A cleric who engages in sexual misconduct with a minor is not "venerable" Pope Leo XIV

 As explained here:

"A 'missionary' bishop made 'Venerable'* and green-lighted for the beatification process by Pope Leo XIV allowed indigenous youth to touch his genitals and shared a bed naked with a youth who had previously made “provocative homosexual attempts,” recently published reports show.

In May 2025, Leo declared Msgr. Alejandro Labaka 'Venerable' along with Sr. Inés Arango Velásquez, with whom he worked. InfoCatolica recently highlighted concerning passages in Labaka’s autobiographical writings in which the bishop recounted his observations of disordered sexual practices of the Huaorani people in the Amazon. Of particular concern is one time when he admittedly allowed the indigenous youth to arouse him.

He recounted in the Huaorani Chronicle, according to InfoCatólica:

The young people were more playful than ever, abound in words and signs that figured the union of sexes, allowing touches on the genitals. This time they especially bothered me, until confirming with uproar that male reactions are identical between us and the Huaorani. In any case, they did not insist either with me or among themselves in a way that pollution occurred. I tried not to make any drama and made an effort to act with naturalness, laugh with them and dissuade them from the game (CH, 146).

This incident was facilitated by the fact Labaka habitually lived nude with the Huaorani, in order to 'adapt' to their culture. As he explained in the Huaorani Chronicle, “They lived naked and I too was often naked like them.” Instead of approaching their nudism from the point of view of Catholic teaching, which understands clothing to be a necessary safeguard following original sin, Labaka claimed that the Huaorani did not need clothes in their “natural morality.”

“Blessed nudism of the Huaorani, who do not need cloths to safeguard their norms of natural morality!” Labaka wrote. “God has wanted to preserve in this people the way of life, the natural morality as in Paradise before sin,” he claimed, even going so far as to call the Huaorani’s culture as one of “extraordinary sexual maturity.”

This claim that the Huaorani did “not need” clothing and lived a “morality as in Paradise before sin” is at odds with Labaka’s description of the youth’s regular, disordered sexual experimentation. He recalled in the Huaorani Chronicle:

I observed the ease, or rather the almost generalized practice as something ritual, of getting excited among males frequently … in addition to other homosexual-looking games in their long family gatherings … Starting from their reality required me to bathe with them or like them, or in the sight of young people and children, with complete naturalness; intentionally performing the full grooming of an adult male; allowing to satisfy the natural curiosity to touch and see in what they see us different.

Labaka also admitted to “lying down naked” in bed with a youth who he said had previously made homosexual advances.

“Peigo (a young Huaorani) stayed, apparently, without a hammock and approached my bed. On previous days I had rejected him, for I feared him because of his gestures and provocative homosexual attempts. This time I had another understanding of ‘accept everything, except sin’ and I shared the bed lying down naked under the same mosquito net,” wrote the bishop.

Father Dave Nix ripped Labaka for allowing the youth to touch his genitals in a repost of Chris Jackson’s commentary on Pope Leo’s elevation of Labaka via the canonization process.

“Anytime there is genital contact between an adult and a child, the adult is ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS the predator, even if he acts coy like this pervert,” Nix wrote.

Jackson observed, “The duty to avoid scandal does not dissolve because a culture has different customs. A missionary can learn a language, eat what is set before him, sleep in a hut, accept poverty, accept danger, accept martyrdom. He does not get to sanctify conditions that predictably invite sexual sin, especially in the presence of the young.”

Under the current Code of Canon Law (specifically revised in 2021, Canon 1398), a cleric who engages in sexual misconduct with a minor (under 18) commits a severe crime against the sacrament and human dignity. Such actions are punishable by dismissal from the clerical state (laicization) and other penalties, with consent being irrelevant. 

Key aspects of Canon Law regarding clerical sexual abuse of minors:

Definition of a Minor: A minor is defined as any person under 18 years of age.

The Offense: Canon 1398 §1 dictates that a cleric is to be punished with removal from office and other penalties, including dismissal, if they commit a sexual act with a minor, groom them, or produce pornography.

Irrelevance of Consent/Age: The minor’s consent, or their initiation of the act, does not mitigate the offense. Recent updates in 2021 removed loopholes where clerics claimed they did not know the victim was a minor.

Punishment: The "just penalties" often include permanent removal from ministry and dismissal from the clerical state.

Reporting: Dioceses are required to have procedures for reporting to civil authorities, cooperating with investigations, and providing pastoral care to victims. 

This is the Church in crisis under Leo XIV. A church where heresy has a home and clerics who allow boys to fondle their genitals and sexually arouse them may be declared "Venerable" and potentially raised to the

altars as canonized Saints.

The counterfeit Church within the Church has been erected. Enter the Antichrist. 

* See here

The notion that there is such a thing as a life not worthy to be lived

 As reported here:

"In a recent video, Kelsi Sheren, a Canadian combat veteran, host of The Kelsi Sheren Perspective, and an outspoken opponent of Canada’s Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) policies, shared how Canada’s government-controlled healthcare system plans to euthanize an estimated 15 million Canadians between 2027 and 2047, a staggering figure justified under the pretext of cost savings.

While doctor-assisted suicide in the U.S. has not yet reached the alarming extremes observed in Canada, the 'death with dignity' movement is actively attempting to change that. Pending Governor Hochul’s signature on New York’s recently passed bill, 11 states and Washington, D.C., will permit this abhorrent and immoral practice.

Fortunately, dedicated coalitions – including the disability rights community, pro-life organizations, leaders within the Catholic Church, and other advocates – have helped slow its expansion.

Since Oregon first legalized assisted suicide in 1997, nearly 10,000 deaths have occurred under such laws. Nevertheless, with a culture increasingly embracing death as a solution, it’s difficult to predict whether the U.S. will ultimately follow Canada’s troubling example by normalizing assisted death instead of prioritizing compassionate care.

What often goes unnoticed, however, is that existing U.S. healthcare policies are already enabling the quiet killing of vulnerable Americans – not through legalized suicide, but through hospital protocols and policies that deny care, withdraw treatment, or subtly hasten death.

______________________________________________

For the Nazis, "euthanasia" (which is translated as "good death") represented a euphemistic term for a clandestine murder program created for the systematic killing of mentally and physically disabled patients living in institutional settings throughout Germany. The National Socialist's "Euthanasia" program would set the stage for the Holocaust: the mass murder of Jews and others who were deemed either racially inferior or ideologically unsuitable. In the words of Dr. Leo Alexander, Chief U.S. Medical Consultant at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials: 'Whatever proportions these crimes finally assumed, it became evident to all who investigated them that they had started from small beginnings."

Dr. Alexander referred to "a subtle shift in emphasis in the basic attitude of physicians." These physicians came to accept the notion that there is such a thing as a life not worthy to be lived. We are witnessing what appears to be a similar "subtle shift in emphasis" with regard to human life today.

