Monday, May 30, 2011

Those who dissent from Church teaching place themselves in peril

It is intrinsic to the Catholic religion, that before one can become a member, he must satisfy himself that the answers to all questions of faith or morals are contained in a Deposit of Faith which has been revealed by God and entrusted to a Custodian established by God Himself and endowed with infallible protection against any change or error.  There are many who consider themselves to be "Catholic" even as they reject the Church's teaching while striving to erect a church in their own image and likeness.  One such deluded soul left a comment at this Blog accusing Catholic bloggers who are faithful to the Church's Magisterium of representing "a Puritan sect" anxious to "excommunicate" other Catholics. 

This sophomoric soul should reflect very carefully on the words of Pope Paul VI, in a discourse given to a general audience on September 1, 1971: "...He who thinks he can remain a Christian by his own efforts, deserting the institutional bonds of the visible and hierarchical Church, or who imagines he can remain faithful to the mind of Christ by fashioning for himself a Church conceived according to his own ideas, is on the wrong track, and deceives himself.  He compromises and perhaps ruptures, and makes others rupture, real communion with the People of God, losing the pledge of its promises."

The Church is a communion of persons with the Living God, brought about by the Lord Jesus in the Holy Spirit. And, as Pope John Paul II teaches in Christifideles Laici, No. 64, " awareness of a commonly shared Christian dignity, an ecclesial consciousness brings a sense of belonging to the mystery of the Church as Communion. This is a basic and undeniable aspect of the life and mission of the Church. For one and all, the earnest prayer of Jesus at the Last Supper, 'That all may be one' (Jn 17: 21), ought to become daily a required and undeniable program of life and action."

When we understand what is meant by the Church's communion, the words of Pope Benedict XVI make perfect sense: "..In order to remain in unity with the crucified and risen Lord, the practical sign of juridical unity, 'remaining in the teaching of the apostles' is indispensable." (Pilgrim Fellowship of Faith: The Church as Communion, p. 69, Ignatius Press).  But the false prophets of the "new morality," which is neither new nor morality, continue to insist that we are now living in a new era in which men have "come of age."  These mental and moral midgets, anxious to baptize abortion, homosexuality, contraception and a host of other evils, argue that there is now before us a new way, an easy way of following God which permits all things in the name of "love."

As these sons and daughters of Hell raise their angry voices against the Church, demanding that she "update" her teaching so that it will be more palatable for "modern man," the Church reminds us all in her authoritative voice that, "They are fully incorporated in the society of the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ accept her entire system and all the means of salvation given to her, and are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a 'bodily' manner and not 'in his heart.' All the Church's children should remember that their exalted status is to be attributed not to their own merits but to the special grace of Christ. If they fail moreover to respond to that grace in thought, word and deed, not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged." (Lumen Gentium, No. 14).

Those who reject the Church's teaching remain in the Church but only in a bodily manner and not in their hearts.  They have ruptured real communion with the People of God and place themselves in danger of losing "the pledge of its promises."  This is not a "puritanical" teaching.  This is the teaching of Holy Mother Church.  This teaching represents the mind of Christ.  And those who are authentically Catholic will embrace it as such.

Sunday, May 29, 2011

"Unless the overwhelming majority of our citizens have a change of heart, and the courage and strength to implement it, our once-Christian country will succumb to the final agony of moral death.."

Writing for The Maryfaithful some years back, Dr. James Brendan Smith warned that, "Unless the overwhelming majority of our citizens have a change of heart, and the courage and strength to implement it, our once-Christian country will succumb to the final agony of moral death in which we find ourselves today.  The greatest evil of our time is not in the vocal and widely publicized minority who openly defy the laws of God as well as those of our country, but the silent millions who, by their silence, permit these evils to be perpetrated.  With all the sophisticated , scientific apparatus and innovations which have been designed to make life easier for us, we have indulged ourselves more than any other group in history, to the point where we have become a nation of conditioned laboratory animals that respond to the tinkle of a bell.  A Paris designer says 'wear this' and we wear it; the movie reviewer says 'see this film' and we see it; the columnist recommends a certain erotic book, so we read it; the self-proclaimed theologian says, 'contraception under certain circumstances is not wrong,' so we practice it; the eminent physician says, 'Abortion in certain instances is morally right,' so we go along with this erroneous thinking and are indifferent to the passage of laws permitting abortion; the educator says, 'teach the children about sex through sex education programs in schools,' so we allow our children to attend such classes without bothering to find out the composition of these programs, some of which are utterly despicable.  Our goals are comfort, convenience and pleasure.  Let someone else shoulder the responsibility, and let principles be damned...

We have allowed ourselves to be so hopelessly misled that we now condemn, ridicule, and penalize virtue, while rewarding evil.  We have decided that our plan for the universe is better than God's so, while priding ourselves on the scientific achievements which prolong life, we suppress the natural forces that produce life.  In our pitiable self-righteousness we abolish capital punishment for the arch-criminal convicted of horrible atrocities but we murder innocent, defenseless infants in their mother's wombs.  We consigned the principles given to us by Almighty God Himself, on which our Church and our country were founded, to the most remote recesses of our minds..."

Now, things were far better when Dr. Smith penned those words.  Since then, we have witnessed a further explosion of immorality as well as the wicked attempt to justify same-sex acts and same-sex "marriage."  If we love America, if our patriotism is something more than a cheap facade, we must first pray and then work untiringly to create a moral climate where truth and righteousness is at home.  For God's Word [despised by those who have lost their faith and who practice a counterfeit "patriotism") says clearly that, "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach [disgrace] to any people." (Proverbs 14:34).

If we truly love America, we will recall the words of Abraham Lincoln given on March 30, 1863, when he issued a historic Proclamation Appointing a National Fast Day:

" is the duty of nations as well as of men to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God, to confess their sins and transgressions in humble sorrow yet with assured hope that genuine repentance will lead to mercy and pardon, and to recognize the sublime truth, announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history: that those nations only are blessed whose God is the Lord: And, insomuch as we know that, by His divine law, nations like individuals are subjected to punishments and chastisement in this world, may we not justly fear that the awful calamity of civil war, which now desolates the land may be but a punishment inflicted upon us for our presumptuous sins to the needful end of our national reformation as a whole people? We have been the recipients of the choicest bounties of Heaven. We have been preserved these many years in peace and prosperity. We have grown in numbers, wealth and power as no other nation has ever grown. But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious Hand which preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us; and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us! It behooves us then to humble ourselves before the offended Power, to confess our national sins and to pray for clemency and forgiveness.."All this being done, in sincerity and truth, let us then rest humbly in the hope authorized by the Divine teachings, that the united cry of the nation will be heard on high and answered with blessing no less than the pardon of our national sins and the restoration of our now divided and suffering country to its former happy condition of unity and peace..."

Lincoln's words are a warning.  Shall we heed them?

Saturday, May 28, 2011

Deacon Nick Donnelly on "Catholics for Choice" credal statement: "To raise the use of condoms onto the same level as belief in God is a gross act of heresy and apostasy.."

My good friend Nick Donnelly, a permanent deacon of the Diocese of Lancaster, is reporting that,  "On the eve of the Vatican conference on the morality and effectiveness of condoms in response to HIV/AIDS the pro-abortion group ‘Catholics’ for Choice have issued a ‘creed’ that puts belief in condoms on the same level as belief in God:

‘We believe in God.

We believe that sex is sacred.

We believe in caring for each other.

We believe in using condoms.

We thank Pope Benedict for acknowledging that condoms save lives.’

In a press release issued with this advert in an Italian newspaper Jon O’Brien, the president of Catholics for Choice, mischievously attempts to portray Pope Benedict XVI as supporting the use of condoms: 'The first ray of light from the Vatican came from Pope Benedict XVI himself last year when he acknowledged that condom use can prevent the spread of the disease. Since then, conservatives within the church have worked to try and muddy this clarity, but Catholic health workers must resist their attempts to roll back progress and endanger the lives and health of millions of people at risk for contracting HIV and AIDS. No longer can the Vatican stand by dangerous statements of men like Cardinal Trujillo, who claimed that HIV could pass through a condom.'

In his interview with Peter Seewald published in Light of the World Pope Benedict said that the use of condoms was always immoral and less than human. He did say that a homosexual prostitute considering using a condom to stop the spread of HIV was the beginning of moral reasoning. This example was clearly not an endorsement by the Holy Father of the use of condoms as moral.

Protect the Pope comment: This ‘credal’ statement from ‘Catholics for Choice’ captures the depth of dissent that they, and their supporters, have sunk. The God they believe in is a ‘god’ created by them in their own image, and is not the God of Jesus Christ and apostolic faith.

Their statement of belief in the sacredness of sex is impoverished and debased, for it makes no mention of love, nor does it distinguish between the moral sexual love between wives and husbands, and the immorality of sex outside of marriage.

They say they believe in caring for each other but this care does not include pre-born children, who they actively seek to kill.

Their pressing Pope Benedict into supporting their position is intentionally misleading and mendacious.

That ‘Catholics for Choice’ call opposition to the use of condoms ‘dissent’ is not only absurd, but also a diabolical twisting of the truth.

To raise the use of condoms onto the same level as belief in God is a gross act of heresy and apostasy. When will the Church take legal action to stop this anti-catholic organisation that is funded by enemies of the Church from passing itself off as ‘Catholic’?" (See here).

It was Saint Cyprian of Carthage, writing against the Greco-Roman pagan world and its vices, who said that, "That Jupiter of theirs is not more supreme in dominion than in vice, inflamed with earthly love in the midst of his own breaking forth by the help of birds to violate the purity of boys. And now put the question: Can he who looks upon such things be healthy-minded or modest? Men imitate the gods whom they adore, and to such miserable beings their crimes become their religion." (Letters 1:8).

