The violent rhetoric of the left

 

Joe Biden on 7.8.2024: "We’re done talking about the debate, it’s time to put Trump in a bullseye."

He got his wish.

Prayers for President Trump. Prayers for America.

Update on the Saint Benedict Center Cult

 

From The Union Leader:

The ultra-traditionalist Catholic organization located in Richmond, the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, had their appeal of Bishop Peter Libasci’s restrictions on them rejected by Vatican officials.

“Rome chose not to consider the appeal,” said Rev. Georges de Laire, the judicial vicar and vicar for canonical affairs for the Diocese of Manchester.

The Slaves, who operate the St. Benedict Center on Fay Martin Road, were ordered to stop calling themselves a Catholic organization in January 2019 under the terms of a letter sent to the group by the diocese. See here.

The group was given an extensive list of prohibitions in the precepts letter, including a restriction against raising money for any Catholic entity, and a restriction on having any priest celebrate Mass or any of the Catholic sacraments at its compound. New Hampshire Catholics are warned to stay away from the group.

The leader of the group, Louis Villarubia, who goes by Brother Andre Marie, did not respond to a request for comment.

The group appealed the orders to the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, or CDF, the Vatican governing body that defends Catholic teaching. However, they missed the deadline for that appeal, according to de Laire.

“The decision from CDF says that it was rejected because it fell outside the statute of limitations,” de Laire said. “The decision holds them to the observance of the decree.”

The ruling means that the Slaves must now follow the same rules as all other Catholics, de Laire said. The dispute between the diocese and the Slaves goes back to the Slaves' founding principles. The Slaves were started by the Rev. Leonard Feeney in the 1950s. Feeney held anti-Semitic beliefs and was for a time excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church.

Feeney also taught that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. While that is the official doctrine of the church, the way the Slaves interpret that teaching has put them on the wrong side of Rome, according to letters from the CDF to Villarubia.

The group’s strict adherence to the Catholic teaching of “no salvation outside the Church” is in conflict with the instructions it received years ago from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith. The CDF’s undersecretary, Monsignor Giacomo Morandi, wrote in a 2016 letter that the group’s theological position was “unacceptable,” and not subject to further discussion.

The group does not allow for the possibility that non-Catholics can be saved through the grace of God, which goes against the full teaching of the church, according to Morandi’s letter.

Villarubia, like the Slaves’ original founder, Feeney, has a history of making anti-Semitic remarks, which has garnered notoriety for the Slaves. Villarubia has called Jewish people the “worst enemy of the Church.”

The Slaves in Richmond are a splinter group that left the Still River, Mass., Slaves organization after Feeney reconciled with Rome shortly before his death. The Slaves in Massachusetts are no longer connected to the Richmond group.

Talks are now underway between de Laire and the Slaves on how they can live in compliance with the bishop's demands.

“We are now engaged in an effort to dialogue, to encourage them to observe the (2019) document,” de Laire said. “It is a complicated relationship that the diocese has with the Slaves and vice-versa.”

Since Libasci's precepts were published and the Slaves lost the right to have a priest celebrate Mass at their compound, Libasci has arranged for a priest from Nashua travel every Sunday to St. Stanislaus Church in Winchester to celebrate a Mass in in Latin using the pre-Vatican II form of the liturgy. This is at the same time that Keene's Parish of the Holy Spirit, which oversees the Winchester church, has been forced to eliminate Mass in English in Winchester because of a lack of priests.

De Laire said there is hope that the rift between the Slaves and Manchester can be mended, and Libasci remains dedicated to serving them as bishop.

“The bishop remains hopeful that a solution can be identified,” de Laire said. “The bishop is committed to the Slaves and their supporters, as they are members of the church and he owes them ministry.”

In 2009, the group’s then-leader, Brother Francis Maluf, signed a letter of obedience to then Bishop John McCormack renouncing anti-Semitism, and several articles about Jewish people were removed from the group’s website. McCormack then allowed the group to bring in a priest of good standing to celebrate Mass for them in Richmond.

Francis attacks Our Lady...

Francis is now suggesting that Our Lady never intended to be Ever Virgin.  See here.

As Tim Staples explains:

"In Luke 1:34, when the angel Gabriel told Mary that she was chosen to be the mother of the Messiah, she asked the question, literally translated from the Greek, “How shall this be, since I know not man?” This question makes no sense unless Mary had a vow of virginity.

When we consider Mary and Joseph were already “espoused,” according to verse 27 of this same chapter, we understand Mary and Joseph to then have had what would be akin to a ratified marriage in the New Covenant. They were married! That would mean St. Joseph would have had the right to the marriage bed at that point. Normally, after the espousal the husband would prepare a home for his new bride and then come and receive her into his home where the union would be consummated. This is precisely why St. Joseph intended to “divorce her quietly” (Matt. 1:19) when he discovered she was pregnant.

This background is significant, because a newly married woman would not ask the question, “How shall this be?” She would know! Unless, of course, that woman had a vow of virginity! Mary believed the message but wanted to know how this was going to be accomplished. This indicates she was not planning on the normal course of events for her future with St. Joseph."

From Pope Saint John Paul II:

"The Blessed Mother’s decision to commit herself completely to the Lord in virginity was the beginning and inspiration of consecrated virginity in the Church
"Mary's virginal life inspires in the entire Christian people esteem for the gift of virginity and the desire that it should increase in the Church as a sign of God's primacy over all reality...

The intention to remain a virgin, apparent in Mary's words at the moment of the Annunciation, has traditionally been considered the beginning and the inspiration of Christian virginity in the Church.

St Augustine does not see in this resolution the fulfilment of a divine precept, but a vow freely taken. In this way it was possible to present Mary as an example to "holy virgins" throughout the Church's history. Mary "dedicated her virginity to God when she did not yet know whom she would conceive, so that the imitation of heavenly life in the earthly, mortal body would come about through a vow, not a precept, through a choice of love and not through the need to serve" (De Sancta Virg., IV, PL 40:398).

The Angel does not ask Mary to remain a virgin; it is Mary who freely reveals her intention of virginity. The choice of love that leads her to consecrate herself totally to the Lord by a life of virginity is found in this commitment.

In stressing the spontaneity of Mary's decision, we must not forget that God's initiative is at the root of every vocation. By choosing the life of virginity, the young girl of Nazareth was responding to an interior call, that is, to an inspiration of the Holy Spirit that enlightened her about the meaning and value of the virginal gift of herself. No one can accept this gift without feeling called or without receiving from the Holy Spirit the necessary light and strength.