In his Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, Pope John Paul II reminded us 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."

We ignore this warning at our own peril.

Can the Vatican ban the Traditional Mass? The Catechism says no

 From Crisis Magazine: Can the Vatican ban the Traditional Latin Mass? No. See here. A pope's authority is not magical.  See here.

Father Linus Clovis makes the point that,“Obedience is owed to the pope, but the pope owes obedience to the word and the apostolic tradition. We have to obey the pope, but the pope himself must obey the written word. He must obey the tradition. He must respond to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Obedience is owed to the pope, but it is the duty of the pope to give the character of possibility to this obedience. The pope has to facilitate our obeying him, by himself being obedient to the Word of God. Pope Felix III told us, ‘an error that is not resisted is approved. A truth that is not defended is suppressed.’ So we have an obligation to resist error, and we must do everything that we can to promote the truth.”  Father Clovis made this remark in response to the crisis in the Church and the role of Pope Francis in this crisis.  

This post,  like my previous post on the subject,  has been banned the Fascist Facebook organization. 

Covid-19 not as deadly as first thought concedes the CDC

 “If you cannot question it, it’s not science. It’s propaganda”

The CDC has finally conceded that Covid-19 is not nearly as deadly as they have been asserting for well over a year.  See here.

The question remains: When will the CDC follow the science?

Francis: The Eucharist is the bread of sinners

 

As noted here, Francis just said that: "..the Eucharist is not the reward of saints, but the bread of sinners."

While it is true that the Holy Mass is ordered to the forgiveness of venial sins, those conscious of grave sin should not approach the Eucharist.

Paragraph 1395 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

"By the same charity that it enkindles in us, the Eucharist preserves us from future mortal sins. The more we share the life of Christ and progress in his friendship, the more difficult it is to break away from him by mortal sin. The Eucharist is not ordered to the forgiveness of mortal sins - that is proper to the sacrament of Reconciliation. The Eucharist is properly the sacrament of those who are in full communion with the Church."

In 1 Corinthians 11: 27-29 we read [those of us who, unlike Francis, actually read Sacred Scripture]: "Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself."

If we will not have Christ, we will have chaos

An editorial in The New York Post:


"In yet another sign that idealistic protests have given way to mindless destruction, vandals over the weekend targeted two statues of … the Virgin Mary.

It was graffiti in Elmhurst, Queens: 'IDOL' spray-painted across her skirt in the early morning outside the Cathedral Preparatory School and Seminary on 92nd Street.

And arson in Dorchester, Mass.: a statue outside of Saint Peter’s Parish damaged by burns to the face, hands and arms. Fr. John Currie, the pastor, was 'disappointed' by the desecration, noting, 'Our image of our lady is so important to us in our faith.'

Maybe these are simply anti-Catholic bigots who figure they might as well join in on the attacks against monuments.

Maybe the perps pretend they’re somehow forwarding the Black Lives Matter message — after all, BLM thinker Shaun King recently said that images depicting Jesus as a 'white European' should be torn down as forms of 'white supremacy' and 'racist propaganda.'

Whoever’s behind it, it shows that mob rule leads straight to madness."

But the protests we've been subjected to were never "idealistic" expressions of moral outrage.  But rather the immature and hate-filled rage of angry haters of God, His Commandments and His order.

The violence we are witnessing across America today is rooted in hatred of truth.  Today there is a demand for sex without love, for a licentiousness in sex which has wrought a heartless society in which individuals do not care for anyone but themselves. The fruit of this demonic theology is the slaughter through abortion and euthanasia of human beings created in the Imago Dei. It is a theology of violence which is rooted in hatred of truth. For at the heart of immorality is falsity, the hatred of truth.

Fr. Vincent P. Miceli, in an essay entitled "The Taproot of Violence," explains: "...violence entered creation from the rebellion of Lucifer. This rebellion arose from the heart of pride. But the sin of pride is the offspring of the vice known as hatred of truth. Hatred of truth is the result of the creature's attempt to rearrange God's hierarchy of beings and values into an order which the creature prefers to the plan of God. This attempt immediately produces the violence of disorder, the chaos of falsity and immorality. For hatred of truth is really hatred of God who creates all things wisely and governs them lovingly. Lucifer, the Morning Star, was instantly deformed into the Prince of Darkness because he attempted to live a lie. He wanted to dethrone God and become God himself..."

We live in an environment where there is a "violence of disorder" because we have abandoned truth.  And hatred of truth leads to violence.  It is the very root of violence.  Jesus said to the Pharisees, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own account, but he sent me.  Why do you not understand what I say?  It is because you cannot bear to hear my word.  You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires.  He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him.  When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.  But, because I tell the truth, you do not believe me." (John 8: 42-45).

It is rejection of truth which leads to violence.  And so we read in verse 59 of the same Chapter, "So they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple."  If there is exaggerated rhetoric and violence across our society, it is because many have rejected God's created order.

But there is a consequence to this rejection of truth.  As Dorothy Sayers reminded us, if we will not have Christ, we will have chaos.

Francis: When it comes to violence against women, do as I say, not as I do

“Women are sources of life, and yet they are continually offended, hurt, raped, forced to prostitute themselves, and to suppress the life they carry. Every violence inflicted on women is a desecration of God, who was born of a woman” - Francis

Dr. Germain Crises explains, "If those who lack virtue and holiness simulate what they lack, they practice hypocrisy, seeking by mere outward show to keep their reputation and to receive undeserved honor. As deceptive communication, all hypocrisy is at least venially sinful. The New Testament, however, condemns as a most grave sin a certain kind of hypocrisy: the pretense of sincere Faith by those who sinful

ly reject or pervert Jesus' gospel. While the enormity of their sin lay in their unbelief more than in their pretense, hypocrisy nevertheless can be a grave matter even without rejection of Faith..."

This isn't the first time Francis has displayed a violent temper. See here.

Francis reminds me of Joe Besser, see here.

Why Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts is not attracting young people

Bishop Joseph F. Maguire, former Bishop of the Springfield Massachusetts Diocese, was known to be part of the cover-up of sexual abuse within the Diocese.  See here.

Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts, the same Church that welcomed prayers for Keith Sullivan, a Youth Minister accused of sexual abuse - see here - (while offering no such prayers for the alleged victim) is now advertising a Memorial Mass for the now deceased Bishop Maguire.

This comes as no surprise as the Church, under Father Shaun O'Connor, has promoted the views of Father Jonathan Morris, a priest who distorted the Church's teaching regarding homosexuality, while banning me from its Facebook page for defending the Magisterial teaching of the Church.

