. Vincent Miceli, S.J., explained in his essay on Call to Action entitled “Detroit: A Call to Revolution in the Church”: “The following are some of the demands the Church simply cannot fulfill for that is not her mission: 1. Wipe out poverty, ignorance, prejudice and war. 2. Democratize the whole world. 3. Stop the sale of arms everywhere. 4. Back the E.R.A. as a constitutional amendment. Like her Saviour, the Church will not turn stones into bread, thereby becoming the Mother of Socialism or a millennium of this world..’

"..the 'theologies of liberation', which reserve credit for restoring to a place of honor the great texts of the prophets and of the Gospel in defense of the poor, go on to a disastrous confusion between the 'poor' of the Scripture and the 'proletariat' of Marx. In this way they pervert the Christian meaning of the poor, and they transform the fight for the rights of the poor into a class fight within the ideological perspective of the class struggle. For them the 'Church of the poor' signifies the Church of the class which has become aware of the requirements of the revolutionary struggle as a step toward liberation and which celebrates this liberation in its liturgy." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Instruction on Certain Aspects of the 'Theology of Liberation,'" No. 10).

Monday, September 20, 2010

Lt. Gen. Thomas P. Bostick calls Christian soldiers "bigots."

The Washington Times is reporting that Lt. Gen. Thomas P. Bostick, the Army's deputy chief of staff in charge of personnel matters who spoke about "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" before several hundred troops at the European Command headquarters in Stuttgart, Germany, said: "Unfortunately, we have a minority of service members who are still racists and bigoted and you will never be able to get rid of all of them...But these people opposing this new policy will need to get with the program, and if they can't, they need to get out. No matter how much training and education of those in opposition, you're always going to have those that oppose this on moral and religious grounds just like you still have racists today." Full article here.

Ironically, General Bostick's commentary reveals that he is guilty of the very charge which he levels against Christians who oppose homosexuality. In Slouching Towards Gomorrah, Robert H. Bork writes, "Moral objection to homosexual practices is not the same thing as animus, unless all disapprovals based on morality are to be disallowed as mere animus. Modern liberalism tends to classify all moral distinctions it does not accept as hateful and invalid. Moral views about sexual practices are particularly suspect.." (p. 113).
As I said in a previous post: "..the same radical homosexual activists who continually cry for more "tolerance" are anything but tolerant. This is a spiritual war. The homosexual movement is not a civil rights movement. It is an attempt at moral revolution. An attempt to change people's view of homosexuality.

Writing in the Chicago Free Press, even homosexual activist Paul Varnell admitted this. He wrote, "The fundamental controverted issue about homosexuality is not discrimination, hate crimes or domestic partnerships, but the morality of homosexuality. Even if gays obtain non-discrimination laws, hate crimes law and domestic partnership benefits, those can do little to counter the underlying moral condemnation which will continue to fester beneath the law and generate hostility, fuel hate crimes, support conversion therapies, encourage gay youth suicide and inhibit the full social acceptance that is our goal. On the other hand, if we convince people that homosexuality is fully moral, then all their inclination to discriminate, engage in gay-bashing or oppose gay marriage disappears. Gay youths and adults could readily accept themselves. So the gay movement, whether we acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a sexual liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people's view of homosexuality." (Paul Varnell, "Defending Our Morality," Chicago Free Press, Aug 16, 2000, See here).
Related reading here.

Sunday, September 19, 2010

"God will strike in an unparalleled manner.."

The eclipse of the Church has been prophesied by Our Lady:

"Mélanie, what I am going to tell you now will not always be a secret; you can publish it in 1858...

Priests, my Son's ministers, priests, by their evil life, by their irreverences and their impiety in celebrating the holy mysteries, love of money, love of honor and pleasures, priests have become sewers of impurity. Yes, priests call forth vengeance, and vengeance is suspended over their heads. Woe to priests, and to persons consecrated to God, who by their infidelities and their evil life are crucifying my son anew! The sins of persons consecrated to God cry to heaven and call for vengeance, and now here is vengeance at their very doors, for no longer is anyone found to beg mercy and pardon for the people; there are no more generous souls, there is now no one worthy of offering the spotless Victim to the Eternal on the worlds behalf.

God will strike in an unparalleled manner. Woe to the inhabitants of the earth! God will exhaust His anger, and no one will be able to escape so many evils at once. The heads, the leaders of the people of God, have neglected prayer and penance, and the devil has darkened their minds; they have become those wandering stars which the ancient devil will drag with his tail to destruction. God will permit the ancient serpent to sow divisions among rulers, in all societies and in all families; both physical and moral punishments will be suffered. God will abandon men to themselves and will send chastisements one after the other for over 35 years.

Society is on the very eve of most terrible scourges and greatest events; one must expect to be governed by a rod of iron and to drink the chalice of God's wrath..."

- Our Lady to Melanie Calvat, La Salette France.

In his book Communism and the Conscience of the West, Archbishop Fulton John Sheen warned that, "He [Satan] will set up a counterchurch which will be the ape of the Church, because he, the Devil, is the ape of God. It will have all the notes and characteristics of the Church, but in reverse and emptied of its divine content. It will be a mystical body of the Antichrist that will in all externals resemble the Mystical Body of Christ...Then will be verified a paradox - the very objections with which men in the last century rejected the Church will be the reasons why they will now accept the counterchurch." (pp. 24-25).

