The Moloch State, and those demon-infested clerics who work for it, don't want Catholics and other people of good will to familiarize themselves with Humanae Vitae

Writing in The Valley Patriot, Paul Murano notes that this past July marked
"..the 49th anniversary of perhaps the most important document written in modern times. It is a simple document, yet profound; something that can be read in less than an hour. It was written in the midst of a burgeoning movement that would later be called the ‘sexual revolution,’ which at the time was a tsunami waiting to be broken open. Future centuries will see this document as the dam that could have kept the tide of evil in check, a tide that would bring about a culture of death by sowing utter confusion on what it means to be a human person. Today, most people ignore this document, reject it, or simply have never heard of it. Non-Catholics see it as exclusively a Catholic thing. It is not. The importance of Humanae Vitae is universal: its object is human nature, it appeals to human reason, and its predictions are truly prophetic. It is addressed not only to Catholics, but “to all men of good will.” Humanae Vitae reiterated the truth about contraception.

Why is HV so important, yet so ignored? Most people know there is something fundamentally askew about how we view life and love today. We can’t seem to put our finger on it, but we see evidence in the ubiquitous drug problem, the numbers of people on prescription meds just to cope, the prominent role that counselors and lawyers have today, the way young people use each other for pleasure both voluntarily and involuntarily, the crises of human sex trafficking and pornography addiction, our divorce culture, the breakdown of the family, the increase in acceptance of homosexuality, a gender ideology that has left young people confused and frightened, and the extraordinarily high suicide rates. Something has gone haywire and we cannot fathom how it happened so quickly.

When the history e-books look back in amazement at how the western world depopulated itself so quickly in the midst of what seemed like unprecedented prosperity, it will be clear that the material catalyst was contraception. Europe, Japan, Canada, Russia, Australia, and other nations are depopulating at an alarming rate, prompting governments to offer incentives for couples to have more children. The average child per family rate has sunk to around 1.3, considerably less than replacement rate. (See www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZeyYIsGdAA.) To fill the economic void, massive immigration, legal and illegal, is being allowed through Europe and the United States. As a result western values, beliefs, and way of life are threatened. While motives for having fewer children are varied, one common motive is economic. Many have come to value money over children, while neighboring peoples who migrate continue to have large families. The numbers will tell the story.

Many internal social viruses have contributed to this cultural suicide, which begins with contraception. For example, the tragedy of divorce cannot be overstated. The death of marriage ignores one crucial metaphysical truth: When two become one, they can never truly become two again. Further, it is not surprising that the divorce culture and family breakdown has coincided with the depopulation crisis. The family is the basic social unit of human society that provides a natural buffer between the individual and the government. Tyranny arises when the family breaks down, as do dysfunctional children and unhealthy adults. Contraception is a large contributor to this growing divorce rate, for it enables couples to hold back on the total self gift of one to the other, a barrier that not only blocks life, but blocks love. In a sense it is an unspoken contract to use each other to avoid their one flesh union. Unaware of its cause, this privation of love eventually erodes the life of the union.

The current “contraception mentality,” that separates the love-making from life-making, lays the foundation for a revolution against human nature. Unplanned pregnancy is now a “mistake” that prenatal homicide (abortion) can ‘fix’. Premarital sex becomes the norm since the permanent bonding it creates is ignored (leading to a plethora of problems) and its power to procreate is denied. No longer is marital commitment seen as important, let alone necessary for one-flesh intimacy, weakening the bond of marriage one enters in the future. Interestingly, people who cohabitate before marriage have a far greater chance of divorce; and in a society that sees a 50% divorce rate, only two percent of couples who practice natural family planning (rather than contraception) ever divorce.

Once the natural purpose of sex is rejected and the notion of the perverted or disordered act has lost its meaning, homosexuality is rationalized. Pornography, which completely guts the act of union of all objective meaning and purpose, has become mainstream; and the practice of masturbation, traditionally understood to be self-abuse, has been proclaimed “healthy” by professional charlatans like Dr. Ruth, et al. on a vulnerable generation of young people, disarmed by their culture.

