Revelation 13: 16-18

Dr Michael said the technology behind uberveillance [Verichip Microchip implanted under a human's skin] would eventually lead to a black box small enough to fit on a tiny microchip and implanted in our bodies. This could also allow someone to be located in an emergency or for the identification of corpses after a large scale disaster or terrorist attack.

"This black box will then be a witness to our actual movements, words — perhaps even our thoughts —-and play a similar role to the black box placed in an aircraft," he said.


Our Lady told Fr. Stefano Gobbi of the Marian Movement of Priests:"I am weeping because the Church is continuing along the road of division, of loss of the true faith, of apostasy and of errors which are being spread more and more without anyone offering opposition to them. Even now, that which I predicted at Fatima and that which I have revealed here in the third message confided to a little daughter of mine (i.e. Sister Lucia) is in the process of being accomplished. And so, even for the Church the moment of its great trial has come, because the man of iniquity will establish himself within it and the abomination of desolation will enter into the holy temple of God." (To the Priests, Our Lady's Beloved Sons, No. 362, September 15, 1987, p. 572.)

And again:"The black beast like a leopard indicates Freemasonry; the beast with the two horns like a lamb indicates Freemasonry infiltrated into the interior of the Church, that is to say, ecclesiastical Masonry, which has spread especially among the members of the hierarchy. This Masonic infiltration, in the interior of the Church, was already foretold to you by me at Fatima, when I announced to you that Satan would enter in even to the summit of the Church. If the task of Masonry is to lead souls to perdition, bringing them to the worship of false divinities, the task of ecclesiastical Masonry on the other hand is that of destroying Christ and his Church, building a new idol, namely a false christ and a false church." (To the Priests, Our Lady's Beloved Sons, No. 406, June 13, 1989, p. 649)

Related reading here.

Cardinal Mahony under federal investigation over abusive priests

In his Bull "Cum Primum," (issued April 1, 1566), Pope Saint Pius V wrote, "Having set our sights on removing everything that can somehow offend the divine majesty, We resolved to punish above all, and without leniency, those things which, on the authority of Sacred Scripture or with most grave examples, are known to displease God and provoke his ire more than any others: namely, neglect of divine worship, ruinous simony, the crime of blasphemy, and the execrable libidinous vice against nature; for these faults people and nations are justly scourged by God with catastrophes, wars, famine and pestilence....If anyone commits nefarious crime against nature, which caused God's wrath to fall upon the sons of iniquity, he will be delivered to the secular arm for punishment, and, if a cleric, he will be subject to analogous penalty after being stripped of his office."

And on August 30, 1568, Pope Saint Pius V issued a second Bull entitled "Horrendum illud scelus" in which he said: "That horrendous crime, for which the corrupt and obscene cities [ of Sodom and Gomorrah] were burned by divine condemnation, fills us with most bitter pain and strongly prods us to repress such crime with the greatest possible zeal. With every reason the Fifth Lateran Council [1512-1517] establishes that any member of the clergy caught in that vice against nature, for which the divine wrath fell upon the sons of iniquity, be released from his clerical orders or constrained to do penance in a monastery (c. 4, X, V, 31). So that the contagion of such a great scourge will not grow with greater audacity by profiting from impunity, which is the greatest incentive to sin, and in order to chastise more severely the clerics guilty of this nefarious crime who are not terrified with the death of the soul, We have decided that they be chastened by the secular authority, which enforces civil law..."

There have been Bishops who, unfortunately, did not adopt this same attitude toward clerical abusers. These will all be accountable before the Lord Jesus. And some will be held accountable before the secular authority.

"Wherefore clerics called to have the Lord for their portion ought by all means so to regulate their whole life and conversation as that in their dress, comportment, gait, discourse, and all things else, nothing aapear but what is grave, regulated, and replete with religiousness." (Session 2, cap. I, de Ref).

Mr. Marvin Schur didn't fail his country. But his country failed him

A veteran of the Second World War, Mr. Schur deserved better.

Oakland County's deputy chief medical examiner says Schur died a "slow, painful death" from hypothermia.




Meditation: Matthew 25:40.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi embarasses herself

From the Drudge Report:

"Pelosi, the mother of 5 children and 6 grandchildren, who once said, 'Nothing in my life will ever, ever compare to being a mom,' seemed to imply babies are somehow a burden on the treasury. The revelation came during an exchange Sunday morning on ABC's THIS WEEK.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?

PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?

PELOSI: No apologies. No. we have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.

I've never been a fan of George Steppinoffthebus. Part of the reason is that he almost always uses the kid gloves when it comes to interviewing Washington liberals. If George had wanted to, he could have challenged Ms. Pelosi's theory with the solid empirical data. The fact is, Ms. Pelosi is just plain wrong. Her economic theory is not consistent with the observable empirical data.

Pope Paul VI, in his Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae, had warned of the negative consequences which would result from societal acceptance of contraception. And his Encyclical Letter has been nothing short of prophetic. Even secular types such as sociobiologist Lionel Tiger have observed that contraception leads to the, "..breakdown of families, female impoverishment, trouble in the relationship between the sexes (mostly because men who contracept tend to lose respect for women), and single motherhood." (See here).

But even if George Steppinoffthebus had challenged Ms. Pelosi, it more than likely wouldn't have produced the slightest crack in her wall of conviction. After all, die-hard Washington liberals are allergic to the truth.

Note: Any resemblance between Nancy Pelosi and the preacher from the film Poltergeist is purely coincidental.

Mr. President, how about opposing every form of torture?

President Barack Obama moved quickly (just a couple of days after his Inauguration) to close down the prison at Guantanomo Bay while banning the harshest interrogation methods (such as "waterboarding" which is viewed as torture). The president cited the Founding Fathers, "This is following through not just on a commitment I made during the campaign but an understanding that dates back to our Founding Fathers that we are willing to observe core standards of conduct not just when it's easy, but also when it's hard."

But it would appear that President Obama isn't too concerned about observing "core standards of conduct" when it comes to those unborn children who must suffer excruciating torture and death at the hands of abortionists. According to Steven Calvin, perinatologist at the University of Minnesota, "The neural pathways are present for pain to be experienced quite early by unborn babies." How early? As early as 8 weeks. And yet, the president has stated publically that if either of his two daughters "make a mistake," he doesn't "want them punished with a baby."

So much for observing "core standards of conduct." Under President Obama, those detained because they are suspected of acts of terrorism or links to terrorist groups will fare much better than innocent unborn children. Let's all pray that President Obama will come to oppose every form of torture. Not just when it's easy (read politically expedient) but also when it's hard.

Archbishop Rino Fisichella, President of the Pontifical Academy for Life, accuses Obama of arrogance

Speaking of President Obama's having overturned a ban on state funding for family-planning groups that carry out or facilitate abortions overseas, Archbishop Fisichella said, "What is important is to know how to listen... without locking oneself into ideological visions with the arrogance of a person who, having the power, thinks they can decide on life and death.."

President Obama takes on Rush Limbaugh

"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done." - President Obama to GOP leaders.

Let's see, the president doesn't want to listen to the Holy Father (telling him "we agree to disagree" about abortion), he doesn't want to listen to Republicans who expressed reservations over his economic stimulus plan (telling them "I won") and he doesn't want anyone to listen to Rush Limbaugh. Got it.

Change has indeed come to Washington. We now have a president who doesn't want to hear from anyone outside of his closed circle of power.

Camelot or Bedrock?

Many of those who work in the mainstream

media have been trying desperately to compare Michelle Obama with Jacqueline Kennedy, who had an astute fashion sense, and to portray an Obama administration as another "Camelot," where youth, vitality and confidence reach a sort of iconic status. This is not a fashion Blog or a political Blog. But in my view, an Obama administration has more in common with Bedrock than Camelot. It's not just the similarities between Wilma Flintstones' fashion sense and that of Michelle Obama. It's the neanderthal approach to issues such as abortion and homosexuality. An approach which says arrogantly to the other political party "I won" instead of striving to understand other perspectives and work "with" instead of "against" that opposing political party. An approach which says to the Vicar of Christ , "We agree to disagree" without even considering what His Holiness has to say.

