The Sons of Belial have their own priorities: Ignore the Culture of Sodomy and Dissent while condemning devout Catholics

The culture of lies, deceit and corruption throughout the Church continues to anger authentic Catholics. Christopher Mannion notes that, "In recent days, as California was rocked by a magnitude 7 earthquake, the Vatican and America’s Catholic hierarchy were inundated by an avalanche of their own.

For a year after the McCarrick scandal broke, prelates here and in Rome had managed to preserve a semblance of credibility, adorned with trappings of a synod and new laws and earnest promises. But within the past fortnight, the rickety stonewall of coverup and omertà crumbled with increasing speed.

On July 3, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, former papal nuncio to the United States, shared new charges with LifeSiteNews. They are troubling indeed.

'Not only is Pope Francis doing close to nothing to punish those who have committed abuse,' Viganò writes, 'he is doing absolutely nothing to expose and bring to justice those who have, for decades, facilitated and covered up the abusers.'"

No, Francis has his own priorities which include condemning materialism while overlooking filth, perversion and sexual abuse, see here or condemning devout Catholics who want doctrinal clarity (see here) while looking the other way when it comes to the Cult of Softness (see here) and Sodomy within the Church.

That's the thing with Modernist counterfeit Catholics; they have all the love in the world for those who engage in sodomy or who misrepresent the teaching of the Church, but have nothing but contempt for those of us who actually adhere to Catholic moral teaching while maintaining a devotion to the Immaculata.

For example, I was banned from the Facebook Page of Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts (where I attend Mass) because of my commitment to the Church's perennial teaching as expressed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.  But the same Facebook Page promoted Father Jonathan Morris, who has misrepresented Catholic teaching and who has since left the priesthood.

Now I could care less about the Facebook Page of Saint Mary's.  Nobody reads the thing anyway.  I get more visitors in five minutes than that page does in an entire month.

But it shows the enmity (see here) these sons of Belial have for authentic Catholics. Make no mistake about it.  This enmity will continue to grow until Christ returns as Saint Louis de Montfort has warned.

Arm yourself with your Rosary and continue to stand against those modern-day Judases within.

Good Catholics cannot ignore the controversy over Francis...but at Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts, that's standard operating procedure

Barbara Simpson writes:

"Roman Catholics were just entering the critical weekend of their Easter celebration – Holy Thursday, Good Friday, Holy Saturday and Easter Sunday, perhaps the most important commemorations in their religion – when Pope Francis threw another of his religious bombshells into the lives of his followers.

Just before Holy Thursday dawned, an interview with the pope was published in La Repubblica. It was written by the founder of the left-wing publication, Eugenio Scalfari, an Italian atheist.

In the article, the 93-year old journalist claimed the pope told him hell does not exist because people are not punished. If they do not repent and go to heaven, they just 'disappear.'

According to Scalfari, the pope said, 'There is no hell – there is the disappearance of sinful souls.'

Inasmuch as that’s a refutation of a core belief of Catholicism, when word of the interview got out, it spread like wildfire, in religious and mainstream publications.

Criticism was widespread, from The Drudge Report to the New York Times, to say nothing of the international press. There was consternation among clergy, and the average churchgoer was at a loss as to what was going on.

The Italian press acknowledged the pope had met with Scalfari five or six times in the past for lengthy 'interviews' and that the journalist does not take notes, nor does he record any interviews. As a result, there clearly were doubts raised as to the accuracy of what he claimed were Francis’ statements. In fact, this was not the first time such questions have been raised about his 'interviews' with the pope.

The Vatican also jumped to respond – but not forcefully. Its reaction didn’t deny what the pope said, but also didn’t affirm it, saying essentially that some of the words were not those of the pope.

Uh, exactly, what does that mean? The problem is that his statements are indeed heretical, so what now?

Apparently, nothing. Francis goes his merry way leaving bits and pieces of his Church and doctrine fraying around the edges and thoughtful clergy beginning to be angry.

American Cardinal Raymond Burke is greatly concerned about what is happening with this pope, saying that by not clarifying what was said, he only 'feeds the confusion.'

Burke is a well-known canon lawyer and the former head of the highest Vatican court. He didn’t mince any words, saying that what Pope Francis said 'went beyond what is tolerable' and is 'a source of deep scandal.'

The whole situation has left many questions, and it appears that there will be no answers, at least not yet. Either Pope Francis is the most naive of men or an individual dedicated to shaking up the lives of Catholics for a purpose he hasn’t revealed.

To the layman, it would appear he’s intent on undermining Catholic beliefs and watering down Church doctrines to suit some ulterior motive.

Regardless of which, it’s dangerous territory and could threaten to tear apart a Church already losing membership and clergy. There are those who believe the Church faces the possibility of collapse during this generation.

