Replacing the Nicene Creed with the Apostles' Creed every Sunday and the gravity of liturgical abuse

The USCCB instructs that:

"In many Masses, the Nicene Creed follows the homily. The Nicene Creed is a statement of faith dating from the fourth century. In certain instances, the Nicene Creed may be replaced by the Apostles’ Creed (the ancient baptismal creed of the Church in Rome) or by a renewal of baptismal promises, based on the Apostles’ Creed."

See here.

Note the wording: "In certain instances the Nicene Creed may be replaced by the Apostles' Creed.."  Usage of the Nicene Creed remains the norm.

Some priests, motivated often by a false irenicism or even a syncretistic agenda, prefer to use the Apostles' Creed every Sunday.  As Wikipedia explains:

"Because of the early origin of its original form, it [the Apostles' Creed] does not address some Christological issues defined in the Nicene and other Christian Creeds. It thus says nothing explicitly about the divinity of either Jesus or the Holy Spirit. This makes it acceptable to many Arians and Unitarians."

Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand warned that, "False irenicism is motivated by a misconceived charity at the service of a meaningless unity. It places unity above truth. Having severed the essential link between charity and defense of the truth, irenicism is more concerned with reaching a unity with all men than with leading them to Christ and His eternal truth. It ignores the fact that real unity can be reached only in truth. Our Lord’s prayer ‘that they may be one’ implies being one in Him and must not be separated from His words in John: ‘And other sheep I have that are not of this fold. Them also I must bring and they shall hear my voice. And there shall be one fold and one shepherd.’"

Many Catholics today, priests and laity as well as consecrated religious, possess a lust for innovation which they use to assault the stability of sacred rites. Referring to these liturgical terrorists who seek to violently replace divine forms with their own reckless innovations, John Henry Cardinal Newman warned that, "No one can really respect religion and insult its forms.  Granted that forms are not immediately from God, still long use has made them divine to us; for the spirit of religion has so penetrated and quickened them, that to destroy them is, in respect to the multitude of men, to unsettle and dislodge the religious principle itself.  In most minds usage has so identified them with the notion of religion, that one cannot be extirpated without the other.  Their faith will not bear transplanting...Precious doctrines are strung like jewels upon slender threads." (John Henry Cardinal Newman, Parochial and Plain Sermons, Vol. II, Christian Classics Inc, pp. 75-76).

Those who are bent on making their own unauthorized changes to the liturgy often fail to appreciate how such an endeavor can constitute grave sin.  I know this because some have accused me of making a mountain out of a molehill for my opposition to various liturgical abuses.

Dr. Germain Grisez explains: "There are many reasons why it is wrong for priests intentionally to make unauthorized liturgical changes.  Two are especially important.  First, such changes sometimes embody or imply deviations from Catholic faith; even when they do not, they often omit (see here for example) or obscure something of the liturgy's expression of faith.  Thus, the Church teaches: 'The law of prayer is the law of faith: the Church believes as she prays.  Liturgy is a constitutive element of the holy and living Tradition' (cf. DV 8).  For this reason no sacramental rite may be modified or manipulated at the will of the minister or the community.  Even the supreme authority in the Church may not change the liturgy arbitrarily, but only in the obedience of faith and with religious respect for the mystery of the liturgy.' (CCC, 1124-1125).

Dr. Grisez continues, "..in the Eucharist, a priest acts in the person of Christ, who joins humankind to the Father; but in making unauthorized changes, a priest obscures Jesus' action, focuses attention on himself, and becomes an obstacle to the relationship between God and His People that priests are ordained to serve...Priests are agents ordained to deliver God's gifts to His People.  If they deliver some substitute for what Jesus has entrusted to them, they interpose themselves between - and defraud - both God and His People...

There are five additional reasons why unauthorized changes should not be made in the liturgy.  First, the liturgy is the worship of the Church as a body, and those who are ordained act as Church officials in performing liturgical roles.  So, insofar as a priest makes unauthorized changes, he misrepresents as the Church's what is in fact only his or some limited group's. Even if this misrepresentation deceives no one and is intended for some good end, it is at odds with the reverence necessary for true worship.  Second, this essential irreverence and the obvious arbitrariness of intentional unauthorized changes strongly suggest that the Eucharist is not sacred, and this suggestion tends to undermine not only faith in Jesus' bodily presence in the consecrated elements, but faith that the Eucharist is Jesus' sacrifice made present for the faithful to share in.  Third, a priest who makes intentional, unauthorized changes acts with deplorable clericalism by imposing his personal preferences on the laity and violating the rights of those who quite reasonably wish only to participate in the Church's worship.  Fourth, intentionally making unauthorized changes sets a bad example of serious disobedience to the Church's norms, and this bad example is likely to encourage some people to think and do as they please not only in liturgical and canonical matters, but in matters of faith and morals.  Fifth...unauthorized liturgical changes often become a needless, divisive issue for the faithful, thus impeding the charity that the Eucharist should express and foster."

Still think that liturgical abuse is a small matter of little significance?  If so, this reflects on your own immaturity and not the objective truth that liturgical abuse constitutes grave matter.  How grave?  Again, Dr. Grisez:

"The reasons why priests should not make unauthorized liturgical changes also make it clear..that a priest's intentionally doing so is of itself matter of grave sin.  Of course, many changes are in themselves very minor, and a few perhaps even are real improvements.  But though this kind of sin admits  parvity, such small changes also are scandalous, not only because they give the faithful a bad example of disobedience but because they contribute to a clerical culture in which liturgical abuse is widely tolerated and sometimes even expected, so that some are encouraged to engage in far graver abuses.  Now, even a sin venial in itself becomes grave scandal when one foresees that it is likely to lead others to commit grave sin; thus, the element of scandal makes grave matter of even minor liturgical abuses likely to encourage more serious abuses by other priests.  Due to widespread confusion and negligence of some bishops, many priests undoubtedly lack sufficient reflection regarding this sin."

Serious matter this.

Cardinal Burke: Bishops and Vatican have failed to defend morality

Cardinal Burke notes how our Bishops and the Vatican have failed to defend morality.  In a recent interview, His Eminence, speaking of the crisis in the Church, Said: “The situation in the Church is very alarming, first of all, because the fundamental truths of faith are undermined, put into question.”

He went on to lament that “there is no strong leadership from Rome that could explain and clarify these matters.”

The time for lying is over.  I have been saying this for years.  Back in 2009, Archbishop Charles Chaput noted that, "40 years of American Catholic complacency and poor formation are bearing exactly the fruit we should have expected...We can't talk about following St. Paul and converting our culture until we sober up and get honest about what we've allowed ourselves to become.  We need to stop lying to each other..." (See here).

The lying must stop.  For this to happen, we need priests and Bishops who fear God more than they do men.  Cowards will not lead us out of the valley of death.  Only shepherds who have the spiritual strength, the Cardinal Gift of Fortitude, to brave the risk of worldly criticism, will be able to lead the American Catholic Church out of the valley of the Culture of Death and back on the road to the Civilization of Love which Pope John Paul II spoke of so often.