The contraceptive mentality that occurred as a result of Humanae Vitae’s rejection has led to the rationalization of a false liberty of radical autonomy, which in turn legalized murder – first for the preborn and now in some states the elderly. Over 60 million people, who should have been here today under 45 years old, are missing due to abortion alone. That’s one out of every three of us.
There is no coincidence that the sexual revolution has led to a culture of death in just one generation. The world would be radically different had Humanae Vitae been heeded. It is not too late."


Perhaps not.  But the hour is late.


The sexual morality popular in the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah brought them to complete and utter destruction.  Today we are building a New Sodom, a Moloch State which offers not law and justice but an oppressive demonic order which claims total jurisdiction over man and defies God and His plan for humanity.  So it is no surprise that many within the priesthood (as throughout society in general) have succumbed to homosexual ideology as they deny the true God and His Commandments.  Rousas Rushdoony exposes the nature of the demonic Moloch State which so many of the clergy now willingly serve: "The Moloch state simply represents the supreme effort of man to command the future, to predestine the world, and to be as God.  Lesser efforts, divination, spirit-questing, magic and witchcraft are equally anathema to God.  All represent efforts to have the future on other than God's terms, to have a future apart from and in defiance of God.  They are assertions that the world is not of God but of brute factuality, and that men can somehow master the world and the future by going directly to the raw materials thereof."

The Devil seduces men through the deceitful tactics of pseudo-saviors.  And ours is a perverse age in which many pseudo-saviors pretend to offer liberation through sex without love, violence and drug abuse as well as the occult.  As Fr. Miceli, S.J., warned: "In the name of its new secular gods, Progress and Liberty, titles that are false fronts for Rebellion and Licentiousness, many formerly Christian nations are driving their sons and daughters through the demonic fires of sacrificial murder.  Thus..so-called Christian nations, having legalized abortion and while preparing to legalize euthanasia, have become Moloch states."

This is the essence of the new anti-Christian sex education in preparation for the Moloch State. As George Kendall explains in Witness for the Truth, this sex education "radically separates sex from the very idea of the covenanted love of man and woman. Sex becomes merely a self-centered appetite to be satisfied and not a gift of self to another. As a result, what this kind of education produces is the lonely, autonomous individual. This is the ultimate in alienation. The autonomous individual is alienated even from his own body, which becomes to him only a thing, too - a thing to be used as a means to his autonomous pleasure. The end result is depersonalization which, if it lasts into eternity without being healed, means eternal loss. Few have put it as eloquently as Randy Engel did: 'Is it any wonder that the state must wage war against the family?* For the state requires not individuals who dream, and think, and pray, but rather what has come to be called 'the mass man' - rootless, unaffirmed, a reactor - a mere reed blowing in the wind - a thing to be manipulated, to be used, to be disposed of, but never, never, to be loved, for the giant has no heart. And since the modern state has no heart, that which men previously have done out of love, must now be done out of fear, and hatred, and brute force.' So clearly, centemporary sex education, 'Catholic' or otherwise, is a profound attack on human dignity and on the human person.." (Witness for the Truth, pp. 399-400. citing Randy Engel "The Family Under Siege," Wanderer, March 6, 1980).

And now I would add, satanic. The United States, like the other Termite Nations of the West, is fast-becoming a Moloch State which claims total jurisdiction over man. It is becoming (and some of us would argue has already become) a demon-state which rejects God's Commandments and His plan for the human family. This demon-state (and make no mistake about it, our leaders increasingly have recourse to demons) denies that there is any transcendent, higher-than-human voice or authority that cares for man.

Enter the Man of Sin!

* See here

Related reading here.

The Cult of Softness and the "Francis effect"

We need priests and Bishops who fear God more than they do men.  Cowards will not lead us out of the valley of death.  Neither will homosexual or effeminate clerics who cannot relate to men.

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 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).

The Cult of Softness (see here) continues to produce only rot within the Church.