Stubborness and stupidity are twins

Sophocles, in Antigone 1. 1023, says, "Stubborness and stupidity are twins." How so? Dr. Montague Brown explains as he makes the distinction between tenacity and stubborness: "Tenacity is the dedicated adherence to something we know to be worthwhile. As such, tenacity is positive. It involves a clear purpose - to persevere in what is good - and welcomes new evidence and perspectives that clarify or enrich that good...Tenacity is particularly evident when the adherence required is difficult. If my perseverance requires great effort of body or mind, or if it requires me to face a great deal of peer pressure and perhaps even ridicule, then my holding fast to my good purpose shows strength of mind and courage. In such cases, there may be little to gain in terms of social standing, but much in moral standing. Tenaciously holding to what is true and good not only benefits me in terms of virtue; it also works to ensure the stability of these goods in the community....Stubborness is the uncompromising insistence on having our own way. As such, stubborness is negative. It involves a kind of blindness, along with a willful rejection of evidence and the perspectives of others. Stubborness is particularly evident when the compromise required is easy. If the evidence I need to convince me to change my mind is readily available, or if accepting another's perspective would mean giving up little of importance, then my refusal to yield is not reasonable, but is motivated by stubborness. There is little to lose except my desire to be in control. Such rigid clinging to my own will hurts the community, because I refuse to cooperate with others, and it also prevents me from becoming successful and virtuous." (Dr. Montague Brown, Ph.D, The One-Minute Philosopher, pp. 162-163, Sophia Institute Press).

Newsmax is reporting that Pope Benedict XVI telephoned President Obama after the election to congratulate him on his victory. When our Holy Father brought up the subject of abortion, President Obama said simply, "We agree to disagree." How profound. But what exactly is the point on which President Obama disagrees with Pope Benedict XVI? When human life begins? As Dr. & Mrs. J.C. Willke explain in their book "Why can't we love them both: questions and answers about abortion," "Biologic human life is defined by examining the scientific facts of human development. This is a field where there is no controversy, no disagreement. There is only one set of facts, only one embryology book is studied in medical school. The more scientific knowledge of fetal development that has been learned, the more science has confirmed that the beginning of any one human individual's life, biologically speaking, begins at the completion of the union of his father's sperm and his mother's ovum, a process called "conception," "fertilization," or "fecundation." This is so because this being, from fertilization, is alive, human, sexed, complete and growing."

In his Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae, Pope John Paul II said that: "Some people try to justify abortion by claiming that the result of conception, at least up to a certain number of days, cannot yet be considered a personal human life. But in fact, "from the time that the ovum is fertilized, a life is begun which is neither that of the father nor the mother; it is rather the life of a new human being with his own growth. It would never be made human if it were not human already. This has always been clear, and ... modern genetic science offers clear confirmation. It has demonstrated that from the first instant there is established the programme of what this living being will be: a person, this individual person with his characteristic aspects already well determined. Right from fertilization the adventure of a human life begins, and each of its capacities requires time-a rather lengthy time-to find its place and to be in a position to act". Even if the presence of a spiritual soul cannot be ascertained by empirical data, the results themselves of scientific research on the human embryo provide "a valuable indication for discerning by the use of reason a personal presence at the moment of the first appearance of a human life: how could a human individual not be a human person?" (No. 60).

Or does President Obama mean to suggest that not all human life has value and is, therefore, disposable?

Is President Obama really interested in truth? Or is he more concerned with power and control? Is he being tenacious or stubborn? As we meditate on this question, let's again consider the words of Dr. Brown, professor of philosophy at St. Anselm College in Manchester, New Hampshire: "Tenacity is a firm choice of the will guided by objective value; stubborness is a firm choice of the will guided by the subjective desire to be right." (op. cit).

Judge Bork warns of threats to religious freedom

From Catholic News Agency
January 21, 2009:


Jurist Predicts "Terrible Conflict" Will Endanger U.S. Catholics’ Religious Freedom
Washington DC, Jan 21, 2009 (CNA).- Former Supreme Court nominee Judge Robert Bork has predicted that upcoming legal battles will have significant ramifications for religious freedom. He names as issues of major concern the continued freedom of Catholic hospitals to refuse to perform abortions and the likely “terrible conflict” resulting from the advancement of homosexual rights.

Speaking in an interview published Tuesday by Cybercast News Service, Judge Bork discussed the contentious nature of modern politics.

“Everything is up for debate these days. I can’t think of anything that isn’t,” he said.
“You are going to get Catholic hospitals that are going to be required as a matter of law to perform abortions,” he claimed.

“We are going to see in the near future a terrible conflict between claimed rights of homosexuals and religious freedom… You are going to get Catholic or other groups’ relief services that are going to be required to allow adoption of a child by homosexual couples. We are going to have a real conflict that goes right to the heart of the society.”

