More government lies...

Tucker on the government lies following the FBI raid on Trump's home here.

"Speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into Him who is the head, into Christ....Therefore, putting away falsehood, let everyone speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members of another." (Ephesians 4: 15, 25).

When communicating with others, we all have certain responsibilities.  For example, we all have a responsibility to submit ourselves to truth when communicating.  Dr. Germain Grisez explains that, “As creatures, human persons are utterly dependent on God.  Their freedom and action presuppose realities whose meaning and value cannot be changed.  Therefore, human fulfillment requires knowing and conforming to the truth, and especially to the truth about what is good.  But since genuine community is cooperation in seeking common fulfillment, it depends on submission to truth. Consequently, since all parties to communication should be open to genuine community, they should submit themselves to truth.  The alternative is pursuing what they want regardless of truth, caring about no common good beyond themselves, and so, while using means of communication, failing to promote genuine community.”

The Eighth Commandment does not say, "You shall not bear false witness unless you have a really good reason."  Rather, the Commandment calls on us to be honest because, as God's children, we are called to imitate our Father who can neither deceive nor be deceived (Job 12: 16).  The Lord hates lying lips (Proverbs 12: 22); He hates a lying tongue (Proverbs 6: 17); He destroys those who speak falsehood (Psalm 5: 6).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains that, "The eighth commandment forbids misrepresenting the truth in our relations with others.  This moral prescription flows from the vocation of the holy people to bear witness to their God who is the truth and wills the truth.  Offenses against the truth express by word or deed a refusal to commit oneself to moral uprightness: they are fundamental infidelities to God and, in this sense, they undermine the foundations of the covenant." (2464).  And again: "Christ's disciples have "put on the new man, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness."274 By "putting away falsehood," they are to "put away all malice and all guile and insincerity and envy and all slander." (2475)

How serious is a lie when it is made under oath?

"False witness and perjury. When it is made publicly, a statement contrary to the truth takes on a particular gravity. In court it becomes false witness. When it is under oath, it is perjury. Acts such as these contribute to condemnation of the innocent, exoneration of the guilty, or the increased punishment of the accused. They gravely compromise the exercise of justice and the fairness of judicial decisions." (2476). 

In 2477 the Catechism explains that:  "Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. He becomes guilty....of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them."

Calumny is a lie told about someone, accusing him of something of which he is not guilty.  It is a sin against charity and justice.  It is more or less serious depending on the importance of the object of the slanderous lie and also on the evils caused to the victim."

The lying media, propaganda servant of the Deep State (read the Democratic Party), isn't interested in respecting the demands of truth.  Those who serve the Father of Lies imitate his example with their lies,  with their calumnies. 

More on the Francis denial of Christ's divinity

See here

The Catholic League: Church needs more masculine priests

The Catholic League notes:

CHURCH NEEDS MORE MASCULINE PRIESTS

The assault on masculinity has been going on inside and outside of the Catholic Church for decades, but it is now at a fever pitch. To cite one recent example, in his February 21 article, New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof blamed masculinity for the sexual abuse scandals in the Catholic and Southern Baptist Churches. The Southern Baptist Convention was recently investigated by reporters.

Kristof quotes Serene Jones, president of the Union Theological Society: “They [the two Churches] both have very masculine understandings of God, and have a structure where men are considered the closest representatives of God.”

This remarkable comment deserves a serious rejoinder. But first a word on why the Southern Baptists were targeted and why Kristof interviewed Jones.

Why did the Houston Chronicle and the San Antonio Express-News investigate the Southern Baptist Convention? There are several other Baptist denominations, so why the Southern Baptists? Alternatively, why didn’t they choose to probe the Episcopalians, Lutherans, Methodists, or Presbyterians?

Let’s take a wild guess. It’s for the same reason the media, until now, have focused exclusively on the Catholic Church: both Churches are known for their orthodox Christian teachings on sexuality. If they can be discredited, their moral voice will be compromised. One would have to be ideologically blind not to see what’s going on.

Why did Kristof tee it up for the president of the Union Theological Seminary? Because he knew she would feed his narrative. This New York-based institution has long been home to “progressive” thinkers, including dissident Catholic theologians (it has even employed those who have been banned from teaching at Catholic colleges due to their wholesale rejection of Catholicism).

More substantively, Kristof’s thesis—masculinity is related to sexual abuse—is so spurious that even he admits to its flaw.

For starters, he summarizes his argument by citing the Catholic Church’s male clergy and the “submissive” role occupied by females, but then a light goes off in his head. If this is the case, he wonders, then why haven’t most of the victims in the Catholic Church been women and girls?

Here is how he puts it. “It’s complicated, of course, for many of the Catholic victims were boys….” Actually, there is nothing complicated about it—he is simply wrong. Masculine priests, those who are naturally attracted to females, account for very little of the sexual abuse.

Kristof can’t even get this little bit right. The vast majority, 81 percent, of the victims were male. That’s not “many”—it’s most. And they were not boys: 78 percent were postpubescent; adolescents are properly regarded as young men. But to admit this is to admit that homosexual priests are responsible for the lion’s share of the abuse. And no one at the New York Times is going to admit to this verity.

The Catholic Church needs more masculine priests, not fewer. To put it differently, though matters are better today, for many years the Church had too many priests who were either effeminate or sexually immature. We’ve seen where that got us.

I've been addressing this problem for years.  See here for example.  And here.

Bishop Thomas Daly: How much more can the People of God put up with?

From The Spokesman Review:

"Light streamed into Bishop Thomas Daly’s office one recent afternoon as he spoke, in sometimes blunt terms, about the widening scandal of sexual abuse by Catholic clergy in the United States.

'It’s a moral crisis,' Daly said. 'We have degenerate behavior, hypocrisy and now cover-up. My thought is, How much more can the people of God put up with?’ 

As the leader of the Spokane diocese since 2015, Daly has the final say on some investigations into abuse by clergy. He talked to The Spokesman-Review in late October following a wave of headlines about sexual abuse in all ranks of the Roman Catholic Church.

It began anew in June, when allegations emerged that Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, the former archbishop of Washington, D.C., had sexually abused minors and adult seminarians over the course of decades. Pope Francis accepted McCarrick’s resignation in July. And then in August, the Pennsylvania attorney general’s office released a grand jury report finding that church leaders had covered up the abuse of more than 1,000 people over a 70-year period, prompting investigations in several other states.

Sexual abuse scandals have rocked the church for nearly 17 years. After the Boston Globe exposed a systemic cover-up in that city’s archdiocese in 2002, similar reports emerged across the country and the world, forcing the church to pay billions of dollars in settlements and establish reporting and prevention programs. The Spokane diocese is among those with a history of predator priests – revelations that sent it into bankruptcy in the early 2000s and dogged it for more than a decade.

The diocese has responded to new allegations in the aftermath of the bankruptcy. Last year, for example, Daly sanctioned a retired priest who had been 'credibly accused' of raping an altar boy in Spokane in the 1980s..."

As I warned in the pages of The Wanderer back in 2002, Canon 1040 of the Code of Canon Law states that: "Persons who are affected by a perpetual impediment, which is called an irregularity, or a simple impediment, are prevented from receiving orders."