Why have so many priests succumbed to fear?  Why is it that their preaching no longer points out sin?  Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange provides us with an answer:


"The reason for this is not difficult to find.  A sermon is the result of the combined effort of all the priest's powers; it reveals his entire person; it is his struggle against the vices of the surrounding world."  In other words, if the preaching is unsound, it is because the priest's spiritual life is unsound.  Fr. Lagrange continues, "Everything in the priest cooperates in his preaching - study, reflection, his powers to compose and revise, the activity of his intellect, his imagination, his memory, his feelings, his voice.  Therefore, when he preaches, the priest stands exposed for all to study; some will be attracted, others will not.  Some will accept what he says, others will simply criticize.  So if the priest approaches his task from the human angle, he will say to himself: 'I cannot afford to lose my reputation; people of weight in the parish who take offense easily must be spared their feelings and not provoked; I must proceed warily so as not to incur criticism.'  In that way Christian eloquence is invaded by a profane eloquence in which the preacher looks after his own interests, not the glory of God or the saving of souls." (The Priest In Union With Christ, p. 156).

I've never been a fan of lying.  And this because Our Lord tells us that the Devil is the Father of all lies (John 8:44),  If it's lying you want, this Blog is not for you.  Forty years of lying has wrought so much damage to the American Catholic Church.  Archbishop Chaput is right, we are merely reaping the fruit of what we've planted.  St. Paul tells us that, "...the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.." (Galatians 5: 22).  But what fruit have we witnessed in the American Catholic Church?  The Church has been infected with dry-rot as so many Catholics have succumbed to the works of the flesh.

We need heroic shepherds.  Men who, like Blessed Miguel Pro, S.J., are willing to give their very lives for the Catholic Church and her teaching.

Archbishop Eamon Martin: Killing children should be "safe, legal and rare."

Archbishop Eamon Martin of Ireland has said that abortion should be "safe, legal and rare."  See here.

"Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, and in communion with the Bishops of the Catholic Church, I confirm that the direct and voluntary killing of an innocent human being is always gravely immoral. This doctrine, based upon that unwritten law which man, in the light of reason, finds in his own heart (cf. Rom 2:14-15), is reaffirmed by Sacred Scripture, transmitted by the Tradition of the Church and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium.

The deliberate decision to deprive an innocent human being of his life is always morally evil and can never be licit either as an end in itself or as a means to a good end. It is in fact a grave act of disobedience to the moral law, and indeed to God himself, the author and guarantor of that law; it contradicts the fundamental virtues of justice and charity. "Nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult, an old person, or one suffering from an incurable disease, or a person who is dying. Furthermore, no one is permitted to ask for this act of killing, either for himself or herself or for another person entrusted to his or her care, nor can he or she consent to it, either explicitly or implicitly. Nor can any authority legitimately recommend or permit such an action". (Pope John Paul II, Evangelium vitae, No. 57).

We are living in a time which has been spiritually crippled by a diabolical disorientation.  And this should hardly comes as a surprise.  As Dr. Germain Grisez has explained, "Insofar as they are in sin or remain emotionally attached to it, people not only cling to thoughts and feelings inconsistent with moral truth but are unreceptive to other thoughts and feelings without which they will probably not reach it, will perhaps not recognize it if it is reached, and will hardly welcome it if it is recognized.  Sin leads them to shun the bright light of moral truth; living in sin, they prefer the shadows of self-deception and rationalization (see Jn 3:19-20).  Like a blind person unable to tell that he or she is in the dark, one cannot discover one's evasions of moral truth and root them out by any direct effort.  The only way to get rid of them is by praying for the healing of the Spirit and making good use of the sacrament of penance, with sincere contrition for one's sins (see Ps 51: 6-12).

The only way to get rid of them is by praying for the healing of the Spirit and making good use of the sacrament of penance.  This is what Pope Benedict XVI said a few years back as he warned of danger for the Church.  See here.

Diabolical disorientation under Francis and its consequences.  See here.

Francis the Divider..

Francis continues to divide the Catholic Church as this article makes clear. From the article:

"Father Thomas Weinandy, a former chief of staff for the U.S. bishops’ committee on doctrine, has accused Francis of causing 'theological anarchy.' Another group of bishops has warned Francis risks spreading 'a plague of divorce.' Last fall, more than 200 scholars and priests signed a letter accusing Francis of spreading heresy. 'This was not something I did lightly,' Father John Rice, a parish priest in Shaftesbury in the U.K. said, claiming the pope’s liberal push has caused 'much division and disagreement, and sadness and confusion in the church.'"

It should come as no surprise that dissent within the Church leads to polarization and undermines truth which is the principle of the Church’s communion. In its Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, No. 40, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said that, “The Church ‘is like a sacrament, a sign and instrument, that is, of communion with God and of unity among all men’ (LG, 1). Consequently, to pursue concord and communion is to enhance the force of her witness and credibility. To succumb to the temptation of dissent, on the other hand, is to allow the ‘leaven of infidelity to the Holy Spirit’ to start to work.”



Some will still object: "But even if people dissent from Church teaching, that's not our concern. Leave them to God. We shouldn't say anything for the sake of peace. They will come to the truth in God's time." 

What of this? Is this an authentic peace? Well, no. In the words of Pope John XXIII, who was an extremely good-natured and peacable Pontiff, a lover of peace, an authentic peace, "is not completely untroubled and serene; it is active, not calm and motionless. In short, this is a peace that is ever at war. It wars with every sort of error, including that which falsely wears the face of truth; it struggles against the enticements of vice, against those enemies of the soul, of whatever description, who can weaken, blemish, or destroy our innocence or Catholic faith." (Ad Petri cathedram, AAS, 51 (1959) 517, PE, 263.93).

Faithful Catholics must now oppose a heretic who is committed to destroying our Catholic faith. A deceiver whose word is worthless.


Related reading here.

Ireland is plunged into darkness as Francis remains silent...

Ireland has voted to legalize abortion. See here.

An obscure book entitled, "The Most Ancient Lives of Saint Patrick Including the Life by Jocelin, Hitherto Unpublished in America, and His Extant Writings," recounts a remarkable prophecy which was given to Saint Patrick in a vision.

Chapter CLXXV of this work explains that, "The different States of Hibernia* are in a Heavenly Vision shown unto the Saint. And the man of God anxiously desired and earnestly prayed that he might be certified of the present and the future state of Hibernia, to the end that he might be assured of the faith, or of the value that his labors bore in the sight of God. Then the Lord heard the desire of his heart, and manifested the same unto him by an evident revelation; for while he was engaged in prayer, and the heart of his mind was opened, he beheld the whole island as it were a flaming fire ascending unto heaven; and he heard the angel of God saying unto him: "Such at this time is Hibernia in the sight of the Lord." And after a little space he beheld in all parts of the island even as mountains of fire stretching unto the skies. And again after a little space he beheld as it were candles burning, and after a while darkness intervened; and then he beheld fainter lights, and at length he beheld coals lying hidden here and there, as reduced unto ashes, yet still burning. And the angel added: "What thou seest here shown, such shall be the people of Hibernia." 