Asked whether there was a freedom of conscience clause anywhere in the Constitution that might prohibit the U.S. government from compelling a religious hospital to perform abortions, he replied: “Well, the free exercise of religion clause might fulfill that role.”

He agreed with the CNS interviewer, Editor in Chief Terry Jeffrey, that such coercion forces someone to act against their religion and could be construed as a violation of the right to free exercise of religion. However, Judge Bork was unsure about whether the U.S. Supreme Court would uphold such a right. He predicted the decision would rest with Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who in some cases sides with liberals and at other times with “originalists,” those who profess to hold a more tradition-minded interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.
“It depends upon Anthony Kennedy,” Judge Bork told CNS. “Now, it’s a funny situation in which the moral life of a nation is in effect decided by one judge, because you have four solid liberal votes, four solid originalist votes, and one vote you can’t predict too accurately in advance.”

Though Justice Kennedy is a Catholic, he sided with the majority who upheld the pro-abortion rights Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade in the 1992 case Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
Judge Bork said that a decision involving the freedom of Catholic hospitals to refuse to perform abortions would split by a 5-4 vote. “But I don’t know which way,” he added.

The Cybercast News interview with the jurist also touched upon the place of religion in public life. “I don’t think the disputants talk much about God anymore,” Judge Bork commented. “That’s one of the things that I think is regrettable--and I know liberals have said the same thing, it is not a conservative position particularly--but it is regrettable that religion has dropped out of our public discourse. I think it impoverishes it and makes it more violent.”

He explained that he believed this violence was not armed conflict, but rather “violent language and propaganda.” Judge Bork said he also thought that America is “now going down a path towards kind of a happy-go-lucky nihilism.” “A lot of people are nihilists,” he continued. “They don’t think about religion. They don’t think about ultimate questions. They go along. They worry about consumer goods, comfort, and so forth.

“As a matter of fact, the abortion question is largely a question about convenience. If you look at the polls about why people have abortions, 90 percent of it has nothing to do with medical conditions. It’s convenience. And that’s I think an example of the secularization of an issue that ought to have a religious dimension.”

When asked whether a nihilistic society can remain “happy-go-lucky” for long, Judge Bork replied: “I don’t know. I guess we are going to find out.”

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's Dream Remains Unfulfilled

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's niece, Dr. Alveda King, hit the nail on the head when she said that, "The election of an African American president sends a powerful and historic message that what was previously unthinkable can become reality...The battle for equal rights has reached a major milestone, but Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's dream of full equality remains just a dream as long as unborn children continue to be treated no better than property." (Read Dr. King's full statement here).

It was on August 23, 1963, on the occasion of the Civil Rights March on Washington, that Dr. King had said: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." But was the content of Obama's character a real consideration for those who voted for him? How about those in the African-American community? How many voted for Barack Obama simply because he happens to be black? Would Dr. King have approved? For the same reason that a candidate should not be rejected because of the color of his skin, he should not be endorsed solely because of the color of his skin. How many Christians voted for Barack Obama knowing of his radical support for abortion? How about his support for the homosexual agenda?

And what of the content of Barack Obama's character? As Dr. Alveda King correctly noted, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's dream will never be a reality as long as unborn children are treated "no better than property." And yet, the President-elect supports abortion through all nine months of pregnancy up to and including so-called partial-birth abortion (which is actually infanticide). As Bishop Robert J. McManus has said, in a letter which was read in all parishes throughout the Worcester Diocese, "The responsibility of government is to protect the lives of all, especially the weakest and most vulnerable." His Excellency reminded readers of The Catholic Free Press that the "Freedom of Choice Act" (FOCA), which President-elect Obama has promised to sign if passed, would require all states to permit 'partial birth' abortions, invalidate any laws protecting physicians' and hospitals' conscientious objection to abortion, and "deny parents the chance to be involved in their minor daughter's abortion decisions." Additionally, the Bishop said that FOCA "would sweep away over 300 federal, state and local laws and regulations that have been passed to protect the life of unborn children" and called its legislative intention "far more radical" than Roe v. Wade.

I share Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's dream of a nation where the color of skin is irrelevant but the content of a man's character is the decisive issue. But what shall we say about the character of a man who believes that innocent and vulnerable unborn children have no value?

Related reading here.

Aggressively Christian?