In a series of letters written from 1969-1970, Sister Lucia [of the Fatima apparition] wrote: "It is indeed sad that so many people let themselves be dominated by the diabolical wave that is sweeping the world, and that they are blinded to the point of being incapable of seeing error! Their principal fault is they have abandoned prayer; in this way they have become estranged from God, and without God everything fails. The devil is very cunning and looks for our weak points in order to attack us. If we are not diligent and careful to obtain strength from God, we shall fall, for our age is very wicked and we are weak. Only the strength of God can keep us on our feet."

Indeed.  Those who have abandoned prayer have succumbed to a multitude of vices and crimes which quickly become their religion.  Abortion becomes an ersatz "sacrament" in the Moloch religion and contraception a sort of unholy sacramental for those who would worship at the altar of lust.  And too many clerics, paralyzed with either fear or indifference or both, say nothing.  These cowardly clerics, these chicken Catholics, are afraid to stand against the Culture of Death and the emerging Moloch religion which will serve the City of Satan.

Deacon Nick is not one of them.  He is, rather, a shining example of everything a Catholic deacon should be.  I am honored to count him as a friend.

Thursday, May 26, 2011

The National "Catholic" Reporter sets itself against the teaching of the Catholic Church

An editorial in the National "Catholic" Reporter entitled "Ordination ban not infallibly taught" (May 23rd edition), referring to Pope John Paul II's infallible teaching in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, No. 4, asserts that, "At issue fundamentally is whether John Paul, in his 1994 apostolic letter, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (“Priestly Ordination”), intended to (or actually did) lay out an infallible teaching when he said, 'I declare that the church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the church’s faithful.'"

Then the editorial says that, "John Paul did not formally pronounce the teaching ex cathedra (speaking from the chair of Peter) or say he was teaching infallibly in his declaration. It is also notable that he said only that it was a 'judgment' that is 'to be definitively held' - not a matter of  'divine faith' that must be 'believed.' For any serious Catholic or student of Catholic teaching, the issue of the words employed in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis is not of minor import."  (See here).

More word games.  Notice the wording in this editorial?  "..he said only that it was a 'judgment' that is 'to be definitively held.'" 

Only?  This is a cheap attempt to downplay the wording of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, No. 4.  Canon Law, specifically Canon 750, states that: “each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely, those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.”

In its editorial, the National "Catholic" Reporter is in effect setting itself against the teaching of the Church by treating the ordination of women as “an open question.” Deliberate nonassent is a grave matter. This situation is all the more serious since the judgment of Pope John Paul II (and he invoked his supreme authority in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis) is to be “definitively held by all.”

Because nonassent is serious in and of itself, and because deliberate nonassent interferes with communion in the Church and serves to polarize people, it is a grave matter. Pope Pius XII, in Humani generis, explains that once a pope makes a point of settling a matter which is disputed among theologians, it can no longer be treated as an open question.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a Responsum ad Dubium in 1995 which read:

"Dubium: Whether the teaching that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women, which is presented in the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis to be held definitively, is to be understood as belonging to the deposit of faith.

Responsum: In the affirmative.

This teaching requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium (cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen Gentium 25, 2). Thus, in the present circumstances, the Roman Pontiff, exercising his proper office of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), has handed on this same teaching by a formal declaration, explicitly stating what is to be held always, everywhere, and by all, as belonging to the deposit of the faith.

The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, approved this Reply, adopted in the ordinary session of this Congregation, and ordered it to be published.

Rome, from the offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on the Feast of the Apostles SS. Simon and Jude, October 28, 1995.

Joseph Card. Ratzinger

Tarcisio Bertone
Archbishop Emeritus of Vercelli"

No serious Catholic or student of Catholic teaching would dismiss a teaching of the Church which is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful.  The National "Catholic" Reporter is setting itself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.  And the U.S. Bishops need to address this most grave matter.

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

"One of the difficulties is that they appear in many disguises..."

Today is St. Padre Pio's birthday.  It is mine as well.  With the spiritual battle intensifying all around us as more and more abandon the Faith of our Fathers, I thought I would post the following thoughts on spiritual warfare from some of our Church's great prayer-warriors:

"Spiritual combat is another element of life which needs to be taught anew and proposed once more to all Christians today. It is a secret and interior art, an invisible struggle in which we engage every day against the temptations, the evil suggestions that the demon tries to plant in our hearts." - Pope John Paul II.

"Whatever the less discerning theologians may say, the devil, as far as Christian belief is concerned, is a puzzling but real, personal and not merely symbolical presence. He is a powerful reality, the 'prince of this world,' as he is called by the New Testament, which continually reminds us of his existence, a baneful superhuman freedom directed against God's freedom. This is evident if we look realistically at history, with its abyss of ever-new atrocities which cannot be explained by reference to man alone. On his own, man has not the power to oppose Satan, but the devil is not second to God, and united with Jesus we can be certain of vanquishing him. Christ is 'God Who is near to us,' willing and able to liberate us: that is why the Gospel really is 'Good News.' And that is why we must go on proclaiming Christ in those realms of fear and unfreedom." - Pope Benedict XVI.

“No one wants to believe in evil, really, above all, not in an evil being, an evil spirit. Everyone wants to abolish the idea. To admit the existence of evil means a responsibility, and no one wants that responsibility. That is the opening through which the evil spirit crawls, stilling all suspicions, making everything seem normal and natural. This is the “thought,” the unwariness of the ordinary human being which amounts to a disinclination to believe in evil. And if you do not believe in evil, how can you believe in or ever know what good is?” - Father Malachi Martin.

"The Devil fears the Virgin Mary more, not only than men and angels but, in a certain sense, than God himself. It is not that the wrath, the power and the hatred of God are not infinitely greater than those of the Blessed Virgin, since Mary's perfections are limited: it is because, in the first place, Satan, being proud, suffers infinitely more from being overcome and punished by the little, humble servant of God, her humility humiliating him more than the divine power; and secondly, because God has given Mary such great power over devils that, as they have often been obliged to admit, in spite of themselves, through the mouths of possessed persons, they are more afraid of one of her sighs of grief over some poor soul, than of the prayers of the saints, and more daunted by a single threat from her than by all their other torments" - Monsignor Leon Cristiani.

"We need to be especially alert to the evil subtlety of Satan. His one desire is to keep people from having a mind and heart disposed to their Lord and God. . .He wants to extinguish the light of the human heart, and so he moves in by means of worldly busyness and worry." - St. Francis of Assisi.

"The Devil does not want to lose this battle. He takes on many forms. For several days now, he has appeared with his brothers who are armed with batons and pieces of iron. One of the difficulties is that they appear in many disguises. There were several times when they threw me out of my bed and dragged me out of my bedroom. I am patient, however, and I know Jesus, Our Lady, my Guardian Angel, St. Joseph and St. Francis are always with me." - St. Padre Pio of Pietrelcina.

Sunday, May 22, 2011

The Worcester Diocesan Commission for Women: Replacing Faith with Opinion in the Pursuit of a Self-Made Church

In his book "Called to Communion: Understanding the Church Today," then Cardinal Ratzinger and now Pope Benedict XVI, writing about futile reform and the "naive arrogance of the self-appointed enlightener who is convinced that previous generations did not get it right, or else were too fearful and unilluminated," explains the thinking of such deluded souls: "It thus appears [for these adolescent Catholics] as the most normal thing in the world to make up for lost time, which means first establishing once and for all this basic patrimony of structures of freedom [elaborated by the Enlightenment].  We must move - it is maintained - from the paternalistic Church to the community Church; no one must any longer remain a passive receiver of the gift of Christian existence.  Rather, all should be active agents of it.  The Church must no longer be fitted over us from above like a ready-made garment; no, we 'make' the Church ourselves, and do so in constantly new ways.  It thus finally becomes 'our' Church, for which we are actively responsible.  The Church arises out of discussion, compromise and resolution.  Debate brings out what can still be asked of people today, what can still be considered by common consent as faith or as ethical norms.  New short formulas of faith are composed...

But questions immediately arise concerning this work of reform, which in place of all hierarchical tutelage will at long last introduce democratic self-determination into the Church.  Who actually has the right to make decisions?  What is the basis of the decision-making process?  In a political democracy the answer to this question is the system of representation: individuals elect their representative, who makes decisions on their behalf.  This commission has a time limit, its mainlines of policy are clearly defined by the party system, and it embraces only those spheres of political action that are assigned to representative bodies by the constitution.

Questions remain even in regard to representation: the minority must submit to the majority, and this minority can be quite large.  Furthermore, there is no infallible guarantee that my elected representative actually does act and speak as I wish.  Once again, the victorious majority, seen from close up, can in no case consider itself entirely as the active subject of political events but must accept the decisions of others, at least in order not to jeopardize the system as a whole.

But there is a general question that is more relevant to our problem.  Everything that men can make can also be undone again by others.  Everything that has its origin in human likes can be disliked by others.  Everything that one majority decides upon can can be revoked by another majority.  A church based on human resolutions becomes a merely human church.  It is reduced to the level of the makeable, of the obvious, of opinion.  Opinion replaces faith.  And in fact, in the self-made formulas of faith with which I am acquainted, the meaning of the words 'I believe' never signifies anything beyond 'we opine.'  Ultimately, the self-made church savors of the 'self,' which always has a bitter taste to the other self and just as soon reveals its petty insignificanceA self-made church is reduced to the empirical domain and thus, precisely as a dream, comes to nothing." (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Called to Communion: Understanding the Church Today, pp. 136, 138-140).