The New York Times has confirmed what devout Catholics already know, that the "Francis effect" is a myth:

"...are Catholics actually coming back? In the United States, at least, it hasn’t happened. New survey findings from Georgetown’s Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate suggest that there has been no Francis effect — at least, no positive one.

In 2008, 23 percent of American Catholics attended Mass each week. Eight years later, weekly Mass attendance has held steady or marginally declined, at 22 percent.

Of course, the United States is only one part of a global church. But the researchers at Georgetown found that certain types of religious observance are weaker now among young Catholics than they were under Benedict. 

In 2008, 50 percent of millennials reported receiving ashes on Ash Wednesday, and 46 percent said they made some sacrifice beyond abstaining from meat on Fridays. This year, only 41 percent reported receiving ashes and only 36 percent said they made an extra sacrifice, according to CARA. 

In spite of Francis’ personal popularity, young people seem to be drifting away from the faith."

Young people are naturally idealistic. They want to be challenged.  They need to be challenged with the hard demands of the Gospel, with the truth.

But Francis offers only a non-dogmatic, Cotton-Candy Catholicism.  A sacharrin "gospel" which appeals to worldly types but which is short on substance.  And while more and more youth are abandoning the Church, rather than placing an emphasis on doctrinal truths, Francis offers unsound teaching and meets with people like Simon Cazal, a homosexual activist who claims to be married to another man while demanding that the Church founded by Christ Jesus change its teaching on homosexuality to accommodate the New Sodom.  See here.

The Cult of Softness has failed.  But Francis cannot steel himself to admit this.  He has succumbed to an alien ideology.  He has decided to genuflect before the spirit of Sodom while this demonic spirit continues to wreak havoc within an already devastated vineyard.  See here.

Father Peter Naranjo, Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts on Twitter:

Saint John of Avila: Doctor of the Church and Model for Priests Suffering from an Identity Crisis

During John of Avila's Canonization Mass, Pope Paul VI called him a model for modern priests suffering from an identity crisis.  The Holy Father said:


"San Juan de Avila is a priest, who in many respects we call modern, especially by the plurality of the nuances that life offers for our consideration and, therefore, our imitation. Not surprisingly he has already been proposed to the Spanish clergy as their role model and mentor in heaven. We think he may be honored as a versatile model of all priests of our time, which says that the priesthood itself is in deep crisis, an 'identity crisis' and that both the nature and mission of the priest are not now sufficient grounds to justify their presence in a society like ours, desecrated and secularized. Every priest who feels doubt about his own vocation can...get a reassuring answer. And every scholar, bent on reducing the figure of the priest in a profane and utilitarian sociology, looking at the Juan de Avila, must change their narrow and negative judgments about the role of priest in the modern world."

Several years ago, in a piece entitled "Priestly Identity: Crisis and Renewal," Annamarie Adkins interviewed Father David Toups, Associate Director of the Secretariat of Clergy, Consecrated Life and Vocations of the U.S. episcopal conference.  Annamarie Adkins wrote, "A general crisis of authentic masculinity in society has also affected the priesthood as only 'real men' can adequately fulfill the role of priest and pastor, says Father David Toups. Father Toups, the associate director of the Secretariat of Clergy, Consecrated Life and Vocations of the U.S. episcopal conference, is the author of 'Reclaiming Our Priestly Character.'

In this interview with...Father Toups, he comments on the identity and character of the priesthood, and the various challenges it faces today.

Q: Your book focuses on recovering what you call the 'doctrine of the priestly character.' Can you describe this 'doctrine' in a nutshell?

Father Toups: The 'doctrine of the priestly character' is about the permanent relationship the priest enters into with Christ the High Priest on the day of his ordination. The priest is always a priest; he is not a simple functionary who performs ritual actions, but rather he is configured to Christ in the depths of his being by what is called an ontological change.

Christ is working through him at the altar, 'This is my Body,' and in the confessional, 'I absolve you of your sins,' but also in his daily actions outside the sanctuary.