Episcopal "Bishop" V. Gene Robinson, commenting in The New York Times about past inaugural prayers, has said that he was "horrified" to discover how "specifically and aggressively Christian they were." Mr. Robinson has already said that his inaugural prayer will not be "especially Christian" and that he will not be using a Bible (see here).

Catholic League president Bill Donohue was right when he said that, "Obama has chosen a man who offends Catholics as much as he does Protestants. If that’s his idea of inclusion, he can keep it." Obama's idea of "inclusion" and "tolerance" is a sham. Radical homosexual activists have shown their true colors. So has Obama.

More on Gene Robinson here.

Persecution Watch

As explained by the Associated Press, "Americans entering the military often receive Bibles, courtesy of the Gideons International. But the Gideons have been told that while they can leave complimentary Bibles at most military induction stations, they cannot stay there to proselytize or preach to the recruits."

Remember Navy chaplain Lt. Gordon Klingenschmitt and his battle with the U.S. Navy over praying in his naval uniform and invoking the name Jesus? See here. As I stated in a previous post, "In the name of 'tolerance,' the New World Order seeks to impose its rebellion from truth on all. It will not tolerate any dissent, any disagreement. Coercion is an acceptable tool in a dictatorship. Soon, the New Order will use violence to achieve its goals and not just coercion and propaganda. In the end, every dictatorship must rely on violence in its vain attempt to hold onto power."

I served this nation honorably in the United States Air Force. I have always been proud of my service to America and proud of the United States military. But this new policy doesn't fill me with pride. It only makes me sad.

Rick Warren praises Obama for inviting homosexual "Bishop" V. Gene Robinson

"Bishop" Robinson has said that he will not use the Bible when praying, and has stated, "I will be careful not to be especially Christian in my prayer." This comes as no surprise. There is nothing "especially Christian" about V. Gene Robinson. But in the New World Order, homosexuality is acceptable, abortion is acceptable, contraception is acceptable, fornication is acceptable. What will not be considered acceptable?

As I said here, "The new humanitarian religion, which is anti-supernatural, must absorb Christianity as it prepares for the entrance of the Man of Sin. Catholics who maintain a devotion to the Holy Eucharist and Our Lady [and authentic devotion to Our Lady presupposes total obedience to the Church's Magisterium] must first be ostracized and later eliminated as incompatible with the New Order.

In the New World Order, one will be expected to not be "especially Christian."


Related reading here.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue on President-elect Barack Obama's selection of Episcopal "Bishop" Gene Robinson to offer a prayer at his inauguration:

“President-elect Barack Obama says he wants to unite Americans, and yet he chooses the most polarizing person in the Episcopal Church, Bishop Gene Robinson, to offer a prayer at one of his inaugural events. Robinson, who dumped his wife and children to live with another man, is not just an embarrassment to rank-and-file Episcopalians, he has a record of offending Catholics, as well.

In 2005, Robinson said the following: ‘I find it so vile that they [the Catholic Church] think they are going to end the child abuse scandal by throwing out homosexuals from seminaries. It is an act of violence that needs to be confronted.’ He added that ‘Pope Ratzinger [sic] may be the best thing that ever happened to the Episcopal Church. We are seeing so many Roman Catholics joining the church.’ “Three months ago, the disgraced openly gay bishop admitted that he had led a retreat a few years ago for gay Catholic priests. He stuck his nose into the affairs of the Catholic Church even further when he urged those priests to push for women priests, saying ‘that if you work for the ordination of women in your church, you will go a long way toward opening the door for the acceptance of gay priests.’

In other words, Obama has chosen a man who offends Catholics as much as he does Protestants. If that’s his idea of inclusion, he can keep it. The only saving grace is that Robinson says he will not use a Bible next week. It would be news if he did.”

Cardinal Ennio Antonelli defends traditional family...

Pontifical Council for the Family president and Cardinal Ennio Antonelli warned that the traditional family must be given "decisive priority...for the future of society in a post-modern culture sick with individualism."