Irregularities arise either from defect (ex defectu) or from crime (ex delicto).  It seems clear that a homosexual inclination, which the Church teaches is "intrinsically disordered," would constitute an irregularity ex defectu. And, as Father Heribert Jone, O.F.M. Cap., J.C.D. explains: "An irregularity is not a penalty, but a means to safeguard the dignity of the clerical state and office by excluding those who are unqualified for the service of the altar."

In fact, when asked by a Bishop if it is licit to confer priestly ordination to men with manifest homosexual tendencies, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments replied with a letter signed by Jorge Cardinal Medina Estevez which stated that, "Ordination to the diaconate and the priesthood of homosexual men or men with homosexual tendencies is absolutely inadvisable and imprudent and, from the pastoral point of view, very risky. A homosexual person, or one with a homosexual tendency is not, therefore, fit to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders."

And we've witnessed this firsthand as homosexual predators have satisfied their perverse appetites by sexually abusing teenage boys.

Bishop Daly has said it well: How much more can the People of God put up with?

Sorry Francis, moral goodness reflects and glorifies God more than any achievement whatsoever...

Once again Francis is taking a swipe at Faithful Catholics who adhere to sound doctrine and who understand that the teaching of the Living God is immutable.

Religion News Service reports:

"Pope Francis is calling for ordinary Catholics to live holy lives in whatever they do, stressing that the 'saints next door' are more pleasing to God than religious elites who insist on perfect adherence to rules and doctrine."

Really?

As Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand has reminded us:


"The attempt to make man the absolute center of the universe has in reality led to a progressive blindness toward the true nature of his dignity. The attempt to make a god out of man ended in making of him a more highly developed ape. The idolatry of great achievements shares the same fate...

When confronting the worship of great achievements, it is imperative to recall man's primary vocation. Great as is the range of values which man is capable of realizing, moral values hold a unique position in man's life. They alone are indispensable for every human being, whatever his special gifts and talents may be. They alone belong to the unum necessarium. Man is called above all to glorify God by his justice, his purity, his veracity, his goodness. 'Be you perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect.' (Mt. 5:48). Moral disvalues are an incomparable evil; they alone offend God; moral goodness reflects and glorifies God more than any achievement whatsoever....Compared with this vocation, the noblest talents and the creation of the greatest impersonal goods are secondary. Progress in the domination of nature, inventions, great achievements in science, cultural activities, and even the creation of masterpieces in art - great as they are in themselves, much as they manifest man's greatness - do not constitute man's primary vocation. No excellence in these fields can be compared at all with the value embodied in a saint." (Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand, The New Tower of Babel, pp. 181-182, Sophia Institute Press).


Archbishop Sheen once noted that, "Christian love bears evil, but it does not tolerate it. It is not broad-minded about sin."

The great Archbishop also made an important distinction: "Tolerance applies to the erring, intolerance to the error."  And again: "Tolerance does not apply to truth or principles. About these things we must be intolerant."

What Francis rails against, referring to as "rigidity" as "sickness," is authentic Christian love, as defined by 1822 of the Catechism.

Before labeling others as sick, Francis should reflect prayerfully on the fact that his one-time Superior General in the Jesuits referred to him as a "sociopath."  See here.

Francis: Our Lady of Fatima was lying or mistaken...

Francis is at it again.  This time he is implying that the Mother of God at Fatima was either lying or mistaken.  He asserted in an interview that:

"The smallest sins are the sins of the flesh, because the flesh is weak...The most dangerous sins are those of the mind."

But Our Lady of Fatima said that: "More souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other
reason."  See here.


Sister Lucia, the last living Fatima seer, said this refers primarily to sins against
chastity, also called sins of impurity. The reason for this statement is not because sins against chastity are the most grievous sins, but the most common and, as Sr Lucia stated,
"because of conscience, " since sins of impurity are less likely to be repented of than other sins.

Why? 1) because the sense of injustice committed, which is the primary stimulus to
repent of one's sins, is not strongly felt when engaging in them, with the exception of
adultery;

2) There is a greater sense of shame when committing certain impure acts and hence greater difficulty confessing them in the sacrament of confession, or even repenting of them in one's heart;

3) Sexual activity of all kinds is presented by our post-Christian —
even anti-Christian — popular culture as natural and good, and sexual abstinence is even taught to be unhealthy. The sixth commandment, relating to chastity, has always been
called "the difficult commandment." Today, with pornography everywhere and women and girls dressing more immodestly than ever, it can almost be called "the impossible
commandment." However, Jesus assures us: "What is impossible with men is possible with God." (Lk 18:27) We may add that all who invoke the Blessed Virgin Mary for help in
overcoming sins of impurity, will receive the grace to do so, as she herself has revealed to St Bridget of Sweden and various other saints. And those who strive to live chaste lives know from experience, when sins of impurity are humbly repented of and confessed, a
great burden is removed from our consciences, and we experience that peace of soul that the world and carnal indulgence cannot give.

Clearly, Francis is repudiating the clear and unambiguous message from Our Lady of Fatima. For him, "sins below the belt" aren't really that serious.  They are "the smallest sins."

More on the blasphemy at Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts...

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 2148, teaches that, "Blasphemy is directly opposed to the second commandment. It consists in uttering against God - inwardly or outwardly - words of hatred, reproach, or defiance; in speaking ill of God; in failing in respect toward him in one's speech; in misusing God's name. St. James condemns those 'who blaspheme that honorable name [of Jesus] by which you are called.' The prohibition of blasphemy extends to language against Christ's Church, the saints, and sacred things. It is also blasphemous to make use of God's name to cover up criminal practices, to reduce peoples to servitude, to torture persons or put them to death. The misuse of God's name to commit a crime can provoke others to repudiate religion.
Blasphemy is contrary to the respect due God and his holy name. It is in itself a grave sin."

In my last post, I examined the blasphemy committed by Father Piotr Pawlus in a homily given last weekend at Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts.  Specifically, Fr. Pawlus asserted that the Fifteenth Chapter of Matthew, verses 21-28, reveals Jesus' "warts."  This confused priest else asserted that the Canaanite woman bested Jesus in argument.

Saint Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church, in His Compendium of Theology, writes, "Inasmuch as Christ is God and the Word of God, He is the begotten Wisdom of the Father, as 1 Corinthians 1:24 indicates: 'Christ the power of God and the Wisdom of God.' For the interior word of any intellectual being is nothing else than the conception of wisdom.  And since, as we said above, the Word of God is perfect and is one with God, He must be the perfect conception of the Wisdom of God the Father.  Consequently, whatever is contained in the Wisdom of God the Father as unbegotten is contained wholly in the Word as begotten and conceived.  And so we are told, in Colossians 2:3:, that in Him (namely, in Christ), 'are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.'"

And yet, Father Pawlus would have us believe that the Lord Jesus has "warts" or imperfections.

Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, Doctor of the Church and a great moral theologian, says that:

"All Sins are Hateful, in the Sight-of God; but the Sin of Blasphemy ought more-Properly to be Called, an Abomination-to the Lord. Every Mortal Sin, as the Apostle says, Dishonors God. "Thou that makest thy Boast of the Law, by Transgression of the Law, Dishonourest God" - Romans 2:23. Other Sins Dishonor God Indirectly, by the Violation-of His Law; but Blasphemy Dishonors Him Directly, by the Profanation of His Holy Name. Hence Saint Chrysostom teaches that no Sin Exasperates the Lord so-much-as the Sin of Blasphemy, against His Adorable Name. "Nihil ita exacerbat Deum, sicut quando nomen ejus blasphematur". Dearly Beloved Christians, allow me then, this Day, to show you First (1st), the Great Enormity-of the Sin of Blasphemy; Secondly (2nd), the Great Rigor, with which God Punishes it." See full article here.