And while Keith Sullivan, arrested by the Nashua Police Department for sexual abuse and kidnapping was welcome at Saint Mary's, apparently Catholics faithful to orthodoxy are not.  This explains why the Church is disintegrating.  One lay person, involved in parish ministry, was overheard saying (to a friend just prior to Mass), that there aren't many kids at CCD and that "young people aren't going to Mass."

Should this really come as a surprise?

Father Gabriel of St. Mary Magdalen, O.C.D., in his classic work devoted to the interior life entitled Divine Intimacy, explains that, "Devotion to Our Lady of Mount Carmel indicates a strong call to the interior life, which, in a very special way, is Mary's life.  The Blessed Virgin wants us to resemble her in heart and mind much more than in externals.  If we penetrate into Mary's soul, we see that grace produced in her a very rich interior life: a life of recollection, prayer, uninterrupted giving of herself to God, and of constant contact and intimate union with Him.  Mary's soul is a sanctuary reserved for God alone where no creature has ever left an imprint; here reign love and zeal for the glory of God and the salvation of men.  Those who wish to live truly devoted to Our Lady of Mount Carmel, must follow Mary into the depths of the interior life...Every interior soul, even if living amid the tumult of the world, must strive to reach this peace, this interior silence, which alone makes continual contact with God possible.  It is our passions and attachments that make noise within us, that disturb our peace of mind and interrupt our intimate converse with God.  Only the soul that is wholly detached and in complete control of its passions can, like Mary, be a solitary, silent 'garden' where God will find His delights.  This is the grace we ask of Our Lady today when we choose her to be the Queen and mistress of our interior life." (Divine Intimacy, pp. 1147-1148).

When a soul is occupied with inordinate attachments to self or creatures or the vain and passing things of this world, it is unable to love God with all its strength and finds itself divided between God and self, between God and creatures, between God and the transitory things of this dying world.  But we are commanded, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with all thy strength and with all thy mind." (Luke 10: 27).

It is these inordinate attachments to self or creatures which lead to dissent and ultimately polarization within the Church.  The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in its Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, tells us that, "The Church 'is like a sacrament, a sign and instrument, that is, of communion with God and of unity among all men' (Lumen Gentium, 1).  Consequently, to pursue concord and communion is to enhance the force of her witness and credibility.  To succumb to the temptation of dissent, on the other hand, is to allow the 'leaven of infidelity to the Holy Spirit' to start to work." (No. 40).

This leaven of infidelity has, for many years now, crippled many within the Church.  The dissent which has been embraced within the Church has led to polarization.  Why?  Because faithful Catholics who do not [and indeed cannot] accept the dissenting view are duty bound to resist it for the sake of the Church's authentic peace, a peace which Pope John XXIII said, "is not completely untroubled and serene; it is active, not calm and motionless.  In short, this is a peace that is ever at war.  It wars with every sort of error, including that which falsely wears the face of truth; it struggles against the enticements of vice, against those enemies of the soul, of whatever description, who can weaken, blemish, or destroy our innocence or Catholic faith." (Ad Petri cathedram).

There has been much dissent and subsequent polarization within the Diocese of Springfield (as in others) because the leadership (and here we are being most generous in our terms) of the local Church has failed to inspire the faithful (and its own priests first and foremost) to strip themselves of all that is not of God.  While St. John of the Cross assures us that, "The soul has only one will, and if it occupies itself or encumbers itself with anything, it will not remain free, solitary, and pure, as is required for divine transformation," the Springfield Diocese has encouraged an atmosphere of self-will, self-assertion, self-affirmation and self-promotion.  Forgotten is the warning of the Holy Spirit that "God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble." (James 4: 6).

We (all of us) must become more Mary-like in heart and mind and not just in externals.  "In every deliberate sin," as Dr. Germain Grisez reminds us, such as dissent from Church teaching or deliberate non-assent, "freedom of self-determination is exercised contrary to what is known to be truly right and good.  In sinning, sinners tend to regard moral truths legalistically, as if they were mere rules blocking them from doing as they please.  Thus, deliberate sin seems to be self-affirming.  Affirming the self and rejecting the limits which deny some forbidden fruit, sinners try to be autonomous, as only God really can be."

Faith demands the renunciation of the sinful self which authentic devotion to Mary necessarily involves.  Pride must give way to humility.  Only then can one find the truth which sets one free (John 8: 32). 

Cardinal Gerhard Müller not satisfied with Vatican denial that Francis denies Jesus' divinity

As reported here:

Cardinal Gerhard Müller criticised the Vatican’s denial on October 9th of Francis reported statement that “Jesus was not God”.

“And they adored the beast, saying, who is like to the beast? And who shall be able to fight with him?” (Revelation 13:4).

As Rev. P. Huchede explains in his book History of Antichrist, “All vile parasites of fortune, astonished at the rapidity with which Antichrist achieves his conquests and also at the unlimited sway of his power, deceived by his prodigies, will prostrate themselves before him and adore him as their god. As soon as he believes himself master of the bodies and souls of all peoples, he will decree and proclaim his divinity and establish a new religion. According to the Apostle, he will lift himself up above all that is called God or that is worshipped, so that he sitteth in the temple of God showing himself as if he were God (2 Thessalonians 2:4). He will command all peoples to place his statue in the public places to be worshipped, the image of the beast whose wound was healed (Revelation 13: 13-15)…..Then he shall think himself able to change times and laws – religious, political, and sacred – by which the world had been governed up to his advent (Daniel 7: 25)…None but adorers of this new god can enjoy the possession of riches or honors. This god shall increase their glory and shall give them power over many and shall divide the land for nothing (Revelation 13: 7)….Those who will refuse to obey his impious orders shall be the object of a terrible and universal persecution….No language can give an adequate idea of the atrocity and effects of this frightful persecution. “I beheld and lo that horn made war against the saints, and prevailed over them” (Daniel 7: 21). The beast shall make war against the saints and shall overcome them and kill them (Revelation 11: 7). And he “shall crush the saints of the Most High” (Daniel 7: 25). And he will put to death all those who will not adore the image of the beast (Revelation 13: 15). Then the truth shall be oppressed. The Church shall see her children apostatize in vast numbers, and in the agony of her heart-rending grief, she will cry out in the words of her divine spouse, ‘My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?’ (Mark 15: 34). Then by order of the tyrant the continual sacrifice shall be abolished (Daniel 9: 27). The holy sacrifice of the Mass shall no longer be offered up publicly on the altars. The Church shall be devastated; the sacred vessels desecrated; the priests shall be scattered and separated from their flocks and put to death….The Church has taken up her abode in the catacombs.” (History of Antichrist, pp. 23-26, Tan Books).

