Showing posts with label Religious. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Religious. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 07, 2016

Pope John Paul II to Contemplatives: Remain faithful to the cloistered life according to your particular charism; Francis: Forget Pope Saint John Paul II's teaching

Pope Benedict XVI, speaking on the value of contemplative life as taught by Saint Teresa of Avila, noted that, “Therefore time devoted to prayer is not time wasted, it is time in which the path of life unfolds, the path unfolds to learning from God an ardent love for him, for his Church, and practical charity for our brothers and sisters..." See here.

And, in a General Audience given on June 13, 2012, Pope Benedict XVI stressed that,

“Therefore, the more room we make for prayer the more we will see our life transformed and enlivened by the tangible power of God’s love. This is what happened, for example, to Bl. Mother Teresa of Calcutta who found in contemplation of Jesus and even also in long periods of aridity the ultimate reason and incredible strength to recognize him in the poor and abandoned, in spite of her fragility.

Contemplation of Christ in our life does not alienate us — as I have already said — from reality. Rather it enables us to share even more in human events, because the Lord, in attracting us to him through prayer, enables us to make ourselves present and close to every brother and sister in his love..."

Pope John Paul II, in Vita Consecrata, No. 59, taught authoritatively that,  "The monastic life of women and the cloister deserve special attention because of the great esteem in which the Christian community holds this type of life, which is a sign of the exclusive union of the Church as Bride with her Lord, whom she loves above all things. Indeed, the life of cloistered nuns, devoted in a special way to prayer, to asceticism and diligent progress in the spiritual life, "is nothing other than a journey to the heavenly Jerusalem and an anticipation of the eschatological Church immutable in its possession and contemplation of God"
… Choosing an enclosed space where they will live their lives, cloistered nuns share in Christ's emptying of himself by means of a radical poverty, expressed in their renunciation not only of things but also of "space", of contacts, of so many benefits of creation.”

…To these dear Sisters, therefore, I extend my gratitude and I encourage them to remain faithful to the cloistered life according to their particular charism. Thanks to their example, this way of life continues to draw many vocations, attracting people by the radical nature of a "spousal" existence dedicated totally to God in contemplation. As an expression of pure love which is worth more than any work, the contemplative life generates an extraordinary apostolic and missionary effectiveness."

But Francis the Destroyer is demanding that Consecrated Religious abandon their particular charisma to better accommodate the modern world.

Marian Horvat notes:

"Francis' latest Apostolic Constitution on Women's Contemplative Life is much more revolutionary than it might appear at first sight. Perhaps that is why it has not received the attention it deserves from the Catholic media, who typically try to avoid reporting the more destructive fruits of Vatican II.

Titled Vultum Dei Quaerere (VDQ), it calls for women religious living in contemplative orders around the world to re-regulate their lifestyles and re-write their constitutions to better conform to the Vatican II guidelines and the changing modern times. The Vatican press release plainly admits VDQ is a “call to implement changes” in 12 areas of the monastic tradition, from formation to cloister and asceticism. In the long term, it is a full re-structuring of contemplative religious orders.


The document is short, if we consider the prolixity of other Francis documents, only 21 pages. Despite much flummery and praise for the contemplative life, the tone of Vultum Dei Quaerere is clear: All Catholic religious in contemplative communities – and that means absolutely all: the cloistered, semi-cloistered, those devoted primarily to prayer, etc. – must officially “get with” the Vatican II program and actively engage in adaptation to the modern world. (VDQ art. 2: §1)

No more exceptions or excuses like “we are following the order’s special charisma.” The move toward centralization and modernization is mandated by the Supreme Pontiff himself and applies to every order under his jurisdiction, including the traditionalist female contemplative institutions – those linked to Fraternity St. Peter, the Institute of Christ the King, the Good Shepherd Institute and, shortly, to those dependent on the Society of St. Pius X, when it officializes its status with Rome.

Forbiddingly, Francis begins by dictating that VDQ abrogates and over-rules all past documents with norms governing the lives of religious contemplative women, including the 1983 Code of Canon Law. To make the command crystal clear, he specifically lists the more relevant documents starting with Pius XII's Apostolic Constitution Sponsa Christi (1950) to the Vatican Instruction Verbi Sponsa (1999) on the contemplative life and enclosure of nuns. (VDQ art. 1 )

Therefore, with a sweep of the hand, Francis mandates:
All contemplative women religious orders must review their aims and rewrite their constitutions to be in better accord with Vatican II;

All past norms and regulations governing contemplatives including Canon Law are voided;

The contemplative women religious orders must submit unquestioningly to VDQ and await another set of guidelines to come.
These new constitutions, once adapted to the new guidelines, still to be issued by the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, must be approved by the Holy See. (VDQ art. 14: §2)

It should be noted here that the one appointed to issue these norms is Brazilian Card. João Braz de Aviz. the head of the Vatican's Congregation for Religious Life. Card. Aviz makes no secret that he believes all religious orders should live their lives more “inserted” into the world.

Addressing the religious formation directors at a Rome congress in 2015, he spoke harsh words against those religious who try to avoid the changes in the Church brought about by Vatican II.

“In fact, those that are distancing themselves from the Council to make another path are killing themselves – sooner or later, they will die,” Braz de Aviz said. “They will make no sense. They will be outside the Church. We need to build, using the Gospel and the Council as a departure point.” (National Catholic Reporter, “ Cardinal to religious: Those who abandon Vatican II are killing themselves,” April 9, 2015)

This is the Cardinal chosen by Francis to issue and regulate the coming specific norms that will direct the contemplative women religious in their task of adaptation to the modern world. I believe it can be fairly said that this does not bode well for the more traditional and conservative orders that have been growing in the past few decades.