It is significant that while I was banned from Saint Mary's Facebook page for defending the perennial teaching of the Church, such filth is tolerated and even applauded at Holy Mass.

Saint Mary's has become a haunt of demons.  A place where blasphemy against Our Lord is, apparently, most welcome.

Bishop Mitchell Rozanski: More concerned with one attack against a mosque than 174 attacks perpetrated by Islamic extremists

Once again, Bishop Mitchell T. Rozanski and members of the USCCB are revealing just how out of touch they are with reality.

Bishop Rozanski has been strangely quiet with regard to the daily carnage perpetrated by violent Islamic extremists, but on his Facebook Page he is denouncing the London Mosque attack:

But, as documented here:

Got that?  During Ramadan, extremists who operate in the name of a cult which is a manifestation of Antichrist murdered 1,595 people and injured 1,960 others.

But Bishop Rozanski and his liberal confreres are more concerned with the one attack on a London Mosque which resulted in one death and which was carried out by a lone individual who was intoxicated and who suffers from mental health issues.

Isn't it gratifying to know that Bishop Rozanski possesses such  a firm grasp on reality as well as the ability to see the big picture?

Dear God, preserve us from "shepherds" such as this!

Related reading here.

Francis: More angry anti-Trump partisan politics...

Once again, Francis is engaging in partisan politics and embarassing himself.

Liberal Speak reports, "Pope Francis, leader of the global Catholic church, has been telling his followers that they must reject Trump’s position on immigrants and refugees. According to Pope Francis, Christians have a duty to embrace immigrants and refugees – that’s exactly the opposite of what Trump and modern day Republicans are trying to do."

Father George Rutler, of EWTN fame, wrote the following about ideologues like Francis:

"The recent action of our government’s executive branch to protect our borders and enforce national security is based on Constitutional obligations (Art. 1 sec 10 and Art. 4 sec 4). It is a practical protection of the tranquility of order explained by Saint Augustine when he saw the tranquillitas ordinis of Roman civilization threatened. Saint Thomas Aquinas sanctioned border control (S. Th. I-II, Q. 105, Art. 3). No mobs shouted in the marketplace two years ago when the Terrorist Travel Prevention Act restricted visa waivers for Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen. The present ban continues that, and only for a stipulated ninety days, save for Syria. There is no “Muslim ban” as should be obvious from the fact that the restrictions do not apply to other countries with Muslim majorities, such as Egypt, Indonesia, Pakistan, Malaysia, Bangladesh and Turkey.

These are facts ignored by demagogues who speak of tears running down the face of the Statue of Liberty. At issue is not immigration, but illegal immigration. It is certainly manipulative of reason to justify uncontrolled immigration by citing previous generations of immigrants to our shores, all of whom went through the legal process, mostly in the halls of Ellis Island. And it is close to blasphemy to invoke the Holy Family as antinomian refugees, for they went to Bethlehem in obedience to a civil decree requiring tax registration, and they violated no statutes when they sought protection in Egypt. Then there was Saint Paul, who worked within the legal system, and invoked his Roman citizenship through privileges granted to his native Tarsus in 66 B.C. (Acts 16:35-38; 22:25-29; 25:11-12) He followed ordered procedure, probably with the status of civis Romanus non optimo jure—a legal citizen, but not allowed to act as a magistrate.

It is obvious that the indignant demonstrators against the new Executive Orders are funded in no little part by wealthy interests who would provoke agitation. These same people have not shown any concern about the neglected Christians seeking refuge from persecution in the Middle East. In 2016 there was a 675% increase in the number of Syrian refugees over the previous year, but while 10% of the Syrian population is Christian, only one-half of one percent of the Syrian Christians were granted asylum. It is thankworthy that our changed government now wants to redress that. The logic of that policy must not be shouted down by those who screech rather than reason."

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

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

Francis has an extremist leftist political agenda.  To advance his agenda, he finds it necessary to demonize those who disagree with it.  Anyone who, following Saint Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church, believes in border control, must be demonized as "non-Christiano," and as somehow "uncharitable."

Francis is cheapening himself and doing much damage to the credibility of the Church.

More on the engineered priest vocation crisis...

Father John Zuhlsdorf on the engineered vocations crisis here.

I've been saying this for many years.

Although I have had extensive psychological testing and screening for the United States military (as part of my security clearance for military intelligence) and have received glowing reports which indicate that I am free of any pathologies - including a homosexual inclination, when I contacted the Worcester Diocese (twice) to express my interest in discerning a priestly vocation, I received no response whatsoever.

Meanwhile, the Diocese of Worcester [ Massachusetts] has ordained homosexual men to the priesthood.  For example, a psychological evaluation in 1977 prior to the ordination of Fr. Jean Paul Gagnon  indicated that the candidate had possible "sex role identification" problems. See here.

Some of you don't want to hear this.  It's easier to stick your head in the sand. But the problem won't go away until we first acknowledge there IS a problem, drop to our knees in prayer, and work to resolve the problem.

Francis: A more sophisticated form of atheism...

As Francis leads so many souls to pantheism and a New humanitarian religion, it would help to reflect upon the words of Father Livio Fanzaga, known as the "radio priest" in Italy, in his book "Wrath of God: The Days of the Antichrist": "Atheism is the religion of the future.  At its root, atheism is always a negation of God and every such negation presupposes His affirmation. Rather than saying 'God does not exist,' a more sophisticated form of atheism will assert that 'Man is God, humanity is God, God is immanent in human history and in the lives of individuals.'  This is a form of religion which has assimilated the characteristics of a true religion.  Adore man and satisfy the religious needs present in every human heart.  Do not renounce the Kingdom of God, construct it, instead, on earth.  Just as the Catholic religion tries to unite all men under a supernatural principle represented in the person of the Vicar of Christ, so too, humanitarianism strives to unite all men and to conciliate all religions.  It seeks to institute universal peace by recognizing the supreme unifying authority of the Antichrist - perfect image of the immanent god in the world,  the man-god.  God did not become man.  The man-God is the savior of the world...Benson [Robert Hugh Benson] had greater foresight [than Feurbach and Marx].  At the turn of the century he clearly perceived that the crisis of faith will not be followed by the growth of atheism but by the rise of a new religion which deifies man...The new religion will have its own ministers of cult, its own rites and ceremonies, and its own books to celebrate those rites.  Churches and abbeys will be transformed into temples of the new religion of humanitarianism and the Mass will be displaced by the celebration of the new rites.  The statue of Christ will disappear and in its place the statue of 'man' will be raised up in the form of 'Apollo,' symbol of corporeal beauty and virility....While churches in which Christ is still adored and Our Lady honored will be empty, those of the new religion will be filled to capacity...Man will go to church to worship himself.  He will incense the altar of his own 'virility' and the statue of 'maternity' and 'continuous life.'  The crisis of faith is the crisis of the supernatural.  Man no longer believes in a God whom he cannot measure or control and who is different from him." (pp. 119-120).

Is there any real doubt that this new humanitarian religion is now rising?  The way of the new religion of the man-God is being prepared by agnostics, atheists, apostates, lovers of this world who have embraced hedonism and materialism and who have nothing but contempt for the true Church, her ministers, sacraments, devotions [especially those to Our Lady] and the lowly faithful who have consecrated themselves to the Immaculata.

