Bishops condemn political violence

In a statement issued in the wake of the attack, the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Archbishop Timothy Broglio, said, “Together with my brother bishops, we condemn political violence, and we offer our prayers for President Trump, and those who were killed or injured. We also pray for our country and for an end to political violence, which is never a solution to political disagreements.”

Archbishop Broglio invited “all people of goodwill to join us in praying for peace in our country,” and invoked the prayers of Mary, Mother of God and Patroness of the Americas.

Lying and homicide are marks of the Devil. See

here.

RNC Commentary here

Faithful Catholics should resist Bishop Mitchell Rozanski, a modernist thug who wants to use Covid-19 as an excuse for prohibiting Communion on the tongue

As noted here:

"Tension is brewing between the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and the bishop of Springfield, Massachusetts, who is forbidding Holy Communion on the tongue in spite of the USCCB's recent decision to the contrary.

In anticipation of Massachusetts' planned multiphase reopening, Springfield bishop Mitchell T. Rozanski sent his clergy a document titled 'Re-Opening Considerations' to give guidelines and suggestions for conducting public Masses as they resume.

Maintaining previous diocesan restrictions and state guidelines, Rozanski is requiring that at public Masses, Holy Communion is offered in the hand only, Holy Water fonts remain empty and covered, social distancing is enforced at a minimum of six feet between individuals and masks be worn at all times. 

Rozanski's prohibition of Holy Communion on the tongue contradicts the USCCB's "Guidelines for Sacraments and Pastoral Care" published in late April, which states:

We have carefully considered the question of Communion on the tongue vs. Communion in the hand. Given the Church's existing guidance on this point (see Redemptionis Sacramentum, no. 92), and recognizing the differing judgments and sensibilities that are involved, we believe that, with the precautions listed here, it is possible to distribute on the tongue without unreasonable risk.

Bishop Rozanski has no right to prohibit Holy Communion on the tongue and faithful Catholics should resist this ecclesial modernist thug to his face.  A Canon Law expert here.

More on Rozanski here, here and here

Update on Bishop Rozanski: Complaint filed against him.  See here.

The USCCB: The Nicene Creed is professed at all Sunday Masses and Solemnities within the Catholic Church

As this link from the USCCB makes clear:

"The bishops at the Council of Nicea (AD 325), in order to ensure that Jesus was professed as the eternal Son of God, equal to the Father, stated that he is "the Son of God, begotten from the Father, the only-begotten, that is from the substance of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, the same substance ( homoousion) with the Father..." The Creed of the Council of Constantinople (381), which is professed at all Sunday Masses and Solemnities within the Catholic Church, similarly stated: "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, of the same substance ( homoousion) with the Father."

The Nicene Creed is professed, "..at all Sunday Masses and Solemnities within the Catholic Church."

Some clerics, puffed up with pride, have decided on their own (without the authority to do so) to abandon the Nicene Creed in favor of the Apostles Creed or no Creed at all.  I have addressed this here.

At Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts, the Nicene Creed has been abandoned.  Ironically, the Missalette used by the Parish indicates, on page 9, that Catholics profess the Nicene Creed on Sundays and Solemnities.  See photograph of this Missalette below.

If the USCCB is to be held as credible with regard to its position regarding same-sex civil unions, it must condemn the actions of Francis

The USCCB has stated that:

"Marriage is a unique good in itself. Nothing compares to the unique partnership of husband and wife, who through their sexual difference form a life-giving communion. No relationship between persons of the same sex can be the same as that between a man and a woman, nor should they ever be treated as analogous to marriage in any way. Thus, legal categories such as "civil unions" or "domestic partnerships" that claim equivalent or analogous status to marriage are wrong and unjust, harmful both to the person and to society. Legal categories such as "civil unions" or "domestic partnerships" should never be treated as analogous to marriage. Such legal approval of "civil unions" contributes to the erosion of the authentic meaning of marriage. As such, they are never acceptable. Basic human rights are not protected but violated by the erosion and redefinition of marriage."

The CDF has also addressed this issue.  See here.

But Francis has signalled his support for recognizing same-sex civil unions.  In a Lifesite News article which may Be found here, we read:

"Pope Francis seems to have affirmed recognizing homosexual relationships under law, an apparent contradiction of the Church's longheld teaching.

In a new book-length interview, the Pope reiterates his strong opposition to same-sex 'marriage,' but recommends using the term 'civil unions' instead.

'Let us call things by their names. Matrimony is between a man and a woman. This is the precise term. Let us call the same-sex union a ‘civil union,’ he said.

Pope Francis made the comment during more than a dozen conversations with French journalist Dominique Wolton, who published the Pope’s words in a 432-page book titled Politics and Society. It was published in French on Wednesday.

The Catholic Church teaches that since homosexual acts are 'intrinsically disordered,' Catholics cannot approve of same-sex civil unions."