Mary made a firm decision for virginity

Although St Augustine uses the word "vow" to show those he calls "holy virgins" the first example of their state of life, the Gospel does not testify that Mary had expressly made a vow, which is the form of consecration and offering of one's life to God which has been in use since the early centuries of the Church. From the Gospel we learn that Mary made a personal decision to remain a virgin, offering her heart to the Lord. She wants to be his faithful bride, fulfilling her vocation as the "daughter of Zion". By her decision however she becomes the archetype of all those in the Church who have chosen to serve the Lord with an undivided heart in virginity.

Neither the Gospels nor any other New Testament writings tell us when Mary made the decision to remain a virgin. However it is clearly apparent from her question to the angel at the time of the Annunciation that she had come to a very firm decision. Mary does not hesitate to express her desire to preserve her virginity even in view of the proposed motherhood, showing that her intention had matured over a long period.

Indeed, Mary's choice of virginity was not made in the unforeseeable prospect of becoming the Mother of God, but developed in her consciousness before the Annunciation. We can suppose that this inclination was always present in her heart: the grace which prepared her for virginal motherhood certainly influenced the whole growth of her personality, while the Holy Spirit did not fail to inspire in her, from her earliest years, the desire for total union with God.

The marvels God still works today in the hearts and lives of so many young people were first realized in Mary's soul. Even in our world, so distracted by the attractions of a frequently superficial and consumerist culture, many adolescents accept the invitation that comes from Mary's example and consecrate their youth to the Lord and to the service of their brothers and sisters.

This decision is the choice of greater values, rather than the renunciation of human values. In this regard, in his Apostolic Exhortation Marialis cultus my venerable predecessor Paul VI emphasizes how anyone who looks at the witness of the Gospel with an open mind "will appreciate that Mary's choice of the state of virginity ... was not a rejection of any of the values of the married state but a courageous choice which she made in order to consecrate herself totally to the love of God" (n. 37).

In short, the choice of the virginal state is motivated by full adherence to Christ. This is particularly obvious in Mary. Although before the Annunciation she is not conscious of it, the Holy Spirit inspires her virginal consecration in view of Christ: she remains a virgin to welcome the Messiah and Saviour with her whole being. The virginity begun in Mary thus reveals its own Christocentric dimension, essential also for virginity lived in the Church, which finds its sublime model in the Mother of Christ. If her personal virginity, linked to the divine motherhood, remains an exceptional fact, it gives light and meaning to every gift of virginity.

Consecrated virginity is source of spiritual fruitfulness

How many young women in the Church's history, as they contemplate the nobility and beauty of the virginal heart of the Lord's Mother, have felt encouraged to respond generously to God's call by embracing the ideal of virginity! "Precisely such virginity", as I recalled in the Encyclical Redemptoris Mater, "after the example of the Virgin of Nazareth, is the source of a special spiritual fruitfulness: it is the source of motherhood in the Holy Spirit" (n. 43).

Mary's virginal life inspires in the entire Christian people esteem for the gift of virginity and the desire that it should increase in the Church as a sign of God's primacy over all reality and as a prophetic anticipation of the life to come. Together let us thank the Lord for those who still today generously consecrate their lives in virginity to the service of the kingdom of God.

At the same time, while in various regions evangelized long ago hedonism and consumerism seem to dissuade many young people from embracing the consecrated life, we must incessantly ask God through Mary's intercession for a new flowering of religious vocations. Thus the face of Christ's Mother, reflected in the many virgins who strive to follow the divine Master, will continue to be the sign of God's mercy and tenderness for humanity."

Why would Francis attack Our Lady in this way?

What do you think?

Even now, the serpent spews his bile in an attempt to overcome the Virgin (Revelation 12:15).

But Our Lady Will crush his head with her heel, her faithful cohort.

Related reading on the emerging Antichrist Culture here

.

College students: I hate President Trump's State of the Union Address and I think it was racist...even though it hasn't been delivered yet

Cabot Phillips writes:

"This Tuesday, President Donald Trump will give his first State Of The Union address to the nation.

Critics of Trump have already begun to express displeasure with his actions in the days leading up to the speech, leading some to wonder whether this opposition is substantive, or rooted in a distaste of Trump as a person.

Wanting to find out, Campus Reform headed to New York University to ask students their opinions of President Trump’s State of the Union. The only problem for them was that the speech would not take place for another seven days…

Would that stop them from giving strong, condemnatory opinions on the speech?

See for yourself."

Watch the video and witness the herd mentality which is representative of many of today's college students.

Philip Johnson, in his book "Objections Sustained: Subversive Essays on Evolution, Law & Culture, tells a story which is both amusing and frightening at the same time. He writes: "I am convinced that conscious dishonesty is much less important in intellectual matters than self-deception...The German biologist Bruno Muller-Hill tells a memorable story to illustrate his thesis that 'self-deception plays an astonishing role in science in spite of all the scientists' worship of truth':

When I was a student in a German gymnasium and thirteen years old, I learned a lesson that I have not forgotten...One early morning our physics teacher placed a telescope in the school yard to show us a certain planet and its moons. So we stood in a long line, about forty of us. I was standing at the end of the line, since I was one of the smallest students. The teacher asked the first student whether he could see the planet. No, he had difficulties, because he was nearsighted. The teacher showed him how to adjust the focus, and that student could finally see the planet and the moons. Others had no difficulty; they saw them right away. The students saw, after a while, what they were supposed to see. Then the student standing just before me - his name was Harter - announced that he could not see anything. 'You idiot,' shouted the teacher, 'you have to adjust the lenses.' The student did that and said after a while, 'I do not see anything, it is all black.' The teacher then looked through the telescope himself. After some seconds he looked up with a strange expression on his face. And then my comrades and I also saw that the telescope was nonfunctioning; it was closed by a cover over the lens. Indeed, no one could see anything through it.'

Muller-Hill reports that one of the docile students became a professor of philosophy and director of a German TV station. 'This might be expected,' he wickedly comments. But another became a professor of physics, and a third a professor of botany. The honest Harter had to leave school and go to work in a factory. If in later life he was ever tempted to question any of the pronouncements of his more illustrious classmates, I am sure he was firmly told not to meddle in matters beyond his understanding.'" (pp. 156-157).

Do we honestly believe that this herd mentality is not to be found throughout our society and even in the Church? If so, we deceive ourselves. Pope Benedict XVI has warned of a liberal notion of conscience which is nothing less than a retreat from truth. In a keynote address of the Tenth Bishops' Workshop of the National Catholic Bioethics Center, on "Catholic Conscience: Foundation and Formation," he says that liberalism's idea of conscience is that: "Conscience does not open the way to the redemptive road to truth - which either does not exist or, if it does, is too demanding. It is the faculty that dispenses with truth. It thereby becomes the justification for subjectivity, which would not like to have itself called into question. Similarly, it becomes the justification for social conformity. As mediating value between the different subjectivities, social conformity is intended to make living together possible. The obligation to seek the truth terminates, as do any doubts about the general inclination of society and what it has become accustomed to. Being convinced of oneself, as well as conforming to others, is sufficient. Man is reduced to his superficial conviction, and the less depth he has, the better for him."

