Chaput goes kaput...

Every now and again, I receive criticism from another Catholic who accuses me of "lacking peace" simply because I defend the Church's authentic teaching on a variety of issues and because I oppose dissent from the same. These confused Catholics have a distorted notion of what constitutes "peace" and are often motivated by guilt which stems from their own refusal to live up to their duty, their responsibility, to both defend and promote the Magisterial teaching of the Church.

Such is the case, sadly, with Archbishop Charles Chaput.  In an article published in First Things, the Archbishop, who is fast becoming a modern-day Judas, says:


"Fr. Martin* is a man of intellect and skill whose work I often admire. Like all of us as fellow Christians, he deserves to be treated with fraternal good will. It’s one thing to criticize respectfully an author’s ideas and their implications. It’s quite another to engage in ad hominem trashing. In Dr. Faggioli’s view, Fr. Martin is yet another victim brought low by a mob of conservative cyber-militias. And these militias have allegedly been fostered by a generation of John Paul II and Benedict XVI bishops, who reshaped “the U.S. episcopate in the image of the ‘culture warrior.’”

As I mentioned in a previous post, Christopher Ferrara explains that the homosexual activist dissident Father Martin continues, "preaching the lie that homosexual acts are not only not depraved, but on the contrary are genuine expressions of what he calls 'love.'  Martin even dared to proclaim openly during a conference at Fordham University (my alma mater) that there is nothing wrong with the depraved acts performed by his homosexual friend 'Mark' and that he professes not to understand how 'even the most traditionalist, homophobic, closed-minded Catholic cannot look at my friend and say: that is a loving act...'"

I never lose any sleep over asinine criticisms such as those from Archbishop Chaput. However, for the sake of those faithful Catholics who take their responsibility to defend and promote the Church's authentic teaching seriously, I submit the following. While it can be constructive (and even necessary) for people to dissent from the official policies of a democratic society and even to resist such policies, because these policies are only grounded in a human consensus, within the Church it's a different story.

How so? The policies of the Church are not merely grounded in a human consensus. They are grounded on faith and directed toward salvation. Therefore, dissent is a tactic which is not appropriate within the Church. In fact, dissent within the Church is only divisive. Dissent from the constant and most firm of Church teaching is an attack on truth. In its Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith had this to say: "The Church 'is like a sacrament, a sign and instrument, that is, of communion with God and of unity among all men' (LG, 1). Consequently, to pursue concord and communion is to enhance the force of her witness and credibility. To succumb to the temptation of dissent, on the other hand, is to allow the 'leaven of infidelity to the Holy Spirit' to start to work." (No. 40, AAS, 82 (1990) 1568, OR, 2 July 1990, 4.).

Some will still object: "But even if people dissent from Church teaching, that's not our concern. Leave them to God. We shouldn't say anything for the sake of peace. They will come to the truth in God's time." What of this? Is this an authentic peace?

Well, no. In the words of Pope John XXIII, who was an extremely good-natured and peacable Pontiff, a lover of peace, an authentic peace, "is not completely untroubled and serene; it is active, not calm and motionless. In short, this is a peace that is ever at war. It wars with every sort of error, including that which falsely wears the face of truth; it struggles against the enticements of vice, against those enemies of the soul, of whatever description, who can weaken, blemish, or destroy our innocence or Catholic faith." (Ad Petri cathedram, AAS, 51 (1959) 517, PE, 263.93).

And in so doing, one may justly employ strong language.  See here.

There you have it. The Church's understanding of peace. The next time a chicken Catholic like Charles Chaput levels an accusation against you of betraying peace simply because you defend and promote the Church's Magisterial teaching, remind them that they are in reality judging your interior dispositions. Remind them as well that perfect love casts out all fear and that the Holy Spirit gives His gift of Fortitude to those who ask for it. If this doesn't work, pray for them while letting their childish criticism roll off your back.

Mother Teresa used to say that people will always be around who will question your motives and, with an air of "superiority," castigate you for the good you do. Do good anyway. And on the Day of Judgment, these people can explain to Jesus not only why they refused to promote and defend Catholic teaching (which is their responsibility as a baptized Catholic), but why they even attempted to discourage faithful Catholics from their mission.

It is interesting that Archbishop Chaput has nothing to say about Father Martin's and other's  unjust criticism of faithful Catholics who defend the immutable teaching of Christ's Church.
But then, evil attracts evil.

*  See here

Those who will not receive correction and those who will not give it are like the limbs of a body beginning to rot..

In her own day, St. Catherine of Sienna found much corruption within the Holy Church. Homosexuality and many other deeply rooted problems were found among the clergy and Our Lord spoke to this Doctor of the Church about these problems (pride, loss of sacred identity, loss of faith, worldliness, and sensuality). These conversations were laid out in St. Catherine's book entitled "Dialogue," and most especially in that portion of the book labelled "The Mystical Body of Holy Church."