As Catholics, we pray - in the Nicene Creed -  "We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation he came down from heaven.."

All orthodox Christians believe that Jesus is the only Son of God and that, "There is no salvation in anyone else, for there is no other name in the whole world given to men by which we are to be saved." (Acts 4: 12).

But the world is being prepared to believe differently.  Many are now willing to abandon the only Son of God for the new religion which will proclaim the divinity of man.  President Obama, while speaking to a group of Christian clergy several years ago at the Easter Prayer Breakfast, referred to Jesus not as the "only Son of God" but as "a son of God."  And he received applause from his audience.

What is this but the spirit of Antichrist?  In 1 John 4: 2-3, we read, "This is how you can recognize God's Spirit: every spirit that acknowledges Jesus Christ come in the flesh belongs to God, while every spirit that fails to acknowledge him does not belong to God.  Such is the spirit of the antichrist which, as you have heard, is to come; in fact, it is in the world already."

Recommended reading: Catechism of the Catholic Church, 441-445.

And so, let us offer an act of reparation as the world is prepared to worship the devil in the flesh:

Act of Reparation to the Blessed Sacrament
By St. Louis de Montfort



"Soupirons, gemissons, pleurons amerement"


Let me cry, let me weep bitter tears to God above,
For Jesus is abandoned in his Sacrament of love;
Forgotten and insulted in the dwelling of the Lord,
Derided and rejected where once he was adored.


The mansions of the nobles are all clean and set with care,
Yet the house of God's forgotten, its altars standing bare;
The floor is all broken, the roof lets in the rain,
The crumbling walls are marked with holes and every kind of stain.


The crucifix is broken, the pictures green with damp,
The altar cloths are rotting, no light burns in the lamp,
The missals torn and battered, the brasswork stained with rust,
The things of God are thrown about and scattered in the dust.


The ciborium is tarnished, the chalice turning black,
The monstrance, which is made of tin, is mouldy at the back;
From font right up to sacristy the picture is the same,
Such disorder in the house of God is our reproach and shame.


The pagans in their temples dare not spit upon the floor,
But in our church a crowd of dogs run in and out the door;
They bark and fight continually and fill the place with slime,
But no one cares enough of this to avenge the dreadful crime.


There is just one exception in all this sorry scene:
My Lord and Lady's special pew is always neat and clean;
And standing out in bright new paint upon the dingy wall
Their gaily-colored coat-of-arms looks down upon it all.


Above the Lord's own altar, instead of the Lord's own name,
The banners of his Lordship, a place of honor claim;
Both priest and mule are flaunting the badges of their thrall,
The former at the altar, the latter in his stall.


The houses of the nobles are so crowded and gay,
And fashionable young ladies are courted night and day;
But the Church of God's deserted, unless they condescend
To go to church for one short Mass they think will never end.


Behold the worldly cleric coming in with haughty face
How his lady friends admire him as he bows with courtly grace!
He bobs a genuflection, then seeks whom he should greet;
He strolls about and chatters as though walking in the street


Still worse, he has a snuff-box, which he opens with a jest,
And delicately takes a pinch, then passes around the rest
Puffed up with self-importance and with his graceful ways,
He squirms about and poses, making faces as he prays


Alas, it's often happened, the way to church he's trod
To pay reverence to Venus, to a goddess not to God;
Every thought and aspiration, every word and loving glance
Are but homage to a creature, a prayer to find romance


Behold upon the other side a sorry scene is played,
A shameless hussy sitting in all her fine brocade;
In her dainty little slippers and head-dress trimmed with lace,
Come simply to parade herself within the holy place


This empty-headed madam, with an impudence unknown,
Up to the very altar ostentatiously is shown,
And poses on a bench in front, so to be seen by all,
To captivate the eyes of men and hold their hearts in thrall


To think this devil's agent, while her knee to Jesus bends,
Must rob him of his glory and lead astray his friends!
The splendor of her finery the thought of Jesus harms,
Forgotten is the altar in the presence of her charms.


And if the time seems tedious, she always has her fan,
Her dog and gloves, to pass the time, and often her young man;
She'll read a bit, and roll her eyes, and fix her hat with care,
Then look around the chapel to see who's watching her


O strike them, God almighty, strike this ungrateful lot!
At least let them respect thee, if they will love thee not
Too long hast thou been patient; thy justice let them see;
Let fear replace that insolence with which they now mock thee


Thy glory has been ravished, dishonored is thy name,
Such sinners against thy majesty must bow their heads in shame
And yet restrain thy anger, at least a while I pray;
The greatness of their wickedness with greater good repay


Forgive them, dearest Jesus, for they know not what they do;
Remember thy great Passion, and have mercy on us too
And if we are unable to atone for all our guilt,
Accept our feeble homage, and treat us as thou wilt


We confess before thy altar that we are sinners still;
Thou canst punish us or spare us according to thy will
But remember thy great mercy and the tears that we have shed,
And hear our cries for pardon, for our hearts are full of dread.


Our Eucharistic Lord waits for you. He waits alone in an empty Church. Outside the world and all its noise appears attractive. But this world and everything in it is passing away. It is, as C.S. Lewis said, a "shadowland." Approach the Light. Pray before the Eucharist and be filled. For your heart will never be filled until you give it totally to Him Who has created and redeemed you.

Francis: I was mistaken

Rome, Italy, Jun 16, 2016

(CNA/EWTN News).- Updated June 17, 2016 to include a clarification by the Vatican: Pope Francis approved a revision to the official transcript to say that “a portion” of sacramental marriages are null, instead of “the great majority.”

Pope Francis said Thursday that many sacramental marriages today are not valid, because couples do not enter into them with a proper understanding of permanence and commitment.

While he initially said in unscripted comments that “the great majority of our sacramental marriages are null,” he later approved a revision of these remarks.

When the Vatican released its official transcript of the encounter the following day, they had changed the comment to say that “a portion of our sacramental marriages are null.”

In the Vatican blog “Il sismografo,” Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi said that this change is a revision approved by the Pope himself.

“When they touch on subjects of a certain importance, the revised text is always submitted to the Pope himself,” Fr. Lombardi said. “This is what happened in this case, so the published text was expressly approved by the Pope.”

Proverbs 29:20 tells us, "Do you see someone hasty in speech? There is more hope for a fool!"  Francis had to revise his asinine comment.  There is a pattern here, and a disturbing one at that, as John-Henry Westen has so ably demonstrated (see here).

And faithful Catholics are rightly concerned.  For a spirit of confusion and chaos has infected Rome.

Francis, who uses Twitter: Facebook users are hypocrites

Francis is building walls again:


Francis is at it again with more strange commentary.   In an article which may be found here, Francis reportedly said:

"On Facebook all are good people, are believers, good husbands, happy families. But privately they forget these things, they forget to thank God, they forget to pray and be humble. In real life are the opposite of what they publish

God detests double standards
Stop being hypocritical in social networks. God does not use facebook."

I see.  But God does use Twitter?  Is that how it works?  And how does the enlightened Francis know that all Facebook users are hypocrites?

Apparently "Who am I to judge" is only for homosexual persons.  Which would explain why Francis will meet with militant homosexual activists such as Simon Cazal while denouncing Trump as a non-Christian.

