Habemus Papam

See here

What's in a name?

The significance of Pope Leo XII provides us with a clue. See here.

On the Feast of the Apparition of Saint Michael:

St. Michael the Archangel, 

defend us in battle. 

Be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. 

May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, 

and do thou, 

O Prince of the heavenly hosts, 

by the power of God, 

thrust into hell Satan, 

and all the evil spirits, 

who prowl about the world 

seeking the ruin of souls. Amen. .

O glorious prince St. Michael, 

chief and commander of the heavenly hosts, 

guardian of souls, vanquisher of rebel spirits, 

servant in the house of the Divine King

and our admirable conductor, 

you who shine with excellence

and superhuman virtue deliver us from all evil,

who turn to you with confidence

and enable us by your gracious protection

to serve God more and more faithfully every day.

A balanced perspective here

Chico, Harpo, Groucho, Gummo, Zeppo and Reinhardo

 As noted here, German Cardinal Reinhard Marx said in an interview published on Thursday that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is “not set in stone” and “one is also allowed to doubt what it says.”

While Reinhard Marx is anxious to build a Queer Church, where homosexual and lesbian sex are sacramentalized, the teaching of the Church is most clear. The First Vatican Council:

"For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles."

In his Apostolic Constitution Fidei Depositum, Pope John Paul II said that, "The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved 25 June last and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority, is a statement of the Church's faith and of Catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, Apostolic Tradition and the Church's Magisterium. I declare it to be a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion and a sure norm for teaching the faith. May it serve the renewal to which the Holy Spirit ceaselessly calls the Church of God, the Body of Christ, on her pilgrimage to the undiminished light of the kingdom!"

A sure norm for teaching the faith!  But Cardinal Marx the clown believes himself wiser than all those who worked on this Catechism. And just who was that?

Again, Pope (Saint) John Paul II:

"It can be said that this catechism is the result of the collaboration of the whole Episcopate of the Catholic Church, who generously accepted my invitation to share responsibility for an enterprise which directly concerns the life of the Church. This response elicits in me a deep feeling of joy, because the harmony of so many voices truly expresses what could be called the symphony of the faith. The achievement of this catechism thus reflects the collegial nature of the Episcopate: it testifies to the Church's catholicity."

What this Marx brother forgets is that 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. Such confused souls will willingly embrace the Man of Sin when he enters the Church to rule her.

The Church remains spotless even when Her members sin...

In these times of scandal it is critical to remember that the Church remains spotless even when Her members sin. There is absolutely no doubt that the human history of the Church, like all of human history, has its dark pages. But if anyone cares to take an objective look at this history, one must quickly acknowledge that the doctrine of the Church has always implicitly condemned abuses introduced by Her members.

In the words of Dr. Dietrich Von Hildebrand, "There were sinners in the Church yesterday and there are sinners in the Church today. But the Church Herself, in her divine teaching, emerges gloriously unspotted in a history stained by human weaknesses, errors, imperfections, and sins." In the words of the great Cardinal Journet:

"All contradictions are eliminated as soon as we understand that the members of the Church do indeed sin, but they do so by their betraying the Church. The Church is thus not without sinners, but She is without sin. The Church as person is responsible for penance. She is not responsible for sins....The members of the Church themselves - laity, clerics, priests, Bishops, and Popes - who disobey the Church are responsible for their sins, but the Church as person is not responsible...It is forgotten that the Church as person is the Bride of Christ, 'Whom He has purchased with His own blood.'" (Acts 20:28).

Do not use scandals as an excuse to leave the Church.  Faithful Catholics need to stay and pray, to fight against the forces of dissent and perversion.

Our Lady has assured us that, in the end, her Immaculate Heart Will triumph.  In the end, Our Lady's heel* will crush the Devil's head.

*  See here

Francis knew McCarrick was a serial predator...

Archbishop Vigano told the truth about Francis and members of the Church's hierarchy who protected Cardinal McCarrick.

The National Catholic Register reports that: "Aboard the papal plane, the Holy Father declined to confirm or deny that he knew about the U.S. archbishop’s sexual misconduct in 2013, yet reinstated him in ministry."

Such comes as no surprise.  Writing for The Spectator, Damian Thompson notes that, "Pope Francis stands accused this morning of covering up the crimes of ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of Washington, one of the most senior and sinister sex abusers in the history of the Catholic Church.

The allegation comes from the Vatican’s former apostolic nuncio to the United States, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, 77, who has called on the Pope to resign.

In a devastating 11-page written testament, Viganò says Francis lifted severe sanctions imposed on McCarrick for sexual wrongdoing by Pope Benedict XVI, the existence of which has not been made public until now.

Viganò writes that he told Francis in person in 2013 that McCarrick ‘had corrupted generations of seminarians and priests and Pope Benedict ordered him to withdraw to a life of prayer and penance’.

But, says the former nuncio, the new Pope decided instead to cover up for the retired Archbishop of Washington – and made him one of his most trusted advisers.

‘He knew from at least June 23, 2013 that McCarrick was a serial predator,’ writes Archbishop Viganò. ‘He knew that he was a corrupt man, [but] he covered for him to the bitter end.’

Only when the media revealed last month that McCarrick was suspected of the abuse of a minor did Francis take action ‘to save his image in the media.'"

The Church must face up to the homosexual problem and rid itself of filth and perversion

Church Militant reports on the experience of John DeFilippis, Ph.D., as a seminarian under the then-archbishop of Newark, Theodore McCarrick.

DeFilippis writes:

"I will never forget what happened in May of 1993 when the then-archbishop of Newark, Theodore McCarrick, visited my home parish to preside at a special Mass. I had just graduated from college, and given that I was planning to enroll in the seminary later that year, my pastor decided to showcase me by assigning me as lector for the ceremony. The Archbishop arrived, we met, and after Mass we had another brief discussion before he departed.

I asked one of our priests how he thought things went. 'I can see that he really liked you,' he said. 'In fact, I bet you'll be getting a call this summer to visit his shore house. And I'll even bet that you're the seminarian who winds up getting to sleep with the Archbishop.'

I was dumbfounded by his statement. However this priest did have an unusual sense of humor, so I dismissed his comment as a bad joke and moved on.

Thankfully, I never got a call that summer. But after entering the seminary in September, I quickly began to learn the ugly truth going on behind the scenes in the archdiocese. Archbishop McCarrick really did have a shore house. He really did invite seminarians to go down on weekends. And he always invited just enough seminarians so that one of them would be forced to sleep with him in his bed."

As I've said many times over the last twenty-five years, the Church must face up to the homosexual problem and root out perversion from its midst.

Before entering into any state of life, a divine vocation is necessary. This because without such a vocation, it is difficult if not impossible to fulfil the obligations which pertain to that state and to obtain salvation. This is particularly true for the ministerial priesthood or any other ecclesiastical state. After all, it was Our Lord Who said: "He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up another way, the same is a thief and a robber" (John 10:1).

Consequently, the man who takes holy orders without a call from God is convicted of theft in taking by force a dignity which God has not called him to and does not desire to bestow upon him. This is the teaching of Saint Paul:

"Neither doth any man take the honor to himself, but he that is called by God, as Aaron was. So Christ also did not glorify Himself that He might be made a high priest; but he that said unto Him: Thou art My Son; this day I have begotten Thee." (Hebrews 5:4,5).

It matters not then how learned or prudent or holy a man may be. No man may place himself into the holy sanctuary unless he is first called and introduced to the same by Almighty God. Jesus Our Lord was certainly the most learned and holy among all men, full of grace and truth (John 1:14), the Son of Man in Whom were (and are) hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Colossians 2:3). And yet, Jesus required a divine call to assume the dignity of the priesthood.

This is the teaching of the Council of Trent. That the Church regards the man who assumes the priesthood without a vocation not as a minister but as a robber:

"Decernit sancta Synodus eos qui ea (ministeria) propria temeritate sibi sumunt, omnes, non Ecclesiae ministros, sed fures et latrones per ostium non ingressos habendos esse" (Session 23, cap. 4).