Is there really any difference between Harter's classmates, who insisted that they could see a planet and its moons when such was impossible, and those who succumb to social conformity and insist that an unborn baby is not really a human being when all the scientific evidence suggests otherwise?

Are today's college students being prepared to think critically or simply to mindlessly regurgitate what their far-left liberal professors tell them to believe and/or what the far-left mainstream media reports?

What do you think?

Related reading: here.

Facebook uses its "Community Standards" policy to engage in partisan politics

In my last post,  I commented on the course,  vulgar  language employed by many who engage in partisan politics and who wish to demonize their political opponents or those who support them.

Because I took exception to a hateful Facebook post attacking Donald Trump and referring to the presidential candidate as an "asshat" and his supporters as "uneducated morons," I found my post deleted and myself accused of violating Facebook standards and banned.

Incredible.  Facebook is obviously engaging in partisan politics.

My post:

And the fallout for commenting on a Trump-basher's hate:

"Gay Marriage" and the frenzy of hate

John Zmirak writes, "The expected Supreme Court decision imposing on 50 states an entirely new understanding of marriage, and the frenzy of hatred that gay activists have stoked against Indiana for trying to shelter religious believers from crippling lawsuits should wake us to a cold and stark reality: The age of tolerance in America is vanishing before your eyes. The question is how Christians and other people of faith and good will are going to respond.

Let’s break this down in stark and simple terms: Not only were gay activists willing to overturn an act of Congress (the Defense of Marriage Act) on spurious grounds; they also wish to force their libertine idea of marriage onto voters in each of the 50 states, voiding dozens of laws on an issue that has always rested with the states.

Not satisfied with that, these activists want the full force of the regulatory state to compel every single American to affirm and accept the delusion of same-sex “marriage,” under the same civil and criminal penalties that now forbid discrimination by race. A famous case was a 70-year-old Christian florist who declined to decorate a gay wedding, and was crushed by a successful lawsuit and the full force of the ACLU’s legal team. She was one of the Brave New Law’s first victims. She will be far from the last.

These activists use the power of city governments (as in San Francisco) to try to intimidate isolated Catholic schools into abandoning Christian teaching on sexual ethics. Such zealots corrupt the academic authorities who grant accreditation in order to financially cripple schools such as Gordon College that maintain Christian “morals” clauses as part of their hiring policies.

Those who defend the reality of marriage, including even unbelievers who defend freedom of religion and association, are not simply wrong — they are “bigots” and “haters” who deserve to be fined, boycotted and bankrupted; to lose their jobs like Brendan Eich, the ex-CEO of Mozilla, and face financial ruin — as Elton John hopes to break Dolce & Gabbana, and as Apple CEO Tim Cook hopes to break the entire State of Indiana. Politicians are joining in, with the Connecticut governor, and Seattle and San Francisco mayors, banning official travel to Indiana.

As Austin Ruse points out, states such as Indiana are not giving Christians a pass to broadly discriminate against gays. Such religious freedom laws “deal with the very narrow question of whether vendors can be forced by the state to participate in religious ceremonies that violate their own religious consciences.”

Given the fanatical response to a modest bill virtually identical to a federal law upheld by courts and bills on the books in twenty other states, how long before the call comes out for the “bigots” to be imprisoned? The First Amendment won’t protect us, if leaders like Hillary Clinton have their way; in public statements she followed President Obama in replacing the Constitution’s “free exercise” with “freedom of worship.”

The implicit message shouldn’t be missed: Say what you want in church for an hour every Sunday, but the rest of the week belongs to us. Your homophobic beliefs deserve no more protection than the religious use of peyote."

Readers of this Blog know that I have been warning about the totalitarian nature of the homosexual hate movement for more than 20 years.

I have been warning for years that just prior to the Man of Sin revealing himself to the world, there would be a tremendous push for societal acceptance of homosexuality and same-sex "marriage."  Back in 2009, I warned that: "President Obama wants all Americans to accept and embrace homosexuality....And this really shouldn't surprise us. Those who abandon Divine Revelation and the Natural Law will no longer seek God and His precepts and Commandments but will instead pursue their own lusts and fantasies. Such people will create and adore their own gods which are almost always a mythical projection of their own vices. They attribute a religious dimension to these vices to 'baptize' them, to justify them in their own darkened minds*.


It was Saint Cyprian of Carthage, writing against the Greco-Roman pagan world and its vices, who said: 'That Jupiter of theirs is not more supreme in dominion than in vice, inflamed with earthly love in the midst of his own thunders...now breaking forth by the help of birds to violate the purity of boys. And now put the question: Can he who looks upon such things be healthy-minded or modest? Men imitate the gods whom they adore, and to such miserable beings their crimes become their religion.' (Letters 1:8).

In a series of letters written from 1969-1970, Sister Lucia [of the Fatima apparition] wrote: 'It is indeed sad that so many people let themselves be dominated by the diabolical wave that is sweeping the world, and that they are blinded to the point of being incapable of seeing error! Their principal fault is they have abandoned prayer; in this way they have become estranged from God, and without God everything fails. The devil is very cunning and looks for our weak points in order to attack us. If we are not diligent and careful to obtain strength from God, we shall fall, for our age is very wicked and we are weak. Only the strength of God can keep us on our feet.'

There is a retreat from truth. Those of us who refuse to abandon our Christian faith must be demonized. We must be placed in a ghetto. Isolated. Portrayed as 'backward' and 'archaic.' And eventually placed in internment camps or simply eliminated altogether should we refuse to accept the New Order."


* Have I been wrong so far?  President Obama has attempted to use the Scriptures to justify his decision.  Speaker Pelosi asserts that her Catholic Faith "compels" her to support sodomy.

Benjamin Wiker notes that, "Making [homosexuality] monogamous does not make it any better, any more than a man promising to have sex with only one child would make it any less a reprehensible act of pedophilia."  Why then the push for "gay marriage"?  Because, as Wiker explains, this desire makes sense to "a materialist still nagged by subliminal, vestigial Christian moral habits" or the Christian "who has sold nearly everything in his universe to the materialist."  Or, as I've put it so many times before here at La Salette Journey, the Christian who has lost his faith but who hasn't steeled himself or herself to admit of this. 