In order for the new religion of humanitarianism to succeed, all dissenting voices will have to be either converted, silenced or removed. The Reign of Antichrist, which will be presented as an age of “love and harmony” will have to be brutally violent in order to achieve world unity. There are already many voices which have called or are calling for such a “global purge” or “cleansing action.” Harvard historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr, in the July-August 1995 edition of Foreign Affairs, said that, “We are not going to achieve a new world order without paying for it in blood as well as in words and money.” Likewise, David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative at the United Nations, has said, “Lucifer comes to give us the final Luciferic initiation…that many people now and in the days ahead, will be facing – for it is an initiation into the New Age…No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian initiation.” Benjamin Crème, another prominent New Age “prophet,” on page 128 of “Maitreya’s mission,” insists that those who refuse to join in this World Initiation will find themselves in the minority and will have to “withdraw from this life.” Creme exhorts his followers to, “Be not afraid, therefore, when the ‘men of cloth’ raise their voices against the Great Lord, naming Him anti-Christ and arch-deceiver, for they know little of the laws which underlie their faiths and act and speak from ignorance and fear.” (April, 1997).

The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains the significance of Jesus' holy name: "Jesus means in Hebrew: 'God saves.' At the annunciation, the angel Gabriel gave him the name Jesus as his proper name, which expresses both his identity and his mission. Since God alone can forgive sins, it is God who, in Jesus his eternal Son made man, 'will save his people from their sins'. In Jesus, God recapitulates all of his history of salvation on behalf of men." (CCC, 430).  And again: "The name 'Jesus' signifies that the very name of God is present in the person of his Son, made man for the universal and definitive redemption from sins. It is the divine name that alone brings salvation, and henceforth all can invoke his name, for Jesus united himself to all men through his Incarnation, so that 'there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.'" (CCC, 432).

The Catechism continues: "Jesus' Resurrection glorifies the name of the Savior God, for from that time on it is the name of Jesus that fully manifests the supreme power of the 'name which is above every name'. The evil spirits fear his name; in his name his disciples perform miracles, for the Father grants all they ask in this name." (CCC, 434).

So important is the holy name of Jesus that Father Paul O'Sullivan writes, "God in His immense goodness gives to each of us an all-powerful word with which we can do wonders for Him, for ourselves and for the world.  That word is 'Jesus.'..."'Jesus' signifies 'God-made-man,' the Incarnation.  When the Son of God became man, He was called 'Jesus,' so that when we say, 'Jesus,' we offer Him His own Divine Son Himself; we offer Him the great Mystery of the Incarnation.  Jesus IS the Incarnation!" (The Wonders of the Holy Name, p. 32).

Saint Paul exhorts us, "All whatsoever you do in word or in work, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.." (Col. 3:17).  This is the sacred rule for Christians.  But we know, because Jesus has already warned us, that the Man of Sin, the Antichrist, will come in his own name (John 5:43), believing instead in his own greatness and spiritual power.  He will come to despise the Holy Name.  Vladimir Soloviev, in his work The Antichrist, understood that the spirit of Antichrist would become more manifest in the 21st century and describes the Man of iniquity thusly, "...he loved only himself.  He believed in God, but at the bottom of his heart unconsciously and instinctively preferred himself to Him.  He believed in the Good, but the all-seeing Eye of Eternity knew that he would bow down before the powers of evil, as soon as it had corrupted him, not by appealing to his senses, base passions or to the supreme temptation of power, but by caressing his boundless pride...At the beginning he had no hostility against Jesus.  He admitted his messianic dignity and significance, but he sincerely saw in him merely the greatest of his own predecessors; his mind, clouded by pride, could not understand Christ's moral achievement and his absolute uniqueness.  He reasoned thus: 'Christ came before me; I come second; but that which in the order of time comes later is essentially prior. I come last, at the end of history, just because I am the perfect and final savior.  The first Christ was my forerunner.  His mission was to anticipate and prepare my coming.'  With this idea in his mind the great man of the twenty-first century applied to himself all that is said in the Gospels about the second coming, understanding by it, not the return of the same Christ, but the replacement of the preliminary Christ by the final, that is, by himself."

The False Prophet rejects the divinity of Christ and secretly yearns to have the demon worshipped as God - he who comes in his own name and whose arrival is a punishment upon mankind because of its rejection of He Who is Truth and His Commandments.

"Clergy will not respect the laws of the Church."

Catholic prophecy being fulfilled in our time

Venerable Bartholomew Holzhauser left us these words on the end times. Reading them, one cannot help but see that he is describing our own day with astonishing detail:

Venerable Bartholomew Holzhauser (17th century, Germany)

"During this period, many men will abuse the freedom of conscience conceded to them. It is of such men that Jude, the Apostle, spoke when he said: 'These men blaspheme- whatever they do not understand; and they corrupt whatever they know naturally as irrational animals do. . . They feast together without restraint, feeding themselves, grumbling murmurers, walking according to their lusts; their mouth speaketh proud things, they admire people for the sake of gain; they bring about division, sensual men, having not the spirit.'"

"During this unhappy period, there will be laxity in divine and human precepts. Discipline will suffer. The Holy Canons will be completely disregarded, and the Clergy will not respect the laws of the Church. Everyone will be carried away and led to believe and to do what he fancies, according to the manner of the flesh."

"They will ridicule Christian simplicity; they will call it folly and nonsense, but they will have the highest regard for advanced knowledge, and for the skill by which the axioms of the law, the precepts of morality, the Holy Canons and religious dogmas are clouded by senseless questions and elaborate arguments. As a result, no principle at all, however holy, authentic, ancient, and certain it may be, will remain free of censure, criticism, false interpretations, modification and delimitation by man."

These are evil times, a century full of dangers and calamities. Heresy is everywhere, and the followers of heresy are in power almost everywhere. Bishops, prelates, and priests say that they are doing their duty, that they are vigilant, and that they live as befits their state in life. In like manner, therefore, they all seek excuses. But God will permit a great evil against His Church: Heretics and tyrants will come suddenly and unexpectedly; they will break into the Church while bishops, prelates, and priests are asleep. They will enter Italy and lay Rome waste; they will burn down the churches and destroy everything."(Yves Dupont, Catholic Prophecy,Tan Books and Publishers, 1973).

The dragon's tail is sweeping away a third of the stars.  See here.

Francis: God creates people with the homosexual inclination...

The Sun is reporting that Francis told a homosexual man that God made him that way.  See here.


"Homosexuality is not hardwired...whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predeterminations."

"..there is an inescapable component of heritability to many human behavioral traits. For virtually none of them is heredity ever close to predictive."

-Dr. Francis S. Collins, one of the world's leading scientists who works at the cutting edge of DNA.

Translated simply, this brilliant scientist is saying that while genes might predispose a person toward homosexuality, they do not predetermine the behavior.  A person still has free will.  Which is why homosexual persons can change their sexual orientation.