Even now, many are working to subvert the Catholic Church from within. Pastors who have been seduced by the spirit of Antichrist and who have fallen into hidden (and sometimes not so hidden) apostasy. As Michael Brown has noted in his book The Trumpet of Gabriel, "The spirit of anti-christ precedes the physical Antichrist. The spiritual battle precedes the physical one.." (p. 218). Nowhere is this spiritual battle more evident than in the Archdiocese of Boston, Massachusetts, where Catholics faithful to the Church's Magisterium are portrayed by the local Church as "dissidents" who are harming community and where those who reject that same Magisterium are celebrated and even honored.

I am not an alarmist. I believe in prophecy however. Including what I refer to as the prophecy of arithmetic: 2 + 2 = 4. Ideas and actions have consequences. Soon, the apostasy which has spread everywhere will almost completely engulf the Church and eclipse it. I say almost because there will always remain a faithful remnant. And just as when we witness a solar eclipse we know the sun is still there, so too when the light of the Church is eclipsed we will know with the eyes of faith that the Church is still present even if obscured by the darkness of sin and error.

Our Lady told Father Stefano Gobbi on August 15, 1989:

"These are the times when an idol is being built to be put in the place of the true God and of the true Church, and this idol is a false christ and a false church."
The spirit of Antichrist leads men to deny the Creator or to forget Him altogether.

Saturday, September 18, 2010

"If my people will not submit..."

We live in an age where words like "fidelity" and "submission" have taken on a negative connotation, a world where "the word fidelity seems to have lost all meaning, to have dropped out of human usage. The fickleness of man and woman, their changeableness is the virtue of the age. One must not be too rigid, too dogmatic, too steadfast; maturity indicates the ability to change, even to call back one's promises and vows made to God" (Fr. Vincent Miceli, Permanent Consecration: Anchor of Religious Community).

And yet, we are all - each and every one of us - warned to, "..submit yourselves to God. Resist the Devil, and he will flee from you." (James 4: 7). This submission to God, and to the Church He founded, is intimately connected with defeating the Devil in our lives. Without such submission, we place ourselves in peril.

Vatican II, in its Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium) No. 25, says that: "This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking."

At La Salette, France, on September 19, 1846 - 164 years ago tomorrow - Our Lady appeared to Maximin Giraud and Melanie Calvat and warned that, "If my people will not submit, I shall be forced to let fall the arm of my Son. It is so strong, so heavy, that I can no longer withhold it."

It is very easy to dismiss the relevance of La Salette today. After all, 164 years have come and gone and we are still here. The arm of Our Lord has not fallen on mankind. There is a temptation to succumb to indifference and to replace submission with self-assertion and the spirit of this age. But our first Pope, Saint Peter, has warned: " not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like one day. The Lord does not delay his promise, as some regard 'delay,' but he is patient with you, not wishing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." (2 Peter 3: 8, 9).
Various signs are beginning to emerge. Anyone who is still spiritually awake is able to discern that the world is in a state of grave crisis. Soon, the world will collapse into chaos and violence - a punishment for repeating that ancient rebel cry of Lucifer: Non serviam! - I will not serve! Many in the world today face both spiritual annihilation and eternal damnation because they refuse to submit to the Lord Jesus.
Let us all have recourse to Our Lady of La Salette: Reconciler of Sinners. When my father died on September 19, 2000 (ten years ago tomorrow), everyone present in his hospital room witnessed a supernatural occurrence: Our Lady and my father's biological mother came to escort him to Heaven. There was something like an electricity in the air that September morning as his cousin, a La Salette priest named Fr. Louis Gould, would remark. My father and I spoke often of the La Salette message and the chastisement which is coming. But it is conditional: 'If my people will not submit.."
In other words, we have a choice. If we refuse to submit to the Lord Jesus, then we become the authors of our own chastisement.

A message from Fr. David Mullen

A message from Fr. David Mullen:

Dear Friends,

I am sending this to my entire e-mail list, so some of you may not remember who I am. Please feel no qualms of conscience if you delete this message!

I am asking everyone to pray for me tomorrow (Saturday) when I will meet with Cardinal O'Malley to talk over the safe environment programs that the Archdiocese wants me to implement in St. Brendan's parish. If you want to brush up on the controversy then you can visit my parish website: and look for the tab that says "TAT Dossier". You will find there all that you need to know, and perhaps some things you would rather not know!
I am hopeful that tomorrow's meeting will be successful. It will be so if God's will is done by myself and His Eminence. His goal is that my parish implement a "safe environment" program so that the Archdiocese is 100% compliant with the child protection goals set by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops. My goal is to protect the innocence of the children of my parents and respect the rights of their parents (and, of course, not go to Hell at the end of my life because I knowingly did something to the children of my parish that I knew was gravely objectionable). I see no reason why the goals of the eminent ordinary and the country pastor cannot be achieved together.

The best result would be for His Eminence to allow St. Brendan's to implement the program of the Diocese of Baker, Oregon, called "Healthy Families: Safe Children". Bp. Robert F. Vasa, the ordinary of Baker, only this evening sent me a very gracious message of personal support (without presuming to tred on the authority of His Eminence in Boston). The program that he has developed in his diocese is derived from the Catholic Medical Association's wonderful report on safe environment programs and child development entitled "To Protect and to Prevent" (2006).

