Pope Francis: Contradicting God's Holy Word

(Vatican Radio) "Capital punishment is cruel, inhuman and an offense to the dignity of human life. In today's world, the death penalty is "inadmissible, however serious the crime" that has been committed. That was Pope Francis’ unequivocal message to members of the International Commission against the death penalty who met with him on Friday morning in the Vatican." See here.

God's Holy Word tells us: "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.  Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience." Romans 13: 1-5.

Does Pope Francis really mean to contradict God's Holy Word?

The thought of St. Augustine, Father and Doctor of the Church:

"The same divine authority that forbids the killing of a human being establishes certain exceptions, as when God authorizes killing by a general law or when He gives an explicit commission to an individual for a limited time.

The agent who executes the killing does not commit homicide; he is an instrument as is the sword with which he cuts. Therefore, it is in no way contrary to the commandment, 'Thou shalt not kill' to wage war at God's bidding, or for the representatives of public authority to put criminals to death, according to the law, that is, the will of the most just reason.

(The City of God, Book 1, chapter 21)


The thought of St. Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church:

"It is written: 'Wizards thou shalt not suffer to live' (Ex. 22:18); and: 'In the morning I put to death all the wicked of the land' (Ps. 100:8). …

Every part is directed to the whole, as imperfect to perfect, wherefore every part exists naturally for the sake of the whole. For this reason we see that if the health of the whole human body demands the excision of a member, because it became putrid or infectious to the other members, it would be both praiseworthy and healthful to have it cut away. Now every individual person is related to the entire society as a part to the whole. Therefore if a man be dangerous and infectious to the community, on account of some sin, it is praiseworthy and healthful that he be killed in order to safeguard the common good, since 'a little leaven corrupteth the whole lump' (1 Cor. 5:6).
(Summa Theologiae, II, II, q. 64, art. 2)


The fact that the evil ones, as long as they live, can be corrected from their errors does not prohibit that they may be justly executed, for the danger which threatens from their way of life is greater and more certain than the good which may be expected from their improvement.

They also have at that critical point of death the opportunity to be converted to God through repentance. And if they are so obstinate that even at the point of death their heart does not draw back from malice, it is possible to make a quite probable judgment that they would never come away from evil.”

(Summa contra gentiles, Book III, chapter 146

Pope Francis has been held up as a model of humility by liberals and so-called "progressives" in the Church. Perhaps then he should respect Sacred Scripture and Tradition (the Depositum Fidei) on this subject?

Pope Francis asserts that the death penalty is ALWAYS inadmissible.  He has, therefore, set himself against the Magisterial teaching of the Church as expressed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

"Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor..." (CCC, 2267).

The Democratic Party has become the enemy of religion

As noted here, Catholics are abandoning a Democratic Party which is increasingly hostile toward religion and religious values.

According to the article, "Steve Krueger, head of the group Catholic Democrats, notes that conservative bishops have been beating the war drums since the George W. Bush administration, even going so far in some cases as to argue that 'good' Catholics can’t vote for Democrats because of their support for abortion rights and, more recently, same-sex marriage — which has resulted in an increased politicization of the church.

Stephen Schneck of Catholic University’s Institute for Policy Research and Catholic Studies has noted that there’s been a certain 'distillation' of the Catholic vote as a record number of presumably more liberal-leaning Catholics — some one-third of those raised Catholic — have left the faith altogether. 'More and more of those who remain are those who actively choose to embrace the church and its teachings,' he wrote.

But neither of these trends explains why white Catholics have abandoned the Democratic Party so suddenly and so dramatically. After all, in 2008 Barack Obama managed to keep his margin of loss of white Catholic voters to John McCain to just 5 points. But four years later, he lost the white Catholic vote to Mitt Romney by a stunning 19 points.

Krueger points to the Catholic bishop’s demonization in 2011 of the 'contraceptive mandate' in the Affordable Care Act, and their subsequent ginning up of the war on 'religious liberty' — which was joined by elements of the religious right and fused with its war on Obamacare — as another factor helping to drive Catholics toward the GOP. And the numbers bear Krueger out. According to Pew, between 2009 and 2014, the number of white Catholics who said the Obama administration — and by inference the Democratic Party — was 'unfriendly to religion' more than doubled from 17 percent to 36 percent.

'The shift in the Catholic vote should really be a wakeup call to the Democrats, says Krueger. 'White Catholics are 18 percent of the electorate and Catholics vote 1 to 2 percentage points above their representation in the overall population. This is a significant voting bloc that now perceives Republicans as being more welcoming to people of faith.'"

David Carlin is a lifelong Democrat. From 1981 to 1992, he served as a Rhode Island state senator, serving as senate majority leader in 1989 and 1990. In 1992 he was his district's Democratic candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives. For more than twenty years, Mr. Carlin has been a professor of philosophy and sociology at the Community College of Rhode Island.

In his book entitled "Can a Catholic Be a Democrat: How the Party I Loved Became the Enemy of My Religion," he writes:

"..an excuse that appeals to the 'separation of church and state' seems to be among the silliest rationales for a Catholic's support of the secularized Democratic Party. This separation, so we're told, is enshrined in the First Amendment to the Constitution, and it prohibits the intrusion of religion into the affairs of government. Yet the First Amendment says nothing about keeping religion out of government; it's concerned instead with keeping government out of religion. Its two religion 'clauses' say (1) that there will be no 'establishment of religion' and (2) that there will be no interference with the 'free exercise' of religion. That's it: government must keep its hands off religion; nothing about religion keeping its hands off government.

However, it should be considered that in writing the religion section of the First Amendment, the framers were no doubt remembering the history of England and how the government of that nation, from the time of Henry VIII until what was then the present day (the 1780's), established a national religion and interfered with the free exercise of dissenting religions. This was a case of government controlling religion, but at the same time it was a case of religion controlling government. That is to say, government persecuted, or at least discriminated against, all religions other than the Church of England, but one of the main reasons it did so was because the Church of England, both through its bishops and its lay members, had tremendous influence over government (only members of the Church of England could serve in Parliament or government). In other words, in its competition with other churches, not to mention its competition with outright infidelity, the Church of England used government to put down the church's rivals.

This is the kind of thing people, many of them Catholics, have in mind when they say that advocating laws against abortion or same-sex marriage violates the principle of separation of church and state. They fear that an alliance of conservative churches might someday gain enough governmental power to impose religious values on everybody else, non-believers included. This is what they mean when they speak, as they often do, of the looming danger of 'theocracy.' Behind the moral-conservative political activism of Christian churches they see would-be theocrats, or 'dominionists,' who want to take over America, stamp out abortion, subjugate women, drive homosexuals back into the closet, and enact other items allegedly on the agenda of the Religious Right. Yet this would be clearly un-American, violating the philosophical, religious, and moral pluralism that has long been, and should be, characteristic of the United States.

One obvious and oft-given answer is this: few liberals have made similar objections to the modern civil-rights movement, which was in large measure inspired by religion and based on churches. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Protestant minister - even, it might be said, a Christian martyr. Are the objectors ready to say that the great legislative fruits of this religio-political movement, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, are illegitimate, that they're instances of the imposition of theocratic values? Will they say that the spirit of American 'pluralism' demanded that the pro-segregation values of the KKK and other racists should have been respected? Of course not. And so it appears that what's at stake for these people isn't a matter of principle (separation of church and state) but a matter of policy. Some policies they like )e.g., civil rights legislation), and some they dislike (e.g., laws restricting abortion). A religion-driven politics is okay when it produces laws they like, but it's very naughty when it produces laws they don't like. And so we may conclude (may we not?) that all this talk about the separation of church and state is nothing but dust they throw in people's eyes." (Can a Catholic Be a Democrat: How the Party I Loved Became the Enemy of My Religion, pp. 129-131, Sophia Institute Press, 2006).

Pope Benedict XVI has spoken clearly enough. And he has condemned "gay marriage" and abortion as "among the most insidious and dangerous challenges" to society. The Democratic Party advances both.

And this is leading to a major crisis for the Party.

