In his zeal to destroy the Supernatural Church founded by the Lord Jesus, Francis the False Shepherd appoints heretic Cardinals

Once again, False Shepherd Francis has appointed a disturbed modernist heretic as a Cardinal.   As noted here:

"Pope Francis shocked the Church on Sunday with his announcement of 21 new cardinals, including 16 cardinal electors, to be installed at a consistory on August 27.

The appointments unsurprisingly include several overt liberals, like pro-LGBT Brazilian Archbishop Leonardo Ulrich Steiner and anti-Latin Mass Vatican liturgy chief Archbishop Arthur Roche.

But the Pope’s most radical pick is Bishop Robert McElroy of San Diego, known to faithful Catholics as arguably the most pro-homosexual, left-wing prelate in the United States.

In recent years, McElroy has sparked outrage for celebrating 'LGBT Masses,' rebuking the Church’s position on homosexual acts, urging Catholic funeral rites for active homosexuals, and throwing his support behind dissident Jesuit Fr. James Martin while blasting conservatives’ 'destructive' attitudes on sexuality.

His record on life issues isn’t much better. No bishop has defended giving Communion to pro-abortion politicians as vigorously as McElroy, who equates abortion with 'climate change' and rejects the idea that abortion is the singular, 'pre-eminent' moral issue facing the U.S. Church."

This should come as no surprise to anyone.  Francis hates the Church founded by the Lord Jesus.  See here.

We have been warned about the rise of a counterfeit church, the Mystical Body of Antichrist,  within the true Church.   See here.

"ego veni in nomine Patris mei et non accipitis me si alius venerit in nomine suo illum accipietis." John 5:43.

Norbert Schackmann: Saint Paul suffered from "verbal diarrhea" and Saint John from "spiritual arrogance"...

This morning on Facebook, an individual by the name of Norbert Schackmann insulted both Saint Paul and Saint John, accusing the former of "verbal diarrhea" and the latter of "spiritual arrogance."

An unhappy soul with a very strange and unscriptural view of these two great Apostles.

Mr. Schackmann asserted that the Apostle John was spiritually arrogant because He referred to himself as, "The disciple whom Jesus loved."  But, as this EWTN article explains:


"Our divine Redeemer had a particular affection for him above the rest of the apostles; insomuch that when St. John speaks of himself, he saith that he was 'The disciple whom Jesus loved*'; and frequently he mentions himself by this only characteristic; which he did not out of pride to distinguish himself, but out of gratitude and tender love for his blessed Master."

Father Vincent Miceli, S.J., in a wonderful essay on zeal, reminds us that, "Christian zeal is an essential qualification in the very notion of a servant of God.  It is the source of holy action in religious services that manifest love of God and of neighbor.  Christian zeal signifies that a person loves God above all things, above all men, above one's dearest, most intimate beloved ones.  And Christian zeal partakes of a priestly quality, for it signifies the consecration of God's servants to the office of rendering sacrifice and adoration to God....Consumed by zeal Himself, is it any wonder that Christ chose His Apostles, those with whom He would share His divine Priesthood forever, from among the zealous?...Extraordinary is the example of St. Paul.  He is perhaps the most zealous of the Apostles...The new Paul, no longer lived his own life but Christ lived in him..."

Mr. Schackmann doesn't see it this way. Referring to the time Saint Paul preached all night long and into the next day, Mr. Schackmann asserts that Saint Paul suffered from verbal diarrhea, thereby implying that the Good News he was bringing, which comes from Christ Jesus Himself, Who personally chose Paul, is mere excrement.