Those who seize the priesthood without a vocation may labor and toil exhaustively. But their labors will profit them very little before God. In fact, the very works which would be considered of much merit when performed by others will deserve chastisement for such souls. Because such men are not in conformity with the divine will, not having a vocation to the state of life which they have usurped, the Lord Jesus will not accept their toils:

"I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of hosts, and I will not receive a gift of your hand" (Malachi 1:10).

Not only will God refuse the gifts of their hand, He will punish the works of the minister who has entered the sanctuary without being called; without a vocation:

"What stranger soever cometh to it (the Tabernacle) shall be slain." (Numbers 1:51).

Bearing all of this in mind, please read the following which first appeared in The Wanderer and may be found at the Faithfulvoice.com website:

On October 1, 1986, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published an instruction entitled, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on Pastoral Service for Homosexual Persons, signed by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and approved by Pope John Paul II.

In this Instruction, Cardinal Ratzinger writes, "It is necessary to point out that the particular inclination of a homosexual person, though not a sin in itself, nevertheless constitutes a more or less strong tendency to an intrinsically evil behavior from the moral standpoint. For this reason, the very inclination should be considered as objectively disordered." (No. 3).

This would appear to be especially significant since Canon 1040 of the Code of Canon Law states that: "Persons who are affected by a perpetual impediment, which is called an irregularity, or a simple impediment, are prevented from receiving orders." Now, irregularities arise either from defect (ex defectu) or from crime (ex delicto). It seems clear to me that a homosexual inclination, which Cardinal Ratzinger has referred to as "objectively disordered," constitutes an irregularity ex defectu.

In fact, when asked by a Bishop if it is licit to confer priestly ordination to men with manifest homosexual tendencies, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments replied with a letter signed by Jorge Cardinal Medina Estevez which stated that, "Ordination to the diaconate and the priesthood of homosexual men or men with homosexual tendencies is absolutely inadvisable and imprudent and, from the pastoral point of view, very risky. A homosexual person, or one with a homosexual tendency is not, therefore, fit to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders."

Homosexual perversion is running rampant throughout the Church.  It's time to cleanse the Temple.  If we don't, God will.  And the chastisement which the Church is currently suffering through will pale in comparison to that which will result if we don't clean house ourselves.

Related reading here.

Because President Donald Trump opposes the pedophile maggot culture, the hatred against him is intensifying

As reported here, "Donald Trump has vowed to tackle the child abduction crisis in the United States by giving pedophiles a fast trial resulting in the death penalty. In October of 2012, Donald Trump tweeted that there are 'too many incidents' and something 'must be done about these perverts.'"

This is yet another reason why the "cultural elites" who represent our maggot culture want to destroy Trump at any cost.  They secretly, and sometimes not so secretly, are in favor of pedophilia.

It should come as no surprise that The New York Times published a 1,225-word obituary entitled "Harry Hay, Early Proponent of Gay Rights, Dies at 90."  For, as Dudley Clendinen wrote in this long eulogy, Hay was the founder of the Mattachine Society which, "proved to be the catalyst for the American gay rights movement." (Dudley Clendinen, "Harry Hay, Early Proponent of Gay Rights, Dies at 90," The New York Times, October 25, 2002).

Harry Hay, who deserted the Catholic Church after having homosexual relations at the age of 14 (with a sailor ten years his senior), was himself a proponent of man-boy sex and gave a speech at an October 7, 1984 conference of NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association) in San Francisco.

Harry Hay spoke frequently at NAMBLA events and periodically came to the defense of the organization when other homosexual groups attempted to prevent it from partipating in "Gay Pride" parades.

So, one of the founders - some would say the founder - of the American "gay rights" movement, was a proponent of sexual relations between men and boys. Why doesn't this trouble those in the mainstream media?  Because the mainstream media has bought fully into the radical homosexual agenda and is incapable of any objectivity whatsoever with regard to the subject of homosexuality.

Within the Church, homosexuals and pedophiles are now in control and are most anxious to have young boys served up to satisfy their filthy desires. See here.

A Cardinal who preyed upon boys has finally been removed.  The question remains: What did the Vatican know and when?  See here.

Pray for President Trump.  He is a man who hasn't bought into the Culture of Pederasty.  And, because of this, those who have embraced the filth hate him. Even to the point of suggesting that his son should be served up to pedophiles. See here.

Cardinal Burke: Bishops and Vatican have failed to defend morality

Cardinal Burke notes how our Bishops and the Vatican have failed to defend morality.  In a recent interview, His Eminence, speaking of the crisis in the Church, Said: “The situation in the Church is very alarming, first of all, because the fundamental truths of faith are undermined, put into question.”

He went on to lament that “there is no strong leadership from Rome that could explain and clarify these matters.”

The time for lying is over.  I have been saying this for years.  Back in 2009, Archbishop Charles Chaput noted that, "40 years of American Catholic complacency and poor formation are bearing exactly the fruit we should have expected...We can't talk about following St. Paul and converting our culture until we sober up and get honest about what we've allowed ourselves to become.  We need to stop lying to each other..." (See here).

The lying must stop.  For this to happen, we need priests and Bishops who fear God more than they do men.  Cowards will not lead us out of the valley of death.  Only shepherds who have the spiritual strength, the Cardinal Gift of Fortitude, to brave the risk of worldly criticism, will be able to lead the American Catholic Church out of the valley of the Culture of Death and back on the road to the Civilization of Love which Pope John Paul II spoke of so often.

Why have so many priests succumbed to fear?  Why is it that their preaching no longer points out sin?  Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange provides us with an answer:


"The reason for this is not difficult to find.  A sermon is the result of the combined effort of all the priest's powers; it reveals his entire person; it is his struggle against the vices of the surrounding world."  In other words, if the preaching is unsound, it is because the priest's spiritual life is unsound.  Fr. Lagrange continues, "Everything in the priest cooperates in his preaching - study, reflection, his powers to compose and revise, the activity of his intellect, his imagination, his memory, his feelings, his voice.  Therefore, when he preaches, the priest stands exposed for all to study; some will be attracted, others will not.  Some will accept what he says, others will simply criticize.  So if the priest approaches his task from the human angle, he will say to himself: 'I cannot afford to lose my reputation; people of weight in the parish who take offense easily must be spared their feelings and not provoked; I must proceed warily so as not to incur criticism.'  In that way Christian eloquence is invaded by a profane eloquence in which the preacher looks after his own interests, not the glory of God or the saving of souls." (The Priest In Union With Christ, p. 156).

I've never been a fan of lying.  And this because Our Lord tells us that the Devil is the Father of all lies (John 8:44),  If it's lying you want, this Blog is not for you.  Forty years of lying has wrought so much damage to the American Catholic Church.  Archbishop Chaput is right, we are merely reaping the fruit of what we've planted.  St. Paul tells us that, "...the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.." (Galatians 5: 22).  But what fruit have we witnessed in the American Catholic Church?  The Church has been infected with dry-rot as so many Catholics have succumbed to the works of the flesh.

We need heroic shepherds.  Men who, like Blessed Miguel Pro, S.J., are willing to give their very lives for the Catholic Church and her teaching.

Cardinal Raymond Burke: The faithful remnant should place themselves under Christ the King during these days of apostasy...

Cardinal Raymond Burke is exhorting the faithful remnant to place themselves under Christ the King during these dark days of apostasy.