While St. Catherine cautions her readers not to engage in blanket condemnations aimed at the clergy in general (using scandals as an excuse to denigrate priests in general), and refers to such people as "irreverent persecutors" of the clergy, still, she was told by Our Lord that those who will not receive correction and those who will not give it are like the limbs of a body beginning to rot.
In our sacharrin society, medicinal rebuke is often mistaken for a "lack of charity" when in actuality such constructive criticism aids in healing. In his excellent work entitled "Liberalism is a sin," Fr. Felix Sarda Y Salvany writes:

"If the propagation of good and the necessity of combating evil require the employment of terms somewhat harsh against error and its supporters, this usage is certainly not against charity. This is a corollary or consequence of the principle we have just demonstrated. We must render evil odious and detestable. We cannot attain this result without pointing out the dangers of evil, without showing how and why it is odious, detestable and contemptible. Christian oratory of all ages has ever employed the most vigorous and emphatic rhetoric in the arsenal of human speech against impiety. In the writings of the great athletes of Christianity the usage of irony, imprecation, execration and of the most crushing epithets is continual. Hence the only law is the opportunity and the truth.

But there is another justification for such an usage. Popular propagation and apologetics cannot preserve elegant and constrained academic forms. In order to convince the people we must speak to their heart and their imagination which can only be touched by ardent, brilliant, and impassioned language. To be impassioned is not to be reprehensible----when our heat is the holy ardor of truth.

The supposed violence of modern Ultramontane journalism not only falls short of Liberal journalism, but is amply justified by every page of the works of our great Catholic polemicists of other epochs. This is easily verified. St. John the Baptist calls the Pharisees "race of vipers," Jesus Christ, our Divine Savior, hurls at them the epithets "hypocrites, whitened sepulchers, a perverse and adulterous generation" without thinking for this reason that He sullies the sanctity of His benevolent speech. St. Paul criticizes the schismatic Cretins as "always liars, evil beasts, slothful bellies." The same apostle calls Elymas the magician a "seducer, full of guile and deceit, child of the Devil, enemy of all justice."

If we open the Fathers we find the same vigorous castigation of heresy and heretics. St. Jerome arguing against Vigilantius casts in his face his former occupation of saloonkeeper: "From your infancy," he says to him, "you have learned other things than theology and betaken yourself to other pursuits. To verify at the same time the value of your money accounts and the value of Scriptural texts, to sample wines and grasp the meaning of the prophets and apostles are certainly not occupations which the same man can accomplish with credit." On another occasion attacking the same Vigilantius, who denied the excellence of virginity and of fasting, St. Jerome, with his usual sprightliness, asks him if he spoke thus "in order not to diminish the receipts of his saloon?" Heavens! What an outcry would be raised if one of our Ultramontane controversialists were to write against a Liberal critic or heretic of our own day in this fashion!

What shall we say of St. John Chrysostom? His famous invective against Eutropius is not comparable, in its personal and aggressive character, to the cruel invectives of Cicero against Catiline and against Verres! The gentle St. Bernard did not honey his words when he attacked the enemies of the faith. Addressing Arnold of Brescia, the great Liberal agitator of his times, he calls him in all his letters "seducer, vase of injuries, scorpion, cruel wolf."

The pacific St. Thomas of Acquinas forgets the calm of his cold syllogisms when he hurls his violent apostrophe against William of St. Amour and his disciples: "Enemies of God," he cries out, "ministers of the Devil, members of antiChrist, ignorami, perverts, reprobates!" Never did the illustrious Louis Veuillot speak so boldly. The seraphic St. Bonaventure, so full of sweetness, overwhelms his adversary Gerard with such epithets as "impudent, calumniator, spirit of malice, impious, shameless, ignorant, impostor, malefactor, perfidious, ingrate!" Did St. Francis de Sales, so delicately exquisite and tender, ever purr softly over the heretics of his age and country? He pardoned their injuries, heaped benefits on them even to the point of saving the lives of those who sought to take his, but with the enemies of the faith he preserved neither moderation nor consideration. Asked by a Catholic, who desired to know if it were permissible to speak evil of a heretic who propagated false doctrines, he replied: "Yes, you can, on the condition that you adhere to the exact truth, to what you know of his bad conduct, presenting that which is doubtful as doubtful according to the degree of doubt which you may have in this regard." In his Introduction to a Devout Life, that precious and popular work, he expresses himself again: "If the declared enemies of God and of the Church ought to be blamed and censured with all possible vigor, charity obliges us to cry 'wolf' when the wolf slips into the midst of the flock, and in every way and place we may meet him."

This is real meat for real Catholics. It was Sir Edmund Burke who said that, "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph in the world is for good people to do nothing." When we witness another Catholic (and yes, even a priest) promoting homosexuality, abortion, contraception, New Age, witchcraft, or dissent in general, we have an obligation (in charity) to speak the truth and to show others how that individual's words, ideas or actions fail to hold up when placed in the Lumen Christi - when held up to the Magisterial teaching of the Church.

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. 

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, for, as Pope Pius XII said, "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).

How quickly some have forgotten this threefold dignity of the laity!

Cardinal Sean O'Malley: Where is your clear and emphatic opposition to a sin that cries to Heaven for vengeance?