Pope Francis: Men shouldn't be so macho and should listen more to women

As noted here, Pope Francis, who once boasted of having been a bouncer,"has called for more women in the International Theological Commission, even after tripling the number of women on the team this past September. 'In the ever more diverse makeup of the Commission,' he said, 'I want to see a higher presence of women.'

The Pope also said recently that it is chiefly women who pass on the faith, and urged men to listen to women more and not be so 'macho.' He said that men often don’t allow enough room for women while 'women are capable of seeing things with a different angle from us, with a different eye.'

Got that?  You men who are discerning a vocation to the priesthood must come to view masculinity as a sort of disease which leads to men ignoring women and ultimately excluding them.  Men must be ashamed of their masculinity and learn to identify more with women.
We don't listen enough to women?  I think the problem, at least in the West, is that we cater too much to women.  One could certainly argue that women in Islamic nations are suppressed and relegated to the status of furniture.  But not in the West.  Throughout the Church in the United States, women outnumber men in virtually every Church ministry. Everyone knows this. The absence of laymen participating in Church ministries to any appreciable degree is the result of the effeminization of the Church, the Cult of Softness.

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

It was Jacques Maritain who said, “Christianity must inform or, rather, transpenetrate the world; not that this is its principal aim (although it is an indispensable secondary end), and not in order that the world become right now the kingdom of God, but in order that grace may be more and more effective in it, and in order that man may better live there his temporal life.”

If grace is to be more and more effective in the world, if a new Christendom is to arise from the ashes of our morally-bankrupt, sin-sick society which subjects mankind to constant and ever-growing threats of degradation and destruction, then saints will have to arise in the midst of our broken world. These saints will be, according to St. Louis de Montfort in his classic treatise True Devotion to Mary, “..like thunder-clouds flying through the air at the slightest breath of the Holy Spirit. Attached to nothing, surprised at nothing, troubled at nothing, they will shower down the rain of God’s word and of eternal life. They will thunder against sin, they will storm against the world, they will strike down the devil and his followers and for life and for death, they will pierce through and through with the two-edged sword of God’s word all those against whom they are sent by almighty God.” (True Devotion, 57).

Such disciples will not be “part-time Catholics” or “Chicken-Catholics,” devoting only one hour a week to their Creator and Redeemer while retreating in fear from any and all conflict during the spiritual battles ahead. St. Montfort insists that, “..we know they will be true disciples of Jesus Christ, imitating his poverty, his humility, his contempt of the world and his love. They will point out the narrow way to God in pure truth according to the holy Gospel, and not according to the maxims of the world. Their hearts will not be troubled, nor will they show favor to anyone; they will not spare or heed or fear any man, however powerful he may be. They will have the two-edged sword of the Word of God in their mouths and the blood-stained standard of the Cross on their shoulders. They will carry the crucifix in their right hand and the rosary in their left, and the holy names of Jesus and Mary on their heart. The simplicity and self-sacrifice of Jesus will be reflected in their whole behavior.” (True Devotion, 59).

George Weigel, weighing in on the supreme crisis which faces the Catholic Church in the United States in the wake of President Obama’s re-election, asserts (correctly) that: “..the opportunity embedded in this crisis..is nothing less than to be the Church of the New Evangelization, full-throttle. Shallow, tribal, institutional-maintenance Catholicism is utterly incapable of meeting the challenges that will now come at the Catholic Church from the most aggressively secular administration in American history. Only a robustly, unapologetically evangelical Catholicism, winsomely proposing and nobly living the truths about the human condition the Church teaches, will see us through the next four years. Radically converted Christian disciples, not one-hour-a-week Catholics whipsawed by an ever more toxic culture, are what this hour of crisis..demands.” (The crisis of a second Obama administration).

Sadly, the militant evangelical Catholicism described by George Weigel is not encouraged - or even tolerated - in some corners of the Catholic Church here in the United States. In some dioceses, the Cult of Softness has all but crippled an authentic, militant evangelization and replaced it with a sacharrin-spirituality which sugar-coats sin while leaving Zebulun and Naphtali in the shadow of death.  As part of the Ecclesia Militans, I am persona non grata in my own diocese - the Diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts.  New Age advocates, dissidents who rail against the Magisterium and those who engage in radical homosexual agitprop are welcome.  But an orthodox Catholic who vigorously promotes and defends the teaching of the Magisterium is deemed "rigid" and "too pre-Vatican II." And, because of my military background, I am held in contempt.

This is our moment as Catholics: We can choose to take a courageous stand for the Faith of our Fathers, witnessing to Gospel truths with the whole of our lives and even unto death; or we can fall back into the shadows and thereby cooperate in the spiritual destruction of a once-great nation.

Along with the Church’s other martyrs, St. Thomas More was confronted with the same choice. While remaining a loyal servant of the King, he chose to be God’s servant first. Will we?

The Church needs men if there is to be a militant evangelization.  Real men who are ready to join the battle.  Not sissies who identify more with women than men, frustrated and psychologically cramped characters who have gender identity issues or latent homosexual tendencies.

I wrote my Bishop expressing interest in discerning a vocation to the priesthood.  I never did get a response.

But then, I am probably considered "too macho."

Recommended meditation: 1 Corinthians 6: 9-10:

"Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God."

Yes Holy Father, Jesus walks with sinners but He asks us to sin no more...

Pope Francis has just reminded us that, "God 'walks with the righteous and the sinners.' He walks 'with everyone, to arrive at that encounter, the final encounter of man with Him.'" (See here).

Once again, it is what Pope Francis does not say that is troubling.  Yes the weeds continue to grow among the wheat until Jesus returns.  Yes, we are all sinners.  But the notion that I can live as I wish, committing one sin after another, and that this is somehow "okay" because Jesus "walks with me" is erroneous.  It is presumption.  The Catechism of the Catholic Church reminds us that: "There are two kinds of presumption. Either man presumes upon his own capacities, (hoping to be able to save himself without help from on high), or he presumes upon God's almighty power or his mercy (hoping to obtain his forgiveness without conversion and glory without merit)." (CCC, 2092).

Dr. Grisez explains that, "Remaining interested in God's promises and counting on him to keep them, those who sin by presumption continue to hope and even, to some extent, to shape their lives by hope. But, not consistently putting hope into practice, they abuse it, expecting pardon without repentance and the reward for following Jesus without the cost of discipleship. This unrealistic expectation is the essence of presumption. An element of pride underlies this sin. Rejecting God's terms for obtaining what he promises, the presumptuous expect to obtain it on their own. They suppose that God, like a blustery parent, threatens punishments which he will be too softhearted to carry out, and, like a permissive parent, accompanies his gift of freedom with a virtual guarantee to fend off the consequences of its irresponsible use. Such suppositions are inconsistent with faith, which not only depends on God's absolute truthfulness but also, assuring believers that God will do his part, calls them to do theirs, as grace empowers them to do.

However, the sin of presumption can be committed without denying any truth of faith. People determined not to fulfill the responsibilities of Christian life in some essential respect, yet, unwilling to face the prospective consequences, can resolve the tension by persuading themselves that somehow God will manage to save them despite themselves. This self-deception need not be logical enough to withstand critical reflection, since that is something the presumptuous manage to avoid...It also weakens hope. Rather than serving as the intention of all the choices which should make up Christian life, presumptuous hope renders many of them unnecessary and clears the way for a life-style apart from, and even sinfully at odds with, hope for the kingdom. Not being exercised, hope weakens as other interests grow strong. Eventually heaven, now taken for granted and regarded as irrelevant to present concerns, becomes a dim prospect, a mere fairyland which one used to yearn for but no longer finds exciting."