Then the saint, exceedingly weeping, often repeated the words of the Psalmist, saying: "Whether will God turn himself away for ever, and will he be no more entreated? Shall his mercy come to an end from generation to generation? Shall God forget to be merciful, and shut up his mercy in his displeasure?" And the angel said, "Look toward the northern side, and on the right hand of a height shalt thou behold the darkness dispersed from the face of the light which thenceforth will arise." Then the saint raised his eyes, and behold, he at first saw a small light arising in Ulydia, the which a long time contended with the darkness, and at length dispersed it, and illumined with its rays the whole island. Nor ceased the light to increase and to prevail, even until it had restored to its former fiery state all Hibernia. Then was the heart of the saint filled with joy, and his heart with exultation, giving thanks for all these things which had been shown unto him: and he understood in the greatness of this fiery ardor of the Christian faith the devotion and the zeal of religion, wherewith those islanders burned. By the fiery mountains he understood the men who would be holy in their miracles and their virtues, eminent in their preachings and their examples; by the lessening of the light, the decrease of holiness; by the darkness that covered the land, the infidelity which would prevail therein; by the intervals of delay, the distances of the succeeding times.

* Ireland.

Prophecy is being fulfilled before our very eyes as Francis remains silent.  See here.

The Rev. P. Huchede, in his work entitled "History of Antichrist," explains the religious preparation, both intellectual and moral, for the Reign of Antichrist which will arrive after economic collapse: "But how shall he deprive the world of Christianity and have himself adored as God? Alas, it is only too true that the minds and hearts of men are admirably disposed for revolution and consequently ready to accept and bear the cruel yoke of such a tyrant. Revolution as the word itself implies means a subversion, but a subversion of all that is true, good, beautiful, and grand in the universe. It is the subversion of religion, representing its dogmas as myths and its moral teachings as tyranical. It is the subversion of authority...

Licentiousness under the name of liberty becomes the order of the day; each one is invested with the right to govern himself. It is the subversion of reason: and do we not find leading minds in some of the most enlightened nations denying the principle of contradiction and maintaining the absolute identity of all beings? Revolution is therefore essentially destructive, and it becomes cosmopolitan by the action of secret societies scattered throughout the world. Is it not true to say that the 'mystery of iniquity' is prepared in secret revolutionary dens? But it does not suffice to destroy; it is absolutely necessary to build up again. The world cannot subsist long in a vacuum. It must have a religion; it must have a philosophy; it must have an authority. Revolution will furnish all these. Instead of the reasonable and supernatural religion of Jesus Christ, Revolution will preach Pantheism. The God-humanity will impart the theurgic spirit and thus lead men to adore the demon as the author of universal emancipation...What frightful immorality must follow in the train of this shameless prostitution of religion! Never has the threefold concupiscence made greater ravage among mankind. And this is the religion sought and hoped for as the cherished boon of the aspirations of our modern free thinkers. To our Christian philosophy, the honor of humanity's revolution will substitute a babel of extravagant and absurd ideas. Instead of a mild and efficient authority consecrated alike by Church and state, despotism and anarchy will rise up and contend for the shreds of religious liberty and human policy...if the state of perversion continue for a while longer, he [Antichrist] will find the world prepared to receive and serve him." (Rev. P. Huchede, History of Antichrist, pp. 13-14, Tan Books).

Clint Walker, gone at age 90...

Clint Walker, the 6'7 actor who started in his own 1960s series Cheyenne, has passed away.  See here.

Clint Walker was an inspiration to me.  He was the epitome of authentic masculinity.  In all his roles, as in real life, he spoke quietly.  He didn't have to act tough.  He was tough.

Along with Carlos Ray Norris, Ed Parker, Bill Wallace and Yip Man, he influenced my life profoundly.  Today, at age 52, I bench 650.

Clint belonged to a different time.  A time when masculinity wasn't viewed as a disease or psychopathology.

He will be missed by many.

Eternal rest grant unto him , O Lord,
and let perpetual light shine upon him .
May the souls of all the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace.

Beautiful tribute to Clint here.

Me, at home.

Clint Walker, as Cheyenne Bodie

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

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


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

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

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

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

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


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

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

The apostasy spreads.

Cardinal Raymond Burke: The faithful remnant should place themselves under Christ the King during these days of apostasy...

Cardinal Raymond Burke is exhorting the faithful remnant to place themselves under Christ the King during these dark days of apostasy.

In his Encyclical Letter Quas Primas, Pope Pius XI wrote:


"In the first Encyclical Letter which We addressed at the beginning of Our Pontificate to the Bishops of the universal Church, We referred to the chief causes of the difficulties under which mankind was laboring. And We remember saying that these manifold evils in the world were due to the fact that the majority of men had thrust Jesus Christ and his holy law out of their lives; that these had no place either in private affairs or in politics: and we said further, that as long as individuals and states refused to submit to the rule of our Savior, there would be no really hopeful prospect of a lasting peace among nations. Men must look for the peace of Christ in the Kingdom of Christ; and that We promised to do as far as lay in Our power. In the Kingdom of Christ, that is, it seemed to Us that peace could not be more effectually restored nor fixed upon a firmer basis than through the restoration of the Empire of Our Lord. We were led in the meantime to indulge the hope of a brighter future at the sight of a more widespread and keener interest evinced in Christ and his Church, the one Source of Salvation, a sign that men who had formerly spurned the rule of our Redeemer and had exiled themselves from his kingdom were preparing, and even hastening, to return to the duty of obedience." (No. 1).

What of this papal teaching on the Kingship of Christ? Why is it that we hear almost nothing on this subject these days? Largely because of our modern democratic mentality. Beginning with the "Enlightenment" (although it was hardly that) and the Industrial Revolution, there was the realization that the rights and interests of a people are best furthered by self-government. This was a positive development. And as nations began to adopt more democratic models of government, the whole notion of royalty either disappeared altogether or was reduced to little more than a museum-piece whose purpose was merely to perpetuate the memory of a romanticized past.

The transition from monarchy to democracy is rightly labelled progress. This because, as any student of history knows full well, the kingship of men more often than not was an exercise in injustice, brutality and unmitigated tyranny. The reign of these merely human kings (and emperors) brings to mind the words of Lord Acton: "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." I write these words as I listen to the Iraqi Prime Minister address the United States Congress and testify to the same.

But should this fact have any implications for our approach to the whole notion of Christ as King of the universe? Obviously we cannot totally divorce our religious concepts from those of the secular sphere. If the notion of kingship is now considered obsolete with regard to our political life, then there are two alternatives which present themselves to us: either we abandon the entire concept and terminology of kingship in the religious sphere, or we must define the Kingship of Christ more precisely so that we might better distinguish this Divine Kingship from that of merely human kings and thereby present it to the world in a more appealing way.

But can we abandon the title of king which Sacred Scripture applies to Christ? Unlike presidents, prime ministers or those we simply refer to as leaders, a king reigns; he rules. And what does it mean to reign or rule? It means to direct or order members of a given society toward their proper end. In a democratic government, it is the people who have the power to rule and the president or prime minister is merely their delegated representative. Whereas in a monarchy, the king alone has the power to rule. And this not by delegation but because this power to rule is derived from his pre-eminence or excellence.