These points are not understood by the Worcester [Massachusetts] Diocesan Commission for Women.  This commission continues to associate itself with well-known dissidents who promote women's ordination, homosexuality and lesbianism, and New Age spirituality.  As I noted in a previous post, the commission has invited Elizabeth Dreyer to be a guest speaker at its 2011 "Gather Us In" Conference.  Ms. Dreyer has publically demanded the ordination of women to the ministerial priesthood.

The commission has also touted Sister Jon Julie Sullivan [in photo].  See here.  Sister Sullivan was part of a group of several hundred dissidents who protested outside of the Cathedral of the Holy Cross on Good Friday back in 2002.  Sister Eileen Brady, a Sister of Mercy who was among the dissidents protesting that day, was quoted by The Boston Globe as having said, "There needs to be significant change [in the Church]. When the Church says you can't even dicuss the ordination of women, that's unjust.  And we stand for justice."  And Sister Sullivan was quoted as having said, "There aren't even words to tell you how many changes we need."  See here.

But is it the Church which must change?  Or something else?  As I've said so many times over the years, the very same intellectually and spiritually cramped adolescents who demand change in the Church fail to recognize that it is not the Church which needs to change but rather themselves.  Saint Paul exhorts us: "Put off the old man who is corrupted according to the desire of error, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind: and put on the new man, who according to God is created in justice and holiness of truth" (Eph. 4:22-24).

Some people seem incapable of grasping this truth.  And they are poorer for it.

Related reading here.

Saturday, May 21, 2011

Homosexual propaganda blog "MassResistance Watch" gets it wrong is reporting that, "A leading authority on the clerical sex abuse crisis has criticized those who conclude that new data has ruled out homosexuality as a significant cause in the scandal - even though the vast majority of priest abuse was perpetrated against adolescent males.

Dr. Richard Fitzgibbons, a top psychiatrist and expert in handling sexually abusive priests, says criminologists 'crossed a line' by pronouncing on the psychological causes behind the data released May 18.

'Analysis of the research demonstrates clearly that the major cause of the crisis was the homosexual abuse of males,' said Fitzgibbons in an interview with the Catholic News Agency.

The new study, conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice and commissioned by the U.S. Bishops, shows that nearly 80 percent of victims were post-pubescent and adolescent males. However, the study concludes that available data 'do not support the hypothesis that priests with a homosexual identity ... are significantly more likely to sexually abuse.'

The report marks the third such effort by U.S. Bishops to address the causes and manifestations of the clerical sex abuse scandal since it first erupted publicly in 2002.

The data also shows that less than 5 percent of abuse involved prepubescent children, contravening rumor that the scandal largely manifested as acts of pedophilia. But homosexuality, according to Fitzgibbons, was clearly the primary sexual aberration driving the bulk of abuse.

'One can conclude that these priests have strong same-sex attraction,' said Fitzgibbons. 'When an adult is involved with homosexual behavior with an adolescent male, he clearly has a major problem in the area of homosexuality.'

The psychologist said that, while the college has done good work collecting data, criminologists 'lack the professional expertise to comment on causes of sexual abuse.'

'If the (U.S. bishops) conference wanted an analysis of the causes of complex sexual behavior with adolescents, don’t turn to criminologists,' said Fitzgibbons. 'They are not trained to understand those causes - that training is given to mental health professionals.'" (Article here).

It didn't take long for a homosexual propaganda blog called "MassResistance Watch" to jump on the faulty conclusions of criminologists who lack the expertise to comment upon the root causes of complex sexual behavior.  In a post authored by a troubled soul who refers to himself as "Boston Bud," we read, "Researchers at John Jay College of Criminal Justice at the City University of New York, who spent five years conducting the most expensive and extensive study of sexual abuse in the Catholic church to date, concluded that homosexual priests were no more likely to abuse than heterosexual priests...If you recall Santorum and the anti-gay loonies were blaming gay priests for all the molestation."  See here.

Who better to write about "loonies" than an individual referring to himself as "Boston Bud" who believes that homosexuality is somehow healthy.  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. Dr. Aardweg notes that, "The term neurotic describes such relationships well. It suggests the ego-centeredness of the relationship; the attention-seeking instead of loving...Neurotic, in short, suggests all kinds of dramas and childish conflicts as well as the basic disinterestedness in the partner, notwithstanding the shallow pretensions of 'love.' Nowhere is there more self-deception in the homosexual than in his representation of himself as a lover. One partner is important to the other only insofar as he satisfies that other's needs. Real, unselfish love for a desired partner would, in fact, end up destroying homosexual 'love'!" (Dr. Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, The Battle for Normality, Ignatius Press, 1997, pp. 62-63).

No, most of the abuse within the Church was committed by sick men suffering from the psychopathology of homosexuality.  Crippled in personality, these homosexual men acted out sexually against adolescent males.  There is no way around this.  Nor should this really come as a surprise.  The Father of so-called "Gay Rights," Harry Hay, was a pervert who was fully supportive of NAMBLA, the North American Man/Boy Love Association, a group which advocates for the legalization of sex between men and boys.  See here.  Talk about "loonies."

Sex between men and boys has long been a part of homosexual culture and history as documented by openly homosexual history professor William Armstrong Percy III in his book entitled "Pederasty and Pedagogy in Archaic Greece." See here.  Of course, propagandists for the Homosexual Hate Movement - like "Boston Bud" - will never admit to this.

But the facts of history tell the real story.

Friday, May 20, 2011

America: Slouching toward Gomorrah, slouching toward destruction

A new Gallup Poll released this morning finds that this month 53% of Americans say same-sex marriage should be recognized in law as equally valid with traditional male-female marriages.  See here.  Father Vincent Miceli, in his book The Antichrist, writes, "Dr. Abram Kardiner, distinguished physician, psychoanalyst, and anthropologist, states that homosexuality reaches pestilential and plague proportions in morally rotting societies during the final stages of total collapse. The cult of softness is perhaps the most pronounced public phenomenon among nations today. It is certainly responsible for the rotting of the moral fibre of Western Civilization not only in sex but also, in the erosion of Christian truth, in education, in art and in letters, in the repudiation of personal responsibility and in the increasing tendency to side with the forces of crime against the forces of law and order." (The Antichrist, p. 237).

In the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith's Letter to Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, Cardinal Ratzinger summarized the biblical teaching on homosexuality and explained why the Church's teaching on this subject follows necessarily from her teaching on the nature and purpose of sexuality: "The Church, obedient to the Lord who founded her and gave to her the sacramental life, celebrates the divine plan of the loving and life-giving union of men and women in the Sacrament of Marriage. It is only in the marital relationship that the use of the sexual faculty can be morally good. A person engaging in homosexual behavior therefore acts immorally. To choose someone of the same sex for one's sexual activity is to annul the rich symbolism and meaning, not to mention the goals, of the Creator's sexual design. Homosexual activity is not a complementary union, able to transmit life; and so it thwarts the call to a life of that form of self-giving which the Gospel says is the essence of Christian living. This does not mean that homosexual persons are not often generous and giving of themselves; but when they engage in homosexual activity they confirm within themselves a disordered sexual inclination which is essentially self-indulgent. As in every moral disorder, homosexual activity prevents one's own fulfillment and happiness by acting contrary to the creative wisdom of God. The Church, in rejecting erroneous opinions regarding homosexuality, does not limit but rather defends personal freedom and dignity realistically and authentically understood."

Increasingly, Americans are coming to reject God's plan for marriage and family life.  As a result, America is placing itself under judgement.

Our Lady told Fr. Stephano Gobbi on November 15, 1990, at Malvern Pennsylvania: "I announce to you that the hour of the great trial is on the point of arriving. The great trial has arrived for your country. How many times, as a concerned and sorrowing mother, have I endeavored to urge my children to follow the path of conversion and of return to the Lord. I have not been listened to. You have continued to walk along the way of rejection of God, and of His law of love. Sins of impurity have become ever more widespread, and immorality has spread like a sea which has submerged all things. Homosexuality, a sin of impurity which is against nature, has been justified; recourse to the means of preventing life have become commonplace, while abortions - these killings of innocent children, that cry for vengeance before the face of God - have spread and are performed in every part of your homeland.The moment of divine justice and of great mercy has now arrived.

You will know the hour of weakness and of poverty; the hour of suffering and defeat; the purifying hour of the great chastisement. The great trial has arrived for your Church. How great is your responsibility, O Pastors of the Holy Church of God! You continue along the path of division from the Pope and of the rejection of his Magisterium; indeed, in a hidden way, there is in preparation a true schism which could soon become open and proclaimed...And then, there will remain only a small faithful remnant, over which I will keep watch in the garden of my Immaculate Heart.

The great trial has arrived for all humanity. The chastisement, predicted by me at Fatima and contained in that part of the secret which has not yet been revealed, is about to take place. The great moment of divine justice and of mercy has come upon the world."

There will be scoffers. As in the days of Noah.  Noah and his family were mocked and ridiculed until the flood waters came.  And the laughing stopped.  And a great multitude suddenly realized that they had not chosen wisely.

Thursday, May 19, 2011

Signs: Obama coming out against Israel

“Certain historical developments are willed by the Lord of History, and they shall take place. About many other — mostly minor — developments, that same Lord … allows men the free will to choose between various options, and He will go along with those choices; for, in the end, all human choices will be co-opted as grist into God’s mill, which grinds slowly, but always grinds exceedingly fine.” - Cardinal Stefan Wysynski.