While Francis heaps praise on “the life of special consecration,” he is also insisting that these women religious become “women of our time.” (VDQ n. 2) For this, “special attention needs to be given to two great documents of Vatican Council II: Lumen gentium and Perfectae caritatis.”

The first of these in effect sets a new definition of Church as “the People of God,” promotes the protestant notion of the priesthood of the faithful and makes a theoretical call to holiness, but in practice exalting the life of service above all others.

How does this translate into transforming the lives of contemplatives? More participation in the liturgy as ”the people of God,” of course, and a prayer aimed toward improving humanity vs. praise of God.

VDQ effectively asks all contemplative women to embrace the social agenda of the post-conciliar Popes, which eschews prayer for conversion to the Catholic Faith and the primary goal of contemplative life in the past: becoming victim souls to appease the just anger of Our Lord for the sins of individuals and nations. 

A new signpost is erected: to offer “intercessory prayer for prisoners, migrants, refugees and victims of persecution.” These intercessory prayers must also extend to the unemployed, the poor, sick, drug addicts, AIDS victims and others in such “urgent” situations. That is to say, the contemplative sisters are to change their focus from prayer for conversion and salvation of souls to prayer for the social well-being and health of bodies. (n. 16)

Francis the Destroyer is on fire to build this world while attempting to destroy the last vestiges of true contemplation and to sanitize the Catholic Church of her supernatural life.

Preparation for the Beast who will soon reveal himself openly.


Wednesday, August 03, 2016

ISIS refutes Francis: This is a religious war


As reported here, "The Islamic State terror group has come out publicly to reject Pope Francis’ claims that the war being waged by Islamic terrorists is not religious in nature, assuring the pontiff that their sole motivation is religious and sanctioned by Allah in the Qur’an.

Thursday, March 10, 2016

The FBI: "biased" students are a potential threat

The surveillance society is here.  In an FBI report entitled Preventing Violent Extremism in Schools, we are told that:

"Youth embracing domestic extremist movements (across any extremist ideology) are sometimes raised in an environment where racial, religious, or cultural bias is viewed as acceptable. This results in behaviors influenced by family involvement. Youth growing up in these environments are exposed to extremism at a very young age, which permeates their values, and aids the formulation of radical beliefs. Youth view these forms of extremism as
family norms, although they are not acceptable in mainstream society. This dynamic perpetuates the cycle of hatred and intolerance."

And who defined the terms "bias" or "extremism"?  Recall my warning about the Obama administration back in 2009, see here.

In his Encyclical Letter Redemptoris Missio (The Mission of the Redeemer), Pope John Paul II said that, "The Church proposes; she imposes nothing." (No. 39). Such was the teaching of Vatican II: "The Church strictly forbids forcing anyone to embrace the faith, or alluring or enticing people by worrisome wiles. By the same token, she also strongly insists on this right, that no one be frightened away from the faith by unjust vexations on the part of others." (Ad Gentes, No. 13). And Dignitatis Humanae, No. 10 teaches that: "It is one of the major tenets of Catholic doctrine that man's response to God in faith must be free: no one therefore is to be forced to embrace the Christian faith against his own will. This doctrine is contained in the word of God and it was constantly proclaimed by the Fathers of the Church. The act of faith is of its very nature a free act. Man, redeemed by Christ the Savior and through Christ Jesus called to be God's adopted son, cannot give his adherence to God revealing Himself unless, under the drawing of the Father, he offers to God the reasonable and free submission of faith. It is therefore completely in accord with the nature of faith that in matters religious every manner of coercion on the part of men should be excluded. In consequence, the principle of religious freedom makes no small contribution to the creation of an environment in which men can without hindrance be invited to the Christian faith, embrace it of their own free will, and profess it effectively in their whole manner of life."

But while the Church respects freedom of conscience and shuns any form of coercion, Pope Benedict XVI warned that, "We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one's own ego and desires.
We, however, have a different goal: the Son of God, the true man. He is the measure of true humanism. An 'adult' faith is not a faith that follows the trends of fashion and the latest novelty; a mature adult faith is deeply rooted in friendship with Christ. It is this friendship that opens us up to all that is good and gives us a criterion by which to distinguish the true from the false, and deceit from truth."

This dictatorship of relativism seeks to impose its immoral agenda on Christians in the name of "tolerance." But this "tolerance" is a sham. It is simply an attempt to make an idol out of a false conception of freedom. Again, Pope Benedict XVI  explained that, "..what clearly stands behind the modern era's radical demand for freedom is the promise: You will be like God...The implicit goal of all modern freedom movements is, in the end, to be like a god, dependent on nothing and nobody, with one's own freedom not restricted by anyone else's...The primeval error of such a radically developed desire for freedom lies in the idea of a divinity that is conceived as being purely egotistical. The god thus conceived of is, not God, but an idol, indeed, the image of what the Christian tradition would call the devil, the anti-god, because therein lies the radical opposite of the true God: the true God is, of his own nature, being-for (Father), being-from (Son), and being-with (Holy Spirit). Yet man is in the image of God precisely because the being-for , from, and with constitute the basic anthropological shape. Whenever people try to free themselves from this, they are moving, not toward divinity, but toward dehumanizing, toward the destruction of being itself through the destruction of truth. The Jacobin variant of the idea of liberation...is a rebellion against being human in itself, rebellion against truth, and that is why it leads people - as Sartre percipiently observed - into a self-contradictory existence that we call hell. It has thus become fairly clear that freedom is linked to a yardstick, the yardstick of reality - to truth*. Freedom to destroy oneself or to destroy others is not freedom but a diabolical parody. The freedom of man is a shared freedom, freedom in a coexistence of other freedoms, which are mutually limiting and thus mutually supportive: freedom must be measured according to what I am, what we are - otherwise it abolishes itself."