As noted here, "Immaculate Heart of Mary School of Still River, MA has withdrawn its marching band and float of Saint Patrick from this year’s Saint Patrick’s Day Parade after learning that a small homosexual activist group will be allowed to march while publicly identifying its homosexuality.

The school is compelled by the teachings of the Catholic Church to pull out. According to the Principal, Brother Thomas Dalton, 'Catholics are forbidden to sponsor or even participate in an event which openly promotes unnatural and immoral behavior. The Church will never accept nor condone same sex marriage and the homosexual life style.'

For 25 years the school has participated in the parade dedicated to Saint Patrick and believes that to have a float with his representation leading a group openly promoting and proud of its homosexual identity would draw down the ire of this great patron of the Boston Archdiocese. 'Saint Patrick stands with Saint Paul in condemning the sin of sodomy,' stated Brother Dalton. 'The name of Saint Patrick should be dropped from the parade as he would have nothing to do with the likes of it today.'

The director of the Band, Br. Peter Bracket stated, 'All the Band members and their parents—although greatly disappointed in not being able to march—are fully supportive of the School’s decision. We have to remain loyal to Church teachings which states in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, promulgated by Saint John Paul II, that ‘homosexual acts are acts of grave depravity’ and ‘are intrinsically disordered…Under no circumstances can they be approved.’ (#2357)'

Brother Peter Bracket is right. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in its document entitled Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, warns that even where homosexual unions have been legalized, "clear and emphatic opposition is a duty." (No. 5). This important document stresses that, "any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws" and even any "material cooperation on the level of their application" must be avoided. "In this area," states the document, "everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection."


Considerations makes it abundantly clear that, "The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to considerations of homosexual unions." (No. 11). In other words, there can be no doubt that all Catholics have a moral duty to oppose the homosexual agenda.

The good folks at Immaculate Heart of Mary School in Still River, Massachusetts understand this.  What a shame that Cardinal Sean O'Malley does not.

The Catholic community in and around Boston deserves an authentic shepherd who understands that opposition to all sin - AND ESPECIALLY SINS THAT CRY TO HEAVEN FOR VENGEANCE-  is a duty of each and every Catholic.

The faithful deserve wheat.  And they suffer from a Cardinal who offers only chaff.

American Sniper and bloodlust

General Douglas MacArthur, in his farewell speech given to the Corps of Cadets at West Point on May 12, 1962, spoke of duty, honor and country and what these words entail for the professional soldier.

General MacArthur spoke of the bloody battles and the heroic sacrifices made by the soldier on countless battlefields. But he added, "This does not mean that you are warmongers. On the contrary, the soldier above all other people prays for peace, for he must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war."

This point is not understood by everyone.  It is least understood by those who have never served in the Armed Forces.  In a post on Facebook, Mr. Deal Hudson writes, ""American Sniper,' in my opinion is NOT TO BE MISSED. The 500 persons in the theater walked out in absolute silence. I've never witnessed that kind of a reaction to a film before, ever. Bradley Cooper is wonderful and Clint Eastwood's direction is masterful."

Various people chimed in fully agreeing.  One woman wrote, "I agree, it is a great movie!!! Thank God for Chris Kyle & others who serve our nation, their wives, children & families.

Another wrote, "Amen Mary. He saved the lives of a lot of Marines." And another, "Saw it Friday, took my very breath away!"

One woman added, "My husband (marine who served in Iraq and Afg) took our 17 year-old son last night. The entire audience reacted the exact same way - complete silence."

One individual wrote, "Heard this movie has lefty heads exploding, so naturally I must see this soon!"

Marcus Grodi, of EWTN's The Journey Home, wrote: "Couldn't agree more. Deeply moving. But a subtle point of the story: why the demands of some Callings require or should require celibacy. Celibacy allows a person the complete freedom to risk all for the good of his task—as it does or should for a priest. Marriage makes some Callings difficult—as it did for Chris when he was in the process of looking for threats to 'take out' to protect the troops while on his cellphone with his wife who was challenging his Calling. There are married men like Chris in harms way every day — like unappreciated policemen — protecting our lives: they need our prayers and support."

Only one individual, Stephen Hand, expressed concern over the film and it's glorification of a man some might consider sociopathic.  He wrote, "Er, the Church opposed that war. We opened up the gates of hell (ISIS). Read John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger who at the time warned us," and included this link with his comment:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/06/real-american-sniper-hate-filled-killer-why-patriots-calling-hero-chris-kyle

And then added: "The real American Sniper was a hate-filled killer. Why are simplistic patriots treating him as a...[hero]?

Deal Hudson responded, "Stephan [Stephen], I don't agree with but I'm not going to argue it out in public in a thread that honors the memory of a man and his comrades who fought for our nation."

Stephen Hand replied, "I don't want to do an injustice to anyone. But his officers had a duty to remove him from combat. Or remove themselves if they were the ones who exhibited psychopathic tendencies. That was always military code and honor."

Deal Hudson answered, "Like I said, Stephen, I understand the point you want to make but this is not the place."

But it is the place to honor a man [sniper Chris Kyle] who publically quipped, "The enemy are savages and despicably evil,” and that his “only regret is that I didn’t kill more.” Kyle made these statements in his best-selling book, “American Sniper,” on which the film is based.