In a General Audience given by Pope Benedict XVI, His Holiness said, "... in this brief list of Paul's journeys it suffices to note how dedicated he was to proclaiming the Gospel, sparing no energy, confronting a series of grave trials, of which he left us a list in the Second Letter to the Corinthians (cf. 11: 21-28). Moreover, it is he who writes: "I do it all for the sake of the Gospel" (1 Cor 9: 23), exercising with unreserved generosity what he called "anxiety for the Churches" (2 Cor 11: 28). We see a commitment that can only be explained by a soul truly fascinated by the light of the Gospel, in love with Christ, a soul sustained by profound conviction; it is necessary to bring Christ's light to the world, to proclaim the Gospel to all of us. This seems to me to be what remains for us from this brief review of St Paul's journeys: to see his passion for the Gospel and thereby grasp the greatness, the beauty, indeed the deep need of the Gospel for all of us. Let us pray the Lord who caused St Paul to see his light, who made him hear his word and profoundly moved his heart, that we may also see his light, so that our hearts too may be moved by his Word and thus that we too may give the light of the Gospel and the truth of Christ to today's world which thirsts for it."

Amen!

*"According to tradition, John is the 'disciple whom Jesus loved', who in the Fourth Gospel laid his head against the Teacher's breast at the Last Supper (cf. Jn 13: 23), stood at the foot of the Cross together with the Mother of Jesus (cf. Jn 19: 25) and lastly, witnessed both the empty tomb and the presence of the Risen One himself (cf. Jn 20: 2; 21: 7)." (Pope Benedict XVI, General Audience).

Saint John of Avila: Doctor of the Church and Model for Priests Suffering from an Identity Crisis

During John of Avila's Canonization Mass, Pope Paul VI called him a model for modern priests suffering from an identity crisis.  The Holy Father said:


"San Juan de Avila is a priest, who in many respects we call modern, especially by the plurality of the nuances that life offers for our consideration and, therefore, our imitation. Not surprisingly he has already been proposed to the Spanish clergy as their role model and mentor in heaven. We think he may be honored as a versatile model of all priests of our time, which says that the priesthood itself is in deep crisis, an 'identity crisis' and that both the nature and mission of the priest are not now sufficient grounds to justify their presence in a society like ours, desecrated and secularized. Every priest who feels doubt about his own vocation can...get a reassuring answer. And every scholar, bent on reducing the figure of the priest in a profane and utilitarian sociology, looking at the Juan de Avila, must change their narrow and negative judgments about the role of priest in the modern world."

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

In this interview with...Father Toups, he comments on the identity and character of the priesthood, and the various challenges it faces today.

Q: Your book focuses on recovering what you call the 'doctrine of the priestly character.' Can you describe this 'doctrine' in a nutshell?

Father Toups: The 'doctrine of the priestly character' is about the permanent relationship the priest enters into with Christ the High Priest on the day of his ordination. The priest is always a priest; he is not a simple functionary who performs ritual actions, but rather he is configured to Christ in the depths of his being by what is called an ontological change.

Christ is working through him at the altar, 'This is my Body,' and in the confessional, 'I absolve you of your sins,' but also in his daily actions outside the sanctuary.

The character that the priest receives is a comfort to the faithful inasmuch as they realize that their faith is not based in the personality of the priest, but rather the Person of Christ working through the priest. On the other hand, the priest is called, like all of the faithful, to a life of holiness. The character received at ordination is actually a dynamism for priestly holiness. The more he can assimilate his life to Christ and submit to the gift he received at ordination, the more he will be a credible witness to the faithful and edify the Body of Christ.

Q: Is it your view that the nature of the priesthood is unknown or misunderstood by many priests? Is mandatory 'continuing priestly education' the answer?

Father Toups: Studies show that there has been confusion regarding the exact nature of the priesthood among priests themselves depending on the timing of their seminary training.

Immediately following the Second Vatican Council, there was confusion among priests and laity alike about the difference between the priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial priesthood. 

Vatican II’s intention was not to suppress one in order to highlight the other, but rather to recognize the universal call to holiness and the dignity of both. 

The ministerial priesthood is a specific vocation within the Church in which a man is called by Christ in the apostolic line to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Priests are different by virtue of ordination, as confirmed by the council itself in paragraph 10 of 'Lumen Gentium,' which emphasized that the baptized and the ordained share in the one and the same priesthood of Christ, but in a way that differs 'in essence and not only in degree.'

This difference certainly does not mean better or even holier -- that would be a major error -- but it does mean that there is a distinction.