The character that the priest receives is a comfort to the faithful inasmuch as they realize that their faith is not based in the personality of the priest, but rather the Person of Christ working through the priest. On the other hand, the priest is called, like all of the faithful, to a life of holiness. The character received at ordination is actually a dynamism for priestly holiness. The more he can assimilate his life to Christ and submit to the gift he received at ordination, the more he will be a credible witness to the faithful and edify the Body of Christ.

Q: Is it your view that the nature of the priesthood is unknown or misunderstood by many priests? Is mandatory 'continuing priestly education' the answer?

Father Toups: Studies show that there has been confusion regarding the exact nature of the priesthood among priests themselves depending on the timing of their seminary training.

Immediately following the Second Vatican Council, there was confusion among priests and laity alike about the difference between the priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial priesthood. 

Vatican II’s intention was not to suppress one in order to highlight the other, but rather to recognize the universal call to holiness and the dignity of both. 

The ministerial priesthood is a specific vocation within the Church in which a man is called by Christ in the apostolic line to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Priests are different by virtue of ordination, as confirmed by the council itself in paragraph 10 of 'Lumen Gentium,' which emphasized that the baptized and the ordained share in the one and the same priesthood of Christ, but in a way that differs 'in essence and not only in degree.'

This difference certainly does not mean better or even holier -- that would be a major error -- but it does mean that there is a distinction.

Cardinal Avery Dulles points out that, if anything, the priesthood of the faithful is more exalted because the ministerial priesthood is ordered to its service. Hence, a recovery from the confusion lies in the need to understand the balance a priest is to find; he is both a servant and one who has been set aside by Christ and the Church to stand 'in persona Christi' -- not as a personal honor, but as 'one who has come to serve and not be served.' 

The priest need not be embarrassed about this high calling, but should boldly live it out in the midst of the world. Pope John Paul the Great regularly reminded priests: 'Do not be afraid to be who you are!'

This brings us to the second part of your question, namely, is mandatory 'continuing priestly education' the answer?

In the book, I use the term 'formation,' not education -- though learning is an important, component part.

Ongoing formation is essential for every Christian vocation. In the midst of full liturgical schedules, parish councils, leaking roofs and hospital visits, the priest must continually open his heart and mind to Christ in prayer and study, annual retreats and seminars, as well as times of recreation and vacation, if he is to thrive as an individual and as a man of faith.

Ongoing formation is about deepening one’s interiority and fostering a relationship with Jesus Christ. It is about an ongoing conversion that reminds the priest who he is as a minister of the Gospel and whose he is as a son of God."

If we are to have an authentic reform within the Church, and a new Springtime of evangelization, we will need more mature priests who fashion themselves after masculine saints like John of Avila.

Weak, tepid priests will not inspire the faithful to become the Church Militant and to fight against the Devil and his angels while being salt and light during a time of diabolical disorientation.

We need men who are filled with missionary zeal and who are determined to challenge the culture while bringing souls back to Holy Mother Church.

Effeminate priests and Deacons, sissy clerics, are not up to the task at hand.

The Cult of Softness and its fruit: The Church in decline

Crux News reports: "...the total number of Catholics in the United States dropped by 3 million since 2007, now comprising about 20 percent – or one-fifth – of the total population.

And perhaps more troubling for the church, for every one Catholic convert, more than six Catholics leave the church. Taken a step further, Catholicism loses more members than it gains at a higher rate than any other denomination, with nearly 13 percent of all Americans describing themselves as 'former Catholics.'"

This should come as no surprise.  Years of witnessing corruption of various kinds (material and moral), not to mention a lack of leadership and charity, have turned young people-  and people of all ages-  off of the Church.

In many parishes, orthodox Catholics are subjected to hatred and violence.  For example, when I called for reverence in the liturgy and advanced the teaching of Pope Benedict XVI that applause has no place within the liturgy, I was threatened with violence by "leaders" at Our Lady Immaculate Parish in Athol and banned from the parish's Facebook page.  See here.

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.  Neither will homosexuality or effeminate clerics who cannot relate to men.  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).