It was foretold in Sacred Scripture that the Jews would return to Palestine toward the end of the world.  The Lord God promised the children of Israel that in the latter days of the world's history they would return to Palestine, rebuild the temple and that He would make a new and everlasting covenant with His people.  The Lord God has also warned that the nations will align themselves against Israel in the latter days and that He will destroy them:

"An oracle: the word of the Lord concerning Israel. Thus says the Lord, who spreads out the heavens, lays the foundations of the earth, and forms the spirit of man within him: See, I will make Jerusalem a bowl to stupefy all peoples round about. (Judah will be besieged, even Jerusalem.) On that day I will make Jerusalem a weighty stone for all peoples. All who attempt to lift it shall injure themselves badly, and all the nations of the earth shall be gathered against her. On that day, says the Lod, I will strike every horse with fright, and its rider with madness. I will strike blind all the horses of the peoples, but upon the house of Judah I will open my eyes, and the princes of Judah shall say to themselves, "The inhabitants of Jerusalem have their strength in the Lord of hosts, their God." On that day I will make the princes of Judah like a brazier of fire in the woodland, and like a burning torch among sheaves, and they shall devour right and left all the surrounding peoples; but Jerusalem shall still abide on its own site. The Lord shall save the tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem may not be exalted over Judah. On that day, the Lord will shield the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the weakling among them shall be like David on that day, and the house of David godlike, like an angel of the Lord before them. On that day I will seek the destruction of all nations that come against Jerusalem." (Zechariah 12: 1-9).

A spirit of hostility is growing against Israel.  The President of the United States is coming out against Israel.  The day is now almost upon us when the nations of the world will align themselves against the children of Israel.  God Himself has foretold this saying, "Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be removed from the city. Then the Lord shall go forth and fight against those nations, fighting as on a day of battle. That day his feet shall rest upon the Mount of Olives, which is opposite Jerusalem to the east. The Mount of Olives shall be cleft in two from east to west by a very deep valley, and half of the mountain shall move to the north and half of it to the south. And the valley of the Lord's mountain shall be filled up when the valley of those two mountains reaches its edge; it shall be filled up as it was filled up by the earthquake in the days of King Uzziah of Judah. Then the Lord, my God, shall come, and all his holy ones with him. On that day there shall no longer be cold or frost. There shall be one continuous day, known to the Lord, not day and night, for in the evening time there shall be light. On that day, living waters shall flow from Jerusalem, half to the eastern sea, and half to the western sea, and it shall be so in summer and in winter. The Lord shall become king over the whole earth; on that day the Lord shall be the only one, and his name the only one. And from Geba to Rimmon in the Negeb, all the land shall turn into a plain; but Jerusalem shall remain exalted in its place. From the Gate of Benjamin to the place of the First Gate, to the Corner Gate; and from the Tower of Hananel to the king's wine presses, they shall occupy her. Never again shall she be doomed; Jerusalem shall abide in security. And this shall be the plague with which the Lord shall strike all the nations that have fought against Jerusalem: their flesh shall rot while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall rot in their sockets, and their tongues shall rot in their mouths. On that day there shall be among them a great tumult from the Lord: every man shall seize the hand of his neighbor, and the hand of each shall be raised against that of his neighbor. Judah also shall fight against Jerusalem. The riches of all the surrounding nations shall be gathered together, gold, silver, and garments, in great abundance.
Similar to this plague shall be the plague upon the horses, mules, camels, asses, and upon all the beasts that are in those camps. All who are left of all the nations that came against Jerusalem shall come up year after year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to celebrate the feast of Booths. If any of the families of the earth does not come up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, no rain shall fall upon them. And if the family of Egypt does not come up, or enter, upon them shall fall the plague which the LORD will inflict upon all the nations that do not come up to celebrate the feast of Booths. This shall be the punishment of Egypt, and the punishment of all the nations that do not come up to celebrate the feast of Booths. On that day there shall be upon the bells of the horses, "Holy to the Lord." The pots in the house of the Lord shall be as the libation bowls before the altar. And every pot in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holy to the Lord of hosts; and all who come to sacrifice shall take them and cook in them. On that day there shall no longer be any merchant in the house of the Lord of hosts." (Zechariah 14: 1-21).

Recommended reading: Ezekiel, Chapters 38 and 39.

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Plano Independent School District wants to ban First Amendment rights of elementary students who want to reference Jesus or God

An article from World Net Daily is reporting that, "A hearing is scheduled Monday before the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans that could determine if students in elementary schools have the protections of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The case arose in the Plano Independent School District in Texas where Thomas Elementary School Principal Lynn Swanson and Rasor Elementary School Principal Jackie Bomchill were sued for restricting student speech when it referenced 'God' or 'Jesus.'

According to the Liberty Institute, in the first incident, officials banned 8-year-old Jonathan Morgan from handing out candy canes with Jesus' name on them to classmates at a school party.

'Then they confiscated a little girl's pencils after school because they mentioned 'God,'' the Institute reported.

But that's not all, the group said.

'They even banned an entire classroom from writing 'Merry Christmas' on cards to our troops serving in Iraq.'

The dispute went to district court then to a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit where school officials' efforts to have the complaint rejected because of their 'immunity' failed.

Now the appeals court has agreed to an en banc hearing in which 17 judges will listen to arguments and decide the dispute.

The school officials are arguing 'that the First Amendment does not apply to elementary school students,' explains the appeal brief submitted by Liberty Institute."

Well then, Plano Independent School District officials are wrong.  The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled, in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, that, "Under our Constitution, free speech is not a right that is given only to be so circumscribed that it exists in principle but not in fact...The Constitution says that Congress (and the States) may not abridge the right to free speech.  This provision means what it says.  We properly read it to permit reasonable regulation of speech-connected activities in carefully restricted circumstances.  But we do not confine the permissible exercise of First Amendment rights to a telephone booth or the four corners of a pamphlet, or to supervised and ordained discussion in a school classroom."

What the Supreme Court said in Tinker is that free speech rights of students can only be "carefully restricted" or "reasonably regulated" by school administrators.  And only if these school administrators can show that such free speech rights would cause a substantial disruption of the school's educational mission. Is there anyone out there - who is sane - who can argue that a pencil which mentions God or a candy cane with Jesus' name on it constitutes a substantial disruption of a school's educational mission?

It is my firm belief that the Plano Independent School District officials in question could benefit greatly from a mental-health checkup.  Not to mention a brief primer in constitutional law.

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

President Obama, who claims to be a Christian, has denied that America is a Christian nation

Back in 2009, in an article for entitled "America is not a Christian nation," Michael Lind wrote, "Is America a Christian nation, as many conservatives claim it is?  One American doesn't think so.  In his press conference on April 6 in Turkey, President Obama explained: 'One of the great strengths of the United States is...we have a very large Christian population - we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values.'  Predictably, Obama's remarks have enraged conservative talking heads.  But Obama's observations have ample precedent in American diplomacy and constitutional thought..."  (See here for full article).

Unfortunately for Mr. Lind, the facts of history do not support his theory.  The Charter of New England of 1620 declared that the primary objective of the colony was "the enlargement of Christian religion, to the Glory of God Almighty."  The Mayflower Compact stated clearly that the purpose of the colony was the "advancement of the Christian Faith."  Larry Schweikart notes, in his book "48 Liberal Lies About American History," that: "The founding documents of every one of the original thirteen colonies reveals them to be awash in the concepts of Christianity and God.  Whatever the documents intended by 'religious freedom,' they never in any way, shape, or form intended the state to interfere with Christian religious expression.  It is therefore silly and unsupported to claim, as religious historian Jon Butler tries to do, that "Revolutionary America Wasn't a Christian Nation.'  Christians played so dominant a role in the American revolution that Joseph Galloway, a Loyalist, complained that the rebellion was led by "Congregationalists, Presbyterians, and Smugglers.'.." (Larry Schweikhart, 48 Liberal Lies About American History, p. 75).

President Obama and his minions may believe that America was not founded as a Christian nation.  But the Supreme Court, in its unanimous decision in Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States (1892), said that: "Our laws and institutions necessarily are based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind...In this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian...This is a Christian nation."

President Obama and his minions, in their push for a secularist Socialist State, are engaging in revisionist history when they deny that America was founded as a Christian nation.  Again Larry Schweikart:

"The Continental Congress in 1777 ordered a day of thanksgiving and praise that the people 'join the penitent confession of their manifold sins...that the day, through their humble and ernest supplication...may please God, through the merits of Jesus Christ..." (Schweikart, p. 73).  If America was not a Christian nation, what was the Continental Congress doing praying - and exhorting others to pray - through the merits of Jesus Christ?  This is, of course, an insurmountable problem for historical revisionists such as Michael Lind and Barack Obama.

Schweikart continues:

"Even the supposed Deist Benjamin Franklin urged the members of the Constitutional Convention to pray, saying, 'I have lived, sir, a long time, and, the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth - that God governs in the affairs of men.  And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid?  We have been assured, sir, in the sacred writings, that 'except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it.'" (Schweikart, p. 73).

While Barack Obama and his minions are doing their best to re-write American history and to deny our Christian heritage, a Chinese think tank has said that Christianity is what made America great. See here.

Monday, May 16, 2011

Stephen Hawking: The Prince of Fairy Tales

British scientist Stephen Hawking is at it again.  In an interview with The Guardian, Hawking said, "I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when its components fail.  There is no heaven for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark."  See here.