When mercy is viewed as a license to sin

In a post which may be found here, Father Robert McTeigue, SJ writes: "Very often, I hear folks speak of mercy as if it were a cancellation of justice. On this view, “justice” means, “you have to pay off your debt—or else.” “Mercy”, then, says, “About that debt—never mind!” And who wouldn’t breathe a sigh of relief when told that one’s debt has been dismissed, made irrelevant? That’s an appealing, even tempting image of justice and mercy, especially if you’ve ever been deeply in debt. Unfortunately, such a view tragically distorts justice and mercy. If left uncorrected, such a view runs the risk of making us unable to see or feel what is, to borrow a phrase from C.S. Lewis, “the weight of glory.” In other words, the roots of human dignity and the very character of God may be obscured by such a facile, beguiling, and impoverished view of mercy and justice."

While there are so many good and faithful priests who do preach on the reality of sin and the need for reconciliation, there are also many who have no love for the souls under their care. As a consequence, these priests neglect the souls entrusted to them and make no attempt to stress the reality of sin and the need for ongoing conversion.

For such priests and their deluded followers, Jesus was little more than a moronic hippy who traveled the countryside preaching non-judgmentalism (who am I to judge*) and a "peace and joy" which includes putting out the welcome mat for any sort of evil or perversion.

When Jesus began His public ministry, He did so with the word "repent" (Matthew 4:17). And He advised the woman caught in adultery to "sin no more" (John 8:11). Likewise, in the case of the man cured at the Pool of Bethesda, Jesus advised him to "sin no more lest something worse befall thee" (John 5:14).When queried on the subject of how many would be saved, Jesus replied "few" because the "gate" to Heaven is "narrow" (Matthew 7:13-14). And while no one can pinpoint the precise meaning of the word "few," still, it is sobering that Jesus chose the image of a narrow gate.

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

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

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

The Catechism of the Catholic Church has this to say about presumption: "There are two kinds of presumption. Either man presumes upon his own capacities, (hoping to be able to save himself without help from on high), or he presumes upon God's almighty power or his mercy (hoping to obtain his forgiveness without conversion and glory without merit)." (CCC, 2092).

The words of Sacred Scripture remind us that such an attitude is very, very wrong: "Of forgiveness be not overconfident, adding sin upon sin. Say not:' Great is his mercy; my many sins he will forgive.' For mercy and anger alike are with him; upon the wicked alights his wrath." (Sirach 5:5-7).


If we are living a sacramental life, confessing our sins and receiving Jesus in the Eucharist as often as possible (at the very least on Sundays and Holy Days, which is our obligation) while praying each day for His grace and mercy, we have nothing to worry about. This isn't presumption. This is confidence in God's mercy as we strive every day to conform our will to His divine will. But God will not be mocked. He can neither deceive nor be deceived.

* "Who am I to judge."  This unfortunate phrase used by Pope Francis has sown much confusion.  Especially amongst liberal Catholics whose ignorance of Sacred Scripture is nothing short of appalling.

Does Pope Francis really want the Catholic world to believe that all judging should be left to God? If so, he is gravely ignorant of the teaching of God's Holy Word.

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 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.

Thank you Father McTeigue for providing your readers with wheat rather than chaff.

Wild Bill on the Cult of Softness...

On April 6, 1941, Bishop Fulton John Sheen gave a sermon on his radio show "The Catholic Hour" in which he reminded listeners that, "The basic spirit of the modern world for the last century has been a determination to escape the Cross." He told his audience as well that, "There is no such thing as living without a cross. We are free only to choose between crosses." And then he asked them: "Will it be the Cross of Christ which redeems us from our sins, or will it be the double cross, the swastika, the hammer and sickle, the fasces"?

Bishop Sheen believed, as I do, that America is at a crossroads. In his own words, "We in America are now faced with the threat of that double cross...Our choice is not: Will we or will we not have more discipline, more respect for law, more order, more sacrifice; but, where will we get it? Will we get it from without, or from within, Will it be inspired by Sparta or Calvary? By Valhalla or Gethsemane? By militarism or religion? By the double cross or the Cross? By Caesar or by God? That is the choice facing America today. The hour of false freedom is past. No longer can we have education without discipline, family life without sacrifice, individual existence without moral responsibility, economics and politics without subservience to the common good. We are now only free to say whence it shall come. We will have a sword. Shall it be only the sword that thrusts outward to cut off the ears of our enemies, or the sword that pierces inward to cut out our own selfish pride"?

Thus far, America has chosen the double cross. Fleeing from the Cross of Christ and the supernatural kingdom established by the Son of God; one of sacrifice and sanctity, America has chosen to pursue a terrestrial kingdom of pleasure and power founded upon a distorted idea of what constitutes liberty or freedom. But this city of man, which has certainly achieved astounding advancements in various spheres while increasing the affluence of some, has also contributed to a climate where men are regarded as mere machines whose only value is to be found in what they produce or consume. This in turn destroys the individual’s sense of personal dignity and responsibility.

Americans, in their tragic desire to flee from the Cross of Christ, have rushed to embrace this distorted notion of "freedom" and have forgotten that, as created beings, they only possess contingent rights. That is to say, rights which are accorded by Almighty God. Consequently, in their zeal to promote the fallacious idea that the basis of public morality should be whatever the majority of citizens are prepared to accept, they have also forgotten that man does not possess, and never will possess, the right to perform or engage in any act which is displeasing to God.

And where has this flight from the Cross of Christ led us up to this point? Was Bishop Sheen being an alarmist? In the words of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, taken from his Commencement Address at Harvard University entitled "A World Split Apart": "Destructive and irresponsible freedom has been granted boundless space. Society appears to have little defense against the abyss of human decadence, such as, for example, the misuse of liberty for moral violence against young people, motion pictures full of pornography, crime and horror. This is considered to be part of freedom, and theoretically counterbalanced by the young peoples’ right not to look or not to accept. Life organized legalistically has thus shown its inability to defend itself against the corrosion of evil."

Getting back to Bishop Sheen. What did he mean when he said that, "Our choice is not: Will we or will we not have more discipline, more respect for law, more order, more sacrifice; but, where will we get it"? I believe Pope Benedict XVI was providing us with a hint toward an answer when he spoke of the "dictatorship of relativism." Americans who have gleefully embraced the tenets of liberalism have not learned the lesson the concentration camp and the gulag. These unfortunate souls refuse to acknowledge that atheistic ideology (and make no mistake, the current idea of "freedom" which has taken root in America is itself rooted in atheistic ideology) always, and without exception, gives birth to sheer violence. This is the lesson of atheistic humanism. A lesson which the majority of Americans would rather not think about.

Who would deny that Bishop Sheen’s warning, issued some 64 years ago, was highly prophetic? America, and the West in general, is at a crossroads. We have before us two crosses: The Cross of Christ and the double cross (which may also be referred to today as the "dictatorship of relativism"). Which will we choose in the end? Will we continue on our present course or change direction and finally come to embrace the Cross of Christ? Will we embrace Christ and His kingdom of sacrifice and sanctity or continue to rush headlong into the idolatry of unbridled hedonism while declaring ourselves, albeit tacitly, to be God?

If we continue to choose the latter, then we should remember the words of Fr. Vincent Miceli, S.J., "When man becomes God, history testifies that then millions of men become imprisoned slaves, terrified automatons and murdered corpses. Society, in the words of Gabriel Marcel, becomes a ‘termite colony.’" (The Gods of Atheism, p. 463).

Boston Mayor Marty Walsh and his stormtroopers assist the homosexual movement to hijack the Saint Patrick's Day Parade

Mass Resistance reports:

"Up until now, Boston had been the only St. Patrick’s Day Parade in the country not to cave in to pressure and allow homosexual groups to march. In 1995, after a huge legal battle with the Massachusetts liberal political establishment, the Allied War Veterans Council, which runs the Boston annual parade, won a 9-0 US Supreme Court decision giving them the right to exclude homosexual-themed groups – or anyone – from their parade.

And they’d held their ground.  Last year, as MassResistance reported, Boston Mayor Marty Walsh put enormous pressure on the Council to relent on their own, but they refused to give in. As expected, the Mayor and his political allies boycotted the parade.

But the Mayor, a former union organizer, knows a thing or two about pressure tactics. This year the Mayor’s increased pressure on the Council leadership was successful. But even then, the Council Commander only had a minority of the members supporting this. As we reported, they had to use dishonest and deceitful tactics to exclude the majority of members when they voted to allow the homosexual group OutVets to march in December. And they used the same tacts again in January when the majority tried ro orchestrate a re-vote.