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.

Sissy clerics aren't getting the job done.  And this Lavender Mafia will never acknowledge this.  The Cult of Softness will not-  IT CANNOT - examine itself.  It is too fat, too lazy, too corrupt, too proud.  It has become a haunt of demons where every manner of filth and immorality is welcome and faith and purity are treated with animus.

Large segments of the Church in America are simply lost.

Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke on the war against masculinity

In an article which may be found here, Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke says,  "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..."

Now I've been saying this for years at this Blog.  The Cult of Softness has infected the clergy and Christianity is increasingly being effeminized.

Dr. Leon Podles, in his book entitled "The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity," notes that, "Many Catholic dioceses actively discourage vocations to the priesthood, in a transparent attempt to put pressure on Rome to allow the ordination of women, or at least of married men...Because Christianity is now seen as a part of the sphere of life proper to women rather than to men, it sometimes attracts men whose own masculinity is somewhat doubtful.  By this I do not mean homosexuals, although a certain type of homosexual is included.  Rather religion is seen as a safe field, a refuge from the challenges of life, and therefore attracts men who are fearful of making the break with the secure world of childhood dominated by women.  These are men who have problems following the path of masculine development..." (p. XIV).

Dr. Podles cites a study by Lewis M. Terman and Catherine Cox Miles, which included a Masculinity-Femininity test, writing, "Terman and Miles gathered data from three groups: Catholic seminarians, Protestant seminarians, and Protestant ministers.  As one might expect, men attracted to the religious life differed strikingly in their masculinity from the general male population: 'The Catholic student priests score at a point far less masculine than any other male group of their age; in their early twenties they are more feminine than the general male population at middle life.  The Protestant theological students in their middle tewnties are, however, more feminine than they and exceed in femininity the sixty-year-old man of equal education.  The adult ministerial group is barely more masculine than the Protestant theological students and less so than the student priests.  They exceed in femininity the college men of the seventh decade.'  Terman and Miles concluded that 'some dominant factors must be present in all three groups to make them, without regard to age, conspicuously and almost equally lacking in mental masculinity.'  Interestingly enough, the similarities between the Protestant and Catholic groups and the Catholic group's slightly higher scores ruled out celibacy as a major factor in a lack of masculinity..." (P. 9).

Effeminacy (and here we are not necessarily speaking of homosexuality), has become the forgotten vice in seminary formation.  This as many masculine men continue to be excluded from pursuing priestly vocations and masculinity itself is banished to the margins of the Church.

I should know.  I'm one of them.

Our Lady Immaculate Parish in Athol, Massachusetts: A circus-like atmosphere inspired by lukewarm clerics

Father Peter M.J. Stravinskas, Ph.D., S.T.L., in "The Catholic Answer, Book 2" says that,"Socializing is inappropriate in the body of the Church; that is for the vestibule and parish hall." (p. 195).  Monsignor Peter J. Elliott, in his book entitled Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite, has this to say: "The Church should be open well before the liturgy for those who wish to pray privately.  Silence is the best preparation for the celebration of the liturgy.  Apart from suitable music, no intrusion on the people's right to tranquility before the Eucharist should be tolerated, for example, musical or choral rehearsals, announcements which could be given later, or distractions in the sanctuary or elsewhere.  People may meet and talk before Mass, but in an area set well apart from the place where the liturgy is about to be celebrated." (Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite, No. 233, p. 87).

The General Instruction of the Roman Missal has this to say: "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."  (GIRM, No. 45).

Silence should also be observed after Mass until one is outside the Church building, both for respect toward the Blessed Sacrament, and toward those members of the faithful who wish to prolong their thanksgiving after Mass.

At Our Lady Immaculate parish in Athol, Massachusetts, there is no silence before Holy Mass, no reverence.  This because there is no real leadership or holy example there.  It is routine practice for Catholics to disrespect Jesus' Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament while keeping other Catholics from their prayer.  See the above video taken this past Saturday at the parish's 4 PM Vigil Mass.