Francis would have you believe that homosexual persons are born that way and that science validates homosexuality.  But the Catholic Medical Association, in Homosexuality and Hope, summarizes the reality:


"A number of researchers have sought to find a biological cause for same-sexual attraction.  The media have promoted the idea that a 'gay gene' has already been discovered...but, in spite of several attempts, none of the much-publicized studies...has been scientifically replicated.  A number of authors have carefully reviewed these studies and found that not only do the studies not prove a genetic basis for same-sex attraction; the reports do not even contain such claims...If same-sex attraction were genetically determined, then one would expect identical twins to be identical in their sexual attractions.  There are, however, numerous reports of identical twins who are not identical in their sexual attractions." (Homosexuality and Hope, Catholic Medical Association, p. 2).

Francis and the homosexual propagandists need to reflect very carefully on the hard science which disproves the notion that "gay" people are "born that way."

The apostasy spreads.

Cardinal Raymond Burke: A pope's authority is not magical..

The National Catholic Register reports:

"Cardinal Raymond Burke has stressed that popes must safeguard and promote Church unity, and that if a Roman Pontiff fails to act in conformity with Divine Revelation, Sacred Scripture and Tradition, he 'must be rejected by the faithful.'

In a talk given today in Rome on the current state of doctrinal confusion in the Church, the patron of the Order of Malta warned that any expression of doctrine or practice by a Roman Pontiff must be an 'authentic exercise' of the Petrine ministry.

He explained in a speech on The limits of papal authority in the doctrine of the Church that plenitudo potestatis — the fullness of power given to a pope — does not mean that a pope’s authority is 'magical, but derives from his obedience to the Lord.'"

Related reading here.

Father Zuhlsdorf gets to the crux of the controversy over Amoris laetitia: Christ or Chaos?

“You must do your duty and make chaos all night..." - Francis to Krakow, Poland youth.

Father John Zuhlsdorf, referring to Francis' Amoris laetitia, gets to the crux of the matter:

"If the unrepentent sinner, unshriven and without a firm purpose of amendment, can officially be admitted to Holy Communion, it’s game over for discipline in the Church.  It’s over for authoritative teaching on faith and morals.

If Christ was wrong about marriage and divorce, then He isn’t God and everything we are doing is pointless and idolatrous."

Lumen Gentium, No. 25, referring to the Pontiff's infallibility, teaches clearly that, "...this infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed His Church to be endowed in defining doctrine of faith and morals, extends as far as the deposit of Revelation extends, which must be religiously guarded and faithfully expounded."

Got that?  Pay attention now.  The Pope's infallibility "extends as far as the deposit of Revelation extends."  It does not surpass or supercede Revelation, a Revelation from the Lord Jesus which must be "religiously guarded and faithfully expounded."

The Pope is the Custodian of the Deposit of Faith, not its Master.

Pope Saint John Paul II, in Familiaris Consortio, No. 84, taught authoritatively that:

"The Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist. Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage.

Reconciliation in the sacrament of Penance which would open the way to the Eucharist, can only be granted to those who, repenting of having broken the sign of the Covenant and of fidelity to Christ, are sincerely ready to undertake a way of life that is no longer in contradiction to the indissolubility of marriage. This means, in practice, that when, for serious reasons, such as for example the children’s upbringing, a man and a woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate, they “take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples." —Familiaris Consortio, “On the Role of the Christian Family in the Modern World”, No. 84.

There is confusion in the Church because Francis isn't satisfied with being the Custodian of the Deposit of Faith.  He wants to be its Master.

Francis de la Mancha: Tilting at Windmills

In an EWTN post which may be found here, Father John Echert notes that:


"The RSV records the Lord’s Prayer as follows:

6:9 Pray then like this: Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. 6:10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, On earth as it is in heaven. 6:11 Give us this day our daily bread; 6:12 And forgive us our debts, As we also have forgiven our debtors; 6:13 And lead us not into temptation, But deliver us from evil.

The Greek text is accurately rendered by the RSV, "Lead us not into temptation" with God understood as the subject. However, we should not understand this to mean that God actively tempts us to sin but that He allows us to undergo testing, including at the hands of the Tempter. In fact, this is precisely what happened to the Son of God who was driven or led by the Spirit into the wilderness, wherein He was tempted by Satan. As we read in the Gospel of St. Mark:

1:12 The Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. 1:13 And he was in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered to him.

The Father knew that the Son would successfully face down these temptations and in the process, in His humanity, grow stronger by testing and obedience. The same is true for us; God does not allow us to be tested or tempted beyond what we can endure and He allows it only for the greater good that it may occasion, if we remain faithful.

St. Augustine comments upon the Lord’s Prayer and makes a distinction between being tempted and being led into temptation. He understands being led into temptation as meaning temptations which we are not able to resist and so we are asking that we may not, deserted by His aid, either consent or yield to any such temptation. But as to being tempted or tested, he notes that without temptation none can be approved and so we do not seek to avoid all temptations which we may successfully face with God’s grace. By these temptations, one is approved and made stronger in the process. Or, as one author correctly notes, 'He who refuses the combat renounces the crown.' Of course, God knows each of us personally and so for one who sincerely prays 'and lead us not into temptation' will not be abandoned by God to a test to which one would succumb."

Which makes it problematic that Francis would assert that, the current language of the Our Father prayer "is not a good translation."

Saint Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church, would disagree.  For this giant of Catholic thought, in his Summa, says:

"We are directed to beatitude accidentally by the removal of obstacles. Now there are three obstacles to our attainment of beatitude. First, there is sin, which directly excludes a man from the kingdom, according to 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, 'Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, etc., shall possess the kingdom of God'; and to this refer the words, 'Forgive us our trespasses.'

Secondly, there is temptation which hinders us from keeping God's will, and to this we refer when we say: 'And lead us not into temptation,' whereby we do not ask not to be tempted, but not to be conquered by temptation, which is to be led into temptation. 

Thirdly, there is the present penal state which is a kind of obstacle to a sufficiency of life, and to this we refer in the words, 'Deliver us from evil.'"

As Father William Saunders has noted, "..we must understand this petition in its context. The preceding petition asks our heavenly Father to forgive us our sins as we forgive others — a very positive petition imploring an outpouring of God's healing grace. The petition in question must also be viewed positively: it asks the Father not to lead us into temptation, but not in the sense of God putting us into temptation. St. James reminds us, "No one who is tempted is free to say, 'I am being tempted by God.' Surely God, who is beyond the grasp of evil, tempts no one" (Jas 1:13). Our Lord would never set us up for a fall to sin.

Rather, as the Catechism indicates, the petition means more "do not allow us to enter into temptation" or "do not let us yield to temptation" (No. 2846). 

Rather than engaging in some sort of Quixotic battle against imaginary dragons, perhaps Francis could make better use of his time by clearing up doctrinal confusion which he has sown through Amoris Laetitia or by addressing the homosexual problem in the priesthood?

Francis, not known for "wisdom and prudence," calls for Jerusalem "status quo."