Wiker wisely asserts that, "The notion of sanctifying homosexual unions by demanding that they be monogamous will soon enough go the way of limiting abortions to the first trimester.  Furthermore, the push for pedophilia is now the 'extreme' which will push homosexuality out of the spotlight of public debate and into full normality.  That pedophilia is even being debated, rather than simply rejected as unimaginably vile, means that it is likely the next item of sexual liberation due for normalization." ( Benjamin Wiker, Ph.D, Moral Darwinism: How We Became Hedonists, p. 312).

During the Reign of Antichrist, which is almost upon us, every sin, every vile act will be celebrated with abandon.  And every Commandment of God, every principle of morality will not only be laughed to scorn but will be outlawed.

Homosexual Hate Movement: The Final Stage

Ten years ago, I posted the following here at La Salette Journey:

Those who are promoting the homosexual agenda are using time-proven tactics which have been employed by secular humanists for some time now. In the words of Ralph Martin, "First, a plea is issued for a dominantly Christian society to 'tolerate' what appears to be a deviant behavior. Then pressure is applied to place the deviant behavior on an equal footing with traditional Christian values. Secular humanists argue that a pluralist society cannot do otherwise. They then try to make the deviant behavior seem normal and behavior governed by Christian values seem abnormal - a threat to a pluralist society. The last step is often to use the legal system to protect immorality and to undermine what Christians have always considered righteous behavior." (A Crisis of Truth, pp. 101-102).

Professor James Hitchcock, in his excellent work entitled "Catholicism and Modernity" (New York:Seabury Press, 1979, p. 86), explains the role of the media in this entire process:

"The media's alleged commitment to 'pluralism' is at base a kind of hoax. The banner of pluralism is raised in order to win toleration for new ideas as yet unacceptable to the majority. Once toleration has been achieved, public opinion is systematically manipulated first to enforce a status of equality between the old and the new, then to assert the superiority of the new over the old. A final stage is often the total discrediting, even sometimes the banning, of what had previously been orthodox."

And increasingly, we are witnessing episodes which serve to highlight the fact that we have entered this final stage.  See here for example.

The homosexual movement is essentially totalitarian.  There is no point in denying this.  See here.

This hate movement seeks to impose its ideology on all.  And it will employ any means, including physical violence, to attain its evil agenda.  See here.

Father Peter Carota: Traditional Catholic Love is greater than the Hate of Progressive Catholics

Traditional Catholic Love Is Greater Than The Hate Of Progressive Catholics

By Father Peter Carota 

During Lent we relived the evil actions of the religious authorities of Jesus’ time.  We read from the Bible of their planning and paying for the eradication of Jesus.
As soon as Jesus began His public ministry of forgiving sins, exorcising devils, healing the sick (especially on the Sabbath), and preaching, He evoked the hatred and jealousy of the Jewish Religious leaders (Scribes, Pharisees, Lawyers and Priest).  All His actions were works of love that only brought on Him their hatred.  I would say that there is a constant law even at work today.  That law is this; evil and hypocritical people will always hate good people who do good things.
The religious leaders at the time of Jesus were faithful to all the prescribed religious actions.  But in their hearts, they were far from God.  How else can you explain the beatings, spitting, scourging, ridicule, false accusations and the final infamous scandal of Jesus crucified naked on the cross.
Pontius Pilate tries to free Jesus from them.  He continually pronounced His innocence and knew that it was only out of jealousy that they hated Him.  He also had Him scourged, hoping that this torturous beating would quell their hatred and let Him live.  But nothing could stop the power of the evil in the Jewish Church at that time from taking their hatred out on Jesus.
But their hatred and secret actions to destroy the loving Jesus backfired on them.  Yes they were able to torture Him and killed Him, but Love had the last say over hate.  While Jesus was going through His excruciating death on the cross, He forgave them, out of love, the religious men, who should have loved Him and followed Him.
They used all their religious and political power to kill Jesus.  And they were very successful.  But after they had tortured Him to death, there was no other way to continue to take out their hatred and blood thirsty jealousy on Him.  They could do no more to the silent Lamb before the slaughter.
On Easter, the Love of Jesus triumphs over the hatred of the Jewish religious.  He can die no more.  He now reigns forever.
But as soon as Jesus was gone, they went after his disciples with the same hatred, jealousy, floggings, imprisonments and killing.  But after they tortured them and killed them, His disciples also shared in His resurrection and now reign with Him forever.
So, when we see so many religious leaders in the Church today who hate the 1800+ year old Latin Mass, (the Mass of all Ages), we should not be surprised.  It is exactly as it was at the time of Jesus.  And when we see so many Catholics hating the Holy Latin Mass, hating to kneeling to receive Jesus and hating priests who condemn sin and immodesty, we are only again seeing the exact same reaction of hatred and jealousy that Jesus evoked from the religious people of His time.  When we see so many Catholics behind the scenes trying to get rid of traditional priests and the Latin Mass, we should not be surprised at all.
But, as Jesus triumphed, by going through His passion and death, we also will triumph though all this persecution and hatred.  And just we need to remember how He triumphed.  It was by suffering with loved.  He forgave from the heart and He went on.
Jesus knew what His mission was.  He did not let the passion get in the way of Him completing His Father will.  He thirsted for the souls of sinners, and shed every drop of His blood, out of love for them, to save them.


Let us traditional Catholic remember that, like the Master we follow, we also will have to suffer.  Religious leaders and people of today, will continue to secretly work against us, behind the scenes, in parishes and chanceries.  We will have every form of obstacles imaginable put in our way.  But we will still stay faithful to our mission, at what ever price, to restore Jesus’ Church and to save of souls.  And in the end, love, truth and life will triumph.

Readers of this Blog know full well how I have been attacked, demonized and ostracized for standing up for the Magisterial Teaching of the Church and sound liturgy.  Only a couple of weeks ago, I objected to the carnival atmosphere at Saint Vincent de Paul Parish in Baldwinville, Massachusetts and the "pastor" there - Father Francis Roberge - accused me falsely of being threatening.  And because I have opposed so-called "gay marriage," women's ordination and New Age spirituality, I have been labeled "hateful."

I've said it before and I'll say it again: While it is true that everything must be done to help sinners, this cannot include helping them to sin or to remain in sin. Because of human frailty, every sinner deserves both pity and compassion. However, vice and sin must be excluded from this compassion. This because sin can never be the proper object of compassion. (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.1, ad 1).