In his Encyclical Letter Quas Primas, Pope Pius XI wrote:


"In the first Encyclical Letter which We addressed at the beginning of Our Pontificate to the Bishops of the universal Church, We referred to the chief causes of the difficulties under which mankind was laboring. And We remember saying that these manifold evils in the world were due to the fact that the majority of men had thrust Jesus Christ and his holy law out of their lives; that these had no place either in private affairs or in politics: and we said further, that as long as individuals and states refused to submit to the rule of our Savior, there would be no really hopeful prospect of a lasting peace among nations. Men must look for the peace of Christ in the Kingdom of Christ; and that We promised to do as far as lay in Our power. In the Kingdom of Christ, that is, it seemed to Us that peace could not be more effectually restored nor fixed upon a firmer basis than through the restoration of the Empire of Our Lord. We were led in the meantime to indulge the hope of a brighter future at the sight of a more widespread and keener interest evinced in Christ and his Church, the one Source of Salvation, a sign that men who had formerly spurned the rule of our Redeemer and had exiled themselves from his kingdom were preparing, and even hastening, to return to the duty of obedience." (No. 1).

What of this papal teaching on the Kingship of Christ? Why is it that we hear almost nothing on this subject these days? Largely because of our modern democratic mentality. Beginning with the "Enlightenment" (although it was hardly that) and the Industrial Revolution, there was the realization that the rights and interests of a people are best furthered by self-government. This was a positive development. And as nations began to adopt more democratic models of government, the whole notion of royalty either disappeared altogether or was reduced to little more than a museum-piece whose purpose was merely to perpetuate the memory of a romanticized past.

The transition from monarchy to democracy is rightly labelled progress. This because, as any student of history knows full well, the kingship of men more often than not was an exercise in injustice, brutality and unmitigated tyranny. The reign of these merely human kings (and emperors) brings to mind the words of Lord Acton: "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." I write these words as I listen to the Iraqi Prime Minister address the United States Congress and testify to the same.

But should this fact have any implications for our approach to the whole notion of Christ as King of the universe? Obviously we cannot totally divorce our religious concepts from those of the secular sphere. If the notion of kingship is now considered obsolete with regard to our political life, then there are two alternatives which present themselves to us: either we abandon the entire concept and terminology of kingship in the religious sphere, or we must define the Kingship of Christ more precisely so that we might better distinguish this Divine Kingship from that of merely human kings and thereby present it to the world in a more appealing way.

But can we abandon the title of king which Sacred Scripture applies to Christ? Unlike presidents, prime ministers or those we simply refer to as leaders, a king reigns; he rules. And what does it mean to reign or rule? It means to direct or order members of a given society toward their proper end. In a democratic government, it is the people who have the power to rule and the president or prime minister is merely their delegated representative. Whereas in a monarchy, the king alone has the power to rule. And this not by delegation but because this power to rule is derived from his pre-eminence or excellence.

In a democratic form of government, there are three functions which are divided and which are the proper domains of three separate brances of government: the legislative, executive and judicial. But a king possesses the fullness of these powers and it is of his royal essence that he is subject to no one else in the realm with regard to these powers.

Christ has full legislative power. We see this in the New Testament as He accomplished His task of setting up the New Covenant. He has full executive power which He exercises over His Mystical Body the Church and through His Apostles. He has full judicial power, a power which will be made all the more manifest when He returns to earth:

"I saw heaven standing open; and behold, a white horse, and he who sat upon it is called Faithful and True, and with justice he judges and wages war. And his eyes are as a flame of fire, and on his head many diadems; he has a name written which no man knows except himself. And he is clothed in a garment sprinkled with blood, and his name is called the Word of God. And the armies of heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses. And from his mouth goes forth a sharp sword with which to smite the nations. And he will rule them with a rod of iron, and he treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God Almighty. And he has on his garment and on his thigh a name written, 'King of kings and Lord of lords" (Revelation 19: 11-16).

Jesus is indeed our King. And yes, He rules with a rod of iron. But not as the brutal despot rules. He rules with justice and He is Faithful and True. He is the King of the Universe who defends His people against the rule of Satan, a rule which He overthrows as He destroys the kingdom of Satan on a blood-soaked Cross.

Our King is meekness itself. He defeats the powers of darkness with an iron rod which is called love. Recall that when He stood before Pilate, the Roman governor questioned him, "Are you the king of the Jews?" (Mt 27:11). And He replied, "You say so." This statement from Jesus our King is absolute. And men of every age and place must acknowledge this truth.

Because of the modern democratic mentality, there are many within the Church who believe that they can dissent from (reject) the authoritative teaching of Jesus our King as made known through the Magisterium of His Church. Recall what Pope John Paul II had to say about this:

"While exchanges and conflicts of opinion may constitute normal expressions of public life in a representative democracy, moral teaching certainly cannot depend simply upon respect for a process: indeed, it is in no way established by following the rules and deliberative procedures typical of a democracy. Dissent, in the form of carefully orchestrated protests and polemics carried on in the media, is opposed to ecclesial communion and to a correct understanding of the hierarchical constitution of the People of God. Opposition to the teaching of the Church's Pastors cannot be seen as a legitimate expression either of Christian freedom or of the diversity of the Spirit's gifts." (Veritatis Splendor, No. 113).

The Church is hierarchical with Christ our King as the head of His Mystical Body. And our heavenly Father has sent forth His firstborn Son to establish a kingdom for a glorious purpose: "For just as in Adam all die, so too in Christ shall all be brought to life, but each one in proper order: Christ the firstfruits; then, at his coming, those who belong to Christ; then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to his God and Father, when he has destroyed every sovereignty and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death, for 'he subjected everything under his feet.' But when it says that everything has been subjected, it is clear that it excludes the one who subjected everything to him. When everything is subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to the one who subjected everything to him [the Father], so that God may be all in all." (1 Corinthians 15: 22-28).

Now that's a Kingship which should appeal to anyone!

Springfield Massachusetts Diocese: Marginalizing men

"Today’s radical feminism was born from Marxism. And its disciples believe that, in order to establish a Marxist society, men need to be marginalized." - Sharon Ambrose, from her essay entitled "Man Down."

And the marginalization of men continues unabated throughout our sin-sick culture. And this includes the Church.

Only effeminate, emasculated "men" are deemed acceptable in the New Church. Men who have a backbone or who act like men are deemed a threat by radical feminists who demand absolute control of a church made in their image and likeness.

While on a retreat several years ago, a Religious Sister (a Presentation Sister) told me that she hates men. Presumably this would include Jesus and His Apostles as well as Saint Joseph and every single Pope and male saint since the Church's founding.

Imagine if a priest gave a homily and proclaimed that he hated women. How would such a statement be received?

The Church is sick with a virus my friends. The virus of anti-masculinity. I have witnessed this misandry firsthand as I attempted to volunteer at my parish only to be turned down so that a woman could serve instead.  My Diocese won't even let me APPLY to the priesthood.  The fact that I'm a military veteran who refuses to embrace the homosexual agenda is most likely a major factor in this discrimination.

Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke has said that, "the radical feminism which has assaulted the Church and society since the 1960s has left men very marginalized...Unfortunately, the radical feminist movement strongly influenced the Church, leading the Church to constantly address women’s issues at the expense of addressing critical issues important to men; the importance of the father, whether in the union of marriage or not; the importance of a father to children; the importance of fatherhood for priests; the critical impact of a manly character; the emphasis on the particular gifts that God gives to men for the good of the whole society.

The goodness and importance of men became very obscured, and for all practical purposes, were not emphasized at all. This is despite the fact that it was a long tradition in the Church, especially through the devotion of St. Joseph, to stress the manly character of the man who sacrifices his life for the sake of the home, who prepares with chivalry to defend his wife and his children and who works to provide the livelihood for the family. So much of this tradition of heralding the heroic nature of manhood has been lost in the Church today."

Lost because of a demonic movement which seeks to effeminize the Church and render it impotent before the Devil.

It comes as no surprise that the Springfield Diocese's Men's Conference has been cancelled this year.  While the Diocese extends a hearty welcome to active homosexuals (without calling them to repentance - see here), masculine men who have concerns are told to shove off, see here.


Cardinal Janis Pujats on Amoris laetitia...