I asked for the meeting with His Eminence and am gratified that he so quickly said "yes". Some are claiming that I said that I was told that if I did not implement a "safe environment" program that I would be dismissed from the parish. I was told no such thing. I came to the conclusion on my own. I have been assured by honorable priests that such a move has not been discussed in the meetings of His Eminence and his advisors. I believe that I have been told the truth in this matter.

Perhaps I have allowed my fears to get to me! The last seven or eight years have been filled with various levels of fear, anger and anxiety. I am not fearful tonight - nor anxious - nor angry. Please pray tomorrow - and tonight! - that my meeting with His Eminence go well tomorrow.

God bless,
Fr. David J. Mullen
St. Brendan Parish
Bellingham, Massachusetts

Related reading on the TAT controversy here.

In its document entitled The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality: Guidelines for Education Within the Family, the Pontifical Council for the Family has this to say:

"In some societies today, there are planned and determined attempts to impose premature sex information on children. But, at this stage of development, children are still not capable of fully understanding the value of the affective dimension of sexuality. They cannot understand and control sexual imagery within the proper context of moral principles and, for this reason, they cannot integrate premature sexual information with moral responsibility. Such information tends to shatter their emotional and educational development and to disturb the natural serenity of this period of life. Parents should politely but firmly exclude any attempts to violate children's innocence because such attempts compromise the spiritual, moral, and emotional development of growing persons who have a right to their innocence." (No. 83).

Father Mullen has stated his three goals: 1. To protect the innocence of children; 2. To respect the rights of parents; 3. To avoid Hell at the end of his life. Every priest should have these goals. Even a Cardinal.

Friday, September 17, 2010

Five men arrested in suspected terror attack during Pope's visit

As Deacon Nick Donnelly said here:

Supporters of Protest the Pope posted a thread yesterday on the Reddit atheism group in which they discussed wanting to commit violent attacks against Pope Benedict during his state visit to the UK. The title of the thread is ‘Protest the Pope’ and it is headed by a link to the Protest the Pope website. The Reddit atheism groups has 81,803 readers.

Contributors to the thread express their sick desire to assassinate Pope Benedict, obscenely comparing him to ‘war criminals who have been executed for less’. They go on to discuss wanting to breaking ‘a few ribs at least’.

Here are excerpts from their ‘Protest the Pope’ thread:

“I apologize for going all serious all of a sudden. I think I need to make it clear that while my appeal for killing the Pope is frivolous, my reason behind that appeal is not.

With his steadfast battle against condoms, the Pope is condemning millions of human beings every year to a painful and inhumane death to AIDS. Women and children, both completely innocent, are dying. War criminals have been executed for less.

Sadly, assassinating the Pope wouldn’t even help. He’d be succeeded by another asshole who would do the same.”

“That idea is very pleasant, but, sadly, it would make the pope (and all other collateral victims) martyrs, only giving more strength to ignorant people. I think some loud booing + some big signs demanding is arrest would be nice to see, for a start =)”

“ [When bargaining, always ask for more so you can settle for what you actually want.] How about just severely beating him? As a follower of Christ, he should appreciate having a few ribs broken, at least.”

Protect the Pope comment: Though this was not a discussion on the Protest the Pope official website, and did not involve organisers of Protest the Pope, they bear moral responsibility for creating a hateful anti-catholic climate that encourages supporters to think that this obscene and illegal discussion is acceptable.

Notice that participants in the thread justify violence against the Holy Father by using some of the false arguments disseminated ad nauseum by Protest the Pope.

These types of comments advocating violence against the Holy Father are common on secularist, atheist, and homosexual websites and networking groups. If violence occurs during the Holy Father’s visit groups such as Protest the Pope, and sections of the media, will be seen as responsible for whipping up this anti-Pope, anti-Catholic hate.

Protest the Pope, and all groups affiliated with it, have a public duty to disassociate themselves from any threats of violence during the Holy Father’s visit made by their supporters.

Offensive anti-Catholic thread here.

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Father Bryan Hehir and Joseph Cardinal Bernardin: Collaborators and Friends

Joe Sacerdo notes how, "Cardinal Bernardin undertook another major initiative intended to broaden the bishops’ pro-life agenda beyond abortion. On 6 December 1983. he delivered a lecture at Fordham University entitled 'The Consistent Ethic of Life: An American-Catholic Dialogue.' In it, he argued that the contemporary world confronts us with a whole range of threats to human life and well-being for which it is necessary to formulate a consistent and comprehensive response, By way of illustration, he linked the bishops’ opposition to abortion to their recent statement on nuclear weapons and went on to draw a further connection with their rejection of capital punishment. Without equating them, he suggested that the bishops’ stands on all three issues reflected a commitment to the support and defense of human life-what he called 'a consistent ethic of life.' Bernardin would deliver several more addresses in this vein over the course of the next few years, expanding the range of issues encompassed within this 'consistent life ethic'. He included opposition to euthanasia and pornography as well as support for greater governmental efforts to fight poverty and provide health care to the poor. The result of his effort was quite novel: an expansive vision of what it means to be truly pro-life and a broad social agenda that cuts across the dominant ideolological stances of the Right and the Left on the U.S. political spectrum.

As one would expect, in undertaking this initiative Bernardin received the invaluable assistance of Bryan Hehir. Indeed it is fair to say that this initiative was chiefly the product of their long collaboration. After working together over the years, the two men had become close friends..."