And speaking of church destruction, Cardinal Joseph Zen, who is the emeritus bishop of Hong Kong, is furious with how the pope has handled dealing with China and Catholic Church activities in that country. He’s blasted the deal, which he says, appeases China by agreeing to have the government choose Church leadership. He says that will be the annihilation of the 'underground church,' which is, in fact, a church that follows traditional Catholicism.

He should know: He spent seven years teaching in China’s official, state-approved church and said he 'know[s] that the church is completely enslaved to the government.' Remember, it’s a Communist government.

But there’s more. Over time, it’s been clear Francis veers left on most of his public positions on world affairs, from war to the environment to the family to borders and refugees.

And there he is again – this time, equating protecting the lives of the unborn to protecting the lives of migrants and their rights. In his latest 'guidance for Catholics,' published just last week, Pope Francis said that Christians must care for immigrants just as they care for the unborn.

In his text, 'Gaudate et Exsultate' ('Rejoice and Be Glad'), he said all human lives matter, and he went on to enumerate everything from the living, the sick, slaves, victims of trafficking and anyone rejected for any reason. While he reaffirmed the Church’s position of the sinfulness of abortion, he criticized those who see it as more important than migration.

He said the defense of the 'innocent unborn' should not supersede the defense of the poor or migrants.

Again, just what does that mean? Here he’s dealing with the issues of borders and massive migrations across Europe and North America. The pope has spoken out before that migrants have rights that supersede the sovereign rights of countries. Now that he is putting the burden of 'sin' on those who oppose open borders, the picture, for Catholics, at least, has changed.

But there’s even more: The pope has just released a written apology to the bishops of Chile for a long-standing child abuse situation.

There are 64 victims in New York and Chile involving a cover-up by Chilean Bishop Juan Barros, a man the pope has supported over the years. Despite the allegations of abuse, the pope continually denied knowing of their validity and said he’d never heard from any of the victims.

The recent Vatican investigation, as reported on LifeSite, finally forced the pope to admit that 'he made grave errors' in this case. In his written note, he asks 'the forgiveness of all those whom I offended over the years,' blaming it on a lack of true information.

He omitted any call for justice against those who committed the abuses. Just an 'I’m sorry.'

So Pope Francis is human and made a big mistake. Now what?

It’s not common for Catholics to criticize a pope – but it is the opinion of this cradle Catholic, and I suspect I am not alone, that he’s used up his 'passes.'

It’s time for Pope Francis to step aside and spend time in deep reconciliation with his faith and God – thus putting an end to his reign of Catholic confusion."

While many clergy, religious and laity are deeply concerned over the errors and misguided actions of Francis, sadly some blindly follow him, preferring to keep their heads in the sand.

And while Raymond Arroyo, over at EWTN, has said that good Catholics cannot ignore the controversy over Francis - see here -  some prefer to view the pope not so much as the Custodian of immutable truths, but as a sort of ersatz wizard with a magic wand, capable of changing that which has been revealed by the Lord Jesus, the true Head of the Catholic Church, Who will judge us all - Popes included.

This is the situation at Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts. For Father Shaun O'Connor and his "pastoral team," there is not only no reason for concern, but we should all be enthralled with Francis, his errors, falsehoods and wreckovation included.

Which makes me wonder: Whom do they worship?  Christ the Second Person of the Trinity, the Incarnate Word, or a frustrated modernist who seems Hell-bent on undermining Catholic teaching while sowing confusion.

Confusion is not a gift of the Holy Spirit. It is, in fact, a mark of the Devil. Perhaps this explains

why the Saint Michael Prayer has been dropped after weekend liturgies at the parish.

Francis: I ignore faithful Catholic Bloggers but homosexual activists have my ear...

Francis has made it clear that he doesn't read Blogs written by devout Catholics faithful to Tradition.  As noted here:

"Few bloggers critical of this notorious pontificate, mired in scandal upon scandal, can be surprised that the Pope regards them as enemies to be prayed for, but ultimately ignored, like a bedraggled Big Issue vendor outside a supermarket might be for much of his time. Some, but not many, will be surprised to hear that he 'sees them and knows them' and that it is unlikely that he sees 'spiritual goodness' in many of them."

For Francis, inspired not by Heaven but by the poison of Hell, orthodoxy, fidelity to Jesus Christ and His Revelation, is wickedness.  See here.  As one Cardinal has said, "Do not follow this pope into his evil designs to destroy Holy Mother Church."

Now that we can say with certainty that Francis ignores those of us who lovingly embrace the Church's perennial teaching, the immutable truths of Holy Mother Church which are not subject to the whims of sociopaths or the prevailing zeitgeist, who exactly does Francis listen to?