In the Church, everyone has a duty to be salt and light and to work for the renewal of society.  Deacons are no exception.  The Constitution on the Church [Lumen Gentium] of the Second Vatican Council had this to say: "At a lower level of the hierarchy are deacons, upon whom hands are imposed 'not unto the priesthood, but unto a ministry of service.'  For strengthened in sacramental grace, in communion with the bishop and his group of priests they serve in the diaconate of the liturgy, of the Word, and of charity to the People of God...Dedicated to duties of charity and administration, let deacons be mindful of the admonition of Blessed Polycarp: 'Be merciful, diligent, walking according to the truth of the Lord, who became the servant of all.'" (Lumen Gentium, No. 29).  Later in the same document we read, "Ministers of lesser rank are also sharers in the mission and grace of the supreme priest" and that Deacons are "dispensers of Christ's mysteries and servants of the Church" who should in holiness "stand before men as personifications of goodness and friends of God." (Lumen Gentium, No. 41).

But the Deacons who "serve" at Our Lady Immaculate are not "personifications of goodness" or "charity to the People of God."  Neither Deacon Scott Colley [who has displayed hatred toward me for defending reverence at Mass, see here] nor Deacon James Linderman serve as models for prayer.  In fact, Deacon Linderman spent his time before Mass (as usual) engaging in loud conversation with several people in the congregation, and especially with two women who sing in the choir. It was Deacon Linderman who interrupted my Rosary before a Christmas Eve Mass several years ago - his attitude seems to be "If I'm not going to pray, neither are you."

Father Vincent Miceli, S.J., reminded us some years back, "Rampant immorality is [an] obstacle opposing the work of evangelization.  Since conduct follows from convictions, once Catholics cancel their creed from their lives, their conduct inevitably becomes depraved....The decay on all sides of Christian morals makes it not only difficult to bring in those outside the Church, but even to stay in themselves and hold their fellow Catholics within the Church." (Essay entitled The Evangelization of the United States).

It is no surprise that OLI has succumbed to a circus-like atmosphere.  The Deacons do not pray.  And the people are following their bad example.

Supertradmum is right in saying that the Church is not a democracy; but wrong in suggesting that the laity should not fraternally correct or rebuke prelates

Just a few years ago, Pope Benedict XVI insisted that the role of the laity in the Church is essential.  In other words, he reminded us that the laity are not "second-class" citizens within the Church.  See here.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church reminds us that: "Since, like all the faithful, lay Christians are entrusted by God with the apostolate by virtue of their Baptism and Confirmation, they have the right and duty, individually or grouped in associations, to work so that the divine message of salvation may be known and accepted by all men throughout the earth. This duty is the more pressing when it is only through them that men can hear the Gospel and know Christ. Their activity in ecclesial communities is so necessary that, for the most part, the apostolate of the pastors cannot be fully effective without it." (CCC , 900).

 In his Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles Laici (The Lay Members of Christ's Faithful People), Pope John Paul II reminded us that, "The voice of the Lord clearly resounds in the depths of each of Christ's followers who, through faith and the sacraments of Christian initiation is made like to Jesus Christ, is incorporated as a living member in the Church and has an active part in her mission of salvation." (No. 3).

Sadly, there are all too many clerics who haven't really embraced this authentic teaching of the Magisterium. For such clerics, the laity are second-class citizens who are tolerated but not really embraced fully as collaborators in the life and mission of the Church. This is most unfortunate. It was Pope Pius XII who said that, "The Faithful, more precisely the lay faithful, find themselves on the front lines of the Church's life; for them the Church is the animating principle for human society. Therefore, they in particular, ought to have an ever-clearer consciousness not only of belonging the Church, but of being the Church, that is to say, the community of the faithful on earth under the leadership of the Pope, the head of all, and of the Bishops in communion with him. These are the Church..." (Pius XII, Discourse to the New Cardinals, February 20, 1946: AAS 38 (1946), 149).