This is deeply disturbing on many levels. Writing about the Bernardin legacy, Catholic author Paul Likoudis, who has served as Editor of The Wanderer, writes:

"The nurturing of a homosexual/pedophile network in the Catholic Church in modern times, which parallels similar networks in government, business and education circles, may, some suggest, date back to the late 1920s and early 30s when the 'Cambridge Apostles,' that elite clique of homosexual Marxists under the direction of Anthony Blunt ( and including such notorious spies as Kim Philby), determined to seize control of the major institutions, especially the churches, newspapers, cinema and radio (and, later, television), universities, museums and government cultural agencies.

If this strikes the reader as difficult to believe, all I can plead is that there is a tremendous aount of information that supports the theory. The late John Costello's masterful biography of Anthony Blunt, Mask of Treachery (William and Morrow, Co., 1988) provides copious documentation on how Blunt placed his friends, both Marxists and homosexuals, in some of the most important cultural agencies in the western world, and even gloated how many were totally unqualified for their positions. In addition, there is the Congressional testimony of former Communists in the United States, such as Manning Johnson and Bella Dodd, who told how they encouraged more than a thousand communists or fellow travelers to enter Catholic seminaries in the 1930s. Bella Dodd tesified: 'In the 1930s, we put eleven hundred men into the priesthood in order to destroy the Church from within,' and the chief tactic devised, once these men came to power, was to label the Church 'of the past' as oppressive, authoritarian, full of prejudices, arrogant and closed to the world.'

If the problem of a homosexual network in the Church is viewed in this larger perspective, one can understand more fully the remarkable role of Joseph Cardinal Bernardin in creating an 'American Church' that has become a trusted ally of all those various social, political and cultural forces promoting sexual libertinism...Bernardin, it must be recalled, at least briefly, was sponsored, tutored and promoted by a number of dubious characters, not only his clerical godfather and mentor, Archbishop Paul Hallinan of Atlanta, who served as a bishop in Bernardin's hometown, Charleston. Bernardin's other 'godfather' was Archbishop (later Cardinal) John Dearden, who would be responsible for the appointment of such notorious pro-homosexual bishops as Detroit Auxiliary Tom Gumbleton, Ken Untener of Saginaw, Joseph Imesch, of Joliet, and Springfield's Daniel Ryan....His closest friend from his South Carolina days, Monsignor Frederick Hopwood, had been accused of abusing hundreds of boys dating back to the early 1950s, when he and Bernardin shared a residence at the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Charleston - where some of the alleged abuse took place....

At the time the Hopwood allegations became public in late December 1993, Bernardin was having trouble on another front. A former seminarian from the Archdiocese of Cincinnati, Steven Cook, filed a $10 million lawsuit against Bernardin and Cincinnati priest Ellis Harsham. The suit accused Harsham, when he was a priest at St. Gregory seminary in Cincinnati in the mid-19702, of numerous coercive sexual acts against him, and then delivering him to Bernardin, then Archbishop of Cincinnati, for the same purposes.

Several months later, however, in February 1994, Cook dropped Bernardin from the suit, saying he couldn't trust his memory. Cook never retracted his charges; nor did he say they were inaccurate - contrary to the accepted party line that Bernardin had been exonerated, which persists to this day. Four months later, Cook's suit against Harsham was conveniently - at least for Bernardin - settled out of court...

While Bernardin went on to have a very public (and filmed) reconciliation with Cook, showing the world what a generous man he was in forgiving a man who had accused him of sexual crimes, Bernardin's lawyers were involved in hushing up another case in which seminarians in Winona, Minnesota, had accused Bernardin and three other Bishops of participating in sexual/satanic rituals at the seminary. Among the facts that the plaintiffs in that case marshaled for their suit: Bernardin was frequently accompanied by Steven Cook.." ( Paul Likoudis, Amchurch Comes Out, pp. 136-139).
More on Cardinal Bernardin from Catholic columnist Matt Abbott here.

Moral cowardice cloaked in a seamless garment

It was Joseph Scheidler, referring to the "seamless garment" approach toward abortion made popular by Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, who said:

"The true evil of the 'seamless garment' is that it provides a specious rationale for naive Catholics to vote for pro-abortion candidates on the theory that a pro-abortion stand can be winked at as long as the candidate otherwise has good liberal credentials. That is precisely the fallacy that has permitted hard-core abortionists to remain in office year after year. Catholic voters have kept them there. It is this tragic error that will allow Catholics to support opportunistic turn-coats on abortion like Richard Gephardt and Jesse Jackson." ("Cardinal's 'Seamless Garment' Theory Is Disastrous," The Wanderer, March 24, 1988).

Joe Sacerdo and his team over at Bryan Hehir Exposed have a wonderful post on Father Bryan Hehir's promotion of the "seamless garment." The "seamless garment" is moral cowardice enshrined. It represents a refusal by the Church's hierarchy to teach the Word of God and to speak out against the murder of the innocent.

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Father Bryan Hehir on Social Sin

As this Wanderer Forum article explains, "By the 1970s, 'USCC leaders and staff became the new elite of the American Church setting the agenda and defining social doctrine more and more for the Bishops so that the concerns and ideology of the USCC secretariat became indistinguishable from that of the American hierarchy.'