Lifesite News reports:

"Cardinal Janis Pujats, Archbishop Metropolitan of Riga, Latvia, has joined three bishops of Kazakhstan and two Italian archbishops in signing the 'Profession of Immutable Truths about Sacramental Marriage,' LifeSite has confirmed.

The addition of Cardinal Janis Pujats’ signature brings the number of signatories to six.

Earlier this week, Bishop Athanasius Schneider, auxiliary of Astana, Kazakhstan, Archbishop Tomash Peta, Metropolitan of Astana, and Archbishop Jan Pawel Lenga of Karaganda, Kazakhstan issued a 'public and unequivocal profession of the truth' regarding the Church’s teaching on the indissolubility of marriage as a 'service of charity in truth' to the Church of today and to the Pope.


The statement of the Kazakh Ordinaries comes in response to Pope Francis’ and certain bishops’ interpretation of Amoris Laetitia to allow some 'remarried' divorcees (without an annulment and not living in sexual continence) access to the Sacraments of Penance and Holy Communion.

The bishops state that such a reading is causing 'rampant confusion,' will spread 'a plague of divorce' in the .Church, and is 'alien' to the Church’s entire faith and Tradition."

___________________________________
It is a simple fact that modernism (which Pope St. Pius X of happy memory drove underground for a time within the Catholic Church) denies the historical institution of the sacraments by Christ and misunderstands the essence of the supernatural thereby attempting to explain the supernatural using merely psychological categories and templates of human experience.

The sacraments were all instituted by Christ Himself: "'Adhering to the teaching of the Holy Scriptures, to the apostolic traditions, and to the consensus....of the Fathers,' we profess that 'the sacraments of the new law were...all instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord.'" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 1114, citing the Council of Trent (1547): DS 1600-1601). And this is what the same Catechism has to say regarding the sacrament of matrimony:

"The intimate community of life and love which constitutes the married state has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws. . . . God himself is the author of marriage. "The vocation to marriage is written in the very nature of man and woman as they came from the hand of the Creator. Marriage is not a purely human institution despite the many variations it may have undergone through the centuries in different cultures, social structures, and spiritual attitudes. These differences should not cause us to forget its common and permanent characteristics. Although the dignity of this institution is not transparent everywhere with the same clarity, some sense of the greatness of the matrimonial union exists in all cultures. "The well-being of the individual person and of both human and Christian society is closely bound up with the healthy state of conjugal and family life." (CCC, 1603).

How may we define "sacrament"? "A sacrament is an event, or a reality, or a rite, which is perceptible to the senses and which has been instituted by Christ in order to signify the saving graces merited by Him, to contain them, and to communicate them to human beings through human beings whenever a sacrament is performed by both its minister and its recipient." (J. Auer).

As Auer explains:

"The deeper reason for saying that Christ alone can be named the institutor of the sacraments is provided by soteriology, which teaches us that all redemptive grace can come only from Christ, and what the sacraments do is apply such redemptive grace to us. Thomas (Summa Theologica, III, q. 64, a.3) distinguishes in Christ three forms of fullness of power: (a) the potestas auctoritativa, which is proper to Christ by virtue of His divine nature and is therefore incommunicable; (b) the potestas excellentiae, which is proper to Christ's human nature because of its union with the Logos and which, according to Thomas, is likewise incommunicable. (Perhaps an aspect of this form of fullness of power may be seen as active in the Church of Jesus Christ - His Mystical Body after all - when, for instance, the Church at the Council of Trent gives a new form to the sacrament of marriage, or when Pope Pius XII recasts the form of priesly ordination, or when in the Church of the seventh century the sacrament of penance receives a new development.) (c) But as God-Man, Christ also properly possesses the potestas ministerii, that form of fullness of power that comes to Him as a human being by virtue of His being sent by the Father (John 20, 21). This is a form of power that was communicated by Christ to the Apostles; this, by nature it is communicable. The proper power that the dispenser of the sacraments in the Church holds as his own is a participation in the fullness of power deriving from the mission of Jesus Christ. Nevertheless, because the sacraments are all ordered within the sphere of the Church, it is Christ Himself who always remains their first and foremost dispenser." (J. Auer and Joseph Ratzinger, Dogmatic Theology Volume 6, A General Doctrine of the Sacraments, CUA Press, pp. 85-86).

Today, the family is under violent attack. Primarily through abortion and the push for same-sex "marriage" and now the indissolubility of marriage. Those dark forces which seek to redefine marriage or its indissolubility have rejected Christ as the institutor of the sacraments and, in their revolution against God, the Author of the Sacraments, are preparing the way for the Man of Sin, who will bring man his own ersatz "sacraments" which will be signified by lying and homicide.

We ignore the teaching of Pope John Paul II to our own peril:

"Certain currents of modern thought have gone so far as to exalt freedom to such an extent that it becomes an absolute, which would then be the source of values. This is the direction taken by doctrines which have lost the sense of the transcendent or which are explicitly atheist. The individual conscience is accorded the status of a supreme tribunal of moral judgment which hands down categorical and infallible decisions about good and evil. To the affirmation that one has a duty to follow one's conscience is unduly added the affirmation that one's moral judgment is true merely by the fact that it has its origin in the conscience. But in this way the inescapable claims of truth disappear, yielding their place to a criterion of sincerity, authenticity and "being at peace with oneself", so much so that some have come to adopt a radically subjectivistic conception of moral judgment.

As is immediately evident, the crisis of truth is not unconnected with this development. Once the idea of a universal truth about the good, knowable by human reason, is lost, inevitably the notion of conscience also changes. Conscience is no longer considered in its primordial reality as an act of a person's intelligence, the function of which is to apply the universal knowledge of the good in a specific situation and thus to express a judgment about the right conduct to be chosen here and now. Instead, there is a tendency to grant to the individual conscience the prerogative of independently determining the criteria of good and evil and then acting accordingly. Such an outlook is quite congenial to an individualist ethic, wherein each individual is faced with his own truth, different from the truth of others. Taken to its extreme consequences, this individualism leads to a denial of the very idea of human nature." (Veritatis Splendor, No. 32).

Cardinal Raymond Burke: The End Times may have arrived...

Lifesite News reports:

"Confusion and error in the Catholic Church regarding its fundamental teaching on marriage and family are so serious that the End Times may have come upon us, Cardinal Raymond Burke said in a new interview.

When the foundation of the moral law is questioned within the Church, the cardinal said, 'then the whole order of human life and the order of the Church itself are endangered.'

'So there is a feeling that in today’s world that is based on secularism with a completely anthropocentric approach,' Cardinal Burke continued, 'by which we think we can create our own meaning of life and meaning of the family and so on, the Church itself seems to be confused.'

'In that sense, one may have the feeling that the Church gives the appearance of being unwilling to obey the mandates of Our Lord,' he stated. 'Then perhaps we have arrived at the End Times.'

Cardinal Burke confirmed in an interview with Catholic Herald contributing editor Paolo Gambi published today that 'very serious questions' remain regarding the dubia submitted to Pope Francis last year on his exhortation Amoris Laetitia.

But he persisted in that the specifics of how to proceed on a formal correction of the pope have yet to be determined.


Cardinal Burke has been long known for his defense of Church orthodoxy, and many regard his resoluteness to that end in the face of seemingly political demotions and derision as an example of courage and fidelity to the faith.

Burke further confirmed in the Catholic Herald interview that although he remains cardinal patron for the Order of Malta, he currently has no function within the Order and thus receives no communication from either the organization itself or from Pope Francis.

He reaffirmed in the interview as well that priests are free to celebrate the Extraordinary Form of the Mass since Pope Benedict XVI’s motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, saying that both the Ordinary Form and the Extraordinary Form of the liturgy are considered normal in the Church.

Gambi asked the cardinal to expound on recent comments he made about the present time being 'realistically apocalyptic' due to 'confusion, division and error' within the Church coming from 'shepherds' even at the highest levels.