Thus, the Mayor has now announced that he would be marching in the parade, has invited his political allies to march, and has become a big supporter of the event."

I've said it before, the same radical homosexual activists who continually cry for more "tolerance" are anything but tolerant. This is a spiritual war. The homosexual movement is not a civil rights movement. It is an attempt at moral revolution. An attempt to change people's view of homosexuality. It is also about control.  And once again, homosexual activists have gotten their way, hijacking a day meant to honor Saint Patrick and to celebrate community and fostering divisiveness.

Writing in the Chicago Free Press, even homosexual activist Paul Varnell admitted that the homosexual movement is not about civil rights but rather a moral revolution. He wrote, 'The fundamental controverted issue about homosexuality is not discrimination, hate crimes or domestic partnerships, but the morality of homosexuality. Even if gays obtain non-discrimination laws, hate crimes law and domestic partnership benefits, those can do little to counter the underlying moral condemnation which will continue to fester beneath the law and generate hostility, fuel hate crimes, support conversion therapies, encourage gay youth suicide and inhibit the full social acceptance that is our goal. On the other hand, if we convince people that homosexuality is fully moral, then all their inclination to discriminate, engage in gay-bashing or oppose gay marriage disappears. Gay youths and adults could readily accept themselves. So the gay movement, whether we acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a sexual liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people's view of homosexuality.' (Paul Varnell, "Defending Our Morality," Chicago Free Press, Aug 16, 2000, http://indegayforum.org/authors/varnell/varnell37.html).

In a previous post, I mentioned how Professor James Hitchcock, in his excellent work entitled "Catholicism and Modernity" (New York: Seabury Press, 1979, p. 86), explains the role of the media in this entire process: "The media's alleged commitment to 'pluralism' is at base a kind of hoax. The banner of pluralism is raised in order to win toleration for new ideas as yet unacceptable to the majority. Once toleration has been achieved, public opinion is systematically manipulated first to enforce a status of equality between the old and the new, then to assert the superiority of the new over the old. A final stage is often the total discrediting, even sometimes the banning, of what had previously been orthodox."

For many years I have been warning [in articles and even at this Blog] that this country is heading for totalitarianism. See here and here for example. I have even compared the Democratic Party with the National Socialist Workers Party of 1930s Germany. Henry Lamb apparently agrees. Mr. Lamb, author of "The Rise of Global Governance," writes that, "As the modern-day freedom fighters begin to organize and strategize, the government chooses not to reform, but to entrench and expand its control over the people. The similarity is remarkable, between the rise of the Democratic Socialist Party now in control of Washington and the rise of the National Socialist Workers Party of Germany in the 1930s. Read his full article here.

In his Encyclical Letter Centesimus Annus, Pope John Paul II warned us that, "....totalitarianism arises out of a denial of truth in the objective sense. If there is no transcendent truth, in obedience to which man achieves his full identity, then there is no sure principle for guaranteeing just relations between people. Their self-interest as a class, group or nation would inevitably set them in opposition to one another. If one does not acknowledge transcendent truth, then the force of power takes over, and each person tends to make full use of the means at his disposal in order to impose his own interests or his own opinion, with no regard for the rights of others. People are then respected only to the extent that they can be exploited for selfish ends. Thus, the root of modern totalitarianism is to be found in the denial of the transcendent dignity of the human person who, as the visible image of the invisible God, is therefore by his very nature the subject of rights which no one may violate — no individual, group, class, nation or State. Not even the majority of a social body may violate these rights, by going against the minority, by isolating, oppressing, or exploiting it, or by attempting to annihilate it.." (No. 44).

Mayor Marty Walsh and his stormtroopers have used the force of power to impose their worldview on Catholics, destroying the purpose of the Saint Patrick's Day Parade for their own selfish ends, to promote a perverse agenda and to curry political favor with liberals who long ago jettisoned their Christian faith for an epicurean ideology.

At the Vatican: Precursors of the Antichrist who will manage to abolish the Mass

Lifesite is reporting that, "This weekend the Vatican formally hosted one of Britain’s most virulently pro-abortion and pro-homosexual writers, as well as the head of an American organization promoting female ordination, at an officially sanctioned event inside Vatican City walls. Organizers spoke to Vatican Radio as well as the secular press, praising the new atmosphere within the Church’s leadership that made the conference possible.

As part of the Vatican’s official observance of International Women’s Day, this Sunday saw two events, one brought in from outside and the other organized by the Pontifical Council for Culture. The latter conference has come under public criticism for its “ham-

fisted,” “tone-deaf,” “uncatholic,” and feminist-inspired approach to “Women’s Cultures.”

The presence of the outside-organized event held inside the Vatican is being forthrightly hailed by organizers and the secular media as feminist victory over the traditional stance of the Church. Among the organizers and speakers were Deborah Rose-Milavec, one of the US’s most prominent agitators for female ordination, and Tina Beattie, a British feminist academic notorious for her advocacy for abortion, homosexual relations, and “gay marriage,” and who once compared the Catholic Mass to homosexual sex."   See full article here.

What is Professor Beattie doing speaking at the Vatican when the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith ordered her banned from Church properties after she signed a letter, in 2012, to the Times, in support of same-sex marriage.

This letter was signed by a number of Christian theologians who wrote, "...it is perfectly proper for Catholics, using fully informed consciences, to support the legal extension of civil marriage to same-sex couples."

On December 31, 1992, Our Lady told Father Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests:

"I have announced to you many times that the end of the times and the coming of Jesus in glory is very near. Now, I want to help you understand the signs described in the Holy Scriptures, which indicate that His glorious return is now close.

These signs are clearly indicated in the Gospels, in the letters of Saint Peter and Saint Paul, and they are becoming a reality during these years.

-The first sign is the spread of errors, which lead to the loss of faith and to apostasy.

These errors are being propagated by false teachers, by renowned theologians who are no longer teaching the truths of the Gospel, but pernicious heresies based on errors and human reasonings. It is because of the teachings of these errors that the true faith is being lost and that the great apostasy is spreading everywhere.

'See that no one deceives you. For many will attempt to deceive many people. False prophets will come and will deceive very many.' (Mt 24:4-5)

'The day of the Lord will not come unless the great apostasy comes first.' (2 Thes 2:3).
'There will be false teachers among you. These will seek to introduce disastrous heresies and will even set themselves against the Master who ransomed them. Many will listen to them and will follow their licentious ways. Through their offense the Christian faith will be reviled. In their greed, they will exploit you with fabrications.' (2 Pt 2:1-3)

-The second sign is the outbreak of wars and fratricidal struggles, which lead to the prevalence of violence and hatred and a general slackening off of charity, while natural catastrophes, like epidemics, famines, floods and earthquakes (see here), become more and more frequent.

'When you hear the report of wars, close at hand or far away, see that you are not alarmed; for these things must happen. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in many places. All this will be only the beginning of greater sufferings to come. Evildoing will be so widespread that the love of many will grow cold. But God will save those who persevere until the end.' (Mt 24:6-8, 12-13)

-The third sign is the bloody persecution of those who remain faithful to Jesus and to His Gospel and who stand fast in the true faith. Throughout this all, the Gospel will be preached in every part of the world.
Think, beloved children, of the great persecutions to which the Church is being subjected; think of the apostolic zeal of the recent popes, above all my Pope, John-Paul II, as he brings to all the nations of the earth the announcement of the Gospel.

'They will hand you over to persecution and they will kill you. You will be hated by all because of me. And then many will abandon the faith; they will betray and hate one another. Meanwhile, the message of the kingdom of God will be preached in all the world; all nations must hear it. And then the end will come.' (Mt 24:9-10, 14)

-The fourth sign is the horrible sacrilege, perpetrated by him who sets himself against Christ, that is, the Antichrist. He will enter into the holy temple of God and will sit on his throne, and have himself adored as God.