This is not what General MacArthur had in mind when he spoke of Duty, Honor and Country.  And what a tragedy that a man who came to enjoy killing so much that he actually wanted to kill more and regretted not being able to do so should be glorified in the cinema.

In his excellent and prophetic book Trousered Apes, Professor Duncan Williams documented extensively the banishment of God from society in the West and said that as a result, "the Western world and its culture is saturated with violence and animalism....We are teaching savagery and are naively appalled at the success of our instruction."

Professor Williams continues, "What shocks an audience today will be acceptable tomorrow and thus the contemporary dramatist [or reality show producer, my note] is constantly impelled to seek further excesses to gratify a warped taste which he has himself implanted in the public mind....The whole modern cult of violence and animalism is in essence an admission of defeat.  Since we cannot be men to any idealistic extent, let us lapse into barbaric animalism but, still clinging to vestiges of a past which we hate but cannot escape, let us clothe our defeat in high-sounding terms: 'alienation,' 'cult of unpleasure,' 'realism,' and similar jargon.  Yet all this fashionable phraseology cannot conceal the fact that the Emperor has no clothes....The contemporary playwright or producer might well take as his motto, Apres moi, la secheresse (After me, the drought), and congratulate himself that he is writing before a morbid public appetite demands scenes of such repellent realism that actors and actresses will have to be killed on stage in order to satisfy it."

Welcome to the Theater of Lust, the Theater of Violence, the Theater of Antichrist.

God help us all!

Bishop Robert McManus, the Diocese of Worcester, and vocations

As I noted in a previous post (see here), the Diocese of Worcester has some sort of animus against men who feel called to the priesthood but who accept, promote and defend the Church's Magisterial teaching.  There really is no denying this.  Candidates such as Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas are entirely welcome within the diocese (see here), but I am not permitted to even apply as part of a discernment process.

This is most unfortunate.  Dr. Germain Grisez explains that, "Since the ordained priesthood and diaconate provide the necessary ministries of the word and sacraments to the whole Church, every member shares a common duty to foster vocations to this service."

This duty, which pertains to all Christians, is codified in Canon Law:

"A duty rests upon the entire Christian community to foster vocations so that sufficient provision is made for the needs of the sacred ministry throughout the entire Church; Christian families, educators and in a special way priests, especially pastors, are particularly bound by this duty.  Since it is principally the concern of diocesan bishops to promote vocations, they should instruct the people entrusted to them concerning the importance of the sacred ministry and the necessity of ministers in the Church; therefore they are to encourage and support endeavors to foster vocations by means of projects especially established for that purpose." (Canon 233).

Paragraph 2 of the same Canon also states, "Moreover priests, and especially diocesan bishops, are also to be solicitous that men of a more mature age who consider themselves called to the sacred ministries are prudently assisted IN WORD AND DEED and duly prepared."

When I contacted the Worcester Diocese to express my interest in DISCERNING a priestly vocation, I received no response whatsoever.  When I wrote Bishop Robert McManus expressing my interest, again, no response.  This is promoting vocations?  This is being "solicitous" for mature vocations while assisting such in "word and deed"?

Of course not.

Every so often local parishes will offer a prayer intention for vocations.  But without any real effort to promote and foster vocations to the priesthood and religious life, such prayer intentions amount to little more than a dog and pony show.  Bishop McManus apparently has such disdain for me (pesky magisterial Catholic that I am) that when I phoned him to inform him that my "pastor" at the time (Fr. Joseph Jurgelonis) and his "pastoral staff" wouldn't schedule a Mass for my departed father, he actually laughed.

Feel the love of Christ Jesus.

Folks, if we really want to turn the tide within and outside of the Church, we will need to be more accepting of men who are orthodox in their faith and who feel called to the priesthood.  The laborers are few.  Can we afford to prohibit men faithful to the Magisterium from having a place at the table?


Related reading here.

 

 

 

Archbishop Vincent Nichols, we need Shepherds not Keystone Cops who fall asleep while on duty

Writing from the UK, my good friend Deacon Nick Donnelly of Protect the Pope reports that:

Archbishop Nichols has re-affirmed the Archdiocese of Westminster’s provision of pastoral care to homosexuals through the so called Soho Masses, while at the same time announcing that he is undertaking a review of the current provision to ensure these Masses are not occasions for opposition to the Church’s teaching on sexuality: ‘At the present time consideration is being given to the circumstances in which these Masses are celebrated to ensure that their purpose is respected and that they are not occasions for confusion or opposition concerning the positive teaching of the Church on the meaning of human sexuality or the moral imperatives that flow from that teaching, which we uphold and towards which we all strive.' (See full article here).

Deacon Nick comments: "This is good news from Archbishop Nichols,and signifies an important shift in his position on the Soho Masses. Before the Holy Father’s visit the archbishop expressed, in intemperate language, that those Catholics concerned about public dissent at the Soho Masses should ‘hold their tongues.’ Now 18 months later Archbishop Nichols has admitted the concern that the Soho Masses could be occasions for confusion and opposition to the Church’s teaching, and needs investigating. This is exactly the claim made by Daphne McLeod and Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice....Protect the Pope recommends that the archbishop includes in his review an examination of the website Queering the Church, run by a member of the organising council Terence Weldon."