It is a false compassion which supplies the sinner with the means to remain attached to sin. Such 'compassion' provides an assistance (whether material or moral) which actually enables the sinner to remain firmly attached to his evil ways. By contrast, true compassion leads the sinner away from vice and back to virtue. As Thomas Aquinas explains:

"We love sinners out of charity, not so as to will what they will, or to rejoice in what gives them joy, but so as to make them will what we will, and rejoice in what rejoices us. Hence it is written: 'They shall be turned to thee, and thou shalt not be turned to them.'" (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 25, a.6, ad 4, citing Jeremiah 15:19).
St. Thomas Aquinas teaches us that the sentiment of compassion only becomes a virtue when it is guided by reason, since "it is essential to human virtue that the movements of the soul should be regulated by reason." (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, c.3). Without such regulation, compassion is merely a passion. A false compassion is a compassion not regulated and tempered by reason and is, therefore, a potentially dangerous inclination. This because it is subject to favoring not only that which is good but also that which is evil (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.1, ad 3).

An authentic compassion always stems from charity. True compassion is an effect of charity (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.3, ad 3). But it must be remembered that the object of this virtue is God, whose love extends to His creatures. (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 25, a.3). Therefore, the virtue of compassion seeks to bring God to the one who suffers so that he may thereby participate in the infinite love of God. As St. Augustine explains:

"'Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.' Now, you love yourself suitably when you love God better than yourself. What, then, you aim at in yourself you must aim at in your neighbor, namely, that he may love God with a perfect affection." (St. Augustine, Of the Morals of the Catholic Church, No. 49,
Let us remember this as we go forth to do battle against the Progressive Catholics who have been poisoned by the fire of Hell.

Archbishop assaulted by topless "gay" activists

Another example of homosexual hate, this time perpetrated against a Catholic Archbishop.  See here.

Already, so many - including many Christians -  have been seduced by the religious deception which is presented as the "new religion," the religion of the Age of Aquarius. Those who wish to destroy the Church and to prepare the way for the Man of Sin know full well that external persecution only strengthens the Church. Therefore, they strive to bring down the Church through internal betrayal and infidelity.


As I've said before, "The new humanitarian religion, which is anti-supernatural, must absorb Christianity as it prepares for the entrance of the Man of Sin. Catholics who maintain a devotion to the Holy Eucharist and Our Lady [and authentic devotion to Our Lady presupposes total obedience to the Church's Magisterium] must first be ostracized and later eliminated as incompatible with the New Order."

"Erit enim tempus, cum sanam doctrinam non sustinebunt, sed ad sua desideria coacervabunt sibi magistros, prurientes auribus. Et a veritate quidem auditum avertent, ad fabulas autem convertentur." (2 Timothy 4: 3-4).

And that time is now. New Age philosophies are spreading throughout the Church. Homosexuality and lesbianism are celebrated. Even in many Catholic parishes. Intoxicated with their own knowledge and learning, those who have succumbed to friendship with the world tell us that we must leave behind the "old complexes" and reject "backward thinking" so that we may evolve into more "civilized" beings who may then build an earthly paradise. These misguided souls are not interested in knowledge for the sake of truth, but for power and possession.

It was Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand who warned that,"..a much worse consequence of the idol of learning is the killing of common sense, which is being undertaken on a widespread scale in grammar schools, high schools, and colleges. One forgets the great source of wisdom which lies in our immediate contact with being, and how pernicious it is to replace the resulting world view, with instruction which draws its nourishment from doubtful psychological and sociological theories, and false, flat philosophies. Every immediate, true experience in which the voice of being speaks to a person, is much more interesting than the questionable theories he has adopted concerning the world and life. Thus it is that a simple, unlettered man, when he speaks about the world and his life, is much wiser, much truer, and more genuine than all the half-educated people who simply repeat the stupid theories expounded by their professors. The statement of a simple person may be clumsily expressed; it may be incomplete, and even contain errors. But it will always have a kernel of truth, always the freshness of a genuine contact with reality, and be free from the arrogant presumption of establishing a valid theory in the sense of looking 'behind the scenes' of reality, and being able to 'explain' everything. The dangerous error of the cult of teaching and learning reaches its climax in the ambition to improve, modify, or even replace natural, immediate, organic contact with the world and life, by an artificial contact based on so-called 'scientific' theories." (The Devastated Vineyard, pp. 85-86).

We are commanded, "Do not love the world or the things of the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, sensual lust, enticement for the eyes, and a pretentious life, is not from the Father but is from the world. Yet the world and its enticement are passing away. But whoever does the will of God remains forever." (2 Timothy 2: 15-17)

The diabolical disorientation Sister Lucia of Fatima spoke of is growing day by day.  In my next post, I will be examining the writings of an anti-Catholic bigot who is attempting to paint the Fatima apparition as a demonic deception.

Liberal columnist Bonnie Erbe: the Christian era is crumbling and this will be liberating

In their Pastoral Letter on Freedom of Conscience and Religion, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, citing Blessed John XXIII's Encyclical Letter Pacem in Terris, No. 14, remind us that, "Every individual has the 'right to be able to worship God in accordance with the right dictates of conscience....Besides being free from external coercion, everyone must be able freely to exercise the right to choose, profess, disseminate, and practice his or her own religion in private and in public.  This includes the freedom for parents to educate their children in their religious convictions and to choose the schools which provide that formation.  Moreover, the State has the obligation to protect this right by means of a legal and administrative framework and to create a suitable environment where it can be enjoyed...Unfortunately, religious freedom is far from being effectively guaranteed everywhere.  Sometimes it is denied for religious or ideological reasons.  At other times, although it may be recognized in law, it is hindered in practice by a legal system or social order which enforces strict control, if not a monopoly, over society....

More subtle threats to religious freedom arise from the cultural predominance of radical secularism and 'a subliminal relativism that penetrates every area of life.  Sometimes this relativism becomes aggressive when it opposes those who say they know where the truth or meaning of life is to be found.' (Pope Benedict XVI, Address to Central Committee for German Catholics, Freiburg in Breisgau, September 24, 2011).

This aggressive and hate-filled secularism which Pope Benedict XVI refers to aims at forcing religious believers - and especially Catholic Christians - to keep their religious convictions to themselves while insisting that atheists, agnostics and the "non-affiliated" should not be held to the same restriction.  The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops rightly declare that such an aim amounts to nothing less than "an expression of religious intolerance."

This intolerance is embraced by liberal columnist Bonnie Erbe.  In a column entitled "Christian leaders losing power, and I'm fine with that," which was carried by the Fitchburg Sentinel & Enterprise, Ms. Erbe argues that America is morphing "from one nation under one Christian god to an amalgam nation under many gods" and that it is "liberating" to know that the non-Christian population is increasing even as the ranks of Church-going Christians decreases.