Cardinal Burke explained that allowing access to sacraments for individuals living in sinful unions is 'a violation of the truth' for both the indissolubility of marriage and the sanctity of the Eucharist.

'In the present moment, there is confusion and error about the most fundamental teachings of the Church,' said Cardinal Burke, 'for example with regard to marriage and the family. For instance, the idea that people who are living in an irregular union could receive the sacraments is a violation of the truth with regard both to the indissolubility of marriage and to the sanctity of the Eucharist.'

Citing St. Paul, he said 'we eat our condemnation' if we receive the Eucharist in an unworthy way.

'Now the confusion in the Church is going even further than that,' Burke added, 'because there is today confusion as to whether there are acts which are intrinsically evil and this, of course, is the foundation of the moral law,' imperiling the order of the Church and human life.

Asked his thoughts on Italian Episcopal Conference Secretary-general Bishop Nunzio Galantino’s recent claim that the Protestant Reformation was an 'event of the Holy Spirit,' Cardinal Burke responded, 'Well, I don’t see how you can say that the division of the Church was an act of the Holy Spirit. It simply does not make sense.'

He also dismissed talk of a common Eucharistic celebration with Lutherans as 'not possible' because of the differences on the doctrine of transubstantiation.


'For Catholics to engage in some kind of ecumenical Eucharist would be abandoning the Catholic Faith,' stated Cardinal Burke. 'This is a profoundly false ecumenism which would do grave harm to the Faith and to souls.'

His response to Gambi asking what his first act would be if elected pope was that 'the first thing any pope should do is simply to make the profession of faith together with the whole Church, as Vicar of Christ on Earth.'

'Most popes did that,' Cardinal Burke added, offering Pope St Pius X’s encyclical E Supremi as example.

'Also Pope St John Paul II’s Redemptor Hominis is a sort of profession of faith,' the cardinal noted, 'calling to mind again that the Church is the Body of Christ, the Church belongs to Christ and that we are all obedient in his service.'"

On June 11, 1988, Our Lady told Father Gobbi, "Satan, my Adversary, with snares and by means of his subtle seduction, has succeeded in spreading errors everywhere, under the form of new and more updated interpretations of the truth, and he has led many to choose with full knowledge - and to live in - sin, in the deceiving conviction that this is no longer an evil, and even that it is a value and a good. The times of the general confusion and of the greatest agitation of spirits has come. Confusion has entered into the souls and the lives of many of my children. This great apostasy is spreading more and more, even through the interior of the Catholic Church. Errors are being taught and spread about, while the fundamental truths of the faith, which the authentic Magisterium of the Church has always taught and energetically defended against any heretical deviation whatsoever, are being denied with impunity....In these times, in the Catholic Church, there will remain a little remnant who will be faithful to Christ, to the Gospel, and to its entire truth. The little remnant will form a little flock, all guarded in the depths of my Immaculate Heart. This little flock will be made up of those bishops, priests, religious and faithful who will remain strongly united to the Pope, all gathered together in the cenacle of my Immaculate Heart, in an act of unceasing prayer, of continual immolation, of total offering to prepare the painful way for the second and glorious coming of my Son Jesus..."

The Sons of Hell, the Children of Belial as St. Louis de Montfort refers to them, are spreading their errors everywhere. The confusion of our own time has become general. And this too was prophesied by the great Jesuit priest Father Nectou, who said that before the triumph of the Church, "The confusion will be so general that mankind will not be able to aright, as if God had entirely withheld His providence from mankind, and during the worst crisis the best thing that can be done will be to remain where God has placed us, and persevere in fervent prayer."

Signs are multiplying everywhere. Today, all across society, people are committing grievous sins and even blasphemously calling these sins virtue. Sin is justified. It is even celebrated. Active homosexuals and lesbians have the audacity to call their perverse practices "love" (practices for which God destroyed the five cities of the plain: Sodom and Gomorrah) and agitate for - demand - the legal status of marriage. As a girl in the Ukraine is reported as hearing from the Blessed Mother: "The present times are worse than at the time of Noah. Then the world was scourged by a deluge of water; now the world is going to be scourged by a deluge of fire." (Firs apparition to Anna at Seredne, December 20, 1954).

Our sin-sick world, puffed up with satanic pride, has become too blind to see its own miserable state. Today our great cities have become new Sodom and Gomorrahs. And at a time when so many confused people look to their priests for moral and spiritual guidance, often they receive chaff instead of wheat.

Pray the Holy Rosary to the Immaculata every day.  Consecrate yourself daily. Confess your sins regularly.  The Devil, through ecclesiastical masonry, has entered within the highest ranks of the Church.

Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga: Rejoicing in Revolution

Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga is bashing Cardinal Raymond Burke publically.  See here.

Cardinal Maradiaga is the same confused cleric who has rejoiced that Francis is stirring up "Revolution" in the Church.  See here.

At least he's honest enough to call it what it is. For a long time now, modernists have dreamt of  changing the Church from within through infiltration.  The ultimate goal of Freemasonry within the Church (ecclesiastical masonry) has been to obtain a Pope favorable to masonic principles, a Pope who will preside over a revolution which will permit the man of iniquity to enter the Church's interior and to conquer the saints.

This is not religious paranoia.  This is not religious fiction.  Many popes have warned (and most notably Pope Leo XIII) about the designs of Freemasonry.  It was Pope Leo XIII who warned that, "Freemasonry is the permanent personification of the Revolution; it constitutes a sort of society in reverse whose aim is to exercise an occult overlordship upon society as we know it, and whose sole raison d'etre consists in waging war against God and His Church." (Encyclical Letter On the 25th year of Our Pontificate, March 19, 1902).

Freemasons believe that the Catholic Church must fall apart and dissolve and that a secular, humanitarian religion must - and will - take its place - Freemasonry.  In his Encyclical Letter Humanum Genus, Pope Leo XIII emphasizes that the ultimate aim of Freemasonry "is to uproot completely the whole religious and political order of the world, which has been brought into existence by Christianity, and to replace it by another in harmony with their way of thinking.  This will mean that the foundation and the laws of the new structure of society will be drawn from pure Naturalism."

As Randy Engel has said, "Catholicism is a religion of Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium, the fullness of the Faith, handed down to us from the time of the Apostles. It never was, is, or will be a religion of 'evolution' or 'change' related to dogmatic truths and morals. Yet, Francis continues to maintain an inordinate fascination with 'change,' which amounts to a 'divinization' of change.."

Because Cardinal Burke understands this, Luciferic forces in the Vatican must persecute him, demonize him. Preparation for Antichrist.

What Cardinal Maradiaga and other mental and moral midgets like him cannot explain (to anyone's satisfaction) is why the Church founded by Jesus Christ is in need of "revolution."

Pius XII, in his encyclical letter Mystici Corporis, taught that:"..The Church, which should be considered a perfect society in its own right, is not made up of merely moral and juridical elements and principles. It is far superior to all other human societies; it surpasses them as grace surpasses nature, as things immortal are above all those that perish...The juridical principles, on which also the Church rests and is established, derive from the divine constitution given it by Christ.."

Can we improve on Christ?  In a word, no.  Which is why I believe that Cardinal Maradiaga is under demonic influence.  Recall the Akita apparition (Church approved) and what it had to say about the demon infiltrating the Church and Bishops and Cardinals opposing one another.

The Cult of Softness and its fruit: Hatred of masculinity

Over at The Wanderer, we read:


"Terry Mattingly writes a blog site called On Religion (tmatt.net). His column on October 18 is worth your time. It is titled, “Why So Many Men Think Church Is for Women.” Mattingly is not a Catholic, but he explores a phenomenon many Roman Catholics have noted in recent decades, but hesitate to discuss in public for fear of insulting the many good women active in the Church.