I remain very concerned over Pope Francis' preaching. Oscar Romero, whom Pope Francis seems to   admire, once said: "A preaching that does not point out sin is not the preaching of the gospel. A preaching that makes sinners feel good, so that they are secured in their sinful state, betrays the gospels call...A preaching that awakens, a preaching that enlightens - as when a light turned on awakens and of course annoys a sleeper - that is the preaching of Christ, calling: Wake up! Be converted! That is the Church's authentic preaching."

While there are so many good and faithful priests who do preach on the reality of sin and the need for reconciliation, there are those who have no love for the souls under their care. As a consequence, these priests neglect the souls entrusted to them and make no attempt to stress the reality of sin and the need for ongoing conversion.
When Jesus began His public ministry, He did so with the word "repent" (Matthew 4:17). And He advised the woman caught in adultery to "sin no more" (John 8:11). Likewise, in the case of the man cured at the Pool of Bethesda, Jesus advised him to "sin no more lest something worse befall thee" (John 5:14).When queried on the subject of how many would be saved, Jesus replied "few" because the "gate" to Heaven is "narrow" (Matthew 7:13-14). And while no one can pinpoint the precise meaning of the word "few," still, it is sobering that Jesus chose the image of a narrow gate.

Jesus is likened in the gospel to a stern master who has lazy servants flogged and murderous ones put to death (Matthew 21:41; Luke 12:47). And while it is true that Jesus is Mercy, He is also Justice. And for every parable illustrative of His mercy, there are three or four threatening divine retribution.

The Judgment Day is always described as a day of wrath and never as a day of rejoicing (Proverbs 11:4; Zephaniah 1:15; Sirach 5:10; Romans 2:5; Revelation 6:17). Why is this? If everyone (or even a large segment of mankind) is headed for Heaven, why does Sacred Scripture refer to the Judgment Day as a day of wrath?

The smug, self-satisfied "we-are-all-saved-already" attitude found in so many Catholic parishes is the result of the sin of presumption. Because there are priests who are betraying Jesus by refusing to preach on the reality of sin and the reality of Hell, a spiritual dry-rot has infected much of the Church. This is why nearly everyone receives Holy Communion at Mass but nearly no one goes to Confession.

 

I would expect Pope Francis to offer us a more solid Catholic preaching.

"I shall be pleased to break the pride of the wicked much more when the world will be most hostile to all that is supernatural"

It is becoming ever more clear that America is suffering through a series of earthly and spiritual scourges as part of the chastisement in the broad sense, a chastisement which will reach its peak with a divine intervention with Three Days Darkness.  Blessed Anna Maria Taigi said that after a series of earthly punishments, a heavenly scourge will come which will de directed solely against the impenitent.  "This scourge," said the great mystic, "will be far more frightful and terrible...it will be mitigated by nothing, but it will take place and act in its full rigor."

We are now living in the times foretold by Elizabeth Canori-Mora when, "God will employ the powers of hell for the extermination of those impious and heretical persons who desire to overthrow the Church and destroy it to its very foundation....He will punish these impious blasphemers by giving permission to the infernal spirits to come out from Hell.  Innumerable legions of demons shall overrun the earth, and shall execute the orders of Divine Justice by causing terrible calamities and disasters; they shall injure individual persons and entire families: they shall devastate property and alimentary productions, cities and villages."

Do we believe this?  Even with the devastation witnessed in Oklahoma?  Because America is entrenched in sin, even the earth is revolting: "Because their land has become defiled, I am punishing it for its wickedness, by making it vomit out its inhabitants." (Leviticus 18: 25).

America is too proud.  And this pride will be shattered completely.  We consider ourselves to be "strong" when we should  be striving instead to be holy.  See here.

Martha Robin, the famous stigmatist who subsisted on the Eucharist alone from 1928 to 1981 and who had apparitions of Christ, Mary and St. Therese the Little Flower, was told by Our Lord: "I play with the plans of men.  My right hand prepares miracles and My name shall be glorified in all the world.  I shall be pleased to break the pride of the wicked much more when the world will be most hostile to all that is supernatural.  And much more admirable and extraordinary will be the event that will come out of our encounter.  In place of the throne of the Beast two glorious thrones will arise, one of My Sacred Heart and the other of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  Then it will be understood that neither human power nor demons nor genius of industry will end the conflict, but that will end only when reparation has been consummated.  Be courageous!  The Kingdom of God is near.  It will begin with something that will come so suddenly as to be entirely unexpected." 

Atheists and counterfeit Catholics refuse to believe this.  Such have lost their faith in supernatural realities.  But these will come to believe.  Their pride will be broken.  And every knee shall bend at the name of Jesus. - every knee (Philippians 2:10).

Charles Curran and the National Catholic Reporter: The Church should not be certain of her teaching

Upset that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has issued a notification criticizing Sister Margaret Farley's book on sexual ethics entitled "Just Love," Charles Curran, writing for the National Catholic Reporter online, complains, "There is a long list of Catholic moral theologians whose works on sexual ethics in a similar vein have been condemned or censured by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in the course of the last 40 years. Pope John Paul II wrote his 1993 encyclical, Vertiatis splendor, because of the discrepancy between the official teaching of the church on moral matters and the teaching of some moral theologians even in seminaries. According to the pope, the church is 'facing what is certainly a genuine crisis, which is no longer a matter of limited and occasional dissent, but of an overall and systematic calling into question of traditional moral doctrine.' All have to recognize there is such a real crisis in the church today. But the crisis is not just a crisis in moral theology; it involves a crisis in the church as a whole and in our very understanding of the Catholic church.."

Curran then argues that, "..the danger for authority in the Church is to claim too great a certitude for its teaching and proposals.."  See here.

It is most ironic that Curran chose to cite a passage from Pope John Paul II's Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (The Splendor of Truth).  This because Pope John Paul II reminds his readers toward the conclusion of the first chapter of this Encyclical that the Church has been entrusted with a more-than-human authority.  John Paul says that this more-than-human authority "is apparent from the living tradition."  Then he confirms this by citing a key passage from Dei Verbum, the Second Vatican Council's Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, which says that, "...the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.  This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit.." (No. 10).

The Church has a more-than-human authority.  She has a divine commission to teach and guard what has been handed on, what has been received through Revelation.  And she accomplishes this task with "the help of the Holy Spirit."  So when Curran objects that, "the primary authority in the Church is the Holy Spirit, who speaks in very diverse ways," he is not being honest.  Jesus has invested in the Magisterium of His Church, the Holy Father and the Bishops united with him, the more-than-human authority to speak in His name on everything which pertains to faith and morals (Matthew 16: 17-19).  And this task of interpreting the word of God is carried out with the assistance of the Holy Spirit.  Yes the Holy Spirit speaks in very diverse ways.  But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God is not carried out in diverse ways.  It is carried out exclusively by the Church's teaching office.