The truth of lay participation in the priesthood of Christ follows logically from the doctrine of the Mystical Body. Everyone who is incorporated into the Mystical Body participates in the dignities, honors, and offices of the Mystical Head (Jesus). "Because Christ is our head," says St. Thomas Aquinas, "that which was conferred upon him, was also in him conferred upon us" (Summa Theologica, III, q. 58, a.4, ad 1). Or, as Pope John Paul II put it: "Referring to the baptized as 'new born babes', the apostle Peter writes: 'Come to him, to that living stone, rejected by men but in God's sight chosen and precious; and like living stones be yourselves built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ ... you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God's own people, that you may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light' (1 Pt 2:4-5, 9).

A new aspect to the grace and dignity coming from Baptism is here introduced: the lay faithful participate, for their part, in the threefold mission of Christ as Priest, Prophet and King. This aspect has never been forgotten in the living tradition of the Church, as exemplified in the explanation which St. Augustine offers for Psalm 26: 'David was anointed king. In those days only a king and a priest were anointed. These two persons prefigured the one and only priest and king who was to come, Christ (the name "Christ" means "anointed"). Not only has our head been anointed but we, his body, have also been anointed ... therefore anointing comes to all Christians, even though in Old Testament times it belonged only to two persons. Clearly we are the Body of Christ because we are all "anointed" and in him are "christs", that is, "anointed ones", as well as Christ himself, "The Anointed One". In a certain way, then, it thus happens that with head and body the whole Christ is formed..'

In the wake of the Second Vatican Council, at the beginning of my pastoral ministry, my aim was to emphasize forcefully the priestly, prophetic and kingly dignity of the entire People of God..." (Christifideles Laici, No. 14).

In his Address to the Bishops of the Episcopal Conferences of the Pacific and of New Zealand on their Ad Limina visit, Pope Benedict XVI reminded the Bishops that, "..the lay faithful’s role in the well-being of the Church is essential since the Lord does not expect pastors 'to undertake by themselves the entire saving mission of the Church' (Lumen Gentium, 30). I understand from your reports that your task of spreading the Gospel often depends on the assistance of lay missionaries and catechists. Continue to ensure that a sound and ongoing formation be afforded them, especially within the context of their associations. In so doing, you will equip them for every good work in the building up of the body of Christ (cf. 2 Tim 3:17; Eph 4:12). Their zeal for the faith under your continued leadership and support will surely bear much fruit in the vineyard of the Lord."  See here.

Vatican II, in its Decree on the Mission Activity of the Church (Ad Gentes), has this to say: "The Church has not been really founded and is not yet fully alive, nor is it a perfect sign of Christ among men, unless there is a laity worthy of the name working along with the hierarchy. For the Gospel cannot be deeply grounded in the abilities, life and work of any people without the active presence of laymen. Therefore, even at the very founding of a chrch, great attention is to be paid to establishing a mature, Christian laity. For the lay faithful fully belong at one and the same time both to the People of God and to civil society...They also belong to Christ, because they were regenerated in the Church by faith and by Baptism, so that they are Christ's in newness of life and work (cf. 1 Cor 15: 23), in order that in Christ, all things may be made subject to God, and finally God will be all in all (cf. 1 Cor 15: 28)." (Ad Gentes, No. 21).

One of the reasons for the rapid decay which is corroding the Catholic spirit in the United States and elsewhere is the spread of a so-called liberalism (neo-modernism) which fosters a secularist attitude in Christians, one that creates an animus against the Faith and works against evangelization.  The lay faithful who remain committed to the Church's teaching and who take seriously their vocation to convert those outside the Church are most often not encouraged.  Often they are discouraged (in the name of an unhealthy pluralism) from engaging in evangelization.

Pope Paul VI, in an allocution given on July 2nd, 1975, warned against this attitude: "In practice many peoplewho call themselves Christians think so [that the field of faith can be separated from that of activity], believing that the adherence to religion does not involve other duties than some specific observances, such as Sunday Mass and the fulfilling of the paschal precept.  We must note, in fact, a certain allergy on the part of modern Christians to action qualified by their own religious sentiments, owing to a misrepresentation of so-called pluralism, as if every doctrinal opinion were admissible, and therefore it was not worthwhile to propose as necessary one's own faith to others; or because of an exclusive authority attributed to subjective conscience, to the detriment of the objective principle that must inform conscience itself."