Cardinal Avery Dulles points out that, if anything, the priesthood of the faithful is more exalted because the ministerial priesthood is ordered to its service. Hence, a recovery from the confusion lies in the need to understand the balance a priest is to find; he is both a servant and one who has been set aside by Christ and the Church to stand 'in persona Christi' -- not as a personal honor, but as 'one who has come to serve and not be served.' 

The priest need not be embarrassed about this high calling, but should boldly live it out in the midst of the world. Pope John Paul the Great regularly reminded priests: 'Do not be afraid to be who you are!'

This brings us to the second part of your question, namely, is mandatory 'continuing priestly education' the answer?

In the book, I use the term 'formation,' not education -- though learning is an important, component part.

Ongoing formation is essential for every Christian vocation. In the midst of full liturgical schedules, parish councils, leaking roofs and hospital visits, the priest must continually open his heart and mind to Christ in prayer and study, annual retreats and seminars, as well as times of recreation and vacation, if he is to thrive as an individual and as a man of faith.

Ongoing formation is about deepening one’s interiority and fostering a relationship with Jesus Christ. It is about an ongoing conversion that reminds the priest who he is as a minister of the Gospel and whose he is as a son of God."

If we are to have an authentic reform within the Church, and a new Springtime of evangelization, we will need more mature priests who fashion themselves after masculine saints like John of Avila.

Weak, tepid priests will not inspire the faithful to become the Church Militant and to fight against the Devil and his angels while being salt and light during a time of diabolical disorientation.

We need men who are filled with missionary zeal and who are determined to challenge the culture while bringing souls back to Holy Mother Church.

Effeminate priests and Deacons, sissy clerics, are not up to the task at hand.

Does Cardinal O'Malley condone such violence toward children?

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in its document entitled Considerations Regarding Proposals To Give Legal Recognition To Unions Between Homosexual Persons, had this to say, "As experience has shown, the absence of sexual complementarity in these unions creates obstacles in the normal development of children who would be placed in the care of such persons. They would be deprived of the experience of either fatherhood or motherhood. Allowing children to be adopted by persons living in such unions would actually mean doing violence to these children, in the sense that their condition of dependency would be used to place them in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development. This is gravely immoral and in open contradiction to the principle, recognized also in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, that the best interests of the child, as the weaker and more vulnerable party, are to be the paramount consideration in every case." (No. 7).

But in the controversy which has erupted in the wake of Cardinal O'Malley's decision to help find a Catholic school for the ward of the lesbian parents who was initially denied admission on the basis of their illicit relationship, Cardinal O'Malley has not only advanced a false notion of compassion, but he has failed to address the violence which is done to children when they are placed in "an environment that is not conducive to their full human development." Why is this? Does Cardinal O'Malley condone this violence to children? If not, should he be finding a Catholic school for the ward of lesbian parents? Is this not tacit approval of an illicit relationship and the environment to which an innocent child is being exposed?

Is Cardinal O'Malley crippled by lukewarmness? Last year, when many faithful Catholics were scandalized over Senator Ted Kennedy's very public funeral liturgy, His Eminence responded by asserting that, "At times, even in the Church, zeal can lead people to issue harsh judgments and impute the worst motives to one another." How true. But, as Father Bede Jarrett, O.P., has reminded us, "Not only may I sin by being angry when I should not, but I may sin by not being angry when I should be. If my reason tells me that it is right to be angry, then I disobey God when I refuse to give place to wrath; for, as the New Testament teaches, it is possible to 'be angry and sin not.' (Eph 4:26). Our Lord Himself, when need arose, roped together a bundle of cords and drove from the Temple those who trafficked in the House of Prayer, and down the front steps He flung the tables of the money-changers. Perhaps for most of us, the fault is not that we are too angry, but that we are not angry enough. Think of all the evils that are in the world, that are known to all, admitted to exist by public press and on public platform. Would they have survived thus far, had folk all shown the indignant anger of Christ? Hypocrisy, cant, and the whole blatant injustice that stalks naked and unashamed in national life - may not our own weakness and silence have helped to render impotent all efforts to reduce these terrible things?" (Classic Catholic Meditations, p. 168, Sophia Institute Press).