During these years, its liberal leadership under Bishops Bernardin and Rausch with their new advisor Fr. Bryan Hehir, endorsed a 'new social ethic' which 'regarded all inequalities of wealth and power that were not immediately tied to some greater service for the common good, as oppressive....This new conception of justice banished the traditional notion of a natural social order and consequently, the older distinction between justice and charity.'

As the concept of social sin took hold, 'some USCC statements implied that citizens participated in social sin without even knowing it.' Fr. Hehir 'defined social sin as an organization or structure that systematically works to the detriment of groups r individuals...'

But this is not the Church's understanding of "social sin." The Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1869, tells us that: "..sin makes men accomplices of one another and causes concupiscence, violence, and injustice to reign among them. Sins give ise to social situations and institutions that are contrary to the divine goodness. Structures of sin are the expression and effect of personal sins. They lead their victims to do evil in their turn. In an analogous sense, they constitute a social sin.'"

In his Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, No. 16, Pope John Paul II explains further that:

"Sin, in the proper sense, is always a personal act, since it is an act of freedom on the part of an individual person and not properly of a group or community. This individual may be conditioned, incited and influenced by numerous and powerful external factors. He may also be subjected to tendencies, defects and habits linked with his personal condition. In not a few cases such external and internal factors may attenuate, to a greater or lesser degree, the person's freedom and therefore his responsibility and guilt. But it is a truth of faith, also confirmed by our experience and reason, that the human person is free. This truth cannot be disregarded in order to place the blame for individuals' sins on external factors such as structures, systems or other people. Above all, this would be to deny the person's dignity and freedom, which are manifested-even though in a negative and disastrous way-also in this responsibility for sin committed. Hence there is nothing so personal and untransferable in each individual as merit for virtue or responsibility for sin.

As a personal act, sin has its first and most important consequences in the sinner himself: that is, in his relationship with God, who is the very foundation of human life; and also in his spirit, weakening his will and clouding his intellect....Whenever the Church speaks of situations of sin, or when she condemns as social sins certain situations or the collective behavior of certain social groups, big or small, or even of whole nations and blocs of nations, she knows and she proclaims that such cases of social sin are the result of the accumulation and concentration of many personal sins. It is a case of the very personal sins of those who cause or support evil or who exploit it; of those who are in a position to avoid, eliminate or at least limit certain social evils but who fail to do so out of laziness, fear or the conspiracy of silence, through secret complicity or indifference; of those who take refuge in the supposed impossibility of chnging the world, and also of those who sidestep the effort and sacrifice required, producing specious reasons of a higher order. The real responsibility, then, lies with individuals. A situation - or likewise an institution, a structure, society itself - is not in itself the subject of moral acts. Hence a situation cannot in itself be good or bad."

Therefore, when Father Bryan Hehir defines social sin "as an organization or structure that systematically works to the detriment of groups or individuals," his thought is not consistent with that of the Church's Magisterium. Additionally, his distorted notion of social sin absolves the individual person of any and all responsibility while holding larger social forces, "organizations and structures," to blame for the individual's moral failings.

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Some background on Call to Action from a Jesuit priest and philosopher

Detroit: A Call To Revolution In The Church
By Father Vincent P. Miceli, S.J.

About 1,340 delegates from 152 dioceses and 1,100 observers from around the nation met in Detroit from October 21 through 23 in a conference sponsored by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops as a culmination of the Church's Bicentennial celebration. The theme of the conference was "A Call to Action." The purpose of the action was "Liberty and Justice for All." But the theme actually developed by the conference was "A Call to Revolution." And the purpose of the revolution was "A Classless Church for All." The following are the observations of this delegate who participated and represented the Confraternity of Catholic Clergy, a group counting close to 1,000 priests and 15 bishops, founded two years ago.

Now in every rigid convention there is a selected slogan patented by the planners and calculated to justify to the world their pre-arranged victory. I notice that The N.Y. Times was quick to catch and zealous in scattering to the journalistic winds the clever myth concocted by the directors of this conference. Giordano Bruno would have cheered the astuteness that produced this tool of deception. Se non e vero e ben trovato: "If it is not true it is very well invented."

On October 22 The N.Y. Times tells us: "Although a broad array of church members are in Detroit, the character of the delegation is clearly reformist . . ." On the 24th we read in those august pages: "Roman Catholics from a broad spectrum of the church today neared the end of a three day conference . . . A remarkable cross section has now spoken . . . Like the (Eucharistic) Congress, the conference is largely a lay affair." On the 25th the same theme swells in intensity: "It (the conference) was the most representative meeting of the Roman Catholic church in its history in this country . . . " And, as if unable to cease singing the same song, the Times was on stage again October 27 four days after the conference closed: "A diversified group of delegates took full advantage of a chance to recommend changes" is the subtitle to a glowing wrap-up story on a meeting that sent The N.Y. Times into great expectations for the coming of a democratic Catholic Church founded on the revelations of progress and humanism. Within the body of the last article we read: "Delegates could hardly be described as belonging to fringe groups. They were chosen by bishops. They represented a wide assortment of people."

Who Chose Delegates?