'This one will oppose and exalt himself against everything that men adore and call God. The lawless one will come by the power of Satan, with all the force of false miracles and pretended wonders. He will make use of every kind of wicked deception, in order to work harm.' (2 Thes 2:4,9)


'One day, you will see in the holy place he who commits the horrible sacrilege. The prophet Daniel spoke of this. Let the reader seek to understand.' (Mt 24:15)

The Holy Mass is the daily sacrifice, the pure oblation which is offered to the Lord everywhere, from the rising of the sun to its going down.
The sacrifice of the Mass renews that which was accomplished by Jesus on Calvary. By accepting the protestant doctrine, people will hold that the Mass is not a sacrifice but only a sacred meal, that is to say, a remembrance of that which Jesus did at His last supper. And thus, the celebration of Holy Mass will be suppressed. In this abolition of the daily sacrifice consists the horrible sacrilege accomplished by the Antichrist.

[Saint Alphonsus Ligouri: "The devil has always managed to get rid of the Mass by means of the heretics making them the precursors of the Antichrist who, above all else, will manage to abolish, and in fact will succeed in abolishing as a punishment for the sins of men, the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar, precisely as Daniel predicted] -The fifth sign consists in extraordinary phenomena, which occur in the skies.

'The sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky; and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.' (Mt 24:29)

The miracle of the sun, which took place at Fatima during my last apparition, is intended to point out to you that you are now entering into the times when these events will take place, events which will prepare for the return of Jesus in glory."

(The miracle of the sun is also reported to have been witnessed many times at Medjugorje and Conyers, and elsewhere.)

'And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven. All the tribes of the earth will mourn, and men will see the Son of Man coming upon the clouds of heaven, with great power and splendor.' (Mt 24:30)

(The sign of the Son of Man has always been the Cross; Garabandal: 'a permanent sign'; Brother David Lopez: 'We will see in the sky one great red cross'; Fr. Anthony J. Paone, in 'My Daily Bread,' published by the Confraternity of the Precious Blood: 'The sign of the cross will appear in the sky.')

My beloved ones and children consecrated to my Immaculate Heart, I have wanted to teach you about these signs, which Jesus has pointed out to you in His Gospel, in order to prepare you for the end of the times, because they are about to take place in your days. " (To the Priests: Our Lady's Beloved Sons, pp. 750-753).

It is true that we don't know "the day or the hour." However, Our Lord tells us "Learn a lesson from the fig tree: when its branches become tender and sprout the first leaves, you know that summer is near. In the same way, when you see these things taking place, know that your liberation is near." (Matthew 24:32-33).

Let's learn the lesson of the fig tree as Jesus commands. Let's read the signs of the times while it is still day. Many have a veil over their eyes and cannot read these signs. We must pray and work to remove that veil.

Father Brian O'Toole and the lack of the passion of anger

In a past post, I noted how it is possible to "be angry and sin not" (Ephesians 4: 26), something which Father Brian O'Toole, "pastor" of the failing Sacred Heart Parish in Gardner, apparently does not understand. And he is not alone.

Writing for Touchstone Magazine, Dr. Leon J. Podles explains that, "..many Christians have a false understanding of the nature and role of anger. It is seen as something negative, something that a Christian should not feel.

In the sexual abuse cases in the Catholic Church, those who dealt with the bishops have consistently remarked that the bishops never expressed outrage or righteous anger, even at the most horrendous cases of abuse and sacrilege. Bishops seem to think that anger at sin is un-Christian. Gilbert Kilman, a child psychiatrist, commented, 'What amazes me is the lack of outrage the church feels when its good work is being harmed. So, if there is anything the church needs to know, it needs to know how to be outraged.'

Mark Serrano confronted Bishop Frank Rodimer, asking why he had let his priest-friend Peter Osinski sleep with boys at Rodimer’s beach house while Rodimer was in the next bedroom: 'Where is your moral indignation?' Rodimer’s answer was, 'Then I don’t get it. What do you want?' What Serrano wanted Rodimer to do was to behave like a man with a heart, a heart that is outraged by evil. But Rodimer couldn’t; his inability to feel outrage was a quality that had helped make him a bishop. He would never get into fights, never rock the boat, never 'divide' but only 'unify.' Rodimer could not understand why he should feel deep anger at evil, at the violation of the innocent, at the oppression of the weak.

Emotional Deformation

The emotions that are now suppressed are hatred and anger. Christians think that they ought not to feel these emotions, that it is un-Christian to feel them. They secretly suspect that Jesus was being un-Christian in his attitude to the scribes and Pharisees when he was angry at them, that he was un-Christian when he drove the moneychangers out of the temple or declared that millstones (not vacations in treatment centers) were the way to treat child abusers.

Conrad Baars noticed this emotional deformation in the clergy in the mid-twentieth century. He recognized that there had been distortions in 'traditional' Catholic spirituality. It had become too focused upon individual acts rather than on growth in virtue; it had emphasized sheer naked strength of will. In forgetting that growth in virtue was the goal of the Christian’s moral life, it forgot that the emotions, all emotions, including anger and hate, are part of human nature and must be integrated into a virtuous life.

Baars had been imprisoned by the Nazis. He knew iniquity firsthand and that there was something wrong with those who did not hate it:

A little reflection will make it clear that there is a big difference between the person who knows solely that something is evil and ought to be opposed, and the one who in addition also feels hate for that evil, is angry that it is corrupting or harming his fellow-men, and feels aroused to combat it courageously and vigorously.

Just Wrath

Wrath is a necessary and positive part of human nature: 'Wrath is the strength to attack the repugnant; the power of anger is actually the power of resistance in the soul,' wrote Josef Pieper. The lack of wrath against injustice, he continued, is a deficiency: 'One who does good with passion is more praiseworthy than one who is ‘not entirely’ afire for the good, even to the forces of the sensual realm.'

Aquinas, too, says that 'lack of the passion of anger is also a vice' because a man who truly and forcefully rejects evil will be angry at it. The lack of anger makes the movement of the will against evil 'lacking or weak.' He quotes John Chrysostom: 'He who is not angry, whereas he has cause to be, sins. For unreasonable patience is the hotbed of many vices, it fosters negligence, and incites not only the wicked but the good to do wrong'..." (Full article here).

The spiritually mature Christian understands that not all anger is unjust. That there is such a thing as just or righteous anger. Such a Christian strives to control anger through prayer and by considering the example of Christ. Let's all pray for those in leadership positions in the Church. That they may come to a mature faith which is able to discern between just and unjust anger.

One shepherd [and he is that in every sense of the word] who possesses such a mature faith is The Most Rev. Fabian Bruskewitz, Bishop of Lincoln, Nebraska. His Excellency has been quoted as having said, "No words that are printable, or even conceivable, are adequate to express my outrage, fury, and depression upon learning that anyone, much less a priest, would sexually molest any children. Such a thing is an unspeakable abomination. Upon hearing such things, I must confess that I am tempted to look for my shotgun and baseball bat, much sooner that I am tempted to give any consideration to a possible 'sickness' in a perpetrator. Molestation victims and their families are certainly entitled to anger. Sometimes their excessive anger and demands, while often becoming unacceptable and unreasonable, are still understandable to me."

How much more just anger should a shepherd demonstrate against those who would spiritually molest faithful Catholics.

At his homily delivered at the 10:30 AM Mass at Sacred Heart Parish today, Father Brian O'Toole said that Jesus "lost it," and drove out the money changers who "weren't really doing anything wrong." This even though Our Lord rebuked them for making His Father's House a "Den of Thieves."

Father O'Toole, as with many of his effeminate contemporaries who have succumbed to the Cult of Softness, doesn't understand this Gospel passage because he lacks the passion of anger.

And that is a vice.

Pope Francis should be more discerning with regard to the Neocatechumenal Way

There are many within the Catholic Church who are rightfully concerned about the Neocatechumenal Way and its approach to Catholic teaching and liturgy.  See here for example.  Back in 2002, I prepared a report on the Neocatechumenal Way for Our Lady's Warriors.  See here.

At EWTN's website, one Catholic notes that the Neocatechumenal Way has, "..un-Catholic beliefs and practices. The REALLY solidly Catholic magazine 'Christian Order' has two articles available on its website giving examples of this. They are: The Neocatechumenate: Testimonies www.christianorder.com/features/features_2000/features_feb00_1.html The Neocatechumenal Way -- A Fearful Danger to the Faith (by Father Enrico Zoffoli) www.christianorder.com/features/features_1995/features_apr95.html This group would seem to be an example of those who have 'deceived the elect'. The abuses noticed by your questioner are not the only problems, as you will gather from the title of the article mentioned above, and the problems are inherent in the group, not just in any 'individual branch'. As far as I know, the group has no canonical status, but has managed to spread all over the world. Complaining to the Bishop or the Vatican is, unfortunately, unlikely to have any effect, because the group is large and influential. But it could be tried. Avoid this group and spread the word about its errors and dangers."  See here.