In the name of "tolerance," the New World Order seeks to impose its rebellion from truth on all. It will not tolerate any dissent, any disagreement. Coercion is an acceptable tool in a dictatorship.

The FBI is calling upon educators and students to report on anyone who is perceived to have a "bias" and who, as a result, is deemed to be in danger of "extremism."

In his book "Apologetics: A Philosophic Defense and Explanation of the Catholic Religion," Monsignor Paul J. Glenn, Ph.D, S.T.D., writes, "Let Catholic apologists..not surrender the cause of Christ...by a milk-and-water philosophy of tolerance. Tolerance is for external conduct; it is not for the mind; the mind cannot tolerate error for an instant." (p. 278). And this because error and truth are not "equally good." In other words, we must always strive to tolerate people [including those who disagree with us; and our worst enemies], but we cannot tolerate error. Differing opinions are not equally valid.

And in his important work "The New Tower of Babel," Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand explains that, "Although the dethronement of truth manifests itself in the most drastic and radical way in Nazism and Bolshevism, unfortunately many symptoms of this spiritual disease are also to be found in democratic countries. For example, in discussions we sometimes hear the following argument: 'Why should your opinion be more valid than mine? We are equal and have the same rights. It is undemocratic to pretend that your opinion is preferable.' This attitude is extremely significant because it reveals the complete absence of the notion of truth, the tacit elimination of truth as the determining norm for the value of an opinion....The immanent theme of every opinion is truth; the only thing that matters here is whether or not it is in conformity with reality..This brings us to another slogan disclosing the dethronement of truth. It is the often repeated statement 'It is true for me, but it may not be true for you.' The truth of a proposition is essentially objective; a truth which as such would be valid for one person only is a contradiction in terms. A proposition is true or false, but it can never be true for one person and false for another. The statement that a certain action is morally good may be true or false; but if it is true, it can never be false for any other person.." (pp. 56-58).

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. But such is simply not the case. Again, Dr. Hildebrand explains: "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).

Anyone who believes that Christ founded one Church for the salvation of man or that there is no other name by which we are saved may be defined as entertaining a "bias."

Does this mean that the FBI will treat such students as "extremists," as a potential threat?

What do you think?


Tuesday, October 13, 2015

Look who's calling the kettle black....

As noted here, "President Obama lamented the rancorous, divided state of U.S. politics in a wide-ranging interview with Pulitzer Prize-winning author Marilynne Robinson.

In the unusual discussion, Obama revealed some of his longstanding frustrations with politics while asking the Iowa author questions about her family, her Christian faith and her writings.

'How do you reconcile the idea of faith being really important to you and you caring a lot about taking faith seriously with the fact that, at least in our democracy and our civic discourse, it seems as if folks who take religion the most seriously sometimes are also those who are suspicious of those not like them?' Obama asked during the interview, which was published Monday in the New York Review of Books."

Rather than addressing the serious and substantive criticisms – or just plain concerns – directed at his policies, Obama has chosen time and again to dismiss his critics by painting them as dishonest, emotionally unstable or simply obstinate.  His fiercest criticism has been directed at those who are actually committed toward their religious beliefs, especially Christians.

Remember when he asserted that Americans who disapprove of homosexuality are clinging to worn arguments and old attitudes. Clearly no one has ever gifted Obama with a copy of Dale Carnegie's best-selling book.

Sophocles, in Antigone 1. 1023, says, "Stubborness and stupidity are twins." How so? Dr. Montague Brown explains as he makes the distinction between tenacity and stubborness: "Tenacity is the dedicated adherence to something we know to be worthwhile. As such, tenacity is positive. It involves a clear purpose - to persevere in what is good - and welcomes new evidence and perspectives that clarify or enrich that good...Tenacity is particularly evident when the adherence required is difficult. If my perseverance requires great effort of body or mind, or if it requires me to face a great deal of peer pressure and perhaps even ridicule, then my holding fast to my good purpose shows strength of mind and courage. In such cases, there may be little to gain in terms of social standing, but much in moral standing. Tenaciously holding to what is true and good not only benefits me in terms of virtue; it also works to ensure the stability of these goods in the community....Stubborness is the uncompromising insistence on having our own way. As such, stubborness is negative. It involves a kind of blindness, along with a willful rejection of evidence and the perspectives of others. Stubborness is particularly evident when the compromise required is easy. If the evidence I need to convince me to change my mind is readily available, or if accepting another's perspective would mean giving up little of importance, then my refusal to yield is not reasonable, but is motivated by stubborness. There is little to lose except my desire to be in control. Such rigid clinging to my own will hurts the community, because I refuse to cooperate with others, and it also prevents me from becoming successful and virtuous." (Dr. Montague Brown, Ph.D, The One-Minute Philosopher, pp. 162-163, Sophia Institute Press).