The N.Y. Times' correspondent, Kenneth A. Briggs, author of all the articles quoted, parroted perfectly the slogan of the ruling radicals at the conference. But what were the facts? First, it is not true to say the delegates were chosen by the bishops. Most of the bishops had neither the time nor energy to choose delegates, nor did they know the majority of delegates from their own dioceses. For example, no bishop chose me. And the same was true of dozens of other delegates I met. The delegates were chosen by middle-management committees made up of new breed priests, liberated nuns and dissident intellectuals. Moreover, these bureaucrats chose delegates for the most part with mind-sets practically identical with their own on revolutionary solutions for religious, social and political problems. It was carefully estimated that forty percent of the delegates were clergy. Women made up another forty percent; the majority of these latter were nuns, a few in religious garb, the overwhelming rest in secular attire, frequently in pants suits. Just how representative of the 49 million Catholics in the U.S. are such specialized types? Then too there were the other special interest groups of delegates — ex-priests, ex-nuns, homosexuals, minority caucuses for Christian Marxism, Socialism and pacifism. At the bottom of the totem pole were the few Catholics who wanted to keep the historical Church, despite some questionable changes called reforms. If there was one glaring fact about the "Call to Action" conference, it was that the delegates by far did not represent the vast majority of American Catholics — neither bishops, priests nor laity. The did represent a miniscule core of intellectual insurgents, disaffected clergy, religious, ex-seminarians — all enthusiasts for the creation of an American democratic Catholic Church.

A few observations should be made on the general and particular meetings that formed documents and passed resolutions on religious and social questions. The N.Y. Times (October 27) tells us that these meetings "were a taste of the democratic process on the widest national scale . . ." Nothing could be further from the truth. It was a common experience to see honest opposition cut-off crudely and silenced. Opponents of ruling radicals were often told "to stop making debating points, to cease referring to encyclicals, council documents and traditional teachings." They were warned "to lay aside philosophical definitions and disciplined, coherent thinking." Especially did the female chairladies insist that "they wanted input that emphasized religious experience and social concern." Only thus could the documents on Church, personhood, family, ethnicity, work, humankind, neighborhood and nationhood become relevant to our times. Often when resolutions embarrassing to the ruling strategists were presented, the chairperson, with mind teeming with schemes, would slowly repeat the resolution meanwhile motioning some ideologically kindred spirit to man a microphone quickly — such spirits hovered close to microphones everywhere. The carefully selected messenger would then move to end debate on the resolution. Another companion would quickly second the motion and the resolution was shouted down by a vote that ended a discussion that never got started. This process went on ad nauseam; the meetings were in the hands of the haters of open discussion; they feared nothing more than intelligent dialects. And they steamrollered the opposition through an abuse of parliamentary tactics that was in fact academic intolerance. For the manipulators were hell-bent on obtaining certain pre-determined goals and they came prepared to brook no opposition.

Rebels Took Over

This became so clear from the very outset that John Cardinal Krol could not keep silent about it. In an interview with The Detroit Free Press, which printed his remarks in the Saturday October 23 issue, the Archbishop of Philadelphia made this complaint: "Rebels have taken over the conference." He then specified thus: "The conference was being manipulated by a few people who had received the support of a naïve group of little ladies." Now the few people manipulating the meeting were agitator-priests, Saul Alinsky types. Indeed one of these Monsignori boasts continually that he is a spiritual child of agitator Alinsky.

Now Saul Alinsky, who died in 1972, is still very much with us as a charismatic leader. He is the author of two very influential books Reveille for Radicals and Rules for Radicals. A Marxist humanist and atheist, some brief thoughts and methods of the man will help us understand what went on at the Detroit conference. Alinsky teaches: "Truth is relative and changing; everything is relative and changing." And it is on this relativism that the organizer of a movement must thrive. For Alinsky the enemy is within and the war for change is to be waged within the community to be changed. He writes: "The first step in community organization is community disorganization . . . The organizer dedicated to changing the life of a particular community must first rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression. He must search out controversy and issues, rather than avoid them, for unless there is controversy people are not concerned enough to act . . . Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future . . . The job of the organizer is to maneuver and bait the establishment so that it will publicly attack him as a dangerous enemy. Such a counterattack then puts the organizer on the side of the people . . . A revolutionary organizer must shake up the prevailing patterns of the people's lives — agitate, create disenchantment and discontent with the current values to produce a passion for change." In this system religion becomes politics and politics becomes religion. And this explains why so many priests, infected with the virus of Alinskyism, are enraptured at destroying the traditional Catholic Church.

'Western' Society Gets Blamed

The priest manipulators of the conference lived up perfectly to the coarse, crude methods of their mentor. Their tactics produced from their audience — delegates and observers — distorted reactions against the Catholic Church, the United States, the First World of the West, business corporations, the white man; all these hysterical reactions led to accusations of criminality against these sectors of Western society and to a frenzied cry to bring these sectors to their knees. No injustice, no war, no poverty, no sickness, no difference or restraint, however reasonable, but was used to condemn these sectors as responsible for all the evils in the world. The whole conference was an activity-oriented frenzy and propaganda orgy. Now "the naïve group of little ladies" were, though the Cardinal was too charitable to specify them, the not-so-naïve liberated nuns who responded with emotionally charged outcries, clappings and vote-acclamations to the wand-waving of their exalted leaders.