Pope Francis seems to have no problem whatsoever with the Neocatechumenal Way and encourages and fully supports the movement.  See here.

This is disturbing since, in his article cited above, Father Enrico Zoffoli refers to heresies fostered by the movement, writing:

"The accusation of heresy is aimed at the doctrinal positions, not the persons, whom we still regard as worthy of respect and who can be inspired by the best intentions.

1. SIN: man cannot avoid committing it, in the same way as he can neither accomplish good nor acquire merits for himself;

- conversion is possible only as recognition, by everyone, of their own moral poverty, not as a determined wish to correct one's faults which sanctity tends to realise;
- sin cannot offend God, and man does not incur the duty to expiate it by satisfying the requirements of His justice.

2. REDEMPTION: Jesus has not brought this about by liberating man from his faults and reconciling him with God;

- the passion and death of Christ has not been a true sacrifice offered to the Father in order to remedy sin and to redeem man;
- Jesus saved the world by virtue of His Resurrection: in order to enjoy the fruits of His work it is enough to confess to be sinners and to believe in the power of the risen Christ.

3. THE CHURCH was not founded by Christ as his only Sheepfold: it is also possible to save oneself by following other religions;

- the Church is not a juridical and hierarchical society, but a spiritual, charismatic one;
- in it there is not found a priesthood derived from the sacrament of the Order - as it is sufficient to have the Baptism which, incorporating all the believers in Christ, makes them participants of His priestly dignity.

4. THE MASS is not a "sacrifice": the Church, at the altar, does not offer to God any Victim;

- in place of the altar, there is nothing but the table, which in the Eucharist allows a festive party to be celebrated among brothers united by the same faith in the Resurrection;
- the consecrated bread and wine are only the symbol of the presence of the risen Christ which unites the fellow-guests by communicating their own spirit, thus making them participants in his triumph over death;
- the Mass, thus conceived, is not celebrated by the priest, but by the Assembly, from which "springs the Eucharist."

5. EUCHARISTIC WORSHIP does not have any meaning, it negates the true, real and substantial presence of Christ under the sacramental species. Acts of faith such as genuflections before the Tabernacle, frequent Communions, hours of adoration, benedictions, processions, congresses, etc. are not therefore justified.

6. CONFESSION is reduced to the sacrament of Baptism: their distinction does not go back to the primitive Church:

- the Church "gestates and leads to the conversion." "The important thing is not the absolution" of the priest, because the value of the confession is essentially its community and ecclesial nature;
- in the "passages" and in the, "scrutinies" the acknowledgement of one's transgressions, including the serious ones, is public, as can still be the case during the "redditio."
7. THE CHRISTIAN LIFE, as a voluntary effort of self-discipline, and therefore an exercise and progress in virtue, is an illusion;

- everyone remains intrinsically a sinner, incapable of obtaining true justice as a perfection of the love of God and of one's fellow creatures;
- on the other hand, Jesus has not been presented to anyone as a "model" to be imitated;
- He has commanded that we should actually hate our parents, brothers, relatives etc, not just, if necessary, to be prepared to prefer Him to them;
- in order to follow Christ, we need to sell our own goods; but, once this renunciation has been accomplished, it is permissible to acquire others and to enjoy all the pleasures of life. "Poverty" as understood by St. Francis, is inspired by the "natural religion," and was also practised by the pagans: it is not a Christian virtue;
- Jesus, having suffered for us, has made our sufferings superfluous, therefore the austerities of the ascetics, the slow martyrdom of the Saints and the religious life itself, involving the effective practice of the evangelical counsels, are not justifiable;
- eternal salvation is offered freely to all by the mercy of God, who forgives everything. Hell should not exist, nor should one speak of Purgatory, of prayers and of indulgences for the dead.

8. THE HISTORY of the true Church founded by Christ comes to an end with the Pax Constantinia and does not resume its course until the 20th century with the Second Vatican Council, having remained frozen for about 1,600 years ... ;

- in this long interval, the exercise of the triple power of the hierarchical Church (teaching, sanctification, guidance) would have been improper, illegitimate ... ; and in particular the Council of Trent would be responsible for the paralysis of the Church, determined to fix formulae of faith, liturgical rites, disciplinary, rules ... ;
- the interpretation of the Word of God is not reserved for the Hierarchy, it is possible for all believers: "the Bible is explained by itself." This freedom of examination in the exegesis excludes the ecclesiastical Teaching, the tradition of the Elders and the doctrine of the theologies."

Pope Francis addresses the Neocatechumenal Way here.

Now it's three-way same-sex "marriage": The Chastisement approaches

As noted here,

"Happy newlyweds Joke, 29, Bell, 21 and Art, 26, took the plunge on Valentine's Day after exchanging their vows in a fairy-tale ceremony at their home in Uthai Thani Province, Thailand.

The three blushing grooms are thought to be the world's only wedded male threesome and have since become internet sensations after photos from their big day went viral.

The trio consummated their love under Buddhist law in the ceremony as same-sex marriages are not recognised as legitimate under Thai law.

In what they described as the happiest day of their lives, the three men were suited and booted for the ceremony in which they exchanged rings after walking down the aisle.

Bell, From Phitsanulok Province, said: 'I think we are first three-way same sex males to have a wedding, possibly in the world.

Although same-sex marriages are not recognised as legitimate under Thai law, the trio were able to consummate their love under Buddhist law in the symbolic ceremony.

Art, from Chiang Mai Province, met Joke, from Uthai Thani Province, through business and started a relationship after realising their love for each other while working closely together in 2010.

Both men knew they were gay before they met and have been living together for the past five years.

Meanwhile Bell, who was studying management at Phitsanuloke University, frequently met the couple at parties before the three men realised they all started to have feelings for each other."


I've been warning for years that the acceptance of sodomy would lead inevitably to the acceptance of bestiality as well. For example, back in December of 2010, I noted that according to Venerable Bartholomew Holzhauser, just prior to the Reign of Antichrist, "...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 law 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...As a result no principle at all- however holy, authentic, ancient, and certain it may be, will remain free of censure, criticism, false interpretations, modifications, 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 of 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."

And I asserted that:

The Reign of Antichrist will witness a celebration of sin and perversion the likes of which few can imagine. Pleasure is the new principle par excellence. If pleasure can justify homosexual behavior (and increasingly that is what our sin-sick society is saying), then other deviant forms of sexual activity which are viewed as pleasurable by some will also be logically justified. This will include pedophilia, pederasty, ephebophilia, gerontophilia, necrophilia, sadism, masochism and bestiality."

Cody Beck, who is sexually attracted to dogs and horses, complains that being a "zoophile" in modern American society is "like being gay in the 1950s.  You feel like you have to hide, that if you say it out loud, people will look at you like a freak."

Beck believes that he and other members of this minority sexual orientation  can, and should, follow in the footsteps of the homosexual movement.  He hopes that this minority group can begin appealing to the "open-minded" for acceptance.  See here.  The push for societal acceptance of bestiality will undoubtedly intensify.  Some have already tested the waters as it were.

Back in the 1970s, the Archdiocese of Boston knew that one of its priests, Fr. Paul Shanley, spoke in favor of sex between men and boys at a 1979 meeting which led to the founding of NAMBLA, a national group advocating the practice.  The Archdiocese was also informed (in 1977),  that during a meeting about homosexuality, Shanley said that he could "think of no sexual act that causes psychic damage - 'not even incest or bestiality.'" See here.

It is only a matter of time before all state laws banning evils such as adultery, prostitution, incest, bigamy, sadomasochism, pedophilia and bestiality are struck down.  Why?  Because in Lawrence v. Texas, the United States Supreme Court created the legal framework for the complete and utter destruction of those legal constructs of every state which safeguard public morality.  Lawrence v. Texas essentially said that there is no morality and that "liberty presumes an autonomy of self."