Already dark forces are raging against President Trump for recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital.  See here.

But Francis is opposed.  As reported here:

"Pope Francis spoke in support of the 'status quo' in Jerusalem on Wednesday, calling for 'wisdom and prudence' in order to avoid conflict.


The Roman Catholic leader's comments came after President Donald Trump announced plans for the U.S. to support the relocation of the Israeli capital to Jerusalem -- and for the U.S. Embassy to be relocated there as well.

The pope said he was 'profoundly concerned' about recent developments regarding Jerusalem, which he called a 'special vocation for peace' and a sacred place for Christians, Jews and Muslims.

He appealed to all sides to respect 'the status quo of the city' as according to the United Nations resolutions."

But Francis isn't known for his "wisdom and prudence."  Jerusalem belongs to the Jewish People:

“The oldest and holiest Jewish cemetery on Mount of Olives is in East Jerusalem, (3,000 years old) as is the Western Wall, so to call new Jewish suburbs in East Jerusalem, settlements, is absurd, and designed to undermine Jewish legitimacy there.” -- Mervyn Bufton

• “[Jerusalem is the] "unified capital of Israel and the capital of the Jewish people, and sovereignty over it is indisputable.” -- Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

•“We are joyful and honored to commence the construction of our new neighborhood which strengthens the Jewish presence in united Jerusalem and stresses the fact that Jerusalem is the home of every Jew in Israel and throughout the world.” -- Rabbi Dani Isaac

• “The Land of Israel without Jerusalem is merely 'Palestine.' Down the generations the Jews have been saying not 'Next year in the Land of Israel' but 'Next year in Jerusalem'... One can create Tel-Aviv out of Jaffa but one cannot create a second Jerusalem. Zion lies within the walls, not outside them.” -- Menachem Mendel Ussishkin

•“After 2,000 years of sacrifice for the dream of returning to Jerusalem, we cannot allow it to be taken away.” -- Irving Moskowitz

•“All countries of the world should understand that attempts to endanger Jerusalem’s unity and Israel’s sovereignty in it, will be rejected immediately.” -- MK Ofir Akunis

•“It’s a noise of construction, not of destruction, thank God. And it will always be like this. Development in Jerusalem, it’s a good thing. Not to the studio but for other things.” -- Benny Elon

•“The Jewish people are in Jerusalem, not as settlers or invaders, but as of right. These rights are clearly spelt out in International Law and should be respected by the international community.” -- Jacques Gauthier

•“A non-broken series of treaties and resolutions, as laid out by the San Remo Resolution, the League of Nations and the United Nations, gives the Jewish People title to the city of Jerusalem.” -- Hillel Fendel

•“You ought to let the Jews have Jerusalem; it was they who made it famous.” -- Winston Churchill

•“Jerusalem was the focal point for the historical connection of the Jewish people to the land of Israel.” -- Dore Gold

Jerusalem belongs to Israel.  This is historical and legal fact.  See here.

Anyone who says otherwise is opposing God's Holy Word.

Not all are welcome at Saint Mary's Church in Orange...

From the USCCB:


"The Church continues to affirm the dignity of every human being, and to grow in knowledge and understanding of the gifts and needs of her members who live with disabilities. Likewise, the Church recognizes that every parish community includes members with disabilities, and earnestly desires their active participation. All members of the Body of Christ are uniquely called by God by virtue of their Baptism. In light of this call, the Church seeks to support all in their growth in holiness, and to encourage all in their vocations. Participating in, and being nourished by, the grace of the sacraments is essential to this growth in holiness. Catholic adults and children with disabilities, and their families, earnestly desire full and meaningful participation in the sacramental life of the Church.

In this regard, as it issues a revised and expanded Guidelines for the Celebration of the Sacraments with Persons with Disabilities, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops wishes to reiterate what was said in previous pastoral statements on this issue:

 It is essential that all forms of the liturgy be completely accessible to persons with disabilities, since these forms are the essence of the spiritual tie that binds the Christian community together. To exclude members of the parish from these celebrations of the life of the Church, even by passive omission, is to deny the reality of that community. Accessibility involves far more than physical alterations to parish buildings. Realistic provision must be made for Catholics with disabilities to participate fully in the Eucharist and other liturgical celebrations.."

Because I took exception to a homily given last weekend by Father Piotr Pawlus denigrating Our Lord by asserting that He has "warts," Fr. Pawlus responded this weekend .with hatred and a passive aggressive attitude, passing over my mother at Communion time.

Although my mother is 86 and recovering from back surgery, Father Pawlus refused to give her Holy Communion at the first pew where she was sitting and forced her to stand up and get in line to receive the Eucharist.

This is realistic provision for a Catholic with a disability?  What is this but an act of violence?  What is this but weaponizing the Eucharist and denying the reality of community?

And so we see once again that what passes for Catholicism at Saint Mary's Church in Orange is a counterfeit. Only those who march in lockstep with the modernists at Saint Mary's Church are welcome.  Others will be discriminated against, hated and excluded.

Bishop Antonio Carlos Cruz Santos: Blaspheming against God

"Homosexuality is not hardwired...whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predeterminations."

"..there is an inescapable component of heritability to many human behavioral traits. For virtually none of them is heredity ever close to predictive."

-Dr. Francis S. Collins, one of the world's leading scientists who works at the cutting edge of DNA.



Bishop Antônio Carlos Cruz,  having succumbed to diabolic disorientation, is now asserting that homosexuality may just be a "gift" from God.  During a recent homily, the confused Bishop said: "From the perspective of faith when you look at homosexuality, you can’t say it’s a choice.  Choice is one thing that you freely choose and no one chooses orientation.  One day the person finds out with this or that orientation.  Choice will be the way you will live your orientation.  Whether in a dignified, ethical, or in a promiscuous way.  But promiscuity can be lived in any of the orientations one has.  So since it is not choice, since it is not an option, since the World Health Organization, since the 90’s no longer considers it as an illness, from the perspective of faith, we have only one answer.  If it is not a choice, if it is not an illness, from the perspective of faith, it can only be a gift.  It is given by God.  This is a gift: it is given by God.  There’s no other way!  If it is not a choice, if it is not a disease, it is a gift, it is given by God.”

Read the statement from Dr. Collins again. Translated simply, this brilliant scientist is saying that while genes might predispose a person toward homosexuality, they do not predetermine the behavior.  A person still has free will.  Which is why homosexual persons can change their sexual orientation.

Bishop Cruz would have you believe that homosexual persons are born that way and that science validates homosexuality.  But the Catholic Medical Association, in Homosexuality and Hope, summarizes the reality:


"A number of researchers have sought to find a biological cause for same-sexual attraction.  The media have promoted the idea that a 'gay gene' has already been discovered...but, in spite of several attempts, none of the much-publicized studies...has been scientifically replicated.  A number of authors have carefully reviewed these studies and found that not only do the studies not prove a genetic basis for same-sex attraction; the reports do not even contain such claims...If same-sex attraction were genetically determined, then one would expect identical twins to be identical in their sexual attractions.  There are, however, numerous reports of identical twins who are not identical in their sexual attractions." (Homosexuality and Hope, Catholic Medical Association, p. 2).