Can the laity correct or rebuke a Bishop?  Yes.  Even if this woman believes otherwise.

 In the Summa Theologica, Question 33, Article 4, of the Second Part of Part II, St. Thomas has this heading: "Whether a Man Is Bound to Correct His Prelate?" His reply to that question runs as follows: "I answer that: A subject is not competent to administer to his prelate the correction which is an act of justice through the coercive nature of punishment; but the fraternal correction which is an act of charity is within the competency of everyone in respect of any person towards whom he is bound by charity, provided there be something in that person which requires correction." St. Thomas reinforces this teaching by a statement from St. Augustine: "Augustine says in his Rule: 'Show mercy not only to yourselves, but also to him who, being in the higher position among you, is therefore in the greater danger'." To this Aquinas adds: "But fraternal correction is a work of mercy. Therefore even prelates ought to be corrected." As to the manner of this correction, St. Thomas says: "Since, however, a virtuous act needs to be moderated by due circumstances, it follows that when a subject corrects his prelate, he ought to do it in a becoming manner, not with imprudence and harshness, but with gentleness and respect." Then, discussing the issue of St. Paul's reproof of St. Peter at Antioch, as mentioned in Paul's Letter to the Galatians 2:11, a rebuke that took place in public, St. Thomas states: "It must be observed, however, that if the faith were endangered, a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly. Hence Paul, who was Peter's subject, rebuked him in public, on account of the imminent danger of scandal concerning faith, and, as the gloss of Augustine says on Gal. 2:11: 'Peter gave an example to superiors, that if at any time they should happen to stray from the straight path, they should not disdain to be reproved by their subjects'."

Cardinal Mahony under federal investigation over abusive priests

In his Bull "Cum Primum," (issued April 1, 1566), Pope Saint Pius V wrote, "Having set our sights on removing everything that can somehow offend the divine majesty, We resolved to punish above all, and without leniency, those things which, on the authority of Sacred Scripture or with most grave examples, are known to displease God and provoke his ire more than any others: namely, neglect of divine worship, ruinous simony, the crime of blasphemy, and the execrable libidinous vice against nature; for these faults people and nations are justly scourged by God with catastrophes, wars, famine and pestilence....If anyone commits nefarious crime against nature, which caused God's wrath to fall upon the sons of iniquity, he will be delivered to the secular arm for punishment, and, if a cleric, he will be subject to analogous penalty after being stripped of his office."

And on August 30, 1568, Pope Saint Pius V issued a second Bull entitled "Horrendum illud scelus" in which he said: "That horrendous crime, for which the corrupt and obscene cities [ of Sodom and Gomorrah] were burned by divine condemnation, fills us with most bitter pain and strongly prods us to repress such crime with the greatest possible zeal. With every reason the Fifth Lateran Council [1512-1517] establishes that any member of the clergy caught in that vice against nature, for which the divine wrath fell upon the sons of iniquity, be released from his clerical orders or constrained to do penance in a monastery (c. 4, X, V, 31). So that the contagion of such a great scourge will not grow with greater audacity by profiting from impunity, which is the greatest incentive to sin, and in order to chastise more severely the clerics guilty of this nefarious crime who are not terrified with the death of the soul, We have decided that they be chastened by the secular authority, which enforces civil law..."

There have been Bishops who, unfortunately, did not adopt this same attitude toward clerical abusers. These will all be accountable before the Lord Jesus. And some will be held accountable before the secular authority.

"Wherefore clerics called to have the Lord for their portion ought by all means so to regulate their whole life and conversation as that in their dress, comportment, gait, discourse, and all things else, nothing aapear but what is grave, regulated, and replete with religiousness." (Session 2, cap. I, de Ref).