By contrast, Pope Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Letter Libertas Humana, said that:

"Liberty, the highest of natural endowments, being the portion only of intellectual or rational natures, confers on man this dignity - that he is 'in the hand of his counsel' [see Ecclus 15: 14] and has power over his actions.  But the manner in which such dignity is exercised is of the greatest moment, inasmuch as on the use that is made of liberty the highest good and the greatest evil alike depend.  Man, indeed, is free to obey his reason, to seek moral good, and to strive unswervingly after his last end.  Yet he is free also to turn aside to all other things; and, in pursuing the empty semblance of good, to disturb rightful order and to fall headlong into the destruction which he has voluntarily chosen...

Therefore, the nature of human liberty, however it be considered, whether in individuals or in society, whether in those who command or in those who obey, supposes the necessity of obedience to some supreme and eternal law, which is no other than the authority of God, commanding good and forbidding evil.  And, so far from this most just authority of God over men diminishing, or even destroying their liberty, it protects and perfects it, for the real perfection of all creatures is found in the prosecution and attainment of their respective ends, but the supreme end to which human liberty must aspire is God."

Pope Francis: "It is a mortal sin to discard the elderly..."

"The eclipse of the sense of God and of

man inevitably leads to a practical materialism, which breeds individualism, utilitarianism and hedonism. Here too we see the permanent validity of the words of the Apostle: "And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct" (Rom 1:28). The values of being are replaced by those of having. The only goal which counts is the pursuit of one's own material well-being. The so-called "quality of life" is interpreted primarily or exclusively as economic efficiency, inordinate consumerism, physical beauty and pleasure, to the neglect of the more profound dimensions-interpersonal, spiritual and religious-of existence.

In such a context suffering, an inescapable burden of human existence but also a factor of possible personal growth, is "censored", rejected as useless, indeed opposed as an evil, always and in every way to be avoided. When it cannot be avoided and the prospect of even some future well-being vanishes, then life appears to have lost all meaning and the temptation grows in man to claim the right to suppress it.

Within this same cultural climate, the body is no longer perceived as a properly personal reality, a sign and place of relations with others, with God and with the world. It is reduced to pure materiality: it is simply a complex of organs, functions and energies to be used according to the sole criteria of pleasure and efficiency. Consequently, sexuality too is depersonalized and exploited: from being the sign, place and language of love, that is, of the gift of self and acceptance of another, in all the other's richness as a person, it increasingly becomes the occasion and instrument for self-assertion and the selfish satisfaction of personal desires and instincts. Thus the original import of human sexuality is distorted and falsified, and the two meanings, unitive and procreative, inherent in the very nature of the conjugal act, are artificially separated: in this way the marriage union is betrayed and its fruitfulness is subjected to the caprice of the couple. Procreation then becomes the "enemy" to be avoided in sexual activity: if it is welcomed, this is only because it expresses a desire, or indeed the intention, to have a child "at all costs", and not because it signifies the complete acceptance of the other and therefore an openness to the richness of life which the child represents.

In the materialistic perspective described so far, interpersonal relations are seriously impoverished. The first to be harmed are women, children, the sick or suffering, and the elderly. The criterion of personal dignity-which demands respect, generosity and service-is replaced by the criterion of efficiency, functionality and usefulness: others are considered not for what they "are", but for what they "have, do and produce". This is the supremacy of the strong over the weak." (Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae, No. 23).

Supremacy of the strong over the weak. This is the Molochian Gospel. It is a "gospel" advanced by President Barack Obama who has said that, "We are God's partners in matters of life and death" - see here.

During his weekly General Audience, Pope Francis said that: “It is a mortal sin to discard our elderly. The elderly are not aliens, we are them, in a short or in a long while; we are inevitably them, even although we choose not to think about it...

If we do not learn to look after and to respect our elderly, we will be treated in the same way. A society where the elderly are discarded carries within it the virus of death...

The quality of a society can be judged by the way it includes its older members. This is a particular challenge for our Western societies, marked on the one hand by ageing populations and on the other by a cult of youth, efficiency and profit which tends to discard everything not considered productive or useful… In showing concern for our elderly, we strengthen the social fabric and ensure the future of our young.”

I have spent time visiting the elderly in nursing homes.  And there is nothing more sad than witnessing those who long for a visit from their loved ones and who often spend their days in tears waiting for family who cannot or will not find the time to spend with them.

Our culture has become selfish and self-absorbed.  The elderly and the disabled are made to feel that they are a burden.

But as Henri Nouwen has said, "The elderly are our prophets, they remind us that what we see so clearly in them is a process in which we all share. . . . Their lives are full of warnings but also of hopes."

The way we respond to the elderly will determine our own future.

Deacon Ryan Duns: Archbishop Nienstedt comes across as homophobic

In a Blog post addressing a letter written by Archbishop John Nienstedt to a mother explaining the Church's teaching regarding homosexual acts and the reception of the Holy Eucharist, Deacon Ryan Duns, the Jesuit seminarian who believes that "gay marriage" might be a movement of the Holy Spirit, said that the Archbishop's letter, "..serves only to reinforce the belief that the Catholic Church is a homophobic institution more concerned with obedience than human flourishing." See here.

In his Encyclical Letter Deus Caritas Est (God is Love), Pope Benedict XVI writes, "It is characteristic of mature love that it calls into play all man's potentialities; it engages the whole man, so to speak. Contact with the visible manifestations of God's love can awaken within us a feeling of joy born of the experience of being loved. But this encounter also engages our will and our intellect. Acknowledgment of the living God is one path towards love, and the 'yes' of our will to his will unites our intellect, will and sentiments in the all- embracing act of love. But this process is always open-ended; love is never 'finished' and complete; throughout life, it changes and matures, and thus remains faithful to itself. Idem velle atque idem nolle —to want the same thing, and to reject the same thing—was recognized by antiquity as the authentic content of love: the one becomes similar to the other, and this leads to a community of will and thought. The love-story between God and man consists in the very fact that this communion of will increases in a communion of thought and sentiment, and thus our will and God's will increasingly coincide: God's will is no longer for me an alien will, something imposed on me from without by the commandments, but it is now my own will, based on the realization that God is in fact more deeply present to me than I am to myself. Then self- abandonment to God increases and God becomes our joy (cf. Ps 73 [72]:23-28)." (No. 17).

Jesus gave us this new Law of Love.  He said, "If you love Me, keep My commandments." (John 14:15).  And through the centuries many have demonstrated their love for Him by obeying His commands, even unto martyrdom. Others have followed Him indifferently or have turned away from Him entirely, abandoning that faith which is the pearl of great price.

Those Catholics who are agitating for "gay pride" and even same-sex "marriage" have embraced a false notion of "freedom."  For such people, there can only be true freedom if they are permitted to engage in homosexual acts or marry a member of the same-sex.  And anyone who resists this immoral agenda which embraces a counterfeit notion of freedom is denounced as a "hater" and a "bigot" or as one who fosters "prejudice."

Clearly Deacon Duns has set himself in opposition to the Church's authentic teaching regarding homosexual acts and has little interest in the truth that the Eucharist is properly the Sacrament of those who are in full communion with the Church (CCC, 1395).

Should this confused individual, who has shown contempt for Church teaching and a faithful Bishop of Christ's Church, be ordained to the priesthood?

Is this What passes for a sound candidate today?

Here is what the Archdiocese of Boston wants for the priesthood...

In a Blog post which may be found here, Deacon Ryan Duns argues that same-sex "marriage" could actually be beneficial to society.

Deacon Duns quotes from Louis Dupre, who said that,  "The quality of a civilization may be measured both by the complexity of its ingredients and by the harmony of their order. The more diverse elements it succeeds in integrating within a harmonious and unified balance, the greater its potential and, usually, its achievements are." (Louis Dupré, Passage to Modernity, 29).

Then this confused soul writes, "...the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) has yielded simultaneously great rejoicing from some, much hand-wringing from others. From Twitter to Facebook, blogs to news sites, the Court's actions were debated and discussed, celebrated and denounced. Mike Huckabee tweeted that 'Jesus Wept' and the USCCB called it a 'tragic day for marriage and our nation.' The New Ways Ministry website likens the experience to 'justice rolling down like a river,' washing away what Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg referred to in March as 'skim-milk marriage.'