Bishop Cruz and other homosexual propagandists need to reflect very carefully on the hard science which disproves the notion that "gay" people are "born that way."

As for homosexual relationships, Dutch psychologist Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, Ph.D., a specialist on homosexuality, writes:

"The term neurotic describes such relationships [same-sex] well. It suggests the ego-centeredness of the relationship; the attention-seeking instead of loving...Neurotic, in short, suggests all kinds of dramas and childish conflicts as well as the basic disinterestedness of in the partner, notwithstanding the shallow pretensions of 'love.' Nowhere is there more self-deception in the homosexual than in his representation of himself as a lover. One partner is important to the other only insofar as he satisfies that other's needs. Real, unselfish love for a desired partner would, in fact, end up destroying homosexual 'love'!" (Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, The Battle for Normality, Ignatius Press, 1997, pp. 62-63).


"Van den Aardweg says that the claim that homosexuality is normal is one of those statements that are "so foolish that only intellectuals could believe them." It is like saying that anorexia nervosa is healthy. And he denies that homesexuality is caused by the genes, or the structure of the brain; the evidence shows that it is acquired. Nor is it a necessary result of effeminacy; it is the child's "self-perception as masculine or feminine" that makes the difference. It is caused by pressure to develop an opposite-sex role. Often mothers do not view or treat their sons as "real men," and fathers do not view or treat their daughters as "real girls." (From the Catholic Insight book review of "The Battle for Normality."

Bishop Cruz is blaspheming against God.  He is asserting that God "gifted" the people of Sodom and Gomorrah with the homosexual "orientation," and then exterminated them in His wrath.

This is equivalent to saying that God is: a.  The Author of evil inclinations and b. That He is unjust ( "gifting" people with a sinful inclination and then destroying them with fire for acting on this "gift."

Deacon Richard Tatro's dishonest homily...

This past Saturday, during the 4:30 Vigil Mass at Holy Cross Church in Templeton, Massachusetts, Deacon Richard Tatro assaulted parishioners with his distorted theology and his fundamentalist interpretation of Jesus's command to "judge not" (Matthew 7:1-5).

Deacon Tatro cited the unfair criticism of the Cure of Ars, Saint John Vianney, with regard to his academic difficulties, specifically his problem absorbing Latin.

Here the criticism, the negative judgements, were obviously unjust.  For though Saint Vianney was not academically gifted, his holiness of life and his wisdom shined brightly for all to see (save for those "scholars" who were his contemporaries).  But does it follow that all judgements are therefore sinful or illicit?

Of course not.  Which is what makes Tatro's homily so insidious.

Catholics of Tatro's stripe apparently believe that love of enemies means condoning vice and sin. In the words of Dr. Germain Grisez, one of the finest moral theologians of our time, "It might seem to follow that love must accept everyone, even enemies, just as they are, and to affirm them even in the error or sin which is present in them. But the law of lovedoes not require indiscriminate affirmation of everything about other persons (see Saint Thomas Aquinas, S.t., 2-2, q.34, a.3). One's love must be like Jesus'. He loves sinners and brings them into communion with himself in order to overcome their error and sin. When the scribes and pharisees bring a woman caught in adultery to Jesus, he not only saves her from being stoned to death but warns her not to sin again (see John 8:3-11). In a true sense, Jesus is not judgmental, he sets aside the legalistic mentality, readily forgives sinners, does not condemn the world, and points out that those who refuse to acknowledge their sinfulness are self-condemned by the truth they violate (see John 3:16-21). But he realistically recognizes sinners as sinners and never accepts error as truth...Similarly, if Christians' love of neighbor is genuine, it not only permits but REQUIRES THEM both to 'hold fast to what is good' and to 'hate what is evil' (Romans 12:9)."

And again, according to Dr. Grisez, "Vatican II neatly formulates the prohibition against judging others" 'God alone is the judge and searcher of hearts; for that reason, he forbids us to make judgments about the internal guilt of anyone' (Gaudium et Spes, No. 28). This norm, however, does not preclude JUDGMENTS necessary for determining that one should try to dissuade others from committing sins or to encourage them to repent if they have sinned."

Poorly instructed Catholics are often heard to remark "I don't like the word 'judge,' or to those of us who defend the Church's authentic Magisterial teaching while exposing error they will say: "You're judging."

What if we are? Judging isn't always sinful. It is only sinful when we judge another's interior dispositions, when we judge their soul. But we are entirely free to judge words, ideas and actions which fail to hold up when placed in the Lumen Christi (Light of Christ).

Sacred Scripture (which these confused souls obviously don't spend much time with) makes this abundantly clear: "should you not judge those inside the Church"? (1 Corinthians 5:12), and again: "the saints will judge the world and angels" (1 Corinthians 6:2-3), and again: "the spiritual man judges all things" (1 Corinthians 2:15), and again: "Let prophets speak and the others judge" (1 Corinthians 14:29).

Not all judging is sinful. This is just common sense. Our legal system is structured in such a way that when a person commits a crime, he or she is tried before a judge and sentenced (judged) if found guilty. Likewise, it is our right (and duty) to judge words, ideas and actions which are not in conformity with the Gospels or which fail to conform to the Magisterial teaching of Christ's Church and to expose these as fallacious and/or sinful. In so doing, we are not rendering a judgment against a person. We are following the teaching of the great Saint Augustine (Bishop, Father and Doctor of the Church), who said: "Interficere errorem, diligere errantem" - kill the error, love the one who errs. This killing of what is sinful or erroneous is necessary if our charity - our love of neighbor - is to be genuine. Otherwise, our love is counterfeit. It is a fraud.

As this article explains, devout Catholics who speak out against error or immorality are often shot down immediately with the accusation that they are being "judgmental," that the Bible teaches us not to judge others, that they should just mind their own business. "After all," they’re told, "I’m not judging you and you shouldn’t be judging me. Read the Bible." But is that really what the Bible teaches?

When pressed to show where the Bible supports this, those who can come up with any response at all usually point to Jesus’ words found in the Gospel of Matthew, "Judge not, that you not be judged." Most people will stop there, with the clear conviction that the Bible teaches that we are not to pass any form of judgment on others. A closer look at this Bible verse and other related verses, however, uncovers a different understanding of Jesus’ teaching.