The anti-intellectual, anti-rational tone of the proceedings was spiritually suffocating. With a shock it dawned on me that I was witnessing a new, alarming, growing phenomenon in the Catholic Church. A movement of Catholic "Know-Nothings" was making a play for power in the Catholic Church. And their first move was to discredit their Church before the world by mounting a witch hunt against her, supposedly to uncover her injustices, her subversive political activity and her disloyalty to the ideals of her Master. In reality this witch hunt was meant to harass and weaken the entire ecclesiastical structure. These agitated Catholics revealed themselves fully at the conference. They were ignorant of Catholic dogma, morals, canon law, philosophy, culture and history. But the most dismal aspect of their ignorance was that they did not give a tinker's damn about it. Indeed they gloried in their ignorance! Their contempt for truth was demonstrated every time they tittered against papal teachings and the age-old doctrines of their Church. Their contempt for justice and moral balance was demonstrated when they demanded that the Church change her doctrines on artificial contraception, abortion, the right to national defense, the right to private property, the right to reasonable profit. Their contempt for authority — divine and human — was demonstrated when they shouted against laws reasonably restraining the use of liberty, when they rejected the divine plan for salvation, when they resented such metaphysical and physical differences as God established in the diverse vocations, sexes and services for the salvation of man. Nor were these exalted souls really interested in "liberty and justice for all." They voted down a resolution presented by an Eastern European group condemning tyranny behind the iron curtain. I had to check with a friend to make sure I heard correctly. He assured me I had. The reason given for the rejection of this resolution was that it was decided that, "no anti-Communist statements were to be placed in any of the final documents. This would be too negative." Once again favorite treatment for the universal enemy, the pet of the rascal radicals. Of course, previously it had not been considered too negative to represent the Church, the West and especially the U.S. as the architects of tyranny.

A Demonstration Erupts

Some years ago Paul VI caused a world-wide commotion by speaking in his Wednesday allocution of the smoke of Satan seeping into the Church of God through the cracks in the walls of the faithful. On October 13, eight days before the opening of the Detroit conference, Paul VI told the world in his allocution that "the tail of the devil is functioning in the disintegration of the Catholic world." (Corriere della Sera, 14 ottobre, p.7) The allusion is to the Apocalypse where the tail of the dragon is said "to be dragging along the third part of the stars of heaven and dashing them to the earth." Without a doubt there was a demonic dimension at the meeting in Detroit. One need merely relate the dramatic event that occurred near the end. As resolution after resolution opposing the radicals was defeated and things were speeding up to allow participants to catch homeward bound planes, a group of four or five young men (they seemed to belong to the frustrated Eastern Europeans) quietly walked into the hall carrying a banner before a suddenly silenced and astonished audience. The banner read: "When you leave this city, take our red cardinal with you." A few policemen then went into action. They reached for the banner and were one the point of roughly ushering the young men out of the hall when the cries from the audience mollified their conduct. "Take your violent hands off those men. They have a right to express their opinion." The policemen then restricted themselves to persuading the men to leave quietly. Suddenly the young men shouted in unison: "Judas, Judas. Traitor priests!" They continued this for some minutes as they slowly left the hall. And their voices were heard gradually dying away with the one word returning weaker and weaker: "JUDAS, JUDAS, Judas, Judas, judas, judas!"

Bishops Were Culprits

One has merely to read the list of over one thousand arrogant demands this conference made upon the Church to realize that its own psychological violence provoked the violence of the young men. The conference sat in judgment, in the chair of Peter not of Moses, on the Church. It preached downward to the hierarchy, scolding them, demanding a reform of their lives, and listing privileges they must give up at once, or at least share with all the faithful. Russell Kirk in National Review, December 10, 1976, reports this incident. "You came here to listen, not to talk," said one militant priest to an unhappy bishop who had attempted to utter sense at one of the workshop sessions. Perhaps the most despised persons at the conference were bishops. Why? Because they enjoyed the fullness of orders; they exercised the power of ruling; they possessed the authority of teaching. And the radicals, moved by the spirit of violent envy — though they themselves would call it the spirit of the theology of hope — demanded all these gifts for themselves. These haters of hierarchy and order demanded a flattened down Church, a Church that functioned through theological egalitarianism. And they wanted such a Church today or tomorrow at the latest. One need just read the finalized documents to be appalled at the madness that prevailed at this conference.

As Russell Kirk wrote in National Review: "Call to Action was the monstrous baby of Cardinal Dearden of Detroit upon whom the Church had conferred responsibility for celebrating the Bicentennial." But when one reads Cardinal Dearden's report of the Detroit conference to the Bishops' meeting on November 9, 1976 in Washington, D.C. one is surprised to find not a monstrosity but a darling child destined to bring great news to the Church of the future. How can one explain this wide divergence of opinion between two such distinguished persons? Let me attempt an explanation. It is within the setting of a fond father evaluating the bizarre anatomical diversity and behavior of a loved, though flawed, child that the Cardinal's praise of the Call to Action conference must be understood. We need not look for conscious distortions in such passages as: "We bishops were able to bring together what must surely rank as one of the more diversified assemblies in our history," even though many bishops explicitly disassociated themselves from the conference and many others lamented the fact that the conference was anything but deliberative. Rather, the explanation must be found in the fascination for exaggeration and the use of hyperbole in praising one's own creature. That fascination will suffice to explain this passage and others: "It could be said that the intelligence, enthusiasm and commitment of those who were chosen to attend the conference is a testimony to the discernment of the bishops who appointed them." This is the tactic of lulling the bishops to sleep on the disaster that was the Detroit conference by lathering them in flattery. Or take this passage: "People do expect us to continue the process by responding with decisive action where it is called for, and with honest disagreement where that seems necessary. The key to our actions in the future is to continue the process, to build on the hopes that have been awakened, to act upon our clear responsibility for the unity, fidelity and vision of the Catholic community." All this is but high-flown nonsense. The people do not wish the shouting and the tumult of Detroit to continue; they were scandalized at it; fears not hopes were awakened in them; they say in the Detroit meeting not the responsible building up of unity, fidelity and vision, but rather the destruction of unity, fidelity and supernatural vision by a revolt against reason, revelation and the sacred authority of the Church. As an architect of the Call to Action, the Cardinal is open to an accusation of special pleading in attempting to whitewash his own creation. Cicero pro domo sua has been for centuries, indeed since the fall of Adam, the whitewash syndrome used to explain away failures. But it will not wash.