In a democratic form of government, there are three functions which are divided and which are the proper domains of three separate brances of government: the legislative, executive and judicial. But a king possesses the fullness of these powers and it is of his royal essence that he is subject to no one else in the realm with regard to these powers.

Christ has full legislative power. We see this in the New Testament as He accomplished His task of setting up the New Covenant. He has full executive power which He exercises over His Mystical Body the Church and through His Apostles. He has full judicial power, a power which will be made all the more manifest when He returns to earth:

"I saw heaven standing open; and behold, a white horse, and he who sat upon it is called Faithful and True, and with justice he judges and wages war. And his eyes are as a flame of fire, and on his head many diadems; he has a name written which no man knows except himself. And he is clothed in a garment sprinkled with blood, and his name is called the Word of God. And the armies of heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses. And from his mouth goes forth a sharp sword with which to smite the nations. And he will rule them with a rod of iron, and he treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God Almighty. And he has on his garment and on his thigh a name written, 'King of kings and Lord of lords" (Revelation 19: 11-16).

Jesus is indeed our King. And yes, He rules with a rod of iron. But not as the brutal despot rules. He rules with justice and He is Faithful and True. He is the King of the Universe who defends His people against the rule of Satan, a rule which He overthrows as He destroys the kingdom of Satan on a blood-soaked Cross.

Our King is meekness itself. He defeats the powers of darkness with an iron rod which is called love. Recall that when He stood before Pilate, the Roman governor questioned him, "Are you the king of the Jews?" (Mt 27:11). And He replied, "You say so." This statement from Jesus our King is absolute. And men of every age and place must acknowledge this truth.

Because of the modern democratic mentality, there are many within the Church who believe that they can dissent from (reject) the authoritative teaching of Jesus our King as made known through the Magisterium of His Church. Recall what Pope John Paul II had to say about this:

"While exchanges and conflicts of opinion may constitute normal expressions of public life in a representative democracy, moral teaching certainly cannot depend simply upon respect for a process: indeed, it is in no way established by following the rules and deliberative procedures typical of a democracy. Dissent, in the form of carefully orchestrated protests and polemics carried on in the media, is opposed to ecclesial communion and to a correct understanding of the hierarchical constitution of the People of God. Opposition to the teaching of the Church's Pastors cannot be seen as a legitimate expression either of Christian freedom or of the diversity of the Spirit's gifts." (Veritatis Splendor, No. 113).

The Church is hierarchical with Christ our King as the head of His Mystical Body. And our heavenly Father has sent forth His firstborn Son to establish a kingdom for a glorious purpose: "For just as in Adam all die, so too in Christ shall all be brought to life, but each one in proper order: Christ the firstfruits; then, at his coming, those who belong to Christ; then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to his God and Father, when he has destroyed every sovereignty and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death, for 'he subjected everything under his feet.' But when it says that everything has been subjected, it is clear that it excludes the one who subjected everything to him. When everything is subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to the one who subjected everything to him [the Father], so that God may be all in all." (1 Corinthians 15: 22-28).

Now that's a Kingship which should appeal to anyone!

Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone on the real reason for the Church...

San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone on the role of the Catholic Church:

"the worst thing we can do, if we truly want to fulfill our reason for being as Catholics, is to soften or downplay the hard parts of our faith, those teachings where we encounter the most resistance and even hostility in the culture...The very reason the Church exists is to evangelize...It is not to antagonize nor to appease, not to pressure nor to placate, but to be Christ’s presence for others, so that they might find and encounter the one Savior of the world and come to be saved. In other words, winning souls for Christ.”

In an essay on the meaning of evangelization, Father Vincent Miceli, S.J. wrote, "Being the work of God and man in cooperation, it must ever be a thrilling and awesome adventure.  We can say, however, that this sanctifying activity proclaims Christ to those who do not know Him, preaches the Gospel to them through catechesis and missionary sermons, confers Baptism and other sacraments and tirelessly exhorts converts to scale the heights of sanctity.  Jesus Christ, Himself, the Good News of God, was the very first and greatest evangelizer.  He proclaimed an absolute Kingdom of God, making everything else relative.  He proclaimed salvation, namely liberation from sin, Satan, death, a liberation that bestowed upon sinners returned to God grace, resurrection in immortality and glorification in the triune God.  He proclaimed the price man must pay for his salvation, namely that men must gain Heaven by violence, i.e., through a life of penance, toil, and suffering accepted in the spirit of the Suffering Servant of God.  And above all He proclaimed that man must undergo that interior renewal which the Gospel calls metanoia, that is the radical change of heart and mind which destroys 'the old man of sin' and creates 'the new man of grace.'"

Fr. Miceli then explains that there are obstacles to evangelization.  He writes, "St Thomas Aquinas teaches that three things are necessary for a soul to find, follow and embrace Christ.  First, a person must know what he ought to believe.  Second, he must know what he ought to desire.  Third, he must know what he ought to do.  Now ignorance is the first great obstacle to evangelization.  Catholics, therefore, should grow in a profound knowledge of their Faith through a constant reading and reflection on the Gospels and a faithful following of the teachings of the Magisterium.  Only thus will they come to appreciate the Catholic Faith as a gift of God that is true, good and beautiful.  They then will be moved by the Holy Spirit to bring non-Catholics to share this gift from God with them..."

Finally, surveying the Catholic Church in the United States, Fr. Miceli writes, "Unfortunately, the fact is that the Church in the United States, instead of being the crusading, courageous, evangelizing society Christ founded it to be, has become a cream-puff chaplaincy to the converted - and because of this attitude is failing to hold on even to these...How are we to stir up again the spirit of evangelization?  Pope Paul VI in Evangelii Nuntiandi gives us our marching orders:

'On us particularly, the pastors of the Church, rests the responsibility for reshaping with boldness and wisdom, but in complete fidelity to the content of evangelization, the means that are most suitable and effective for communicating the Gospel message to the men and women of our times.'" (Fr. Vincent P. Miceli, citing Pope Paul VI in Evangelii Nuntiandi, No. 40).

Note this passage.  What does Pope Paul VI mean by "complete fidelity to the content of evangelization"?  The Holy Father means that pastors of the Church must offer the men and women of our times what Pope Benedict XVI has said is the entire plan of God. See here.  That is to say, the full content of Catholic teaching - including, and especially, those hard truths which the world does not want to hear but which faithful Catholics must share with hurting souls who wander about without a shepherd.

This is what evangelization is all about!

Sadly, too many priests today emphasize social justice issues or community projects and fund-raising while remaining mute on the hard truths which the faithful need to hear. These Chicken-clerics have either succumbed to fear or indifference or both.  They offer, not the fine wheat of solid Catholic doctrine, but the chaff of watered-down, cotton-candy Catholicism.