Obama accuses people of faith with sincere and deeply held religious beliefs as being "suspicious of others." This from the same POTUS whose administration authorized a document entitled the "Domestic Extremism Lexicon," which was issued to the Department of Homeland Security. In this lexicon, the Obama administration defined pro-life advocates as follows: "A movement of groups or individuals who are virulently anti-abortion and advocate violence against providers of abortion-related services, their employees, and their facilities. Some cite various racist and anti-Semitic beliefs to justify their criminal activities."

Religious belief isn't the reason why we lack civil discourse in our politics.  The root behind such incivility is fanaticism; The fanaticism which seeks to demonize the other, as Obama frequently does.  See here for example.

In his work of critical importance entitled "Man Against Mass Society," the French philosopher Gabriel Marcel writes, "..the fanatic never sees himself as a fanatic; it is only the non-fanatic who can recognize him as a fanatic; so that when this judgment, or this accusation, is made, the fanatic can always say that he is misunderstood and slandered...Fanaticism is essentially opinion pushed to paroxysm; with everything that the notion of opinion may imply of blinded ignorance as to its own nature....whatever ends the fanatic is aiming at or thinks he is aiming at, even if he wishes to gather men together, he can only in fact separate them; but as his own interests cannot lie in effecting this separation, he is led, as we have seen, to wish to wipe his opponents out. And when he is thinking of these opponents, he takes care to form the most degrading images of them possible - they are 'lubricious vipers' or 'hyenas and jackals with typewriters' - and the ones that reduce them to most grossly material terms. In fact, he no longer thinks of these opponents except as material obstacles to be overturned or smashed down. Having abandoned the behaviour of a thinking being, he has lost even the feeblest notion of what a thinking being, outside himself, could be. It is understandable therefore that he should make every effort to deny in advance the rights and qualifications of those whom he wishes to eliminate; and that he should regard all means to this end as fair. We are back here again at the techniques of degradation. It cannot be asserted too strongly or repeated too often that those the Nazis made use of in their camps - techniques for degrading their victims in their own eyes, for making mud and filth of them - and those which Soviet propagandists use to discredit their adversaries, are not essentially different though we should, in fairness, add that sadism, properly so called, is not to be found in the Russian camps." (pp. 135-136, 149).

Marcel explains that, "In fact, the greatest merit of the critical spirit is that it tends to cure fanaticism, and it is logical enough that in our own fanatical times the critical spirit should tend to disappear, should no longer even be paid lip service as a value."

It is obvious that President Obama is no fan of the critical spirit but has, rather, succumbed to ideological fanaticism and the techniques of degradation.

He is the one suffering from suspiciousness of others.  To the point of anti-religious paranoia.

Thursday, September 03, 2015

Kim Davis jailed for her religious beliefs...

The iron fist of anti-Christian persecution has struck Kim Davis. Because this child of God refused to jettison her deeply-held Christian beliefs and violate her conscience, a Christianophobic judge has decided to jail her.  No accommodations will be made for her.  Because she's a Christian. See here.

I have been warning for years (see here for example) that a persecution inspired by the Homosexual Hate Movement was coming.  I was derided by some.  But Cardinal Raymond Burke agreed with me.  And now it has arrived.

Don't say I didn't warn you.

Related reading here.


Sunday, July 05, 2015

The Gaystapo are on the march to destroy your religious freedoms

Dr. Kevin Collins notes "The ink on the Supreme Court’s lawless decree that God’s law against sodomy is null and void is scarcely dry, but the Gaystopo has not taken a day off. They are pressing the fight and will continue to do so until either they or the Catholic Church in America have been defeated.

Emboldened by the realization that they own the Supreme Court, the Gaystopo, as predicted here, are turning every screw they can to mock Catholic doctrine and press their attack."

For 25 years I have been warning that the homosexual hate movement is totalitarian and has absolutely nothing to do with "equality" or "civil rights." See here and here for example.

And now, in the light of the SCOTUS decision last week, many Americans are finally beginning to wake up.  Even as most of the clergy remain mute, either paralyzed by fear or silent because they secretly favor the sodomite agenda or are actively engaging in homosexual acts themselves.

The homosexual hate movement is engaging in what the French philosopher Gabriel Marcel [who helped shape my philosophy] labelled the "techniques of degradation."

In his work of critical importance entitled "Man Against Mass Society," Marcel explains, "I understand by 'techniques of degradation' a whole body of methods deliberately put into operation in order to attack and destroy in human persons belonging to some definite class or other their self-respect, and in order to transform them little by little into mere human waste products, conscious of themselves as such, and in the end forced to despair of themselves, not merely at an intellectual level, but in the very depths of their souls.." (p. 42).

Through the fanatical employment of such techniques, radical homosexual activists hope to smash down their opponents, to categorize us as mentally ill (suffering from a "phobia"), as hate-filled "bigots" who cling to "worn out arguments" based upon an "archaic morality" which is rooted in Divine Revelation and Natural Law, as superstitious and backward people who need to be re-educated in order to fit into the new Culture of Sodomy.

Marcel writes, "Having abandoned the behaviour of a thinking being, he [the fanatic of any stripe who seeks to impose rather than propose*] has lost even the feeblest notion of what a thinking being, outside himself, could be. It is understandable therefore that he should make every effort to deny in advance the rights and qualifications of those whom he wishes to eliminate; and that he should regard all means to this end as fair. We are back here again at the techniques of degradation.." (p. 149).

In the New Order, those who oppose homosexuality on moral grounds must be degraded. They must be placed in a ghetto. Just as the National Socialists employed the techniques of degradation in their propaganda war against the Jewish People, portraying them as rats emerging from a sewer, as subhuman people who stood in the way of a new republic and a more glorious era, so too radical homosexual activists seek to demonize any and all moral opposition toward homosexuality and will use any and all means to achieve that end.