If the USCCB is to be taken seriously with regard to its teaching on same-sex civil unions, it must condemn the language used by Francis.  And it must do so immediately.  Otherwise that body will, through the sin of omission, forfeit its credibility.

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 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.

Will the USCCB finally wake up and smell the coffee?

A new report of the USCCB shows conclusively that that the clerical sex abuse scandal is a crisis not of pedophilia but of homosexuality.

Readers of this Blog know that I've been saying just that for 15 years.  See here and here for example.

Before entering into any state of life, a divine vocation is necessary. This because without such a vocation, it is difficult if not impossible to fulfil the obligations which pertain to that state and to obtain salvation. This is particularly true for the ministerial priesthood or any other ecclesiastical state. After all, it was Our Lord Who said: "He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up another way, the same is a thief and a robber" (John 10:1).

Consequently, the man who takes holy orders without a call from God is convicted of theft in taking by force a dignity which God has not called him to and does not desire to bestow upon him. This is the teaching of Saint Paul:

"Neither doth any man take the honor to himself, but he that is called by God, as Aaron was. So Christ also did not glorify Himself that He might be made a high priest; but he that said unto Him: Thou art My Son; this day I have begotten Thee." (Hebrews 5:4,5).

It matters not then how learned or prudent or holy a man may be. No man may place himself into the holy sanctuary unless he is first called and introduced to the same by Almighty God. Jesus Our Lord was certainly the most learned and holy among all men, full of grace and truth (John 1:14), the Son of Man in Whom were (and are) hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Colossians 2:3). And yet, Jesus required a divine call to assume the dignity of the priesthood.

This is the teaching of the Council of Trent. That the Church regards the man who assumes the priesthood without a vocation not as a minister but as a robber:

"Decernit sancta Synodus eos qui ea (ministeria) propria temeritate sibi sumunt, omnes, non Ecclesiae ministros, sed fures et latrones per ostium non ingressos habendos esse" (Session 23, cap. 4).

Those who seize the priesthood without a vocation may labor and toil exhaustively. But their labors will profit them very little before God. In fact, the very works which would be considered of much merit when performed by others will deserve chastisement for such souls. Because such men are not in conformity with the divine will, not having a vocation to the state of life which they have usurped, the Lord Jesus will not accept their toils:

"I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of hosts, and I will not receive a gift of your hand" (Malachi 1:10).

Not only will God refuse the gifts of their hand, He will punish the works of the minister who has entered the sanctuary without being called; without a vocation:

"What stranger soever cometh to it (the Tabernacle) shall be slain." (Numbers 1:51).

Bearing all of this in mind, please read the following which first appeared in The Wanderer and may be found at the Faithfulvoice.com website:

On October 1, 1986, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published an instruction entitled, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on Pastoral Service for Homosexual Persons, signed by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger and approved by Pope John Paul II.

In this Instruction, Cardinal Ratzinger writes, "It is necessary to point out that the particular inclination of a homosexual person, though not a sin in itself, nevertheless constitutes a more or less strong tendency to an intrinsically evil behavior from the moral standpoint. For this reason, the very inclination should be considered as objectively disordered." (No. 3).

This would appear to be especially significant since 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." Now, irregularities arise either from defect (ex defectu) or from crime (ex delicto). It seems clear to me that a homosexual inclination, which Cardinal Ratzinger has referred to as "objectively disordered," constitutes an irregularity ex defectu.

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."

It's so encouraging that the USCCB is now playing catchup with this Blog. The question is: Will they finally act on the evidence and address the homosexual problem?

I've got another pot of coffee brewing. Morning Sunshine!

St. Cecilia's Parish in Boston: Ignoring USCCB Guidelines for Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons

St. Cecilia's Parish in Boston, which attempted to have a "Gay Pride" Mass last month, is now announcing in its bulletin: "Please join the entire Saint Cecilia Parish community for next Sunday's eleven o'clock liturgy where we will reaffirm that Saint Cecilia is a place of welcome for all, including the LGBT community.." (See here).

Now the USCCB has already issued guidelines which stress emphatically that persons with a homosexual inclination are to be treated with "dignity, respect and compassion" and made to feel welcome.  But these same guidelines also stress that, "The ministry of the Church to persons with a homosexual inclination must always have the overriding aim of fostering the greatest possible friendship with God, participation in the divine life of the Trinity through sanctifying grace.  Integral to friendship with God is holiness.  God is holy and all who would come near to God must likewise become holy." (p. 12).  We haven't seen this emphasis in St. Cecilia's "rainbow ministry."  On the contrary, we've witnessed a departure from Church teaching.

This is all the more troubling as the USCCB's guidelines stress that, "All ministry to persons with a homosexual inclination must be guided by Church teaching on sexuality...'Departure from the Church's teaching, or silence about it, in an effort to provide pastoral care is neither caring nor pastoral." (p. 13; see footnote 30).