Peter Kreeft, professor of philosophy at Boston College, refutes this argument nicely explaining that, "A computer is not reliable if it has been programmed by chance rather than by rational design (e.g., by hailstones falling at random on its keyboard).  The human brain and nervous system are a computer.  They may be much more, but they are not less than a computer.  So the human brain is not reliable if it has been programmed by mere chance..if materialism is true, if the soul is only the brain, if there is no spirit, no human soul and no God, then the brain has been programmed by mere chance.  All the programming our brains have received, through heredity (genetics) and environment (society), is ultimately only unintelligent, undesigned, random chance, brute facts, physical causes, not logical reasons.  Therefore materialism cannot be true.  It refutes itself.  It destroys its own credentials.  If the brain is nothing but blind atoms, we have no reason to trust it when it tells us about anything, including itself and atoms...If materialism is not true, this means there is immaterial reality too.  And that immaterial reality - usually called spirit, or soul - need not be subject to the laws of material reality, including the law of mortality."

Mr. Hawking has made bizarre claims in the past.  He has advanced abiogenesis in a desperate attempt to uphold failed evolutionary theories while warning anyone who will listen that humanity faces a potential threat on its horizon from "aliens" from outer space.

It would appear that Stephen Hawking is eminently qualified to speak on fairy stories.  For he is the Prince of Fairy Tales.

Saturday, May 14, 2011

Constructing a New World Order Police State

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."  But there are forces in this country which are striving to undermine these constitutional protections.

This past Thursday the Indiana Supreme Court ruled that citizens have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.  Justice Steven David, writing for the court, said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.  See here.

William Parker, in an article entitled "Your fourth amendment rights under attack by Obama, DOJ," writes:

There is no talk of 'the slippery slope' anymore, which so many people used as an argument against many policies enacted by the Bush administration. Yet, now more than ever, it seems the slippery slope has given way to the sheer drop from the cliffs of sanity. There are intentional actions already in progress to simply take from us the rights we have apparently taken for granted. The Dept. of Justice apparently believes that U.S. citizens do not enjoy a "reasonable expectation of privacy" with respect to cell phone use, and have been attempting to acquire the ability to simply demand user information from the cell phone companies without going through standard procedures to obtain a warrant for specific information on specific individuals for use in specific prosecutions. They are assaulting the fourth amendment in yet another case, asserting that "email over 181 days old should not be protected from warrantless search and seizure."

Where is the outrage? These are not things that are occurring as a consequence of, or as a by-product of, some other action being taken for some otherwise lofty purpose. The government means to take these freedoms, piece by piece, with the hopes that nobody will care until it's too late."  Full article here.

In his Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, Pope John Paul II warned us that, "....totalitarianism arises out of a denial of truth in the objective sense. If there is no transcendent truth, in obedience to which man achieves his full identity, then there is no sure principle for guaranteeing just relations between people. Their self-interest as a class, group or nation would inevitably set them in opposition to one another. If one does not acknowledge transcendent truth, then the force of power takes over, and each person tends to make full use of the means at his disposal in order to impose his own interests or his own opinion, with no regard for the rights of others. People are then respected only to the extent that they can be exploited for selfish ends. Thus, the root of modern totalitarianism is to be found in the denial of the transcendent dignity of the human person who, as the visible image of the invisible God, is therefore by his very nature the subject of rights which no one may violate — no individual, group, class, nation or State. Not even the majority of a social body may violate these rights, by going against the minority, by isolating, oppressing, or exploiting it, or by attempting to annihilate it.." (No. 44).

Two years ago I argued that the United States was in twilight.  It would appear that the darkness is now falling swiftly.  And where is all of this leading?

Another chilling development noted here.

Thursday, May 12, 2011

Elizabeth Dreyer, guest speaker at the 2011 Gather Us In Conference: "There's a lot of misogyny and oppression" in the Catholic Church

"The history of the church is complex. There have been many opportunities in the church for women to obtain dignity and rights. And, then, on the other side, there’s a lot of misogyny and oppression, and they’re both there in quite large doses. I think it’s amazing that the memories of Jesus in the New Testament escaped sexism to the extent that they did. But by the early second century the cultural context of patriarchy reasserts itself." - Elizabeth Dreyer, feminist theologian who advocates women's ordination and who has been invited to appear as a guest speaker at the 2011 Gather Us In conference of the Worcester Commission for Women [Diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts].  See full interview with citation here.

In an article entitled "A Gender Gap in the Church?," Father Jay Scott Newman, pastor of two rural parishes in the Diocese of Charleston, South Carolina who holds a Licentiate in canon law from the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, writes: "Even a cursory glance at most newspapers and magazines, both Catholic and secular, suggests that there is a wide gulf of misunderstanding and mutual suspicion between men and women in the Church - especially between women and the aging, all-male, celibate hierarchy.

The basic story line runs thus: The all-male priesthood is the last redoubt of absolute patriarchal authority left in the Western world, and those in power -particularly in Rome-will do anything to preserve their positions of prestige and prevent women from breaking this last irrational barrier to their full participation in public life.

The story continues by pointing out that every major Protestant communion now has female clergy and by suggesting that Rome's failure to respond to this simple demand of justice is yet another indication that Catholicism-as all reasonable people know-is and always has been a force of oppression and domination. So runs the standard story, but is it true?"  Fr. Newman then proceeds to dismantle this childish notion of "patriarchal oppression" and "misogyny" which is part and parcel of Elizabeth Dreyer's worn-out theology which is driven by the demonic drive to enslave women to the tyranny of a purely masculine criteria.

Women are not made whole by being turned into copy-cat men.  They are truly whole and free when their own genius is respected.

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

The Worcester Commission for Women invites dissident theologian Elizabeth Dreyer to speak at its "Gather Us In" conference

In previous posts I have looked at the Worcester [Massachusetts] Commission for Women and their promotion of New Age spirituality and relativism.  See here and here for example.  I have also examined some of the past speakers of the Commision's "Gather Us In" conference.  See here.

The Commission for Women has invited feminist theologian Elizabeth Dreyer to speak at their 2011 conference.  Ms. Dreyer is one of 16 dissident theologians who signed what is known as The Madeleva Manifesto.  This manifesto states:

"In the tradition of Sister Madeleva Wolff, CSC, we sixteen Madeleva lecturers have been invited to speak a message of hope and courage to women in the church. Reflecting the diversity of gifts bestowed on us by the Spirit, we speak from our particular experiences and vocations, yet share in a universal vision that is faithful to our catholic tradition.

• To women in ministry and theological studies we say: re-imagine what it means to be the whole body of Christ. The way things are now is not the design of God.

• To young women looking for models of prophetic leadership, we say: walk with us as we seek to follow the way of Jesus Christ, who inspires our hope and guides our concerns. The Spirit calls us to a gospel feminism that respects the human dignity of all, and who inspires us to be faithful disciples, to stay in the struggle to overcome oppression of all kinds whether based on gender, sexual orientation, race, or class.

• To women who are tempted by the demons of despair and indifference, we say: re-imagine what it means to be a full human being made in the image of God, and to live and speak this truth in our daily lives.

• To women who suffer the cost of discipleship we say: you are not alone. We remember those who have gone before us, who first held up for us the pearl of great price, the richness of Catholic thought and spirituality. We give thanks to those who continue to mentor us.

• To the young women of the church we say: carry forward the cause of gospel feminism. We will be with you along the way, sharing what we have learned about the freedom, joy and power of contemplative intimacy with God. We ask you to join us in a commitment to far-reaching transformation of church and society in non-violent ways. We deplore, and hold ourselves morally bound, to protest and resist, in church and society, all actions, customs, laws and structures that treat women or men as less than fully human. We pledge ourselves to carry forth the heritage of biblical justice which mandates that all persons share in right relationship with each other, with the cosmos, and with the Creator.

We hold ourselves responsible to look for the holy in unexpected places and persons, and pledge ourselves to continued energetic dialogue about issues of freedom and responsibility for women. We invite others of all traditions to join us in imagining the great shalom of God."

April 29, 2000

Feast of St. Catherine of Siena, lay woman, Doctor of the Church

St. Mary’s College, Notre Dame, Ind.

See here.

Now, in his Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, No. 4, Pope John Paul II said that, “..the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women” and that “this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.”

Canon Law, specifically Canon 750, states that: “each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely, those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.”

The Madeleva Sixteen therefore are setting themselves against the teaching of the Church by treating the ordination of women as “an open question.” Deliberate nonassent is a grave matter. This situation is all the more serious since the judgment of Pope John Paul II (and he invoked his supreme authority in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis) is to be “definitively held by all.”

I've said this before at this Blog: Because nonassent is serious in and of itself, and because deliberate nonassent interferes with communion in the Church and serves to polarize people, it is a grave matter. Pope Pius XII, in Humani generis, explains that once a pope makes a point of settling a matter which is disputed among theologians, it can no longer be treated as an open question.

But for Ms. Dreyer, who believes she is wiser than the Lord Jesus Christ who teaches us through His Church's Magisterium, the ordination of women is more than an open question.  She has demanded it, signing a petition which reads, "Break the Silence on Women's Ordination.  Shatter the Stained Glass Ceiling." 

And Bishop Robert J. McManus has no problem with any of this?  God help the troubled Diocese of Worcester, a diocese which has been crippled with the leaven of infidelity.  The same diocese which welomes practicing homosexuals and dissidents who reject the Church's authoritative and definitive teaching has no place for me.  And yet, I do live a chaste life while adhereing to everything the Church teaches.

Is this the work of the Holy Spirit or of some other spirit?

You decide.

Photo shows Bishop McManus (who couldn't even bother to respond to my letter expressing interest in pursuing a priestly vocation) at a "Gather Us In" conference.

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Massachusetts officials, anxious to advance the radical homosexual agenda, reject their obligation to seek the truth

Dignitatis Humanae, No. 2 of the Second Vatican Council teaches us that, "It is in accordance with their dignity as persons-that is, beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility-that all men should be at once impelled by nature and also bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth, once it is known, and to order their whole lives in accord with the demands of truth.."