So Archbishop Nichols is going to conduct a "review" to ensure that the infamous Soho Masses "are not occasions for confusion or opposition" to the Church's moral teaching regarding homosexuality?  Why is it that I have an image of The Keystone Cops playing in my head?  Your Excellency, Terence Weldon, who serves as an Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist at these Masses, has been engaging in public dissent from the Church's teaching in this area for years.

In his latest post at "Queering the Church," Mr. Weldon writes that, "One part of conventional Catholic teaching on homosexual persons, is that our orientation is the cross that we must take up, and deal with. I disagree – orientation in itself is a gift from God, not an ordeal to survive. The cross that we carry, as I wrote in a Lenten post last year, is the disordered teaching of the Church, the persecution that it brings in discrimination bullying, gay -bashing and hate-crime murders – and the internalized homophobia that drives a disproportionate number of us to suicide, or to less extreme pathological behaviour, in addictions or in the closet....CDF documents claim, with no evidence whatsoever, that homosexuality/homosexual acts lead us away from God. That is certainly not my experience, which shows the exact reverse." (See here).

What do you think Your Excellency?  Does this passage indicate that Terence Weldon is striving to conform to Church teaching or that he is openly dissenting from the same?

Father John Unni has the full confidence and support of Cardinal O'Malley and the Archdiocese of Boston

The Boston Globe reported yesterday that, "Opposition to the Mass [the so-called "Gay Pride Mass" which had been planned for St. Cecilia's Parish in Boston's South End] grew out of a post by a local blogger who writes under the pseudonym Joe Sacerdo and who has criticized the Archdiocese of Boston for what he describes as 'relativism’' and deviation from doctrine.

Sacerdo also criticized the parish for sponsoring an upcoming trip to the Boston Gay Men’s Chorus, which it also advertised in its most recent bulletin.

'I think it’s the right thing to do,’' he said yesterday of the archdiocese’s decision. 'There’s not a place for a Mass like that in the Catholic Church.’'

In his blog post Wednesday, he questioned Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley’s commitment to church doctrine: 'What’s next, NY Rep. Anthony Weiner and Tiger Woods giving a talk at the church on the topic of marital fidelity?’'

'Celebrating a ‘Gay Pride’ Mass isn’t expressing the moral teachings of the church with clarity and fidelity or telling people their behavior is unacceptable — it’s telling them their behavior is just fine,’' Sacerdo said.

He called on O’Malley to put the pastor on leave.

Donilon said that would not happen. “Father Unni has the full confidence and support of the Cardinal and the archdiocese,’’ Donilon wrote in an e-mail. “He is a great pastor."

Apparently the Archdiocese of Boston has some rather unique ideas as to what constitutes "a great pastor."  Vatican II teaches us authoritatively that, "Among the virtues that priests must possess for their sacred ministry, none is so important as a frame of mind and soul whereby they are always ready to know and do the will of him who sent them and not their own will (cf. Jn 4:34; 5:30; 6:38)...Aware of his own weakness, the true minister of Christ works in humility tring to do what is pleasing to God (cf. Eph 5:10)...the priestly ministry, since it is the ministry of the Church itself, can only function in the hierarchical union of the whole body.  Pastoral charity, therefore, urges priests, as they operate in the framework of this union, to dedicate their own will by obedience to the service of God and their fellow men.  In a great spirit of faith, let them receive and execute whatever orders the Holy Father, their own bishop or other superiors give or recommend." (Presbyterorum Ordinis, No. 15).

And in No. 4 of the same Vatican II document, we are told that: "The People of God are joined together primarily by the word of the living God. And rightfully they expect this from their priests. Since no one can be saved who does not first believe, priests, as co-workers with their bishops, have the primary duty of proclaiming the Gospel of God to all. In this way they fulfill the command of the Lord: 'Going therefore into the whole world preach the Gospel to every creature' (Mk 16:15), and they establish and build up the People of God. Through the saving word the spark of faith is lit in the hearts of unbelievers, and fed in the hearts of the faithful. This is the way that the congregation of faithful is started and grows, just as the Apostle describes: 'Faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ' (Rom 10:17).


To all men, therefore, priests are debtors that the truth of the Gospel which they have may be given to others. And so, whether by entering into profitable dialogue they bring people to the worship of God, whether by openly preaching they proclaim the mystery of Christ, or whether in the light of Christ they treat contemporary problems, they are relying not on their own wisdom for it is the word of Christ they teach, and it is to conversion and holiness that they exhort all men."

According to the Council, the task of priests is "not to teach their own wisdom but God's Word." And this task is of no less importance for the priest than his offering of the Eucharistic Sacrifice. Both of these are inseperably linked to each other: "The ministerial priesthood has the task not only of representing Christ - Head of the Church - before the assembly of the faithful, but also of acting in the name of the whole Church when presenting to God the prayer of the Church, and above all when offering the Eucharistic sacrifice." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 1552).