Lastly, the USCCB's guidelines make clear that, "It can be helpful for persons who find themselves with homosexual attractions to gather together in mutual understanding and support. This can be particularly the case because persons with a homosexual inclination may feel 'different,' which can lead to isolation and alienation, which are risk factors for an unhealthy life, including unchaste behaviors. Support groups, noted for their adherence to Church teaching, for persons who experience same-sex attraction continue to be an important part of Church ministries and are to be encouraged. Persons with a homosexual inclination should not be encouraged to define themselves primarily in terms of their sexual inclination, however, or to participate in 'gay subcultures,' which often tend to promote immoral lifestyles. Rather, they should be encouraged to form relationships with the wider community." (p. 22).

Note this last passage.  Persons with a homosexual inclination should not be encouraged to define themselves primarily in terms of their sexual inclination.  Isn't that exactly what St. Cecilia's Parish is doing when it says that the parish is a place of welcome for the "LGBT community"?

Why is it that St. Cecilia's Parish continues to encourage persons with a homosexual inclination to define themselves as "gay," "lesbian," bi-sexual," or "transgendered"? If you doubt this, examine the image above from the parish website which includes a homosexual rainbow symbol encircling the cross. Why isn't the parish encouraging such persons to view themselves as children of God created in the Imago Dei (the image and likeness of God) who have a vocation to holiness of life rather than as "gay Christians" or members of an "LGBT community"?

What do you think?

Cardinal O'Malley, when will you do something about this?  And when will you insist that St. Cecilia's ministry to homosexual persons be guided by Church teaching?

Watering down the Word of God to suit the Cult of Softness

The Latin Vulgate (see the Douay-Rheims Bible) indicates that the effeminate will not inherit the Kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:10). But the New American Bible, which is used by the USCCB, omits the word effeminate:


1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (Latin Vulgate):

Verse 9: "Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: Neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers:

an nescitis quia iniqui regnum Dei non possidebunt nolite errare neque fornicarii neque idolis servientes neque adulteri

Verse 10: Nor the effeminate nor liers with mankind nor thieves nor covetous nor drunkards nor railers nor extortioners shall possess the kingdom of God.

neque molles neque masculorum concubitores neque fures neque avari neque ebriosi neque maledici neque rapaces regnum Dei possidebunt."


1Corinthians 6: 9-10 (New American Bible) posted online by the USCCB:

Verse 9: "Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites

Verse 10: nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God."

Why do you think this is so?  The Latin Vulgate, which we have obtained from the great St. Jerome, is the most precise translation of the Sacred Scriptures available.  There are many other problems with recent translations of the Scriptures.  But my focus here is on this passage.  Why has the word "effeminate" been dropped from 1 Corinthians 6?

Dr. Leon Podles writes, "Walter Ong, having been formed in a masculine, Jesuit, clerical milieu does not seem to be aware of how feminized Christianity had become even before the 1960s, but he saw a rapid shift in the Catholic Church in the 1960s toward even greater feminization...The contrasts of Christianity, grace and sin, life and death, have been toned down with a considerable loss of emotional power.  Without this power, the popular appeal of the liturgy has declined (even with a more accessible language) and church attendance has plummeted...Even the change from Latin to the vernacular was also a symptom of feminization, according to Ong.  Latin had been a means of maintaining a Latin culture in the Roman Catholic clergy.  A language restricted to men is common; it is a sign of masculine separation from the feminine world.  After it became a learned language, Latin was learned almost exclusively by men.  The system of education that used Latin and centered around Latin literature was centered around contest and disputation and was confined almost entirely to men.  The disappearance of Latin was part of the demasculinization of the clergy.." (The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity, pp. 133-135).

The Cult of Softness has made such inroads that it has crippled the inner life of the Church.  Liturgy has been feminized  And now, the Sacred Scriptures (the very Word of God) must be rewritten so as not to offend more "civilized" and "refined" tastes; so as not to offend modern man.  The Christian faith must be replaced by a self-worship which cloaks itself in language which purports to be Christian but which nevertheless remains a language which has been watered down to make it more acceptable to modernity.

Related reading: The prophecy of Saint Nilus.

"...and to such miserable beings their crimes become their religion.."

Those who abandon Divine Revelation and the Natural Law will no longer seek God and His precepts and Commandments but will instead pursue their own lusts and fantasies. Such people will create and adore their own gods which are almost always a mythical projection of their own vices. They attribute a religious dimension to these vices to "baptize" them, to justify them in their own darkened minds.


It was Saint Cyprian of Carthage, writing against the Greco-Roman pagan world and its vices, who said:

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

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

There is a retreat from truth across society and throughout the Church.  The USCCB faces a critical choice at this moment: will it opt to clean house and turn back the radical homosexual agenda within the Catholic Church in the United States?  Or will it continue to slide down the slippery slope of moral corruption and apostasy from the True Faith?


Related reading: Sodomite activists issue statement of support for Bishop Kicanas.

Related reading: Pope Benedict XVI on the root of the sexual abuse scandals.