Yes, zeal can sometimes lead to excess. But when James and John displayed an excess of zeal, asking our Lord to rain down destruction on those who wouldn't accept Him, He gave them evidence of his admiration for their zeal as he gave them the name Boanerges: Sons of Thunder. But, as Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer reminded us, we must "Fight against that weakness which makes you lazy and careless in your spiritual life. Remember that it might well be the beginning of lukewarmness...and, in the words of the Scripture*, God will vomit the lukewarm out of his mouth."

Lukewarmness in the Church has brought us nothing but disaster. Can we not see it? Yes, zeal must be tempered by the Cardinal Virtues of prudence and temperance. But God hates the lukewarm. It is a lukewarm Church which fails to deliver the Gospel with courage, with fortitude. The faithful are looking for shepherds, not for leaders who are crippled by lukewarmness and moral cowardice.


* Rev 3:16.

A harmless religion which offends no one....

It was John Henry Cardinal Newman who wrote, "What is Satan's device in this day?...He has taken the brighter side of the Gospel - its tidings of comfort, its precepts of love; all darker, deeper views of man's condition and prospects being comparitively forgotten. This is the religion natural to a civilized age, and well has Satan dressed and completed it into an idol of the Truth...Religion is pleasant and easy; benevolence is the chief virtue; intolerance, bigotry, excess of zeal, are the first of sins." (Parochial and Plain Sermons, vol. 1, sermon 24).

Dr. von Hildebrand notes how, "burning zeal for the truth, for God, for Christ and His holy Church, is looked on as fanatical, intolerant, and incompatible with charity. Of this burning holy zeal, which every true Christian necessarily possesses, Newman says: 'Now I fear we lack altogether....firmness, manliness, godly severity. We are ever-tender in dealing with sin and sinners. We are deficient in the jealous custody of the revealed Truths which Christ has left us. We allow men to speak against the Church, its ordinances, or its teaching, without remonstrating with them. We do not separate from heretics, nay, we object to the word as if uncharitable....' In the saints we find..union of burning zeal and triumphant love of neighbor - one has only to think of the Apostles, of St. Peter, St. Paul, St. John, or of St. Athanasius, St. Augustine, St. Francis de Sales, St. Catherine of Siena, St. Teresa of Avila, and countless others....But today we find a twofold evil: harmlessness and loss of holy fear, as well as loss of burning zeal for supernatural things..."

We congratulate ourselves on how "civilized" we've become. How tolerant. But we forget that lukewarness is the Devil in disguise. Do we hate sin and error? If not, then we do not really love God. Our love of God is a sham, a counterfeit, a fraud. It is not without reason that God will say to the lukewarm: "I know your works; I know that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either cold or hot. So, because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I will vomit you out of my mouth." (Revelation 3: 16).

Which will we embrace: a harmless religion which makes no demands (a natural religion which prepares the way for the Man of Sin) or a supernatural faith which unites burning zeal for truth with love of neighbor? Do we even understand what charity consists of? If not, we should reflect very carefully on 1822 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Natural religion, harmless religion, is the religion of Antichrist. This is the seduction of our time: we are overwhelmed by a culture which exhorts us to be "reasonable." To be "tolerant." But, as Pope Benedict XVI writes (in his book Jesus of Nazareth): "If we had to choose today, would Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Mary, the son of the Father, have a chance? Do we really know Jesus at all? Do we understand him? Do we not perhaps have to make an effort, today as always, to get to know him all over again? The tempter is not so crude as to suggest to us directly that we should worship the devil. He merely suggests that we opt for the reasonable decision, that we choose to give priority to a planned and thoroughly organized world, where God may have his place as a private concern but must not interfere in our essential purposes..." (p. 41).

"Be reasonable," our culture says: "Don't rock the boat, what do you care if a woman wants to have an abortion? After all, that's her affair. You should stop being so fanatical and intolerant. You believe life is sacred? Good, but keep your beliefs in your Church." And: "Why shouldn't people of the same sex be married? Stop denying them their civil rights. You are being judgmental. After all, God is love."