For this reason, priests have the very serious obligation to teach the faithful under their care that it is never licit to have sexual relations outside of marriage; that a Catholic cannot (having been validly married in the Church) after divorce, marry another or otherwise pretend that sexual relations with another individual are somehow "marital"; that "formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense" and that '"the Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life" (CCC, 2272); and that "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible, is intrinsically evil.." (CCC, No. 2370, citing Humanae Vitae, No. 14).

The Church proposes these (and other teachings) as true and it does so in the name of Christ. The priest is not to question them. He is not to ignore them or neglect them out of a false sense of "compassion" or "charity." It was Pope Paul VI who said that, "To diminish in no way the saving teaching of Christ constitutes an eminent form of charity for souls." (Humanae Vitae, No. 29). Pope John Paul II reiterated these words in Familiaris Consortio, No. 33."

During a meeting with priests and religious from the Diocese of Rome on March 10, Pope Benedict XVI called upon priests to exhibit "full-time" fidelity to their vocation as priests, "being with Christ and being ambassadors of Christ." The Holy Father also called upon priests to proclaim "the entire plan of God," stressing that, "The Apostle does not preach Christianity 'a la carte,' according to his own tastes, he does not preach a Gospel according to his own preferred theological ideas; he does not take away from the commitment to announce the entire will of God, even when uncomfortable, nor the themes he may least like personally.." (See here).

Father John Unni may have the full confidence and support of the Cardinal and the Archdiocese, but there are serious questions about his fidelity to the teaching of the Magisterium and his vocation which is to "announce the entire will of God, even when uncomfortable" and not his own "preferred theological ideas."  In one of his parish bulletins, for example, Father Unni advertised a presentation entitled "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," which was given by Chuck Colbert, who has served on the board of the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association and has written for various "gay" and lesbian publications such as Boston Spirit Magazine.

Mr. Colbert is a propagandist for the homosexual lifestyle.  His association with the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association is most significant.  As Bernard Goldberg wrote in his book entitled Arrogance: Rescuing America from the Media Elite, "...like other newsroom lobbies, by definition the NLGJA represents a constituency - and that constituency is not the public at large.  The National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association has an agenda, which is to make sure that gay-related stories are reported with what it regards as the appropriate slant and the necessary sensitivity...Can anyone imagine the howl if the NLGJA stood instead for the National Law-Abiding Gun-Loving Journalists Association, whose goal was to ensure that gun owners' perspectives were prominently featured in every story about firearms?" (pp. 172-173).

The Archdiocese of Boston may insist that Father John Unni is "a great pastor."  But, like Joe Sacerdo, I dispute this.  A great pastor is always first and foremost a lover of souls who fully embraces and preaches the entire plan of God as interpreted by the Magisterium of the Church.

Father Unni's promotion of a homosexual propagandist and his desire to have a "Gay Pride Mass" at his parish are not the hallmarks of "a great pastor."  We should ask ourselves what Saint Jean Vianney would have done.  Would the Patron Saint of Parish priests have promoted homosexual agitprop and homosexual liturgies?

You know the answer.  And for that reason, it is not only Father John Unni who is suspect but a Cardinal and his Archdiocese which gives him its "full confidence and support."

"My people perish for want of knowledge..."

Vatican II, in its' Decree on the Ministry and Life of Priests (Presbyterorum Ordinis) No. 4, tells us that: "The People of God are joined together primarily by the word of the living God. And rightfully they expect this from their priests. Since no one can be saved who does not first believe, priests, as co-workers with their bishops, have the primary duty of proclaiming the Gospel of God to all. In this way they fulfill the command of the Lord: "Going therefore into the whole world preach the Gospel to every creature" (Mk 16:15), and they establish and build up the People of God. Through the saving word the spark of faith is lit in the hearts of unbelievers, and fed in the hearts of the faithful. This is the way that the congregation of faithful is started and grows, just as the Apostle describes: "Faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ" (Rom 10:17).


To all men, therefore, priests are debtors that the truth of the Gospel which they have may be given to others. And so, whether by entering into profitable dialogue they bring people to the worship of God, whether by openly preaching they proclaim the mystery of Christ, or whether in the light of Christ they treat contemporary problems, they are relying not on their own wisdom for it is the word of Christ they teach, and it is to conversion and holiness that they exhort all men."

According to the Council, the task of priests is "not to teach their own wisdom but God's Word." And this task is of no less importance for the priest than his offering of the Eucharistic Sacrifice. Both of these are inseperably linked to each other: "The ministerial priesthood has the task not only of representing Christ - Head of the Church - before the assembly of the faithful, but also of acting in the name of the whole Church when presenting to God the prayer of the Church, and above all when offering the Eucharistic sacrifice." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 1552).

For this reason, priests have the very serious obligation to teach the faithful under their care that it is never licit to have sexual relations outside of marriage; that a Catholic cannot (having been validly married in the Church) after divorce, marry another or otherwise pretend that sexual relations with another individual are somehow "marital"; that "formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense" and that '"the Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life" (CCC, 2272); and that "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible, is intrinsically evil.." (CCC, No. 2370, citing Humanae Vitae, No. 14).