But some are not interested in this moral obligation to seek the truth, and especially religious truth, and to adhere to it once it is known.  Such people do not want to hear.  They refuse to open their eyes.  They refuse to be converted.  To such people Our Lord issues a stern rebuke: "He who is of God hears the words of God.  The reason why you do not hear is that you are not of God." (John 8:47).

For such people, the first demand of conscience, which is that the truth be honestly sought, is not essential.  For they have a different concept of conscience.  One which Pope Benedict XVI has rejected.  Our Holy Father explains that liberalism's idea of conscience, "...does not mean man's openness to the ground of his being, the power of perception for what is highest and most essential.  Rather, it appears as subjectivity's protective shell, into which man can escape and there hide from reality."  Such a notion of conscience, ".does not open the way to the redemptive road to truth - which either does not exist or, if it does, is too demanding.  It is the faculty that dispenses with truth.  It thereby becomes the justification for subjectivity, which would not like to have itself called into question.  Similarly, it becomes the justification for social conformity...The obligation to seek the truth terminates, as do any doubts about the general inclination of society and what it has become accustomed to.  Being convinced of oneself, as well as conforming to others, is sufficient.  Man is reduced to his superficial conviction.." (Keynote Address of the Tenth Bishops' Workshop of the National Catholic Bioethics Center, on "Catholic Conscience: Foundation and Formation," February 1991).

The liberal notion of conscience becomes the justification for subjectivity and becomes the faculty that dispenses with truth.  This erroneous notion of conscience was in evidence in Massachusetts as one official called for those who oppose the homosexual agenda to be banned and another dismissed their concerns as "irrelevant and ignorant."  See here.

It was Noam Chomsky who wrote, "If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."  Apparently Massachusetts officials such as Jennie Caissie really do not believe in freedom of expression.  Further evidence of the truth that while the Church proposes, the world imposes.

Monday, May 09, 2011

"When conscience, this bright lamp of the soul, calls 'evil good and good evil,' it is already on the path to the most alarming corruption and the darkest moral blindness."

In his Encyclical Leter Evangelium Vitae (The Gospel of Life), Pope John Paul II reminds us that, "The eclipse of the sense of God and of man inevitably leads to a practical materialism, which breeds individualism, utilitarianism and hedonism. Here too we see the permanent validity of the words of the Apostle: 'And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct' (Rom 1:28). The values of being are replaced by those of having. The only goal which counts is the pursuit of one's own material well-being. The so-called 'quality of life' is interpreted primarily or exclusively as economic efficiency, inordinate consumerism, physical beauty and pleasure, to the neglect of the more profound dimensions-interpersonal, spiritual and religious-of existence.

In such a context suffering, an inescapable burden of human existence but also a factor of possible personal growth, is 'censored', rejected as useless, indeed opposed as an evil, always and in every way to be avoided. When it cannot be avoided and the prospect of even some future well-being vanishes, then life appears to have lost all meaning and the temptation grows in man to claim the right to suppress it.

Within this same cultural climate, the body is no longer perceived as a properly personal reality, a sign and place of relations with others, with God and with the world. It is reduced to pure materiality: it is simply a complex of organs, functions and energies to be used according to the sole criteria of pleasure and efficiency. Consequently, sexuality too is depersonalized and exploited: from being the sign, place and language of love, that is, of the gift of self and acceptance of another, in all the other's richness as a person, it increasingly becomes the occasion and instrument for self-assertion and the selfish satisfaction of personal desires and instincts. Thus the original import of human sexuality is distorted and falsified, and the two meanings, unitive and procreative, inherent in the very nature of the conjugal act, are artificially separated..." (No. 23).

Proponents of absolute sexual permissiveness and the Culture of Sodomy are most anxious to paint a sexual morality in accordance with the Natural Law and the moral teaching of the Catholic Church as "harmful" and even "dangerous."  The Church and pro-family individuals and groups must be demonized as being backward, as being unbalanced freaks who are comparable to Nazis or racists.  As "ignorant and irrelevant." See here.

Should this surprise us?  It is the inevitable result of embracing a theology from Hell.  Because so many today follow the doctrines of demons, "A large part of contemporary society looks sadly like that humanity which Paul describes in his Letter to the Romans. It is composed 'of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth' (1:18): having denied God and believing that they can build the earthly city without him, 'they became futile in their thinking' so that 'their senseless minds were darkened' (1:21); 'claiming to be wise, they became fools' (1:22), carrying out works deserving of death, and 'they not only do them but approve those who practise them' (1:32). When conscience, this bright lamp of the soul (cf. Mt 6:22-23), calls 'evil good and good evil' (Is 5:20), it is already on the path to the most alarming corruption and the darkest moral blindness." (Evangelium Vitae, No. 24).

And so it can be seen that we are already on the path toward the most alarming corruption and the darkest moral blindness.  The path we are on leads directly to the City of Satan and the Reign of Antichrist. Inflated in their rebellion against the God-Man, the Sons of Satan, those committed toward the atheistic program of attacking the Church from without and undermining it from within in preparation for the Man-God, will continue to intensify their persecution of craftiness and subversion until it reaches its culmination in an explosion of hate-filled rage which will bear much blood and death.

How blind our sin-sick society has become.  Recently, officials of the Archdiocese of Boston accused Catholics faithful to the Magisterium of "harming the community."  But the same officials do not accuse Governor Deval Patrick, or any of those who have promoted Barbara Lenk's nomination to the Massachusetts SJC, of harming the community or the Common Good.

Sunday, May 08, 2011

Lesbian Judge Barbara Lenk is confirmed as Republican Jennie Caissie refers to pro-family individuals and groups as "irrelevant and ignorant."

Mass Resistance is reporting that lesbian judge Barbara Lenk has been confirmed, in a 5-3 vote, for the Massachusetts SJC:

"On Wednesday the elected Governor’s Council met to vote on the nomination of Barbara Lenk to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. As MassResistance has reported and documented, Lenk is an 'out' lesbian activist with troubling record of activism. She brings a stated philosophy that judges can 'evolve' the law, and an apparent intent to promote social change from the bench. Governor Patrick, who owes the homosexual lobby for its tireless support in his election, touted his nomination of Lenk as an important 'first'....Lenk's nomination was an immediate red flag for conservatives. Knowing that, the liberal establishment even more fiercely pushed her confirmation. Their fear tactics came out in force. If you mentioned anything about Lenk's 'sexual orientation' then you were an ignorant bigot. That's been the public party line and it was largely effective.

Thus, just about all the Massachusetts pro-family groups stayed on the sidelines. Only MassResistance, the Catholic Action League, and Joe Ureneck’s fatherhood groups came to the hearing to testify, or participated in any meaningful way. And in the media, only Boston Herald columnist Howie Carr was unafraid to tell the truth. Talk show host Jeff Katz was also vocal in opposition to Lenk, but he was careful to state that her 'sexual orientation' didn’t bother him at all.

As we reported, the pro-family people who came to the public hearing were straightforward in their concerns. The testimony generally centered around (1) Lenk's pro-gay judicial record and her apparent bias toward the homosexual movement; (2) her public self-identification as an 'out' lesbian in a same-sex 'marriage' (thus supporting with the Goodridge decision) – and how that will be used in the public schools and elsewhere; (3) her pro-activist judicial philosophy; (4) concerns about her position on fathers' rights; and (5) her apparent support for the homosexual-themed (and anti-Semitic) play 'Falsettos' produced at a local school.

And of course, it's this same Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court that gave us the 'same-sex marriage' Goodridge decision -- the gold standard for radical judicial activism. It shouldn't be considered a surprise that these things would be on peoples' minds. These seemed to be reasonable concerns regarding a judge who would be a final guardian of the Commonwealth’s civil rights. But members of the Governor’s Council obviously saw that differently. At the public hearing, a few of them took the unprecedented action of berating, insulting, and badgering the pro-family witnesses. As we reported, it was terrible. Then on Wednesday, just before the vote, two others stood up to speak about the upcoming vote and continued that bizarre and offensive behavior...Councilor Marilyn Devaney made the outrageous statement that people with pro-family values on homosexuality should not be allowed to speak at all. Devaney told the Council and the attendees:  'I am not responsible for the public who spoke at that hearing. I don't know them. If I was presiding I would have gaveled out of order speakers who used demeaning and inappropriate language.'

Demeaning and inappropriate language from members of the public? That, of course, is a reference to the testimony of pro-family speakers that day. Well, excuse us for having traditional values and voicing our concerns about people who will be judges over us. And obviously Councilor Devaney has some issues with the First Amendment. This is among the most offensive things we've ever heard a public official say, and we’ve heard a lot. And what about the Councilors who actually were demeaning and inappropriate to us? Apparently not a problem for Devaney. Devaney also said that because the actions of people like us other qualified homosexuals were afraid to apply for judgeships, and that bothers her greatly.

But then Jennie Caissie, the newly elected Republican, was equally as offensive. She stood up right after Devaney and said, 'I want to begin by thanking Judge Lenk for her candid testimony at the hearing, for her professionalism, and her stoic presentation in the light of some very unprofessional and irrelevant questioning. I rise because I want to set the basis for my vote and distinguish myself from those irrelevant and ignorant questions.'  'Irrelevant and ignorant?' Again, this is incredibly outrageous. What arrogance. This woman, like Devaney, has no business being an elected official. The 2012 elections can’t come fast enough."