I find the above quote from Louis Dupré particularly helpful this morning as I reflect on yesterday's events. For, to my mind, a new question begins to emerge and demand response: if gay marriages are considered equal and of the same standing as heterosexual marriages, will this contribute to or detract from the harmony of society? Can this so-called marriage equality contribute to unification or will it result in further fracturing?

In their press release, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops rightly stresses 'the common good of all, especially our children, depends upon a society that strives to uphold the truth of marriage. These decisions are part of a public debate of great consequence. The future of marriage and the well-being of our society hang in the balance.'

Yesterday's SCOTUS decision is hardly the final word on the issue of marriage. As the USCCB asserts, it is 'part of a public debate of great consequence.' Indeed, it may be better to see these decisions less as offering the definitive word on marriage than on opening up a space for new words to spoken. The words to be spoken can come only through the lived witness of same-sex couples living lives of love and commitment that contribute to, rather than detract from, the common good of our nation.

Pope Francis has managed in three months to capture the attention of a skeptical world and an increasingly jaded flock. The credibility of his words arises from his actions and it's hard to deny that the Holy Father is active. His is a faith that works, his works are born of faith.

In the months and years ahead, a great burden will continue to be shouldered by those same-sex couples in the United States willing to commit themselves to one another. Great attention will be focused upon them and many Christian communities will remain skeptical of their relationships' ability to witness to the values of God's Kingdom. Gay and Lesbian Christians must now accept the shadow of the Cross falling long upon them. Many will deny that God's Spirit can be active in their commitments. It is only through the testimony of their lives, the witness of fidelity and love, that they have any chance in changing the hearts and minds of others.

In the Acts of the Apostles, the Pharisee Gamaliel offered the following counsel concerning the nascent movement growing around the claim that Jesus had been raised from the dead:
"...in the present case, I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone; because if this plan or this undertaking is of human origin, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them - in that case you may even be found fighting against God." (Acts 5:38-39).

I accept that, whether we like it or not as a faith community, a new path has been opened up to citizens of our nation. My prayer is that marriage will continue to be the glue that holds the fundamental unit of our society together: the family. Whether same-sex couples can contribute to the common good in and through their witness of socially sanction and legally protected fidelity, we must wait and see. We must, all of us, keep our hearts and eyes and ears open so that if we begin to see the movement of God's Spirit, we can respond with joy and gratitude. Should the trace of God's life not be found, should only greater disharmony and rancor reign, we will find confirmation of our received Tradition's wisdom."

Got that?  According to this Deacon of the Boston Archdiocese, waiting to be ordained while my own vocation to the priesthood is thrown into the garbage heap because I accept, defend and promote the Church's perennial teaching, especially in the area of sexual morality, God has allowed "a new path" to be opened up - one that permits homosexual and lesbian sex and even sacramental marriage - and we should all keep our hearts and minds open in order to discern "the movement of God's Spirit."

Isn't it amazing how people will strain to rationalize sin (especially those sins they are engaging in themselves)? But homosexual acts may never be approved of.  They are intrinsically evil acts.  They cry to Heaven for vengeance.

These intrinsically evil acts are not the result of the movement of the Holy Spirit but the movement of the Evil spirit.  They are the fruit of the demonic spirit.

Because I accept and promote the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which teaches authoritatively that, "...In the sanctorum communio, 'None of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself.'  'If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together.  Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.'  'Charity does not insist on its own way.'  In this solidarity with all men, living or dead, which is founded on the communion of saints, the least of our acts done in charity redounds to the profit of all.  Every sin harms this communion." (CCC, 953), my vocation is relegated to file 13.

Paragraph 817 of the Catechism assures us that "ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body...do not occur without human sin."

Granted that when an evil act, such as a homosexual act, is done in public, the resulting scandal compounds its intrinsic evil.  But an intrinsically evil act does not become good or neutral simply because it is performed in private.  The evil nature of the act remains unchanged.  Pope John Paul II, in his Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, explains that, "If acts are intrinsically evil, a good intention or particular circumstances can diminish their evil, but they cannot remove it.  They remain 'irremediably' evil acts per se and in themselves they are not capable of being ordered to God and to the good of the person." (No. 81).

Pope John Paul II insists that, "No damage must be done to the harmony between faith and life: the unity of the Church is damaged not only by Christians who reject or distort the truths of faith but also by those who disregard the moral obligations to which they are called by the Gospel (cf. 1 Cor 5: 9-13).  The Apostles decisively rejected any separation between the commitment of the heart and the actions which express or prove it (cf. 1 John 2: 3-6).  And ever since Apostolic times the Church's Pastors have unambiguously condemned the behavior of those who fostered division by their teaching or by their actions." (Veritatis Splendor, No. 26).
Deacon Dun's vocation is accepted, nurtured and encouraged.  Mine is rejected.

The difference: I stand with Jesus Christ and the Church He founded.  I'm not a spiritual whore.  I won't promote sodomy for the sake of being accepted. I refuse to sell my soul for a bowl of porridge.

For what does it profit a man to gain the entire world...you know the rest!

Related reading here.

Cardinal Sean O'Malley: Where is your clear and emphatic opposition to a sin that cries to Heaven for vengeance?

As noted here, "Immaculate Heart of Mary School of Still River, MA has withdrawn its marching band and float of Saint Patrick from this year’s Saint Patrick’s Day Parade after learning that a small homosexual activist group will be allowed to march while publicly identifying its homosexuality.

The school is compelled by the teachings of the Catholic Church to pull out. According to the Principal, Brother Thomas Dalton, 'Catholics are forbidden to sponsor or even participate in an event which openly promotes unnatural and immoral behavior. The Church will never accept nor condone same sex marriage and the homosexual life style.'

For 25 years the school has participated in the parade dedicated to Saint Patrick and believes that to have a float with his representation leading a group openly promoting and proud of its homosexual identity would draw down the ire of this great patron of the Boston Archdiocese. 'Saint Patrick stands with Saint Paul in condemning the sin of sodomy,' stated Brother Dalton. 'The name of Saint Patrick should be dropped from the parade as he would have nothing to do with the likes of it today.'

The director of the Band, Br. Peter Bracket stated, 'All the Band members and their parents—although greatly disappointed in not being able to march—are fully supportive of the School’s decision. We have to remain loyal to Church teachings which states in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, promulgated by Saint John Paul II, that ‘homosexual acts are acts of grave depravity’ and ‘are intrinsically disordered…Under no circumstances can they be approved.’ (#2357)'

Brother Peter Bracket is right. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in its document entitled Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, warns that even where homosexual unions have been legalized, "clear and emphatic opposition is a duty." (No. 5). This important document stresses that, "any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws" and even any "material cooperation on the level of their application" must be avoided. "In this area," states the document, "everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection."


Considerations makes it abundantly clear that, "The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to considerations of homosexual unions." (No. 11). In other words, there can be no doubt that all Catholics have a moral duty to oppose the homosexual agenda.

The good folks at Immaculate Heart of Mary School in Still River, Massachusetts understand this.  What a shame that Cardinal Sean O'Malley does not.

The Catholic community in and around Boston deserves an authentic shepherd who understands that opposition to all sin - AND ESPECIALLY SINS THAT CRY TO HEAVEN FOR VENGEANCE-  is a duty of each and every Catholic.

The faithful deserve wheat.  And they suffer from a Cardinal who offers only chaff.

The battle lines have now been drawn

Years ago, when Pope John Paul II still reigned, Michael Brown over at Spirit Daily contacted Father Albert Roux of the Marian Movement of Priests because of a story he was writing on Father Stefano Gobbi.

Fr. Roux  emphasized that: "The Blessed Mother keeps saying that when the Pope [John Paul II] dies the Church will be projected into a dense darkness and it's going to be a great confusion, where people will be dropping out of the Church...There is a man of iniquity who is supposed to be entering the Church. To me that is the anti-christ and his false prophet, and my understanding is that the false prophet will be a false pope who will empty the Church of her spirituality and her doctrine, and will create the abomination of desolation by declaring that the Gospels are not historical and that the divinity of Christ is questionable and the Eucharist is just a symbol. Then he's going to raise the anti-christ, which is going to happen before Jesus's return...