Curran has his own crisis to deal with.  Influenced by our secular culture and its rejection of anything which has the character of coming from above, he has succumbed to a skepticism of authority.  In a Keynote Address entitled Good Shepherd: Living Christ's Own Pastoral Authority, which was delivered at the 10th Annual Symposium on the Spirituality and Identity of the Diocesan Priest on March 18, 2011, Bishop Samuel J. Aquila had some important things to say about the role of Bishops. His Excellency noted that:



"Perhaps most difficult for us who lead in the Church today, due to the influence of the secular world with its rejection of God and the authority of God, along with a real skepticism of authority, is the exercise of the office of governance. Benedict XVI reminds us as bishops and priests again to turn to Jesus Christ to learn how to exercise this authority. No one is really able to feed Christ's flock, unless he lives in profound and true obedience to Christ and the Church, and the docility of the people towards their priests depends on the docility of the priests towards Christ; for this reason the personal and constant encounter with the Lord, profound knowledge of him and the conformation of the individual will to Christ's will is always at the root of the pastoral ministry. (General Audience, May 26, 2010).

Jesus at times was direct in calling people to conversion – to change their way of acting and thinking. This directness makes many of us uncomfortable today. We should follow his example and language, even if we do not use his precise words. His language is good to contemplate and definitely should challenge us to look at how we correct the faithful, including priests and bishops, and speak the truth especially with those who say they are with Christ and the Church but do not accept the teaching of Jesus and the Church.

One has only to read Matthew 23 to hear the forceful language Jesus uses when speaking with the Pharisees and Scribes. He refers to them as ―hypocrites, blind guides, and white washed tombs and towards the end asks them the question, ―You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell? In our politically correct world this type of language would never be tolerated today, and yet the Gospel writers were not hesitant to pass on these exhortations of Jesus.

Furthermore, when Peter began to remonstrate with Jesus about going up to Jerusalem, he did not softly tell Peter, ―You do not understand. Rather Jesus spoke the vigorous words, ―Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me; for you are not on the side of God, but of men (Mt 16:23). Jesus speaks these words with force to the apostle he has chosen and the one whom he made first among the apostles. In love Jesus makes these direct statements to open the eyes of those whose hearts and minds are hardened. His straight talk, given in love for the person, desires the conversion and holiness of the person to the ways of God.

Jesus provides the Church and her leaders with the criteria for correcting a brother or sister. ―If your brother sins against you; go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector (Mt 18:16-17).

The steps in this passage are clear and Jesus is teaching us, but do we listen and follow his example? If this criteria had been followed with dissenting theologians, priests, religious and faithful in 1968 with the encyclical, Humanae Vitae, would we still be dealing with the problem today of those who dissent on contraception, abortion, same sex unions, euthanasia and so many other teachings of the Church?

One must honestly ask, how many times and years may a Catholic politician vote for the so called ―right to abortion, ―murder in the words of John Paul II in Evangelium Vitae (58), and still be able to receive Holy Communion? The continual reception of Holy Communion by those who so visibly contradict and promote a grave evil, even more than simply dissent, only creates grave scandal, undermines the teaching and governing authority of the Church and can be interpreted by the faithful as indifference to the teaching of Christ and the Church on the part of those who have the responsibility to govern. If we honestly pray with the Gospel we can see that hesitancy and non-accountability are not the way of Jesus Christ, but rather are a failure in the exercise of governance.

Bishops and priests, as an act of loving obedience to Christ, must return to a full exercise of the governing authority of Christ witnessed in the Gospel. If we do not exercise that authority, are hesitant to exercise it, or doubt it, then it only leads to the ―father of lies taking hold of the minds and hearts of the faithful, and their continuing to act in the ways of man and not the ways of God.

Pope Benedict XVI, in his conversation with Peter Seewald in the book Light of the World, made the following observation concerning the sexual abuse crisis among clergy, after speaking with the Archbishop of Dublin. In their conversation they spoke to a mentality prevalent after Vatican II. ―The prevailing mentality was that the Church must not be a Church of laws but, rather, a Church of love; she must not punish. Thus the awareness that punishment can be an act of love ceased to exist. This led to an odd darkening of the mind, even in very good people. Today we have to learn all over again that love for the sinner and love for the person who has been harmed are correctly balanced if I punish the sinner in the form that is possible and appropriate. In this respect there was in the past a change of mentality, in which the law and need for punishment were obscured. Ultimately this also narrowed the concept of love, which in fact is not just being nice or courteous, but is found in the truth (emphasis added). And another component of truth is that I must punish the one who has sinned against real love (Pages 25-26)." (Full Address here).

Take note of Bishop Aquila's warning to his brothers in the Episcopate: "If we do not exercise that authority [which Jesus has entrusted to the Church's Pastors], are hesitant to exercise it, or doubt it, then it only leads to the father of lies* taking hold of the minds and hearts of the faithful and their continuing to act in the ways of man and not the ways of God."

This is precisely what Curran wants.  He wants the Church's Pastors to doubt the authority and the teaching entrusted to them..  This is why he insists that "the danger for authority in the Church is to claim too great a certitude for its teaching."

Is Charles Curran serving Christ or the father of lies?

* John 8: 44.

More on Clark University and its definition of heterosexism...

Some of those students who attend Clark University have suggested that Clark University, through its definition of "heterosexism," is merely trying to protect a certain segment of the school's population from "harassment."  This is, of course, ludicrous.  Even a cursory read of Clark's definition   will reveal that much more is intended here.

Lest there be any doubt about where Clark University stands, let's look at the definition of "heterosexism" provided by Clark University's homosexual propagandist-in-residence.  In an article co-authored with JuliAnna Smith of the University of Massachusetts Amherst, we read from Dr. Abbie Goldberg that heterosexism is, "an ideological system that denies, denigrates, and stigmatizes any nonheterosexual form of behavior, identity, relationship, or community."

Got that?  Any moral opposition to the homosexual lifestyle is, then, deemed heterosexism, a form of discrimination.  Goldberg and her co-propagandist for the radical homosexual agenda continue: "At the societal level, institutionalized heterosexism takes the form of antigay legislation such as laws preventing same-sex couples from marrying or adopting children." (See here for full article).

In other words, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is "heterosexist" because it insists that homosexual acts are "intrinsically disordered," "contrary to the natural law," and "under no circumstances can they be approved." (CCC, 2357).  And, according to Goldberg and associate, any institution which opposes same-sex "marriage," such as the Catholic Church, is guilty of "institutionalized heterosexism."

The U.S. Bishops, see here, teach us that: "The natural structure of human sexuality makes man and woman complementary partners for the transmission of human life. Only a union of male and female can express the sexual complementarity willed by God for marriage. The permanent and exclusive commitment of marriage is the necessary context for the expression of sexual love intended by God both to serve the transmission of human life and to build up the bond between husband and wife (see CCC, nos. 1639-1640).

In marriage, husband and wife give themselves totally to each other in their masculinity and femininity (see CCC, no. 1643). They are equal as human beings but different as man and woman, fulfilling each other through this natural difference. This unique complementarity makes possible the conjugal bond that is the core of marriage.

Why is a same-sex union not equivalent to a marriage?

For several reasons a same-sex union contradicts the nature of marriage: It is not based on the natural complementarity of male and female; it cannot cooperate with God to create new life; and the natural purpose of sexual union cannot be achieved by a same-sex union. Persons in same-sex unions cannot enter into a true conjugal union. Therefore, it is wrong to equate their relationship to a marriage.