Ms. Erbe rails against the Catholic Church in particular because the U.S. Bishops have had the audacity to stand up for religious freedom against the Obama administration's contraception mandate which would violate the First Amendment guarantee of religious liberty.  She writes, "Clearly, they and other Christian church leaders still see us as one nation under one god.  But...this is changing.  Another Pew poll released two years ago on the 'millennial' generation and its relationship with faith should be even more troubling to Christian leaders.  It showed the following, quoting from the Pew website: 'Americans ages 18 to 29 are considerably less religious than older Americans.  Fewer young adults belong to any particular faith than older people do today.  They also are less likely to be affiliated than their parents' and grandparents' generations were when they were young.'

For Ms. Erbe, this is all just great news.  She writes joyfully, "One day, Christian leaders will wake up and recognize that their era is crumbling.  If that means they will have decreasing power in the political realm, it will be a blessing for all of us..."

In other words, if the rights and freedoms of Christians are to diminish as their ranks grow smaller, such will represent a blessing to those who oppose the Christian Church.  Having succumbed to the Father of Lies (John 8: 44), Ms. Erbe could not possibly understand that the growing apostasy will not represent a "blessing" for pagans, atheists, agnostics and the "non-affiliated."  On the contrary, the Holy Spirit assures us through Saint Paul that the day of the Lord will not come "unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of perdition" (2 Thessalonians 2: 3) and that, "The coming of the lawless one by the activity of Satan will be with all power and with pretended signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are to perish, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved." (2 Thessalonians 2: 9-10).

The coming of the lawless one (the Antichrist for the scripturally illiterate) will set off a sequence of events culminating in the complete destruction of those who have "refused to love the truth and so be saved."  Jesus refers to this mystery in John 5: 43.  After this destruction comes, we will have a new heavens and a new earth where nothing unclean shall enter (Revelation 21: 27).

Now that will be a blessing!

Mr. David Niose and Clark University's Christianophobic "Freethought Society"

Back in January, I noted how Paul Agne of Clark University's "Freethought Society" wrote that there's nothing wrong with mocking Christianity, asserting that, "Even if we do criticize/mock Christianity, there is nothing wrong with that. If I see irrational dogma, bigotry, intolerance, etc it is not exempt from criticism/ridicule just because it is someone's religious (or political/cultural/etc) belief. And furthermore, as Christianity is the dominant religion in the US, and inserts itself into our lives daily it will of course be more relevant to us, and we will have more to say about it than, say, Jainism."

For Mr. Agne then [and for the "Freethought Society" as a whole since the group published his comments], Christianity is equivalent to irrationality, bigotry and intolerance.  Which no doubt is why the Worcester Telegram & Gazette ran a positive story on this hate group.  In an article entitled "Non-believer groups grow on campus," we read that, "Mr David Niose, a local attorney who is president of the American Humanist Association, said many students today prefer reason or logic over spirituality."

Of course, as Pope John Paul II reminded us in his Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio, on the relationship between faith and reason, faith and reason go hand-in-hand: "Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth; and God has placed in the human heart a desire to know the truth—in a word, to know himself—so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves (cf. Ex 33:18; Ps 27:8-9; 63:2-3; Jn 14:8; 1 Jn 3:2).

But Mr. Niose insists that the students attracted to atheist groups on campus such as Clark's "Freethought Society," "choose reason over the beliefs that come from ancient texts" and that "many students are being driven to non-belief because of the rigid dogma and very conservative views espoused by some churches." (See here).

But faith and reason can never contradict one another.  As Saint Thomas Aquinas explains in his Summa Contra Gentiles I, 7:

"The truth that the human reason is naturally endowed to know cannot be opposed to the truth of the Christian faith.  For that with which the human reason is naturally endowed is clearly most true; so much so, that it is impossible for us to think of such truths as false.  If we only understand the meaning of the terms in such self-evident propositions as 'The whole is greater than the part' or 'What has color must have size,' we cannot think them false.  Nor is it permissible to believe as false that which we hold by faith, since this is confirmed in a way that is so clearly divine.  It is not our faith but its object, God, that justifies our certainty.  Since, therefore, only the false is opposed to the true, as is clearly evident from an examination of their definitions, it is impossible that truth of faith should be opposed to those principles that the human reason knows naturally."

It is most ironic that Mr. Niose should refer to some of the Churches as being "rigid."  This because Clark University's "Freethought Society" is extremely rigid and intolerant toward views which dissent from its own.  As I noted here:

Just recently, Pope Benedict XVI said that, "It is imperative that the entire Catholic community in the United States come to realize the grave threats to the Church's public moral witness presented by a radical secularism which finds increasing expression in the political and cultural spheres...Cardinal George Pell of Australia has correctly noted that, 'Some secularists seem to like one way streets..Their intolerance of Christianity seeks to drive it out not only from the public square, but even from the provision of education, health care and welfare services to the wider community. Tolerance has come to mean different things for different groups. Indeed. And this intolerance of tolerance is in evidence at Clark University in Worcester. At its website, we read that:

"Clark students

•Are passionate about ideas, causes and events beyond themselves.

•Embrace issues and take action.

•Approach life with open minds and a global perspective."
And yet, because I questioned the research findings of one of Clark University's professors, Dr. Abbie Goldberg, one of the university's approved student groups - the Clark "Freethought" Society, posted my photo with the following commentary from Clark Student Brian Seitzman: "He's a delusional nutter who spends a lot of time posting photos of aborted fetuses on FB [Facebook]*...He also appears to have some major persecution fantasies...In short, the guy's pretty much of an ass.... but you'd likely figured that much out already." Apparently Mr. Seitzman would consider Pope Benedict XVI and Cardinal Pell - not to mention a growing number of the Church's hierarchy - to be "delusonal nutters" who suffer from "persecution fantasies."

Pope John Paul II reminded us in Centesimus Annus that, "Authentic democracy is possible only in a State ruled by law, and on the basis of a correct conception of the human person. It requires that the necessary conditions be present for the advancement both of the individual through education and formation in true ideals, and of the 'subjectivity' of society through the creation of structures of participation and shared responsibility. Nowadays there is a tendency to claim that agnosticism and sceptical relativism are the philosophy and the basic attitude which correspond to democratic forms of political life. Those who are convinced that they know the truth and firmly adhere to it are considered unreliable from a democratic point of view, since they do not accept that truth is determined by the majority, or that it is subject to variation according to different political trends. It must be observed in this regard that if there is no ultimate truth to guide and direct political activity, then ideas and convictions can easily be manipulated for reasons of power. As history demonstrates, a democracy without values easily turns into open or thinly disguised totalitarianism."