The anti-christ can not come on the public scene until John Paul dies. Something is holding the anti-christ from coming out and I believe this is the papacy of John Paul II. John Paul is not afraid of anyone and he would face up to the anti-christ and unmask him publicly and [the anti-christ] would lose his clout. He would be humiliated, and Satan is not about to let this happen, so he's got to wait till John Paul dies for the anti-christ to appear on the public scene....

I think the United Nations is preparing for the anti-christ's coming to the public scene. He's going to govern the world through the United Nations. Now is the time that Jesus is separating the goats from the sheep. What He's going to do is send Mary to advise and to send events for us to make decisions when we face them. Either we stand on the right hand of Jesus or the left hand side. When Jesus comes in glory He's going to destroy His enemies and then He's going to recreate the earthly paradise  that Adam and Eve had. Those on the right hand side will go into this new promised land." See here.      

Is there not a real sense that the two camps of the Mystical Body of Christ and the Mystical Body of Antichrist are now entering a time of final battle?

It was Archbishop Fulton John Sheen who warned that,"We are living in the days of the Apocalypse - the last days of our era...The two great forces of the Mystical Body of Christ and the Mystical Body of Antichrist are beginning to draw up the battle lines for the catastrophic contest."

And that was more than forty years ago. The battle lines have now been drawn. The catastrophic contest begins in earnest at the upcoming Synod.  The Man of Sin waits for his prophet to prepare his entrance into the Church.

When he enters, the man-God will eventually abolish the Mass and demand that worship which belongs to God alone.

Which side dear reader will you fall on?  Be warned: the fate of your soul depends upon the answer to that question.

Father Thomas Rosica and the leaven of infidelity

In an interview with Professor Gregory Baum for "Salt and Light TV," Father Thomas Rosica told the notorious dissident, “I’ve certainly admired very much your theology, your writings but also your love of the Church, your love of Christ, and you helped to keep alive not only the spirit of the Second Vatican council, but also the authentic teaching of the Council … you remain a faithful, deeply devoted Catholic, love Jesus, the Church, the Eucharist.”

Lifesite News has reported, "Liberal Catholic press-people have recently touted a man some call Canada’s leading dissenter since the 1960s - former Catholic priest Gregory Baum - because of his role as an expert, or peritus, to the Canadian bishops at Vatican II.  Baum, an advocate of homosexual ‘marriage’ and sex outside of marriage and contraception, was lauded by Fr. Thomas Rosica of Salt and Light TV, Michael Swan of the Catholic Register and also given free reign in the pages of the Scarboro Foreign Missions magazine.

Had he merely publicly rejected Catholicism, Baum would not have been as grave a danger to the Church and especially its moral teachings.

Despite the automatic excommunication he incurred for marrying an ex-nun while still a priest, Baum continued to speak lovingly of Jesus and the Gospels as he repudiated many of the principles of faith and morals revealed by Christ and in Sacred Scripture.  One of the tools of repudiation was the dissenting Catholic New Times newspaper co-founded by Baum and other dissenters in 1976 and eventually prohibited from one diocese after another.

Such two-facedness led one of Baum’s contemporaries, canon lawyer Monsignor Vincent Foy, to consider Baum as having “done more than any person to harm the Church in Canada…"

This is the disturbed soul which Father Thomas Rosica has publically lauded.  What would that suggest about Dr. Rosica?

Vatican II, in its' Decree on the Ministry and Life of Priests (Presbyterorum Ordinis) No. 4, tells us that: "The People of God are joined together primarily by the word of the living God. And rightfully they expect this from their priests. Since no one can be saved who does not first believe, priests, as co-workers with their bishops, have the primary duty of proclaiming the Gospel of God to all. In this way they fulfill the command of the Lord: "Going therefore into the whole world preach the Gospel to every creature" (Mk 16:15), and they establish and build up the People of God. Through the saving word the spark of faith is lit in the hearts of unbelievers, and fed in the hearts of the faithful. This is the way that the congregation of faithful is started and grows, just as the Apostle describes: "Faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ" (Rom 10:17).


To all men, therefore, priests are debtors that the truth of the Gospel which they have may be given to others. And so, whether by entering into profitable dialogue they bring people to the worship of God, whether by openly preaching they proclaim the mystery of Christ, or whether in the light of Christ they treat contemporary problems, they are relying not on their own wisdom for it is the word of Christ they teach, and it is to conversion and holiness that they exhort all men."

According to the Council, the task of priests is "not to teach their own wisdom but God's Word." And this task is of no less importance for the priest than his offering of the Eucharistic Sacrifice. Both of these are inseperably linked to each other: "The ministerial priesthood has the task not only of representing Christ - Head of the Church - before the assembly of the faithful, but also of acting in the name of the whole Church when presenting to God the prayer of the Church, and above all when offering the Eucharistic sacrifice." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 1552).

For this reason, priests have the very serious obligation to teach the faithful under their care that it is never licit to have sexual relations outside of marriage; that a Catholic cannot (having been validly married in the Church) after divorce, marry another or otherwise pretend that sexual relations with another individual are somehow "marital"; that "formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense" and that '"the Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life" (CCC, 2272); and that "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible, is intrinsically evil.." (CCC, No. 2370, citing Humanae Vitae, No. 14).

The Church proposes these (and other teachings) as true and it does so in the name of Christ. The priest is not to question them. He is not to ignore them or neglect them out of a false sense of "compassion" or "charity." It was Pope Paul VI who said that, "To diminish in no way the saving teaching of Christ constitutes an eminent form of charity for souls." (Humanae Vitae, No. 29).

Pope John Paul II reiterated these words in Familiaris Consortio, No. 33. We are reminded in Lumen Gentium 14 of the Second Vatican Council that: "He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a "bodily" manner and not "in his heart." All the Church's children should remember that their exalted status is to be attributed not to their own merits but to the special grace of Christ. If they fail moreover to respond to that grace in thought, word and deed, not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged."

When a priest ignores or neglects his duty, his task, of serving the Word of God with fidelity, he fails to persevere in that charity described by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II as a charity which diminishes in no way the saving teaching of Christ. And he will be the more severely judged (Luke 12:48).

But so many priests have neglected their duty to proclaim the Gospel to all.  And the Church is now reaping the fruit of this infidelity.  Even though Canon Law states quite clearly that, "The Christian faithful have the right to receive assistance from the sacred pastors out of the spiritual goods of the Church, especially the word of God and the sacraments" (Canon 213), there has been a dearth of sound catechesis.  The People of God have not been formed by sound instruction based on Church doctrine and Church Tradition.  When was the last time (if ever) you heard a homily in your local parish citing the Catechism of the Catholic Church or papal documents?  Were it not for EWTN, you might never hear such authentic preaching.

And this is nothing short of shameful.  For such a foundation is vital.  Where it is absent, people will assume that they have the right to form their conscience according to their own opinions, their own whims.  The Catechism teaches us that, "Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened.  A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful.  It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator.  The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings." (1783).

Those priests who remain silent while their people crave truth and direction are betraying their vocation.  And they will be (as Lumen Gentium 14 reminds us), the more severely judged.  As will every Catholic who knowingly rejects the authoritative teachings of Christ's Church.  Truly the words of Hosea apply to our own time:

"Sons of Israel, listen to the word of Yahweh, for Yahweh indicts the inhabitants of the country; there is no fidelity, no tenderness, no knowledge of God in the country, only perjury and lies, slaughter, theft, adultery and violence, murder after murder.  This is why the country is in mourning, and all who live in it pineaway, even the wild animals and the birds of heaven; the fish of the sea themselves are perishing."

And to the priests:

"But let no man denounce, no man rebuke; it is you, priest that I denounce.  Day and night you stumble along, the prophet stumbling with you, and you are the ruin of your people.  My people perish for want of knowledge.  As you have rejected knowledge so do I reject you from my priesthood; you have forgotten the teaching of your God, I in my turn will forget your children.  Many as they are, all of them have sinned against me, they have bartered their glory for shame.  They feed on the sin of my people, they are all greedy for their iniquity.  But as with the people, so let it be with the priest: I will make them for their conduct, I will pay them out for their deeds.  They will eat but never be satisfied, they will play the whore but still be sterile, because they have deserted Yahweh to give themselves up to whoring." (Hosea 4: 1-11).

The Church is in crisis because priests like Father Thomas Rosica continue to genuflect before the world in their zeal to serve the Prince of this world.

Pray for these confused clerics.