Why have so many priests succumbed to fear?  Why is it that their preaching no longer points out sin?  Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange provides us with an answer:


"The reason for this is not difficult to find.  A sermon is the result of the combined effort of all the priest's powers; it reveals his entire person; it is his struggle against the vices of the surrounding world."  In other words, if the preaching is unsound, it is because the priest's spiritual life is unsound.  Fr. Lagrange continues, "Everything in the priest cooperates in his preaching - study, reflection, his powers to compose and revise, the activity of his intellect, his imagination, his memory, his feelings, his voice.  Therefore, when he preaches, the priest stands exposed for all to study; some will be attracted, others will not.  Some will accept what he says, others will simply criticize.  So if the priest approaches his task from the human angle, he will say to himself: 'I cannot afford to lose my reputation; people of weight in the parish who take offense easily must be spared their feelings and not provoked; I must proceed warily so as not to incur criticism.'  In that way Christian eloquence is invaded by a profane eloquence in which the preacher looks after his own interests, not the glory of God or the saving of souls." (The Priest In Union With Christ, p. 156).

I've never been a fan of lying.  And this because Our Lord tells us that the Devil is the Father of all lies (John 8:44),  If it's lying you want, this Blog is not for you.  Forty years of lying has wrought so much damage to the American Catholic Church.  We are merely reaping the fruit of what we've planted.  St. Paul tells us that, "...the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.." (Galatians 5: 22).  But what fruit have we witnessed in the Catholic Church across the United States?  The Church has been infected with dry-rot as so many Catholics have succumbed to the works of the flesh.

We need heroic shepherds.  Men who, like Blessed Miguel Pro, S.J., are willing to give their very lives for the Catholic Church and her teaching.  Shepherds who offer the hard truths and not effeminized, New Agey claptrap.

The UK is quickly becoming a Moloch State

The UK is becoming increasingly totalitarian.

Now that Alfie Evans has been murdered, six more children are being targeted for elimination.  See 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).

It was Edmund Leach who warned that, "Having abandoned the God of love, the Supreme Creator, 21st-century man is now ready to worship himself and to usurp the divine powers of creation and destruction. In the words of Dr. Edmund Leach of King's College at Cambridge: 'The scientist can now play God in his role as wonder-worker, but can he - and should he - also play God as moral arbiter?...There can be no source for these moral judgments except the scientist himself. In traditional religion, morality was held to derive from God, but God was only credited with the authority to establish and enforce moral laws because He was also credited with supernatural powers of creation and destruction. Those powers have now been usurped by man, and he must take on the moral responsibility that goes with them' (Edmund Leach, "We Scientists Have the Right to Play God," The Saturday Evening Post, November 16, 1968, p. 16).

But make no mistake about it, when man becomes God society becomes, in the words of the French philosopher Gabriel Marcel, "a termite colony." We are still in the twilight, but the darkness is quickly advancing and unless we take a stand now, we will have the Moloch state. As at Auschwitz, men will determine who has quality of life and who should be "mercifully terminated."

Good Catholics cannot ignore the controversy over Francis...but at Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts, that's standard operating procedure

Barbara Simpson writes:

"Roman Catholics were just entering the critical weekend of their Easter celebration – Holy Thursday, Good Friday, Holy Saturday and Easter Sunday, perhaps the most important commemorations in their religion – when Pope Francis threw another of his religious bombshells into the lives of his followers.

Just before Holy Thursday dawned, an interview with the pope was published in La Repubblica. It was written by the founder of the left-wing publication, Eugenio Scalfari, an Italian atheist.

In the article, the 93-year old journalist claimed the pope told him hell does not exist because people are not punished. If they do not repent and go to heaven, they just 'disappear.'

According to Scalfari, the pope said, 'There is no hell – there is the disappearance of sinful souls.'

Inasmuch as that’s a refutation of a core belief of Catholicism, when word of the interview got out, it spread like wildfire, in religious and mainstream publications.

Criticism was widespread, from The Drudge Report to the New York Times, to say nothing of the international press. There was consternation among clergy, and the average churchgoer was at a loss as to what was going on.

The Italian press acknowledged the pope had met with Scalfari five or six times in the past for lengthy 'interviews' and that the journalist does not take notes, nor does he record any interviews. As a result, there clearly were doubts raised as to the accuracy of what he claimed were Francis’ statements. In fact, this was not the first time such questions have been raised about his 'interviews' with the pope.

The Vatican also jumped to respond – but not forcefully. Its reaction didn’t deny what the pope said, but also didn’t affirm it, saying essentially that some of the words were not those of the pope.

Uh, exactly, what does that mean? The problem is that his statements are indeed heretical, so what now?

Apparently, nothing. Francis goes his merry way leaving bits and pieces of his Church and doctrine fraying around the edges and thoughtful clergy beginning to be angry.

American Cardinal Raymond Burke is greatly concerned about what is happening with this pope, saying that by not clarifying what was said, he only 'feeds the confusion.'

Burke is a well-known canon lawyer and the former head of the highest Vatican court. He didn’t mince any words, saying that what Pope Francis said 'went beyond what is tolerable' and is 'a source of deep scandal.'

The whole situation has left many questions, and it appears that there will be no answers, at least not yet. Either Pope Francis is the most naive of men or an individual dedicated to shaking up the lives of Catholics for a purpose he hasn’t revealed.

To the layman, it would appear he’s intent on undermining Catholic beliefs and watering down Church doctrines to suit some ulterior motive.

Regardless of which, it’s dangerous territory and could threaten to tear apart a Church already losing membership and clergy. There are those who believe the Church faces the possibility of collapse during this generation.

And speaking of church destruction, Cardinal Joseph Zen, who is the emeritus bishop of Hong Kong, is furious with how the pope has handled dealing with China and Catholic Church activities in that country. He’s blasted the deal, which he says, appeases China by agreeing to have the government choose Church leadership. He says that will be the annihilation of the 'underground church,' which is, in fact, a church that follows traditional Catholicism.

He should know: He spent seven years teaching in China’s official, state-approved church and said he 'know[s] that the church is completely enslaved to the government.' Remember, it’s a Communist government.

But there’s more. Over time, it’s been clear Francis veers left on most of his public positions on world affairs, from war to the environment to the family to borders and refugees.

And there he is again – this time, equating protecting the lives of the unborn to protecting the lives of migrants and their rights. In his latest 'guidance for Catholics,' published just last week, Pope Francis said that Christians must care for immigrants just as they care for the unborn.

In his text, 'Gaudate et Exsultate' ('Rejoice and Be Glad'), he said all human lives matter, and he went on to enumerate everything from the living, the sick, slaves, victims of trafficking and anyone rejected for any reason. While he reaffirmed the Church’s position of the sinfulness of abortion, he criticized those who see it as more important than migration.

He said the defense of the 'innocent unborn' should not supersede the defense of the poor or migrants.

Again, just what does that mean? Here he’s dealing with the issues of borders and massive migrations across Europe and North America. The pope has spoken out before that migrants have rights that supersede the sovereign rights of countries. Now that he is putting the burden of 'sin' on those who oppose open borders, the picture, for Catholics, at least, has changed.

But there’s even more: The pope has just released a written apology to the bishops of Chile for a long-standing child abuse situation.

There are 64 victims in New York and Chile involving a cover-up by Chilean Bishop Juan Barros, a man the pope has supported over the years. Despite the allegations of abuse, the pope continually denied knowing of their validity and said he’d never heard from any of the victims.

The recent Vatican investigation, as reported on LifeSite, finally forced the pope to admit that 'he made grave errors' in this case. In his written note, he asks 'the forgiveness of all those whom I offended over the years,' blaming it on a lack of true information.