The homosexual movement is not a civil rights movement. It is a moral revolution. And while the Church proposes, the ideological stormtroopers of the Gaystapo seek to impose.

Saturday, May 02, 2015

Opponents of religious freedom are driven by satanic rage

Charlie Butts and Jody Brown, in an article written for OneNewsNow, note that, "The opponents of religious freedom aren't stopping at trying to redefine marriage. In the words of one attorney, recent events indicate they also want to 'ruin every aspect' of the lives of those who stand for natural marriage."

I've been warning for years that the same radical homosexual activists who continually cry for more "tolerance" are anything but tolerant. This is a spiritual war. The homosexual movement is not a civil rights movement. It is an attempt at moral revolution. An attempt to change people's view of homosexuality.

Writing in the Chicago Free Press, even homosexual activist Paul Varnell admitted this. He wrote, "The fundamental controverted issue about homosexuality is not discrimination, hate crimes or domestic partnerships, but the morality of homosexuality. Even if gays obtain non-discrimination laws, hate crimes law and domestic partnership benefits, those can do little to counter the underlying moral condemnation which will continue to fester beneath the law and generate hostility, fuel hate crimes, support conversion therapies, encourage gay youth suicide and inhibit the full social acceptance that is our goal. On the other hand, if we convince people that homosexuality is fully moral, then all their inclination to discriminate, engage in gay-bashing or oppose gay marriage disappears. Gay youths and adults could readily accept themselves. So the gay movement, whether we acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a sexual liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people's view of homosexuality." (Paul Varnell, "Defending Our Morality," Chicago Free Press, Aug 16, 2000, http://indegayforum.org/authors/varnell/varnell37.html).

In a previous post, I mentioned how Professor James Hitchcock, in his excellent work entitled "Catholicism and Modernity" (New York: Seabury Press, 1979, p. 86), explains the role of the media in this entire process:"The media's alleged commitment to 'pluralism' is at base a kind of hoax. The banner of pluralism is raised in order to win toleration for new ideas as yet unacceptable to the majority. Once toleration has been achieved, public opinion is systematically manipulated first to enforce a status of equality between the old and the new, then to assert the superiority of the new over the old. A final stage is often the total discrediting, even sometimes the banning, of what had previously been orthodox."

We have entered that final stage. Christianity will now be criminalized because of evil forces without the Church and cowardly Christians within her who cannot even muster enough fortitude to stand with Jesus in defense of His truth.

Blessed are they who are not ashamed of the Lord Jesus.  What does that suggest about those who are?

Recommended meditation: Rev 3:16.

Saturday, July 07, 2012

Archbishop Chaput and the U.S. Bishops are challenging us: How shall we respond?


In a homily delivered at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception that brought the U.S. bishops' "fortnight for freedom" to a close, Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput stressed that defending religious liberty is part of the bigger struggle to "convert our own hearts" and to "live for God completely."  See here.

This struggle to convert our own hearts and to live for God completely encompasses a battle against Satan and his demonic forces.  Satan does not want the follower of Jesus to live in peace and harmony.  He wants to seduce the followers of the Lord away from God.  How easy it is to lose sight of this reality.  Just recently, I noted how the Profession of Faith, the Nicene Creed, was omitted during Holy Mass at Saint Joseph's Parish in Fitchburg.  A parishioner named Jan left a comment at this Blog telling me that if I have a problem with such liturgical abuse, I shouldn't attend Mass there.  I was told that Jan is most likely the parish secretary at Saint Joseph's, the same woman with an internet profile photograph depicting herself in a state of undress and sporting devil's horns.  See photo.  Readers of this Blog know that Saint Joseph's Parish has had its share of difficulties.  Last year, one of the priests attached to the parish, Father Lowe Dongor, was found to have been downloading child pornography and fled the country to avoid prosecution.

This is the same parish which excluded me from participating in ministry because of my orthodoxy.

In order to live our lives completely for God, we have to struggle against the principalities and powers of this world.  So many Catholics today refuse to acknowledge this truth.  For such people, belief in evil spirits is a matter of "superstition."  Pope Paul VI, in a general audience on November 15, 1972, refuted this notion saying, "What are the Church's greatest needs at the present time?  Don't be surprised at our answer and don't write it off as simplistic or even superstitious: one of the Church's greatest needs is to be defended against the evil which we call the Devil...Evil is not merely an absence of something but an active force, a living, spiritual being that is perverted and that perverts others....It is a departure from the picture provided by biblical and Church teaching to refuse to acknowledge the Devil's existence...or to explain the Devil as a pseudoreality, a conceptual, fanciful, personification of the unknown causes of our misfortunes...St. Paul calls him the 'god of this world,' and warns us of the struggle we Christians must carry on in the dark, not only against one Devil, but against a frightening multiplicity of them.."

Our spiritual struggle, then, is against a host of evil spirits.  And these evil spirits are extremely cunning.  Although they are fallen angels, they are still far more intelligent than us because of their angelic natures.  Pope Paul VI, during the same audience, stressed that the Devil, "..undermines man's moral equilibrium with his sophistry.  He is the malign, clever seducer who knows how to make his way into us through the senses, the imagination and the libido, through utopian logic, or through disordered social contacts in the give and take of our social activities, so that he can bring in us deviations that are all the more harmful because they seem to conform to our physical or mental make-up, or to our profound, instinctive aspirations....The matter of the Devil and of the influence he can exert on individuals as well as on communities, entire societies or events, is a very important chapter of Catholic doctrine which should be studied again, although it is given little attention today.."