The Pope has said it. The Devil merely suggests that we opt for the reasonable decision. But we do so at the price of apostasy.

Zeal for your house will consume me

Readings from the Third Sunday of Lent:

Reading 1Ex 20:1-17 or 20:1-3, 7-8, 12-17

In those days, God delivered all these commandments: "I, the LORD, am your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. You shall not have other gods besides me. You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth; you shall not bow down before them or worship them. For I, the LORD, your God, am a jealous God, inflicting punishment for their fathers' wickedness on the children of those who hate me, down to the third and fourth generation; but bestowing mercy down to the thousandth generation on the children of those who love me and keep my commandments. "You shall not take the name of the LORD, your God, in vain.For the LORD will not leave unpunished the one who takes his name in vain. "Remember to keep holy the sabbath day. Six days you may labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD, your God. No work may be done then either by you, or your son or daughter, or your male or female slave, or your beast, or by the alien who lives with you. In six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them; but on the seventh day he rested. That is why the LORD has blessed the sabbath day and made it holy. "Honor your father and your mother, that you may have a long life in the land which the LORD, your God, is giving you. You shall not kill. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. You shall not covet your neighbor's house.You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male or female slave, nor his ox or ass, nor anything else that belongs to him."

Responsorial PsalmPs 19:8, 9, 10, 11

R. (John 6:68c) Lord, you have the words of everlasting life.

The law of the LORD is perfect,refreshing the soul; The decree of the LORD is trustworthy,giving wisdom to the simple.

R. Lord, you have the words of everlasting life.

The precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; the command of the LORD is clear, enlightening the eye.

R. Lord, you have the words of everlasting life.

The fear of the LORD is pure, enduring forever; the ordinances of the LORD are true, all of them just.

R. Lord, you have the words of everlasting life.

They are more precious than gold, than a heap of purest gold; sweeter also than syrup or honey from the comb.

R. Lord, you have the words of everlasting life.

Reading II 1 Cor 1:22-25

Brothers and sisters: Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those who are called, Jews and Greeks alike, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

Gospel Jn 2:13-25

Since the Passover of the Jews was near, Jesus went up to Jerusalem. He found in the temple area those who sold oxen, sheep, and doves, as well as the money changers seated there. He made a whip out of cords and drove them all out of the temple area, with the sheep and oxen, and spilled the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables, and to those who sold doves he said,"Take these out of here, and stop making my Father's house a marketplace." His disciples recalled the words of Scripture, Zeal for your house will consume me. At this the Jews answered and said to him,"What sign can you show us for doing this?" Jesus answered and said to them, "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up." The Jews said, "This temple has been under construction for forty-six years, and you will raise it up in three days?" But he was speaking about the temple of his body. Therefore, when he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they came to believe the Scripture and the word Jesus had spoken. While he was in Jerusalem for the feast of Passover, many began to believe in his name when they saw the signs he was doing.But Jesus would not trust himself to them because he knew them all, and did not need anyone to testify about human nature.He himself understood it well."

The Lord God has commanded us, "You shall not kill." There are nine words in Hebrew for taking a life (I have addressed this in a previous post). The word used in Exodus 20: 13 for "Thou shalt not kill" is ratsach, a strong verb used to indicate an intentional and unjustified act of murder. And yet, the murder of innocent unborn children continues. The Gospel reading tells us that after Jesus cleansed the Temple, the Apostles remembered the words of Scripture, "Zeal for your house will consume me."

Zeal for your house will consume me. Let's reflect very carefully on these words as we ponder the Word of God in 1 Corinthians 3: 16-17: "Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy that person; for the temple of God, which you are, is holy."

Zeal for your house will consume me. The blood of the innocents cries out to the Living God as surely as it did when Cain murdered his brother Abel. If our society does not repent of its crimes, if it does not turn away from murdering the innocent and destroying God's Temple, then Jesus will fashion "another whip."