What phenomenon? Well, I know there are admirable exceptions that many readers of this column may point to, but isn’t it true that you don’t find many young men who play sports, work on cars, and hunt and fish, active in our parishes any longer? That is my experience, at any rate, where altar servers tend to be girls, as are members of parish youth groups. I can’t read the minds of the young men who shy away from Catholic parish life, but I think it safe to say that they now see it as…well, soft, too overtly pious, not a “guy-thing.” The priest sex scandals have increased this perception..."

Addicted to homosexuality and effeminism, the Cult of Softness has a deep and abiding hatred of real men and anything even remotely resembling masculinity.  I've addressed this truth often at this Blog.

In the New Church, which will accept the Man of Sin, the Cult of Softness will be the New dogma.  Already there is preparation on so very many levels.

The Latin Vulgate (see the Douay-Rheims Bible) indicates that the effeminate will not inherit the Kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:10). But the New American Bible, which is used by the USCCB, omits the word effeminate:


1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (Latin Vulgate):

Verse 9: "Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: Neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers:

an nescitis quia iniqui regnum Dei non possidebunt nolite errare neque fornicarii neque idolis servientes neque adulteri

Verse 10: Nor the effeminate nor liers with mankind nor thieves nor covetous nor drunkards nor railers nor extortioners shall possess the kingdom of God.

neque molles neque masculorum concubitores neque fures neque avari neque ebriosi neque maledici neque rapaces regnum Dei possidebunt."


1Corinthians 6: 9-10 (New American Bible) posted online by the USCCB:

Verse 9: "Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites

Verse 10: nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God."

Why do you think this is so?  The Latin Vulgate, which we have obtained from the great St. Jerome, is the most precise translation of the Sacred Scriptures available.  There are many other problems with recent translations of the Scriptures.  But my focus here is on this passage.  Why has the word "effeminate" been dropped from 1 Corinthians 6?

Dr. Leon Podles writes, "Walter Ong, having been formed in a masculine, Jesuit, clerical milieu does not seem to be aware of how feminized Christianity had become even before the 1960s, but he saw a rapid shift in the Catholic Church in the 1960s toward even greater feminization...The contrasts of Christianity, grace and sin, life and death, have been toned down with a considerable loss of emotional power.  Without this power, the popular appeal of the liturgy has declined (even with a more accessible language) and church attendance has plummeted...Even the change from Latin to the vernacular was also a symptom of feminization, according to Ong.  Latin had been a means of maintaining a Latin culture in the Roman Catholic clergy.  A language restricted to men is common; it is a sign of masculine separation from the feminine world.  After it became a learned language, Latin was learned almost exclusively by men.  The system of education that used Latin and centered around Latin literature was centered around contest and disputation and was confined almost entirely to men.  The disappearance of Latin was part of the demasculinization of the clergy.." (The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity, pp. 133-135).

So crippled by radical feminism and effeminate clergy, the Church often finds herself incapable of either giving or receiving fraternal correction.  The Cotton-Candy "Church of Nice" (not the Church founded by Christ Jesus to deliver hard truths and thereby save souls), is the Church of "Who am I to judge?", the Church of empty, bland New Age homilies-  Chicken Soup for the Chicken Catholic. Because I had the audacity to stand up to several women at a parish in Baldwinville, Massachusetts who were disrespecting Our Eucharistic Lord by talking loudly and laughing before the tabernacle as people attempted to prepare for Holy Mass, I was told by the priest that I am a "large man" who is scary and that I would be "ostracized." See here.

This is a favorite tactic of liberals to silence authentic men who are not sissified and who actually possess backbone.

The Cult of Softness permeates the entire Church.  It is passive aggressive and desires total control of everything it comes into contact with.

But it cannot fight head on or on solid ground. That is its weakness.  And it is there we must take the fight.

It was Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke who correctly noted, "I think there has been a great confusion with regard to the specific vocation of men in marriage and of men in general in the Church during the past 50 years or so. It’s due to a number of factors, but the radical feminism which has assaulted the Church and society since the 1960s has left men very marginalized.

Unfortunately, the radical feminist movement strongly influenced the Church, leading the Church to constantly address women’s issues at the expense of addressing critical issues important to men; the importance of the father, whether in the union of marriage or not; the importance of a father to children; the importance of fatherhood for priests; the critical impact of a manly character; the emphasis on the particular gifts that God gives to men for the good of the whole society.

The goodness and importance of men became very obscured, and for all practical purposes, were not emphasized at all. This is despite the fact that it was a long tradition in the Church, especially through the devotion of St. Joseph, to stress the manly character of the man who sacrifices his life for the sake of the home, who prepares with chivalry to defend his wife and his children and who works to provide the livelihood for the family. So much of this tradition of heralding the heroic nature of manhood has been lost in the Church today.

All of those virtuous characteristics of the male sex are very important for a child to observe as they grow up and mature. The healthy relationship with the father helps the child to prepare to move from the intimate love of the mother, building a discipline so that the child can avoid excessive self‑love. This ensures that the child is able to identify himself or herself properly as a person in relationship with others; this is critical for both boys and girls.

A child’s relationship with their father is key to a child’s self‑identification, which takes places when we are growing up. We need that very close and affirming relationship with the mother, but at the same time, it is the relationship with the father, which is of its nature more distant but not less loving, which disciplines our lives. It teaches a child to lead a selfless life, ready to embrace whatever sacrifices are necessary to be true to God and to one another.

I recall in the mid-1970’s, young men telling me that they were, in a certain way, frightened by marriage because of the radicalizing and self-focused attitudes of women that were emerging at that time. These young men were concerned that entering a marriage would simply not work because of a constant and insistent demanding of rights for women. These divisions between women and men have gotten worse since then.

Everyone understands that women have and can be abused by men. Men who abuse women are not true men, but false men who have violated their own manly character by being abusive to women.

The crisis between man and woman has been made much worse by a complete collapse of catechesis in the Church. Young men grew up without proper instruction with regard to their faith and to the knowledge of their vocation. Young men were not being taught that they are made in the image of God – Father, Son and Holy Spirit. These young men were not taught to know all those virtues that are necessary in order to be a man and to fulfill the particular gifts of being male.

Making things worse, there was a very fluffy, superficial kind of catechetical approach to the question of human sexuality and the nature of the marital relationship.

At the same time, in society, there came an explosion of pornography, which is particularly corrosive for men because it terribly distorts the whole reality of human sexuality. It leads men and women to view their human sexuality apart from a relationship between a man and woman in marriage.

In truth, the gift of sexual attraction is directed toward marriage, and any kind of sexual union belongs properly only within marriage. But the whole world of pornography corrupts young people into believing that their sexual capacity is for their own entertainment and pleasure, and becomes a consuming lust, which is one of the seven capital sins.

The gift of human sexuality is turned into a means of self‑gratification often at the expense of another person, whether in heterosexual relations or in homosexual relations. A man who has not been formed with a proper identity as a man and as a father figure will ultimately become very unhappy. These poorly formed men become addicted to pornography, sexual promiscuity, alcohol, drugs, and the whole gamut of addictions..."

Father Zuhlsdorf: Authentic shepherd

Father Zuhlsdorf, over at WDTPRS, Just posted this:

"From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

Is there a reasonable hope that all souls will be saved since it is a part of our liturgy?

No.  That is not reasonable.  It is wishful thinking.

Many* will be lost.

The feel good of translations and other aspects in our sacred -or not so sacred – worship have given many more than a rosy prospect.

There is no part of our authentic liturgy as Catholics which suggests that “all” will be saved.

It is time to sober up.

We can lose the gift of membership in the Kingdom of God which Christ opened for us.

We can and we do… when we sin.

GO TO CONFESSION!"


Always nice to find a Catholic priest who isn't, well, insane.  Father Z is most sound of mine and an authentic shepherd.  He cares for souls.  Not all priests, however, are sane.  I do not say this to be uncharitable.  But remember, as Frank Sheed reminded us, good theology and sanity go hand in hand - see here.