As I said here:

The Homosexual Hate Movement is indeed totalitarian. It seeks to impose its agenda and to punish those who refuse to accept or condone illicit same-sex relationships. For example, British and Canadian homosexual activists want to punish the African State of Malawi because it will not recognize same-sex liaisons...Radical homosexual activists are engaged in a psychological attack in the form of propaganda aimed at those who are opposed to homosexuality. Their goal is to convert the mind and the will. As homosexual activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen explain in their book "After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear & Hatred of Gays in the 90s," 'Desensitization aims at lowering the intensity of antigay emotional reactions to a level approximating sheer indifference; Jamming attempts to blockade pr counteract the rewarding 'pride in prejudice' attaching to homohatred a pre-existing, and punishing, sense of shame in being a bigot....Both Desensitization and Jamming...are mere preludes to our highest - though necessarily very long-range - goal, which is Conversion. It isn't enough that antigay bigots should become confused about us, or even indifferent to us - we are safest, in the long run, if we can actually make them like us.

Conversion aims at just this...By Conversion we actually mean something far more profoundly threatening to the American Way of Life, without which no truly sweeping social change can occur. We mean conversion of the average American's emotions, mind, and will, through a planned psychological attack , in the form of propaganda fed to the nation via the media.' (p. 153).

The Homosexual Hate Movement is, by its own admission, engaged in psychological warfare through the use of propaganda to convert people to its agenda. And even that this conversion is 'profoundly threatening to the American way of life.' And when these radical activists fail to get their way, as we've witnessed in California and in other parts of the country, they can become violent. Indeed, this hate movement will use and all means - including economic sanctions - to impose its ideology. And that is totalitarianism."

Saturday, May 07, 2011

Air Force Opens Satanic Chapel for Witches

Jean Bodin, in his work "De la Demonomanie des Sorciers," writes, "Sorcier est celuy qui par moyens Diaboliques sciemment s'efforce de paruenir a quel que chose" - A sorcerer is one who by commerce with the Devil has a full intention of attaining his own ends."  The Air Force Academy has decided to open a chapel for such servants of the Devil.  See here.

What does the Catechism of the Catholic Church have to say about such activity?  Paragraph 2117 explains that, "All practices of magic or sorcery, by which one attempts to tame occult powers, so as to place them at one's service and have a supernatural power over others - even if this were for the sake of restoring their health - are gravely contrary to the virtue of religion. These practices are even more to be condemned when accompanied by the intention of harming someone, or when they have recourse to the intervention of demons. Wearing charms is also reprehensible. Spiritism often implies divination or magical practices; the Church for her part warns the faithful against it. Recourse to so-called traditional cures does not justify either the invocation of evil powers or the exploitation of another's credulity."

In 1974, the American Council of Witches issued the "Principles of Wiccan Belief." No. 10 states: "Our only animosity towards Christianity, or toward any other religion or philosophy of life, is to the extent that its institutions have claimed to be 'the only way,' and have sought to deny freedom to others and to suppress other ways of religious practice and belief."

So Wicca acknowledges an "animosity" toward Christianity which teaches that salvation is in Jesus alone (Acts 4:12). The question presents itself: what does this animosity consist of?

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

Even some who profess to be Catholic have associated themselves with wiccans/pagans and have failed to understand that their practices are "gravely contrary to the virtue of religion."   

Pope Benedict XVI has warned that, "There is..a consciously antirationalist response to the experience that 'everything is relative,' a complex reality that is lumped together under the title of New Age. The way out of the dilemma of relativism is now sought, not in a new encounter of the 'I' with the 'Thou' or the 'We,' but in overcoming subjective consciousness, in a re-entry into the dance of the cosmos through ecstasy. As in the case of Gnosis in the ancient world, this way believes itself to be fully in tune with all the teachings and the claims of science, making use of scientific knowledge of every kind (biology, psychology, sociology, physics). At the same time, however, it offers against this background a a completely antirationalist pattern of religion, a modern 'mysticism': the absolute is, not something to be believed in, but something to be experienced. God is not a person distinct from the world; rather, he is the spiritual energy that is at work throughout the universe. Religion means bringing my self into tune with the cosmic whole, the transcending of all divisions...Objectifying reason, New Age thinking tells us, closes our way to the mystery of reality; existing as the self shuts us out from the fullness of cosmic reality; it destroys the harmony of the whole and is the real reason for our being unredeemed. Redemption lies in breaking down the limits of the self, in plunging into the fullness of life and all that is living, in going back home to the universe....The gods are returning. They have become more credible than God. Aboriginal rites must be renewed in which the self is initiated into the mysteries of the universe and freed from its own self. There are many reasons for the renewal of pre-Christian religions and cults that is being widely undertaken today. If there is no truth shared by everyone, a truth that is valid simply because it is true, then Christianity is merely a foreign import, a form of spiritual imperialism, which needs to be shaken off just as much as political imperialism. If what takes place in the sacraments is not the encounter with the one living God of all men, then they are empty rituals that mean nothing and give us nothing and, at best, allow us to sense the numinous element that is actively present in all religions. It then seems to make better sense to seek after what was originally our own than to permit alien and antiquated things to be imposed on us. But above all, if the 'rational intoxication' of the Christian mystery cannot make us intoxicated with God, then we just have to conjure up the real, concrete intoxication of effective ecstasies, the passionate power of which catches us up and turns us, at least for a moment, into gods..." (Truth and Tolerance, pp. 126-128).

Already, there are those who are trying to marginalize Christians in the military while promoting satanism and homosexuality.  See here and here.

Thursday, May 05, 2011

A word of advice to parents from Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, Doctor of the Church

Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, a moral theologian and Doctor of the Church who founded the Redemptorists, lived from 1696 to 1787.  This holy and learned Saint has some profound advice for parents.  He says:
"The gospel tells us, that a good plant cannot produce bad fruit, and that a bad one cannot produce good fruit. We learn from this, that a good father brings up good children. But, if the parents are wicked, how can the children be virtuous? Our Lord says, in the same gospel, Do men gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles? (Matt. 7:16). So, it is impossible, or rather very difficult, to find children virtuous, who are brought up by immoral parents. Fathers and mothers, be attentive to this sermon, which is of great importance to the eternal salvation of yourselves and of your children. Be attentive, young men and young women, who have not as yet chosen a state in life. If you wish to marry, learn the obligations which you contract with regard to the education of your children, and learn also, that if you do not fulfill them, you shall bring yourselves and all your children to damnation. I shall divide this into two points. In the first, I shall show how important it is to bring up children in habits of virtue; and, in the second, I shall show with what care and diligence a parent ought to labor to bring them up well.

A father owes two obligations to his children; he is bound to provide for their corporal wants, and to educate them in the habits of virtue. It is not necessary to say anything else about the first obligation, than, there are some fathers more cruel than the most ferocious of wild beasts, for these squander away in eating, drinking, and pleasure, all their property, or all the fruits of their industry, and allow their children to die of hunger. Let us discuss education, which is the subject of this article.

It is certain that a child's future good or bad conduct depends on his being brought up well or poorly. Nature itself teaches every parent to attend to the education of his offspring. God gives children to parents, not that they may assist the family, but that they may be brought up in the fear of God, and be directed in the way of eternal salvation. "We have," says Saint John Chrysostom, "a great deposit in children, let us attend to them with great care." Children have not been given to parents as a present, which they may dispose of as they please, but as a trust, for which, if lost through their negligence; they must render an account to God.

One of the great Fathers says that on the day of judgment, parents will have to render an account for all the sins of their children. So, he who teaches his son to live well, shall die a happy and tranquil death. He that teaches his son...when he died, he was not sorrowful, neither was he confounded before his enemies (Eccl. 30: 3,5). And he will save his soul by means of his children, that is, by the virtuous education which he has given them. She shall be saved through childbearing (I Tim. 2:15).

But, on the other hand, a very uneasy and unhappy death will be the lot of those who have labored only to increase the possessions, or to multiply the honors of their family, or who have sought only to lead a life of ease and pleasure, but have not watched over the morals of their children. Saint Paul says that such parents are worse than infidels. But if any man have not care of his own, and especially of those of his house, he has denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel (I Tim. 5:8).

Were fathers or mothers to lead a life of piety and continual prayer, and to communicate every day, they should be damned if they neglected the care of their children.

If all fathers fulfilled their duty of watching over the education of their children, we should have but few crimes. By the bad education which parents give to their offspring, they cause their children, says Saint John Chrysostom, to rush into many grievous vices; and thus they deliver them up to the hands of the executioner. So it was, in one town, a parent, who was the cause of all the irregularities of his children, was justly punished for his crimes with greater severity than the children themselves. Great indeed is the misfortune of the child that has vicious parents, who are incapable of bringing up their children in the fear of God, and who, when they see their children engage in dangerous friendships and in quarrels, instead of correcting and chastising them, they take compassion on them, and say, "What can I do? They are young; hopefully they will grow out of it." What wicked words, what a cruel education! Do you hope that when your children grow up, they will become saints? Listen to what Solomon says, "A young man, according to his way, even when he is old, he will not depart from it" (Proverbs 22:6). A young man who has contracted a habit of sin, will not abandon it even in his old age. His bones, says holy Job, will be filled with the vices of his youth, and they will sleep with him in the dust (Job 20:11). When a young person has lived in evil habits, his bones will be filled with the vices of his youth, so that he will carry them to the grave, and the impurities, blasphemies, and hatred to which he was accustomed in his youth, will accompany him to the grave, and will sleep with him after his bones are reduced to dust and ashes. It is very easy, when they are small, to train children to habits of virtue, but, when they have come to manhood, it is equally difficult to correct them, if they have learned habits of vice.

Let us come to the second point, that is, to the means of bringing up children in the practice of virtue. I beg you, fathers and mothers, to remember what I now say to you, from on it depends the eternal salvation of your own souls, and of the souls of your children.