Forty years later, we can still say the same.  Little if any attention is paid to this critical aspect of Catholic doctrine.  Mostly, I think, because we believe (in our arrogance) that we can solve all problems and difficulties ourselves.  We forget Jesus' warning that some spirits can only be driven out through much prayer and fasting.

Jesus gives us power and authority over demonic forces.  The demons were subject to the seventy disciples (Luke 10: 17-20).  They were subject to Saint Paul and the first Christians.  And they are subject to us as present-day followers of the Lord Jesus.  But in order to use this power over the evil spirits, those of us who profess to be Christian must grow and develop in our spiritual lives.  This means that we must strive to "live for God completely" as Archbishop Chaput reminded us.  We must attend Holy Mass faithfully (and reverently), pray daily - the Rosary is a spiritual weapon which Satan fears, and spend time with Sacred Scripture - God's Holy Word.

As Christians, we are MORE THAN CONQUERORS through the shed Blood of Jesus Christ (Romans 8: 37-39).  Let's live our lives accordingly.  This means listening to the Magisterium of the Church with docility and submitting our minds and wills to that teaching authority which has been established by Jesus Himself.  Without such obedience, how can we expect the evil spirits to obey our command - in the name of Jesus - to depart?  Disobedience and sin will not drive out the demons.  Only a life of faith lived in humility, taking the Virgin Mother of God as our model.

What are we waiting for? And whom shall we take as our model: Our Lady and the Saints who lived for God completely or the devils who reject God's saving plan?

The answer to that question will determine whether we re-evangelize our culture or come to resemble the demons whose doctrines we follow.



Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Richard Wagner wants us to know (gasp) that there have been homosexual priests and religious throughout the Church's history


Richard Wagner, a confused soul who resides in Seattle, Washington, has a brief biography at the website for the "Center for Progressive Christianity" which may be found here.  This lost soul says that he works to "heal" professionals including religious leaders and that he has facilitated "support groups for gay clergy of numerous denominations for many years."  Mr. Wagner offers his advice at a website titled drdicksexadvice.com.

Why am I even writing about him?  Because this lost soul who suffers from the psychopathology of homosexuality describes himself as a "gay priest."  His website, which may be found here,  and his Blog both offer the same old tired homosexual agitprop.  At his Blog, he asserts that, "For centuries homosexuals have been villified and persecuted by the Catholic Church, but throughout all of its history the Church has had a very inconvenient secret."

And what is this great secret?  That there have been clergy and religious men and women who were homosexual!  Gosh, who would have thought?  Saint Catherine of Siena, a great mystic and Doctor of the Church, fought for reform at a time when many clergy had succumbed to the vice of homosexuality.  So this doesn't exactly come as a news flash, unless of course you have been ignorant of the Church's history.  In her Dialogues, St. Catherine said that, "...these wretches not only do not bridle this fragility [of a weak nature], but do worse, committing that accursed sin against nature, and as blind as fools, with the light of their intellect darkened, they do not know the stench and misery in which they are."

Saint Peter Damian, another Doctor of the Church, a Cardinal and great reformer of the clergy, wrote an entire treatise entitled the Book of Gomorrah against the inroads made by homosexuality among the clergy.  In his important work, St. Damian describes the iniquity of homosexuality as well as its psychological and, more importantly, its moral consequences:

"Truly, this vice is never to be compared with any other vice because it surpasses the enormity of all vices...It defiles everything, stains everything, pollutes everything.  And as for itself, it permits nothing pure, nothing clean, nothing other than filth....The miserable flesh burns with the heat of lust; the cold mind trembles with the rancor of suspicion; and in the heart of the miserable man chaos boils like Tartarus [Hell]....In fact, after this most poisonous serpent once sinks its fangs into the unhappy soul, sense is snatched away, memory is borne off, the sharpness of the mind is obscured.  It becomes unmindful of God and even forgetful of itself.  This plague undermines the foundation of faith, weakens the strength of hope, destroys the bond of charity; it takes away justice, subverts fortitude, banishes temperance, blunts the keenness of prudence.  And what more should I say since it expels the whole host of the virtues from the chamber of the human heart and introduces every barbarous vice as if the bolts of the doors were pulled out."

Because the soul en route to Hell has lost faith and is utterly miserable, it seeks company on its journey to final impenitence and, ultimately, eternal damnation.  Which is why Mr. Wagner advances the now exhausted argument that anyone who stands with the Church's moral teaching and opposes homosexuality because of divine revelation and or the natural moral law is a "homophobe" who secretly pines for a homosexual encounter.  He asserts that, "one's level of homophobia" is in direct proportion to one's own brutally closeted desire for homosexual sex."  Wagner argues that "the more you wail against something" the more likely it is that you are attracted to that thing.  Operating on this theory may we assume that those heroic souls who opposed National Socialism in general and the Nazi Party more specifically were closeted Nazis?  Perhaps Simon Wiesenthal hunted Nazi butchers because he secretly admired their genocidal mentality?  And what of those who railed against the Ku Klux Klan or Atheistic Humanism with its record of genocide and sheer brutality?

Wagner, as with many of his associates in the homosexual hate movement, employs this argument because he has nothing substantive to offer.  It is nothing more than a cheap attempt at intimidation: "If you oppose homosexuality I'll tell evreyone that you are a closeted homosexual."