Some years ago, in an article entitled "Can Jews, Muslims be saved," Fr. John Dietzen wrote, "Pope John Paul II reflects this Catholic attitude [that non-Catholics may be saved] in his moving and hopeful book, 'Crossing the Threshold of Hope.' God wants to save all mankind in Jesus Christ, he writes. We don't know how God does all this, but we know Christ came into the world for all people and 'has his own ways of reaching them' (pp. 80-83) In other words, God has committed himself to work through baptism and the other sacraments, but he is not bound or limited by them."

It is certainly true that non-Catholics who "..through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience..may achieve eternal salvation" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 847) and that although, "God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism..he himself is not bound by his sacraments." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 1257). I have often quoted these passages to refute the errors of the Feeneyites who insist that only baptized Roman Catholics may be saved.

But it does not follow that because "God came into the world for all people" and "wants to save all mankind in Jesus Christ" that all will be saved. Will some souls end up in hell? Fr. Dietzen concludes from his examination of Pope John Paul II's book that, "We just don't know enough about the mystery of God's saving plan to make such a judgment." He then writes, "Perhaps you know of Father Hans Urs von Balthasar, one of the major Catholic theologians of the 20th century, a friend and close consultant to Pope John Paul II. He wrote much about the possibility of universal redemption, including the book, 'Dare We Hope: That All Men Be Saved,' in which he maintains it is our Christian call to pray and hope that all are reconciled with God. He was named a Cardinal but died before he could receive the red hat."

What of this? Was Pope John Paul II in agreement with Hans Urs von Balthasar? The average Catholic, after reading Fr. Dietzen's article, would certainly get that impression. But they would be wrong. For Fr. Dietzen is not intellectually honest and only cites those passages of Pope John Paul II's book which seem to support this notion. A more careful examination of the Holy Father's book will serve to highlight Fr. Dietzen's dishonesty. For example, in a passage responding to the concern of "great thinkers in the Church," [including von Balthasar] who have been "disturbed" by the problem of hell, Pope John Paul II refers to Jesus' "unequivocal" words: "He speaks clearly of those who will go to eternal punishment (cf. Mt 25: 46)."

Pope John Paul II concludes his remarks (which may be found on pages 185 to 186 of "Crossing the Threshold of Hope") with a series of rhetorical questions which indicate that some sinners will end in hell: "Is not God who is Love also ultimate Justice?," "Can He tolerate these terrible crimes," "Can they go unpunished?," "Isn't final punishment in some way necessary in order to reestablish moral equilibrium in the complex history of humanity?," "Is not hell in a certain sense the ultimate safeguard of man's moral conscience?"

Fr. Dietzen conveniently leaves these passages out of his article in an attempt to convince the faithful that Pope John Paul II and the Church are in agreement with Hans Urs von Balthasar. I have quoted [in another post on Fr. Dietzen] from Lumen Gentium, No. 48 of the Second Vatican Council which teaches clearly that some souls will end up in hell. And faithful Catholics will reflect very carefully on the fact that the Lord Himself speaks about the damned in a form that is grammatically future: "...and those who have done evil will go to the resurrection of condemnation" (Mt 25: 46). Does Fr. Dietzen consider Christ to be a liar? Does he believe Christ to be mistaken?

It's true that Pope John Paul II appointed von Balthasar a Cardinal. But when the Pope appoints someone a Cardinal, he does not authoritatively commend his thought.

I called upon Fr. Dietzen to issue an apology to his readers for his misleading article.  But he never delivered.

The faithful have a right to Catholic teaching in its purity and integrity (Veritatis Splendor, No. 113). Father Dietzen and others who dare to suggest that all men will be saved fail to offer Catholic teaching in its purity and integrity.

*  How do we interpret "many"?  See here.

Our Lady warned of "a bad Council and a bad Mass..."

One Peter Five notes:


"Today, on the Feast of Pentecost, I called Fr. Ingo Dollinger, a German priest and former professor of theology in Brasil, who is now quite elderly and physically weak. He has been a personal friend of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI for many years. Father Dollinger unexpectedly confirmed over the phone the following facts:

Not long after the June 2000 publication of the Third Secret of Fatima by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger told Fr. Dollinger during an in-person conversation that there is still a part of the Third Secret that they have not published! “There is more than what we published,” Ratzinger said. He also told Dollinger that the published part of the Secret is authentic and that the unpublished part of the Secret speaks about “a bad council and a bad Mass” that was to come in the near future.  Father Dollinger gave me permission to publish these facts on this High Feast of the Holy Ghost and he gave me his blessing.  Father Dollinger was ordained a priest in 1954 and served as secretary of the well-respected bishop of Augsburg, Josef Stimpfle. In God’s providence, I met this bishop once when I was not yet a Catholic, and I was deeply touched by his humility, warmth and welcome. He invited me to visit him once in Augsburg. When I was in the process of conversion, I did reach out to him, but then, to my chagrin, I discovered that Bishop Stimpfle had already passed away. (He is greatly missed.)  Father Dollinger was himself also involved with the German Bishops’ Conference’s discussions concerning freemasonry in the 1970s at the end of which came the statement that freemasonry is not compatible with the Catholic Faith.  He later taught moral theology at the seminary of the Order of Canons Regular of the Holy Cross which belongs to the Opus Angelorum. Bishop Athanasius Schneider, auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan, is member of that same  Order of Canons Regular of the Holy Cross. Most importantly, Father Dollinger had Padre Pio (d. 1968) as his confessor for many years and became very close to him. Dollinger is also personally known to one of my beloved family members. This sensitive information pertaining to the Third Secret, which has been circulating among certain Catholic groups for a few years now, has now been personally confirmed to me by Fr. Dollinger himself, at a time in history where the Church seems to have fallen into a pit of confusion. It might help explain, at least in part, why we are where we are now.  Importantly, it shows the loving mercy of the Mother of God to warn us and to prepare her children for this battle that the Church now finds herself in. In spite of the decision of those in responsible places within the Church, She has made sure the fuller truth would still be revealed and spread. This information also might explain why Pope Benedict XVI, once he had become pope, tried to undo some of the injustices that are directly related with this Dollinger revelation, namely: he freed the Traditional Mass from its suppression; he removed the excommunication of the bishops of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX); and lastly, he publicly declared in 2010 in Fatima: “We would be mistaken to think that Fatima’s prophetic mission is complete.”


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I 've said this many times before, masonic forces seek to subvert the Church from within and to create a 'new church' created in the image and likeness of man. The new humanitarian religion will result from a quiet revolution within the Church. This new religion will be anti-supernatural. And it will embrace the Socialistic New World Order and the Reign of Antichrist. This is the false church Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich saw in her visions.

In this false church within the True Church, the cancer within the Mystical Body of Christ, there is a loss of the sense of the sacred.  Which is why Fr. Miceli wrote that, "Much of the new liturgy has been drained of the numinous and the sacred.  The new forms are without splendor, flattened, undifferentiated.  Why was kneeling replaced by standing?  Jesus himself fell on his knees and on his face as he prayed to his heavenly Father.  Satan too knows the meaning of worship and man's need for it.  He tried to get Jesus to fall down and worship him.  Why has the liturgical year and the Mass been so unfortunately mutilated against the wishes of the faithful?  In fact, the faithful are now confused about the Mass, the feast of the saints, the holy seasons.  Why was the Gloria, that prayer of total consecration on God's Majesty and Goodness, restricted practically to Sundays alone, and only to those Sundays outside of Lent?  Moreover, is the faith really renewed and vivified by by obscuring our sense of community with the Christians of apostolic and ancient times?  The new liturgy no longer draws us into the true experience of reliving the Life of Christ.  We are deprived of this experience through the elimination of the hierarchy of feasts and the at random changing of the dates of famous feasts.... 