Goldberg's definition of "heterosexism" is nothing less than an assault on Catholic moral teaching.  As Pope John Paul II said, in his Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, "In teaching the existence of intrinsically evil acts, the Church accepts the teaching of Sacred Scripture.  The Apostle Paul emphatically states, 'Do not be deceived: neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the Kingdom of God.'" (Veritatis Splendor, No. 81, citing 1 Corinthians 6: 9-10).

Dr. Goldberg's definition of "heterosexism," which has obviously been fully embraced by Clark University, takes no account of the Natural Law and is merely an exercise in chronological snobbery or what the French philosopher Jacques Maritain referred to as"chronolatry" in his work "Le paysan de la Garonne" - The Peasant of the Garonne. Maritain defines chronolatry as the idolatry of what is newest or latest in time. This is the characteristic flaw of today's "progressive" who looks upon the wisdom of the ages and dismisses it as nothing more than "theories" which belong to the past.

Clark University is indeed suffering an intellectual crisis.  A crisis which has resulted in institutionalized arrogance.

Pope Benedict XVI: "Once more we see the need for an engaged, articulate and well-formed Catholic laity..."

Joining his voice with that of the U.S. Bishops, Pope Benedict XVI warned of "certain attempts being made to limit that most cherished of American freedoms, freedom of religion."  And then the Holy Father said something most significant, something which most likely fell on deaf ears for the most part:

"..once more we see the need for an engaged, articulate and well-formed Catholic laity endowed with a strong critical sense vis-à-vis the dominant culture and with the courage to counter a reductive secularism which would delegitimize the Church's participation in public debate about the issues which are determining the future of American society...The preparation of committed lay leaders and the presentation of a convincing articulation of the Christian vision of man and society remain a primary task of the Church in your country; as essential components of the new evangelization, these concerns must shape the vision and goals of catechetical programs at every level.."

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

And then I added, "One of the reasons for the rapid decay which is corroding the Catholic spirit in the United States and elsewhere is the spread of a so-called liberalism (neo-modernism) which fosters a secularist attitude in Christians, one that creates an animus against the Faith and works against evangelization. The lay faithful who remain committed to the Church's teaching and who take seriously their vocation to convert those outside the Church are most often not encouraged. Often they are discouraged (in the name of an unhealthy pluralism) from engaging in evangelization...Pope Paul VI, in an allocution given on July 2nd, 1975, warned against this attitude:

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

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


Sadly, there are all too many clerics who haven't really embraced this authentic teaching of the Magisterium. For such clerics, the laity are second-class citizens who are tolerated but not really embraced fully as collaborators in the life and mission of the Church. This is most unfortunate. It was Pope Pius XII who said that, "The Faithful, more precisely the lay faithful, find themselves on the front lines of the Church's life; for them the Church is the animating principle for human society. Therefore, they in particular, ought to have an ever-clearer consciousness not only of belonging to 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).

The Church's witness in the United States has been crippled because the laity, for the most part, have not been taken seriously.  It is pointless to argue this.  Why else would our Holy Father be speaking of the pressing need for "an engaged, articulate and well-formed Catholic laity" unless he felt that this was lacking in the United States?

The Church in the United States has failed to appreciate that every member of the Mystical Body of Christ has a vocation which involves more than simply sitting in a pew and dropping money in a collection basket.  It has been forgotten (if not denied altogether by some) that every member of the Church has a definite function to perform.

And the new evangelization has suffered because of it.

Cardinal O'Malley, let's give more than just lip service to the importance of Holy Mass

In a November 20 pastoral letter on the importance of Sunday Mass, Cardinal Sean O'Malley urged people not to take the Mass for granted or to allow it to become a mere routine.  Excellent advice indeed.  But we must give more than lip service to the importance of the Holy Mass and the reverence with which we ought to assist at Holy Mass.  The Council of Trent, in its Decree Concerning the Celebration of Mass (Sess. xxii) had this to say: "If we must needs confess that no other work can be performed by the Faithful so holy and divine as this tremendous mystery...it is also sufficiently clear that all industry and diligence is to be applied to this end, that it be performed with the greatest possible inward cleanness and purity of heart and outward show of devotion and piety."

But this past summer the Archdiocese of Boston displayed a rather disturbing attitude toward the Holy Mass by allowing it to be used by those who engage in radical homosexual agitprop to advance the "gay agenda."  See here.  For too many Catholics today, the Holy Mass has become merely a "celebration of community" - a celebration of themselves.  Such people forget that it is the "mystery of Christ that the Church proclaims and celebrates in her liturgy so that the faithful may live from it and bear witness to it in the world: For it is in the liturgy, especially in the divine sacrifice of the Eucharist, that 'the work of our redemption is accomplished,' and it is through the liturgy especially that the faithful are enabled to express in their lives and manifest to others the mystery of Christ and the real nature of the true Church." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1068).

In his book Ceremonies of the Modern Roman Rite, Msgr. Peter J. Elliott notes that, "All worship ought to be centered on God.  Therefore, ceremonial must lead people to God, helping them to become those who worship Him 'in spirit and in truth' (John 4: 23, 24).  Ceremonial is a means, not an end in itself.  But, as an outward form, it is normally inseparable from the content of the sacraments.  In movements, gestures, sacred actions and signs, the religious language of the body must 'speak' reverently to God and of God, and thus give glory to Him...

Reverence in every gesture expresses the faith that is within us.  It proceeds from 'wonder and awe.'  Therefore reverence on the part of the celebrant should communicate to worshippers a sense of the sacred.  Through reverence we affirm that here in this place we are in the presence of God; that here we are involved in the supreme human act for which each of us was created - giving glory to our Creator and Redeemer; that here, as living cells in the Body of Christ, we are a 'holy people.'...By reverence we give glory to God and in turn share in His grace and glory." (p. 2).

It is no secret today that the enemies of the Church want to destroy belief in the divinity of Christ. For, as Fr. Vincent Miceli, S.J., explained, "Once the liturgy is humanized, Christ the Center and Object of it becomes the humanist par excellence, the liberator, the revolutionary, the Marxist ushering in the millenium; he ceases to be the Divine Redeemer. We must be alerted to those who plan, by convincing us to abandon our sacred forms, at length to seduce us into denying our Christian faith altogether. The Church is attacked by these Sons of Satan, in and outside her fold, because she is a living form, the sacrament - sign and instrument - of communion with God and of unity among all men; because she is the visible body of Religion. Hence these shrewd masters of sedition know that when her sacred forms go, religion will also go. Violate the lex orandi and you must inevitably destroy the lex credendi. That is why they rail against so many devotions as superstitions, why they propose so many alterations and changes, a tactic cleverly calculated to shake the foundations of faith...."


The Devil hates the Eucharist and never ceases to attack Our Eucharistic Lord. He uses variations on gnosticism, symbolism and modernism to attack the authentic teaching of the Magisterium on the Holy Eucharist. As the spiritual war continues to escalate all around us, Satan's attacks against the Eucharist will multiply. There will even be physical manifestations of this hatred. These attacks will intensify and reach a crescendo with the Man of Sin. St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Doctor of the Church, explains that: "The devil has always managed to get rid of the Mass by means of the heretics, making them precursors of the Antichrist who, above all else, will manage to abolish, and in fact will succeed in abolishing, as a punishment for the sins of men, the Holy Sacrifice of the altar, precisely as Daniel had predicted." ("Le Messa e l'Officio Strapazzati" in Opere Ascetiche).