First, let’s look at the full context of Jesus’ words:

Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, "Let me take the speck out of your eye," when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye. (Matt. 7:1-5)

If we break this passage down line by line, it becomes clear that Jesus was not telling his disciples that they could not ever judge the behavior of others. Rather, he was cautioning them to live righteous lives themselves so that their judgment of others’ behavior would not be rash judgment and their efforts would be effective in admonishing their neighbors.

"Judge not, that you be not judged." By itself, this statement could be construed to mean that one may escape even God’s judgment simply by not judging the behavior of others. Of course, everyone is judged by God, so this cannot be a proper understanding. Jesus goes on to reformulate his statement in a positive way: "With the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get." Jesus indeed expects his disciples to judge but he warns that they, too, will be judged in a like manner.

This is reminiscent of the line in the Lord’s Prayer, "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us" (Matt. 6:12). Much more than a simple warning that God will treat us as we treat others, this is an appeal to each of us to be as much as we can like God in the way that we treat others. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains, "there has to be a vital participation, coming from the depths of the heart, in the holiness and the mercy and the love of our God. Only the Spirit by whom we live can make ‘ours’ the same mind that was in Christ Jesus" (CCC 2842).

In the next two lines Jesus cautions against hypocrisy: "Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye?" Judging hypocritically is not effective. A petty thief admonished by a bank robber only scoffs at his admonisher.

Jesus then explains how to judge rightly: "First take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye." Much to the point of this article, there can be no doubt that those final words—"take the speck out of your brother’s eye"—are, indeed, permission to judge so long as it is done rightly.

Other Bible passages which seem on the surface to indicate a condemnation of judging others’ behavior may be treated similarly in their full context. The idea of rightly judging the behavior of others can be found throughout the New Testament.

Jesus told the Jews, "Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment" (John 7:24).

He instructed his disciples what to do if someone sins against them:

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. (Matt. 18:15-17)
It is not possible to follow Jesus’ instructions without being "judgmental" of another’s behavior.

Paul, too, exhorted right judgment of other Christians: "For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. Drive out the wicked person from among you" (1 Cor. 5:12-13).

Also, "Do you not know that the saints [i.e. Christians] will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, matters pertaining to this life!…Shun immorality" (1 Cor. 6:2-18).

A look at the Old Testament reveals similar teaching: "You shall do no injustice in judgment; you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor" (Lev. 19:15).

Clearly, contrary to what many would prefer to believe, the Bible exhorts us to rightly judge the behavior of others.

Deacon Tatro should apologize for his dishonest homily.  The role of any cleric, be he priest or Deacon, is to offer sound doctrine, which the faithful have a right to - see for example Veritatis Splendor, No. 113).

In fact, I issue a challenge to Deacon Tatro.  In light of the clear and unambiguous teaching presented in this post, please explain why you decided to offer parishioners at Holy Cross Church not the fine wheat of sound Catholic doctrine, but instead served up a meal of chaff.

Deacon?

With a new priest, perhaps Saint Mary's Parish in Orange, Massachusetts will come to understand that masculinity is not a disease

As I mentioned in a previous post, I have been ostracized at the Parish where I attend Holy Mass because I have exposed the liberal agenda there to funnel monies to pro-abortion and pro-homosexualist groups via the "Catholic Campaign for Human Development" - CCHD.

Although I attempted to register at the Parish and to volunteer in Parish Ministry, I was excluded.  Such has been the hatred toward me that when I attempted to post an article on the Parish Facebook Page regarding the objectively heretical statements of Francis (See here), the article was deleted and a parishioner, whose identity remains unknown, responded by writing, "Hi Paul.  I would appreciate it if you would not post this link on our page."

Because this parish has succumbed to liberal ideology and misandry, authentic men are not welcome.  Only those who adhere to liberal "Catholicism" and an effeminized Church are welcome to register and/or participate in parish ministry.  All others need not apply.  And the same parish that couldn't welcome me because I oppose the Cult of Softness, is looking for volunteers:

As this article explains:

"Though the New Evangelization has been a major effort in the Catholic Church for over forty years, it has failed to stem the disastrous losses of the faithful in the U.S. The New Evangelization is faltering: since 2000, 14 million Catholics have left the faith, parish religious education participation of children has dropped by 24%, Catholic school attendance has dropped by 19%, baptisms of infants has dropped by 28%, baptism of adults has dropped by 31% and sacramental Catholic marriages have dropped by 41%. Something is desperately wrong with the Church’s approach to the New Evangelization.

The New Emangelization Project has documented that a key driver of the collapse of Catholicism in the U. S. is a serious and growing Catholic “man-crisis”. One third of baptized Catholic men have left the faith and the majority of those who remain “Catholic” neither know nor practice the faith and are not committed to pass the faith along to their children. Recent research shows that large numbers of young Catholic men are leaving the faith to become “Nones”, men who have no religious affiliation.The growing losses of young Catholic men will have a devastating impact on the U.S. Catholic Church in the coming decades, as older Catholic men pass away and young men fail to remain and marry in the Church, accelerating the devastating losses that have already occurred.

While there are massive cultural forces outside of the Church (e.g. secularism, pluralism, anti-Christian bias, radical feminism, pornography, media saturation, etc.) and missteps within the Church (e.g. failure to make men a priority, sex abuse scandals, homosexuality in the priesthood, etc.) that have contributed to the Catholic “man-crisis”, the New Emangelization Project has conducted dozens of interviews with top Catholic men’s evangelists[4] that suggest that a core reason for the “man-crisis” is that bishops and priests have not yet made the evangelization and catechesis of men a clear priority. Men are being ignored by the Church."

Apparently Saint Mary's Parish in Orange, Massachusetts has been okay with this.  Hatred can rationalize such discrimination.

Now that the Parish has a new priest who appears to be faithful, not to mention less hostile toward men and masculinity, with the help of God's grace, things will change.

Francis: God cannot be God without us?

And now Francis, the brilliant theologian, is asserting that God cannot be God without us.  See here.

Wrong.  God has no need for human beings. "The God who made the world and everything in it … is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything" (Acts 17:24-25).

God did not make us because he was lonely. Long before we were here, God already had "company" with his Son and the Holy Spirit, referred to in Genesis 1:26, "Let us make man in our own image."

And he didn't make us because he needed to satiate His ego. He did not make us to satisfy some craving to be worshiped. God is totally secure in who he is—without us.

But, despite not needing us, God chose to create us anyway, out of his great love: "I have loved you with an everlasting love" (Jeremiah 31:3).

God loved us before he even created us. He loved us with an "everlasting" love.

God is love (1 John 4:8), and because of that love and his wonderful creativity, he made us so we can enjoy all that he is and all that he's done.  He created us, as the Baltimore Catechism reminds us, to "know, love and serve" Him.

God created us to fulfill his eternal plan.  But, He doesn't need us.  And even if He had never created us, He would still be God.

God has always been.  He has always been God.  Francis is saying that, before we were created, He wasn't God.

Time to depose Francis?