He omitted any call for justice against those who committed the abuses. Just an 'I’m sorry.'

So Pope Francis is human and made a big mistake. Now what?

It’s not common for Catholics to criticize a pope – but it is the opinion of this cradle Catholic, and I suspect I am not alone, that he’s used up his 'passes.'

It’s time for Pope Francis to step aside and spend time in deep reconciliation with his faith and God – thus putting an end to his reign of Catholic confusion."

While many clergy, religious and laity are deeply concerned over the errors and misguided actions of Francis, sadly some blindly follow him, preferring to keep their heads in the sand.

And while Raymond Arroyo, over at EWTN, has said that good Catholics cannot ignore the controversy over Francis - see here -  some prefer to view the pope not so much as the Custodian of immutable truths, but as a sort of ersatz wizard with a magic wand, capable of changing that which has been revealed by the Lord Jesus, the true Head of the Catholic Church, Who will judge us all - Popes included.

This is the situation at Saint Mary's Church in Orange, Massachusetts. For Father Shaun O'Connor and his "pastoral team," there is not only no reason for concern, but we should all be enthralled with Francis, his errors, falsehoods and wreckovation included.

Which makes me wonder: Whom do they worship?  Christ the Second Person of the Trinity, the Incarnate Word, or a frustrated modernist who seems Hell-bent on undermining Catholic teaching while sowing confusion.

Confusion is not a gift of the Holy Spirit. It is, in fact, a mark of the Devil. Perhaps this explains

why the Saint Michael Prayer has been dropped after weekend liturgies at the parish.

Under Francis, the Catholic Church in decline

Life Site News reports:

"The Catholic Church is seeing its biggest decline in Mass attendance in the U.S. in decades that started between the papacies of Pope Benedict XVI and Pope Francis, a new Gallup poll says.

'From 2014 to 2017, an average of 39% of Catholics reported attending church in the past seven days. This is down from an average of 45% from 2005 to 2008 and represents a steep decline from 75% in 1955,' the poll found.

Francis became Pope in 2013.

Weekly Mass attendance among Catholics dropped six percentage points, the findings said, with fewer than four in 10 Catholics going to Mass in any given week.

In contrast, the survey said church attendance remained strong over the last decade with U.S. Protestants."

The eclipse of the Church has been prophesied by Our Lady:

"Mélanie, what I am going to tell you now will not always be a secret; you can publish it in 1858...

Priests, my Son's ministers, priests, by their evil life, by their irreverences and their impiety in celebrating the holy mysteries, love of money, love of honor and pleasures, priests have become sewers of impurity. Yes, priests call forth vengeance, and vengeance is suspended over their heads. Woe to priests, and to persons consecrated to God, who by their infidelities and their evil life are crucifying my son anew! The sins of persons consecrated to God cry to heaven and call for vengeance, and now here is vengeance at their very doors, for no longer is anyone found to beg mercy and pardon for the people; there are no more generous souls, there is now no one worthy of offering the spotless Victim to the Eternal on the worlds behalf.

God will strike in an unparalleled manner. Woe to the inhabitants of the earth! God will exhaust His anger, and no one will be able to escape so many evils at once. The heads, the leaders of the people of God, have neglected prayer and penance, and the devil has darkened their minds; they have become those wandering stars which the ancient devil will drag with his tail to destruction. God will permit the ancient serpent to sow divisions among rulers, in all societies and in all families; both physical and moral punishments will be suffered. God will abandon men to themselves and will send chastisements one after the other for over 35 years.

Society is on the very eve of most terrible scourges and greatest events; one must expect to be governed by a rod of iron and to drink the chalice of God's wrath..."

- Our Lady to Melanie Calvat, La Salette France.


In his book Communism and the Conscience of the West, Archbishop Fulton John Sheen warned that, "He [Satan] will set up a counterchurch which will be the ape of the Church, because he, the Devil, is the ape of God. It will have all the notes and characteristics of the Church, but in reverse and emptied of its divine content. It will be a mystical body of the Antichrist that will in all externals resemble the Mystical Body of Christ...Then will be verified a paradox - the very objections with which men in the last century rejected the Church will be the reasons why they will now accept the counterchurch." (pp. 24-25).

Even now, many are working to subvert the Catholic Church from within. Pastors who have been seduced by the spirit of Antichrist and who have fallen into hidden (and sometimes not so hidden) apostasy. As Michael Brown has noted in his book The Trumpet of Gabriel, "The spirit of anti-christ precedes the physical Antichrist. The spiritual battle precedes the physical one.." (p. 218).

Our Lady told Father Bobbi:

"The great trial has come for the Church, so violated by the evil spirits, so divided in its unity, so darkened in its holiness. See how error has flooded throughout it, error which leads to the loss of the true faith. Apostasy is spreading everywhere...how many are those pastors who grope about in the mist, become speechless out of fear or compromise, and who no longer defend their flocks from the many rapacious wolves!...The faithful are being drawn in by the enticements of a world which has become pagan, or by the countless sects which are spreading more and more.


The hour its great trial has above all come for the Church, because it will be shaken by the lack of faith, obscured by apostasy, wounded by betrayal, abandoned by its children, divided by schisms, possessed and dominated by Freemasonry, turned into fertile soil from which will spring up the wicked tree of the man of iniquity, the Antichrist, who will bring his kingdom into its interior." (Our Lady to Father Stefano Gobbi, January 1, 1993, Rubbio (Vicenza, Italy).

Francis: This atheist was a "good man" who is in Heaven

Just recently, Francis told a young boy whose atheist father passed away, "Maybe we could cry like Emanuele when we have pain in our heart. He cries for his father who died and has had the courage to do it in front of us because there is love in his heart – he underlines – his father was an atheist but he had his four children baptized, he was a good man. It’s nice that a son says his dad was “good.” If that man was able to make children like that he was a good man, God is proud of your father. God has a father’s heart, your dad was a good man, he’s in heaven with him, I’m sure. God has a father’s heart and before an unbelieving father who was able to baptize his children, would God be able to abandon him? God surely was proud of your father, because it is easier to be a believer and to have children baptized than to be a believer and to have their children baptized. Pray for your dad, talk to your dad. This is the answer”.

Francis assured the boy in question that his atheist father was a "good man" and in Heaven.

A good man.  The Lord Jesus teaches us something quite different in the eighteenth chapter of the Gospel of Luke, verses 18-19:

"An official asked him this question, 'Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?' Jesus answered him, 'Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.'"

It is true that Lumen Gentium 16 of the Second Vatican Council teaches that:

"Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience."

Through no fault of their own.  Francis cannot state with certainty that this atheist is in Heaven any more than we can state he is in Hell.  God alone is the Judge in this matter.  He alone can judge this man's soul.  He alone knows whether he was culpable for not being baptized himself or embracing Catholic truth.  Gaudium et Spes, No. 28 of the same Council: "God alone is the judge and searcher of hearts, for that reason He forbids us to make judgments about the internal guilt of anyone."  But just as we cannot make judgments regarding a person's internal guilt, so too we cannot make judgments regarding a person's innocence or lack of culpability for the truths which they violate.  God alone is the "Judge and searcher of hearts." Does Francis consider himself God?