Authentic Christians have always and everywhere accepted a "healthy pluralism." At the same time, such Christians have also understood that they have an obligation to acknowledge their beliefs and to preach the moral message given to them by the Lord Jesus. The follower of the Lord Jesus possesses a qualified certainty regarding the tenets of Natural Law and other truths which are revealed by God and help guide the conduct of man. Consequently, the authentic Christian understands that Christian ethical principles inform human society. Secular Humanists and those committed toward advancing the radical homosexual agenda have their own agenda and will do everything in their power to censor the Christian view.

The authentic Christian [or any person of good will] will reject the sophism of those who declare that anyone who does not buy into the Dictatorship of Relativism (a pluralism of opinions which rejects any and all absolute truth or even its possibility) is a "fanatic" or a "fundamentalist." On the contrary, such people will defend the truth in a positive manner. And while respecting persons and living out charity, they will proclaim the truth without fear.

This is the mind of Christ. As Pope John Paul II taught us in his Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, No. 95:

"The Church's teaching, and in particular her firmness in defending the universal and permanent validity of the precepts prohibiting intrinsically evil acts, is not infrequently seen as the sign of an intolerable intransigence, particularly with regard to the enormously complex and conflict-filled situations present in the moral life of individuals and of society today; this intransigence is said to be in contrast with the Church's motherhood. The Church, one hears, is lacking in understanding and compassion. But the Church's motherhood can never in fact be separated from her teaching mission, which she must always carry out as the faithful Bride of Christ, who is the Truth in person. As Teacher, she never tires of proclaiming the moral norm... The Church is in no way the author or the arbiter of this norm. In obedience to the truth which is Christ, whose image is reflected in the nature and dignity of the human person, the Church interprets the moral norm and proposes it to all people of good will, without concealing its demands of radicalness and perfection...

In fact, genuine understanding and compassion must mean love for the person, for his true good, for his authentic freedom. And this does not result, certainly, from concealing or weakening moral truth, but rather from proposing it in its most profound meaning as an outpouring of God's eternal Wisdom, which we have received in Christ, and as a service to man, to the growth of his freedom and to the attainment of his happiness."

Clark University's "Freethought" Society has one post after another on Facebook ridiculing religious belief (especially Christianity) and has numerous links to radical secularist groups which seek to drive Christianity out of the political and cultural spheres and to relegate it to the margins of society. In short, far from encouraging authentic dialogue and a healthy pluralism, the university-approved student group apparently has the sole purpose of demonizing any and all religious expression.

Free thought? Or slavery to what Pope Benedict XVI has referred to as the "Dictatorship of Relativism"?

* I have posted one photograph of an aborted baby on Facebook.  Why should this trouble Brian Seitzman?  The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM) has hundreds of photographs of murdered Jews at its website to highlight the atrocities of the Third Reich. 


Related posts here and here.

Where was the outrage?

By now you've all heard about Pastor Terry Jones, head of the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida, who plans to burn copies of the Koran on September 11th. No decent person would agree with Pastor Jones' plan. It is morally offensive. And there has been outrage across the globe. Various world leaders have been highly critical of the pastor.

But what concerns me is that when Islamic extremists treat the Bible (or Christians) with contempt, we do not hear anything approaching the same level of condemnation from world leaders. Back in 2007, Islamic extremists stormed the Latin Church and the adjacent Rosary Sisters School in Gaza City. These gunmen used rocket-propelled grenades to blow through the doors of the Church and school before burning bibles and destroying every cross they could get their hands on. Father Manuel Mussalam told the Associated Press that these Muslims ransacked, burned and looted both the school and the convent.

Where was the outrage? How many of you have even heard of this incident? Anyone?

When Muslim students in Melbourne Australia urinated on bibles and burned them (what would this suggest they were being taught about the Bible), the story was barely reported by the press. As Patrick Buchanan notes, "..Islam, the faith of one in five people on earth, does not mean freedom. It means 'submission' - to the will of Allah. In the Islamic world, there is no freedom to preach and proselytize for faiths such as Christianity...The secular Western idea - that all religions should be treated equally and permitted to convert non-believers - is punishable heresy in the Islamic world. Can not we Americans, who once called ourselves a Christian country, understand that?" (Day of Reckoning, p. 76).

It would seem not.

More commentary on the Catholic Church from Juda Myers...

In my previous post on Juda Myers, a pro-life activist who has appeared on EWTN and who has been affiliated with various pro-life groups, some of them Catholic, I highlighted some of Ms. Myers anti-Catholic sentiments. What follows is more commentary from Ms. Myers. This particular response came after I told Ms. Myers of my devotion to the Holy Rosary:

"My only concern is that the rosary hails Mary more than Jesus. Jesus didn't acknowledge her when she and his brothers came where He was. Matthew 12: 46 While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47 Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you." 48 He replied to him, "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" 49 Pointing to his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother." I know that Mary was a very special woman indeed to have carried our Savior but she too needed Him to save her.

Jesus said [in] Matthew 6:7 But when you pray, use not vain repetitions There is so much spoken in the Catholic bible that goes unused and rejected. Even the part where Jesus tells us to call no man "father, teacher or rabbi" as we have only one father in heaven who teaches us. He warned against calling people that as an elevation or position. Matthew 23 Then there's the case for not getting married: 1Timothy 4:1 Now the Holy Spirit clearly says that in the later times some people will stop believing the faith. They will follow spirits that lie and teachings of demons. 2 Such teachings come from the false words of liars whose consciences are destroyed as if by a hot iron. 3 They forbid people to marry and tell them not to eat certain foods which God created to be eaten with thanks by people who believe and know the truth.

The Catholic church starting forbidding priests to marry because the first born was to inherit the wealth of the church and also carry on the priesthood. When many refused but took the wealth, the church instigated marriage to be forbidden. Also the not eating of meat on Friday is not a biblical command.

The Catholic church has piled so many man made laws onto the body of Christ..."

I responded to Ms. Myers fundamentalist interpretation of the Scriptures by referring her to an excellent work by Paul Whitcomb entitled "The Catholic Church has the answer." A booklet which may be found online here.

I asked Ms. Myers repeatedly to refrain from writing me on Facebook. But still she contacted me with several more messages.

Pray for Juda Myers. Anti-Catholicism has been called the deepest bias in the history of the American people (Schlesinger). It is clear that even in some pro-life circles, it is alive and well.

The Homosexual Hate Movement has much in common with the Ku Klux Klan...

Historian John Higham once described anti-Catholicism as "the most luxuriant, tenacious tradition of paranoiac agitation in American history." Historian Arthur M. Schlesinger, Sr. characterized prejudice against Catholics as "the deepest bias in the history of the American people." And conservative commentator Peter Viereck has said that "Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals."