With his appointment of LGBT promoting Father James Martin, S.J., as a Vatican Consultant and his meeting with homosexual activist Simon Cazale, a man who claims to be married to another male while demanding that the Church change her teaching regarding homosexual acts, it's obvious who has Francis' ear.  It's not Nineveh he's listening to, it's Sodom and Gomorrah.

Ignore Cardinal Donald Wuerl

As noted here:

WASHINGTON — The District’s top Catholic leader has weighed in on the Supreme Court’s decision to legalize same-sex marriage.

“The law of the land is the law of the land,” says Archbishop of Washington Cardinal Donald Wuerl. “We certainly follow what the law says. That doesn’t mean we change the word of God. That doesn’t mean we change the scriptures, or the church’s millennia-long tradition of what marriage is.”

Sodomy is the law of the land?  Sure it is, and I play spin the bottle with Carmen Electra every Friday evening.

And now....sanity.

The doctrine on the necessary conformity of civil law with the moral law is in continuity with the whole tradition of the Church. This is clear from the teaching of Pope John XXIII, "Authority is a postulate of the moral order and derives from God. Consequently, laws and decrees enacted in contravention of the moral order, and hence of the divine will, can have no binding force in conscience...; indeed, the passing of such laws undermines the very nature of authority and results in shameful abuse".

This is the clear teaching of Saint Thomas Aquinas, who writes that "human law is law inasmuch as it is in conformity with right reason and thus derives from the eternal law. But when a law is contrary to reason, it is called an unjust law; but in this case it ceases to be a law and becomes instead an act of violence". And again: "Every law made by man can be called a law insofar as it derives from the natural law. But if it is somehow opposed to the natural law, then it is not really a law but rather a corruption of the law".

Cardinal Wuerl has obviously succumbed to the diabolical disorientation of our time.

Ignore him.

"The Liturgy, with its different moments and symbols, cannot ignore silence.."

The following Instruction is taken from the Vatican website:

OFFICE FOR THE LITURGICAL CELEBRATIONS
OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF

Periods of Silence within the Eucharistic Celebration

 

Number 45 of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (Third and Emended Typical Edition, 2008) prescribes:

Sacred silence also, as part of the celebration, is to be observed at the designated times. Its purpose, however, depends on the time it occurs in each part of the celebration. Thus within the Act of Penitence and again after the invitation to pray, all recollect themselves; but at the conclusion of a reading or the homily, all meditate briefly on what they have heard; then after Communion, they praise and pray to God in their hearts. Even before the celebration itself, it is commendable that silence be observed in the church, in the sacristy, in the vesting room, and in adjacent areas, so that all may dispose themselves to carry out the sacred action in a devout and fitting manner.

Paragraph 30 of the Liturgy Constitution, Sacrosanctum Concilium, likewise prescribes: “And at the proper times all should observe a reverent silence.”

Number 56 of the General Instruction specifies better the importance of silence within the Liturgy of the Word, while number 78 makes the same clear for the Liturgy of the Eucharist: “The Eucharistic Prayer demands that all listen to it with reverence and in silence.” Number 84 then underscores the importance of the observance of silence as a means of good preparation for the reception of Holy Communion: “The priest prepares himself by a prayer, said quietly, that he may fruitfully receive Christ’s Body and Blood. The faithful do the same, praying silently.” Finally, the same attitude is proposed for the period of thanksgiving after Communion: When the distribution of Communion is finished, as circumstances suggest, the priest and faithful spend some time praying privately.¹ If desired, a psalm or other canticle of praise or a hymn may also be sung by the entire congregation. (n. 88)

In several other paragraphs of the General Instruction similar directives concerning silence are repeated, such that silence is an integral part of the liturgical celebration.

The Servant of God John Paul II had recognized that, in actual practice, the directive of the Second Vatican Council concerning sacred silence, a directive later included in the General Instruction, was not always faithfully observed. He writes: “One aspect that we must foster in our communities with greater commitment is the experience of silence. . . . The Liturgy, with its different moments and symbols, cannot ignore silence.” (Spiritus et Sponsa, n. 13, emphasis in original)

 

Here we can recall a text of the then-theologian and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger:

We are realizing more and more clearly that silence is part of the liturgy. We respond, by singing and praying, to the God who addresses us, but the greater mystery, surpassing all words, summons us to silence. It must, of course, be a silence with content, not just the absence of speech and action. We should expect the liturgy to give us a positive stillness that will restore us.²

 

Consequently, the observance of the moments of silence envisioned by the liturgy is of great importance. These moments of silence are as much an integral part of the ars celebrandi (art of celebrating) of the ministers as is participatio actuosa (active participation) on the part of the faithful. Silence in the liturgy is the moment in which one listens with greater attention to the voice of God and internalizes His word, so that it bears the fruit of sanctity in daily life.