Even when he reluctantly admits "hasty, untidy, careless, even extreme" defects in the conference's proceedings, the Cardinal cannot leave the brush alone. "Yet even these flaws can be exaggerated," he writes. It is my contention as well as Russell Kirk's and many other delegates and observers at the meeting that the flaws were often so blasphemous that they could hardly be exaggerated. Indeed, because the Cardinal attempts to minimize these flaws one is scandalized at his carelessness over the seriousness of the situation. Here was a frenzied meeting in which disgruntled Catholics irrationally attacked the Catholic Church, Mystical Body of Christ.

In viewing the hysteria of the delegates, this writer was reminded of the truth of Dryden's poetic lines: "Great wits are sure to madness near allied . . . There is a pleasure, sure, in being mad, which none but madmen know."

Demands Were Made

The following are some of the conference's mad demands which the Catholic Church simply cannot grant without ceasing immediately to be the true Church of Christ. If she granted them, she would become a Church of the world, a snake pit of radicals. She would become a center of doctrinal, moral, chaotic disorder and psychoneurotic distress. The radicals demanded: 1) Divorced, remarried couples to receive Holy Communion while still living in adulterous unions. 2) Ordained women priests and bishops. 3) Women given the power to preach the Gospel with authority. 4) A reversal on the doctrine of artificial birth control. 5) A mitigation of the doctrine on abortion. 6) A teaching approving Marxism, Socialism and pacifism as doctrinally true and morally good practice. 7) A denial of the right to property and to reasonable profit. 8) The creation of a new Church, democratic, non-hierarchical in structure, a classless church.

The following are some of the demands the Church simply cannot fulfill for that is not her mission: 1) Wipe out poverty, ignorance, prejudice and war. 2) Democratize the whole world. 3) Stop the sale of arms everywhere. 4) Back the E.R.A. as a constitutional amendment. Like her Savior, the Church will not turn stones into bread, thereby becoming the Mother of Socialism or a millennium of this world. Finally here are a few demands the Church will most probably not grant in the interest of her supernatural mission to make converts of all nations: 1) Allow married men to be ordained. 2) Allow priests to marry. 3) Revoke the vows of celibacy of priests and religious. 4) Life the excommunication from divorced, remarried Catholics still living in adultery.

A final word of advice to Cardinal Dearden, Archbishop Peter Gerety and Msgr. John Eagan, prime movers at Detroit in the drive to create a democratic church of the future in a five year program. Such a democratic church will not be accepted by American Catholics, for such a church would be a man-made utopia, incapable of saving anyone. The Holy Spirit and the Vicar of Christ will preserve Catholics from such a sterile kingdom of this world. Bereft of Christ, such a church could only become an instrument of the Sons of Satan in their war against the flock of Christ. To loyal, perceptive bishops, priests and laity who still love their traditional, apostolic Church, it is of no small significance that the world is rejoicing over the debacle at Detroit. Such faithful souls know that when The New York Times rapturously reports the wild doings of a conference of Catholic enthusiasts and projects their redimensioned model of the Church as the inevitable Church of the future, then proper Church authorities better grab the holy water sprinkler, the prayer manual of exorcisms and, if need be, the legal instrument of excommunication before it is too late. Only by at once applying these remedies vigorously (Alinsky would insist on the vigorously) will the temple of God be cleansed effectively of its iconoclasts and the true Catholic Church rescued from the savagery of latter-day malcontents posing as concerned Catholics. Superstition? Hardly. Rather security measures against outside agitators and inside traitors.

Echoing Father Miceli's concerns, John Mulroy, writing for The Wanderer, warned:

"Let the Spirit of Detroit triumph in the bishop's conference, and in the conclusions it arrives at concerning the 'Call to Action,' and the time is not far off when the Church in this country will no longer be Catholic. Instead, it will be merely a withered and decaying branch, cut off from the Chair of Peter and from the life of Him through whom the Church was first planted and nurtured on these shores of the Americas. If we wish to destroy the great work of the North American martyrs, and of innumerable other missionaries who spent their lives in the establishment of the Catholic Church in this country, we have only to defend the Detroit assembly and to claim that its results are compatible with Catholic teaching. Only a repudiation of the entire process of which the Detroit disaster was the culmination, will enable the bishops to begin to repair the terrible damage that already has been done." ("Bishops' Evaluation of 'Call to Action' Will Be Crucial," The Wanderer, December 9, 1976).

Father J. Bryan Hehir of the Boston Archdiocese had a key role in developing Call to Action. We'll be examining this in more detail at this Blog.
Site Meter