In a previous post which may be found here, I wrote:

If you live in Massachusetts and feel called by the Lord Jesus to do your part to promote and defend the vocation of marriage, click on this link to learn how to get involved. Christian marriage is sacred. In God's plan, the marriage covenant between a man and a woman becomes the image and symbol of the Covenant which unites God to His people (Hos 2:21; Jer 3:6-13; Is 54:5-10). It is the sign of Christ's love for His Church (Eph 5:32). As Pope John Paul II explained, "So often the pressures of modern living separate husbands and wives from one another, threatening their lifelong interdependence in love and fidelity. Can we also not be concerned about the impact of cultural pressures upon relations between the generations, upon parental authority and the transmission of sacred values? Our Christian conscience should be deeply concerned about the way in which sins against love and against life are often presented as examples of 'progress' and emancipation. Most often, are they not but the age-old forms of selfishness dressed up in a new language and presented in a new cultural framework?" It is important that we all take up the Church's call to promote and defend marriage and family life as sacred realities."

Let's all join with His Eminence Cardinal Ennio Antonelli and defend the traditional family.

Internment Camps being readied?

I've been telling readers of this Blog about this for some time. What is the real purpose of these camps? Are they really meant to hold illegal aliens? Or are they intended for another use?

As the apostasy spreads, Churches across the Northeast continue to close...

"The great trial has arrived for your Church. How great is your responsibility, O Pastors of the Holy Church of God! You continue along the path of division from the Pope and of the rejection of his Magisterium; indeed, in a hidden way, there is in preparation a true schism which could soon become open and proclaimed...And then, there will remain only a small faithful remnant, over which I will keep watch in the garden of my Immaculate Heart.The great trial has arrived for all humanity. The chastisement, predicted by me at Fatima and contained in that part of the secret which has not yet been revealed, is about to take place. The great moment of divine justice and of mercy has come upon the world."

- Our Lady to Fr. Gobbi, Malvern Pennsylvania, 1990.

While I have struggled (to no avail, see here) in the past to get The Catholic Free Press to list a Marian Movement of Priests Cenacle in the Diocesan Calendar of Events (which to me, is odd), a Professor continues to teach at the College of the Holy Cross even though he is supportive of homosexuality and claims to be "married" to another man! *

Who is welcome and who is not? The MMP is fully loyal to the Magisterium of the Church. Members consecrate themselves to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and pledge full obedience and loyalty to the Magisterium.

* See here.

Our Lord Jesus to St. Faustina:

You will prepare the world for My final coming. (Diary 429)

Speak to the world about My mercy ... It is a sign for the end times. After it will come the Day of Justice. While there is still time, let them have recourse to the fountain of My mercy. (Diary 848)

Tell souls about this great mercy of Mine, because the awful day, the day of My justice, is near. (Diary 965).

I am prolonging the time of mercy for the sake of sinners. But woe to them if they do not recognize this time of My visitation. (Diary 1160)

Before the Day of Justice, I am sending the Day of Mercy. (Diary 1588)

He who refuses to pass through the door of My mercy must pass through the door of My justice. (Diary 1146).

In addition to these words of Our Lord Sr. Faustina gives us the Words of the Mother of Mercy, the Blessed Virgin:

You have to speak to the world about His great mercy and prepare the world for the Second Coming of Him who will come, not as a merciful Savior, but as a just Judge. Oh how terrible is that day! Determined is the day of justice, the day of divine wrath. The angels tremble before it. Speak to souls about this great mercy while it is still the time for granting mercy. (Diary 635).

Catholic Insight: Pushing the Earth Charter

"Was Mikhael Gorbachev on target when he said, at three separate press conferences at the RIO+5 Conference in Rio de Janeiro, in 1997: "The Ten Commandments are out of date. They will be replaced by the [then] 15 Principles of the Earth Charter."

A search of the Earth Charter website reveals its current status. It now has 16 Principles. The first has some potential: a) Recognize that all beings are interdependent, and every form of life has some value regardless of its worth to human beings. (I wonder if this includes the human fetus.)

Number 12 states: Uphold the right of all, without discrimination, as based on race, colour, sex, sexual orientation..

And here is a new rub. At all major U.N. conferences there have been rabid proponents of inserting into UN documents the right to sexual orientation; governments have rejected this. If the United Nations finally accepts the Earth Charter, it will mean that "sexual orientation" is in through the back door. They will have approved a concept rejected until that point." (Jeanne Ferrari, M.D., from the Catholic Insight article).