If Richard Wagner was really a Catholic priest at one time, I'd like to know how and why he was ordained. But if this mental midget believes that he's telling us something we don't already know when he says that there have been priests and religious throughout the Church's history who were homosexual, he is deluding himself. 

What of it?  Alexander VI was a notorious sinner too.  Does that mean we should all join him?

Thursday, January 19, 2012

Clark University in Worcester: Demonizing religious opposition toward homosexuality

Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts is engaging in what the French philosopher Gabriel Marcel labelled the "techniques of degradation."


In his work of critical importance entitled "Man Against Mass Society," Marcel explains, "I understand by 'techniques of degradation' a whole body of methods deliberately put into operation in order to attack and destroy in human persons belonging to some definite class or other their self-respect, and in order to transform them little by little into mere human waste products, conscious of themselves as such, and in the end forced to despair of themselves, not merely at an intellectual level, but in the very depths of their souls.." (p. 42).

Through the fanatical employment of such techniques, radical homosexual activists hope to smash down their opponents, to categorize them as mentally ill (suffering from a "phobia"), as hate-filled "bigots" who cling to "worn out arguments" based upon an "archaic morality" which is rooted in Divine Revelation and Natural Law, as superstitious and backward people who need to be re-educated in order to fit into the new Culture of Sodomy.

Marcel writes, "Having abandoned the behaviour of a thinking being, he [the fanatic of any stripe who seeks to impose rather than propose] has lost even the feeblest notion of what a thinking being, outside himself, could be. It is understandable therefore that he should make every effort to deny in advance the rights and qualifications of those whom he wishes to eliminate; and that he should regard all means to this end as fair. We are back here again at the techniques of degradation.." (p. 149).

In the New Order, those who oppose homosexuality on moral grounds must be degraded. They must be placed in a ghetto. Just as the National Socialists employed the techniques of degradation in their propaganda war against the Jewish People, portraying them as rats emerging from a sewer, as subhuman people who stood in the way of a new republic and a more glorious era, so too radical homosexual activists seek to demonize any and all moral opposition toward homosexuality and will use any and all means to achieve that end.

Clark University, the same institution which employs Doctor Abbie Goldberg, a radical homosexual activist, is most anxious to demonize those who oppose homosexuality on moral grounds [Divine Revelation and/or the Natural Moral Law] and to paint such people as hateful and discriminatory.  Those who believe that marriage is between a man and a woman are categorized as "heterosexists," as people who mistreat homosexuals and lesbians and who have the audacity to believe that heterosexual relationships are the norm.  The University asserts:

"Heterosexism is the systematic, day-to-day, institutional mistreatment of gay, lesbian, transsexual and bisexual people by a heterosexually dominated culture. At its core, heterosexism assumes that heterosexual relationships represent the norm and are, therefore, implicitly superior to gay, lesbian, transsexual or bisexual relationships. Out of heterosexism stems homophobia which is the fear and/or hatred of gays, lesbians, transsexuals and bisexuals because of their sexual orientations." (See here).

By affixing the homophobic label on those who oppose the deviancy of homosexuality, Clark University (as with other institutions which seek to impose the radical homosexual agenda) hopes to intimidate those who oppose the psychopathology by dismissing their arguments based on right reason as "irrational fears."

Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, in their blueprint for propagandizing Americans to accept homosexuality entitled "After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear & Hatred of Gays in the 90s," write that, "By conversion we actually mean something far more profoundly threatening to the American Way of Life, without which no truly sweeping social change can occure.  We mean conversion of the average American's emotions, mind, and will, through a planned psychological attack, in the form of propaganda fed to the nation via the media." (p. 153).

These tactics are employed not only via the media but by college campuses across the nation.  As this article makes clear, the propagandists will stop at nothing to desensitize the "average American" and will even resort to violence if all else fails:

"In 1989, Dr. Chuck McIlhenny, pastor of San Francisco's First Orthodox Presbyterian Church, exercised his Constitutional rights of free speech and assembly and helped engineer the defeat of a domestic partnership law that would have forced the public to accept homosexual immorality by compelling everyone to treat two sodomites as a family.


McIlhenny and his family soon became the focus of intense and vicious sodomite hate. For three years, they received thousands of threatening and harassing phone calls 24 hours a day, and many callers swore to sodomize and then kill the McIlhenny's three daughters.

His home and church were firebombed. In 1990, sodomite groups repeatedly vandalized the church and home with graffiti like 'Dykes for Choice,' and attacked the crisis pregnancy center housed in the church. Cowardly, skulking sodomites broke the church's windows so many times the parishioners boarded them up permanently.

Institutions such as Clark University are encouraging this sort of climate by portraying Christians and others who oppose homosexuality on moral grounds as "bigots" who suffer from irrational fears and as religious fanatics (see here).

Clark University is fomenting hatred and Christianophobia.  This shouldn't really come as a surprise.  The Church proposes but the world imposes.  See here.

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

U.S. Army threatens military chaplains with court martial for "religious, conscience" objection to homosexuality

I have been warning for years that this was coming. 

Gaudium et Spes No. 16 of the Second Vatican Council teaches us that, "In the depths of his conscience, man detects a law which he does not impose upon himself, but which holds him to obedience. Always summoning him to love good and avoid evil, the voice of conscience when necessary speaks to his heart: do this, shun that. For man has in his heart a law written by God; to obey it is the very dignity of man; according to it he will be judged. Conscience is the most secret core and sanctuary of a man. There he is alone with God, Whose voice echoes in his depths. In a wonderful manner conscience reveals that law which is fulfilled by love of God and neighbor. In fidelity to conscience, Christians are joined with the rest of men in the search for truth, and for the genuine solution to the numerous problems which arise in the life of individuals from social relationships. Hence the more right conscience holds sway, the more persons and groups turn aside from blind choice and strive to be guided by the objective norms of morality."  And Dignitatis Humanae further explains that, "In all his activity a man is bound to follow his conscience in order that he may come to God, the end and purpose of life.  It follows that he is not to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his conscience." (DH, 3).