The Church proposes these (and other teachings) as true and it does so in the name of Christ. The priest is not to question them. He is not to ignore them or neglect them out of a false sense of "compassion" or "charity." It was Pope Paul VI who said that, "To diminish in no way the saving teaching of Christ constitutes an eminent form of charity for souls." (Humanae Vitae, No. 29).

Pope John Paul II reiterated these words in Familiaris Consortio, No. 33. We are reminded in Lumen Gentium 14 of the Second Vatican Council that: "He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a "bodily" manner and not "in his heart." All the Church's children should remember that their exalted status is to be attributed not to their own merits but to the special grace of Christ. If they fail moreover to respond to that grace in thought, word and deed, not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged."

When a priest ignores or neglects his duty, his task, of serving the Word of God with fidelity, he fails to persevere in that charity described by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II as a charity which diminishes in no way the saving teaching of Christ. And he will be the more severely judged (Luke 12:48).

But so many priests have neglected their duty to proclaim the Gospel to all.  And the Church is now reaping the fruit of this infidelity.  Even though Canon Law states quite clearly that, "The Christian faithful have the right to receive assistance from the sacred pastors out of the spiritual goods of the Church, especially the word of God and the sacraments" (Canon 213), there has been a dearth of sound catechesis.  The People of God have not been formed by sound instruction based on Church doctrine and Church Tradition.  When was the last time (if ever) you heard a homily in your local parish citing the Catechism of the Catholic Church or papal documents?  Were it not for EWTN, you might never hear such authentic preaching.

And this is nothing short of shameful.  For such a foundation is vital.  Where it is absent, people will assume that they have the right to form their conscience according to their own opinions, their own whims.  The Catechism teaches us that, "Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened.  A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful.  It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator.  The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings." (1783).

Those priests who remain silent while their people crave truth and direction are betraying their vocation.  And they will be (as Lumen Gentium 14 reminds us), the more severely judged.  As will every Catholic who knowingly rejects the authoritative teachings of Christ's Church.  Truly the words of Hosea apply to our own time:

"Sons of Israel, listen to the word of Yahweh, for Yahweh indicts the inhabitants of the country; there is no fidelity, no tenderness, no knowledge of God in the country, only perjury and lies, slaughter, theft, adultery and violence, murder after murder.  This is why the country is in mourning, and all who live in it pineaway, even the wild animals and the birds of heaven; the fish of the sea themselves are perishing."

And to the priests:

"But let no man denounce, no man rebuke; it is you, priest that I denounce.  Day and night you stumble along, the prophet stumbling with you, and you are the ruin of your people.  My people perish for want of knowledge.  As you have rejected knowledge so do I reject you from my priesthood; you have forgotten the teaching of your God, I in my turn will forget your children.  Many as they are, all of them have sinned against me, they have bartered their glory for shame.  They feed on the sin of my people, they are all greedy for their iniquity.  But as with the people, so let it be with the priest: I will make them for their conduct, I will pay them out for their deeds.  They will eat but never be satisfied, they will play the whore but still be sterile, because they have deserted Yahweh to give themselves up to whoring." (Hosea 4: 1-11).

In a speech given on March 21, 2009 in Detroit, Archbishop Charles Chaput, having been asked to examine what November 2008 and its aftermath can teach Catholics about American culture, the state of American Catholicism and the kind of Pauline discipleship necessary today, said that, "November showed us that 40 years of American Catholic complacency and poor formation are bearing exactly the fruit we should have expected. Or to put it more discreetly, the November elections confirmed a trend, rather than created a new moment, in American culture.”  And noting that there was no question about President Barack Obama’s views on abortion "rights," embryonic stem cell research and other "problematic issues," His Excellency said that, "Some Catholics in both political parties are deeply troubled by these issues. But too many Catholics just don’t really care. That’s the truth of it. If they cared, our political environment would be different. If 65 million Catholics really cared about their faith and cared about what it teaches, neither political party could ignore what we believe about justice for the poor, or the homeless, or immigrants, or the unborn child. If 65 million American Catholics really understood their faith, we wouldn’t need to waste each other’s time arguing about whether the legalized killing of an unborn child is somehow ‘balanced out’ or excused by three other good social policies.”

Then His Excellency offered a stunning indictment of American "Catholicism":

"We need to stop over-counting our numbers, our influence, our institutions and our resources, because they’re not real. 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, to ourselves and to God by claiming to ‘personally oppose’ some homicidal evil -- but then allowing it to be legal at the same time."  See full text here.

"It is a diabolical disorientation..."

"Let people say the Rosary every day, Our Lady has repeated that in all of Her apparitions, as if to fortify us in these times of diabolical disorientation, in order that we not let ourselves be deceived by false doctrines...Unfortunately, in religious matters, the people for the most part are ignorant and allow themselves to be led wherever they are taken. Hence, the great responsibility of the one who has the duty of leading them..."

"It is a diabolical disorientation that is invading the world, deceiving souls! It is necessary to stand up to the devil."

- Sister Lucia of Fatima

Related reading here and here.