Athanasian Creed

1. Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith;
2. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.
3. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;
4. Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance.
5. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit.
6. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.
7. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit.
8. The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated.
9. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible.
10. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal.
11. And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal.
12. As also there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensible, but one uncreated and one incomprehensible.
13. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty.
14. And yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty.
15. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God;
16. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God.
17. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord;
18. And yet they are not three Lords but one Lord.
19. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord;
20. So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say; There are three Gods or three Lords.
21. The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten.
22. The Son is of the Father alone; not made nor created, but begotten.
23. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.
24. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits.
25. And in this Trinity none is afore or after another; none is greater or less than another.
26. But the whole three persons are coeternal, and coequal.
27. So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.
28. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.
29. Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
30. For the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and man.
31. God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and man of substance of His mother, born in the world.
32. Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.
33. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.
34. Who, although He is God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ.
35. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of that manhood into God.
36. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person.
37. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ;
38. Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead;
39. He ascended into heaven, He sits on the right hand of the Father, God, Almighty;
40. From thence He shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
41. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies;
42. and shall give account of their own works.
43. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting and they that have done evil into everlasting fire.
44. This is the catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully he cannot be saved.

Cardinal Robert Sarah on the real mission of the Church...

Lifesite News reports:

"The Church would ignore the "real crisis" she faces today if she focuses on social justice issues rather than her basic mission to evangelize, Cardinal Robert Sarah warns in a newly-published interview.

'The Church is gravely mistaken as to the nature of the real crisis if she thinks that her essential mission is to offer solutions to all the political problems relating to justice, peace, poverty, the reception of migrants, etc. while neglecting evangelisation,' the cardinal told Aid to the Church in Need on April 18.

Sarah, who is the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, said that while the Church 'cannot disassociate herself from the human problems,' she will ultimately 'fail in her mission' if she forgets her real purpose.

The cardinal quoted Yahya Pallavicini, an Italian and former Catholic who converted to Islam, to drive home his point: 'If the Church, with the obsession she has today with the values of justice, social rights and the struggle against poverty, ends up as a result by forgetting her contemplative soul, she will fail in her mission and she will be abandoned by a great many of her faithful, owing to the fact that they will no longer recognize in her what constitutes her specific mission.'

The Church’s mission is summed by Jesus in Matthew’s Gospel when he sent his followers to 'go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.' This mission, according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, means 'proclaiming and establishing among all peoples the Kingdom of Christ and of God.'

Sarah’s remarks are interesting given the emphasis Pope Francis has placed on the Church working with migrants and refugees. In his addresses to world leaders, Pope Francis frequently highlights political problems, such as migration, with little mention of Christ or the Church's evangelical call."

____________________________________

Standing before a statue of Mary near the Spanish Steps some years ago, on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, Pope Benedict XVI reminded his listeners that the Gospel is the good news of freedom from sin, that it is "the proclamation of the victory of grace over sin, of life over death."  Proponents of the "social gospel" have forgotten this.  The mission of the Church is not to eradicate poverty or social injustice.  As Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand explains, while "a deep interest in the earthly welfare of our neighbor is a central duty of the Christian and an essential demand of the love of neighbor," still, "it is definitely no part of the message of Christ that there is to be no more poverty, no more war, that the earth is to become a natural paradise."

Proponents of the "social gospel" fail to understand, as Dr. Hildebrand reminds us, that "..the primary task of the Church is the proclamation of the divine Revelation, the protection of it against all heresies, the the sanctification of the soul of the individual, the securing of his eternal salvation - this is the spreading of the kingdom of God on earth, and not the attempt to build up an earthly paradise." (Essay entitled This-Worldliness).

Dr. Hildebrand explains that, "...the motive of many for eliminating poverty (which itself is not morally wicked, but only a morally relevant evil) is not rooted in the spirit of Christ or His Gospel, but in a humanitarian ideal.  The widespread tendency today to demand everything as a right and to refuse to accept any gifts is surely no manifestation of a Christian spirit.  There is in reality a clear, sharply delineated difference between justice and love.  Justice can and should be protected and demanded by state law; but love of neighbor could never be demanded by any law.  For it is a duty before God, and no state law could or should prescribe it or enforce it.  Love of neighbor presupposes the fulfillment of the claims of justice, but it goes far beyond this.  The words of the Gospel, 'if someone asks you to go one mile, go two miles with him,' clearly go far beyond the sphere of justice.  Of course, it is a pharisaical hypocrisy to the demands of justice as if one were giving alms.  But it is a terrible pride not to want to accept any alms, and to demand that which comes as a gift.  The true Christian should be happier to receive alms and to be grateful for them, than simply to receive what he has a right to. When he receives a gift he is happy not only over the good which is the gift, but also over the goodness of the giver; and he experiences it as a great source of happiness that he can and should be grateful."

Priests and deacons who have succumbed to the distortions of the "social gospel" seldom, if ever, preach against sin or remind their listeners of the reality of Hell.  Dr. Hildebrand addresses this fact saying that, "this-worldly tendency can be detected in various pastoral letters, and above all in countless sermons.  One speaks more about the fight against poverty and for social justice and world peace - in a word, more about improving the world - than about offending God by our sins, sanctifying the individual, about heaven and hell, eternity and the hope of eternal union with God in the beatific vision.  The this-worldly tendency emphasizes the earthly future more than eternity..." (This-Worldliness).

The true Christian, in the Creed, proclaims: Et exspecto resurrectionem mortuorum, et vitam venturi saeculi - 'We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come." But proponents of the "social gospel" have largely abandoned such a hope and prefer instead to embrace a humanitarian religion and to work for an earthly "utopia."  Robert Hugh Benson, in his classic work entitled The Lord of the World, describes this humanitarian religion:

"Humanitarianism..is becoming an actual religion itself; though anti-supernatural.  It is a pantheism.  Pantheism deifies all nature, God is the world, but naturally, man above all is God since he is the highest expression of nature.  It is a religion devoid of the 'super' natural, because since God is nature itself, there is no longer a distinction between Creator and creature.  The creature is God and hence arbitrator of his own destiny and establishes the moral law for himself....Humanitarianism is a religion devoid of the supernatural.  It is developing a ritual under Freemasonry; it has a creed, 'God is man'; and the rest.  It has, therefore, a real food of a sort to offer religious cravings: it idealizes and yet makes no demands upon the spiritual faculties..." (Introduction, p. xvii).

The Church's mission is not to solve poverty.  In fact, Jesus said that we would always have the poor with us (Mark 14: 7).  The Church's mission is the salvation of souls.  When a crowd of people went searching for Jesus and found Him on the other side of the Sea of Galilee, they said to Him, 'Rabbi, when did you come here?'  And Jesus answered them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves.  Do not labour for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you; for on Him has God the Father set His seal."  The crowd said to Him, "What must we do, to be doing the works of God?"  And Jesus answered them: "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him who He has sent." (John 6: 25-29).