Then too, the new forms are the result of experimentation.  But one experiments with things, with objects that one wants to analyze.  Experimentation is the method of science.  The wretched idolatry and vulgarity of tinkering with sacred realities has, unfortunately, penetrated the Church and produced a mediocrity-ridden liturgy, a show for spectators that distracts from the holy, frustrates intimate communion with God and trivializes, where it does not suppress, sacred actions, symbols, music and words. 

In reality, such diminished liturgies have renewed nothing.  Rather these innovations have emptied churches, dried up vocations to the priesthood and sisterhood, driven off converts and opened the doors wide to a flood of renegades.  Even though valid in its essence, such a new liturgy cannot inspire for it is colorless, artificial, banal, without the odor and flavor of sanctity.  A humanized and popularized, man-oriented liturgy will never produce saints.  Only a divinized, God-oriented liturgy can accomplish that miracle.  One suspects that many priests realize the banality of the new liturgy.  That is why they often become, during the Mass and other ceremonies, actors and entertainers.  They put on a show in order to gain the attention of the congregation.  These comedians in chasubles preach a utopian Christianity rather than the true Christianity.  Their treasure is man rather than God; their emphasis this-worldly rather than other-worldly; their goal progress rather than sanctity; their apostolate is immanent rather than transcendent; their means to their goal is the way of revolution rather than the way of the cross; they preach a secular Church instead of the Sacred Church founded by Christ; the essence of their morality is self-assertion rather than self-denial; the Christ they present to the congregation is the Humanist Christ rather than the God-Man crucified Christ...they genuflect before the world and stand before Christ...they are moved by resentment and envy instead of radiating the joy of Christ.."

These comedians in chasubles, these actors on a stage erected to celebrate the Cult of Man, prefer the tabernacle off to the side and the celebrant's chair in the center. The idea of a crucified Christ is repugnant to these propagandists for a man-centered religion.  And those who maintain an authentic devotion to the Mother of God and her Holy Rosary, those who fall to their knees in prayer, are considered "out-of-date" and "immature" in faith.

Enter the Man-god.  John 5:43.

Si palam res est, repetitio injuria non est...

In an article which may be found here, Cardinal Christoph Schonborn is quoted as having said that, "The truth will set you free...Without the truth, one cannot experience Jesus’ mercy....But it must be truth in its proper form. One must speak the truth without injury.”

Really?  Here again is the lie that we must, at all costs,  avoid a "negative polemic."

Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand refutes this intellectual sophistry.  He writes, "Some might be tempted to believe that the rejection of error and falsehood [ and here, again, we are speaking of ideas not persons] is something "negative" and even cult-like....Perhaps never before has there been as much intellectual fraud as there is today. In the mass media - and even in discussions on university campuses - this intellectual fraud appears chiefly as the manipulation of slogans designed to bluff the hearer or reader, and prevent him from thinking clearly. For a typical example, let us consider how the terms positive and negative are now most often used to discredit the refutation of pernicious errors and to give credit to the most shallow speculations. The intellectual swindlers who play such an important role in public discussions will often denominate as 'positive' propositions and attitudes they favor. They thereby seek to forestall questions of truth and value by enveloping their prejudices in a vague suggestion of 'creativity,' 'originality,' 'openness,' 'unaggressiveness.' This is the device of the cuttlefish. The moment one tries to grasp it, it emits a murky substance to confuse and deceive.

In reality, the popular slogan usages of positive and negative is a distortion of the genuine meanings of the terms. In proper usage they can refer to existence and nonexistence or to value and disvalue. They can refer to desirability and undesirability, or to answers to questions and demands, or to results of tests and inquiries. But when these terms are applied to attitudes of mind or to theses - by way of suggesting an evaluation - an intellectual fraud is committed; for they are then being used to evoke vague associations that distract from the question that alone matters - namely: Is this attitude objectively called for? Or: Is this thesis true?...It is the nature of truth to exclude every contradiction of itself. Thus, the rejection of errors and falsehoods can never be separated from the affirmation of truth. The one implies the other...

To give the impression that affirmations are 'positive' and denials 'negative' is to misrepresent completely the nature of judgments and propositions. This abuse of the language transforms the terms positive and negative into deceptive slogans and thus amounts to an intellectual swindle..." (The Charitable Anathema, pp. 45-47).

Si palam res est, repetitio injuria non est: "To say what everybody knows is no injury."

In one of his last homilies, Archbishop Oscar Romero, the martyred Archbishop of San Salvador [whom Francis claims to admire], said: "A preaching that does not point out sin is not the preaching of the gospel. A preaching that makes sinners feel good so that they become entrenched in their sinful state, betrays the gospel's call. A preaching that does not discomfit sinners but lulls them in their sin leaves Zebulun and Naphtali in the shadow of death. A preaching that awakens, a preaching that enlightens -- as when a light turned on awakens and of course annoys a sleeper -- that is the preaching of Christ, calling, "wake up! Be converted!" this is the church's authentic preaching. Naturally, such preaching must meet conflict, must spoil what is miscalled prestige, must disturb, must be persecuted. It cannot get along with the powers of darkness and sin."

We've had enough of a preaching which leaves Zebulun and Naphtali in the shadow of death.  We've had enough of a Cotton-Candy Catholicism which offers Chicken-Soup Homilies and asinine theatrics rather than the solid meat of sound preaching and liturgical reverence.  Sadly, so many of our priests haven't caught on to this.  And so they continue to spoon-feed us the unsatisfying pablum.

The time for lying is over.  I have been saying this for years.  Back in 2009, Archbishop Charles Chaput noted that, "40 years of American Catholic complacency and poor formation are bearing exactly the fruit we should have expected...We can't talk about following St. Paul and converting our culture until we sober up and get honest about what we've allowed ourselves to become.  We need to stop lying to each other..."

The lying must stop.  For this to happen, we need priests and Bishops who fear God more than they do men.  Cowards will not lead us out of the valley of death.  Only shepherds who have the spiritual strength, the Cardinal Gift of Fortitude, to brave the risk of worldly criticism, will be able to lead the American Catholic Church out of the valley of the Culture of Death and back on the road to the Civilization of Love which Pope John Paul II spoke of so often.

Why have so many priests succumbed to fear?  Why is it that their preaching no longer points out sin?  Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange provides us with an answer:


"The reason for this is not difficult to find.  A sermon is the result of the combined effort of all the priest's powers; it reveals his entire person; it is his struggle against the vices of the surrounding world."  In other words, if the preaching is unsound, it is because the priest's spiritual life is unsound.  Fr. Lagrange continues, "Everything in the priest cooperates in his preaching - study, reflection, his powers to compose and revise, the activity of his intellect, his imagination, his memory, his feelings, his voice.  Therefore, when he preaches, the priest stands exposed for all to study; some will be attracted, others will not.  Some will accept what he says, others will simply criticize.  So if the priest approaches his task from the human angle, he will say to himself: 'I cannot afford to lose my reputation; people of weight in the parish who take offense easily must be spared their feelings and not provoked; I must proceed warily so as not to incur criticism.'  In that way Christian eloquence is invaded by a profane eloquence in which the preacher looks after his own interests, not the glory of God or the saving of souls." (The Priest In Union With Christ, p. 156).

I've never been a fan of lying.  And this because Our Lord tells us that the Devil is the Father of all lies (John 8:44),  If it's lying you want, this Blog is not for you.  Forty years of lying has wrought so much damage to the American Catholic Church.  Archbishop Chaput is right, we are merely reaping the fruit of what we've planted.  St. Paul tells us that, "...the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.." (Galatians 5: 22).  But what fruit have we witnessed in the American Catholic Church?  The Church has been infected with dry-rot as so many Catholics have succumbed to the works of the flesh.

We need heroic shepherds.  Men who, like Blessed Miguel Pro, S.J., are willing to give their very lives for the Catholic Church and her teaching.

If anyone is inclined to listen to the ramblings of this faithless Cardinal, I would remind them that this is the same confused individual who asserted that, "We should give more consideration to the quality of homosexual relationships."  See here.