But this is precisely what the United States Army would like to do.  It would like to force military chaplains to betray their conscience.  This is gravely disturbing since legal recognition by the state for the right of the person to object in conscience is necessary.  It is necessary because civil law at times permits and even requires morally evil actions.  A society is said to be just when its laws defend the freedom of right conscience within due limits.  Think of those who, on religious grounds, have refused to serve in a combat role when this country was at war.  Conscientious objectors have always been permitted to serve their country in non-combat roles.

Christians everywhere should pray about this.  Military chaplains should be able to say along with St. Paul, "Brethren, I have lived before God in all good conscience up to this day" (Acts 23:1).

Related reading here and here.

Get involved.  Tell the Obama administration that you believe military chaplains shouldn't be forced against their conscience to reconcile with homosexual sin.  Go here.

Monday, September 20, 2010

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


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

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

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

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

There are three wounds, in this country of yours, which are causing pain to my motherly Heart and making it bleed...




On December 3, 1986, at Dallas, Texas, Our Lady said to Fr. Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests: "There are three wounds, in this country of yours, which are causing pain to my motherly Heart and making it bleed. The first wound is caused by apostasy, which is spreading, because of the errors that are being taught and promoted more and more even in Catholic schools, and which are leading an immense number of my poor children to separate themselves from the true faith. The responsibility for this grave situation rests above all with those who have consecrated themselves to God because, having been seduced by the spirit of pride, they continue on their way, despite my motherly admonitions and the directives given by the Magisterium of the Church. You, my beloved sons, are to be my remedy for this illness, by preaching more and more the truth which Jesus has taught you and which the Pope and the bishops united with him are still presenting today to everyone with clarity and courage. You must oppose anyone who teaches doctrines which are different, and, above all, you must speak openly to all the faithful of the grave danger, which they are encountering today, of swerving from the true faith in Jesus and in his Gospel. Recite often the profession of faith, composed by the first of my beloved sons, Pope Paul VI, now up here with me, as he foresaw these difficult moments.


The second wound is caused by the disunity that has entered into the Church which exists in your countries. How it makes the Heart of Jesus and my motherly Heart suffer to see that many bishops, priests, religious and faithful are no longer united with - and are even openly opposing - the Pope, whom Jesus has set up as the foundation of his Church. This division is becoming daily more extensive and deeper, and soon it will become even open and proclaimed. How much pain I feel in seeing that often the greatest supporters of this rebellion are those who have consecrated themselves to God and have vowed to follow Jesus along the road of humility, of poverty, of chastity and of obedience. You, my beloved sons, are to be my remedy for this deep wound by being ever more united with the Pope, by helping your bishops to be united with him, through prayer, love and your good example, and by leading all the faithful to this unity.


The third wound is caused by the infidelity that has entered into the life of many children of the Church, who no longer follow the commandments of God and the teachings given by Jesus in his Gospel. Thus they walk along the wrong road of evil and of sin. Sin is no longer recognized as an evil. Often justification is made for even the gravest sins against nature, such as abortion and homosexuality. Sins are no longer confessed. To what a grave state of sickness have you now come!


You, my beloved sons, are to be my remedy for such a grave and so extensive an evil, by helping my children to walk along the road of purity and of holiness. Return again to teaching everyone true Catholic morality. Give a helping hand to my poor sinful children, to lead them to the observance of the Law of God. Make them understand the necessity of frequent confession, which becomes indispensable before one who is in the state of mortal sin may receive Holy Communion. The Church here is all wounded because of communions received sacrilegiously...


If you accept this motherly invitation of mine, you will then be the gift of love which my Immaculate Heart is offering today to the Church and to all of humanity which is living in this great country of yours. You will thus become my remedy for your illnesses. You are the instruments of my peace...."
Is there really any doubt that the apostasy is spreading everywhere? Sins against nature (such as homosexual acts which cry to Heaven for vengeance - Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1867 - are being justified even in many churches which profess to be Christian (see here for example). The New Age movement has made inroads into the Church.
On October 13, 1973, at Akita, Japan, Our Lady told Sister Agnes Katsuko Sasagawa that:


". . . if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one will never have seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. The only arms which will remain for you will be the Rosary and the Sign left by my Son. Each day recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the bishops and the priests."

"The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against other bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their confreres (other priests). Churches and altars will be sacked. The Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord."

"The demon will be especially implacable against the souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will be no longer pardon for them."

". . . Pray very much the prayers of the Rosary. I alone am able still to save you from the calamities which approach. Those who place their confidence in me will be saved."

Thursday, December 18, 2008

No wiggle room...

Father Ray Bourgeois, an American Maryknoll priest who advocates the ordination of women, will be excommunicated unless he renounces his stand. I was attacked by a La Salette priest for standing with the Church on this issue. Read here. This angry priest saw no problem with La Salette religious discussing the ordination of women to the ministerial priesthood (going so far as to suggest that there is "wiggle room" on the issue) and described such discussion as "casual speculation."

Wrong Father. It's disobedience. And I won't expect you to understand the difference.
Site Meter