The work of God is believing in Him whom the Father has sent.  Jesus reveals Himself as the Bread of Life.  He reveals in the synagogue who He is, where He comes from and the good things He has in store for those who believe in Him: faith, the Eucharist and eternal life.

Proponents of the 'social gospel" have forgotten that "man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God" (Matthew 4: 4).  Crippled by distorted humanitarian ideals, such confused souls forget Our Lord's injunction to "seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things (food, drink, clothing etc) shall be yours as well." (Matthew 6: 33).

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

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

Religion News Service reports:

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

Really?

As Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand has reminded us:


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

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


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

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

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

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

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

The National Catholic Register reports:

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

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

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

Related reading here.

Professor Tat-siong Benny Liew: Holy Cross College's resident clown

Crux Now is reporting that:

"A Massachusetts bishop has called the notions of a New Testament scholar in his diocese “highly offensive and blasphemous,” and has called on his Jesuit college to ask him to publicly disavow his writings on the sexuality of Jesus.

Professor Tat-siong Benny Liew, the chair of New Testament Studies at the College of the Holy Cross, has published articles claiming Jesus was a 'drag king' and said the relationship between the Father and Son was homosexual and masochistic in nature.

In one article, Liew said the centurion who approaches Jesus to heal his servant was actually speaking about his lover and described the relationship as 'pederastic.' Liew said the biblical author affirmed the relationship, adding this 'may also be consistent with Matthew’s affirmation of many sexual dissidents in her Gospel.'

Bishop Robert J. McManus of Worchester said he was 'deeply troubled and concerned' that someone who authored such things holds an endowed chair at the Catholic institution.

After the professor’s controversial writings - published a decade ago - were highlighted in a March 26 article in The Fenwick Review, an independent opinion journal based at the College of the Holy Cross, an online petition calling for Liew’s ouster gained over 10,000 signatures."

Sign this petition here.

Pope Saint John Paul II, in his Apostolic Constitution Ex Corde Ecclesiae, had this to say:

§ 3. "In ways appropriate to the different academic disciplines, all Catholic teachers are to be faithful to, and all other teachers are to respect, Catholic doctrine and morals in their research and teaching. In particular, Catholic theologians, aware that they fulfil a mandate received from the Church, are to be faithful to the Magisterium of the Church as the authentic interpreter of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition."

If one is to be faithful to Christ and His Church, one cannot assert that what the Magisterium teaches is false and that the faithful may reject Magisterial teaching and replace it with their own opinions or those of theologians. In his encyclical letter Veritatis Splendor, Pope John Paul II explains that, "Dissent, in the form of carefully orchestrated protests and polemics carried on in the media, is opposed to ecclesial communion and to a correct understanding of the hierarchical constitution of the People of God." (No. 113).

When a Catholic dissents from Church teaching, he is not in living communion with the mind of Christ, which is made known to us through His Church's Magisterium. Such a person is not, therefore, in a proper condition to receive the sacraments. Pope John Paul II has stated this clearly: "It is sometimes claimed that dissent from the Magisterium is compatible with being a 'good Catholic' and poses no obstacle to the reception of the sacraments. This is a grave error." (Address to the U.S. Bishops, Los Angeles, September 16, 1987). See also Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1395).

Some erroneously hold that, "No school that regulates ideas can justly call itself a university."


The late Fr. Vincent P. Miceli, who was a classically-educated Jesuit scholar and a brilliant philosopher, would have disagreed. For he explained that, "The trouble with this understanding of academic freedom is that it takes for granted as a truth what is a falsity, indeed a complete illusion, namely, that academic freedom is absolutely immune from any reasonable bounds, limitations or restrictions. No human freedom is absolutely immune to restriction. Freedom is no longer freedom when it is reduced to being the unhindered pursuit of one’s whims and desires. This is especially true of freedom exercised in the field of philosophy where conflict with the authentic and infallible teachings of the Church is foreseeable. A true understanding of academic freedom, therefore, is in order so as to distinguish it clearly from academic license.

Academic freedom derives from the rational nature of man. It is rooted in the intellectual activity of man whereby he is called to a dominion and stewardship of the universe through a conquest of truth. Positively, then, academic freedom is a generous guarantee to the unimpeded access to the evidence of truth in any given science. Thus, academic freedom is always bounded by the canons and axiomatic truths of each discipline of learning. Thus, again positively, academic freedom is both purposive and responsible. It has its own built-in rules; its requirements are conditioned by pre-defined directions towards the truth of its particular science. The moral right to academic freedom arises from the inviolability of the proper action necessary to its scientific achievements of truth, founded on man’s connatural inner dynamism of the human intelligence’s hunger for truth. Negatively, academic freedom means at the very least the immunity from unreasonable restrictions, both from within and from outside the academic community, of the right to communicate the results of one’s researches through lectures and publications, and the right to be immune from unreasonable restriction in the pursuit of the teaching profession.

We are now in the position to ask, ‘How is academic freedom violated?’ Scholars, scientists and philosophers hold that whenever one of their members ventures consciously and freely to teach as truths doctrines that contradict the clearly established dogmas or unconditional truths of their disciplines, then such a member of the university is abusing his academic freedom, putting it at the service of stupidities or known falsehoods instead of using it to advance the horizons of truth. Now every science has its dogmas, theology, philosophy and all the natural sciences. Dogmas are not only the ultimate answers to some fundamental questions; they also prompt further questioning and research, leading thus to enlarged, more profound truth....a Catholic university that allows professors and lecturers to attack the authentic teachings of the Church, whether they are infallibly defined or not, is not faithful to the best canons of scholarship, nor to the Church or its own students who have a right in justice to receive the divinely revealed truths in their pristine purity." (The Antichrist, pp. 166-167).

Many Catholic institutions have devaluated the faith and have become enslaved to a narrow (and conceptually flawed) notion of academic freedom. And why have these institutions sold out to secularism? Again, Fr. Miceli, S.J., explains: "Gradually, over the years the essential purpose of the Catholic university has been radically changed. Lusting after secular academic excellence, huge student bodies, expensive science complexes, notoriety, publicity, political clout and financial power, the leaders of Catholic universities somehow lost sight of the unearthly purpose and spirit of the Catholic university. Thus, in today’s Catholic university, intellectualism is preferred to Catholicism; scientism to faith, relativism to truth, immanentism to transcendence, subjectivism to reality, situationism to moral integrity and anarchism to authority. The essential purpose of the Catholic university has de facto been changed, despite the lip service that is still paid to the original Catholic ideal. Conduct flows from convictions and when the conduct is consistently depraved [Such as allowing controversial plays like the Vagina Monologues, my note] it is because the convictions have been corrupted. For example, Judas, forerunner of the Antichrist, had radically changed his deepest convictions about the person and mission of Christ before he sold his Lord for thirty pieces of silver. No virtuosity at contorted rationalization can mask the massive turning away from the Catholic ideal that has taken place in the Catholic universities of the United States. The light and love of the world have made tragic advances against the light and love of Christ." (The Antichrist, p. 161).

Professor Tat-siong Benny Liew is a clown offering not the fine wheat of Catholic truth but rather asinine opinions which were hatched in a warped mind.

Sign the petition to have this fool removed from his teaching position at Holy Cross.