---

¹It is worth noting that the original Latin text which the English renders as “privately” is actually “secreto,” better translated as “quietly” or “in silence.”²The Spirit of the Liturgy (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2000), 209.

Recently, I noted how Saint Vincent de Paul Parish in Baldwinville, Massachusetts [Diocese ofWorcester, Mass], will not provide silence to devout Catholics who wish to pray and prepare before Mass - so that they may be properly disposed to receive the Blessed Sacrament . 

The "pastor" of St. Vincent de Paul Parish, Father Francis Roberge, apparently left a comment at this Blog in which he asserted that I will be "ostracized" for politely reminding a group of women who were talking loudly in front of the tabernacle that silence should be observed before Mass.  Father Roberge also implied that my fraternal correction [and it was certainly fraternal and respectful] "crosses a line" and "is also illegal."

Just how does one respond to an individual who presents himself as mentally unbalanced?  I did what I thought best.  I contacted the Saint Joseph Foundation to address this matter of liturgical abuse.

Please pray for Father Roberge and Saint Vincent de Paul Parish.  The atmosphere there will never be spiritually sound as long as there is no silence and reverence in the House of God and as long as those who insist on sound doctrine or liturgical rubrics are treated as criminals.

The faithful deserve better!

 

The assault at Camp Lennox in Otis, Massachusetts: Why is the media downplaying the male-on-male component?

By now most of you have heard about the rapes which took place at an athletic camp in Western Massachusetts.  The Associated Press reports that, "Prosecutors say the assaults occurred Aug. 25 at Camp Lenox in Otis, where Somerville High School was holding an annual team-building retreat. Authorities say the three juniors assaulted the freshmen in a cabin.

Massachusetts state police detectives arrested 17-year-old Galileo Mondol and two 16-year-old boys Friday. Mondol faces numerous charges, including aggravated rape of a child, assault with intent to rape a child, and assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. The juveniles face similar charges. Their names were not released."

Interestingly, almost every newspaper and television account have neglected to mention that this was a case of male-on-male sexual assault.  Now why is that? Because the same liberal mainstream media which has bought into the radical homosexual agenda will often do everything possible to suppress inconvenient facts which would prove harmful to their agenda.  See here for example.  I discussed this in a recent post.

This explains why the mainstream media has no problem exposing incidents of heterosexual rape in the military but virtually ignores the fact that the number of homosexual assaults in the military has been three times greater.  See here.

Read the statistical data which I have provided here and ask yourself why the mainstream media refuses to consider the evidence.

 

When will the media acknowledge the fact that the sexual abuse of children is not a "Catholic problem"?

Pope Benedict XVI met with a group of clerical abuse victims and promised them that the Catholic Church will continue to implement "effective measures" to protect young people in the future. Meanwhile, the sexual abuse of children across other segments of society continues to be largely ignored by the media. And this only serves to suggest that the media are not so much concerned with the welfare of children as they are with unfairly portraying the abuse of children as a "crisis in the Church."

The 2002 John Jay report tabulated a total of 4,392 priests and deacons in the U.S. against whom allegations of sexual abuse were considered by their dioceses to have been substantiated. Most of these were incidences of homosexual misconduct - somewhere between 80-90 percent of all cases. Dr. Thomas Plante of Stanford University and Santa Clara University has said that, "available research suggests that approximately 2 to 5% of priests have had a sexual experience with a minor" which "is lower than the general adult male population that is best estimated to be closer to 8%."

In her report prepared for the U.S. Department of Education entitled "Educator Sexual Misconduct: A Synthesis of Existing Literature," Charol Shakeshaft explains that, "This analysis indicates that 9.6 percent of all students in grades 8 to 11 report contact and/or noncontact educator sexual misconduct that was unwanted." (p. 25). And then Ms. Shakeshaft puts this percentage in a proper perspective:

"To get a sense of the extent of the number of students who have been targets of educator sexual misconduct, I applied the percent of students who report experiencing educator sexual misconduct to the population of all K-12 students. Based on the assumption that the AAUW surveys accurately represent the experiences of all K-12 students, more than 4.5 million students are subject to sexual misconduct by an employee of a school sometime between kindergarten and 12th grade. Possible limitations of the study would all suggest that the findings reported here under-estimate educator sexual misconduct in schools." (p. 26).

Full Shakeshaft report may be found here.

Where are children safer: in the Catholic Church or in the public schools? Who are they safer with: a Catholic priest or a male within the general population?

The numbers tell the story. But the media do not. The statistics do not lie. But a biased media has been known to.

What a shame that those who produce our media do not believe that people deserve the full truth. Until they do, how many more children will have to suffer because of the lack of scrutiny and the denial within the media that the sexual abuse of children is a societal problem?