Culture of Sodomy: Seton Hall University to offer course on same-sex "marriage" by a homosexualist professor

The Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in a document entitled Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons which was published on July 31, 2003, explains that marriage "is not just any relationship between human beings. It was established by the Creator with its own nature, essential properties and purpose" and that this truth is so evident that "no ideology can erase from the human spirit the certainty that marriage exists solely between a man and a woman." (No. 2).

Considerations goes on to explain that, "There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family. Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against the natural moral law. Homosexual acts 'close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.' Sacred Scripture condemns homosexual acts 'as a serious depravity....This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.' This same moral judgment is found in many Christian writers of the first centuries 'and is unanimously accepted by Catholic Tradition.'" (No. 4).

In No. 5, the document explains that, "..the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil.." and that even where homosexual unions have been legalized, "clear and emphatic opposition is a duty." In fact, "any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws" and even any "material cooperation on the level of their application" must be avoided.

The CDF has also taught clearly that, "All support should be withdrawn from any organizations which seek to undermine the teaching of the Church, which are ambiguous about it, or which neglect it entirely. Such support, or even the semblance of such support, can be gravely msinterpreted...Special attention should be given to the...use of Church buildings by these groups, including the facilities of Catholic schools and colleges. To some, such permission to use Church property may seem only just and charitable; but in reality it is contradictory to the purpose for which these institutions were founded, it is misleading and often scandalous." (Letter to Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons).

If Seton Hall University insists upon promoting the culture of sodomy and engaging in homosexual agitprop, the Church should withdraw all support for the institution. Seton Hall University wasn't founded for the purpose of advancing the cause of militant sodomy. It was founded to direct the formation of human persons created in the image and likeness of God to their final, eternal goal, to the common good of the society in which they live and to that intellectual and spiritual maturity which is achieved by growing in Christ Jesus.

Memorial Day and a birthday

I want to thank all of you who wished me a happy birthday.

I celebrated Memorial Day and my birthday by visiting my father's grave in Gardner, Massachusetts and the Veteran's Cemetery in Winchendon, Massachusetts. What better way to celebrate a birthday than to spend it honoring some of those who died so that I could celebrate another birthday in a free country! Those who take freedom for granted will not understand my gratitude. But they are poorer for it.

To my father up there in the sunlit hills of Heaven, I love you dad. And I have not forgotten the lessons you taught me. God first. And always: Duty, honor, country. The first as his guide, the second he applied, for the third he died.

Survey: New Hampshire residents losing their religion

"Sixty-two percent of New Hampshire adults identified themselves as Christians last year, the American Religious Identification Survey for 2008 reported. This is a 23 percent decline from 1990, when 85 percent of adults called themselves Roman Catholics, mainline Protestants and other Christians...Northern New England now surpasses the Pacific Northwest as the most irreligious region of the country, according to the survey...The survey, released on Monday, reports 29 percent of New Hampshire adults say they have no religion." (For full article, click on title of this post).

This fact imposes a burden on those of us who claim to be disciples of Christ. The Council Fathers tell us that, "..the laity are called in a special way to make the Church present and operative in those places and circumstances where only through them can it become the salt of the earth. Thus every layman, in virtue of the very gifts bestowed upon him, is at the same time a witness and a living instrument of the mission of the Church itself, 'according to the measure of Christ's bestowal...For all their works, prayers, and apostolic endeavors, their ordinary married and family life, their daily occupations, their physical and mental relaxation, if carried out in the Spirit, and even the hardships of life, if patiently borne - all these become 'spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ' (1 Pt 2:5). Together with the offering of the Lord's Body, they are most fittingly offered in the celebration of the Eucharist. Thus, as those everywhere who adore in holy activity, the laity consecrate the world itself to God." (Lumen Gentium, Nos. 33, 34 of the Second Vatican Council).

What are we waiting for? Haven't we been told that the Lord Himself will demand an account of the talents He has given us (Mt 25: 14-30). Do we really want to be among those who are relegated to the "darkness outside" because we succumbed to fear or apathy? Blessed Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer was right when he said, "There is but one fatal illness, one deadly mistake you can make: to settle for defeat, not to know how to fight with the spirit of a child of God. If this personal effort is lacking the soul becomes paralyzed and languishes alone, and is incapable of bearing fruit. Such cowardice on man's part puts pressure on Our Lord to utter those words addressed to him by the paralytic at the pool of Bethsaida, hominem non habeo! - I have no man to help me. What a pity if Jesus does not find in you the man or the woman he expects."

A 7 year-old girl named Heather McNamara has shown great courage and determination not to settle for defeat. Surely we can follow her example and show courage in the spiritual realm? Blessed Miguel Pro, S.J., did. His crime? Celebrating the Holy Mass. His punishment? Execution. The above photograph shows Blessed Pro just moments before he was gunned down. He extended his arms and proclaimed, Viva Christo Rey! - Long live Christ the King!

His love overcame his fear. He did not settle for defeat. He conquered his executioners with faith. hope and love. In the eyes of the world, he suffered defeat. But where is he now? And where are his executioners? Who really won the victory? You know the answer.