In his Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, Pope John Paul II explains the significance of the Decalogue (the Ten Words, or Commandments) which God gave to Moses and which Mikhael Gorbachev says are "out of date":

"If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments" (Mt 19:17)

"Only God can answer the question about the good, because he is the Good. But God has already given an answer to this question: he did so by creating man and ordering him with wisdom and love to his final end, through the law which is inscribed in his heart (cf. Rom 2:15), the "natural law". The latter "is nothing other than the light of understanding infused in us by God, whereby we understand what must be done and what must be avoided. God gave this light and this law to man at creation". He also did so in the history of Israel, particularly in the "ten words", the commandments of Sinai, whereby he brought into existence the people of the Covenant (cf. Ex 24) and called them to be his "own possession among all peoples", "a holy nation" (Ex 19:5-6), which would radiate his holiness to all peoples (cf. Wis 18:4; Ez 20:41). The gift of the Decalogue was a promise and sign of the New Covenant, in which the law would be written in a new and definitive way upon the human heart (cf. Jer 31:31-34), replacing the law of sin which had disfigured that heart (cf. Jer 17:1). In those days, "a new heart" would be given, for in it would dwell "a new spirit", the Spirit of God (cf. Ez 36:24-28).

Consequently, after making the important clarification: "There is only one who is good", Jesus tells the young man: "If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments" (Mt 19:17). In this way, a close connection is made between eternal life and obedience to God's commandments: God's commandments show man the path of life and they lead to it. From the very lips of Jesus, the new Moses, man is once again given the commandments of the Decalogue. Jesus himself definitively confirms them and proposes them to us as the way and condition of salvation. The commandments are linked to a promise. In the Old Covenant the object of the promise was the possession of a land where the people would be able to live in freedom and in accordance with righteousness (cf. Dt 6:20-25). In the New Covenant the object of the promise is the "Kingdom of Heaven", as Jesus declares at the beginning of the "Sermon on the Mount" — a sermon which contains the fullest and most complete formulation of the New Law (cf. Mt 5-7), clearly linked to the Decalogue entrusted by God to Moses on Mount Sinai. This same reality of the Kingdom is referred to in the expression "eternal life", which is a participation in the very life of God. It is attained in its perfection only after death, but in faith it is even now a light of truth, a source of meaning for life, an inchoate share in the full following of Christ. Indeed, Jesus says to his disciples after speaking to the rich young man: "Every one who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name's sake, will receive a hundredfold and inherit eternal life" (Mt 19:29)." (Veritatis Splendor, No. 12).

Mikhael Gorbachev has been promoting the Earth Charter for some time. And he believes (along with many others who are behind the Charter) that the Ten Commandments are "out of date." Why then would Catholic Religious be promoting this document?


Watch this video.

Monsignor Schooyans and the Earth Charter

"As can be seen from many recent documents from UN agencies like UNFPA, there is a trend for the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights to be supplanted by documents such as the Earth Charter. Man is considered to be the result of the evolution of matter, and he must agree to submit himself to the Great Whole. This, we are told, is the price to pay for "sustainable development". This view of Mother Earth denies man the central place in the world that was assigned to him in the 1948 Declaration. We must return to this anthropocentrism and this universalism, which was inspired by the Roman, Jewish, and Christian traditions and was brilliantly reaffirmed by the Renaissance, if we wish to save and protect human capital. The quintessential value is man and not the environment. Without men properly prepared to become responsible managers of Nature, Nature itself cannot but deteriorate and man cannot but vanish. This view of man and his relationship with nature necessitates a fully humanistic conception of development. This conception prompts us to revisit current educational, health, and food policies. It also prompts us to reconsider policies relating to women and families."

- Monsignor Michel Schooyans

Speaking about the Earth Charter and related globalism, Msgr. Michel Schooyans said, "In order to consolidate this holistic vision of globalism, certain obstacles have to be smoothed out and instruments put to work. Religions in general, and in the first place the Catholic religion, figure among the obstacles that have to be neutralized."

According to its founders, the Earth Charter is "a declaration of fundamental principles for building a just, sustainable, and peaceful global society in the 21st century." The Earth Charter Commission hopes that the Charter will become the common standard "by which the conduct of all individuals, organizations, businesses, governments, and transnational institutions [such as the Roman Catholic Church, my note] is to be guided and assessed."

The globalists who are behind the Earth Charter seek to promote a New Age religion which will neutralize the supernatural faith of Roman Catholicism. In the words of Archbishop Javier Lozano Barragan, "Clearly, we are faced with the total denial of Christianity."

A Powerful Weapon for the Spiritual Battles Ahead