Saint Paul teaches sufficiently, in a few words, in what the proper education of children consists. He says that it consists in discipline and correction. And you, fathers, provoke not your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and correction of the Lord (Ephes. 5:4). Discipline, which is the same as the religious regulation of the morals of children, implies an obligation of educating them in habits of virtue by word and example. First, by words: a good father should often assemble his children, and instill into them the holy fear of God. It was in this manner that Tobias brought up his little son. The father taught him from his childhood to fear the Lord and to fly from sin. And from infancy he taught him to fear God and abstain from sin (Tobias 1:10). The wise man says, that a well educated son is the support and consolation of his father. Instruct your son, and he will refresh you, and will give delight to your soul (Prov. 29:17). But, as a well instructed son is the delight of his father's soul, so an ignorant child is a source of sorrow to a father's heart, for the ignorance of his obligations as a Christian is always accompanied with a bad life.

It was related that, in the year 1248, an ignorant priest was commanded, in a certain synod, to make a discourse. He was greatly agitated by the command and the Devil appearing to him, instructed him to say, "The rectors of infernal darkness salute the rectors of parishes, and thank them for their negligence in instructing the people; because from ignorance proceeds the misconduct and the damnation of many."

The same is true of negligent parents. In the first place, a parent ought to instruct his children in the truths of the Faith, and particularly in the four principle mysteries. First, that there is but One God, the Creator and Lord of all things; secondly, that this God is a remunerator, Who, in the next life, will reward the good with the eternal glory of Paradise, and will punish the wicked with the everlasting torments of Hell; thirdly, the mystery of the Most Holy Trinity, that is, that in God there are Three Persons, Who are only One God, because They have but One Essence; fourthly, the mystery of the Incarnation of the Divine Word, the Son of God, and True God, Who became man in the womb of Mary, and suffered and died for our salvation.

Should a father or mother say, "I myself do not know these mysteries," can such an excuse be admitted? Can one sin excuse another? If you are ignorant of these mysteries, you are obliged to learn them, and afterwards to teach them to your children. At least, send your children to a worthy catechist. What a miserable thing to see so many fathers and mothers, who are unable to instruct their children in the most necessary truths of the Faith, and who, instead of sending their sons and daughters to Christian doctrine, employ them in occupations of little account, and when they are grown up, they do not know what is meant by mortal sin, by Hell, or eternity. They do not even know the Creed, the Our Father, or the Hail Mary, which every Christian is bound to learn under pain of mortal sin.

Religious parents not only instruct their children in these things, which are the most important, but they also teach them the acts which ought to be made every morning after rising. They teach them first, to thank God for having preserved their life during the night, secondly to offer to God all their good actions which they will perform, and all the pains which they will suffer during the day, thirdly, to implore of Jesus Christ and Our Most Holy Mother Mary to preserve them from all sin during the day. They teach them to make, every evening, an examination of conscience and an act of contrition. They also teach them to make every day, the acts of Faith, Hope and Charity, to recite the Rosary, and to visit the Blessed Sacrament. Some good fathers of families are careful to get a book of meditations to read, and to have mental prayer in common for half an hour every day. This is what the Holy Ghost exhorts you to practice. Do you have children? Instruct them and bow down their neck from their childhood (Eccl. 7:25). Endeavor to train them from their infancy to these religious habits, and when they grow up, they will persevere in them. Accustom them also to go to confession and communion every week.

It is also very useful to infuse good maxims into the infant minds of children. What ruin is brought upon children by their father who teaches them worldly maxims! "You must," some parents say to their children, "seek the esteem and applause of the world. God is merciful; He takes compassion on certain sins." How miserable the young man is who sins in obedience to such maxims. Good parents teach very different maxims to their children. Queen Blanche, the mother of Saint Louis, King of France, used to say to him, "My son, I would rather see you dead in my arms, than in the state of sin." So then, let it be your practice also to infuse into your children certain maxims of salvation, such as, What will it profit us to gain the whole world, if we lose our own souls? Everything on this earth has an end, but eternity never ends. Let all be lost, provided God is not lost. One of these maxims well impressed on the mind of a young person, will preserve him always in the grace of God.

But parents are obliged to instruct their children in the practice of virtue, not only by words, but still more by example. If you give your children bad example, how can you expect that they will lead good lives? When a dissolute young man is corrected for a fault, he answers, "Why do you censure me, when my father does worse?" The children will complain of an ungodly father, because for his sake they are in reproach (Eccl. 41:10). How is it possible for a son to be moral and religious, when he has had the example of a father who uttered blasphemies and obscenities, who spent the entire day in the tavern, in games and drunkenness, who was in the habit of frequenting houses of bad fame, and of defrauding his neighbor? Do you expect your son to go frequently to confession, when you yourself approach the confessional scarcely once a year?

It is related in a fable, that a crab one day rebuked its young for walking crookedly. They replied, "Father, let us see you walk." The father walked before them more crookedly than they did. This is what happens to the parent who gives bad example. Hence, he has not even courage to correct his children for the sins which he himself commits.

According to Saint Thomas, scandalous parents compel, in a certain manner, their children to lead a bad life. "They are not," says Saint Bernard, "fathers, but murderers, they kill, not the bodies, but the souls of their children." It is useless for parents to say: "My children have been born with bad dispositions." This is not true, for, Seneca says, "You err, if you think that vices are born with us; they have been engrafted." Vices are not born with your children, but have been communicated to them by the bad example of the parents. If you had given good example to your sons, they would not be so vicious as they are. So parents, frequent the Sacraments, learn from the sermons, recite the Rosary every day, abstain from all obscene language, from detraction, and from quarrels, and you will see that your children follow your example. It is particularly necessary to train children to virtue in their infancy, Bow down their neck from their childhood, for when they have grown up, and contracted bad habits, it will be very difficult for you to produce, by words, any amendment in their lives.

To bring up children in the discipline of the Lord, it is also necessary to take away from them the occasion of doing evil. A father must forbid his children to go out at night, or to go to a house in which their virtue might be exposed to danger, or to keep bad company. Cast out, said Sarah to Abraham, this bondswoman and her son (Gen. 21:10). She wished to have Ismael, the son of Agar the bondswoman, banished from her house, that her son Isaac might not learn his vicious habits. Bad companions are the ruin of young persons. A father should not only remove the evil which he witnesses, but he is also bound to inquire after the conduct of his children, and to seek information from family and from outsiders regarding the places which his children frequent when they leave home, regarding their occupations and companions. A father ought to forbid his children ever to bring into his house stolen goods. When Tobias heard the bleating of a goat in his house, he said, Take care, perhaps it is stolen, go, restore it to its owners (Tobias 2:21).

Parents should prohibit their children from all games, which bring destruction on their families and on their own souls, and also dances, suggestive entertainment, and certain dangerous conversations and parties of pleasures. A father should remove from his house books of romances, which pervert young persons, and all bad books which contain pernicious maxims, tales of obscenity, or of profane love. He should not permit his daughters to be alone with men, whether young or old. But some will say, "But this man tutors my daughter; he is a saint." The saints are in Heaven, but the saints that are on earth are flesh, and by proximate occasions, they may become devils.

Another obligation of parents is to correct the faults of the family. "Bring them up in the discipline and correction of the Lord." There are fathers and mothers who witness faults in the family and remain silent. Through fear of displeasing their children, some fathers neglect to correct them, but if you saw your child falling into a pool of water, and in danger of being drowned, would it not be savage cruelty not to catch him by the hair, and save his life? He that spares the rod hates his son (Prov. 13:24). If you love your children, correct them, and while they are growing up, chastise them, even with the rod, as often as it may be necessary.

I say, with the rod, but not with a stick; for you must correct them like a father, and not like a prison guard. You must be careful not to beat them when you are in a passion, for you will then be in danger of beating them with too much severity, and the correction will be without fruit, for then they believe that the chastisement is the effect of anger, and not of a desire on your part to see them amend their lives. I have also said, that you should correct them while they are growing up , for when they arrive at manhood, your correction will be of little use. You must then abstain from correcting them with the hand; otherwise, they will become more perverse, and will lose their respect for you. What use is it to correct children with injurious words and with imprecations? Deprive them of some part of their meals, of certain articles of dress, or shut them up in their room. I have said enough. Draw from this discourse the conclusion, that he who has brought up his children badly, will be severely punished, and that he who has trained them in the habits of virtue, will receive a great reward."

He who has brought up his children badly will be severely punished.  Reflect very carefully on those words.  Today many parents are following the doctrines of devils as they train their children in the ways of perversity.  Just recently, Bonnie J. Toomey, a columnist for the Sentinel & Enterprise, provided us all with her demonic ideas regarding the training of children.  Those responsible for publishing her devilish ideas will also have to render an account for this travesty.

Elsewhere, a mother is encouraging her little boy to dress in pink, sparkly dresses and to be a "princess boy."  In fact, the mainstream media have really played this up.  And this comes as no surprise.  For the mainstream media is fully supportive of educating children for Hell.  We have a sobering reminder from Saint Faustina of the Divine Mercy messages as to the reality of Hell.

Parents, do not wait for your parish priest to impart Gospel values to your children.  Many of our priests have become, in the Words of Our Lady, "mute dogs" who will abandon your children - as they have abandoned you - to the wolves.

Find yourself a good and faithful priest.  Educate your children using the Holy Scriptures, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and the papal encyclicals.  Rely on the Church Fathers and Doctors.  Make your home an ark.  For the smoke of Satan has entered even into the Church.  There are devils both within and without the Church who are determined to drag as many souls as possible to Hell with them.
Site Meter