But nowhere is this "paranoiac agitation" and hate-filled prejudice against Catholics more deeply ingrained than in today's Homosexual Hate Movement. There are parallels between this hate movement and the Ku Klux Klan at the early part of the twentieth-century. When the Klan enjoyed a resurgence in the 1920s, anti-Catholic rhetoric intensified to such a degree that it led to violence against Catholics and the burning down of a Catholic Church. Just two weeks after the Church of the Little Flower was erected in 1925, the Klan burned a cross in front of the church. Later the church would burn down in a fire.

Today, hate-filled rhetoric is being levelled against the Catholic Church by rabidly anti-Catholic extremists and this extreme rhetoric has led to open violence against Catholics and Catholic churches (not to mention Protestant and Mormon churches). See here. One radical anti-Catholic activist has compared the Holy Father to a vampire who is nothing but a bigot (See here). One of his associates (a professor of Sociology) has written that, "The Pope and the Vatican, modern day Pharisees, and their minions, have caused untold suffering to countless numbers of people, and no decent person, no Christian, no LGBT person, has any business giving credibility to that institution by his/her presence and money." (See here). Of course, this bright light offers no evidence to support his wild and irresponsible claims against the Church. But then how can we expect such an individual to be concerned with facts in the face of such blanket condemnations of a Church comprising more than 1 billion people? The classic definition of prejudice: "Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion."

Let's all pray that such irrational hatred will not lead to more violence against Catholics and others who morally oppose homosexuality while respecting the homosexual person.

Related reading here, here and here.

The New York Times has donated monies to an anti-Catholic organization

"..the fanatic never sees himself as a fanatic; it is only the non-fanatic who can recognize him as a fanatic; so that when this judgment, or this accusation, is made, the fanatic can always say that he is misunderstood and slandered...Fanaticism is essentially opinion pushed to paroxysm; with everything that the notion of opinion may imply of blinded ignorance as to its own nature....whatever ends the fanatic is aiming at or thinks he is aiming at, even if he wishes to gather men together, he can only in fact separate them; but as his own interests cannot lie in effecting this separation, he is led, as we have seen, to wish to wipe his opponents out.

And when he is thinking of these opponents, he takes care to form the most degrading images of them possible - they are 'lubricious vipers' or 'hyenas and jackals with typewriters' - and the ones that reduce them to most grossly material terms. In fact, he no longer thinks of these opponents except as material obstacles to be overturned or smashed down. Having abandoned the behaviour of a thinking being, he has lost even the feeblest notion of what a thinking being, outside himself, could be. It is understandable therefore that he should make every effort to deny in advance the rights and qualifications of those whom he wishes to eliminate; and that he should regard all means to this end as fair. We are back here again at the techniques of degradation." (Gabriel Marcel, Man Against Mass Society, pp. 135-136).

As this article explains, the New York Times has donated monies to Planned Parenthood, an organization with an anti-life and anti-Christian bias. Responding to the paper's failure to report a Pro-Life March of some 300,000 people, Don Feder correctly noted that the paper's ideology determines its reporting. See here.

In a previous Blog post, I noted that, "Planned Parenthood is virulently anti-life and anti-Christian. In one pamphlet, Planned Parenthood says: 'In every generation there exists a group of people so filled with bigotry and self-righteousness that they will resort to any means - even violence - to impose their views on society. Today, such fanatics dominate a movement ironically called 'the Right-to-Life,' a movement which threatens the most basic of all human rights.'" And, as Dr & Mrs Willke explain, "Planned Parenthood has promoted a pro-abortion 'comic book,' geared for teenagers, entitled Abortion Eve. On the back cover is a caricature of the 'Assumption of the Blessed Virgin' depicting a pregnant Mary with the idiot face of Mad Magazine's Alfred E. Neumann. The caption says, 'What, me worry?'"

George Weigel has written of the New York Times descent into tabloid journalism. But the newspaper has degenerated to such a point that one might justifiably compare it to a Jack Chick publication. In other words, a hate publication.

Fitchburg Mayor Lisa Wong would like to see Planned Parenthood open an office at Burbank Hospital

According to the Sentinel & Enterprise, Mayor Wong said she would like to see more interaction between Planned Parenthood and the public. It's rather unfortunate that the mayor has no problem with Planned Parenthood. For, as Dr & Mrs. J.C. Willke explain in their book "Why Can't We Love Them Both: Questions and Answers About Abortion," Planned Parenthood "..is the largest, most powerful, most effective pro-abortion, anti-life, anti-family, anti-Christian force in the U.S. and internationally." (p. 340).


Planned Parenthood is virulently anti-life and anti-Christian. In one pamphlet, Planned Parenthood says: "In every generation there exists a group of people so filled with bigotry and self-righteousness that they will resort to any means - even violence - to impose their views on society. Today, such fanatics dominate a movement ironically called 'the Right-to-Life,' a movement which threatens the most basic of all human rights."


And, as Dr & Mrs. Willke explain, "Planned Parenthood has promoted a pro-abortion 'comic book,' geared for teenagers, entitled Abortion Eve. On the back cover is a caricature of the 'Assumption of the Blessed Virgin' depicting a pregnant Mary with the idiot face of Mad Magazine's Alfred E. Neumann. The caption says, 'What, me worry?'" (p. 343).

Don Weintraub, Vice President for International Affairs of PPFA, has admitted that, "Planned Parenthood is not just a social or medical service agency. It is part of a cause, a movement.." (March 12, 1985). And what is the driving force behind this movement? Racism, eugenics and the destruction of Christian morality. See here.

Margaret Sanger, the Founder of Planned Parenthood, was a prominent proponent of eugenics and forced sterilization. See here. She approved of Hitler's forced sterilization program. (See "Into the Darkness, Nazi Germany Today," by L. Stoddard, p. 196). Go here to learn more about Margaret Sanger by reading her own words.

Mayor Lisa Wong obviously views Planned Parenthood as something "positive" for Fitchburg. But what does this suggest about the mayor? That she has chosen sides in an ongoing spiritual war. That she cares little or nothing for the empirical evidence which proves conclusively that Planned Parenthood has failed on so many levels. As Catholic Blogger JayG put it:

"Planned Parenthood has had a generation to work to reduce sexually transmitted disease, and we do not believe their approach has worked. We believe the promotion of promiscuity, the mocking of monogamy, and the band-aid of safe-sex has been totally ineffective. Couple this colossal ineffectiveness with the fact that the Fitchburg Planned Parenthood office will be a feeder to the Worcester Planned Parenthood abortion center and you have all the reason Fitchburg needs to keep Planned Parenthood out of town." (See entire Blog post here).

Does Mayor Wong really believe that this belongs at Burbank Hospital?